HC Deb 07 May 1998 vol 311 cc925-33

Amendments made: No. 35, in page 47, leave out lines 5 to 7 and insert—

"'(4A) In the application of this section to the police force—

  1. (a) in subsection (2) for the words "as expenses of the police authority" there shall be substituted the words "out of funds put at the disposal of the Chief Constable under section 10(5) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998"; and
  2. (b) subsection (4) shall be omitted.".'.

No. 36, in page 47, leave out lines 22 and 23 and insert—

'"(4A) In the application of paragraph (4) to the police force for the words "as expenses of the police authority" there shall be substituted the words "out of funds put at the disposal of the Chief Constable under section 10(5) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998".".'.

No. 37, in page 49, leave out lines 32 to 34 and insert—

"'(3A) In the application of this Article to the police force—

  1. (a) in paragraph (2) for the words "as expenses of the police authority" there shall be substituted the words "out of funds put at the disposal of the Chief Constable under section 10(5) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998"; and
  2. (b) paragraph (3) shall be omitted.".'.

No. 38, in page 49, line 36, at end insert

'The Police (Health and Safety)(Northern Ireland) Order 1997 (NI 16)

25. In Article 7(3) of the Police (Health and Safety)(Northem Ireland) Order 1997 in the definition of "the relevant fund" after paragraph (a) there shall be inserted— (aa) in relation to the Royal Ulster Constabulary or the Royal Ulster Constabulary Reserve, funds put at the disposal of the Chief Constable under section 10(5) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998; and".'.—[Mr. Dowd.]

Order for Third Reading read.

7.37 pm
Mr. Ingram

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

I shall not detain the House much longer, but it is important that we comment on the considerable debates on Second Reading, in Committee and on Report. We have had another useful debate on all the issues involved in the Bill this evening.

The provisions of the Bill will establish a more efficient, effective, accountable and acceptable police service in Northern Ireland. It is worth reflecting briefly on the significant provisions in the Bill. It preserves the operational independence of the Chief Constable. He will remain free of partisan political control. It also preserves and more clearly focuses the role of the Police Authority.

It introduces new police objective setting and planning mechanisms. Those will enable greater accountability of the police to the community through the Police Authority.

The Bill clarifies the responsibilities and roles of the partners in the tripartite structure. It enables financial responsibility for the day-to-day management of policing to pass to the Chief Constable from the Police Authority so that the local senior officer can be held accountable for the service that he or she delivers. The Bill also provides for the establishment of a new independent system for investigating police complaints. That measure, above all others, has received unanimous support.

The provisions of the Bill are therefore the building blocks on which other sensible improvements can be made if found to be necessary in the future. There is no doubt that the Bill has benefited from its passage through the Commons. I am extremely grateful to hon. Members from all parties for their contribution. I also thank the Police Authority, the RUC and the Independent Commission for Police Complaints for their valuable contributions as the Bill has proceeded through the House. All have had a major input in shaping the Bill. It will leave the House in a form that will command the full support not only of the House of Commons but of people across Northern Ireland.

As the House will be aware, while we were taking the Bill through its Commons stages, the on-going talks process resulted in the Good Friday agreement. That agreement, if endorsed by the people of Northern Ireland on 22 May, will result in the setting up of an independent commission on policing. Many of the key features of the Bill are identified in principles set out in the agreement and in the terms of reference for the independent commission, which will consider those essential ingredients of sound, effective and widely supported policing arrangements for Northern Ireland.

The independent commission will be truly independent and will look at the areas identified in its terms of reference; therefore, it can look at this legislation. However, I am sure that, when it does so, it will take due note of our deliberations and the support in the House and across Northern Ireland for the Bill's provisions.

The Bill will bring real benefits to all the people of Northern Ireland, because good, effective policing is at the very heart of any law-abiding society. It is a worthwhile and necessary measure, and I commend it to the House.

7.39 pm
Mr. Moss

I concur with most of what the Minister has just said. I went through the amendment paper and counted 38 Government amendments on Report, which is adequate testimony to the proper and detailed scrutiny that the Bill has received, both in Committee and on Report. The Bill was in gestation during the time of the previous Government, but considerable additions and changes have been made by the Labour Government and there are differences from the legislation that pertains in England and Wales. I give credit to the Minister and his team for the constructive way in which they have addressed the concerns expressed by Opposition members of the Committee. Despite political change, it was important to go ahead with the legislation.

Northern Ireland is disadvantaged by not having a Police Authority with appropriate powers to look after the public interest—powers that have been enjoyed for some time by police authorities in the rest of the United Kingdom. The Bill not only defines an expanded role for the Police Authority for Northern Ireland, but gives it considerably enhanced powers and responsibilities. First and foremost, it is accountable to the general public and most of the amendments tabled in Committee were designed to clarify that role and strengthen the powers of the Police Authority to fulfil it.

The new and evolving political situation provides a changing backdrop for the Bill; it also raises questions about the future of the Royal Ulster Constabulary. The Opposition have been reassured by the Prime Minister's comments on a secure future for the RUC, but we would be most unhappy to see any developments that undermined the RUC's morale and efficiency.

We view the forthcoming commission as an opportunity, not a trial—an opportunity to put on the record in a conclusive and definitive way the significant contribution made by the RUC to law and order, to the normalisation of life in Northern Ireland and to general stability in society. Great sacrifices have been made by numerous brave officers in the face of threats and intimidation over many years and we commend that record of unstinting service, both to the Crown and to the communities of Northern Ireland. We are confident that the commission will reach similar conclusions as there is nothing to hide.

The Bill puts policing in Northern Ireland on a completely new level. The changes are to be welcomed, dealing as they do not only with the powers of the enhanced Police Authority, but with the new position of the police ombudsman. That breaks entirely new ground and is ahead of the legislation that applies to the rest of the United Kingdom. There are several areas in which the Opposition would still like to see some change and those will, no doubt, be the subject of debate in the other place. For the time being, the Bill is much better for the amendments that have been made.

7.43 pm
Mr. Maginnis

I suppose that there are times in one's life when one feels that the efforts that one has made here are ignored and unrewarded. I have endured that feeling on many occasions in the past and will probably do so on many occasions in the future. However, in this instance, I feel that the long hours that we have spent taking the Bill through its various stages have been worth while.

As someone who has been closely associated with the Royal Ulster Constabulary for many years, I have been deeply concerned at how external interests have had dominance over the interests of a police service that, not only for the past 28 years but for the past 42 years—with the exception of about nine uneasy years tucked in at various points—has had to place itself time and again as a bulwark between the law-abiding community and the terrorist. I sometimes get the feeling that that role is forgotten.

I had that feeling a couple of years ago when the Chief Constable was conducting his fundamental review and looking at the possibility of a peaceful society in Northern Ireland and at the ultimate necessity of downsizing the RUC. At that time, I searched for what the RUC, with its more than 300 dead policemen and its more than 7,000 injured policemen, had been given that was out of the ordinary and took account of the special circumstances in which it has to police. I looked at the £240 million that came from the peace and reconciliation fund and discovered that the RUC had not been given a single solitary brass farthing.

I raise that matter because, with the help of others who are friends of the RUC and who are concerned about the welfare of the RUC, and with the RUC federation, there was established at that time the Police Rehabilitation and Retraining Trust. Originally, it was hoped that the trust would provide on-going medical assessment for policemen who were suffering the physical and mental effects of so many years combating terrorism; and that, looking forward to a more peaceful society and the need to downsize, we would not have several hundred, 1,000, 2,000 or 3,000 policemen suddenly discarded without any consideration for their welfare. The trust has continued to work over the past couple of years with those aims in mind.

It is with a degree of enjoyment—there is no better word—that I acknowledge the work that the Minister of State has done since we first broached the subject with him five months ago. That work has led to the Prime Minister announcing yesterday a £4.5 million package to be used to provide physical and mental assessments so that members of the police in Northern Ireland will have access, at the right time, to the best medical care; and so that a policeman no longer feels he has to hide chronic illnesses, but knows that they can be dealt with efficiently and effectively. I hope that hon. Members of all parties will also approve the concept of retraining our police for the future, before the event. I am grateful that the Government have reacted so positively on that issue.

As we move hopefully towards, not just an agreement signed or assented to on 10 April or the referendum result that will come on 22 May, but greater accommodation and understanding between the two traditions in Northern Ireland, I should like to think that the role of the police will change to a considerable degree, so that both traditions will accord the sort of respect to our constabulary that they expect our constabulary to accord them. That process could begin if we do not create circumstances in which the police have to continue to occupy a position between the two traditions. It could begin if the nonsense and obscenity of Harryville comes to an end. It could begin if the nonsense and obscenity of those who oppose the church parade at Drumcree comes to an end.

If we are to have ultimate agreement in our society in Northern Ireland, there has to be respect between the two traditions. We cannot say that we believe in equity and equality of treatment if at the same time we are saying, "I cannot stand the sight of that person from the other tradition to the extent that he cannot walk to his church once a year or every Saturday evening."

The RUC has for many years been an anti-terrorist police force, but it has also fulfilled with great efficiency its role as a civil power. Its level of detection, ability to obtain convictions and crime prevention work, whether on burglary or drugs, are of considerable note. It is a successful constabulary, but it is to be examined once again. Examination is not a bad thing, except when it is repeated many times. The RUC seems always to be under the microscope.

The appointment of a commission will be crucial to the RUC's confidence and morale. The commission's task, first and foremost, must be to ensure the welfare of the RUC, now and in the future. I hope that, in the light of new arrangements, there will be a recognition that the RUC has a right to its history, just as we all believe that we have such a right. I hope also that the clamour for a change in name and for other unnecessary and mischievous changes will abate, and that, in the light of the Bill and what is to come, we shall consider carefully how our civil power can operate normally in a civil society.

The police recognise that downsizing is an inevitable consequence of peace, but I have never heard a policeman say, "I should like the violence and confrontation to increase because my job is at stake." I work closely with the police. They are always looking for the moment when they are rewarded for their years of working to protect society in Northern Ireland.

In the wake of the decision that we are making today, and of other decisions that have been made in the past couple of months, and in looking forward to constructive decisions that I hope will be made in the coming months, we should all adopt a compassionate attitude—I do not think that that is an exaggeration—to those who have faced so much on our behalf and who now have to go through yet another period of uncertainty, with retraining and perhaps even having to find a new job in the next four or five years. Our Royal Ulster Constabulary deserves that compassion. I am grateful to the Minister and those in his Department who have helped to make the Bill more acceptable to the interests of the RUC and of the Police Authority, which has an important role in ensuring that society has a channel to the law keepers and law enforcers.

7.56 pm
Mr. Mallon

Like other hon. Members, I am pleased and relieved that we have reached the final stages of the Bill. It has been a long, tedious and difficult Bill because of its innovations. In Committee and in the House we have debated policing without ever deviating to discuss the police. That tells us something about the process that we have been through.

The Bill is not a watershed, but it is certainly a signpost in the right direction. I am not being less than generous to it when I say that its principles will extend far beyond the time when the problem may start to be solved. That solution will come inexorably. When it does, the current and previous Governments can take great credit for having had the foresight to see that things were going to change and for trying to deal with that change constructively and positively.

We have dealt with a difficult aspect of Northern Irish life, as the speech of the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. Maginnis) showed. On one side of the community there is a deep emotional attachment to policing, but there is a chasm on the other side. We have to address that. We can deal with the technicalities in legislation, but the gap must be dealt with. The issue symbolises the division in our community. As the hon. Gentleman says, we must start to bind the wounds, because they are deep and are linked to powerful emotions throughout the entire community.

I come from a village that lost a number of people who were members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary. They were killed by IRA terrorists. I knew them. I knew their families. I know the effect that such loss has on an entire community, and I know how deep a residue it leaves on both sides—not only deep hurt, but a sense of guilt, which must be dealt with too.

I respond to the point made by the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone by saying that if the new agreement is passed, as it will be on 22 May, it will be followed by an election, and it will then start to operate. Those are the technical elements of the agreement, but what are its essence and ethos? For the first time, what are now two communities in the north of Ireland will, we hope, start to work with a unity of purpose that will allow us to bind the wounds and to deal with the scars, to start the process of accommodation and to start the process—if I may use the term without sounding banal—of forgiveness, because that is what it will have to be.

We must start the process of restoring self-respect to everyone in the north of Ireland. That is one of the things that is at stake, especially in relation to what we have been discussing today. I could almost hear the sound of the post-colonial bugle in the speech made by the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone—I could hear the emotion in it; but I suggest to him that there should be no feeling of triumphalism on either side. There should be no feeling of losing or winning in relation to this issue. There should be no feeling of getting one over the other fellow, or one community getting something other than what is agreed by the other community. I believe that, very quickly, once that approach starts to operate, it will solve the problems of policing, as it will solve the political problems, the problems of instability, the problems of bigotry and the problems of hatred—the problems whose roots are so deeply embedded in our entire community.

Good Friday and the week leading up to it were among the most remarkable days of my life, because there was a sense of something happening which was good and would never be lost. Participation in the Bill's passage has also been good for all of us, because when we look into the future, we realise some of the challenges that we must face. I look forward to facing those challenges alongside the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone and all his honourable colleagues on the Opposition Benches. I look forward to facing up to the problems that we must deal with, binding the wounds that we have to bind and creating the self-respect for everyone that we must create as a priority.

Political leadership in Northern Ireland will be crucial. It is my belief that, when the agreement is implemented and the assembly is set up, the assembly will come of age when those in it agree to assume full responsibility for the process of policing and justice, because that goes to the heart of any society—agreeing how it will live. That is the primary responsibility that any political authority should seek.

That will not happen quickly and it will not happen without many problems—time will be of the essence in binding the wounds and bridging the gaps—but the assembly will have come of age when, in effect, the people of the north of Ireland, from all sides, together, assume responsibility for that crucial part of their lives.

I have spent 18 years as a spokesman on policing and justice, which I have found a fairly difficult area due to the divisions, tensions and aberrations of attitude in both communities, but I hope that there is one thing I never lost: the belief that, somehow or another, through time, by using our abilities, through whatever grace is given to us, we would be able to start together; Unionist, nationalist, republican, loyalist, Catholic, Protestant—call it what you like; one word will do me, people—in the north of Ireland, to solve these problems.

The hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone made a very proper and poignant reference to the fund for policemen who had been injured physically or mentally, and their families, because they have suffered greatly too. I want to be associated with those remarks. I want it to be known that I believe that it is right that those people should receive recognition and get whatever comfort they can be given. It is stark, but I believe that the greatest tribute that we can pay to all those who died—ordinary people, policemen, soldiers or whoever—in the past 25 years of barbarism is together to start to bind those wounds, and by binding them, solve these problems once and for all.

8.7 pm

Rev. Ian Paisley

I want to express a different point of view—one that will not surprise the House.

I stood in the European Parliament on Wednesday 29 April and I saw the Secretary of State and the Foreign Minister of the Irish Republic sitting together. I have heard some very good and rightful tributes to the Royal Ulster Constabulary, but one question is uppermost in the minds of the people of Northern Ireland. Under the terms of the agreement, those who have been amenable to the law for some of the murders of the 270-odd police officers and others who have died will be out on the streets in 24 months; and yet one police officer was murdered in the south of Ireland and the amnesty will not affect the man who murdered him. He stays—rightly, in my opinion—behind bars. I want to say on behalf of those who cannot speak—the 270 police officers: is the agony that their loved ones went through any different from the agony of that one wife in the south of Ireland? Some say that there are no winners, but there are winners in regard to that matter. The hon. Member for Newry and Armagh (Mr. Mallon) said that it goes very deep, but we cannot deal with the wounds except by facing up to them realistically.

The hon. Gentleman should not be too sure about 22 May. When the Prime Minister was in our country he had a conversation with various people. Everyone knows that Northern Ireland is a closely related society. He was worried about his opinion polls, and he mentioned figures that did not bear out what his opinion polls were telling him about 22 May. People should not think that ordinary Unionists in Northern Ireland will be bribed, bullied or attacked into not doing what they know in their hearts they should do.

