---

Northern Ireland Bill

In debating the possible future of the Northern Ireland Assembly, it is absolutely imperative that the Government and the Minister who will answer the debate understand what our community requires. It is not a requirement built on prejudice. It is not an excessive or extreme requirement, but it is a requirement that will not move. It is a reasonable requirement, which we demanded a considerable number of years ago. It remains steadfast today, and it will remain exactly the same at midnight on 24 November. Our requirement is twofold. First, it relates to the Provisional IRA. The IMC report has been released today, and progress has been made. I make what I hope will be the very obvious and helpful statement that if we are making progress with democratising the IRA, we keep making that progress. If we are pushing those in the IRA in the right direction, we keep pushing them in the same direction. We do not ease up; we do not change tack; we do not legitimise them, but we keep pushing them in the same direction. Therefore, if the tactics of a more recent vintage are working—unlike the tactics leading up to 1998 and subsequently, which patently did not work—the message is clear: we keep adopting the same tactics. If that takes until November or December, or November 2007 or 2008, we keep adopting the same tactics. We require the IRA to be gone, to be history, to be out of guns and out of business and to be finished and not coming back. That is the first aspect of what we require, and every reasonable person in Northern Ireland—both those who support the DUP and those who may come to support our party in future—will agree to that prerequisite. The other thing that we require is an acceptable system of government. We need an acceptable system for the Assembly. That system was not provided in 1998. Some of the changes that we have seen—I hope that more are to come—are potentially the ones that we would require. The system would then be more accountable, more democratic and more responsive to the people of Northern Ireland. If those two eminently reasonable requirements were met—we hope that they will be—we would embrace devolved government, with all the democratic political parties playing their role. The question is, by 24 November will Sinn Fein be the same as every other political party in Northern Ireland that is upholding democracy? My view is that it will not. In the midst of much lauding of what has happened to date, people may well think that there will be some sort of fast-forward process between today and 24 November. Methinks not, but I remain to be convinced. If the IRA goes into history in the next six months—as it has not over the past 37 years—that will be some fast forward, which I will welcome, and which will be widely welcomed by the community that we represent. I hope that those two prerequisites will be viewed and welcomed by democrats everywhere. However, I want to urge another word of caution. In this House and elsewhere, some hon. Members have made statements regarding Sinn Fein’s need to support the police. It would be foolish for people to say that a statement in support of the police by Gerry Adams, or anyone else in the leadership of Sinn Fein, would automatically mean that an organisation that has spent 37 years engaging in mayhem, murder and slaughter was suddenly democratic, by virtue of issuing that statement. Sinn Fein needs to be in a credible position that allows it to support the police. Anyone can issue a statement. We have watched Sinn Fein as it has tried to reconcile what are supposed to be pragmatic elements in the republican movement with those who are less pragmatic. Allegedly, it has been saying different things to different elements in the republican movement. Why do people not believe that Sinn Fein would do the same with regard to the police? It could issue a statement of support for the police, but at the same time say to the backwoodsmen, who are allegedly supposed to be holding the process back, ““This is simply a device to allow us to corrupt the Policing Board from within and to ensure that the policing system falls apart.”” Sinn Fein must be credible in supporting the police. In other words, it must have divested itself of all aspects of criminality. Then, we would expect and demand a statement of support for the police, because Sinn Fein would be credible in offering it. I caution Members not to say simply, ““Sinn Fein must issue a statement of support for the police.”” It needs to do much more than that. Unfortunately, in recent weeks and months there have been approaches to members of my party that have seemed to indicate that the reasonable position that we are putting forward—and which we have put forward for years—is somehow perceived as a radical departure. There seems to be an idea that people who previously had horns—that is to say, members of the Democratic Unionist party—have gone through some form of metamorphosis, re-formed ourselves into democrats and are now suddenly reasonable people. It appears that there is some confusion. Members cannot seem to distinguish between having a reasonable position, which we have, and being utterly resolute and determined that we will give no inch or quarter to terrorists, murderers and those who would pollute democracy.