HC Deb 30 July 1998 vol 317 cc599-603
Mr. Donaldson

I beg to move amendment No. 4, in page 31, line 41, at end insert— '(3) No executive function shall be discharged under this section, by a Minister or Ministers, without the prior approval of the Assembly voting on a cross-community basis in accordance with section 4(5).'.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this, it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 5, in clause 68, page 32, line 20, at end insert 'but may not be made without the approval of the Assembly voting on a cross-community basis in accordance with section 4(5).'.

7.45 pm
Mr. Donaldson

The terms of the agreement in strand 2 dealing with the north-south ministerial council state: Northern Ireland to be represented by the First Minister, Deputy First Minister and any relevant Ministers, the Irish Government by the Taoiseach and relevant Ministers, all operating in accordance with the rules for democratic authority and accountability in force in the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Oireachtas respectively. The amendment would make explicit in the Bill the requirement for democratic authority to be granted to Ministers as they enter into discussions and reach decisions in the north-south ministerial council with their Irish counterparts. It must be clearly understood that Ministers are operating with democratic authority, as laid down by the Assembly, and that they are accountable to the Assembly for executive decisions taken after discussions in the north-south ministerial council.

Amendment No. 5 applies to clause 68, which deals with the implementation bodies that will be agreed and established by the north-south ministerial council. Subsection (4) states: Where the Secretary of State has made or proposes to make grants under subsection (3), an order under this section may make provision corresponding to paragraph 7 of Schedule 8". The amendment would add the words but may not be made without the approval of the Assembly voting on a cross-community basis in accordance with section 4(5). The agreement makes it clear in the provisions under strand 2 that funding for the implementation bodies is to be provided by the two Administrations—the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Irish Government— on the basis that the Council and the implementation bodies constitute a necessary public function. Our amendment seeks to take account of the provisions of the agreement, which would require the Assembly, voting on a cross-community basis, to bring into effect the funding for the implementation bodies. If the Assembly is to have real control over its budget, it is important that it should have control over the funding of the implementation bodies.

I hope, therefore, that the Government, honouring the spirit of the agreement and its terms, particularly in relation to the functions of the assembly, will accept the amendments. They cannot argue against the amendments on the basis that they are not in the agreement, because they clearly follow the explicit terms of the agreement. The amendments would create more confidence in the accountability of the north-south institutions to the Assembly.

Mr. Peter Robinson

We are dealing with one of the twin pillars of the agreement, to which the Prime Minister directly referred when he came to Northern Ireland and when he gave commitments in the House and elsewhere. He made it clear that the Assembly would be democratic and that the north-south bodies would be accountable to the Assembly.

I shall be frank. Throughout the referendum campaign, I made it clear that I did not see anywhere in the agreement what the Prime Minister was saying. The Bill is a faithful representation of what the agreement says, but it is not a faithful representation of how the agreement was interpreted by the Prime Minister for the people of Northern Ireland—it was, after all, based on the interpretation of the Prime Minister that the people of Northern Ireland voted in the referendum.

This is the Prime Minister's Government, and I suppose that it must be recognised that they will want to make good the Prime Minister's pledges. On 20 May—that famous occasion—the Prime Minister came to Northern Ireland, complete with his poster hoarding, and personally signed his five pledges. One was that the power to take decisions would be returned to a Northern Ireland Assembly, with accountable North/South co-operation. That pledge contains two elements—accountability and co-operation—but the Bill makes it very clear that the north-south bodies are not accountable to the Assembly, and that they will be performing executive functions.

I remember that, in Committee, the Minister attempted to say that the north-south bodies were accountable because Ministers were accountable. If he is relying on that argument as his get-out clause for what the Prime Minister said, I have to tell him that it is very weak. He knows as well as I do that Ministers are not accountable in the sense that Ministers would be accountable in this Chamber. A majority cannot get rid of a Minister or overturn a ministerial decision. In this set-up, it requires a consensus vote and, in many cases, the Minister's party could veto any move against him or against his decision. There is no real accountability. If accountability applies only to the Minister, not to his actions, that makes the position even weaker.

I hope that the Minister will recognise that he has not resolved the issue that is central to the concerns of many Unionists in the House and in Northern Ireland, and that he has to do better. The provision cannot remain in the Bill and enjoy the support of the Unionist community in Northern Ireland.

Mr. McGrady

It seems that the amendment seeks to ensure that democratic accountability resides with the Assembly of Northern Ireland in respect of the involvement of members of the north-south ministerial council. I refer the proposers of the amendment to paragraph 6 of strand 2 of the agreement, which reads: Each side to be in a position to take decisions in the Council within the defined authority of those attending, through the arrangements in place for co-ordination of executive functions within each jurisdiction. Each side to remain accountable to the Assembly and Oireachtas respectively". The degree of accountability is clear, and the Bill reflects that accountability. I refer the House to clause 15 in part III, which deals with the executive authority of the First, Second and any other Ministers.

