HC Deb 29 June 1995 vol 262 cc1070-2
4. Mr. Soley

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what new proposals he has to legislate for human rights in Northern Ireland. [29804]

Sir Patrick Mayhew

It is my intention that legislation on the general lines of the Race Relations Act 1976 should be introduced in Northern Ireland. We will also be considering, in the context of the talks process, how civil, political, social and cultural rights might best be further protected.

Mr. Soley

I am grateful for that answer. May I urge on the Secretary of State that he and his Department give careful thought to the possibility of a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland, which could go some way to reassure all sections of the community that in the future, whatever that holds, civil and human rights will be preserved and enhanced?

Sir Patrick Mayhew

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, who has long taken close interest in these matters. We have said for a long time that we would be prepared to enhance protection for human rights in Northern Ireland. There is obviously a passage in each of the framework documents that bears upon that. If all the parties were to agree that the best means of such protection were a Bill of Rights, the Government would obviously take account of that view in the light of prevailing circumstances. At this juncture, we would not wish to rule anything out or in.

Mr. Stephen

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the most important human right of all is the right to life? Is not it remarkable that there has been freedom for such a long time from sectarian killing and destruction in Northern Ireland, a situation that many people thought would never happen? Is not that due in large measure to the brilliant negotiating skills of our right hon. Friend the Prime Minister?

Sir Patrick Mayhew

I very warmly endorse what my hon. Friend has just said. I do not believe that any body of opinion in Northern Ireland would disagree with what he has said, both as to the Prime Minister's skill, and certainly his commitment, and as to the level of surprise that what has come about in the past 10 months has occasioned. The right to life is the most fundamental human right of all, and one must always continue to stress that, not least when discussing the activities of people who presume to impose punishment without charge, without trial and without appeal.

Mr. Maginnis

Will the Secretary of State confirm for the record that the Ulster Unionist party tabled specific and detailed proposals for a Bill of Rights at the very start of the 1992 inter-party talks and was the only party to do so, but that neither the Irish Government nor the leader of the Social Democratic and Labour party showed any interest in discussing those proposals?

In the light of the decision by the IRA's northern command to embark upon what it calls "a rolling resumption" of violence, how does the Secretary of State envisage that he will be able to sustain human rights for the greater number of people in Northern Ireland?

Sir Patrick Mayhew

First, I confirm that the hon. Gentleman's party did introduce substantial proposals for a Bill of Rights. I readily acknowledge that. The question of a Bill of Rights gives rise to an interesting debate, which is not all one way but, as I said, and I now repeat, if everyone agrees upon it, that will obviously weigh heavily with the Government.

As to the hon. Gentleman's assertion, I and my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office are grateful to the hon. Gentleman for meeting my right hon. Friend last night and making him aware of information that has come to him. That is the only source of such information in the Government's possession at the moment, but I simply say that if anyone in Northern Ireland has any intention to return to violence, that will meet with outrage from the people of Northern Ireland. I can assure the hon. Gentleman and the House that the security forces will take all appropriate precautions to ensure that it is thwarted.

Mr. Mallon

I associate myself with the remarks about Senator Gordon Wilson, who was a friend and a colleague and someone for whom I had enormous respect. That is also the view of my colleagues.

Does the Secretary of State agree that in any society based on human rights there are two principles—one is the principle of equality before the law and the other is the principle that those who govern and those who are governed at all times and in all circumstances uphold the primacy of the law?

Does the Secretary of State further agree that if he makes a decision in the Clegg case, an Executive decision made by a politician on the advice of civil servants, which overrules a decision of the Northern Ireland High Court, the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, that, in effect, will devalue and demean the whole process of law in Northern Ireland?

Will the Secretary of State accept from me that at this moment that would be tantamount to throwing a lighted match on to a tinder-box in Northern Ireland and, moreover, would rub salt in the wounds of those who have served long sentences according to due process, not according to Executive decision? Will the Secretary of State answer that? Does he uphold the primacy of the law and will he in this case?

Sir Patrick Mayhew

Of course I will. I have no intention of overruling, nor have I any jurisdiction to overrule, the decision of the High Court, the Court of Appeal, or the House of Lords. The hon. Gentleman is confusing that notion with the concept of the jurisdiction that Parliament has conferred upon the holder of my office—as it has conferred it on the Home Secretary in Great Britain—to deal with the question of whether a sentence for life should mean for the whole of someone's natural life or not. I imagine that there are many people in prison of whom the hon. Gentleman has some knowledge—though very little sympathy, I feel sure—whom he would not wish to see languish in prison for the rest of their natural lives simply because that is the character of the sentence that has been imposed upon them. He can be perfectly certain that any individual case that falls within my jurisdiction will be dealt with in the best way that seems to me to accord with the rule of law and the jurisdiction conferred upon me by Parliament.

At the risk of going on for too long—I hope I am not—I can say that of course we uphold the concept of equality before the law. That does not mean to say that every individual case receives equal treatment in terms of years or whatever. It means that the same considerations are applied, but does not mean that the identical result appears in every case. If that were the case, the individual circumstances would be neglected

Ms Mowlam

In view of the breadth of the issues that have been raised in the House this afternoon, and the strength of feeling about decommissioning and prisoners, would the Secretary of State give a commitment to the House to bring those matters up in his discussions with the Tanaiste tomorrow and tell the House a little more about the nature of the study group set up with Dublin following the Cannes meeting earlier in the week?

Sir Patrick Mayhew

The proceedings of intergovernmental conferences are always confidential and I think that it is right that they should remain confidential. It is very important that the two Governments, who have now established a long practice and experience of talking freely and frankly with each other, should be able to do so in circumstances of confidentiality. Most things that are relevant to the jurisdiction of each Government get discussed.