| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Taylor: I very much welcome that contribution. It underlines my point that the procedure is not defined with sufficient clarity. We need a genuinely independent chairman who is respected by the elected representatives within the forum.
Paragraph 22 of Cmnd. 3232 refers, rightly, to the business committee. We need some guidance from the Minister about the size of that committee. Will there be one representative from each of the two Governments and one from each of the political parties, or is some other formula being suggested?
Paragraph 23 is a mistake by the Government, repeating that old and failed formula that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. That was one of the contributory factors in the collapse of the Brooke all-party talks at Stormont. I regret that one of the reasons for the failure of those talks is being repeated in the Command Paper. I appeal to the Government, even at this late stage, to remove that obstacle to real progress within Northern Ireland.
Paragraph 26 is entitled "Validation". It states that both Governments should
Can we have confirmation from the Minister that, whether or not there is a referendum in the Republic, the referendum within Northern Ireland will be separate, limited to the people of Northern Ireland and under the legislation of Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom?
Clause 4(5) deals with the issue of there being no court. I realise that that refers specifically to referendums. It says:
If no court is being allowed to interfere, that will be most unusual, because we have electoral courts in all elections in the United Kingdom. It is very odd that there should be a specific exclusion of the court to overrule the chief electoral officer if people wish to challenge any decisions.
Although the clause refers specifically to the referendum, I trust that there is no suggestion that the electoral court will be prevented from overriding the chief electoral officer in the electoral process to the forum. That would be a serious infringement of normal democratic practices.
Rev. Martin Smyth:
Will my right hon. Friend accept that, although the draftsmen deliberately excluded the question of the border referendum at an earlier stage, they may have been thinking that the result of the referendum would be so overwhelming, like that previous referendum, that no court could overturn it? Having said that, I accept my right hon. Friend's point about the electoral process to the forum.
Mr. Taylor:
I thank my hon. Friend for that contribution, and for the way in which he has developed the point I was trying to make.
We were promised referendums under the Northern Ireland Constitution Act 1973, and we did have one. However, since the Unionists won, we have not been allowed to have another one. That is the way that democracy has operated in Northern Ireland since 1972. Any time the Unionists win something, it is immediately dropped and some other attempt is made, where it is hoped that the Unionists will not win.
This Bill is yet another example of that. Its whole thrust is to weaken the unity of the Ulster Unionist people. I assure the Secretary of State that, when the election takes place, the Ulster Unionist people will rise up to a man and to a woman, and there will be one of the biggest turnouts in Northern Ireland's electoral history. There will be a strong Unionist and loyalist mandate, because the people will rejoice at this opportunity to speak--and speak loudly they will.
Mr. Bermingham:
One of the grounds on which a ballot should be able to be challenged is that of electoral fraud. We all know about voting from the grave--I say that as a born Dubliner--
Mr. Taylor:
So you would know.
Mr. Bermingham:
Yes, I know it well enough. That is what worries me about the clause.
Mr. Taylor:
I certainly know what the hon. Gentleman is talking about. That cannot happen in Northern Ireland, although it still may happen in the Republic. We have strict controls in Northern Ireland; people have to produce one of 10 types of identification document. Some of them include photographs, which is sensible, while others do not, which is not so sensible.
The Government should look again at the whole question of identification on polling day in Northern Ireland elections. Quite often, a married couple will turn up at a polling station. The man has his driving licence, which, in Northern Ireland, carries a photograph, but his wife has forgotten to bring an identification document. So the returning officer tells the wife that she cannot vote, but her husband can--with the result that both of them walk away without voting, because the husband will not vote if his wife is not allowed to. So both votes are lost.
Mr. Beggs:
In some parts of Northern Ireland, because of a lack of proper scrutiny within the precincts where voting takes place of those coming in to vote, we cannot be certain that multiple voting by some parties does not take place. Would my right hon. Friend agree with that?
Mr. Taylor:
My hon. Friend is correct. The hon. Member for Belfast, West (Dr. Hendron), who is in his place, can confirm what is unfortunately happening in some parts of his constituency.
Clause 5 includes the interesting term "nominating representative". It is said that that means
So it is not up to members of a party to decide who is their leader; it is the Secretary of State who will decide.
It was the hon. Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn) who said that the electoral system proposed in this Bill exists nowhere else in the world. First, parties
have to be named, and then the Secretary of State decides which ones he will allow to fight the election. There is a rumour in Northern Ireland that President Yeltsin is looking closely at this legislation and is encouraged by it.
I think that the "nominating representative" phraseology has to do with internal Conservative party politics. It is designed to overcome divisions in the Conservative party. That party in Northern Ireland wants to fight the election on a policy opposed to what the Secretary of State stands for. So the Secretary of State is presenting one policy, while Conservative candidates in Northern Ireland present a different one. We therefore do not know who will speak for the Conservatives.
So how do the Government propose to get around this problem? They will let the Conservative party compete in the election, but once it is over, the Secretary of State will decide who will represent the winning Conservative candidates. He will select himself as the possible leader of Conservative members.
Clause 5(1) refers to
Who does the Secretary of State have in mind as "the most appropriate person" to act for the Conservative party? I suspect that it will not be any Conservative who is elected in Northern Ireland, but that the Secretary of State would prefer to be "the appropriate person".
Rev. Ian Paisley:
Surely the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the paper given to us in discussion stated that the chairman of the Conservative party was placed to be the leader. When the right hon. Member for Peterborough (Dr. Mawhinney) became the chairman of the Conservative party, we were told that he was the most appropriate person. When I spoke to him today, he said, "They will be able to stand because I will accredit them, but they will not be allowed to negotiate."
Mr. Taylor:
This is another one for President Yeltsin. People will be allowed to stand in an election but, once they win, they will not be allowed to participate in the negotiations. The Government must end that scandal, and amend the Bill. There is no way in which we can rig electoral systems in Northern Ireland in such a manner.
Rev. Martin Smyth:
I appreciate my right hon. Friend's point, but perhaps he is being uncharacteristically judgmental. It may not be a campaign to "dump the doctor", but some of the strange parties that have been brought into existence may not know their leaders. It would be up to the Secretary of State to appoint that person.
Mr. Taylor:
The point is well made. We are beginning to see the contradictions in the Bill.
Clause 6 provides for the payment of allowances and the Secretary of State's expenses. Obviously allowances will have to be paid to elected persons, because they are not being elected as parliamentarians, district councillors or members of an assembly. We certainly hope that the people elected will contribute to thoughtful negotiations with skill and ability, and they may come from industry, the professions, or the business or academic world. We hope to attract good-quality candidates who are interested in constitutional issues, not routine parliamentary or district council matters such as the needs of individual constituents.
"reaffirm their intention that the outcome of negotiations will be submitted for public approval by referendums in Ireland--North and South".
"No court shall entertain any proceedings for questioning the numbers as certified by the Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland . . . of any ballot papers counted or answers given in a referendum."
"the person who . . . appears to the Secretary of State to be the leader of the party".
"the person who . . . appears to the Secretary of State to be the leader of the party or otherwise the most appropriate person to act on behalf of the party for the purposes of this Act."
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |