Examination of Witnesses (Questions 137
- 139)
WEDNESDAY 29 NOVEMBER 2000
DR DOMINIC
BRYAN, DR
NEIL JARMAN
AND MR
MICHAEL HAMILTON
Chairman
137. A warm welcome. Thank you very much indeed
for coming at this hour. I am sorry the perspective is slightly
skewed because of the geography of this room and the positioning
of the shorthandwriter. In welcoming you, let me say that if there
is any occasion either now or hereafter where you want to gloss
any answer you have given because of subsequent reflection or
because you think what you have said is capable of misunderstanding,
please do not hesitate to do that—as I say, either now or
in writing afterwards. We will feel free to come back with any
supplementary questions that we feel we ought to have asked but
failed to do so, but we will do that in writing afterwards too.
We will try to make the questions follow a logical order, but
it means that they may come from different quarters of the room
and will not necessarily follow a logical pattern around the room.
Is there anything you would like to add—and we are very
grateful to you for having come to give evidence—before
we embark?
(Dr Bryan) Thank you very much for the invitation.
There are three very quick things that I would like to flag up
before we start. The first is simply to say that we are here partly
due to our involvement with Democratic Dialogue, which is a think-tank
in Northern Ireland, but it is important for us to point out that
Democratic Dialogue does not of itself have a view on the parades
issue; the views we represent are those of ourselves to the work
we have done on parades and you might also find that the three
of us do not necessarily always agree on some of the issues. That
is the first thing I would like to flag up. The second thing is
to say that we have had a variety of involvements. Neil and I
have been watching parades for over 10 years and Michael has been
looking specifically at the workings of the Parades Commission
and determinations. I think it is reasonable for us to point out
that we have worked on a consultancy basis on a couple of occasions
for the Parades Commission. Neil and I were involved in developing
the stewarding project with the Apprentice Boys of Derry and Michael
and myself have been involved in looking at how monitoring the
parades might take place. Both of those are occasions where we
have worked as consultants to the Parades Commission. The third
thing perhaps to say is that, as well as looking at the legal
and political ramifications of the workings of the Parades Commission,
we have spent an awful lot of time looking at the practicalities
and realities of what takes place on the street during parades.
For all three of us our work has been a relationship between the
legal side of what takes place and actually looking to see what
takes place in reality on the street.
138. Thank you very much indeed for that. In
view of the fact that you may wish to disagree among yourselves,
I think we must leave the chairing of your submissions to you,
and you must decide who is going to answer which particular questions
or, indeed, more than one of you. If we can avoid all three of
you giving answers to all the questions that are asked, it may
have a beneficial effect on the timetable, but we would not want
in any way to preclude the opportunity for dissension among you,
and, indeed, dissension may well prompt supplementaries from the
people around the table. In your written submission you comment
that, "The present disputes [between Loyalists and Nationalists]
must be seen within the context of inequalities of power between
communities that are reflected in the parading `traditions'."
What precisely do you mean by that?
(Dr Bryan) Historically, the development of parading
and demonstrating has gone through a number of phases over the
last 200 years, but it was quite clear, particularly during the
Stormont era, that the way all sorts of commemorative events were
policed it meant that the Orange tradition had opportunities to
hold parades and demonstrations in places that the Nationalist
tradition would not have done, and for that reason the Nationalist
tradition, in many of the types of parade it has, have been restricted
to particular areas. It meant that the sort of events that the
Orange Order and the other loyal orders and bands would have held
went into areas where a Nationalist or Republican or even a Catholic
event would not have gone into. So the idea of tradition itself
could not be seen as being a neutral development; it has developed
because of differing power relationships on the street in the
way policing has worked.
139. Data submitted by the Parades Commission
reveals that in 1998-99 there were 2,012 Loyalist parades and
81 Nationalist parades, a ratio of nearly 25:1. Clearly the two
traditions take a very different view at present of the role and
value of parades. An immediate question arising out of the evidence
you have just given is whether that ratio is a function of what
you were describing in your last answer, in terms of the historical
development, but, given the fact that you do have that ratio,
is it surprising that Loyalists see Nationalist attempts to block
parades as an attack on Loyalist traditions?
(Dr Bryan) I think the answer to that is it is in
part a function of those power differentials. It is partly to
do with the fact that the Protestant community treats parading
in some senses as a more important part of its culture than the
Nationalist community might do. But, if you look at particular
areas, if you look at Portadown as the most obvious example, there
have been historically a number of attempts for Catholics and
Nationalists to hold parades in that town which have never been
allowed to take place. So the Nationalist tradition in that town
has clearly, in terms of events that it would try to take part
in, been restricted—indeed, the present round of disputes
in 1985 started over a St Patrick's Day parade that was blocked
by the police and some Unionist demonstrators. But I would not
like to say that the parading tradition is of equal importance
to the two communities. In answer to your second question, clearly
there is no doubt that the block on parades of the Loyal Orders
and other parades is perceived by some people within the Protestant
community as an attack upon that community, and I think that has
to be dealt with. So, yes, absolutely, it obviously appears as
an attack on that community.
(Dr Jarman) The disputes over parades and the antagonism
between the communities over parades is not new. You can look
back to the first Orange parade, you can look back before the
Orange Order started parading, to see that parades were a function
of power and an attempt to demonstrate strength between the two
communities. There is a long history of conflict and antagonism
between the two communities expressed through this medium—the
fact that all parades were legally prohibited largely for 40 years
in the 19th century; the disputes in Portadown can be traced back
to the 1870s; disputes in Derry to the same period. I mean, it
is not a new function between the two communities. I think the
fact that there have been power differentials, differential relationships
between access to the State and to the authorities, the police
in particular, has enabled the Protestant tradition to expand
while the Nationalist tradition has remained or contracted.
|