Time will tell, but one thing is certain: the majority of the Unionist population will not be voting yes in the referendum. We shall see whether all parties stand on the same platform. We shall see how far there is a consensus, with a majority of one side of the community agreeing with a majority of the other side. The agreement departs from that principle because it makes it clear that if at any time 50 per cent. plus one—not the majority of each part of the population—say that Ulster should go into a united Ireland, the Governments of both countries will see to it that that takes place. The House should recognise that.

We are told in speeches that there are no winners, then we listen to what Gerry Adams says. Some members of the party to which the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh belongs are saying entirely different things—not what we have heard in the House today about the RUC, but about its destruction. They do not want a reconstructed RUC; they want a new police force in Northern Ireland. The people of Northern Ireland must consider that.

All over Northern Ireland there are sorrowing hearts. There is no difference between the sorrow of a Protestant mother and that of a Roman Catholic mother. There is no difference in the heart's agony. I have been in the homes of both communities, and I know what I am speaking of. I have perhaps attended more funerals in both communities than any other person. I know how they feel.

The House must not think that the Bill will serve as a magic wand and change the entire situation. The hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. Maginnis) knows how divided his party is on the issue and how the majority of the official Unionist Members of Parliament feel about it. Elected representatives know the feeling of their community and they know the feeling that motivates that community.

As I said on Second Reading, I do not believe that the Bill was brought before the House so quickly just because the Government were anxious to deal with it. The arrangement was a sop to republicans. I reminded myself of what the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh said in his speech on Second Reading, when we discussed the oath that the police take to Her Majesty the Queen, which the Bill will do away with. He said: I welcome the change in the affirmation or oath, although I do not believe that it will make any fundamental difference to the problem."— [Official Report, 15 December 1997; Vol. 303, c. 57.] There is reality. Other people think that if they remove this, that and the other, they will have solved the problem. They will have done nothing of the sort. The solution will be accomplished only when all men are equal under the law and all are equally subject to the law. The agreement deviates fundamentally from that principle.

As I said to the Prime Minister on one occasion, there was a terrible tragedy in Scotland. Young people were mown down by a gunman. There was heartbreak and heartache. What happened? The previous Government, and the Government formed by the right hon. Gentleman when they came to power, decided to take the licensed guns from everyone. That legislation went through the House and those who held on to their guns would get a maximum penalty of 10 years in gaol.

We have arsenals of arms—not licensed guns, but guns that have done some of the most horrendous murders, brought tears to the widows and orphans, split families, destroyed society, and spread grief and harm. Yes, those guns are held by both sides of the community, yet the Government do not say, "Bring in those guns. Let them all be taken in." The policy of the talks was that their surrender must be a mutual process: those who held murder weapons must mutually agree to hand them in. That day will never dawn.

I have heard people say that the ghosts of the past haunt us, but it is not the ghosts of the past that haunt the people of Northern Ireland tonight. What haunts them tonight is the reality of the present and the future, when gunmen will be in the streets and have access to those arsenals of arms and be ready to use them if they do not get their way, as they have in the past. That is what worries the people of Northern Ireland, and the Bill does not deal with it. People here do not want to discuss the matter, but it hangs as a shadow over the future of my Province. Such matters cannot be swept under the carpet; they must be faced.

There is unity on one part of the Bill, as I mentioned, and I am glad of that, but much of the rest of the Bill is a sop to republican thinking. We could have waited until the commission was in place, but the tide of time will run on to 22 May and beyond. We shall see what is in the minds and the hearts of the people of Northern Ireland. No £3 million will be spent by the ordinary people in Northern Ireland on the referendum. That will be Government money. No special money will be set aside by so-called business interests to promote their attitude among the people. The ordinary man in Ulster will do his duty and his voice will be heard. I hope that the House will listen to it because, time and again, it has not heeded the voices of the ordinary people of Northern Ireland.

I remind the House of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which was supposed to heal the malady. The House may remember that hon. Members from the Unionist groupings left this place and fought an election—and we know the results of that election. The people spoke, but they were not listened to. The people gathered, and they were not listened to. Perhaps on this occasion they will be listened to. In heeding the voice of the people, we shall find the way forward for Northern Ireland.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.