---

Northern Ireland Bill

My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, for setting out in his usual clear and forthright manner the details of this short Bill and the context in which the Government are introducing it. Let me begin by making it quite clear that the Opposition support the Bill. We have had our differences with the Government over the years on their conduct of certain aspects of the peace process in Northern Ireland but today we share their objectives in wishing this initiative through to a successful conclusion. Devolution has now been suspended since October 2002—itself the fourth suspension since 1999. Yet the Assembly has continued to cost the taxpayer more than £80 million per annum simply to maintain it. As the Government have made clear, it is not sustainable to go on like this—paying Assembly Members’ salaries for a job of work that they are no longer carrying out. That is the reality. So, like the Government and all the main parties in Northern Ireland, we want to see a democratically accountable devolved government functioning in Northern Ireland. We want to see decisions over the issues that affect people’s daily lives taken by locally elected politicians in the Assembly rather than through the unsatisfactory procedures of direct rule that we struggle with here at Westminster. We want to see politicians from both the main traditions working together for the good of all the people of Northern Ireland. In all of this we are at one with the Government. We look forward to the Assembly’s recall on 15 May, and, if it proves impossible to elect an executive within six weeks—the most likely scenario—I hope that one can be formed by 24 November. But let us not delude ourselves about the obstacles that still have to be overcome. Judging by the statements of the Prime Minister and Bertie Ahern, they have come to the conclusion that the only remaining obstacle to devolution is the Democratic Unionist Party’s unwillingness to share power with Sinn Fein. In other words, they seem satisfied that Sinn Fein has now taken all the steps required of it to warrant, under its mandate, a place in the Government of Northern Ireland. I have to say to the Minister and Her Majesty’s Government that this is most definitely not how the matter is seen by the majority of people of Northern Ireland—not just the DUP but across the broader unionist community. Distrust of the republican movement—Sinn Fein and its IRA associates—remains widespread and deep. Of course, a great deal of progress has been made over the past year. This was acknowledged by the DUP deputy leader, Peter Robinson, in an important speech to the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body in Killarney last week. The IRA’s statement last July formally ending its armed campaign was hugely significant and welcome, as, I believe, was the act of decommissioning that took place in September. Gerry Adams has made it clear that the ““war””—in the sense of seeking to achieve a united Ireland through violence—is over. The Independent Monitoring Commission’s Tenth Report was published on Wednesday. Again, many of its conclusions were encouraging—a sign that republicans are moving in the right direction. But, for many people in Northern Ireland the question marks remain. There is the legacy of 30 years of appalling and savage terrorism. Anyone who lives in Northern Ireland knows somebody or a family, from both the unionist and nationalist traditions, that has been affected by or suffered from IRA terrorism. So let us not underestimate what we are asking unionists in Northern Ireland to do when we ask them to enter government with Sinn Fein. And we should not be surprised if the community is hardly falling over itself to embrace Sinn Fein simply on the basis of one IMC report—welcome as it is—that gives the IRA a cleaner, though by no means a completely clean, bill of health. Just before Easter the Garda intercepted a lorry carrying €300,000 of stolen vodka and three known members of the IRA were arrested, one of whom was released early under the terms of the Belfast agreement. This prompted the Justice Minister in the Republic of Ireland to assert:"““As long as the IRA continues to exist and the IRA constitution continues to be treasonable and subversive then problems will continue to remain””." We agree with that assessment. Both the IMC and the Secretary of State indicate that in recent months the IRA has sought to prevent its members engaging in illegal activities. Indeed, the Secretary of State has said that the IRA is ““cracking down”” on members—whatever that means in practice. It used to mean knee-capping and worse. So we are right to be hopeful but, at the same time, cautious. Then there is the issue of policing. Sinn Fein still refuses to support the PSNI. In the words of the IMC, this is,"““still very controversial on the ground and has not been resolved to date within PIRA despite robust discussion””." To my mind it is simply inconceivable that a party can take up seats in any devolved government in the United Kingdom without supporting the police, the courts and the rule of law. So Her Majesty’s Government must accept that this issue has to be resolved before an executive can be formed. Without it, any chance of meeting the November deadline will be very small indeed. There is, of course, a simple test of whether the Government now accept the republican movement’s bona fides. If they believe that the IRA is permanently and irreversibly committed to peaceful and democratic means then presumably there is no longer any justification for IRA membership being a criminal offence. If the IRA no longer represents a terrorist threat, then presumably the Government will remove it from the list of terrorist organisations in Schedule 1 to the Terrorism Act. Would it not look rather odd in November to ask unionists to form a government with Sinn Fein, when that party remains inextricably linked to an organisation that is still proscribed under the Terrorism Act? Looking ahead to the recall of the Assembly itself, the Government have said that it will be able to debate the issues likely to face an incoming executive, such as education and local government reform. The Secretary of State in the other place pledged to take the Assembly’s views into account. Surely, the Government should go further than that. My honorable friend David Lidington, the Shadow Secretary of State in the other place, suggested at the weekend that the Government should have a freeze on such controversial pieces of legislation until after the 24 November deadline, or at least until such time as it becomes clear whether or not an executive will be formed. Will the Minister look seriously at that suggestion? It would be a travesty if the Assembly came to an agreement on issues in the coming weeks only for the Government to ride roughshod over its views. In the sad event of devolution not being possible by 24 November—I have asked this question before and have had a satisfactory answer but I will ask it once more—will the noble Lord reaffirm that plan B does not involve any move towards joint authority between London and Dublin over Northern Ireland? Welcome as co-operation on a range of matters is between two states that share a common land border, the internal governance of Northern Ireland is and will remain a matter for Her Majesty’s Government alone, accountable to this Parliament. That is a very important message to reiterate across the country and particulary the Province. We have come a long way in Northern Ireland over the past 15 years. For most people, life has improved immeasurably and I readily acknowledge that. I want nothing less than for Northern Ireland to be a peaceful, stable and prosperous part of the United Kingdom. We still have some way to go, however, and we should be in no doubt about that. We wish the Government well but are clear that devolution on an inclusive basis will happen only when all parties seeking ministerial positions subscribe to the same democratic values. It is against this background that my party shall support the Bill before your Lordships’ House this afternoon.