The Bill states that the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister will present to the Assembly a programme of executive action and budgetary control. Clause 15(2) states: A determination in respect of policy, intended executive action and a proposed budget under subsection (1) shall not have effect unless it is approved by a resolution of the Assembly passed with cross-community support. The thread of authority flows directly from the Assembly, through cross-community approval to Ministers and the participating persons in the north-south body, which, by its very nature, is constrained by that which has already been approved by the Assembly. Although I understand the fears expressed by the proposers of the amendment, I submit that they are fully covered by the Bill.

Mr. Öpik

Liberal Democrats raised this issue at earlier stages of our consideration of the Bill. There is great concern in certain quarters that there is no specific reassurance in the Bill that executive functions discharged by Ministers under the strand 2 arrangements require cross-community approval, as outlined in the amendment.

The hon. Member for South Down (Mr. McGrady) made it clear that his interpretation of the Bill, especially clause 15 and related clauses, is that it contains sufficient conditions to ensure that no significant decisions can be made by Ministers before those decisions have received the approval of or ratification from the Assembly. I understand his cogent argument, but it would be extremely helpful if, for the sake of the record, which will be used to interpret the Bill, he could give a reassurance that it is his clear expectation that Ministers could not embark on important executive decisions without the clear authorisation of the Assembly.

This debate and its consequences could cause friction in the future, and we have to navigate it carefully. One of the advantages that we have is that we shall review procedures in the not too distant future, once the Assembly has had some time to function. I seek the Minister's reassurance that he will be willing to revisit the matter if it seems that there are continuing difficulties with strand 2, and that, if it becomes clear that there are deficiencies, he will return to the House with proposals to overcome them.

Mr. Temple-Morris

This issue was discussed in Committee. I welcome the amendment moved by the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Mr. Donaldson), and I have a great deal of sympathy with the concern expressed by the hon. Member for Belfast, East (Mr. Robinson). This provision needs to be drawn as tightly as possible, and there are gaps between the Bill and paragraphs 9 to 13 of strand 2 of the Belfast agreement, which is what concerns Opposition Members.

I might be reinforcing that point by saying that, if I remember rightly, during our previous debate my hon. Friend the Minister undertook to examine the wording of clause 66. I am sure that clause 68, which is allied to it, will form part of that research. In other words, the Minister has already given an undertaking, which will no doubt be repeated now and which will form part of the busy summer that he is rapidly taking upon himself.

My substantive point is that although we need to get things right, I see no cause for alarm. Paragraph 13 of strand 2 of the agreement states: It is understood that the North/South Ministerial Council and the Northern Ireland Assembly are mutually inter-dependent". The idea that a functionary of the Assembly can participate in these bodies without the broad consent of the Assembly before, after or during is not at issue. I am sure that the Assembly will control that which it has to control, whatever the drafting of the particular clauses. If it does not, it will not work. It is as simple as that.

However, I agree that there must be sufficient resemblance between the Bill and the Belfast agreement. The accountability is there, as is the legislative authority that has been transferred to the Assembly. Anything that any Northern Ireland Minister does in one of these bodies has to be approved in legislation by the Assembly. In common-sense terms, that is sufficient, but we should perhaps improve the clause to allay any fears that might exist in Northern Ireland.

Mr. Paul Murphy

We debated this matter at some length earlier in the week and on Second Reading. I take account of the points that were made by my hon. Friend the Member for Leominster (Mr. Temple-Morris) and by other hon. Members. I shall deal with the two amendments and then make some general comments.

Amendment No. 5 is unnecessary because it deals with orders that will be made during the transitional shadow period to give effect to arrangements that will have been agreed by the Northern Ireland Administration. The Secretary of State's power to make orders under the clause are needed to enable the Government to meet their responsibility to set up the implementation bodies that are envisaged in strand 2. They will be identified and agreed between representatives of the Northern Ireland transitional administration and the Irish Government operating in the north-south ministerial council. Of course, they will be set up by order in the House.

8 pm

Amendment No. 4 goes beyond the Belfast agreement by insisting on prior approval of every ministerial function. Paragraph 6 of strand 2 clearly states: Each side to be in a position to take decisions in the Council within the defined authority of those attending, through the arrangements in place for co-ordination of executive functions within each jurisdiction. The amendment goes against that. However, I sympathise with much of what hon. Members have said, because, although to my mind it is clear that the north-south ministerial council must be properly accountable to the Dail and to the Assembly, there is a case for looking more carefully at the wording of the relevant clauses to ensure that accountability is clear. I think that the meaning is implicit, but there is a need to look at the matter again.

Some days ago I said, and I repeat, that no Minister on the north-south ministerial council who is worth his salt would return to the Assembly in the knowledge that he or she would not have its backing. For example, money would have to be provided for any scheme and legislation might be required, and those are matters for the Assembly. There is a case for revisiting the clauses and I shall be grateful if the amendment is withdrawn on the understanding that we shall look at the wording in another place.

Mr. Donaldson

In the light of what the Minister has said, I am prepared to withdraw the amendment. I hope that the Minister will pay careful attention to what has been said. We stand ready to assist him with the wording in whatever way we can. I hope that he will take on board our arguments on this important aspect of the Bill. The Government must understand that if there is to be confidence among many people the Government must address this matter. I welcome the speech by the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Temple-Morris) in that regard.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Forward to