OATHS AND DECLARATIONS (REPEALS) (NORTHERN IRELAND) ORDER 1973

HL Deb 03 May 1973 vol 342 cc218-21

5.0 p.m.

LORD WINDLESHAM to move, That the Oaths and Declarations (Repeals) (Northern Ireland) Order 1973, laid before the House on April 4, be approved. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move the first Order standing in my name on the Order Paper. The effect of this Order—made under the urgent procedure—is to repeal and amend existing Northern Ireland legislation concerning oaths and declarations so as to bring it into line with the rest of the United Kingdom. The Government's intention to do this was announced in the White Paper. The Constitutional Bill which will give effect to our proposals will provide that the Northern Ireland Assembly may not impose upon any member of an appointed body, or upon any person paid out of public funds, any requirement to make any form of oath or declaration except when such an oath or declaration is required in comparable circumstances in the rest of the United Kingdom.

The Constitutional Bill will be presented to Parliament as soon as possible, but the Government have decided to act by way of an Order in Council in order to make the change in time for the local elections which will be held on May 30. In the past there has been a requirement for district councillors to take an oath of allegiance. This Order fulfils that aim but the problem is not confined solely to district councillors. The present position is full of anomalies. For example, the existing law provides that all full-time civil servants including manual and industrial staff must take an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty and Her Government of Northern Ireland; but in local government, only elected members and certain clerical and administrative workers have been required to take the oath, while manual workers are not required to do so. On October 1 this year when local government is reorganised a considerable number of manual workers will be transferred to the service of the, regional government and unless the law was changed such employees would be required to take an oath for the first time, although their jobs would remain exactly the same. Again, those members of the new Area Boards—the Area Boards for Education and Libraries and Health and Personal Social Services—who are appointed by Ministers are not required to take an oath, but those Board members who are to be drawn from elected members of the new district councils would, unless the law was changed, have taken an oath on election to their respective councils.

The Order, therefore, in addition to relieving local councillors of the requirement to swear an oath of allegiance, brings such anomalies to an end by repealing the relevant legislation requiring certain local government officers, and Northern Ireland civil servants, to take an oath. It also repeals the same requirement for officers of the Youth Em- ployment Service and school teachers, so that all these officials, together with elected members, are placed in the same position as their counterparts in the rest of the United Kingdom. The question of oaths has been a continuous issue in the past in Northern Ireland; and there is, as so often, a long history; but in the present circumstances looking towards the sort of new political institutions we are concerned to construct in Northern Ireland the Government have no doubt that a measure of this kind is justified. I beg to move.

5.4 p.m.

BARONESS WHITE

My Lords, I would wholeheartedly support the Government in the introduction of this Order. It was subject to some contentious debate in another place. In fact, it was taken to a Division but as there was no quorum that had no effect. It would have been carried in any case. It was then subsequently passed. The noble Lord is quite correct in saying that there is a long history, both in Northern Ireland and in Southern Ireland, on this question of oaths of allegiance. It was one of the sticking points in the treaty negotiations of many years ago and the main Act concerned in this, the Promissory Oaths Act 1923, was enacted at a time when political feelings were running very high. As the debate in the other place indicated, they have not died down, even now. I am sure that the Government are right to take this step. It is the honourable person who is caught by the provision of an oath of allegiance; dishonourable persons can take an oath and disregard it. That has happened on occasion. One ought not to offer that kind of temptation, it seems to me, if it is not absolutely essential for the public weal. Therefore, it is to us entirely satisfactory that we should bring the matter into line with the provisions in the rest of the United Kingdom.

I gather from the explanation given by the Minister in another place that a member of a local authority in this country does make a declaration of acceptance of office. This should not in any way be confused with the oath of allegiance mentioned in this Order. I presume that some such act may be required of those elected in the forthcoming local government elections in Northern Ireland.

The only other point—and I do not think the Minister touched on it—is the position of the constabulary. I understand that they still take an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty but that the reference to the Government of Northern Ireland is to be omitted in future. I think that we should accept that a police officer is in a somewhat different position from a teacher or other public servant and one could accept in those circumstances (if I am correct in my interpretation) that the sort of oath that I understand would be administered in future would be appropriate. What stuck with so many people in Northern Ireland in the previous arrangements was that they had to take an oath not only to the Crown but also to the Government of Northern Ireland which many of them wholeheartedly detested.

5.7 p.m.

LORD WINDLESHAM

My Lords, it was fitting that the noble Baroness began with an historical reference to the Treaty negotiations. Her father, Tom Jones, played a notable part in achieving the settlement which was reached at that time. I have read Volume III of the Whitehall Diaries covering that period with considerable interest, if at times with a feeling of resignation and exasperation because so many things seem to be recurring again, fifty years later, which the noble Baroness's father and Lloyd George grappled with. As regards the future position of councillors, elected district councillors in Northern Ireland will still make a declaration as they do in the rest of the United Kingdom. Their declaration will be that they take the said office upon themselves and will duly and faithfully fulfil the duties thereof according to the best of their judgment and ability. It no longer contains any reference to rendering true and faithful allegiance to the Queen and to her Government in Northern Ireland. Similarly, what the noble Baroness said regarding the Royal Ulster Constabulary was accurate. The police in Northern Ireland, as in Britain, will continue to swear an oath. The form in Northern Ireland is somewhat different from what it is in the rest of the United Kingdom, but the reference to the Government in Northern Ireland has been deleted for the future.

On Question, Motion agreed to.