Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140
- 159)
WEDNESDAY 29 NOVEMBER 2000
DR DOMINIC
BRYAN, DR
NEIL JARMAN
AND MR
MICHAEL HAMILTON
140. Let me say to my colleagues that because
the topography of this room does not give me as good a view of
all my colleagues at any one time, if anybody does want to come
in with supplementaries in the nature of the evidence which is
being given to us, please do not hesitate to indicate, but you
will have to be rather more violent in gesturing if I am actually
going to be able to see you. I am most grateful to Dr Jarman.
May I just go back to Mr Bryan's evidence. Towards the end of
your response you used the phrase "dealt with". I think
you said that the issue of either conflict or blocking needed
to be dealt with. I was not quite clear what "dealt with"
meant.
(Dr Bryan) Quite simply, you have to understand the
strong feelings that people within the Protestant community feel
over this issue. It cannot be disregarded and you have to find
ways of creating an environment where they feel less pressured.
I mean, one could make an objective argument that the parading
tradition within the Protestant community is very, very strong,
has remained strong, there are large numbers of parades and in
many ways it has expanded over the last few years, and yet the
perception within that community seems to be that their tradition
is under threat. That differential is something that needs to
be talked though and dealt with, and I feel that that community
should not feel in that area as under threat as it does. It should
in fact be celebrating the fact that, in expansion of band parades
and many commemorations, its tradition has grown over the last
few years and not been restricted.
(Mr Hamilton) If I may also add a clarification on
what "dealt with" might mean. In taking on board the
concerns that the Loyalist community might have about objections
to its parades, there is one of the legislative criteria which
the Parades Commission can consider when doing so, and that is
the desirability of allowing a parade customarily held in one
particular route to continue to be held. In dealing with that
issue the Parades Commission has taken account of that factor.
On my analysis of 1998 and 1999 determinations, while it has not
been one of the overriding factors that has persuaded the Commission,
they have in 1998 taken that into account in 14 per cent of their
determinations and this rose in 1999 to 24 per cent.
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed.
Mr Hunter
141. Just to follow up a point which you made
earlier, I appreciate that there is a history of problems arising
from parades that goes back a long, long time, but is it not the
case that a different dimension has entered into the scenario
in recent years, that we are now looking at a trend in which,
increasingly, the number of contentious parades increases and
a degree of orchestration of protest against them. Is this not
a new dimension in the age-old problem of parades?
(Dr Bryan) There has been a clear campaign within
the Nationalist community around the issue of parades. How much
this has come about through being a concerted joined-up campaign
I think is a matter of debate. However, I think there is a whole
range of relationships which has created the situation we have
now. The political situation has meant that this issue has been
a helpful one within Nationalist communities. There can be no
doubt about that. It has provided an issue in which Sinn Fein
and the SDLP have been able to have much common ground over their
feelings. It has also played upon many existing feelings within
those communities. I find it ridiculous, this idea that you sometimes
hear, that leaders of residents groups can somehow create this
situation from nothing. The reality is that much of the resentment
over these parades has existed for a period of time. But I also
think one has to look at the changes of policing that has taken
place. The recent round of disputes can probably be traced back
to the early 1980s and I suspect it came at a time when the police
changed some of their tactics over the policing of parades. In
many ways, in 1995 and 1996 I suspect some of the residents groups
chanced upon this, when they realised that in fact, if they conducted
concerted campaigns, these could also be very successful campaigns.
Ironically, from their point of view—because many of them
would see the police as not having changed over that period of
time—I think this has taken place in part because there
have been changes within the policing of parades.
(Dr Jarman) I also think that, while there was an
early expansion, a rapid florescence of protests in a number of
locations, the vast majority of the protests were raised in 1995
and 1996. While there have been some minor additions in terms
of small areas where the people have raised protests against parades
subsequently, most of the protests date from the early years of
this cycle, 1995-96, so it has not snowballed to the extent that
some people predicted, that it would be the protesters charter,
that all kinds of parades would be under attack. There are certain
parades which are being challenged, but, realistically, most of
those are defined in the very early stages of the cycle of disputes.
Chairman
142. Before I turn to Mr Pound, in the light
of the evidence Mr Hamilton gave us a moment ago about the 1998-99
determinations, I realise this is an area where you might be doing,
in a sense, academic research anyway, but if you felt able to
give us a memorandum on how you felt the determinations had been
reached, so that there is a rather greater analysis in support
of the figures which you have quoted, that would be very helpful
but I do not want in any way to prejudice any academic work you
are separately doing.
(Mr Hamilton) Certainly I can do something along those
lines[2].
Chairman: I am most grateful. Mr Pound.
