Previous SectionIndexHome Page


11.30 pm

Mr. Robert McCartney (North Down): It is evident from some of the speeches that have been made tonight that the true significance of the symbolism of the flag in Northern Ireland has been misinterpreted. In Surrey or Cardiff or many other places, the flag is taken for granted, just as constitutional rights are taken for granted. The citizens of those places know that their British citizenship will never be called into question. Only in those areas of the United Kingdom where there is a real fear and appreciation that British citizenship is conditional is an extra importance attached to symbols.

The Secretary of State suggested that there had been a tremendous breakthrough, but it is abundantly clear from the opening paragraph of the Provisional IRA's statement that there will be no lasting peace in Northern Ireland until the basic causes of the conflict are removed. That means the end of partition, the end of the British claim to part of Ireland and self-determination on an all-Ireland basis. The first paragraph of that much-heralded breakthrough says specifically that there will be no lasting peace until partition and the British presence are removed.

The next paragraph makes it clear what the Provisional IRA considers to be the true import of the Belfast agreement. If the agreement is fully implemented according to their Provisional IRA's specification, it will provide a political context in an enduring peace process that will give the potential for meeting all its objectives. If it does not provide that potential, there will be no lasting peace and the Provisional IRA will have recourse to its weapons, which it has not and will not put beyond use.

What significance does that have for flags? The pro-Union people of Northern Ireland have seen their Britishness and their position in the United Kingdom as British citizens constantly eroded. The Royal Ulster Constabulary's name is to be changed. Why? Because the word "royal" is an indication of its Britishness. Even though the crown in the RUC's insignia is coupled with the harp and the shamrock, it will be removed because it is deemed unsuitable. It is a British symbol. The royal coat of arms has traditionally been set above a presiding judge. It will be removed because it is said that it in some way intimidates litigants or causes them to be unhappy. I have practised in Northern Ireland courts for 40 years and

16 May 2000 : Column 280

represented all shades of opinion, all denominations and all political allegiances. I have never heard a single client make such a suggestion. Nevertheless, the insignia must be removed. The Minister for External Affairs, Mr. Cowen, has made it abundantly clear that all the symbols of Britishness in Northern Ireland must go. The pro-Union people have become increasingly conscious of the importance of their symbols, because they have become increasingly conscious of the substance that those symbols represent being removed.

I am sorry to say that I view the order as a piece of political expediency. It was evident that the issue of the flag would be a major obstruction to the new seismic shift--the conditional offer from the IRA that if the process delivers Irish unity it will withhold the use of its arms, but will not dispense with their availability. The truth is that the issue of the flag, like the suspension that will be put on the determination of the RUC name, will be put on hold to lull Unionists into a false sense of security that something may yet happen that will preserve their symbols.

Under the order, it is left to the discretion of the Secretary of State to decide. On what principles will he decide? If the principle of consent means what it is declared to mean--that Northern Ireland will remain part of the United Kingdom until such time as a majority decide otherwise--where is the problem? If we are part of the United Kingdom, we are entitled to fly the flag on public buildings on such occasions as is done in other parts of the United Kingdom. That being the case, what need is there for a devolved Assembly, which derives all its powers from the constitutional rights vested in this Parliament, to decide what is a constitutional issue? The Secretary of State need simply state that he has decided. There need be no consultation. He should say, "This is a constitutional matter. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. I, in discharge of my constitutional obligation, declare that the flag of the United Kingdom, and that flag alone, will fly on the public buildings of Northern Ireland in the same way as it flies on the public buildings of Canterbury or Salford."

There is no need for the order unless it is a political expedient, designed purely to put on the long finger what will be equally divisive. At great length, the right hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) detailed all the mischiefs that will arise from this proposal. They were amplified by the contribution from the hon. Member for North Antrim (Rev. Ian Paisley). Those mischiefs are real and they will occur, but they could be knocked out in one stroke by the Secretary of State acknowledging the real meaning of the principle of consent, which he alleges is in force, and acting upon it. The rest is mere surplusage, which will create more mischief than it was designed to remove.

The Secretary of State should reflect on what has been said tonight because, as Dr. Faust found, there is a moment of reckoning, when the Mephistopheles of making this discretionary decision will return and will knock on the door of the Secretary of State--or, possibly, his successor--and say, "Now is the moment of truth, what are you going to do?" At that time, it may not matter for the people of Northern Ireland, but it will be another stain on the integrity of this House.

