You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Commons Debates by date > Commons Debates - previous sessions > Bound Volume Hansard - Debate
Previous SectionIndexHome Page

Mr. John D. Taylor: Supports Celtic?

Mr. Ross: The hon. Gentleman may support Celtic; I understand that it is a pretty good football team--but I must confess that, if I were a football lover, I might support another team.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear.

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North): That is the root of the problem.

22 Apr 1996 : Column 131

Mr. Ross: I meant Coleraine; it is in my constituency. [Interruption.] I could not follow the hon. Member for North Antrim (Rev. Ian Paisley) down that road. But I am not a footballer, so the problem does not arise.

The Second Deputy Chairman: Order. This is no doubt most interesting and entertaining, but can the hon. Gentleman tell me what it has to do with his amendment?

Mr. Ross: Actually, Dame Janet, I had moved somewhat from my own amendment to discuss amendment No. 100, which the hon. Member for Falkirk, West hopes to move if he catches your eye in a few minutes' time. He demands:


That is an interesting proposition.

Mr. Corbyn: It is a good amendment.

Mr. Ross: It is an interesting proposition, but I do not think it is needed. Surely we are told by Mr. Bruton that, since 1985, the Irish Government have constantly been consulted on a daily basis. Are we to believe that they are not consulted on those issues, and that in the past ten and a half years there has ever been a time when the Government of the Irish Republic have not raised the constitutional position of Northern Ireland?

The proposition by the hon. Member for Falkirk, West is unnecessary. It is redundant, because what the hon. Gentleman wants is already happening, and we are trying to ensure that it stops happening. We want the Secretary of State to consult not only the Unionist population--the greater number in Northern Ireland--but the people of Northern Ireland.

Surely the electorate of Northern Ireland should be allowed to pronounce on such matters. As I have said, if that happened, a burden would be lifted from the Government's shoulders. They are loth to transfer the responsibility for things going wrong on to the shoulders of the Unionists. Perhaps they would find it easier, wiser and more defensible to transfer that burden to the shoulders of the people of Northern Ireland--a burden that that electorate would joyfully accept, because it would mean that they could protect the position that they enjoy within the kingdom.

Mr. Wilshire: I want to speak to the two amendments in my name, Nos. 83 and 84. Amendment No. 83 seeks to make it clear that the Government could not proceed with any decision emerging from talks unless a majority of the people supported it in a referendum within Northern Ireland. That is a variation on amendment No. 125.

Amendment No. 84 seeks to make it clear that the purpose of a referendum is to obtain not simply the views of the people of Northern Ireland but their consent.

11.30 pm

Amendment No. 83 takes up something that we discussed in slightly more general terms earlier--the consent of the people of Northern Ireland. My right hon. Friend the Minister kindly made it clear that there would have to be consent from the majority in Northern Ireland.

22 Apr 1996 : Column 132

That has been talked about in the past. Having said that earlier today, I am asking him to put it in writing so that we have in the Bill what we are repeatedly told informally is the case. As my amendment merely confirms what the Government have already said, I assume that they will not find it difficult to accept.

The Government make much of the triple lock. Some of us are not so sure how secure it is, but they tell us that it is vital and that the people of Northern Ireland must agree. The amendment says that if they do not agree, the proposals


If the Government are willing to say that, let them do so, but I draw my right hon. Friend the Minister's attention to my amendment's detailed wording. It defines "majority" as being


not a straightforward majority of those who happen to turn up on a wet Thursday afternoon. There is a precedent for that in other referendums that have been held in the United Kingdom to determine the future relationship of a part of the Union with the whole. The Government should make it clear that they accept that the consent of the people of Northern Ireland means a majority of those entitled to vote doing so.

Mr. William Cash (Stafford): My hon. Friend may have glanced at clause 4(6), which we shall debate later. He may not have noticed that it states:


and this is the important bit--


Section 1 of that Act states:


It is a strange anomaly that clause 4(1) refers to


but that clause 4(6)--

The Second Deputy Chairman: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman but interventions should be brief, as I have had occasion to say before. If he wants to make such a complicated and lengthy point, he should try to catch my eye to make a separate speech.

Mr. Wilshire: I understand your point, Dame Janet, but I found my hon. Friend's intervention interesting and helpful. I consider myself told off for not reading that part of the 1973 Act as he did. His intervention provides with me with another argument. If my amendments say only what already exists in other legislation, it is sensible for the Government to accept that the Bill should be changed to bring it into line with what he described.

Amendment No. 84 goes beyond simply seeking the views of the people of Northern Ireland. I believe that we should confirm in writing tonight that the purpose of the

22 Apr 1996 : Column 133

exercise is what the Government have repeatedly said informally--that we are seeking consent. Let us put that into writing for the avoidance of all doubt.

So that I do not have to speak again during this short debate, I must assume that the hon. Member for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan) will speak to amendment No. 100, which suggests that there should be formal consultation with a foreign Government about the internal affairs of the United Kingdom. The decision by a sovereign Parliament to hold a referendum within its territory is a matter for that country alone. To suggest that a foreign Government, be it the Republic of Ireland, Peru, or wherever, should have a formal status in the process of the House deciding to hold a referendum on a particular date and what wording to put to its citizens and to no others is utterly unacceptable. I hope that the House will have no part of the amendment that I suspect will be moved.

I realise that there is an overlap and that the Republic may want to hold its own referendum. There may be some need for an informal chat over a pint of Guinness, or whatever these people do on such occasions. But it would be an impertinence for us to interfere formally in what is decided in Dublin, just as it is an impertinence for them to interfere in the internal matters of this sovereign nation.

Once again, I am pleading with my right hon. and hon. Friends not simply to come up with soothing words when they respond to my points and, having said all those things all over again, to say, "No. We can't accept these amendments either." My right hon. and hon. Friends may find my amendments unnecessary, but that is not the point. I would be grateful to hear--if it can be argued--why my amendments are wrong, not why they might be inconvenient to the Government.

I consider that, by accepting the amendments, the Government will prove beyond all doubt that they are willing to stand by their informal words. They will show that they are willing to help their friends on the Back Benches. I urge them, therefore, to accept the amendments. It is one way of making speedier progress tonight.

Mr. Canavan: My amendment No. 100 would impose on the Secretary of State a statutory obligation to


I emphasise that we are talking not simply of a new internal constitutional arrangement in Northern Ireland, or the relationship between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. My amendment refers to


It is only fair and democratic, therefore, that that new constitutional package, defining a new relationship between all the peoples of the island of Ireland, should be put to a democratic test throughout the entire island, rather than just one part of it.

My amendment places a statutory obligation on the Government to implement paragraph 26 of the White Paper, Cm 3232, which states:


22 Apr 1996 : Column 134

I always thought that the plural of referendum was referenda, but it says referendums--


It would make good sense, therefore, for there to be consultation between both Governments, so that they could agree on exactly the same form of wording to be put to their peoples. There may well be some advantage in holding the referenda on the same day. Those could all be matters for consultation.

The Republic of Ireland has a longer history of referenda than we have. I understand that it must hold a referendum if it amends its constitution. Whatever referendum is put to the people of the Republic of Ireland may be one that is required by its constitution, so the wording would perhaps not be exactly the same. The wording of part of the constitutional package may be the same, but if it involves a constitutional amendment in the Republic of Ireland, the British Government obviously would not want to include that in the wording of the referendum put to the people of Northern Ireland. Those matters are all points for consultation. They are important and there is merit in making the wording on the relationship between the peoples of Ireland as similar as possible in the two referenda.

Next Section

IndexHome Page