Law Officers (Hansard, 1 July 1993)

§ 2. Mr. Campbell-Savours
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what proposals he has for strengthening the powers of Law Officers as they relate to Northern Ireland.

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
None at present.

§ Mr. Campbell-Savours
Are not the ideas set out in the discussion document of my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara), particularly as they relate to future law and order enforcement in Northern Ireland, a breath of fresh air which the British people will welcome, as they want to see British politicians break the logjam in Northern Ireland? To confirm that, I must tell the Secretary of State that we have constituents in the north of England who spend their time patrolling the streets of Northern Ireland. They, more than any others, want the logjam to be broken. Should not all British political parties look constructively on the very good work that has been done by my hon. Friend?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
We do not know—that is the trouble—whether the policy document constitutes fresh air, hot air or the declared policy of the Labour party. I believe that we are entitled to know that. The hon. Gentleman's constituents—[Interruption.] If I may attract the hon. Gentleman's attention. I assumed, in his favour, that he might be interested in an answer. The hon. Gentleman's constituents who serve gallantly in the British Army in Northern Ireland will want to know whether it is the policy of the so-called alternative Government that there should be imposed upon Northern Ireland, against the wishes of the majority—a constitutional change which would ensure that the hon. Gentleman's constituents had a much harder task on their hands when they next serve there.

§ Mr. Peter Bottomley
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the best thing for the Law Officers and for the paper is for it to be published openly by the Labour party rather than be hidden and for the Leader of the Opposition to say where he stands and where his party stands and whether it is the same as where the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) stands?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
That would be interesting. It would also be interesting to know what connection this topic has with the Law Officers.

§ Mr. Molyneaux
Given that 20-minute display of reconciliation and bipartisanship, and given the requests made by many authoritative institutions in Northern Ireland for a strengthening of the law against terrorism, will the Secretary of State assure us that when the royal commission reports, which will probably be next week, he will take speedy action on those matters, which have been in the pending tray for too long?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The right hon. Gentleman refers to suggestions made recently by the Chief Constable for changes in the law. It is perfectly true that those are under consideration. They are bound, I would guess, to be considered by the Runciman royal commission which is reporting shortly. It would be sensible to see what that report says about those proposed changes. The law must be kept under review and any changes must meet the test of being effective in the control of terrorism and proportionate to the harm that is sought to be redressed. That is a test which would generally apply.
The document has some relevance to the Army because paragraph 13 says: Security would initially be the joint responsibility of the Great Britain and Irish nominees to the Executive Joint Authority. Responsibilities for the police force and the army would rotate between them. That is a good example of joint authority towards which the Labour party's policy is evidently moving.

§ Mr. McNamara
I have a great number of replies to give to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, though I thought that I was asking the questions. The hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Duncan Smith) who asked Question 1 left after the reply from the Secretary of State. [HON. MEMBERS: "So what?"] I should have thought that he might at least have waited to hear the supplementary questions.
Let me make the position of the leaked document clear. It was a discussion document. In my party, party policy is not made at the whim of official spokesmen, but by party conferences, after free discussion and properly gathered. The spokesmen have a duty to lead forward discussion—[Interruption.]

§ Madam Speaker
Order. I called the hon. Gentleman because he indicated that he wished to put a supplementary question to Question 2. I must ask him to put his question in relation to Question 2.

§ Mr. McNamara
You have put me in a difficult position, Madam Speaker, because—[ Interruption.] I have had questions put to me by the Secretary of State and I thought that he wanted answers. I have questions to ask. Let me observe, before I put my question, that the right hon. and learned Gentleman did not answer the point that the Anglo-Irish Agreement was imposed and gave the Irish Government the right to ask any question they wanted concerning the affairs of Northern Ireland.
Coming to the question of the Law Officers and of legality, following last year's disturbances in the Lower Ormeau road on 12 July, has the Secretary of State had any discussions this year about re-routing the march from that highly sensitive area? Given that the Secretary of State told reporters on Monday night that the issue of parades had never been discussed at the Anglo-Irish conference meetings, will he confirm that he put his name to the last communiqué of the intergovernmental conference which stated: 1098 The conference discussed a number of particular issues including … parades"? Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman only have a selective memory and should we prefer Sir Hal Miller's?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The hon. Gentleman refers to an answer I gave to journalists on Tuesday. I understood that I had been asked whether there had been a discussion in London at the last IGC meeting about the route to be taken by the parade that took place on Saturday. That was how I was understood by journalists present. That was confirmed, incidentally and interestingly, yesterday in a question put by Eamonn Malley of Downtown Radio when I was in Antrim, who said that, on Tuesday, I had rightly said that there was no discussion of the route taken by that march in Belfast on Saturday. Of course, it is right that the general topic of marches and their effect on public order falls within the ambit of what is properly discussed under intergovernmental policies. That comes under what is agreed in the Anglo-Irish Agreement, and the most recent communiqué makes that perfectly clear. If the hon. Gentleman is seeking to get out his muck rake again, he has chosen the wrong heap.