House of Commons
Thursday 11 July 1996
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
NORTHERN IRELAND
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
1. Mr. William Ross: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the effects of BSE on the Northern Ireland economy. [35380]
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Sir Patrick Mayhew): The BSE crisis has had a devastating effect in Northern Ireland because of the vital role that the beef industry plays in the overall economy of the Province. Slaughterings are now at 61 per cent. of pre-crisis levels and there have been more than 900 full-time and 260 part-time lay-offs or redundancies in the beef and ancillary sectors. In order to ensure that we still have an industry when the unjustified ban is lifted, we have provided very significant aid packages to farmers, the slaughtering industry and the renderers.
Mr. Ross: The Secretary of State has detailed the devastating effect that BSE is having on the economy of Northern Ireland. What further steps does he intend to take to ensure that Northern Ireland very soon becomes a BSE-free area, so that the export of beef to the continent and elsewhere can resume? Will he give particular attention to the problems of transferring flagging from holdings to herds so that the difficulties that farmers experience whenever the cattle are changed disappear? Will he also give particular attention to the dreadful problems that the suckler herd men will face two or three months down the road?
Sir Patrick Mayhew: I think that the answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question lies in very scrupulous and particular monitoring of the various restrictions that are in place. I will naturally draw the matter of transferring flagging from holdings to herds to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Agriculture. Flagging is a safeguard and not a stigma, and all of us must do our best to see that it is viewed as such. We shall attend to all those who have an interest in the suckler cow premium when the decisions fall to be taken. The premium is of considerable importance to a wide range of interests in Northern Ireland.
Mr. Gill: Does my right hon. and learned Friend share my concern that one of the possible results of the accelerated cull programme is that the United Kingdom would need to import cattle from other countries to replace those that have been culled, and in doing so might inadvertently import cattle with a higher risk of being BSE infected than those they replace? What programme do the Government have to ensure that that does not happen, as I fear that the cure may be more severe than the complaint?
Sir Patrick Mayhew: I hope that my hon. Friend will excuse me if I deal with that question solely in relation to Northern Ireland, where I am happy to say that only about 2,000 beasts are likely to be the subject of the additional cull. If there is any substance in what my hon. Friend foresees as a possibility, it is therefore not likely to be material in Northern Ireland. I shall, however, draw the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Agriculture to the point that my hon. Friend has made.
Mr. Illsley: The Secretary of State will be aware that, in view of the particular circumstances of Northern Ireland, there are difficulties with breeders of young bulls and suckler herds. I understand that 850 million ecu is available from the European Union to spend on beef and the beef industry throughout the Union, of which the United Kingdom's share is about £34 million. Can the Secretary of State give an assurance that Northern Ireland farmers, breeders and the beef industry will be able to decide how their share of that money is spent in view of the particular problems?
Sir Patrick Mayhew: A noteworthy feature of agriculture in Northern Ireland is the very close and well informed relationship between it and the Agriculture Department. That close relationship is of great value to the industry and to the Government, and the hon. Gentleman's suggestion will benefit from it.
Education and Library Boards
3. Mr. Pickthall: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on education and library boards in Northern Ireland. [35382]
Sir Patrick Mayhew: My right hon. Friend the Minister of State announced on 25 June that he proposes to bring legislation before the House which would reduce the number of education and library boards from five to three and change the membership of the three new boards to increase the proportion of district councillors on boards from 40 per cent. to 48 per cent.
Mr. Pickthall: Is it not odd for the Government to claim that they are making administrative savings by reducing the number of ELBs at the same time as they are putting aside about £8.3 million for the administration of the nursery voucher scheme and are about to create a new bureaucracy with the incorporation of Northern Ireland further education colleges? Is it not outrageous that a dying Administration are trying at this late stage to push through three items which would be far better put to the people of Northern Ireland at a general election?
Sir Patrick Mayhew: I may be retiring, but I am not dying--unless the hon. Gentleman knows something that I do not. The important thing about the proposal is that it is not primarily a cost-cutting exercise, but an exercise in greater efficiency and in directing resources to the classroom. The expected savings from my right hon. Friend's proposal amount to some £2 million, or the equivalent of 90 extra teachers. Parents and children in Northern Ireland will welcome that.
Rev. Martin Smyth: Will the Secretary of State look again at early-day motion 1074, which expresses the objections of all parties in Northern Ireland to the change? Are not the estimates referred to just guesstimates? Shall we really get savings, as a new headquarters may be required? Does he accept that although the proportion of local councillors has increased, the numbers have been reduced?
Sir Patrick Mayhew: The location of the new headquarters is very much a matter for consultation, and that remains to be decided. There has been a diligent process of consultation on the separate phases of change. In March 1992, we announced the review and invited the submission of views. From February to June 1993, the document "Educational Administration in Northern Ireland" was produced, which set out the broad options. From April to June 1995, "Proposals for Change" was published, suggesting the four-board model. Objections to that were received, and discussions with local parties took place from October 1995 to January 1996. The system is seriously over-administered and its application to Belfast is inappropriate, as the Greater Belfast area is served by three education and library boards. We must have regard to the need for change in a system that has been unchanged for 20 years.
Security Situation
4. Mr. Maginnis: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the security situation in Northern Ireland. [35383]
Sir Patrick Mayhew: We have taken a number of steps to reintroduce security measures since the end of the PIRA ceasefire and as a result of the widespread disorder that we have witnessed in recent days. For instance, we recalled two relocated battalions soon after the end of the ceasefire, but two further battalions will be deployed over the next few days. Other precautionary action has been taken. We are also talking to the Irish Government about further co-operation on security. We are absolutely determined that Northern Ireland should not slip into the abyss of sectarian violence and we shall do everything in our power to protect the hard won gains of the last 22 months.
Mr. Maginnis: Does the Secretary of State accept that the consistent inability of the Chief Constable to consult and liaise at both a professional and a political level has, more than anything else, led to the futile impasse at Drumcree? Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that my party has put proposals on the table which address the long-term interests of both traditions, in terms of parades, and will he assure us that never again will the interests of
decent people from either tradition be sacrificed to the machinations of IRA-Sinn Fein activists such as Brendan McKenna?
Sir Patrick Mayhew: I believe that I must deal with questions of this character at this moment in a considered and guarded way, as I hope will all right hon. and hon. Members. I do not accept the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question. The question of the march at Portadown and Drumcree has been the subject of more sustained consultation over the past year than any similar event. I reject criticism of the Chief Constable for the decision that he took originally or, in the light of a changing balance of circumstances, for the decision that he has taken today. I am happy to deal further with that aspect in answer to further questions. I acknowledge that the hon. Gentleman's party has put forward constructive proposals, which have been valuable.
As for the latter part of the question, I do not want to get into particularities. Every effort has been made, most notably by the Church leaders in the past 36 hours, to initiate meetings and consultations between representatives of each tradition at local level. Unfortunately, they have failed.
Mr. Hunter:
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the events of the past few days have shown once again that communication and dialogue are infinitely preferable to confrontation and hostility, not least in the context of the seasonal marches? Will he confirm that it is his policy to strive to re-create the conditions in which meaningful negotiations can take place between those who are genuinely committed to non-violence and democracy?
Sir Patrick Mayhew:
I warmly agree with my hon. Friend, and I noted with admiration what he said yesterday about the balance that has to be struck. As the Church leaders have said today, a resolution has to be found, not just for the short-term problems at Drumcree, but for the long-term issue of how the deeply rooted traditions of marches can better be handled in future, perhaps by reference to agreed criteria and guidelines. The Government will consider that closely in the next few days.
Mr. Hume:
Given the Secretary of State's correct support and the Prime Minister's correct support for the decision of the Chief Constable on Sunday about the march at Drumcree, and given the events of the past four days--widespread intimidation, attacks on people's homes, businesses and churches, and blockages of airports, harbours, towns and roads--how can the Secretary of State explain today's disgraceful decision to surrender to the people who have been engaged in such activities over the past four days? Can he tell me whether he himself or the Government had any role in that surrender and change of opinion?
Sir Patrick Mayhew:
First, I reject the notion of surrender. Secondly, as the hon. Gentleman will perhaps have heard from what the Chief Constable has said publicly this afternoon, no political pressure of any kind was put on the Chief Constable which might have led to his decision today--any more than there was for the
As for the character of the decision taken today, I urge the hon. Gentleman to reflect that the Public Order (Northern Ireland) Order 1987, which is the legislation for Northern Ireland as approved by Parliament, requires that, whenever the Chief Constable considers whether to exercise his powers to direct the conduct of a march, he should balance one risk against another. There is no doubt that in some circumstances the risk of serious public disorder if a march goes ahead must be balanced against the risk of serious public disorder if it does not. The balance has to be examined and struck in the light of changing circumstances. That balance shifts. In the judgment of the Chief Constable the balance had shifted today and it led to his rescinding the order that he originally made.
Mr. Brazier:
In considering the security situation, will my right hon. and learned Friend tell us what progress has been made in finding the bombers who perpetrated the horrendous events in Manchester? Whatever other circumstances may be crucial in achieving security and peace in the long term in Northern Ireland, does he agree that the finding, trying, convicting and punishing of those who have carried out such horrendous attacks on both sides of the Irish channel and both sides of the Irish border must play an important part?
Sir Patrick Mayhew:
I warmly agree with my hon. Friend. Very intensive investigations, and not unfruitful ones, are taking place and will continue, I am glad to say, in relation to those horrifying and deeply wicked crimes. It is essential that people should be brought to justice who seek to advance their political objectives by means of hideous crimes.
Mr. Stott:
Would the Secretary of State care to comment on whether he believes that those of us who are elected to this House, and particularly those people who lead parties in this House, should have regard to the fact that one of Her Majesty's loyal chief constables made a decision purely on operational, policing matters four days ago? Will he join me in reinforcing the message to a particular individual who leads a party that he should have more regard for the Chief Constable's decision than he has had in the past?
Sir Patrick Mayhew:
I began by imposing upon myself a certain measure of restraint this afternoon. It is important that no one today is in the business of pointing fingers or allocating blame or responsibility. It is absolutely right, as the hon. Gentleman said, that that original decision was taken on operational grounds. We did not hear anything at that time about the Chief Constable's having surrendered to mob rule--at least, I did not hear it myself. Today, that decision has been lifted, again on purely operational grounds. We all ought to recognise the enormously difficult and very lonely role that the Chief Constable has to play, as well as the enormously demanding role that the Royal Ulster Constabulary that he leads with great distinction has played in recent events.
Mr. Wilkinson:
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the consistent lesson of the troubles has been
Sir Patrick Mayhew:
I agree with my hon. Friend, who has taken a close interest in our affairs for a long time, that alienation is an ever-present danger. Of course I agree that, almost by definition, taking anything too far is dangerous. We have to encourage parity of esteem and a balancing of the perfectly proper hopes, aspirations and fears of one side of the community against those of its counterparts. That is what we try to do.
Mr. Alton:
While I recognise the invidious position of the Chief Constable, does the Secretary of State nevertheless agree that the combination of confrontation and subsequent capitulation is bound to send the wrong signals to the minority community in Northern Ireland, because it undermines respect for the law and the law enforcement agencies? Does he also agree that, in this day and age, for anyone to parade and march through other people's communities is deliberately inflammatory and triumphalistic, stirs up old hatreds and should have no place in a civilised age?
Sir Patrick Mayhew:
On the first part of the question, I do not think that the language of capitulation is consistent with the nature of the decision that the Chief Constable has to take. As I have tried to describe, it is a question of balancing risk. The House, by legislating as it has, has recognised that there is always a balance of risk to be made. In those circumstances, to describe it as capitulation today might just as well, I suppose, have led the hon. Gentleman to speak of capitulation on 6 July. It is inappropriate language. It is a striking of a balance in the light of changing circumstances.
On the question of marching, I have already said that the practice is deeply rooted and the issue is enormously difficult. I warmly agree with the Church leaders who have said now and previously that the issue must be addressed. There is common ground, because everyone believes that we must not continue, year after year, going through these tortures.
Mr. Worthington:
I fully agree with the Secretary of State that the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the Army are put in an impossible situation, year after year, because of marches and parades. Does he share our support for the work that they have done in the past week in impossible circumstances? Will he further join me in supporting those residents of the Garvaghy road and some in the Orange Order who want to negotiate and not force their way to the future? Surely we must now establish an independent commission, supported by all the democratic parties in the House, to find a way to allow peaceful parades which do not seek to intimidate and threaten. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman now set up that commission?
Sir Patrick Mayhew:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the tribute that he paid to the RUC and the military, which is well deserved. Equally, I share his tribute to those who have tried, in his striking phrase, to
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |