---

Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill

New clauses 7 and 8 are better than the provisions that we examined in Committee, but we are still concerned on a couple of counts. On the new grounds for exclusion, the question whether people are committed to upholding the rule of law in Northern Ireland leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Earlier today, I mentioned the attitude of parties to the Parades Commission’s rulings, to the performance of the police in enforcing such rulings and to the ensuing violence in the case of Whiterock. It is possible to question many parties other than Sinn Fein about their attitude to upholding the rule of law. We now face the additional problem created by the step too far by the leader of the Ulster Unionist party in incorporating the leader of the political wing of the Ulster Volunteer Force into the UUP Assemblygroup. I assume that the Independent Monitoring Commission’s examination of the activities of political parties in the Assembly would centre on the rights and roles in the Assembly of the new UUP Assembly group rather than distinctively or specifically the Progressive Unionist party, because the IMC has powers, which have not yet been activated, on the conduct and rights of parties in the Assembly. That is an additional complication, and, because we are all coming to terms with it and hoping that other people might resolve it for us, it would be dangerous to accept new clause 7. New clause 8 proposes an addition to the pledge of office. As I have said, the SDLP is happy to consider in the context of a proper review of the agreement altering the pledge of office to include commitments on the rule of law or, indeed, the Police Service of Northern Ireland. In that context, new commitments could be made to people who participate in all the institutions or who exercise responsibility in all of the institutions. I originally drafted the pledge of office when we negotiated the agreement, and I was careful not to build in a commitment to all the institutions, because that would be unfair to Ministers who oppose the agreement—people should not have to sign up to the agreement to take office. Equally, we did not build in specific commitments at that stage in relation to policing and the rule of law. If the circumstances have changed, we could consider that matter, but it should be done in the context of a review agreed by the parties rather than by the House acting at its own behest.