---

Northern Ireland

My Lords, first, I welcome the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, to his Northern Ireland role. I wish him well, but I must caution him that he has an awesome task to perform. During the past seven or eight years, Northern Ireland has drifted into administrative chaos. In that respect, it is worse now than it was at the height of the Troubles. As always, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Park, for her consistent interest and for the opportunity that the debate provides. After 22 years in Parliament and after the many disappointments that I have had during that time, I must still express surprise that, whatever our shortcomings, we are still dismissed as second-class citizens. To illustrate that, let me begin with children—vulnerable children, children suffering from autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Yesterday, I received two Written Answers from the Minister, which tell me that,"““Information on the number of children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders is not available””," and that,"““Information on the number of children referred for suspected autistic spectrum disorder assessment and the current waiting times for assessment are not collected centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost””.—[Official Report, 8/6/05; cols. WA 90–91.]" That is outrageous. My simple question is: if that is the case, how can my six year-old grandson and the hundreds of other children like him who are autistic be properly catered for? Without even basic information, how can the Government plan to finance their needs; adequately to progress their education; and to provide in a systematic way new, developing processes that may enable them to overcome their difficulties? A system, an administration or a government that have not addressed that problem indicate a scandalously negligent government. I look to the Minister to effect changes. In the light of the inadequate information available, I want an immediate meeting with the Minister responsible. Be assured, I will return to the issue in your Lordships’ House. I move to children in care and pose the proposition that we may as well not have a Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY). I have tried to work with the department and NICCY for the past three years to try to get them to address the extent to which the 1997 children’s Act has swung the pendulum too far in the opposite direction from that which pertained previously. I have raised the issue of 13 year-old girls in care being plied with drugs, getting into debt and then   being sexually exploited—prostituted—by their suppliers. I have had the validity of my allegations admitted by NICCY, but the best that can be done by the authorities is that contraceptive measures are provided, often without the parents’ knowledge. Political correctness is such that carers in the system are being given an impossible task. The rights of any foolish or vulnerable child have priority over her social, educational and moral welfare. I have found NICCY to be a useless operation, a waste of resources. On my experience, I would not give it house room. In this case, there is no point in me asking the Minister to arrange a meeting with anyone else. I have lost count of the meetings that I have had, and it is time that we had an urgent review of legislation that does nothing short of facilitating very young people who may, rebelliously or innocently, choose to throw themselves on the scrapheap of society. I would, however, be happy to meet the Minister, if he so wished. Another gigantic scandal is the £8 million to £9   million per annum operation that elevates the Police Ombudsman to a status that virtually outranks the Director of Public Prosecutions. While our hospitals and rural schools structures are under severe financial scrutiny, the Police Ombudsman has been allowed a free hand to establish a veritable kingdom of 128 staff, costing between £1,000 and £1,200 per annum for every police officer. That operation might usefully be contrasted with the efficiency of the Assembly Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, who couples that job with being the   Northern Ireland Commissioner for Complaints. Notwithstanding his responsibility to scrutinise 10   government departments, 26 councils, every government agency, including the Housing Executive and social security, and the cross-border bodies, he makes do with 24 staff and a budget of around £1.2 million. Where is the justification for that? Let the Minister look at some of the parliamentary Answers that I have received over the past year; let him look at the prosecutions pursued by Mrs O’Loan over periods of up to four years for a single case, only for them to be thrown out when every perverse machination has failed; let him consider the officers and their families kept in mental torture throughout that time; let him read the case studies that I have sent to the Attorney-General and which I will willingly share with him. Let him tell me if that is justice. I have sought to discover, through a series of Written Questions, what correspondence passed between Mrs   O’Loan and the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor relating to how a resident magistrate acted in the course of dismissing a case brought against police by Mrs O’Loan’s office. Initially I was told that there was no such letter, but gradually, as I persisted, I learnt differently. Eventually, on 18 April this year, I received a response from the Police Ombudsman’s office explaining why the letter was sent to the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor and, as I understood it, offering me a chance to see the correspondence. It stated:"““The Police Ombudsman has no difficulty in giving you access to the correspondence appropriately redacted, if you feel that would alleviate your concerns and I will be happy to do this if you so indicate””." As such correspondence was, I considered, unwarranted interference in and abuse of the judicial process, I did not avail of the offer. Instead I again asked for the correspondence to be placed in the Library and received the following reply:"““The Police Ombudsman has advised that under Section 63 of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998 . . .  she does not believe it appropriate to disclose copies of the correspondence between her office and the Lord Chancellor””.—[Official Report, 8/6/05; col. WA 90.]" Your Lordships’ House has a right to know, not just Ken Maginnis. It would be unacceptable to me—and, I believe, to your Lordships’ House—if the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor had to measure up to some caveat imposed by Mrs O’Loan, as it appears the Director of Public Prosecutions in Northern Ireland must. It is not good enough. Justice must be seen to be done. The noble Lord, Lord Rooker, has a mountain to climb. I wish him well. He will have the co-operation of my colleagues and me. With the noble Lord we look forward to a new openness that can replace the prevailing evasion and equivocation.