---

Northern Ireland Act 2000 (Modification) Order 2006

I thank the Minister for bringing the order before us. In doing so, I regret—probably more than most—that it has to be renewed. I am a firm believer in devolved government and, if I had my way, we would be in a devolved administration at Stormont tomorrow, where I would try to work the system from the inside outwards. But, sadly, that is not what the public in Northern Ireland want and it is not what they understand to be the needs of our community. There is another political party which, in that one respect—and only in that one respect—has shown it to be more at one with the electorate than my party has been. In other respects, Ulster Unionism has a vision for the future and would like an opportunity to move things forward. I shall use the mild word ““coercion””—I could use a much more aggressive word—to describe the way in which certain people who currently have responsibility in Northern Ireland treat the Unionist people. There is a degree of coercion in terms of, ““If you do not do it our way, in the timescale we envisage as important, we will work virtually to your disadvantage””. We see this in terms of the education order that is coming before this House in the near future when there should at least be a Bill brought before us. The Government in their attitude to post-primary education have—and I say this bluntly—not played fair with the people of Northern Ireland. We have had a system of education that has sustained us through the most difficult times since the late 1940s. I was one of the first of that generation to benefit from the grammar school system and universal education at that level and I have seen my four children educated through the grammar school system. The Government are now saying, ““You take responsibility for government in Northern Ireland and you can do what you like—but in the mean time we are going to change that system””. Let me illustrate why I resent that attitude. I asked a parliamentary Question in about June or July 2004; I asked the same Question at about the same time in 2005; and I asked it yet a third time a month or two ago. The Question was quite simple: what planning has been done, and what infrastructure audit has been carried out, of educational facilities in Northern Ireland? What costing has been done of how the changes would affect the educational budget with regard to extra transport and supervision and the time that teachers, children and others would be away from the classroom if we got into the very complex and—to put it bluntly—nonsensical system that is being proposed? The first time I asked the Question I was told that no infrastructure audit had been done and that there had been no costings. I was told the same thing the second time. On the third occasion—and I thank the Minister for this—I got a more comprehensive answer. I thank him for the more comprehensive answer, not for its content, because the content was basically, ““Well, we will let it work itself out locally and, as it works itself out, we will know what it costs and we will deal with it””. That is not government and it is not reflective of the speech that I heard from the Chancellor of the Exchequer in another place today. That lack of co-ordination and planning is a weakness that I must, by right, point out to the Government. I shall give one other example. Prior to 1998, when I was personally involved in the negotiations that brought about the Belfast agreement, I met with a senior officer in the RUC, Stephen White—who later became an assistant chief constable—and a team of senior civil servants, who had spent a great deal of time planning how restorative justice might be introduced into our system in Northern Ireland. I disagreed with some of what they were saying but, none the less, constructive work was carried out by those people. In the interim, nothing has happened. Well, strictly speaking, that is not true. In the interim, paramilitary and other organisations which are totally unaccountable have set up restorative justice schemes in Northern Ireland dealing with young people. Noble Lords will realise that the after effects of terrorism mean that we are a ghettoised society. In the loyalist ghettos, loyalist organisations are administering their own form of justice and the same is happening in republican ghettos—and the Government do not seem to care. Again in response to a parliamentary Question, I was told that private money is involved and that the schemes—I am trying to remember the words—are unregulated. That is not justice and it should not be tolerated. I was also told that I should ask the RUC and the Director of Public Prosecutions what they were doing about it and how the whole issue was being policed. I went to the police but, try as hard as they can—they told me that they have searched through 45,000 documents—they cannot find anything to do with the work of the then chief superintendent, Stephen White, and his associate civil servants. So is direct rule, as we call it, to be second best? I know that the Minister—I say this not to flatter him because he is the sort of person who is well able to defend himself—works hard and I know that he tries to do what is best for Northern Ireland. I should not say this because he will have to defend them, but I am not sure that all of his colleagues have the same motivation. But, having said that, it is the lack of accountability in Northern Ireland that distresses me most. Such accountability may relate to the police. In his recommendations, the noble Lord, Lord Patten, said that the police board should have a majority of elected people. The Secretary of State has changed that. It has now become a quango—and a quango is anathema to me and to people like me. We simply do not want Northern Ireland to be governed by quangos and by those who are unaccountable. That brings me to my final point. The Government are moving us forward with some speed towards the reform of public administration. I am glad that public administration—particularly at local government level—is being re-examined and that we might make progress. We have been waiting for that for a long time. But there has been no preparation. If it is the Government’s intention to implement new boundaries and a new system of local government by 2009, we will not be ready. Bluntly, we do not have enough good people interested in running local government as it is at the moment—and I think we all understand why. I have just retired from local government after 24 years. There are not enough younger, more energetic and more community-involved people in local government to move things forward on the totally new dispensation that is about to be introduced. There are many questions I could ask to follow up points that have already been made, but I shall desist. I would be grateful, though, if the Minister would tell us what preparation is being made in practical terms to ensure that there are enough people, with enough information and training, to make a new tier of local government with all the added responsibilities that we have not had since 1973. How will it be made to work?