Mr Pound
143. Thank you, Chairman. I was interested in
the points you made earlier on about the band parades—"band"
not "banned". The data from the Parades Commission reveals
that it is only really Nationalist and Loyalist parades (as distinct
from any other forms of parades) which are required to be notified
to the Commission. It is only these parades that require the Commission
to exercise its statutory powers to impose conditions and route
restrictions. Within these categories, as only a very small number
of parades were affected, do you regard them—and I am choosing
my words very carefully—not being an academic, but using
the word "sectarian" parades, even within a tradition,
as a monolith? Is it settled? Or does it make sense to draw a
distinction between traditional and non-traditional parades, parades
to and from church services, band parades, etc. Is there a difference
there or should we be thinking of this as one block?
(Dr Bryan) No, you should not be thinking of them
as one block. They are enormously complicated, they differ widely
in different areas, different band parades of different sorts.
The nature of some of the parades has changed over periods of
time. If you look again at the most high profile parade, the Drumcree
church parade, the nature of that parade has varied. At various
points they have had blood and thunder bands taking part in that
parade—there were a couple of years in the early nineties
when they had a blood and thunder band—now it is down to
accordion bands. Some of the natures of the commemorations have
changed over periods of times. The band parade varies very widely:
parades in the city vary widely from parades in the country. I
think that is one of the difficulties of dealing with this problem,
they are really not monolithic at all. Even though they get described
as the Loyal order parades, a visit to a Black parade in Fermanagh
is going to be starkly different from an Orange parade in the
centre of Belfast.
144. Is there a consistency in the change? Are
we talking about an evolving band or marching tradition or is
this horses for courses, local changes for local circumstances,
in your opinion?
(Dr Bryan) There is an evolution in different areas.
I mean, to give you one obvious example, the band tradition has
changed remarkably over 30 or 40 years. It is a strange, if you
like, contradiction, that on the one hand people from the Orange
Order talk about this as a tradition, but when you talk to people
in the Orange Order about that tradition they will tell you how
much it changes and they will tell you about the sorts of bands
you had in the 1960s compared to the 1970s and 1980s. So that,
effectively, you could argue that during the environment of what
gets called "the Troubles" the parades have become more
assertive and the role of large blood and thunder bands, usually
from working class areas, has grown within the parades, so the
very nature and the look of some of the parades has changed quite
distinctly in 20 or 30 years.
145. I have finally found a point of common
interest between myself and the Orange Order, in that we both
constantly go on about bands of the Sixties!
(Dr Jarman) Can I come back to the first point you
made. While I agree that the body of parades is incredibly diverse,
what we found, when we started responding to the disputes in the
early 1990s/mid-1990s, was that, within the broader Catholic community,
the people that we were talking to at that time did not see that
diversity. They saw that a parade was a parade was a parade. It
did not really matter whether it was a church parade or a main
commemoration or a band parade, it was an Orange parade to them.
There was, to some extent, extreme ignorance about what the parades
were about and there was always the sense from a number of people
in a number of areas, particularly out of Belfast, that it was
a conspiracy of disinformation. There was a sense that there were
always new parades coming up: "They've never had this parade
before. We don't know what it is about. It has suddenly appeared
on the streets, we are not aware of it, we don't know when it
is coming." There was a sense of that about it, that there
was an attempt to try and keep forcing parades down. I am sure
that that was not the case, but there was a case where it was
very difficult to find out when parades were taking place, what
they were taking place for. Even for someone who was researching
the issue and had good contacts within the Loyal Orders, it is
very difficult to go to the Orange Order and find out what parades
are taking place where and when, for instance—even today.
So I think within the Nationalist community there was a sense
that an Orange parade was an Orange parade, and I think probably
that still survives to a great extent.
Mr Pound: Thank you very much indeed.
Mr Hunter
146. What are the differences, if any, between
a parade of the Orange Order or the Ancient Order of Hibernians
on the one hand and a march with banners or flags for a political
objective or, indeed, in pursuit of industrial dispute. Should
we regard them as similar or are there fundamental differences?
(Dr Bryan) I would say they are fundamentally similar
because it depends upon your perception and where you are looking
from as to how you consider that event. I understand completely
that people within the Orange Order or within the Ancient Order
of Hibernians see their events as broadly religious or cultural
or social events, but each of those organisations, particularly
the Orange Order, clearly has major political dimensions to it,
so that one could not possibly say it is unreasonable to someone
who views it as a political event. One has to accept that these
things tend to be in the eye of the beholder. I personally would
consider them as all a part of the same sort of people expressing
their identity both culturally and politically.
147. Is that view shared by your colleagues?
(Dr Jarman) Broadly, yes.
(Mr Hamilton) Yes.
Mr Barnes
148. You have just been explaining what I get
up to on May Day because in the Labour movement it is sometimes
felt that the further you walk round the streets the more you
have actually done for the cause. That is maybe common in other
areas. In your written submission you say, "It has been the
opinion of many commentators that the behaviour of many loyal
order parades has been unacceptable for some time," and you
quote the autobiography of ex-Chief Constable Jack Hermon in connection
with that. What sort of behaviour has been complained of?
