---

Northern Ireland

My Lords, I, too, thank the   noble Baroness, Lady Park of Monmouth, for initiating the debate. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mayhew, said, there is a possibility that concern fatigue may set in on the issue of Northern Ireland. Having a debate on Northern Ireland so early on in this Parliament should allay those fears to some extent. It has been a very good debate so far, and I applaud the contributions that have been made. I, too, welcome the members of the new NIO team and endorse everything that my noble friend Lord   Shutt said about them. I also pay tribute to David Trimble, who has moved a long way from being a Vanguard unionist to becoming something of a world statesman. We have all been privileged to watch that odyssey. We would all agree that my noble friend Lord   Alderdice provided a brilliant analysis of the current situation. As many noble Lords have said, politically the omens are not good. The resounding victory of the DUP at the general election has made it the only effective voice of unionism. The UUP may renew itself some day, but that is not likely in the foreseeable future. The DUP is now dominant in the unionist community. It is comparatively more dominant than Sinn Fein is among the nationalist community because the SDLP did surprisingly well and maintained its parliamentary representation. The stark fact remains that the extreme polarisation seen in the outcome of the last election to the Assembly is now even more entrenched. As the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, said, we have a Mexican stand-off. After his undoubted electoral success, Mr Ian Paisley is, I am afraid, sounding even more bellicose and obdurate. He has been making noises, extravagant even by his standards. He has stated that he believes the Belfast agreement should be torn up and a new start made. Among other demands, he wants a new election to the Assembly, presumably so that he can complete his rout of the UUP. I trust that the Government will have no truck with those and any similar demands from Mr Paisley. If an attempt is to be made to get all parties to think seriously again about devolution, the first action—I have said this before—is to give them three months’ notice that if there has not been some movement towards progress the salaries of all MLAs will cease. I have long argued for that and, although he was originally opposed to the idea, the noble Lord, Lord Kilclooney, was won over to my argument. There can be no justification for the taxpayer forking out more than £500,000 a month to the MLAs, who cannot agree between themselves to get on with their main task of running Northern Ireland. The Prime Minister and the former Secretary of State, Mr   Paul Murphy, are on record as coming round to that view. It is now time to act on it. Money—or rather, the threatened lack of it—will help concentrate minds. That is particularly true in Northern Ireland and is one of the many bonds that the two communities share. As I have said on a number of occasions in your Lordships’ House, MLAs of all parties could at least agree on acting as a scrutiny body for the considerable amount of Northern Ireland legislation that comes to Westminster as a result of direct rule. There are a number of arguments in favour of that. First, it could be a confidence-building measure. During the relatively brief spell of devolution, the parties in the Assembly worked well together in scrutinising and agreeing on legislation, as my noble friend Lord Alderdice would testify. It concerned major items, including the most important of all, setting the budget. There is no reason why that could not happen again. Secondly, it would allow for an authentic democratic regional voice to be heard about the merits or otherwise of proposed policy measures. Thirdly—related to the last point—Westminster is not equipped to deal adequately with the volume of Northern Ireland legislation that comes before it. For example, for the past two years we have dealt with the budget in Grand Committee in about two hours. It was a cursory glance at a subject of crucial importance. That means that there is no democratic accountability, and direct rule, to all intents and purposes, is no more than civil servants taking all the major decisions—and the minor ones, for that matter. That is an appalling and unacceptable situation. The problem is further aggravated by the fact that most legislation coming before us is in the form of secondary legislation. You do not have to take the extreme position of the late Lord Chief Justice Hewart to appreciate that that is a very undemocratic way of doing things. That is perhaps why the Government try to extend the practice to other areas beyond Northern Ireland. By convention, Orders in Council and statutory instruments cannot be amended—they can only be accepted or opposed—and Opposition Whips in this House discourage their Front-Benchers from dividing the House on such issues. As I have done before, I give notice that there will be an issue on an Order in Council, where, as a matter of principle, we will seek to have it negatived. In that connection, I ask the Minister to say what new provisions will be introduced for better scrutiny at Westminster of Northern Ireland business. Before the election, the noble Baroness the Lord President of the Council, in acknowledging the democratic deficit, stated that the Government were examining how it could be overcome. She reiterated that last Monday. Will the Government consult widely with those of us with an interest in Northern Ireland about how the situation could be remedied, and when is that likely to happen? The fourth argument in favour of using MLAs as a pre-legislative scrutiny body is that it would be a good enough reason for continuing to pay them their salary. It would thereby continue in a formal way the main element of what passes for a political class in Northern Ireland. It has been argued that to convene the Assembly as a pre-legislative scrutiny body would require primary legislation. That is pedantic Civil Service talk, bereft of vision. I believe that if—I accept that it is a big ““if””—the political parties could see such a step as a pragmatic way to move forward, everyone at Westminster would be happy to pass any necessary primary legislation with the utmost expedition. The necessary imagination and political will is required to make that very modest movement to help unfreeze the present impasse. Of course, what I have been suggesting is how to begin the slow incremental process of resolving the current gridlock. A much swifter resumption of the peace process would come from a dramatic move by the Provisional IRA, as many noble Lords have said, to the effect that it would no longer have recourse to armed conflict but would adhere exclusively to peaceful and democratic methods in pursuit of its objectives. That is now, more than ever, a prerequisite condition because of the changed disposition of the unionist representation. That fact of life must also be coupled with Sinn   Fein’s performance. Its popular vote, which hitherto seemed to be climbing inexorably, was down perceptibly at the election, while its failure to make more ground in Derry in both parliamentary and municipal terms must give Sinn Fein pause for rumination. That falling short of its expectations may well be echoed in elections in the Irish Republic, which cannot be far off. Sinn Fein has been presuming too much and overplaying its political hand. Were Mr Gerry Adams and his colleagues able to persuade the Provos to give up their paramilitary predilections, it would yield strong benefits for Sinn   Fein, the peace process and, most important, the people of Ireland, north and south. As the economists say, it would be a Pareto Optimal solution in which everyone gains. Finally, will the Minister consider, as the previous Secretary of State said immediately after the Northern Bank raid, including Northern Ireland under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, so that we can know what the accounts of the political parties are. As the noble Lord, Lord Laird, said, the money laundering carried out by Sinn Fein is considerable. As the noble Baroness, Lady Park, said, it is the richest party in this country. According to my data, it is the richest party in Europe. We must know the sources of its income. If there were some dramatic move, as the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, hopes there will be—we all do, though some of us do not share his optimism; I admire him for it because optimism is difficult much of the time in Northern Ireland—and paramilitary activity such as punishment beatings and enforced exiling stopped, with republicans participating in the arrangements covering the PSNI, the prospects for a quick return to devolution would brighten considerably. Unless the Provisional IRA can deliver that package to Sinn Fein, the other political parties and the two Governments, direct rule will remain as the very unsatisfactory form of governance for Northern Ireland. Paramilitary activity and the crimes associated with it, including robberies, drug dealing, extortion and the like, will continue unchecked and may well increase in scale. There is some evidence that that is already happening, as my noble friend Lord Alderdice said. No one, save for the most twisted terrorist minds, would countenance a return to increased paramilitary activity, killings and bombings.