NORTHERN IRELAND CONSTITUTION BILL

HL Deb 10 July 1973 vol 344 cc642-85

3.6 p.m.

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (LORD WINDLESHAM)

My Lords, I have it in command from Her Majesty the Queen to acquaint the House that Her Majesty, having been informed of the purport of the Northern Ireland Constitution Bill, has consented to place her prerogative and interest, so far as they are affected by the Bill, at the disposal of Parliament for the purposes of the Bill.

I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. I do not intend to speak at great length in introducing this measure to-day. What the Bill does is to give legislative effect to the proposals contained in the White Paper, Northern Ireland: Constitutional Proposals (Cmnd. 5259), which your Lordships approved after a full debate on March 28, 1973. These new arrangements will replace those provided by the Government of Ireland Act 1920.

Since our debate on the White Paper, that part of the legislation needed to elect a new Assembly has been enacted and, as your Lordships will know, the elections to the new Assembly took place successfully on June 28, 1973. There are, therefore, now 78 representatives of different groups of opinion in Northern Ireland, each newly elected, and each with a distinct degree of individual responsibility to try to work towards the achievement of more stable and peaceful conditions. That, at least, the people of Northern Ireland, as well as of the United Kingdom as a whole, are entitled to expect.

We shall listen with particular interest to what the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, has to say in the debate to-day, since he is one of the 78 people who have just been elected as Members of the new Assembly. Noble Lords will also follow with the greatest attention the remarks of my noble friends Lord O'Neill of the Maine and Lord Moyola, both of whom made such valiant and courageous attempts to create a better future for all the people of Ulster during the time that they were responsible for the Government of Northern Ireland.

The White Paper set out the conclusions reached by the Secretary of State and the Government collectively as to the sort of constitutional system which is most likely to contribute to reconciliation. I must emphasise that these proposals did not emerge from some back room in Whitehall. They are, and should be recognised as, the results of a continuous appraisal of the situation as it is in all its stark reality on the ground in Northern Ireland. One of the consequences of the Temporary Provisions Act which prorogued the Parliament at Stormont fifteen months ago and transferred to Westminster direct responsibility for the Government of the Province was that, for the first time for half a century, British Ministers have been based in Northern Ireland, operating as a central part of the Irish political scene. Like any other political society, Ulster politics call for study and for understanding. I think most people would credit Mr. Whitelaw and his team (of which I was proud to have been a member until recently) as having accepted this imperative and acted upon it to the best of our ability. Thus these proposals, following on over a year of consultation with a wide range of interests, represent a considered judgment as to the framework of government best suited to the distinctive needs of the Province.

Northern Ireland, my Lords, is of course a Province, a part of the United Kingdom for which laws are made by The Queen in Parliament, and in respect of which measures of the Northern Ireland Assembly will be approved by the Queen in Council. Not only do we exercise sovereign rights but also we are bound by the pledges on the status of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom which are incorporated in Clause 1 of the Bill. There was some controversy in another place about whether it was necessary for these pledges to appear in the Bill and whether there should be machinery for determining the consent of the majority of the people in Northern Ireland by means of a poll. My right honourable friend, the Secretary of State explained why it is that the Government take the view that the pledge on the territorial status of Northern Ireland should be included in the Bill. Following extensive discussions which he recently held in Northern Ireland on this matter, the Secretary of State concluded that he should ask Parliament to take account of the strongly expressed view that there should be a provision in the Bill giving effect to the undertaking of the Prime Minister on March 24, 1972; namely, that there should be periodic plebiscites on the Border.

My Lords, in places the constitutional proposals contained in this Bill may at first sight look a little unfamiliar. It may not be immediately apparent to some of your Lordships why certain aspects of the Government's policies towards Ireland—for example, plebiscites, proportional representation, a broadly based Executive, legislation against religious and political discrimination and so on—are necessary. What I must therefore underline at the outset is that we have tried to build on what common ground there is in Northern Ireland and to develop new institutions which are capable of taking root and operating effectively in the quite different political conditions which apply in Northern Ireland.

The most distinctive feature of the situation in Northern Ireland is undoubtedly the deep divide between the two communities, far deeper than many people in Britain can envisage. There are many reasons for this—economic, social, and above all traditional reasons, as well as political and religious divisions, but some way has to be found to try to bring the communities closer together. Thus the principle which lies at the heart of the Bill is that of power sharing. Clause 2 of the Bill, in particular, interprets and puts into statutory form what was said in paragraphs 52 and 53 of the White Paper.

The Government recognise that there are considerable difficulties associated with the principle of power sharing which the provisions of Clause 2 are designed to achieve. No one would underestimate the problems facing those who have to work this new system. The important thing is to see this provision not only as a constitutional formula but also as a practical recognition of an inescapable fact. For unless the communities in Northern Ireland are prepared and able to work together, there cannot be any prospect of long-term peace and stability.

In the search for stable political institutions in Northern Ireland there are really only two approaches. One is to build upon a majority Government of the kind we have grown used to in Britain. But it is a fact that, for whatever reason, institutions modelled very closely on those at Westminster (the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill of the Maine, has in the past, I recall, argued that they have been too closely modelled on Westminster, giving the appearance of far greater independence than was the case) did not bring peace or government by consent in Northern Ireland over the last 50 years. If this is accepted—and who can dispute it?—then the only real alternative is some form of power sharing. There may legitimately be arguments—there will be arguments—as to how this can be achieved, but that it must be attempted is, I believe, something that none of your Lordships would wish to deny.

Democracy has many meanings, my Lords, but whatever else it means, it certainly does not just mean majority government. It is a whole complex of principles and relationships which permit free men to be governed with their general consent. What is suitable in a homogeneous society may be inappropriate in a divided one. Thus the Bill provides for a broadly based Executive, within the meaning of Clause 2, before power can be devolved to Northern Ireland institutions; and that the new institutions should incorporate provisions for consultative committees which will enable all interests in the Assembly to participate in government in Northern Ireland.

My Lords, if I may move on to Clause 8 of the Bill, this clause provides for an Executive comprising of Heads of Depart-muffs and a Chief Executive Member. Heads of Departments will in the normal way be responsible to the Northern Ireland Assembly for what they are doing and it will be necessary for the new Executive to get its business through the Assembly in a way similar to the practices with which we are familiar in Britain. Further, the business which will have to be conducted is of considerable importance. Once the broadly based Executive is set up, all functions other than those concerning the"excepted" and "reserved" matters which are set out in Schedules 2 and 3, can be transferred to Northern Ireland. We have deliberately left ourselves freedom to devolve further functions set out in Schedule 3 when stable government returns in Northern Ireland and when this Parliament thinks it proper to do so.

There is, however, another principle behind the proposals contained in the Bill. This is that the constitutional arrangement should be cast in a form which provides for a good deal of flexibility. It has always been our intention that elected representatives of the people of Northern Ireland should play as large a part as possible in deciding how a basis of government by consent can be established. The Bill incorporates this principle. What has to be found is some way of exercising executive power in Northern Ireland in relation to these transferred matters which is broadly acceptable throughout the community. Noble Lords will see that the Bill does not specify any precise provisions for weighted majorities and so on. The detailed procedures are left for the parties in the Northern Ireland Assembly to work out with the Secretary of State, but the criteria contained in Clause 2 must be met before any of the powers contained in the Bill can be devolved to Northern Ireland institutions.

My Lords, Part III of the Bill concerns discrimination. These clauses, Clauses 17 to 23, prohibit legislation which discriminates on political or religious grounds, and provides machinery to determine the validity of any such legislation. It also makes unlawful any actions in the public sector which are discriminatory on religious or political grounds. A Standing Advisory Commission on Human Rights will be set up to advise the Secretary of State on the adequacy and effectiveness of the law, and the practice of certain persons and bodies, in preventing discrimination. Clause 21 makes it unlawful for specified authorities and public or local bodies in Northern Ireland to require a person to take an oath or make an undertaking or declaration as a condition of his appointment to such an authority or body. No oath is required of members of the Assembly, and indeed the only requirement contained in the Bill concerning oaths or making a declaration is contained in Clause 8(10). This applies solely to members of the Executive and to two or three other members of the Assembly with executive functions. The wording is contained in a Schedule to the Bill, Schedule 4. Since oaths have played such a long and contentious part in Irish history, and since the form of words is quite brief, I shall read the Schedule to your Lordships. It reads as follows: I swear by Almighty God [or affirm] that I will uphold the laws of Northern Ireland and conscientiously fulfil [as a member of the Northern Ireland Executive] my duties under the Northern Ireland Constitution Act 1973 in the interests of Northern Ireland and its people. My Lords, I have not repeated to-day any of the tributes which we have expressed so often, and with such deep feeling, to Mr. Whitelaw, to the Army, and indeed to all of those in Northern Ireland (and there are many of them) who have made such great efforts to bring this tragic conflict to an end. They are determined, and will continue to be determined—my noble friend Lord Belstead not least—to try to come to terms with a most complex situation, and one that is deeply rooted in history. Nor have I referred again to our total rejection of, and contempt for, the campaign of violence which has been waged by extremists on both sides with such terrible consequences in terms of personal suffering, injury and death. These thoughts are for other occasions. To-day we are considering a Bill which we must earnestly hope represents a new beginning. I beg to move.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 2ª.—(Lord Windlesham.)

