The Union (Hansard, 21 February 1994)

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Wakeham)
My Lords, as my right honourable friend the Prime Minister has made clear on numerous occasions, the Government wholeheartedly support the Union in its present form.

§ Lord Ellenborough
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that short reply. However, is it not deplorable that Her Majesty's Government should state that they have no interest in one part of the Union which they govern? That is especially so in view of the strong emphasis at the last general election, rightly so, on the great importance of the Union. Is it not the case that a substantial majority of people in Northern Ireland, including an increasing number of Catholics as well as Protestants, who wish to support the Union now feel that they are being slowly nudged away from it into a kind of semi-detached Gibraltar-style status? In other words, are not the Government saying,"Stay with us if you must, but we would just as rather if you didn't"?

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, the phrase from the Joint Declaration to which my noble friend refers needs to be understood in its full context. It was first used in a speech in 1991 by the present Heritage Secretary. It describes the Government's policy, which is unchanged; namely, that the constitutional status of Northern Ireland is a matter for the democratic wishes of its people, freely expressed. With that in mind that phrase makes it clear that the Government have no private interest of their own such as would lead them to seek to frustrate that wish. As I have made clear and emphasise again, the Government fully support the Union in its present form.

§ Lord Mason of Barnsley
My Lords, does not the Leader of the House agree that those were not the wisest of words? They are insulting to the Province, they anger the Unionists and they pander to the Republicans. Is it not incumbent upon the Minister to try to neutralise those words by stressing that Northern Ireland is a part of the United Kingdom and shall remain so until a majority of the people of that Province decide otherwise?

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, I do not accept the first part of the noble Lord's question. The Government have long held the position that they have no interest that would lead them to frustrate the democratically expressed will of the majority of the people in Northern Ireland, whether they support the Union or joining a sovereign united Europe. We shall not impose our will on the majority of people in Northern Ireland. That does not mean that we are indifferent to their concerns or their future. We support their economy generously, and we deploy 18,000 of our troops there. We want Northern Ireland to enjoy a safer, more prosperous future in which democracy can survive.

§ Lord Monson
My Lords, can the Leader of the House say whether the Prime Minister, or any other Member of Her Majesty's Government, would be prepared to use precisely the same words in regard to Scotland or Wales as the Prime Minister used in relation to Northern Ireland? If not, why the discrepancy?

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, we would like to preserve all parts of the Union, but there is a clear difference between Scotland and Northern Ireland. Each requires a different approach. In the case of Northern Ireland there are several relevant factors which are quite different to Scotland; for example, the identity which a large minority of the Northern Ireland community shares with the Republic of Ireland; the essentially regional-based Northern Ireland party structure; and the need to achieve a functioning political accommodation between the two main parts of the community. In Scotland, however, the best approach is to strengthen parliamentary accountability, to devolve further powers to the Secretary of State for Scotland, and give increased powers to institutions outside central government and to the people of Scotland. The great strength of the Union is its ability to accommodate a variety of approaches in all its constituent parts.

§ Lord Williams of Mostyn
My Lords, does not the noble Lord agree that the key word here is the adjective "selfish"? There is a good deal of support for the proposition which the noble Lord rightly says has been government policy for around three years— that no selfish overriding interest of any government should interfere with the free conclusion of the majority of those who live in Northern Ireland. Does not the Minister agree that without a free vote for a change in constitutional arrangements there can be no change?

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Williams. In the case of Northern Ireland we undertook to uphold the Union so long as that remains the democratic wish of the greater number of the people in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland's constitutional status as part of the United Kingdom is enshrined in both national and international law, and that was confirmed in the recent Joint Declaration.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, does not the noble Lord agree that the "Union" in this context can be reconciled with a measure of devolution?

§ Lord Wakeham
Certainly, my Lords.

§ The Marquess of Donegall
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that abandoning the bases at Spike Island and Lough Swilly in 1938 complicated the defence of the Western Approaches in the last war and cost many lives? Without Northern Ireland, many more lives, ships and their cargoes would have been lost. In the present state of the world, are the Government so sure that Northern Ireland has no strategic value?

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, I do not think we said that there was no strategic interest in Northern Ireland. We said that there was no strategic interest which should overrule the wishes of the majority. That is the point. I fully accept my noble friend's reminder to the House of the very significant contribution made by Northern Ireland to the defence of the Western Approaches.

§ Lord Ewing of Kirkford
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, like him, I am in favour of the devolution of power while preserving the unity of the United Kingdom? Does he accept that what makes our task more difficult is the decision by private monopolies like British Gas to close down their Scottish headquarters with the loss of 1,500 high quality jobs and transfer all that work to areas in England? As a former Secretary of State for Energy, will the noble Lord undertake to speak to the Prime Minister and at least have discussions with British Gas about the possibility of reversing that arrogant decision?

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, I shall certainly have a look at the decision mentioned by the noble Lord but I have some doubts as to whether it is appropriate for the Government to intervene in such a case. What I can say to the noble Lord— and he knows because I certainly had a great deal of experience of it in my time as Secretary of State for Energy— is that an enormous number of jobs have been created very much as a result of the policy adopted by this Government over the development of the North Sea in these past years.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that it only darkens counsel to confuse the situations in Northern Ireland with those in Scotland, Wales or England? What we all believe in — those of us who are Unionist in philosophy— is unity in diversity and diversity in unity. That is based on the support of the people of the places concerned.

§ Lord Wakeham
My Lords, my noble and learned friend puts it extremely well. Perhaps on that note we ought to move on now to the next Question.