HL Deb 20 March 1997 vol 579 cc1156-60

7.52 p.m.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Northern Ireland Office (Baroness Denton of Wakefield) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 10th March be approved [15th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I am conscious not only of the late hour of the day—although this is not necessarily an unusually late hour at which to take Northern Ireland business—but also of the fact that this is a late hour in the life of this Parliament. I shall attempt to be brief, but I stress that that does not mean that these are not important issues.

This order would withdraw from effect the statutory provisions that set up last year a forum for discussion of issues relevant to promoting dialogue and understanding within Northern Ireland. The Secretary of State is obliged, subject to parliamentary approval, to make such an order, if it appears to him that the multi-party talks that have been proceeding in Northern Ireland since last June are suspended. At the meeting of the open plenary session of the talks on 5th March there was a general recognition that further progress in the talks was impossible before the election. Accordingly, the plenary agreed to meet next on 3rd June. The Secretary of State has concluded that, in the terms of the Act, this constitutes suspension of the talks.

This order reflects the important principle that the two institutions—talks and forum—are parallel, and that the forum should not continue to meet when the talks are no longer in process. In any event, that accords with the realities: it is unlikely in an atmosphere increasingly dominated by electoral considerations that the forum could go properly about its remit of discussion of issues relevant to promoting dialogue and understanding. The practical difficulties of meeting during an election period have in any event now led the forum to adjourn itself over the period.

The work that the forum has undertaken, chaired with much effort and commitment by Mr. John Gorman, has been valued by some. Others have doubted that it has taken significant steps in the promotion of dialogue and understanding that were seen as the essence of the forum's remit. But evidently the parties at the forum have come to a greater understanding of one another's views. I should say that we firmly believe that the forum would have been a better institution had the Social Democratic and Labour Party continued to attend it rather than withdrawing from it as it did last summer. I hope that its position may be open to reconsideration.

Even without this order, the forum's initial lifespan would in any event have expired at the end of May this year. But the Secretary of State is empowered to revive it, with parliamentary approval, for a further period, or periods, until the end of May 1998. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State has said that it would be the intention of a Conservative Government to revive the forum as early as practicable in the life of a new Parliament; and the Opposition have spoken in similar terms of the intentions of a future Labour Government.

The forum should, in conformity with the scheme which your Lordships approved last year, cease to meet because the talks have finished. That is right in principle and is a recognition of the practicalities as we approach a succession of elections. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 10th March be approved [15th Report from the Joint Committee].—(Baroness Denton of Wakefield.)

Lord Fitt

My Lords, the Act is entitled the Northern Ireland (Entry to Negotiations, etc.) Act. We know that "etc" can mean many things in Northern Ireland. I recall vividly that when the legislation to establish both the talks and the forum first went through the House, many of us had misgivings about the setting up of the forum and the conditions under which the election to that forum was held. There was the added impetus of a deliberately rigged set of election laws to ensure that certain people would get seats. Although 10 parties were represented, the rules ensured that some of those people who were originally to have a seat at the forum and at the peace talks got only a derisory number of votes in the election. That was the Government's intention.

I expressed reservations about the circumstances surrounding the election to the forum. Indeed, I recall that my noble friend Lord Merlyn-Rees, a former Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, expressed similar reservations and said that it would be hard to get those who had been elected to the forum to give up their seats at any given time. I think that our reservations have been proved correct. No sooner had the forum been elected, than the members of the SDLP—the party which I had the honour to bring into being and which I represented for many years—and of Sinn Fein said that, although they had been elected, they were not going to take their seats but would withdraw from the forum. That meant, in effect, that those members who remained in the forum could be charged with representing only one section of the community in Northern Ireland. As such, the forum was not guaranteed any success or longevity.

I bitterly regret the fact that the forum did not have more success. I have never believed in abstention. I believe that if you go to the electorate and receive their mandate in votes, you should use that mandate to take part in whatever institution or whatever forum may exist and that you should put forward your point of view. I do not believe—I have never believed—in abstention, but unfortunately the party which I formed and which I led for many years seems to have changed and, wherever it may not be in a winning position, now seems to absent itself.

I am sorry that the Forum has ceased to exist. I agree with the noble Baroness that John Gorman has proved to be an admirable chairman. He has done everything to prove that the Forum is an institution that would in time have gained the respect of the whole community in Northern Ireland. I only hope that whatever may be the next Parliament, the Forum will be re-created. I make a heartfelt plea that those who are elected to the Forum should attend it, sometimes in a minority. In a democratic society one cannot have a situation where at all times one's views are paramount. I appeal to the SDLP, if and when the Forum is reconstituted, to attend it. I do not appeal to Sinn Fein because I do not believe that it is amenable to any kind of reason.

The noble Baroness has said that this is the last occasion in this Parliament on which we shall be able to discuss Northern Ireland. As I have said many times before, I believe that she has carried out the functions of all her offices in Northern Ireland with admirable rectitude. She has gained the support and affection of the vast majority of people in Northern Ireland. It is on this issue that I should like to put a specific question. I understand that following a controversy that has arisen over the past few weeks in relation to employment activities within her department an inquiry has been set up into the circumstances.

