---

Column 1209

House not feel that that is bound to be intolerable to members of the regiment, especially in view of their sacrifices?

What will the end of the story be? After the debate concludes and the House divides on Third Reading, the word will go back to Northern Ireland that this is the end of the UDR. People in our Province remember the day when the House did the same with the Ulster Special Constabulary. They will have more despair in their hearts at the end of this debate than they have had for many long years. They hoped and trusted that at long last the Government and the Prime Minister would take the matter in mind. Instead, they find that once again their hopes have been dashed. Those who have served well in the UDR have got their come-uppance, which they do not deserve. They have been treated in a manner that I put on the record as disgraceful. I cannot accept the arguments that I have been given, although I should like to accept them. It is far easier to live at peace than to live at war, and it is far easier to conform than not to conform. However, when one is elected to office, one has a responsibility to ensure that the electors give their views. Having balanced those views and found them to be absolutely honest and trustworthy, one has a duty to put those views in the place to which one has been elected. Whether the House wishes to hear them and whether that man receives scorn from the people to whom he speaks, he must say what the people have convinced him is right. Having talked to UDR officers, to UDR men, to a prominent general in the British Army and to others related to military service, I am convinced--

Mr. Peter Robinson : Does it concern my hon. Friend that, in every contact with the Minister he has said with absolute conviction--I do not doubt him for one minute--that the UDR wants the change? Does it disturb my hon. Friend that the Minister actually believes that? I can see that the Minister is not interested in listening, although he will have plenty of time later in which to listen.

Is it not disturbing that the Minister clearly believes that the UDR wants the Bill? We who come from Northern Ireland know that the UDR wants nothing to do with the Bill and that the grass roots, the men who serve on the streets and roads of Northern Ireland, want the measure defeated.

Rev. Ian Paisley : I do not expect the Government to listen. The only time they listen to Northern Ireland is when they are in trouble. They then run to the leaders from Northern Ireland saying, "Please help us." The hard-pressed people of Northern Ireland say, "In God's name, help us. You are not helping us tonight by what you are doing."

It is no use the Government bluffing their way and saying, "Everything will be all right." Everything will not be all right. The Minister has the evidence. I put it to him again. I see a person in the Box who was present at the meeting at which it was revealed to us that the Government had spent money on a survey--an opinion poll--which came out overwhelmingly in favour of the Bill. The Minister should now tell us when the poll took place, what money was spent on it, how many officers, NCOs and privates were questioned. What was the breakdown, and what was the result of that poll?

---

Column 1210

Mr. Robinson : My hon. Friend said that the poll was of the officers and men of the Ulster Defence Regiment. Was it not also of the officers and men of the Royal Irish Rangers, and did not the Minister suggest that there was a less enthusiastic response from the Royal Irish Rangers when they were asked those questions--even though the sample was clearly geared to get the best result for the opinion poll?

Mr. John. D. Taylor : On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. As the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. I. Paisley) said more than an hour ago, the future of the UDR is very important to us in Northern Ireland. My party tabled an amendment in Committee, but it was defeated by the Government. We have not had a full and proper debate at any stage in the Bill's proceedings. The debate is now getting off the ground, and many hon. Members wish to take part in it. There is a rumour that the Government are about to curtail the debate. Can we have a ruling from you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on how long we have available to continue?

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Paul Dean) : The right hon. Gentleman and the House know full well that the occupant of the Chair cannot deal with hypothetical questions. I have to deal with the situation as it proceeds.

Rev. Ian Paisley : Further to the point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. May we have an assurance that the debate can continue for as long as you are satisfied that hon. Members wish to voice their opinions on Northern Ireland, and that those opinions will be heard. I was told by those in the Table Office that the debate could continue for as long as there were people who were prepared to speak. If that is not so, I should like to hear it contradicted ; if it is so, I should be happy to hear you say so.

Mr. Deputy Speaker : I can add nothing to what I have already said. As long as the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. I. Paisley) is in order, he is entitled to proceed.

Rev. Ian Paisley : Let me take this opportunity to warn the Government not to try to gag Northern Ireland Members tonight. It does not matter to me if they curtail our proceedings ; it would suit me because I have plenty of other things to do in Northern Ireland. But I can tell the Minister that, if the Government do that the people of Northern Ireland will realise the lengths to which they are prepared to go to gag Northern Ireland's public representatives and prevent us from speaking.

We do not enjoy the opportunities available to hon. Members representing seats in Wales, Scotland and England. In Great Britain, legislation is implemented by way of Bills which have stages--Second Reading, Committee, Report and Third Reading. Our laws are passed in one and a half hours in a series of Orders in Council. It is amazing that I can move an amendment to a law affecting the people of England and Wales but that I cannot amend a law affecting those who sent me to the House. Our opportunities for debates are limited, and if we do not have a full opportunity to debate Bills that affect Northern Ireland, the people of Northern Ireland had better know that we are limited in that way. We have no forum in Northern Ireland to which we can take matters.

The House should remember that it is always dangerous to stifle debate. If debate is stifled, frustrations will break out in another way. If that is what the

---

Column 1211

Government are about, let them do it. That will be all right, but they will reap in Northern Ireland what they are sowing. This debate is open ended, but if the Government had wanted, they could have guillotined it. They thought that the matter would never be seen on the Order Paper and that it would be nodded through.

It will not be nodded through. I have already told the Minister of State that it would be better to withdraw the Bill and bring it forward again. What has he to fear? Is he not going to return to this place? If he returns, he will have the opportunity to do that. If he does not return, Labour Front-Bench Members, who are in favour of the Bill, can bring it back for him. The Minister of State can join them in a new coalition. He did not withdraw the Bill, so I shall continue. I thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to do so.

Mr. Peter Robinson : Will my hon. Friend say something about the consequences of this measure becoming law, in particular the lessons that will be learned by the Provisional IRA, which campaigned for the removal of the B Specials? It was successful in persuading the House to remove the B Specials because of IRA propaganda. IRA propaganda has concentrated on the Ulster Defence Regiment, and the Government have again responded to IRA propaganda. Is there a lesson that the IRA will draw from that?

Rev. Ian Paisley : Yes. The lesson that I have learnt is that I have to talk on and on, because I have discovered that the Government intend to move a closure motion when I sit down. That leaves me no option but to continue to speak on this matter. I deeply regret that attitude. It will have a sad reaping in my Province. The Minister of State should go the second mile on the issue. He is not even prepared to listen. He has been doing his correspondence and talking to his hon. Friends. He wants to silence the person to whom he is not prepared to listen. That is not democracy at all, it is the worst form of dictatorship.

Please, for the sake of the widows, orphans and memory of the Ulster Defence Regiment, let the House debate the matter. If nobody but Northern Ireland hon. Members want to take part in the debate, they should be heard. This is our only opportunity to debate the matter.

Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West) : I am sorry to disturb the hon. Gentleman's brief remarks, but may I refer to something that he said a few moments ago? He said that other hon. Members are not aware of living under the threat of violence. We all appreciate that the threat in Northern Ireland is serious, but some hon. Members are living under the same threat. Their names have appeared on lists. Of course, hon. Members have been murdered. Two lists were discovered. One was in Limerick. It was discovered by the Garda six months ago. Other hon. Members who are not Northern Ireland Members were on that list. I remind the hon. Gentleman as gently as I can that the terror and fear are shared by many other hon. Members and their families.

Rev. Ian Paisley : I do not know of any case on this side of the water of a family having to leave their own home at night and go into a lonely outhouse--a cowshed--and stretch out their beds, with the father bolting the door and putting two cartridges into a double-barrelled shotgun. I do not know of any part of the United Kingdom where a man goes out ploughing and his wife has to lie up against

---

Column 1212

a hedge with a gun in her hand. I know and appreciate that there is fear among people. There is fear on both sides of the Community. I am aware of that.

In my other capacity as a minister of religion, I have to visit the hospital. When I visit the Royal Victoria hospital it takes 20 police officers to get me in and out safely. One of the Ministers visited the hospital the other day. It took 200 members of the security forces to get him in and out safely. Does the House realise the continual pressure that we are all under?

Mr. John D. Taylor : It is important to clarify the issue of fear. The hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) limited fear to the fear among elected Members of Parliament here in Great Britain. Of course a handful of Members of Parliament in Great Britain live in fear. But that is not the issue that the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley) was addressing. He was not worried about Members of Parliament. He was rightly worried about the fear that has spread across the ordinary people of Northern Ireland. It is the people of Northern Ireland who live in fear. Ordinary Members of Parliament here in Great Britain still do not understand what the fear is like in practice in Northern Ireland.

Rev. Ian Paisley : The right hon. Gentleman is right. I must say to the House that people who go into public life in Northern Ireland take their life in their hands. We all know that. The IRA attempted to kill the right hon. Member for Strangford (Mr. Taylor). I remember visiting him in the hospital shortly after he received all those bullets in his face. I am warned continually that I am on the danger list and could be murdered. My wife has been attacked. I have been shot at. But if one chooses to take a stand and be a public representative in Northern Ireland, no matter who one is and what one's convictions, one will always be under threat. But that is not what I seek to convey to the House about the Bill.

The ordinary people in Northern Ireland who go about their daily business, whose name is never on the front of the newspaper, who are unknown, who bring up their children, send them to school and do their best to rear them and give them a chance in life, are living in fear. It is a fear that goes across the religious divide. Protestants are afraid and Roman Catholics are afraid. The fear enters into the gut of the people. There is great fear. If the Bill is passed tonight, there will be more fear. The Bill will not lessen but build up fears.

The right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Mr. Molyneaux), the leader of the Ulster Unionists in the House, told the Prime Minister when we met him that there was a perception that the British Government would pull out of Northern Ireland. That perception leads to fear among not only Protestants but Roman Catholics, who do not know what will happen if the Government pull out. We have a super-abundance of fear.

Some people in the House may be cynical and say that the fears are unreal, but even if they are unreal, they are real to the people who have them. We must emphasise that to the House. The House should take cognisance tonight that there are real fears in the hearts of people.

Mr. Peter Robinson : Apart from the fear of terrorism, is there not a real fear in Northern Ireland as a consequence of legislation such as this? It creates fear that a Government who introduced the Anglo-Irish Agreement moved directly at the behest of Dublin to start making

---

Column 1213

changes such as the removal of the Ulster Defence Regiment. Has my hon. Friend read the memoirs of Dr. Garrett Fitzgerald? In them it says that, during negotiations on the Anglo-Irish Agreement, Dr. Fitzgerald and his colleagues pressed the Government of the United Kingdom to do away with the UDR. He says that there was less than a solemn defence of the Ulster Defence Regiment from the British Government during that time. Will the people of Northern Ireland not fear that there is a sell-out by the Conservative Government over the Ulster Defence Regiment, just as they sold out Northern Ireland over the Anglo-Irish Agreement?

Rev. Ian Paisley : I must confess to my colleague that I have not read that large book--the memoirs of the Taoiseach--but I have read extracts from it, which made it clear that Garrett Fitzgerald entirely got his own way. As my hon. Friend said, he also put on record that he was amazed that representatives of the British Government did not defend the position of people in the north of Ireland and almost readily accepted his charges.

I emphasise that, when the Anglo-Irish Agreement was signed, the whole attack was aimed at the Ulster Defence Regiment. Some hon. Members told us that the agreement would not make any difference, that the sovereignty of this country over Northern Ireland was more secure than ever before, and that the Dublin Government would have little interest. The Dublin Government has since had continual influence in Northern Ireland.

Where was this Bill born? It was not born in the hearts of the Government, but at an Anglo-Irish Conference meeting. It was born when the Dublin Government put on pressure to get rid of the Ulster Defence Regiment.

Winston Churchill said that appeasement never pays. You can appease and appease crocodiles, but eventually they will swallow you up. That is what will happen to the Government if they go on appeasing.

Mr. John D. Taylor : On the relationship of the Anglo-Irish Agreement and how that has led the Conservative party to recommend the abolition of the Ulster Defence Regiment, there is confusion in the political arena in Ulster tonight, confusion created by the British Conservative party. Although the Conservative party imposed the Anglo-Irish Agreement, Conservative candidates in Northern Ireland say that they are opposed to it. Although the Conservative party is promoting what are known as the Brooke inter-party talks, Conservative candidates have said that they will campaign against those talks during the election.

Can the hon. Member for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley) at least help the Conservatives to clarify the confusion about the Ulster Defence Regiment? The Conservatives are abolishing the Ulster Defence Regiment in this House, but will Conservative candidates in Northern Ireland campaign to preserve it?

Rev. Ian Paisley : I find it amusing, because a Conservative candidate says that he will fight against me in Antrim, North. He is welcome to do so if he wants to lose £1,000 for central office. In my constituency, he says that he is against the Anglo-Irish Agreement. Why does he say that? Because he knows that he would not stand any chance of anyone listening to him if he did not say it. That is absolutely dishonest, and that man is either a pirate, or

---

Column 1214

he has the approval of central office to say something different in Northern Ireland from what is said on the mainland. That is what the issue is about.

On the Brooke talks, the leader of the Conservative party in Northern Ireland, Mr. Kennedy, says that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is responsible for IRA murders because he called those talks. The other day, he was received at a meeting for candidates, and he met the Prime Minister at a candidates' reception. Yet when he got back to Northern Ireland, he said that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland was responsible for those killings. So far, Conservative candidates have been mute on the subject of the Ulster Defence Regiment, but after this debate they will all be saying, "We are for the Ulster Defence Regiment." Those candidates are against the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which is a child of this Government who helped to beget it. They are against the Brooke talks, which I happen to be for. It was through the honourable leader of the Unionist party and myself that these talks came about. We have been pleading with the Government to go ahead and have these talks, but the Government are against them and now they are to be against the UDR.

How can the people of Northern Ireland think that the Conservative party is serious when its candidates say that the direct opposite in Northern Ireland to what the Government say from the Front Bench here? Let us have some decency, some honesty. If a candidate-- The Treasurer to Her Majesty's Household (Mr. Alastair Goodlad) rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put.

Question put, That the Question be now put :--

The House proceeded to a Division :--

Rev. Ian Paisley (seated and covered) : On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Perhaps you can help me. Does this mean that, if the Bill is passed now, the House will have no other opportunity of commenting on it? Does this bring the debate on it to an end?

Mr. Deputy Speaker : I am dealing with the Division on which the House is engaged. We must see what the result of the Division is. The House having divided : Ayes 250, Noes 13.

Division No. 113] [5.25 pm

AYES

Alexander, Richard

Alison, Rt Hon Michael

Allason, Rupert

Amess, David

Arbuthnot, James

Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

Ashby, David

Aspinwall, Jack

Baker, Nicholas (Dorset N)

Baldry, Tony

Batiste, Spencer

Bellingham, Henry

Bendall, Vivian

Bennett, Nicholas (Pembroke)

Bevan, David Gilroy

Blaker, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Body, Sir Richard

Bonsor, Sir Nicholas

Boscawen, Hon Robert

Boswell, Tim

Bottomley, Peter

Bowden, Gerald (Dulwich)

Bowis, John

Boyson, Rt Hon Dr Sir Rhodes

Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard

Brandon-Bravo, Martin

Brazier, Julian

Bright, Graham

Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

Bruce, Ian (Dorset South)

Buck, Sir Antony

Burns, Simon

Butler, Chris

Butterfill, John

Campbell-Savours, D. N.

Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)

Carrington, Matthew

Carttiss, Michael

Cash, William

Chalker, Rt Hon Mrs Lynda

Channon, Rt Hon Paul

Chapman, Sydney

Churchill, Mr

Clark, Rt Hon Sir William

---

Column 1215

Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe)

Colvin, Michael

Coombs, Anthony (Wyre F'rest)

Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

Cormack, Patrick

Couchman, James

Critchley, Julian

Curry, David

Davies, Q. (Stamf'd & Spald'g)

Davis, David (Boothferry)

Day, Stephen

Devlin, Tim

Dicks, Terry

Dorrell, Stephen

Dover, Den

Dunn, Bob

Durant, Sir Anthony

Dykes, Hugh

Evans, David (Welwyn Hatf'd)

Fairbairn, Sir Nicholas

Farr, Sir John

Fenner, Dame Peggy

Finsberg, Sir Geoffrey

Fookes, Dame Janet

Forman, Nigel

Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

Forth, Eric

Fowler, Rt Hon Sir Norman

French, Douglas

Fry, Peter

Gale, Roger

Garel-Jones, Rt Hon Tristan

Gill, Christopher

Glyn, Dr Sir Alan

Goodlad, Rt Hon Alastair

Goodson-Wickes, Dr Charles

Gorst, John

Grant, Sir Anthony (CambsSW)

Greenway, John (Ryedale)

Gregory, Conal

Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N)

Ground, Patrick

Hamilton, Rt Hon Archie

Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)

Hampson, Dr Keith

Hanley, Jeremy

Hannam, Sir John

Hargreaves, A. (B'ham H'll Gr')

Harris, David

Haselhurst, Alan

Hawkins, Christopher

Hayes, Jerry

Hayward, Robert

Heathcoat-Amory, David

Hicks, Mrs Maureen (Wolv' NE)

Hicks, Robert (Cornwall SE)

Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L.

Hind, Kenneth

Hordern, Sir Peter

Howard, Rt Hon Michael

Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)

Hughes, Robert G. (Harrow W)

Hunt, Rt Hon David

Hunt, Sir John (Ravensbourne)

Hunter, Andrew

Irvine, Michael

Jack, Michael

Jackson, Robert

Janman, Tim

Janner, Greville

Jessel, Toby

Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey

Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

Jones, Robert B (Herts W)

Jopling, Rt Hon Michael

Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine

Key, Robert

King, Roger (B'ham N'thfield)

Kirkhope, Timothy

Knight, Greg (Derby North)

Knight, Dame Jill (Edgbaston)

Knowles, Michael

Knox, David

Latham, Michael

Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark

Lester, Jim (Broxtowe)

Lilley, Rt Hon Peter

Lloyd, Sir Ian (Havant)

Lloyd, Peter (Fareham)

Lord, Michael

Luce, Rt Hon Sir Richard

Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas

McCrindle, Sir Robert

MacGregor, Rt Hon John

MacKay, Andrew (E Berkshire)

Maclean, David

McLoughlin, Patrick

McNair-Wilson, Sir Michael

McNair-Wilson, Sir Patrick

Madel, David

Major, Rt Hon John

Malins, Humfrey

Maples, John

Marlow, Tony

Marshall, John (Hendon S)

Marshall, Sir Michael (Arundel)

Martin, David (Portsmouth S)

Mates, Michael

Mawhinney, Dr Brian

Maxwell-Hyslop, Sir Robin

Mayhew, Rt Hon Sir Patrick

Mills, Iain

Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

Mitchell, Sir David

Moate, Roger

Morris, M (N'hampton S)

Morrison, Sir Charles

Morrison, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Moss, Malcolm

Moynihan, Hon Colin

Nelson, Anthony

Neubert, Sir Michael

Newton, Rt Hon Tony

Nicholls, Patrick

Nicholson, David (Taunton)

Norris, Steve

Onslow, Rt Hon Cranley

Oppenheim, Phillip

Page, Richard

Paice, James

Patnick, Irvine

Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

Pawsey, James

Peacock, Mrs Elizabeth

Porter, David (Waveney)

Portillo, Michael

Price, Sir David

Raffan, Keith

Raison, Rt Hon Sir Timothy

Rathbone, Tim

Redwood, John

Renton, Rt Hon Tim

Riddick, Graham

Ridsdale, Sir Julian

Roberts, Rt Hon Sir Wyn

Rossi, Sir Hugh

Rowe, Andrew

Ryder, Rt Hon Richard

Sackville, Hon Tom

Sainsbury, Rt Hon Tim

Sayeed, Jonathan

Scott, Rt Hon Nicholas

Shaw, David (Dover)

Shaw, Sir Giles (Pudsey)

Shelton, Sir William

Shephard, Mrs G. (Norfolk SW)

Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

Shepherd, Richard (Aldridge)

Shersby, Michael

---