3.23 p.m.

BARONESS WHITE

My Lords, I speak for all my noble friends on this side of the House in welcoming this Bill and also in welcoming the spirit of the speech with which it has been introduced by the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham. We, too, look forward very much to the speeches which we hope to hear from the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill of the Maine, and the noble Lord, Lord Moyola; and perhaps more particularly, as the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, himself indicated, from the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, because he is in a particularly responsible position as a newly-elected member of the Assembly.

In offering general support for this Bill we are of course perfectly consistent, because we also warmly supported the White Paper on which it is based. I think there is only one matter of principle, to which I shall come a little later on, in which we seriously differ from the Government, and that is the question of enshrining in the Bill provisions for a Border poll. But, apart from that, we fully accept that legislation is required on the lines set out here, first of all for the position of Northern Ireland as set out (with the exception that I mentioned) in Clause 1. And because it will not be possible to provide for the activation of Part II without Parliamentary approbation, we should like to make it quite clear that we will do everything in our power to expedite the passage of this Bill through the House. I am empowered by my noble friend the Leader of the Opposition to say that, if it seems necessary or desirable, we should be happy to take all further stages of this Bill on one day.

I should also like to draw attention to the remarks made by my right honourable friend the Leader of the Opposition in another place concerning—if necessary, unpopular as it might be—a recall of the House if it proved impossible to obtain the necessary arrangements for the power-sharing Executive before we rise for the Recess. We hope very much that such arrangements can in fact be made, because we think very firmly that it would be in the general interests that they should be made as soon as possible, but we should not wish the Government to feel under any sort of constraint in their timing of any future action by the fact that Parliament normally goes into Recess I trust a little earlier this year than at least we did last year. It is only right that we should refer to the offer of co-operation made by my right honourable friend in another place, although we very much hope that it will not be necessary to take advantage of it. My Lords, we, as I am sure everyone in this House at least, look forward to an early announcement that discussions have resulted in the formation of an acceptable Executive. We do so in the feeling that, difficult as it must be in the situation which has arisen as a result of the last election, nevertheless the people of Northern Ireland, contrary to expectations, I think, in certain quarters, did show by their participation in that election that they are concerned that progress should be made in dealing with the political ordering of the Province. We have also all been very much impressed by the comments which have come in recent days from the Prime Minister of the Republic, because this surely must have some influence on both sides in the North. Things really have moved a very long way, I should have thought, when one has the Prime Minister of the Republic not any longer asserting the right to jurisdiction in the North. This is a most historic change, and one of which I hope everyone will take cognisance and full advantage.

It seemed to me it was also particularly important that Mr. Cosgrave did not substitute one dogmatism for another. His attitude is one which I hope we shall all share: that in Ulster we are feeling our way forward towards a new dispensation, that it is extremely difficult to see precisely how the new machinery will evolve, but that we should move forward. In the words of Mr. Cosgrave himself: Let us trust that the process itself will determine the outcome". In other words, if in order to try to make the new machinery work people exercise the good will, the patience and the tolerance which has been so much lacking in Ulster in the past, then, in a spirit of pragmatism and trial and error, we shall, I hope, find that these new institutions will prove successful. It is of course of outstanding importance that Mr. Cosgrave should have accepted the principle of consent, and should have accepted it as publicly and officially as he has done. This, again, is a new departure. We have seen some slight evidence of it before in the South, but I think this is the first time it has been put in such categorical terms as have been used by Mr. Cosgrave. Therefore, so far as the relationship with the Republic is concerned, it should be much easier for the Parties in Northern Ireland to work out their own salvation.

In saying that, I am only too well aware that things do not go by logic in any part of Ireland and that one cannot therefore take it for granted that these very sensible and wise words of Mr. Cosgrave will have the effect we should expect them to have. Nevertheless, one hopes they may make things easier far everyone of good will who is genuinely trying to make the new constitution work. We are acutely aware that there are persons in Ulster and persons who have been elected to the new Assembly whose declared policy it is to ensure that the new arrangements do not work; but there is, so far as one can judge in the shifting sands of politics, a majority of those, of very widely differing views, in the new Assembly who do wish from their respective viewpoints to secure the success of the new arrangements. Within those arrangements we certainly hope that a sufficient basis of agreement will be reached for the power-sharing machinery to come into effect.

It is, of course, true that in the Bill itself there are provisions which do not find their place in the working of government and politics in this country, but I think we should all entirely accept the proposition of the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, that what is suitable in our own more homogeneous society may not be appropriate in a society in which divisions are so very deep and of such long standing. Therefore, so far as we on this side of the House are concerned, we are happy to go along with the sections of the Bill which deal with proportional representation, with the broadly-based Executive, with the legislation against non-discrimination, with the standing advisory Commission on human rights, with the change in the form of oath or affirmation—indeed, that has a long history in Ireland—and therefore we entirely accept all these changes.

The one matter on which, my Lords, we have quite serious difficulty and which we may wish to discuss in greater detail on the Committee stage of the Bill is the provision in terms in the Bill for the holding of a referendum, plebiscite. Border poll—whatever you like to call it—at stated intervals of not less than ten years. This, frankly, we find ill advised. It is quite true that one Border poll has been held, but that was in exceptional circumstances when there was no elected body for the entire Province of Ulster by which opinions could have been expressed. The circumstances were unique; they will not hold good with the election now of an Assembly and we think that it is undesirable to have a provision of this kind enshrined in this legislation.

It is quite true that in another place when objections were made to this provision the Secretary of State, Mr. Whitelaw, explained that the results of a Border poll would not themselves automatically change the situation in any way. Very pertinent questions were put to him: what kind of majority would one need in a Border poll for it to be regarded as effective, because one could visualise a situation where a mere handful of people might be in a majority which might affect the entire status of the Province for another 10 years. This would not be regarded as good sense, I think, by anyone in any Party. Mr. Whitelaw pointed out, as I said, that there would be no immediate automatic effect; that the matter would have to be brought to Parliament at Westminster for determination if there were to be any change and, as he also very rightly emphasised, it would be subject to what the Republic might think, so that there would be no immediate effect. That being so, which of course is absolutely true, we feel that it is all the more undesirable to have this provision in the Bill. We appreciate that there was a pledge given by the Prime Minister in 1972 and that therefore the Government may feel that the Bill is bound to include such a provision. But of course we are not bound by any such pledge. Therefore, in spite of our general support for the Bill, we are not under any obligation to the Government to support them in this particular matter.

My Lords, there are others who wish to speak and I should not wish to take up the time of your Lordships' House in going into details which would be more appropriate at later stages of the Bill. I can only reiterate that we all hope—and some of us at least would pray—that the legislation that we are being asked to pass may be a step towards bringing to a close a very sad chapter indeed in the history of Northern Ireland. The Bill, we believe, provides hope for the people of the Province if they will endeavour to work it with good will and good sense; and we therefore wish it well.

3.37 p.m.

LORD MOYOLA

My Lords, being new to your Lordships' House I hope it is in order if I start my remarks by saying how very much many of us who live in Northern Ireland regret the departure of the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, who introduced this Bill, from the Northern Ireland scene. I can only say that he has been a tower of strength to us there; he has listened to many problems patiently and courteously, and has successfully dealt with very many of them, and I can assure him that there are very many people in Northern Ireland who are both grateful to him and very sad that he has left.

I have not, my Lords, very many points to make about the Bill. The only questions in my mind are: will it work, or is there anything that can be done that will make it work? I would say at this moment that it is certainly not possible to dwell on what happens if it does not work; and threats as to what may happen, that the troops may withdraw or whatever action might be thought appropriate to take in this country, will probably in fact do more harm than good, because on the one side they simply encourage the I.R.A. and the terrorists who think, "One more heave and we will push Northern Ireland over the cliff", and on the other I think they probably bring out the very worst streaks of Ulster obstinacy: people dig in their toes, dig them first into positions which in the ultimate they know and we all know are bound to be untenable. I think we should be looking at the ways and means of making work the things that are proposed in this Bill.