16 May 2000 : Column 281

11.40 pm

Mrs. Maria Fyfe (Glasgow, Maryhill): I shall be very brief. Of course, there can be no question but that it is the civic duty of any person with information about the Omagh bombings, or any other atrocity, to give that information to the proper authorities.

Two principles are involved in the discussion of the order: we must stick to the terms of the Good Friday agreement, and we must stick to the principles of devolution. The order is sensible because it does not say that the Secretary of State will take over and make a decision that the Northern Ireland Assembly has been unable to make. Rather, the order makes it clear that the Secretary of State would regulate the flying of flags only after the Executive Committee of the Northern Ireland Assembly had failed to reach agreement. The order therefore provides an opportunity for the Assembly to reach that agreement.

I accept that that is a difficult proposition, but it is safe to predict that the Assembly will encounter many other difficult decisions. Its members will simply have to learn to work together and to find solutions with which at least the majority of the population--and preferably everyone--can manage to live. It is true that the SDLP will be put in a difficult position, but other elected members of the Assembly will be in difficult positions in other contexts as the months and years pass.

Finally, if members of the Assembly cannot manage to work through a problem such as this, what hope is there that they will come to sensible decisions on bread-and-butter issues such as housing, health, education, and so on, which affect all the people of Northern Ireland? Let us hope for some common sense in this matter. We must realise that no one has it easy in the context of Northern Ireland.

11.41 pm

Mr. William Cash (Stone): I read this weasel order with great sadness. Paragraph (3)(1) states:


Leaving aside the fact that the word "buildings" has been misspelled, that paragraph makes one wonder to what body the word "government" refers. If the order is needed at all, to what "government" will it apply?

The short answer is that there is complete ambivalence in the mind of the Secretary of State, who has no answer to the question for reasons that I shall explain to the House.

Paragraph (4)(2) states:


In other words, the Assembly will merely go through the motions of reporting. Paragraph (4)(3) provides that the Secretary of State "shall consider any report", but what does that mean? It means that he will think about a report. There is no need for him to make a decision, as he is merely under a requirement to "consider" any report.

16 May 2000 : Column 282

The crucial point arises in paragraph (4)(4), which states:


It was on the point of "shall have regard" that I intervened on the Secretary of State earlier.

Some of us have some small experience of looking at the nuts and bolts of legislation. This order will have the force of law when the House agrees it tonight, as will no doubt happen, yet the Secretary of State will not have to comply with the Belfast agreement, only "have regard to" it.

I assure the House that the Secretary of State, and those who drafted the order, know exactly what the words "have regard to" mean.

This is extremely difficult territory. I do not accept that the Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) or any others in the House do not realise exactly what the order involves. To put up a flag on a Government building, in terms of regulating the flying of flags on Government buildings, is not merely a symbolic act, but a declaration of the constitutional status of that Government building. According to one newspaper report today, the Union jack is apparently not flown on our embassy in France. It is an extraordinary state of affairs.

I have no objection to people wanting to declare their allegiance, but I want to know what their allegiance is. The order gives no one any confidence about the continuation of the flag that represents the constitutional status of the Government of the United Kingdom, with respect to Government buildings, in this House.

I say to the Secretary of State that I am extremely disappointed at the order, as I am with others in the House. It is a sell-out, and the Secretary of State knows that it is a sell-out. I have got used to sell-outs in relation to the United Kingdom with regard to a number of treaties that have been passed in the House. I need say no more, because everybody knows what I am talking about. [Laughter.]

Just as other Governments are created, parallel to and absorbing the Government of the United Kingdom in respect of this Parliament, so, with respect to Northern Ireland, there is the gradual absorption--some may think imperceptible--which is none the less relentless, through the continuing diminution, reduction and assimilation, provided by orders of this kind, of the government of the people of Northern Ireland into another constitutional status.

The Secretary of State knows this, because nobody with half a wit could fail to know it. It is very simple; it is going on. All the talk about the consent of the people of Northern Ireland will mean nothing when, bit by bit, gradually, by absorption, the government of the people of Northern Ireland is subsumed by orders of this kind.


Next Section

IndexHome Page