Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Cormack (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 26 April 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Northern Ireland Bill.


Northern Ireland Bill

They are indeed. Because of the demography of Northern Ireland and the sad history of recent decades, we recognise that we must try to find an accommodation and work with those people. The least that we can expect is for them to behave in the same way as Marxist parties in some democracies—although not many—in other parts of the world. We are asking a great deal. I make a plea to the Government on two fronts. I understand why the Secretary of State cannot be present, and I hope that the Minister, who is diligent, will relay my points to him. First, while I accept the firmness of the Government’s intention and wish for a deadline, I think that it would be sensible to make it the end of the year. Secondly and more important, I think that it would be sensible, if we are to plead with the parties in Northern Ireland to work together, to refrain from any unnecessary Orders in Council in the House, at least until the November deadline specified by the Government. Several speakers, including the right hon. Member for Torfaen, referred to the reform of local government. At the moment, this House is imposing on the people of Northern Ireland a democratic local government structure that none of the democratic parties wants. It is clear to me from my many conversations with people in Northern Ireland that there is an acceptance that there are too many local authorities. But there is an equal acceptance among most to whom I speak that seven authorities is too few—an acceptance of the logic of the argument of the hon. Member for Foyle (Mark Durkan) that such a structure runs the risk of polarising Northern Ireland for generations into, ““Three green, three orange and Belfast.”” Such a structure cannot be good if we truly want a Northern Ireland that works together. Frankly, it was very undemocratic of the Secretary of State to dismiss such worries when he was intervened on by saying that business people and various groups want such a structure. Northern Ireland’s elected politicians, who are playing a part in the democratic structures of this House, do not want it, so I beg the Minister to put that proposal on ice and to say, as a real encouragement to those who would participate in a proper and fully functioning Assembly, ““We will not impose on you a new local government structure if you can get your act together by the deadline.”” I also hope that the same will prove true of education. I accept that unanimity among the parties on this issue does not exist; indeed, it is clear from the evidence that my Committee took, and from talking to people, that there is division. There is probably a majority in Northern Ireland who do not want the change that the Government are seeking to impose, although there seems to be a general recognition that the form of the 11-plus could be altered. However, we should let the Assembly get its teeth into this issue and deal with it. As I said in a jocular aside to the right hon. Member for North Antrim, I am not sure that this House should even be passing water until 24 November; there again, there are deep divisions in Northern Ireland and real concerns. [Interruption.] Perhaps that is what the right hon. Gentleman, who is no longer in his place, has gone to do. [Interruption.] That was indeed a very indelicate remark. I urge the Minister to recognise that we are dealing with a number of issues that will affect the daily lives of the people of Northern Ireland for generations to come, and that we are anxious to have an Assembly that represents, is elected by and is answerable to them. Should not that Assembly have the same freedom to decide on such issues as the Parliament established in Scotland and the Assembly established in Wales? If we all mean business, there will have to be give and take on all sides. The absent ones in this House—the Sinn Fein Members who do not take their seats—have got to prove their democratic credentials. I would like them to be here, but if they will not come here, they should at least make the absolute and total renunciation that I have talked about. I say to the Unionist parties—and to the Social, Democratic and Labour party; I well remember the bravery of Gerry Fitt—that those who have suffered at the hands of gangsters and terrorists will have to sit down with those who have been gangsters or terrorists, or who supported them. A lot of give and take is involved. We in this House must be prepared to say, ““We are going to draw back from interference and domination while you have this period to sort yourselves out.”” That is not too much to ask of the Government—it is not too heavy a price for them to pay—in order to preserve a truly bipartisan policy. I am very pleased that we in the Select Committee do not divide on party lines. I hope that we will not, and that this House will not do so today or tomorrow. I very much hope that the Secretary of State’s wishes will be fulfilled, but I ask that he show the degree of caution and tolerance that is necessary if we are to have a real chance of achieving success on 24 November.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
445 c638-40 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Crimes of violence Decommissioning Devolution Belfast Agreement Elections Education IRA Local government Northern Ireland Powers Public appointments Northern Ireland Assembly Members Political parties Rates and rating Politics and government Ministers Northern Ireland Executive Water charges Reform Timetables Standing orders First Minister (NIE) Assembly Statutory instruments
Legislation
Northern Ireland Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk