Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Dodds of Duncairn (Democratic Unionist Party) in the House of Commons on Monday, 13 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.


Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and this issue, which was fully debated during the election campaign for this House not so long ago, doubtless contributed to the success of our party. We made sure that the devolution of policing and justice could happen only with the agreement of Unionists in Northern Ireland via a cross-community vote in the Assembly. I agree entirely with the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) on the attitude that Sinn Fein and any party that aspires not just to run policing and justice, but to be in government, must adopt. They must support the forces of law and order and the administration of justice, and demonstrate such support not just by taking seats on the Policing Board or in the district policing partnerships. We must remember that members of Sinn Fein took their places in the Northern Ireland Executive and still went about their criminality—drug dealing, racketeering, intimidation, murder and all the rest—so that they could be in government and undermine everything that good government stands for. Simply taking one’s seat on the Policing Board or in a DPP is not sufficient in itself. Sinn Fein have to make it clear that they support policing on the ground in practical ways, and that they are giving a lead in their local communities. Anything short of that disqualifies that party and any other party that takes the same view from being in government and from ruling over people in any democracy. The recent IMC report—the eighth report—was clear, despite the efforts of some to spin it for their own purposes, about the extent of ongoing criminality and of ongoing intelligence gathering about subversive activity by the Provisional IRA. The Provisional IRA was not alone, because there were references to loyalist organisations and dissidents. We do not wish to gloss over that or set it to one side. We accept that such activity also has to end, but—as has already been made clear—we are talking about the Provisional IRA because Sinn Fein has the political numbers and the votes to enable it to aspire to government. That is why we are concentrating today and in other debates on the role of the Provisional IRA. From the IMC report, our own sources, the Chief Constable’s remarks and other information, there is no doubt that the Provisional republican movement has a long way to travel before anyone can be certain that it has moved to a permanent and irreversible position and foresworn violence and illegal activity for good. As I said in an earlier intervention, as long as it maintains an illegal terrorist organisation, that will be a strong indication to many people that it cannot yet be described as being exclusively committed to peaceful and democratic means. Why would one need an illegal terrorist organisation, even if it is silent, if one were truly and permanently committed to peaceful and democratic methods? That point has been well made, over and over again, by Michael McDowell, the Minister for Justice in the Irish Republic, and by other political parties there. Our party backs the changes in the Bill to the electoral registration process. The decision to move the registration deadline nearer to polling day—11 working days before—is to be welcomed. It is a positive move and brings us into line with the position in the rest of the United Kingdom. It will also encourage greater voter participation and involvement in elections. Many people in many of the communities that I represent in north Belfast turn their attention to the issue of whether they are on the electoral register only when an election is announced. By then, it is too late, and I hope that the change will help to ensure that people who want to vote and are entitled to vote can do so. I accept that we need safeguards, one of which is that people who register so late will not be able to apply for a postal or absentee vote. There will be other restrictions, but I make a plea that they should not be too burdensome. If they are, they would negate the change. One of the problems that we had with rolling registration and getting people on to the register after the annual canvas was completed was that some people were called to interview in the electoral office. Some of those interviews were set for the middle of the day when people were at work or had other commitments. They were unable to attend and therefore did not bother to proceed with their application to be registered outside the normal annual canvas. I hope that the Minister will accept that any safeguards should be commensurate with the objective of getting as many people on to the register as possible. The abolition of the annual canvas will save considerable expenditure and it will also mean less chance of people falling off the register by accident, simply through neglecting to renew their application. Provided the electoral office is given the resources to ensure, through the proper use of databases and so on, that those who should be on the register are on it and those who should not are removed, we should end up with a much more accurate register. On the issue of political donations, we have no objection in principle to the Bill, which will bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the United Kingdom. We accept entirely the concerns that have been voiced by the hon. Member for South Down (Mr. McGrady), and that is one reason why the current provisions will be extended until at least 2010. I am sure that the Minister will confirm that if, come 2010, the parties in Northern Ireland are agreed that intimidation is still an issue, he will look carefully at whether to extend those provisions. That is a matter for the future. The hon. Gentleman was right about the concerns on this issue, but one thing strikes me as odd. In answer to a question from the hon. Member for North Down (Lady Hermon), he said that it would be paramilitaries linked to political parties in Northern Ireland who would be guilty of intimidation of donors to his party. At the same time as the hon. Gentleman makes that point strongly here today, the leader of his party—and others in his party—call for parties linked to those paramilitaries to take their place in government. Indeed, we are told that we should rush ahead and call the Assembly together in six weeks. No doubt, the hon. Gentleman’s party would want us to vote into government those same parties with the paramilitary friends who would try to intimidate donors to his party. Sometimes, people need to take a reality check. I have no doubt that what the hon. Gentleman said was right. As the Chairman of the Select Committee said, he is an honourable man, but how can we admit those parties into government? Surely we need to be certain that all the criminal and illegal activity is finished for good.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
443 c1210-2 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Criminal proceedings Devolved matters Administration of justice Decommissioning Amnesties Fraud Finance Elections Firearms Donors Energy Electricity Electoral register National security Northern Ireland Police Northern Ireland Assembly Political parties Terrorism Sustainable development Weapons Timetables Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland Reserved matters Statutory instruments Northern Ireland Consolidated Fund
Legislation
Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk