Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Allason: Ten minutes.

Mr. Mallon: It is not 10 minutes: it is a whole day.

For prisoners to serve their time in the north of Ireland would not affect their sentences or the justice that is being done. It creates an humanitarian context within which they

5 Mar 1997 : Column 953

can serve their sentences. After all, it is a basic tenet that a loss of freedom is what people are sentenced to when they are sentenced to prison. That is sufficient, without adding to it.

The hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone referred to an incident in my constituency, the murders at Kingsmills. I will never forget going to those funerals, or the sound of my feet walking through the streets in Bessbrook, because it was not easy for a Catholic nationalist representative to attend. A couple of weeks ago, but 21 years later, I heard the same sound of my own footsteps in the dark of night in Bessbrook, the night that the young soldier Stephen Restorick was killed.

In those 21 years, those who are committed to the view that we can solve our problems by violence and punitive means have learnt nothing. Surely it is the business of the political process, of which all hon. Members are part, to consider the problem without being tied ideologically to an approach that has not been very successful.

The hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Rendel) said that such an approach was an antibiotic that can be used repeatedly until the problem is solved. If only it were as easy as that. The system becomes immune to antibiotics; after a while, they have to be replaced. The time is right to replace the present approach to solving the problem. That does not mean making any concessions to the IRA, the Ulster Volunteer Force, the Ulster Defence Association or anyone else.

6.47 pm

Mr. Rupert Allason (Torbay) rose--

Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. A few moments ago, my hon. Friend the Member for Brent, East (Mr. Livingstone) alleged that a Minister had said of Roisin McAliskey, "She should have thought of that before she started bombing people." I distinctly heard the hon. Member for Torbay (Mr. Allason) making that comment. At the outset of his brief remarks, he should have either the courage to confirm that that is his view, or the grace to withdraw the allegation.

Madam Speaker: I heard no such comment. Perhaps the hon. Member for Torbay (Mr. Allason) could make it clear whether he said that.

Mr. Allason: I certainly made that comment, Madam Speaker. If you want me to withdraw it, I am happy to be guided by you.

Madam Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is withdrawing the comment. He should understand that he should not comment on such cases.

Mr. Allason: Terrorism is murderous extortion for political purposes. It is as old as danegeld. Danegeld tells us that, if we start giving in to terrorism, we will be left with it for a long time. Terrorism, as we understand it in Britain, dates back in modern times to the Leila Khaled case, when a British Overseas Airways Corporation aeroplane was held hostage. Unfortunately, the British Government gave in to the terrorists, and Leila Khaled was released to safeguard British lives. As a direct

5 Mar 1997 : Column 954

consequence of the willingness of our European partners to do deals with terrorists, we and the west in general have had to endure terrorism.

The only weapon against terrorism is absolute resolution. That resolution was shown during the hunger strikes and at the Iranian embassy seige. The people responsible for fighting terrorism in Britain have three objectives. First, they are anxious to prevent and deter people from fighting their turf wars on this territory. That does not necessarily include the Provisional IRA. The Algerians have been using the United Kingdom as a base, and Sikh separatists have certainly been doing the same. There was a Saudi bomb a short time ago. The most recent terrorist convictions were of two Palestinian bombers.

The second objective of the people to whom we give the responsibility of fighting terrorism is to prosecute and bring good convictions of terrorists. I refer my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary to my earlier intervention about the possible use in criminal trials in the United Kingdom of intercept evidence. Customs and Excise, the National Criminal Intelligence Service, the police, the Security Service and the Secret Intelligence Service are now of the view that that would be a worthwhile weapon.

Of course one does not want to compromise the source, but, since the Interception of Communications Act 1986, most people have readily understood that particular weapon, which is a useful one. The people responsible for fighting terrorism are handicapped by not being able to use intercept evidence in court.

Thirdly, extradition is an essential part of the fight against terrorism. Fuller co-operation is required, not only from Britain--to make absolutely certain that Crown Prosecution Service papers are in order when they are served overseas--but from our European partners.

The hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Rendel) made a characteristically dire speech, using the royal "we" throughout, although he was alone on the Liberal Democrat Benches. The proposition that he appeared to make, that false confessions were made as a consequence of prolonged detention, was nonsense. The Bridgewater case had nothing whatever to do with prolonged detention. In the Judith Ward case--the only one I can think of which involved a false confession--she volunteered the confession before she was taken into detention.

I suggest that the Houses should give one final message to the terrorist--that all hon. Members on both sides of the House went through the same Lobby tonight. That is a message that will be understood, particularly by people in the Clinton Administration, who got an unpleasant shock when the Canary Wharf bomb went off, and it became clear that the ceasefire period had been used by the Provisionals to regroup.

We must show resolution. That is the only thing that terrorists--whatever their origin, whatever their motives--understand. The House standing united this evening would send the best possible message to them.

6.53 pm

Ms Marjorie Mowlam (Redcar): It would be best if the hon. Member for Torbay (Mr. Allason) realised that he should say on his feet what he says from a sedentary position. I welcome his withdrawal of his earlier sedentary comment.

5 Mar 1997 : Column 955

I am sure that the whole House identifies with the closing comments of the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh (Mr. Mallon)--that, whatever people's views on this issue, it is one of the basic democratic rights in the country and in the House that individuals have the right to vote as they choose. There was general agreement in the Chamber this evening with that view.

Since the IRA abandoned its 18-month ceasefire in February last year, people in Britain and Northern Ireland have once again been subjected to a sustained campaign of violence and intimidation. The bombing at Canary Wharf shattered a thousand hopes and dreams, here, in Northern Ireland and in the Republic, and took the lives of two men. The appalling and sickening catalogue of atrocities committed by the IRA has continued throughout the United Kingdom, as my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. Eastham) outlined so clearly.

The same point was emphasised by the right hon. Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Needham), who, as he said, made his maiden speech in the House in the presence of fewer people than were present this evening. I read his maiden speech while other hon. Members were speaking this evening. It was rather humorous, and he used rather more words than his predecessors in his family used, five of whom have been Members of Parliament. Among many people I meet in Northern Ireland, there is a great deal of respect for the right hon. Gentleman and the work he did in Northern Ireland. I welcome the years of effort that he put in to try to bring peace and economic development to Northern Ireland.

Mr. Livingstone: While we condemn all acts of violence, does my hon. Friend agree that part of the problem that undermines the campaign against violence is the insensitive way in which the Government have used the powers they have? Literally thousands of people coming through our ports have been criminalised. They feel humiliated by the way in which they are treated. We have heard this evening the appalling account of the way in which Roisin McAliskey is being treated. She has been strip-searched 60 times in little more than six weeks.

Ms Mowlam: I hear what my hon. Friend says. He, I and my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North (Mr. Corbyn) have written to the Home Secretary and to the Prison Service about Roisin McAliskey. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is a difficult issue, but I am informed that the necessary medical services are being provided. In considering whether she and her baby should be allowed to be together, the health of the mother and child should be paramount. I am assured that my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw), the shadow Home Secretary, agreed with me on that point.

Mr. Corbyn: Will my hon. Friend confirm that it is essential that Roisin McAliskey be told now exactly what the birth arrangements will be, who the birth partner can be, and where she will give birth?

Ms Mowlam: I am told that all the information on the birth partner is available, and has been printed in answer to parliamentary questions. I have answered sufficiently the first part of my hon. Friend's question.

5 Mar 1997 : Column 956

My time has run out, so I shall make two or three points, and leave it to the Home Secretary to conclude the debate. My hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn clearly outlined the two problems with the prevention of terrorism Act--exclusion, and detention for seven days without judicial review. I was pleased that the hon. Member for Basingstoke (Mr. Hunter), adopting his usual approach, tried to consider the arguments on either side, and reason through our position. I welcome his open-mindedness.

The hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. Maginnis) wanted the broadcasting restrictions reinstated. That view is not shared by the Labour Front-Bench team, but an open discussion of the issue was most welcome.

The debate has moved on. We have explained why we believe that there are flaws in the legislation, as I did in the debate on the emergency provisions Act last year. We have reassured the House that we will not vote to leave the people of Britain and Northern Ireland without the protection of anti-terrorist legislation. We have reinforced that in the position that we have adopted this evening.


Next Section

IndexHome Page