My Lords, there are two or three difficulties. Perhaps I may deal with the first, as I see it. As we know, the Assembly Elections are over, and many people I think feel that the result, which to us in Northern Ireland was fairly predictable, has been somewhat of a disappointment. The centre Parties have not done as well as they hoped to do, and the more extreme have done rather better. But be that as it may, at least we in Northern Ireland now know who speaks for the electorate. That in fact is a considerable advance. However, the extreme people on both sides have done well because of the continuing violence, and until the security situation improves —and I am the first to recognise that it is enormously better than it was even a few months ago—and we reach what a distinguished Member of another place referred to as an "acceptable level of violence", and assassinations and all that sort of thing cease, the extreme elements are going to be in the ascendancy. I am afraid that means that the prospects for this Bill and the new Assembly are bound to remain somewhat bleak. Having said that about the security situation, I hasten to add that it is in no way intended as an implied criticism of the Army, for whom I have nothing but the highest praise. If I were to be asked what more I thought ought to be done, I really could not answer; and, thank God! I should be out of order if I did. I would simply say that security does have an influence, and a very big one, on the likely actions of the Assembly.

My Lords, if I may touch on one more general point of that kind which I think has a hearing on the workings of this Bill and the Assembly, it is simply that we still need more help and co-operation from the Government of the Republic. I am not thinking particularly of chasing terrorists, but more in terms of the extra- dition of known terrorists who are wanted in the North. No doubt the noble Lord who is going to reply to the debate will be able to tell us how many extradition applications are outstanding. The fact is, so far as I am aware, that only one case of extradition has so far been granted, and between the North and the South that has become an extremely emotive issue. All I would say on that is that no extradition Northwards hardens one side of the political spectrum, just as assassinations harden the other. So far as I can see, these hard-line actions will go on until these things go right and the Army has won the battle. Once that has happened, things will settle and I believe that this Bill and the Assembly have a chance of working.

Then I think that the success or failure of the Bill also depends very much on the personalities involved, rather than on the contents of the Bill we are considering to-day. From the Northern Ireland point of view, as I see it, the crux of the whole matter is power-sharing: to try to persuade, somehow or other, the majority of the population to share with those whom they believe would wish to join Northern Ireland with the Republic, and whom they therefore think have not the slightest interest in the good Government of the country; and to persuade, on the other side of the coin, the S.D.L.P., who may have been brought up to believe, in my view quite wrongly, that oppressors are the cause of most of Northern Ireland's troubles that they can work with the Unionist Party. For this reason, the Leaders of both these Parties, in my view, will have quite a number of defectors when the power-sharing crunch comes; and it is therefore uncertain, to say the least, whether those who are willing to share power, or, as I would rather put it, to govern together, will command a majority of the Assembly even with the help of the Alliance Party, which I do not doubt will be forthcoming. All I can say on this matter is that whomsoever is to be the chief executive must have the right to choose the individuals with whom he is to govern. There must be no attempt, either from here or by the Parties in Northern Ireland, to try to force this issue. I personally think this system can work, but that it can only work provided we do not go too fast at it, and provided the chief executive is allowed to choose from the various Parties those with whom he feels able to work and who feel able to work with him.

My Lords, I should like to mention one matter within the Bill, and that is the question of the Border Poll. We have already heard the noble Baroness, Lady White, say that this is something which might well be omitted from the Bill. I hesitate to disagree with anyone who knows this House so much better than I do, but all I can say is: for God's sake leave it in! My view is that if it is accepted in Northern Ireland that from time to time public opinion can be tried out by a poll along the lines that we had on March 8 last, there is a hope that the Border will be taken out of Northern Ireland politics, and thereby you take cut the most controversial issue, the issue that gets tempers running highest. That issue will then be removed, I hope, both from elections and from the working of the Assembly. I believe that if the poll remains in the Bill there is a much greater possibility of really constructive work of a kind that will be of benefit to all, being done in the Assembly. As I see it, if you take it out, then Northern Ireland will have reason once again to go back to the old type of politics that we have known for so long, and which, in my view, are, and have been, totally unpopular.

Reverting to the present position and my original theme of whether this Bill and this new Assembly can work, I can only hope that the new Members of the Assembly will follow their own consciences and will not be told by outside influences what they have to do. Under this Bill they are asked (and let us not underestimate it) to do something which is extremely difficult. Unionist and the S.D.L.P. Parties look to be the key to the situation, and it certainly seems that one's remarks can be most usefully addressed to them. I have spent all of my political life in Northern Ireland as a member of the Unionist Party. It is a Party that has been criticised and vilified in a most extravagant way, but I would say that it contains many honourable people who have given good service to Northern Ireland. I would say to them, through your Lordships' House, that Parties have many different policies and objectives, but there sometimes comes a crucial point when one must make up one's mind about what comes first; when one must decide what, above all else, one's Party is for. I have always believed that, above all else, the purpose of the Unionist Party is to maintain the Union, and that, in order to save the Union, it is necessary to set aside some cherished ideas and policies. I would urge that course as being for the greater good of Ulster. But let no one think that this can be done on a one-sided basis. If there is to be a political contribution to the task of ending the violence—and that is what everybody in Norhern Ireland wants to see—it has to come from both sides. The S.D.L.P. have been returned in a position of some strength. If they seek to use that position to make demands and insist on conditions which are wholly unacceptable, and indeed deeply offensive, to others, then no progress can be made. They, too, have to remember that their new strength ought to be accompanied by a new sense of responsibility.

My Lords, we could argue for hours and days about the form of the new Constitution for Northern Ireland. To my mind, this Bill is as good a fist at it as it is possible to make. I will accordingly gladly support it.

3.50 p.m.

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, following one Prime Minister and preceding another, I rise with my habitual diffidence. I recall that a great poet told us that: Heard melodies are sweet,but those unheard Are sweeter". It might be thought that the fewer speeches made to-day the better; but there are things which clearly must be said. The noble Lord, Lord Windlesham—incidentally, I find myself congratulating him on so many things that he may become tired and so my tributes to him may become counter-productive—I must insist on congratulating once again. He told the House, I am sure with justice, that three speeches would be listened to with special attention: those of the noble Lord who has just spoken, of the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill of the Maine, and the noble Lord. Lord Dunleath, who has won a signal victory in the Elections. Assuming that Front Bench speeches are always listened to with special attention, that leaves only the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, and myself who will not be listened to! However, I know that some degree of toleration will be extended to the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, and myself.

With two qualifications, which I shall mention in a moment, I should like to support the Bill very strongly, and in doing so I should like to pay a tribute not only to the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, but to Mr. Whitelaw downwards—that is to say, all those who have made this situation possible. Again subject to qualification, I look upon this as a measure which points the way to reconciliation in three senses: reconciliation within Northern Ireland between the two parts, the Six Counties and the 26, and reconciliation between the island of Ireland as a whole and this British island. I believe that at long last the policy of the British Government is on the right lines. I entirely agree with what the noble Baroness, Lady White, has said about the fine response to Mr. Cosgrave, Prime Minister of the Irish Republic. Gently and respectfully, I must correct her on one point. It would be quite wrong to suppose that Mr. Cosgrave has been the first Prime Minister in recent times who has said that the principle of consent must be adopted. To go no further back than Mr. Lynch, that gentleman has repeatedly said that there can be no Irish unity without consent. While I join in the applause for Mr. Cosgrave's notable speech, I think it would be unfair to Mr. Lynch not to put the record right in that respect at least.

There are many encouraging features in the recent Election results for Northern Ireland. The men of violence have been temporarily squashed. One cannot think that they have been permanently disposed of, but at any rate they had a poor Election result. I suppose for some of us here, and also for some outside this Chamber, the main regret will be that the Northern Ireland Labour Party fared so badly and the respected Leader did not win a seat. The Leader, Mr. Simpson, was the first to bring forward the idea of a Coalition Government, as it then was. It has passed from the idea of a community Government to power-sharing now; but it was he who four years ago first put forward this idea. I venture to recall that I followed him very quickly, but it was Mr. Simpson who first brought the idea forward and I do not think that that should be forgotten at this moment.

The Bill in general, based as it is (as the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, said) on the idea of power-sharing, must commend itself to all of us here and, if I may say so with all modesty, I myself have been suggesting the idea for quite a number of years now. If I may here make my first qualification—and I hope it will not be regarded as a criticism—it seems to me that if one took this Bill on its own without any White Paper or Government Statements, and so on, surrounding it, it would be quite inadequate. If one takes power-sharing, one may well say that this Bill is perfectly compatible with power-sharing and, taken with the pronouncements and commitments made by the Government, certainly it can be used to give effect to that. But if your Lordships look at perhaps one of the most crucial clauses, Clause 2(1)(b) says that there has to be an executive, and that this must be likely to be widely accepted throughout the community. I suppose it could be said that here in Britain the present Government are widely accepted throughout the community. It is a rather vague and ambiguous phrase and would not in itself be a demand for a special arrangement for power-sharing. I should like to point out that that in itself does not give explicit effect to the idea of power-sharing.

I must express a little alarm at something which was said by the distinguished Prime Minister who preceded me, and which might perhaps be repeated by the distinguished Prime Minister who will follow me. The noble Lord, Lord Moyola, said that he hoped the chief executive would be allowed to choose his own colleagues. That hardly appears to be the intention laid down in the Bill. Clause 8(3) tells us: The chief executive member and the heads of the Northern Ireland departments shall be appointed by the Secretary of State on behalf of Her Majesty … and so on. So we must presume that the ideas of the noble Lord, Lord Moyola, have been rejected. I hope they have. When the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, winds up, I hope he will make it plain that the Bill as it stands means what it says and that the suggestion of the noble Lord, Lord Moyola, is not the policy of Her Majesty's Government, because if it were adopted the whole idea of power-sharing would be defeated.

Also, one would have liked to see in the Bill, taking it on its own, an explicit reference to the Council of Ireland. Again, I am not criticising, because I do not imagine that the Government of the Irish Republic would have expected or wished to see a reference to the Council of Ireland here; but unless one knew already that that was the policy of the Government, one would have been very much concerned about the absence of an explicit reference. Speaking for myself, and indeed for probably many other people, I should have thought that the policy of reconciliation would amount to nothing unless there is a Council of Ireland or some similar body. We must recognise that everything will depend on this practical co-operation growing ever more between the two parts of Ireland in the years ahead. What I call the threefold reconciliation depends on that at every point. Therefore, while not criticising the measure here, I should like to point out that, taken by itself, the Bill would be gravely insufficient. Dare I say that there are two qualifications there?—but I can understand why the Government have drafted the Bill in the way they have.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, I wonder whether I might interrupt my noble friend. Is he quite correct in saying that there is nothing in the Bill? There is no reference to the Council of Ireland, but it seems to me that Clause 12 of the Bill is intended to enable the creation of that kind of institution.

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, of course I have not neglected Clause 12, and if the Government had wished to put a reference in the Bill to the Council of Ireland that is clearly where it would have occurred. It makes it possible, but it deliberately refrains from a reference, probably in view of the White Paper, in which the Government accepted the policy of a Council of Ireland. We must assume that, for whatever reason, the Government have refrained from including it. One excellent reason for not including it, of course, which will occur to all of us, is that it would be laying down a plan for dealings with another Government, the Government of the Republic. One can see why it might not be included. Compared with the White Paper there is a rather noticeable omission here, and therefore I am labouring the point that to appreciate this Bill we must take it in the context of the other Government commitments. On that basis I am favourable towards it.

Now I come to something which has been already criticised by one of my noble leaders, the noble Baroness, Lady White, and, on the other hand, it has been praised by the noble Lord, Lord Moyola: the referendum. Perhaps it is worth pausing for a moment to look at this provision rather more closely. It is not just a provision for a referendum. I am not particularly in favour of referenda. They had one recently in Ireland which turned out very well, in which the Party under Mr. Lynch and the special position of the Roman Catholic Church were removed. On the other hand, we did not have a referendum here when we might have thought it suitable at the time of our entry into the Common Market. Who will say what might have happened if we had had a referendum then?

I am not laying down a great principle in favour of a referendum. It might well turn out to be a good way of determining opinion when the time comes, but it is a great pity that this provision should be included here. It is not so much a pity that there should be a reference to the referendum. What is a grave defect in the Bill—and I speak plainly, it is a serious defect; it is no good saying it is fatal, but it is a serious defect—is the fact, explained in Schedule 1, that these referenda can take place only at intervals of ten years, and the first one cannot take place earlier than March 9, 1983, ten years from now. According to this Bill, for ten years, even if the people of Northern Ireland by a large majority, so far as one can judge—and one usually judges by elections and other indications—want the unity of Ireland, they are prevented by this Bill. Extremists could say, "We are not going to allow this unity". Suppose 25 per cent. were still opposed to Irish unity, they could say that nothing could happen for ten years. What an opportunity for the I.R.A. or other dangerous bodies in the meanwhile! It is not only that there cannot be a referendum for ten years, but there cannot be another one for another ten years.

Supposing after ten years opinion moved a long way and the people in favour of a united Ireland were not far short of those who wanted the status quo; and supposing a little further on from that, another two or there years, judging by elections the majority wanted a united Ireland, they would still have to wait for another seven or eight years after that. The more you look at it the more deplorable this rigidity appears. I shall be told that we are practical people in this country and always find the right answer on the night; but it might be the night of the long knives. It could be a dangerous moment if the majority of the people wanted a united Ireland and were being stopped by the restrictions of this ultra-rigid Schedule. Whatever we try to do here, this Bill is likely to become law, and I regard this as a lamentable provision. It may not last for ever; it may be disposed of if things move in the direction that I hope. I wish to see this provision opposed by every constitutional means open to us.

My Lords, I have finished. I do not flatter myself that any words of mine, in spite of my long connection with this question, are likely to have any particular effect with any particular section of opinion in Northern Ireland. But so far as I have read or studied at all, I should like to implore all those who might be in any position to influence opinion in Northern Ireland to play their part in taking advantage of the greatest opportunity that has ever come up till now to their tormented but indomitable Province.

4.5 p.m.

LORD O'NEILL OF THE MAINE

My Lords, as others in your Lordships' House have done, I should like to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, on his recent success in gaining a seat in the Assembly. I could not help thinking that if by any chance some of the rumours we have seen in the Press are true, that he may be elected as Presiding Officer of the Assembly, he will be unable to speak in that Assembly but will be able to speak in this one. He will be in rather a special position, Another thing which I think is particularly helpful these days is that both the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition have knowledge of Northern Ireland. I should think this is probably the first time in the history of your Lordships' House that this has been the case. The Leader of the Opposition's knowledge of Northern Ireland is perhaps (I say this with all due respect) a little out of date; although he has lived there for longer than the Leader of the House, nevertheless, it is valuable that this should be common to both sides of the House. I wanted to say that in passing.

My Lords, I hope that this Bill will be given a smooth and swift passage, and then—and this is most important—time must be given. That is why I am so glad to hear the noble Baroness, Lady White, expressing the willingness of the Opposition in certain circumstances not to press for anything to be done before Parliament rises. Time must be given. In no circumstances should decisions be pressed for in July, to suit the convenience of the Westminster Parliament. I speak with some knowledge about these affairs. The whole of Northern Ireland is on holiday this week and next week. I can remember in the old days the Upper House in Northern Ireland used to complain, just as your Lordships House does, about being brought back in August to complete unfinished business from another place. I remember on one occasion saying to the Upper House in Northern Ireland, "If you object to being brought back in August, why not finish it off in July?" I found that that was even less acceptable.

If the Secretary of State is able to have successful and fruitful conversations with members of the Assembly this month and he is seeing them to-day and to-morrow—nothing would be more welcome to me. At the same time, if it is necessary to have these discussions in August I do not think they should be pressed ahead merely for the convenience of the Parliament at Westminster. It would be far better, if necessary, to have a recall in September—but let us hope that will not be necessary. The House should realise that the whole of Ireland closes down in the month of July and it would be unwise to press on with something which happens to suit us here. If, however, no agreement can be reached by, let us say, the end of August, then it is not for me to say what should happen at that point in time. I am merely stressing that nothing should be done in a hurry at the moment.

As I see it, the most precious thing we have had in the past four years has been the bipartisan policy at Westminster. I should like to pay tribute to the present Opposition spokesman on Northern Ireland affairs in another place. I often think that, coming from Wales, he understands these problems better than the English. If, perchance, the "unworkables", as they have come to be known in Northern Ireland, win, if these wreckers win, and the Assembly cannot and does not function, then I fear, my Lords, that I can see the great patience of the British people starting to ebb away. So, in so far as anybody has any interest in what my views are at home in Northern Ireland, I hope that the Members of the Assembly will realise how important it is that they should behave with moderation and statesmanship at this vital point in the history of Northern Ireland's affairs. I trust, too, that the present Secretary of State, especially now that he has lost his right-hand man—and from the point of view of your Lordships' House we are very glad that he has—will be allowed to stay in his present Office at least until Christmas. It is possible that even an extremist in Ulster might prefer the devil he knew to the one he did not. So, from all points of view, I very much hope that he will be allowed to stay in Office until we can find out whether the Assembly is going to work or whether it is not.

So far as the Office of the Secretary of State is concerned, it seems to me quite admirable in every way. Scotland has a Secretary of State and is an integral part of the United Kingdom. Why on earth should not Northern Ireland have a Secretary of State? What is more, I would myself, at any rate for the foreseeable future, look upon such a man as an umpire, as it were holding the scales of justice in his hands; and I believe that if any effort were made to remove this Office—I am sure there will not be—there would be a backlash of a different nature from the one that has been questioning the existence of Westminster control taking place in this manner.

My Lords, I should like now to mention once again a subject with which I dealt before in this House and which the noble Lord the Leader of the House himself touched on because in my view it is so important. That is the question which might be described as nomenclature. The question of names in the old Stormont was at the root of part of the trouble. It would be true to say that for fifty years many ordinary people in Northern Ireland have quite genuinely believed that Stormont was a sovereign Parliament. It was not until the noble Baroness, Lady White, advised me to read a section of her father's diaries dealing with Northern Ireland that I fully understood how this had all taken place in 1920, 1921 and 1922—which, incidentally, is a horrifying parallel to 1970, 1971 and 1972.

At that particular time, what the Irish wanted (I am not referring now to the Northern Ireland people) was Dominion status. At that time we had the British Empire, India; and Lloyd George's attitude was that if Ireland were given Dominion status it would lead to the break-up of the British Empire. But being a man of considerable agility—possibly aided by the noble Baroness's father, I do not know—he hit on the idea of giving them Dominion titles without Dominion status. As someone who has been to Canada on many occasions I have discovered that in Canada, where there are I suppose 10 or 11 "Northern Irelands", it is perfectly possible for Canadian citizens to distinguish between their Federal Parliament in Ottawa and their Provincial Parliament in, shall we say, British Columbia—I am taking that as an example because that had 52 Members of a Legislative Assembly, and Stormont, with far fewer powers, had 52 Members of Parliament.

This makes a tremendous difference. In Northern Ireland they had a Prime Minister. I should never have been a Prime Minister; I should have had a different name from that of the top man in London. In Canada he is called a "Premier". In Canada there is only one Minister of Finance; he is in Ottawa. In British Columbia, or one of the other Provinces, the man is called "Provincial Treasurer". And, far more important than anything else, there are no Members of Parliament; there are only M.L.A.s. In this way the ordinary Canadian people can understand that power resides in the Federal Parliament and not in the Provincial Parliament.

Your Lordships may say that this is all a lot of rubbish; it does not matter at all. My Lords, I beg you to believe that it matters a great deal. It is essential that the man in the street in Northern Ireland should understand where power resides; and it resides here in London. Under the Government of Ireland Act 1920, I think I am right in saying that there was not to have been a Cabinet in Northern Ireland; there was to have been an Executive Committee of the Privy Council. But in the course of time it became a Cabinet. It could well be—and I am being hopeful now in assuming that the Assembly will work at all—that in the months that lie ahead the Chief Executive will start calling himself "Prime Minister"; the Presiding Officer calling himself "Speaker"; the Assembly will start calling itself "a Parliament" and before you know where you are you will be back again to where you were before: the ordinary man in the street will be totally bemused as to where power really lies. Therefore, at the risk of being a first-class bore on this subject, I would say that I hope your Lordships have understood that these names are really very important indeed.

As I see it, the most important point is that the Assembly should somehow or other be made to work—I do not want to use the phrase about "the last chance", but nevertheless, it is a great turning point in Northern Ireland's future. I am sure that the Secretary of State will be firm and fair and, moreover, flexible. The Government were very much criticised for not laying down everything in the Bill we are considering to-day. They would have been highly unwise to lay everything down. There must be some flexibility left for the man on the spot who is dealing with this appallingly difficult subject. I wish him well. I wish the Government well. I hope, above all else, that the bipartisan policy which has existed for the last four years will still be in operation by Christmas. And I appeal once again to the people of Ulster: For Heaven's sake! make this Assembly work, because the patience of the great British people is not going to go on forever.

4.19 p.m.

LORD DUNLEATH

My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill, the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, and the noble Baroness, for their kind words towards me. I would assure the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill, that things have not changed since he was in power. There is much speculation in the Press and elsewhere and usually there is not a word of truth in it. But in fact they were right—and I may say it was to my complete surprise and partial dismay—in that the week before last I was elected to the Northern Ireland Assembly as a representative for the Alliance Party. I was going to start my speech this afternoon by declaring an interest because I suppose it could be said that the smooth passage of this Bill through your Lordships' House is worth £2,500 a year to me. Incidentally, there has been widespread speculation as to what we are going to be called. Obviously not "M.P." I have heard it suggested that it might be "M.A.", but the universities took a poor view of that, so what it will he remains to be seen.

However, there are more important reasons why I am anxious to see this Bill passed through its various stages without impediment. My noble friend Lord Windlesham has already mentioned quite a number of them. I welcome the proposal that there should be a standing advisory Commission on human rights. I recall that my friend in Northern Ireland, Miss Sheila Murnaghan, put forward a Bill of Human Rights in Stormont, but at that time it was felt that it was unnecessary and irrelevant. But if the Party which I represent had been in Stormont at that time I am sure that we should have supported her. However, I am glad it is coming up now.

So far as Clauses 17 to 24 are concerned, already quite a bit of action has been taken over any risk of discrimination in the public sector of employment. This is good, and I am glad about it, but I think the Alliance Party would feel that what has been done has by no means been before time: indeed, it could well have been done sooner and with more expedition. What seems now to be needed is swift action to make the private sector of employment consistent with the public sector. As I have said, already a structure has been formed; there is the machinery and this can be built on. But, important though I consider it to be, it is possibly even more important that it should be done in a sensitive manner. Discrimination has a different meaning in Northern Ireland from what it has in the rest of the British Isles, I am afraid. I suppose there are employers who deliberately decide, "I am not going to have a Protestant working in my firm", or "I am not going to have a Catholic working in my firm". I do not know any myself but I accept that there may be some. There are probably far more who, for geographical reasons, find their company in either a predominantly Protestant or predominantly Roman Catholic area, and for that reason most of their employees are of one religion or the other.

Then also there is the matter of convenience. A manager knows that if a certain climate of opinion exists in his company and his work force is predominantly Protestant, and he suddenly introduces into it a number of Roman Catholic workers, this may cause industrial unrest. He does not want that: he wants continuity of production. So where discrimination exists it is often circumstantial. The Northern Ireland Board of the British Institute of Management (of which I am a member) discussed this matter some little time ago, and whereas in principle we heartily welcomed any move to eliminate discrimination, we found it difficult to envisage how any measure could he drawn up that would not be too much of a blunt instrument. However, since then a report has been presented a few weeks ago and it may be that a formula has been found. I sincerely hope so, for I look forward to seeing action being taken on this problem.

I was presumptuous enough to be one of the first people in your Lordships' House to propose the Border poll, and I still think it is right that this should take place at periodic intervals. My original suggestion was for 15 years, and a minimum period of ten years has now been laid down. I still think that the important thing is that the Border should be taken out of Northern Ireland politics. The noble Earl, Lord Longford, said that things might develop in between the ten year polls which would cause injustice. I can only say that past experience does not indicate to me that this is likely to happen; and I think it would do much to get rid of many of the myths that at present drag down politics in Northern Ireland if the question of the Border could be settled for a ten-year period at least, so that there is no point in arguing about it in between. Let us get down to the practicalities and realities of the things that really matter, such as housing, employment, the economy, et cetera.

Power sharing has been another bone of contention. Again, it is rather a peculiar situation that we have in Northern Ireland. We should not have to look to any such compromise as this elsewhere in the United Kingdom. I can only say that power sharing is not perfect, but at least it is practicable, and if there were to be a bit of generosity—which is needed—I am sure we should make it work.

There is just one thing in the Northern Ireland Constitution Bill which I deeply regret. I did not contemplate tabling an Amendment, for two reasons: one, that I knew it was too late to do anything about it, and, two, that I did not want to impede the progress of the Bill. But what I deeply regret is the fact that it has not been possible to find, or it has not been thought fit to seek, any formula whereby the Office of the Governor of Northern Ireland could be continued. I know the explanation that has been given: that it is constitutionally impossible to have a Governor of Northern Ireland and a Secretary of State. I can only say that if one is convinced that something is right and one is determined to achieve it, there are ways of getting round any obstacle to it. My regret is multiplied by the calibre and personality of the noble Lord, Lord Grey of Naunton, who last occupied that office. The wit and wisdom of his public utterances, the understanding and profundity of his private counsel when one asked him for advice, was something the like of which I had never before seen, and perhaps never will again. He was a man dedicated to the welfare of Northern Ireland; he was a man loved by all his people and he was a real giant. Northern Ireland can ill afford to lose people of this calibre who are dedicated to its service.

Finally, I wish to move to my principal point. To your Lordships who live on this side of the water (as we call it) the Northern Ireland situation must frequently look depressing. This is an opinion that I have not been able to resist myself from time to time, but my morale is now a great deal higher. There were depressing features about the results of the Assembly election but there were also some very encouraging ones, if one went to look for them. My tame statistician tells me that 62½per cent. of the electors voting in the election voted in favour of candidates who were pledged, even if with some detailed qualification, to make the provisions of the White Paper work. So that means that there are quite a few of us around, and, apart from the quantity, one of the things that has heartened me most has been the quality of the people that I found working in the recent election. I speak, of course, from my own personal experience in my own Party.

I have found them to be an enthusiastic, dedicated, young and sizeable band of people—I say "young "; from their late teens to their middle forties would tend to be the average age. They have their own jobs to do, their own families to look after, but they have really got down to this election. Why? Because they want to see Northern Ireland pulled out of its present trouble. I was most encouraged by this. I have mentioned the necessity for generosity. I will practice what I preach and say that it is most likely that in the official Unionist Party, in the Northern Ireland Labour Party and in the Social Democratic Labour Party there are a great many similar young people dedicated to what I have just said. I am sure that although we do not agree with their views, in many ways we agree with their opinions as to what the end should be, although perhaps we do not always agree as to what the means to that end should be. That is why I have much more confidence for the future than I have had for quite a while. I think that with the assistance of such people we can make Northern Ireland work—in fact, we jolly well will make it work! That is the mood of these people. We will isolate the wreckers. We will make their efforts as unrewarding as it is for an aspiring heckler to go to a political meeting with a view to embarrassing the speaker, only to find when he gets there that that same speaker is receiving one standing ovation after another. We will make their efforts as ineffective as it would be to try to shout abuse at an aircraft carrier when it gets in the way of your 14-foot dinghy.

My Lords, I am most grateful—we are all most grateful—to the noble Lords, Lord Windlesham and Lord Belstead, for all they have done and are doing for Northern Ireland. We are also grateful to our right honourable and honourable friends in another place. So I say to-day that my morale is much raised, and in the light of what I have said, I would say to your Lordships, "Lift up your hearts." We can make Northern Ireland work, and, by Christ—I do not blaspheme; I speak deliberately and thoughtfully as a committed Christian—we will make it work.

4.32 p.m.

LORD LYELL

My Lords, how refreshing we must all find it, first of all, to hear the views of so many distinguished leaders and politicians from Northern Ireland—Lord Dunleath, Lord O'Neill, Lord Moyola, and the noble Lord the. Leader of the House who has done so much in recent months and years to help Northern Ireland. Secondly, it must give us all a great deal of satisfaction to discover the relative success of the recent elections for the Northern Ireland Assembly, because this Assembly was only suggested or outlined in the Green Paper of 1972. This Assembly was to be the creature of Northern Ireland alone because it is far more flexible than anything which could be imagined elsewhere in the United Kingdom. I think the Assembly will be able to make its own rules of procedure so long as the responsibilities with which it is entrusted can be carried out to the satisfaction of the people of Northern Ireland. But at the same time I think the most important clause of the Bill is that which sets out the responsibilities and duties of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. We must all pay tribute to our right honourable friend in another place who has still to search for solutions in what is completely unexplored territory. His guidance and tolerance will go a long way towards smoothing the problems which will appear during the first few months of the new Assembly's work. There are bound to be difficulties, since never before has such a complicated and sophisticated system of democratic institution been tried in the United Kingdom, or in precious few other countries in the world.

My Lords, all of us have been very impressed by the forbearance and good will of the people in Northern Ireland who have studied and listened to the scheme for proportional representation and who have then tried to make it work. No one can doubt there is a need to try new institutions where politics are so far removed from consensus policies, sadly approaching tribal and divided policies. It remains a mystery to many of us, when so many reasonable men and women strive to see that the Northern Ireland Assembly will work, that a substantial part of the Loyalist population are at the moment declaring their intention of making the Assembly unworkable. To those of us who have been relatively unfamiliar with the tricky currents of Northern Irish political waters, it is unbelievable that after so much effort, time, trouble and money has been spent by the United Kingdom Government, such relative political success can still be obtained by the extremists.

However, it is not our homes, our shops, our factories and towns which are being bombed and continually put at risk by a small minority of terrorists. We must have increasing sympathy with the people there. They look to some solution of this problem. I believe that the Members of the new Assembly could do a great deal not only for their own electors, but also for the population of the remainder of the United Kingdom were they to bring about some kind of reconciliation between the political leaders of Northern Ireland. It is this aspect of power-sharing which must succeed if Northern Ireland is to have any chance of extracting itself from the bleakness which now surrounds the life of the province.

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Moyola, drew attention to the problems of extraditing suspected murderers and terrorists. I wish to add my support to his comments. It is quite certain that nothing would brighten the prospects of co-operation between Eire and Northern Ireland more than the successful extradition of known terrorists. Sadly, there is at least one person that the United Kingdom courts in Scotland wish to extradite from the Republic, with not much success yet. As the noble Earl, Lord Longford, pointed out, he and I are the two outsiders in this debate—I am a lot worse, not being in any way Irish; I am proud to declare myself a Scot. At the same time, I take this opportunity of congratulating the noble Lord the Leader of the House and the Secretary of State for what they have so far produced for Northern Ireland. I think the good wishes of the whole of the United Kingdom must go out to the Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly as they seek for solutions to these new problems that are arising in that country. Let us hope that the gloomy prophesies of the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill, will not come true just yet, since I am afraid that I, too, fear the patience and tolerance of Englishmen, Scotsmen and Welshmen could be tested even so far as breaking-point. It seems quite clear that the success of the recent elections for the Assembly show the merest glimmer of realisation by the people of Northern Ireland that they cannot be expected to live again through the nightmare of the last four years. For our part we shall not fail the people of Northern Ireland. All we ask is that they will redouble their efforts to make the Assembly work, and that they will not fail themselves. My Lords, I add my support to the Bill.

4.38 p.m.

VISCOUNT AMORY

My Lords, we have listened to some wonderful speeches from noble Lords who know well the Northern Ireland problems and I would say only one word as one who dces not know Northern Ireland well, but feels deeply about this problem. I want to congratulate Mr. Whitelaw and his team, my noble friend Lord Windlesham, and all who have co-operated with them to enable them to bring forward this constructive measure.

My Lords, I should like to say how much I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady White, when she referred to the present much more helpful attitude in Dublin. I am sure that the new attitude of the authorities in Dublin makes us feel we are very fortunate in the restraint and moderation, and the personal attitudes on the part of both Mr. Lynch, when in office, and the present Prime Minister, Mr. Cosgrave. I think we were all deeply moved at the fine speech made by my noble friend Lord O'Neill, and for the hopeful note he struck in that magnificent speech. I am sure that all of us who are not in close touch with Northern Ireland would like to wish the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, and his colleagues every passible success in the work that lies before them.

4.40 p.m.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, this debate has moved rather rapidly, because, after all, it is not long ago that we debated the Government White Paper. I have very little to add to what I had to say on that occasion. I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, opened, because I have always attached great importance to our debates on Northern Ireland. I think it is important that this House should show that we are discussing matters of very deep importance to Northern Ireland and that senior Ministers should participate. I am glad, therefore, that he spoke, and it is no reflection on the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, when I say that I hope that the Leader of the House will continue to do so, except on those occasions when he lets the noble and learned Lord who sits on the Woolsack loose on an issue such as the subsequent and rather more controversial Bill, to which the noble and learned Lord will bring such great knowledge. Indeed, if I may say so, there have been some prophetic qualities about the speeches of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor, and since I do not intend to speak in that particular debate I am equally very glad that he is conducting that Bill.

There is always a danger, when bipartisanship breaks out or is established, that we appear to be far too self-congratulatory; and although it is satisfactory that there is a degree of agreement we ought not to suppose—and I am sure no noble Lord thinks it—that because there is harmony in this House we have as yet made much progress. Indeed, the history of the last few years, under successive Governments, but particularly, if I may say so, under the present Government, was a story of missed opportunities. I do not say this in order to spoil the bipartisan approach, but with a consciousness that until the noble Lord himself and Mr. Whitelaw appeared on the scene we were missing out very badly indeed. That is one of the reasons why we on this side attach such importance to getting a sense of urgency, a sense of urgency which I am sure rests in the minds of noble Lords and Ministers who are concerned with Northern Ireland.

We wish to strengthen their efforts, and it is for that reason that my noble friend Lady White emphasised that, so far as we were concerned, we would seek to get this Bill into law at the earliest possible opportunity. Although there are certain things that will have to be said in Committee, we want this Bill to be on the Statute Book, not because we wish the Government to behave in a precipitate way, but because we do not want (and I know the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill of the Maine, is conscious of this) to miss the tide if there is a particular opportunity. Therefore, in their judgment of the timing of the implementation of this Bill, we want the Government to have it in their pocket as an Act of Parliament.

I am sorry that my noble friend Lord Brockway is not taking part in this debate, because so much of what is contained in this Bill was urged by him on earlier occasions and resisted by us, by noble Lords, including myself. It is satisfactory that there are provisions which amount to some considerable extent to a charter of human rights, which will be supplemented by the Bill on private employment. I would not criticise the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, whom we all admire, for the initiative and the decision he took, coming as he did from an historically Unionist family, moving across and into the Alliance Party. I do not know whether, as the sole representative of the Alliance Party in this House he hopes to gather others around him and possibly into his own Whip one day. Nevertheless I am bound to say that the difficulty about private employment, is that it is a fact—and I think he will agree that the majority of the employers in Northern Ireland have been largely the middle class and upper middle class, who have been more predominantly Protestant than Catholic. There is no doubt that industrialists, like the trade union leaders, have an important part to play. There is always the danger when one comes to discussing discrimination, of somehow feeling—and I know the noble Lord does not feel this—that this happens anyway, and that is what people tolerate. It means a consistent, a determined, fight of the kind that he and the noble Lord. Lord O'Neill, and others have made, to get rid of discrimination, the full extent of which, I must confess, despite a good deal of knowledge of Northern Ireland, I was certainly unaware.

We have had an interesting debate. I hope that the reputation of the noble Lord, Lord Moyola, has not been damaged by the inadvertent implication of my noble friend Lord Longford that he might be a latter day reincarnation of Loyola.

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, I meant that he was loyaller than anyone else.

LORD SHACKLETON

I was thinking of Ignatius at that point. None the less, certain points of disagreement here and there did arise. I must admit that I, like my noble friend Lady White, am unhappy about Clause I and the requirement of a poll to be held not sooner than 10 years' time. It is noteworthy that when this was debated in another place there were some fairly strange alliances; the more strongly Unionist M.P.s there voted with the Labour Party against this provision on the ground that it was not worth the paper it was written on. Of course, to some extent—and I have to choose my words carefully—indeed, not merely to some extent, no provision of this kind can be entrenched; the important part of Clause 1 is that no transfer should take place without the consent of the majority of the people of Northern Ireland; and in a sense it is perhaps unfortunate to spell out the particular method of assessing this.

I accept that we shall pursue this matter in Committee and that a number of people in Northern Ireland—and we have to remember this all the time in dealing with the Irish situation—attach very great importance to it. Although I suspect that the noble Lord, Lord Windlesham, and other Ministers may have wondered whether this was in fact a good undertaking to give, they have given such an undertaking. At any rate, we shall be able to explore this at the Committee stage, though not necessarily by means of an Amendment. We shall want to consider that further. I stress this point about the consent of the majority of the people of Northern Ireland because, as my noble friend Lady White made clear, this has been constantly emphasised in recent years by the Government of the Republic. I agree of course that Mr. Lynch, in difficult circumstances, showed a good deal of courage in this matter, none the less, it has been reiterated with even greater force by the present Government of the Republic. I commend to noble Lords the interview that the Minister for External Affairs, Mr. Garrett FitzGerald, gave when he spelled out time and again that they did not want to bring the people of Northern Ireland into the Republic unless they were really willing partners. It depends on the consistent acceptance of this—and it will need to be repeated again and again by the Government of the Republic—if the deep, dark suspicions of the more extreme Ulster Unionists are to be overcome.

There are one or two aspects of the Election and the results about which we have grounds for regret. I am deeply sorry that the Northern Ireland Labour Party, to whom tributes have always been paid impartially from both sides of this House, did not do better. We are glad that the Alliance Party did as well as they did. The Northern Ireland Labour Party have followed a firm non-sectarian line, and their leaders, many of them young people, have shown great courage. I trust that they will accept that the great majority of Members of your Lordships' House hope that they will continue in the same way. The time may come one day in Northern Ireland—or perhaps within a different context, in a Republic or a European union—when we shall see something that conforms more closely to the pattern that we know in this country of a Labour Party, a Conservative Party —and, need I say, a Liberal Party? No, I need not say a Liberal Party. I was particularly interested in the points made by the noble Lord, Lord O'Neill of the Maine, about the importance of the name. Aided by the education that he received from the father of my noble friend Lady White, he emphasised again the great importance of getting this right. It is a matter to which the Government will no doubt devote attention. It will not be just a matter of no importance; it will be a matter of real importance.

My Lords, I do not think there is more that I need to say to-day, beyond referring to the point that my noble friend Lord Longford made about the Council of Ireland. No one has shown a greater interest and concern with Ireland than my noble friend. How far this is a consciousness of the ancestral guilt that many Anglo-Irish feel (perhaps less so in my Anglo-Irish family, because they were Quakers), I do not know; but his consistency in this matter entitles him on all occasions to press his views. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Beistead, will be able to confirm that Clause 12—and after all, this is a Bill and not a White Paper—could be the vehicle, if discussions come to a fruition with the Government of the Republic, for some of the working machinery of the Council of Ireland. When we come to Clause 12 in Committee it may be useful to have some sort of a discussion on it, rather than attempt to explore the matter to-day. I repeat again that this is a Bill of the greatest importance. We hope that it goes rapidly into law, with the support of the great majority of the people in both Houses of Parliament—although with perhaps a declining support in the United Kingdom. I hope that at last there is a growing acceptance, as the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, and others have pointed out, of the fact that, while I hesitate to say this is the last hope for Northern Ireland, this is certainly the best hope in the present generation. We shall look forward to the Bill's receiving the Royal Assent at the earliest possible moment.

4.55 p.m.

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, NORTHERN IRELAND OFFICE (LORD BELSTEAD)

My Lords, the significance of the Bill which your Lordships are debating today has already been amply demonstrated by the speeches which noble Lords have made during the course of this afternoon —and made by noble Lords who are all very much better qualified to speak on this subject than I am. It is a Bill of the highest importance, both to Northern Ireland and to the United Kingdom as a whole. It is a Bill which displaces the existing Constitution of Northern Ireland, a Constitution of more than fifty years' standing. It is this Bill in which we earnestly aim to provide a new mechanism for the successful government of this most important part of the United Kingdom. On behalf of my noble friend the Leader of the House, I am glad to be able to thank the noble Lord. Lord Shackleton, and the noble Baroness, Lady White, for their helpful remarks, and particularly about the forthcoming timetable.

I am sure that noble Lords will understand that, as only a fortnight has passed since the date of the Northern Ireland Election, I have no information to give this afternoon on the timetable for appointing the Executive, except to say that my right honourable friend will press on with discussions as rapidly as is prudent. My right honourable friend will, in the phrase of the noble Lords, Lord Moyola and Lord Dunleath. "do everything to try to make it work". As my noble friend Lord Lyell said. I think that all of us in this House would wish him and those who are going to form the Assembly and the Executive well, and not least the noble Lord. Lord Dunleath. Although the noble Lord is well versed in Northern Ireland affairs, there is one little hit of the small print that he has missed in the Bill he is already a candidate for his £2,500 per annum as a member of the Assembly.

My noble friend the Leader of the House has spoken of the outstanding difference between this Bill and the 1920 Act that it displaces. Some other means of government by consent really is required in Northern Ireland than the one that we have traditionally enjoyed in this country. This the Billl seeks to provide, but seeks at the same time not to tie the hands of those responsible for operating the new machinery of government. As my noble friends the Leader of the House and Lord O'Neill of the Maine emphasised, it would be wrong, for instance, for the Bill to seek to impose upon future generations in Northern Ireland any fixed formula about the membership of the forthcoming Executive. It would indeed nullify consultation with political interests in seeking to reach solutions about the Executive.

When the noble Lord, Lord Moyola, and the noble Earl, Lord Longford, differ about the chief executive appointing his own Executive members, may I say that the noble Earl is perfectly right and interprets Clause 8 correctly. Appointments are the Secretary of State's appointments on behalf of Her Majesty, but it is implicit in everything that my right honourable friend has done to bring this Bill before both Houses that power sharing means consent, and consent will refer to selection rather than appointment, with which the Secretary of State will not try to dictate but will try to help.

This flexible approach to the future Government of Northern Ireland is the second central principle to which I would draw attention. In some places the Bill is complex, but the complexities flow from the Government's belief that it would be wrong to provide for formulæ and procedures which are too rigid and too inflexible. For instance, Clause 3 provides for the future devolution of additional powers on the Northern Ireland institutions or even for the transfer of the Northern Ireland Government's powers, in some cases, perhaps, back to the United Kingdom Government. And the Assembly is given a qualified power under Clause 5 to legislate on matters which are primarily "reserved" under Schedule 3 for the United Kingdom Government. This is, of course, a significant departure from the 1920 Act, and while Clause 6 maintains Parliamentary control over Assembly measures on "reserved" matters, I hope your Lordships might agree that the opportunity for legislation presented by Clause 5 is a constructive approach to the scope which the Assembly may achieve in the future.

May I say a very brief word about what the Green Paper called, The Irish Dimension? Clause 12 of the Bill is a simple provision providing that the Northern Ireland authorities will be able to join in discussions with their opposite numbers in the Republic and to introduce legislation, if that is necessary, to give effect to any agreements or arrangements which they may make. Because of its international aspect, the legislation is "reserved" and paragraph 7 of Schedule 3 has this effect so that Parliament may have an opportunity to consider such legislation before it is submitted to Her Majesty for confirmation. This clause is not, however, a provision for a Council of Ireland, although the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, was perfectly right to refer to this clause in that context. It is a provision to enable the new Government of Northern Ireland to enter into sensible co-operation with the Government of the Republic. Whether any Council of Ireland should be established, or any other form of international institution, will be a separate matter which, as the Government announced in the White Paper, can be discussed at the conference which Her Majesty's Government propose to hold in due course.

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord one question'? I gather that the Council of Ireland is generally understood to be set up without further legislation? Is that the position?

LORD BELSTEAD

My Lords, I think that that is the position, provided of course that it does not in any way need legislation. Of course, as soon as it needs legislation that becomes immedi-ately "reserved". Representatives of the Government of Northern Ireland and of the Government of the Irish Republic will he invited to that conference and will be invited to discuss there the three objectives which the Government set out in the Green Paper last autumn, which I do not think I need to repeat.

One of those three objectives was the basis for concerted action against terrorist organisations, and my noble friend Lord Mayola asked me a cluestion about extraditions. There have been 26 requests for extradition for offences of violence made to the Republic since the beginning of 1971. Of these 26, one is not being proceeded with by us, one man is in prison in the Republic and five have been arrested in Northern Ireland. Of the remaining 19. one has been discharged by a Republican court, 10 are before courts in the Republic contesting their return, and in 8 cases the R.U.C. are resubmitting their warrants. But in giving these statistics to my noble friend, may I also say, on the other side of the coin, that I, and I think my noble friend the Leader of the House, listened carefully to what the noble Baroness, Lady White, said about the very constructive approach which the Prime Minister of the Republic has taken in public and, in the words of the noble Baroness, this is something with which we would most certainly agree.

It is of course true that we must bear in mind that in the same Bill are included both Clause 12 and Clause 1. The Border issue was the dominant subject when your Lordships debated the Green Paper last December, and it occupied a little of the debate on the White Paper four months ago. Perhaps at this stage I may simply answer the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, the noble Earl, Lord Longford, and the noble Baroness, Lady White, in this way. In his opening speech, my noble friend the Leader of the House referred to the Government's view expressed by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State on Report in another place, that we think it is right to include the pledge on the territorial status of Northern Ireland in the Bill.

The machinery provided by Schedule 1 may not be perfect, but it has two advantages. First, the ten-year period—which is permissive and not mandatory—will not necessarily coincide with Assembly elections; indeed, it almost certainly will not. So that the Border need not be a specific issue in a General Election in Northern Ireland politics. This is something which my noble friend Lord Mayola, with his long experience, mentioned in the debate on the White Paper and again to-day, as did the noble Lord. Lord Dunleath. Secondly, at the same time it could allow people to express periodically and in a constitutional form their views on the issue. As I said, I know that the arrangements may not necessarily be perfect, and doubtless your Lordships will want to look at this point again before the Bill goes very much further. But the Government believe that the provisions of Clause 1 and Schedule 1 are the best method that can be devised for advance. They remove uncertainty for at least ten years yet. at the same time, there is flexibility in that a poll will be held only if one is obviously wanted, and of course the final decision is reserved to Parliament as to whether a poll would be right.

Perhaps I might, in the few minutes remaining, say a little about human rights in Northern Ireland and the elimination of discrimination which has played a prominent part in your Lordships' con- sideration of these problems in the past few years. I think it is fair to claim that the Government have consistently recognised the crucial importance of this issue. The Green Paper last autumn observed that there was a wide body of opinion which thought that further provision was required in Northern Ireland, and commented that it was essential to incorporate in legislation provisions which would not only have a declaratory effect but be practical as well. That is why there was a Part IV in the White Paper and that is why we now have Part III in the Bill. Clause 17 makes it clear that legislation which discriminates on religious or political grounds will be prohibited, and even if such legislation is made under the provisions of this Bill it will still be possible to challenge it before the courts as being unlawful. And Her Majesty will have power to refer to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council any Northern Ireland measure or draft measure which it appears may contain a discriminatory provision. Similarly, discriminatory actions by public bodies are prohibited by Clause 19.

In addition to this, there is the proposal to establish a Standing Advisory Commission on Human Rights in Northern Ireland. What I should like to make clear is that the Commission's hope is far more than just hacking up Clauses 17 and 19 of the Bill. The Government attach the greatest importance to this Commission, with its task of constantly surveying the existing protections against discrimination and of considering and recommending improvements both in practice and in the law. Finally, as we announced in the White Paper, the Government intend in due course to bring forward legislation to prevent discrimination in private employment in Northern Ireland, to which the noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, and the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, have both referred.

Your Lordships may remember that a working party, with representatives drawn from industry and from the trade union movement, has recommended some far-ranging changes in the law and the establishment of a new agency to police them. I think it is fairly obvious from what both noble Lords have said, that the Government will consult the appropriate organisations in Northern Ireland with a view to bringing forward legislation on this matter. I do not know whether I am right, but it strikes me that it would be wrong not to bear in mind the steps which have been taken in the past, not least by both former Prime Ministers of Northern Ireland who are in the House to-day, to try to work towards an end to discrimination. But the important factor in the provisions in this Bill is that the prohibition of religious or political discrimination builds on, and does not supplant, existing legislation and existing bodies. Indeed, Clause 17 goes further and makes it clear that former Acts of the Northern Ireland Parliament and future measures of the Assembly shall both be tested against the criteria of Part III of this Bill. I hope that your Lordships will consider that these clauses are a step forward, and it is in that hone that I commend them to the House.

Perhaps I may say that in the speech in which the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, made his position clear, and which I think very much interested the House, he expressed considerable regret about the departure of the Governor of Northern Ireland. Your Lordships will already know of the many tributes which have been paid to Lord and Lady Grey, and how rightly. Their departure from Northern Ireland is indeed a blow to people who are there; but, as has been explained before, the new constitutional arrangements for Northern Ireland really do not offer a place for an Office of the dignity and importance which we have come to associate with the Governor of Northern Ireland. Broadly speaking, my Lords, this is true. The functions of the Governor will be exercised by the Secretary of State; but, more than that, I think that political interest must now be taken by Westminster in Northern Ireland in ways rather different from those in which it has been taken before—for instance, interest, perhaps, in ways in which the Assembly will want to become involved in reserved matters. And, of course, Her Majesty will be identified more closely, if anything, with affairs in Northern Ireland not least because Royal approval is needed for every measure of the Assembly.

The noble Lord, Lord O'Neill of the Maine, referred to what he called nomen- clature. He is of course entirely right when he points to the significance of names, as the noble Lord, Lord Shackle-ton, stressed at the end of his speech. The Government recognise this in the Bill, although I realise from what Lord Shackleton said that there are probably still quite difficult problems ahead on this point. We have sought to provide titles which are appropriate to the new form of devolved government in Northern Ireland. The noble Lord, Lord O'Neill, mentioned some of the new terms; but it must not be thought that the new titles indicate a weak or unimportant Government in Northern Ireland. The Assembly and the Executive will have important responsibilities for what the noble Lord, Lord Dunleath, described as the things that matter—employment, housing, social welfare, the economy; and perhaps your Lordships will understand if I add education.

My Lords, my noble friend the Leader of the House was deeply involved with my right honourable friend in preparing this Bill with other Ministers after careful and prolonged discussions with the many interests in Northern Ireland. The noble Lord, Lord Shackleton, and his colleagues on the Front Bench and other Benches opposite have, I know, consistently given constructive advice in the many Northern Ireland debates over the last 15 months, and he and the noble Baroness, Lady White, have said to-day that, reserving of course any right to disagree on details, they and their Party share the convictions upon which the provisions of the Bill are based. Further, of course, your Lordships, many expert in Northern Irish affairs, have recognised in the speeches this afternoon the importance of the Bill which we are now debating. It is a Bill which is founded as far as possible upon an analysis of what the people of Northern Ireland themselves declare that they wish to have. Following Darlington and the Green Paper, there then came, of course, the White Paper, and this Bill has grown from that. As is consistent only with the urgency and importance of the situation with which we are to-day confronted in Northern Ireland, this Bill has been prepared and brought before Parliament with quite considerable urgency. As my noble friend explained, the considerations which underly the Bill and the principles to which it seeks to give effect, themselves represent the most deeply considered views of Her Majesty's Government. The Bill seeks to achieve a new constitutional framework within which people of different views may work, so that, after a tragic period in which so many have died, there may be a community in which all may be secure to live.

On Question, Bill read 2ª, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.