I do not believe that an inquiry is necessary. I believe that the Northern Ireland Office was wrong to set it up. What is much more disturbing is that the person who is to chair the inquiry is a retired civil servant who has relations with those who are still civil servants in the Northern Ireland Office. I believe that he has been given the task of inquiring into an office which was within the remit of the noble Baroness.

I have heard very disquieting rumours circulating in Northern Ireland to the effect that, having been given this remit, he is to report back to a civil servant who has been central to the whole dispute in Northern Ireland. That appears to me to be a matter of "Ask my brother if I am a liar". I believe that if there is to be an inquiry it should report back, not to a civil servant, but to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. It would be disgraceful if that inquiry took place—I do not believe that it should have been set up in the first place—and reported back to an ex-civil servant or anyone within the Civil Service in Northern Ireland who had been central to the whole dispute.

I ask the noble Baroness: with what terms of reference has this inquiry been set up? To whom and when will it report? I believe that it would be totally unconstitutional if the inquiry reported back to a civil servant who had been central to the whole dispute within her office.

Lord Cooke of Islandreagh

My Lords, I support all that the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, has said about labour relations within the noble Baroness's office. It is causing great concern, upset and annoyance. As the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, said in a debate last week, this matter has been misreported and misrepresented. It is total nonsense. The noble Baroness has done nothing at all to interfere in any way with good relations in her office. The way that this matter has been taken up is causing great annoyance throughout Northern Ireland. The investigation is quite unnecessary and, I believe, out of order. I also believe that it is out of order that £10,000 compensation has been paid to one complainant. I hope that the noble Baroness can soon forget about it. In no way is she at fault. I also hope that the Forum will be restored as soon as possible. Even without the SDLP it has performed a valuable function, in that boys and girls with no previous experience of politics have learnt to debate and discuss. I believe that this is the start of the education of young people to get them involved in politics. There has not been such an opportunity in Northern Ireland for 25 years.

Baroness Park of Monmouth

My Lords, I too should like to add my very strong support not only for this Order but for what has just been said by both noble Lords. My noble friend has played and is playing a vital part in the work of bringing inward investment and development to the Province, despite all the uncertainties arising from the end of the ceasefire. She has shown great courage, persistence and address in visiting many parts of the Province despite the dangers. She tirelessly advances the cause of the people of Northern Ireland in the US and elsewhere.

It would be disgraceful if Sinn Fein/IRA and certain others, who have not scrupled to undermine her as far as they can, were able to use an incident in which my noble friend had behaved with absolute propriety and thus deprive Northern Ireland of one of its best assets. I do not like to see assets wasted. I see from the Irish News that Mr. Mitchell McLoughlin intends to try to make capital of all this and continue the campaign of vilification with his friends in Congress when he visits the US. That shows how much Sinn Fein/IRA care about the future prosperity of Northern Ireland that my noble friend has done so much to advance. For us to allow that to happen would be disgraceful; and it would also demonstrate political ineptitude.

I still believe that the talks have a future, but sadly at present my noble friend represents the only area of our future strategy in a troubled land which can be seen to be working well. I know that she has been privately sustained and encouraged by many of her colleagues in Government; but what is needed urgently is strong public support of the kind that Ministers are usually quick to give their colleagues under attack. So far I hear a loud silence and, behind that, the rustlings in the local undergrowth—the unworthy manoeuvrings of certain small animals (perhaps weasels and ferrets) who wish that my noble friend would go away and leave them to run their comfortable sub-culture in their own way. Fortunately, my noble friend is brave as well as committed. I do not believe that she will go away.

Lord McConnell

My Lords, I also support what has been said by the noble Lord, Lord Fitt. The noble Baroness has gained great respect in Northern Ireland. She has worked extremely hard and produced very good results. It is outrageous that she should be attacked in this way. We support her in this House.

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, I thank noble Lords for their very generous and kind comments. I believe that there are others who share the concerns of the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, about the constitutional implications of the inquiry. I shall ensure that I draw these matters to the attention of my right honourable friend the Secretary of State. But we come here this evening to discuss the suspension of the Forum. The noble Lord, Lord Fitt, was right to say that abstention was not the way to move anything forward. I hope that people will not be elected to Westminster with the avowed intention of not taking their seats. I believe that participation in Westminster and Parliament is a great privilege and one that is not to be ignored.

The noble Lords, Lord Cooke and Lord Fitt, drew attention to the fact that dialogue in Northern Ireland was the way forward. Despite the abstentions, there has been successful dialogue and much understanding of, but not agreement with, alternative views. The committees of the Forum with which I have dealt on specific subject matters have been industrious and demonstrated a commitment that is to be admired.

My noble friend Lady Park shares my concerns that the personal attacks have been used by Sinn Fein in Washington to create hazards in relation to the bringing of jobs to Northern Ireland.

I should like to share with your Lordships the fact that yesterday I was able to announce that there are now more people in work in Northern Ireland than ever before. That is something in which we should take pride. It is something we have achieved. This is merely a suspension. I am pleased to say that with the commitment of both leading contenders in the election the Forum can look forward to doing more good work. I commend the order to the House.

On Question, Motion agreed to.