§ 3. Mr. Beithasked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he expects to receive the report of the reconvened Constitutional Convention.
§ 6. Mr. O'Halloranasked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he is satisfied with the progress being made by the reconvened Convention; and if he will make a statement.
§ 7. Mr. Biggs-Davisonasked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will make a statement about the resumed Constitutional Convention.
§ 11. Mr. Watkinsonasked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will 1463 make a further statement about the political situation in Northern Ireland.
§ Mr. Merlyn ReesThe reconvened Convention met on 3rd February and decided to continue its work through inter-party meetings chaired by Sir Robert Lowry, the Chairman of the Convention. I understand that a number of such meetings have taken place. As I told the House on 12th January—[Vol. 903, c. 61.]—I expect the reconvened Convention's business to be concluded within four weeks of its first sitting.
§ Mr. BeithI welcome the fact that these meetings are continuing to take place. Does the Secretary of State agree that it would be a bad day for Northern Ireland if those who have the largest representation in the Convention denied to that Province the degree of self-government which many of us would like it to have because they are unwilling to find a basis for co-operation in government with the representatives of the whole of the community?
§ Mr. ReesI have made the Government's views clear. I did so last in a White Paper which was the text of a letter that I sent to the Chairman. I stand by that. We need some means whereby a severely divided community can work together for the good of Northern Ireland. That is the only way we shall get a devolved Government there. If that does not happen, we have responsibility for Northern Ireland. Nothing that anybody can say or do can wash away that responsibility, because it is there. If people want devolved government, they must put their ideas constructively to us.
§ Mr. NeaveI agree with the right hon. Gentleman's statement about devolved government, but does he not agree with the leading article in The Times today, which says that the withdrawal of the Government's authority from Northern Ireland, which is advocated by a number of his hon. Friends in a letter to The Times, will encourage the IRA, be a starting flag for civil war in a part of the United Kingdom, and will not lead to the political solution that he wants?
§ Mr. ReesI have not said anything but that. Many people treat Northern Ireland as if it is a colonial territory and as if there is a Government to take it over. It was this House that ended the 1464 Government of Northern Ireland in 1972. There is nothing to hand over to. There are occasions when people there act as though they govern Northern Ireland. They do not. All the reins of government are here. This is where they will remain, even if there is a devolved Government, because devolution does not mean independence.
§ Mr. WatkinsonTo what extent is the Mafia-style of politics that is developing in Northern Ireland hindering the creation of a viable political solution there?
§ Mr. ReesMy hon. Friend may be referring to some of the happenings that take place there, particularly the happenings of yesterday and some of the happenings of last week end. From my postbag and from comments made elsewhere it seems that they are the sort of unparliamentary activities that take place. The sort of thing that took place at Stormont Castle yesterday afternoon does nothing for the good name of Northern Ireland.
§ Mr. RoseWill my right hon. Friend make it abundantly clear to those who purport to value the British connection that if they deny the will of Parliament—to which they say they owe allegiance—by refusing any form of power sharing or coalition they will call into question not only their good name but the govern-ability of that Province, with a consequent reappraisal of the presence of our security forces there?
§ Mr. ReesI understand what my hon. Friend says, because it is what many people in this country say. The plain fact is that any reassessment of the situation is still faced with two basic facts. Anyone who believes that if we were not present in Northern Ireland the minority community there would get the treatment they wanted would be wrong. If it were not for the presence of the British Army and the rôle that it plays in Northern Ireland there would be a civil war far worse than anything we have seen, which would spread this side of the water. There are no easy reappraisals, or solutions waiting to be pulled out of a drawer. It was only five years ago that we began to look again at the matter. I hope that we shall not make the mistake that is often made this side of the water in believing that there is a simple solution. 1465 Irish affairs are always too complicated for that.