Devolution (Hansard, 26 May 1999)

§ 3. Mr. Don Touhig (Islwyn)
What progress is being made towards devolution in Northern Ireland. [84439]

§ 4. Mr. Bill Michie (Sheffield, Heeley)
What progress has been made in implementing the Good Friday agreement. [84440]

§ 5. Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood)
When she expects the Executive for Northern Ireland to assume its governmental responsibilities. [84441]

§ 6. Miss Anne Begg (Aberdeen, South)
What progress is being made towards devolution in Northern Ireland. [84442]

§ The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Marjorie Mowlam)
A great deal of progress has been made in implementing the Good Friday agreement. Practical preparations for devolution are complete, and a deadline of 30 June has been set. The Government and the parties are continuing to talk to resolve the outstanding issues.

§ Mr. Touhig
The Government have delivered on their pledges for devolution in Wales, Scotland and Northern 338 Ireland. As one who represents a Welsh constituency, I consider today's opening of the Welsh Assembly to be an historic event for all the peoples of Britain. Does my right hon. Friend agree, however, that it will be a great disappointment for the people of Northern Ireland if, having elected an Assembly nearly a year ago, they cannot join the people of Wales and Scotland in taking control of their own affairs on devolution day, 1 July?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
Yes, that would be a great disappointment—not just for the Northern Ireland parties represented here, but, above all, for the people of Northern Ireland. A year ago, in the only poll that counts—a referendum—they demonstrated that they, too, wanted progress. Now they are scared: they are frightened that progress will not be made. I agree wholeheartedly that it would be an appalling tragedy if we failed to make that progress.

§ Mr. Michie
Will my right hon. Friend reassure the House that the implementation of the Good Friday agreement and the recommendations on policing in Northern Ireland will not suggest that there is an equivalence between the law-abiding citizens who have been fighting for law and order and democracy in Northern Ireland, and those who have deliberately sought to destroy those things?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
I assure my hon. Friend that there is no equivalence between the two groups as he has outlined them; I can give him that assurance categorically. May I at the same time say to the police and to the other emergency services that they have worked so hard over the years to hold the fabric of Northern Ireland together that I should like—in terms of this question—to put that on record. It is important to do that now when we are working up to the parades, as we have on previous years. The police will be caught in the middle between both communities and will be there trying to hold the fabric of that society together and to uphold the rule of law. It is important that, with the Patten commission inquiry pending, that recognition is clearly given.

§ Mr. Wilkinson
May I remind the Secretary of State that paragraph 23 of the Belfast agreement is clear: As a condition of appointment, Ministers … will affirm the terms of a Pledge of Office". Paragraph (b) of the pledge is a commitment to non-violence and exclusively peaceful and democratic means". No amount of vacuous sophistry or appeasement can in any sense permit political parties that are apologists for those who illegally hold weapons to participate in an elected Executive for the Province.

§ Marjorie Mowlam
I assure the hon. Gentleman that it is not a policy of appeasement. That pledge of office and the commitment to non-violence and a democratic way forward was made by the parties in the talks. We are slowly moving that process forward. Yes, there is violence on the fringes still. Since the beginning of May, the figures are something like 20 paramilitary beatings and 15 assaults. Some of those are by groups that want to destroy the process; others are by individuals. I study the information carefully—I can assure him of that—as I did with the security advisers whom I met at the beginning of the week.
339 I have hearsay. I have discussion with journalists, but I do not have evidence. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that, if I had evidence, in terms of the judgment that I review constantly in the round as to whether people should still be in the talks, I would act. At the moment, I do not have that information. I make it clear to him that, if I did, I would act accordingly.

§ Miss Begg
Having seen the pictures of the new Scottish Parliament sitting in Edinburgh and today's official opening of the Welsh Assembly, does my right hon. Friend share the frustrations of the House of Commons that there has been so little progress in setting up the Executive in Northern Ireland? Will she join me in encouraging the politicians there just to get on with it?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
I thank my hon. Friend for those comments. We all share that frustration. It would be inhuman not to, but we have to understand, and it is difficult some days, that people are trying to change and change is not easy to cope with. I think that everyone wants progress to be made, none more so than the people of Northern Ireland. I do believe that, however slow it is, there is a commitment by the parties to try to make progress and that is what we are seeing at the moment. I am sure that the parties involved in the talks will hear the feelings of the whole House that we want progress to be made because, in the end, that is what the people of Northern Ireland want. I hope that, very soon, with the deadline of 30 June, that frustration declines considerably.

§ Mr. William Ross (East Londonderry)
Given that it appears that, if devolution takes place, Mr. Martin McGuinness will be the Secretary of State for Education, or in charge of education, in Northern Ireland, how will any teacher in any school in Northern Ireland convince the pupils under their care that past involvement in violence, thuggery, beating, mutilations, intimidation, arson, bombings and murder will be a bar to future preferment and advancement?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
What we are doing is implementing the Good Friday agreement, which was supported by the parties in the talks. Some parties that are not represented here today voted against it. They will be represented in the devolved Parliament, too, if they so choose, but what we are doing is implementing the Good Friday agreement.
As I have said so often in the House, we can live in the past, we definitely have to understand the history, but we should not live in the past. If we do, the violence will continue. With the Good Friday agreement, we have the best chance for many years to make progress. Yes, it is difficult. I do not enjoy talking to people with the kind of background that some of them have, but I prefer to talk than have people killed. That is what the Good Friday agreement, at base, is about.

§ Mr. Phil Willis (Harrogate and Knaresborough)
Liberal Democrat Members appreciate the difficulties facing the Secretary of State in trying to reach a compromise by 30 June. If that compromise is not achieved, and there is not a solution by that date, will she trigger d'Hondt?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
I should turn that around by saying that, at some point—for devolution to occur— 340 d'Hondt will have to be triggered. We shall be spending the next couple of weeks in trying to find a way of doing that.

§ Mrs. Maria Fyfe (Glasgow, Maryhill)
As we work our way towards reaching agreement, on 30 June, does my right hon. Friend share my frustration at constantly hearing in the House remarks seeming to imply that all the violence is coming from one side? Will she join me in condemning current sectarian attacks against Catholics? What assessment has she made of those who are responsible for that particular violence?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
I support my hon. Friend's comment that violence—currently, more loyalist than Catholic—is being perpetrated by both extremes. However, that violence should be roundly condemned by all sides. As I said in reply to the question by the hon. Member for Ruislip-Northwood (Mr. Wilkinson), I constantly keep the situation under review and make assessments. My current assessment is that there is not sufficient evidence to make a judgment in the round that action should be taken. However, I should leave the House in no doubt that, if that evidence comes forward, we shall act accordingly.

§ Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby)
The Secretary of State said that she wants to live not in the past, but in the present and the future. Will she therefore hail as a success implementation of the Good Friday agreement if terrorists and representatives of terrorist organisations are sitting in the Government of Northern Ireland while those same terrorist organisations—be it the IRA or others—hold on to their weapons?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will accept that, as Ministers have said many times from the Dispatch Box, there will have to be both decommissioning and formation of the Executive. Both will have to happen: the Good Friday agreement will have to be implemented. Neither is a precondition, but both are obligations. We are currently working on a way in which to ensure that both happen.

§ Mr. Andrew MacKay (Bracknell)
Does the Secretary of State recall that the Prime Minister described the recent Hillsborough declaration as a "huge and significant milestone"? If that is so, why has the declaration's central plank—on IRA decommissioning of illegally held weapons—been jettisoned, and why are we now being told that Sinn Fein members should, before decommissioning, take their places in the Executive?

§ Marjorie Mowlam
That is a complete misrepresentation of current discussions. The Hillsborough declaration was the best that the two Governments could do to find a way forward in addressing the issues that I outlined in my previous reply. We are trying to address those issues now, as we have been for the past four weeks. The options currently being considered by the parties do not address the big issues of decommissioning and formation of the Executive, which the right hon. Gentleman mentioned, but are a step towards addressing them, in the hope of making some progress in moving the process forward. Progress will not be made in a flash of immediacy, but will be made step 341 by step. We are now considering only one of those steps, and it does not include the issues that the right hon. Gentleman raised.

§ Mr. MacKay
The questions that I have asked are essential and fundamental. There is no question that, in a democracy, such as ours, people should hold Executive office but not decommission their illegally held arms and explosives. It would hugely help the talks and the process if the Secretary of State would now promise the House that there are no circumstances in which Sinn Fein members would become Ministers in the Executive without having properly started to decommission their illegally held weapons.

§ Marjorie Mowlam
Of course, as the right hon. Gentleman has said, the two issues are crucial—central—to the Good Friday agreement. No one is avoiding them. All one is trying to do—it is the nature of negotiations—is to try, slowly, to build the trust and confidence to move the process forward. The issues will be got to—they cannot be avoided; they are part of the agreement. The process that we are trying to achieve is one in which the parties reach a point at which they are able directly to address those issues. If we bang them on the table on day one, we are not likely to make progress. We are still at day one in trying to deal with the issue. That is the nature of the negotiations. We are trying to move issues forward step by step. It is for the parties, with our help and support, to do what they can to reach an accommodation on the issues.