(Dr Jarman) Some of the behaviour referred to is related
to participants in the parade, for instance, playing music at
or around chapels or sensitive locations, striking up drums louder,
playing particular sectarian songs or particularly contentious
songs at sensitive locations, or passing other communities. Other
aspects of behaviour would be claimed by the organisers to be
the responsibility of the hangers-on: urinating in public, alcohol
drinking, littering—that sort of generally anti-social behaviour
that occurs when people are spectating at the parades. There was
certainly a case in the early stages of the mid-1990s when people
were arguing that the people who came to watch the parades were
not the responsibility of the parade organisers; that they took
responsibility for the behaviour of the people in the parade but
not the responsibility of the people that came to watch the parade.
But, again, the people who were witnessing the parades did not
see that separation, so they were all one and the same thing basically.
149. Is it at particular types of parade that
that type of behaviour would emerge?
(Dr Jarman) If you break the categories of parades
down, there are certain types of parades which cause more disturbance,
more disruption. Church parades, by and large, do not cause too
much disturbance or disruption, although they have become the
focus for opposition. The larger parade, then generally the larger
the disruption. Certain parades that went past contentious areas,
that went through areas inhabited by or seen as belonging to the
other community, would have been seen as more contentious. Certain
types of band parades, particularly ones which take over a town
through an evening, where there is considerable alcohol consumption—something
like the parade coming up on Saturday in Derry, the Lundy Day
Parade, has had a fairly appalling reputation in terms of alcohol
consumption and spin-off bad behaviour, and it has been one of
the factors, I think, that has caused the parade to be moved a
couple of weeks and attempts by the police to reduce the amount
of consumption of alcohol.
150. In what ways could these problems be tackled,
other than conditions and determinations?
(Mr Hamilton) I think one of the best ways in which
the problem might be tackled is by placing a greater reliance
on the Code of Conduct, because the end game, in which everybody
I am sure would agree we are involved, is trying to foster a situation
where organisers of parades can exercise self-control and that
people's responsibilities are defined in a more concrete way.
Looking at the way that these things have been tackled in the
past, the code of conduct which the Parades Commission has issued
has not been, in my view, relied upon as much as it could have
been and there is a much greater potential for the Code of Conduct
to be used as a basis of tightening up on poor behaviour by participants
and ensuring that behaviour by hangers-on is also brought under
control as well.
151. Have there been similar problems to the
ones you have described with Nationalist parades?
(Dr Bryan) I am not aware to the same extent that
there have been those kind of problems. There is not the same
tradition of band parades within the Nationalist community—although
they are becoming more common, they are still very small in number.
I think the problems in terms of bad behaviour related to parades
has largely been seen as one to do with the Loyalist community.
Although there would be instances, say, in terms of, I suppose,
some of the Republican parades in Belfast city centre, with the
desecration of some of the Unionist symbols of Victoria, flags
have been draped around, some of the slogans that have been displayed,
some of the references that have been made on banners, rather
than some of the direct behaviour. I am sure there are examples
of public urination and so forth that take place in Nationalist
parades. Can I go back to the point in the previous question,
just to say that I think one of the cases being argued two or
three years ago was for parade organisers to accept that they
had the responsibility for the totality of the parade—not
just the people walking but the people coming out to watch—and
I think that has been taken on board to a greater or lesser extent.
People are recognising that the parades attract watchers, supporters,
and that they have a responsibility to the community that they
come into to take cognisance of those. I think the example of
what is going to be done on Saturday is a good case in point,
where the organisers of the parade have acknowledged that it can
be the supporters that cause as much problem or more problem than
the marchers.
Chairman: Before I come to Mr Grogan, I think
Mr Clarke has a supplementary
Mr Clarke
152. Thank you, Chairman. Coming back to your
comment that the Nationalist community would say a parade is a
parade is a parade, are they not correct, inasmuch as, from the
evidence you have just given, what we have now determined is that
the parade in itself is just the vehicle. What we are really talking
about is the response to the behaviour of those on a parade and
the response of those to it. As such, would you not accept that
even within a rural setting an Orange Order parade could be extraordinarily
offensive, it is just that there is nobody there to listen to
it—inasmuch as the types of behaviour you have mentioned,
sectarian signs and blood and thunder bands, could exist within
a rural setting, the only reason why there would not be that much
controversy is that there are less people around who would be
offended.
(Dr Jarman) It is possible that you could look at
it from that perspective, but I do think the blood and thunder
bands tend largely to be an urban phenomenon. If you look at some
of the rural parades we have watched parades in County Fermanagh
particularly and noted the absence of symbols. I think we saw
two Union flags in the Black parade through Fermanagh, and they
were carried by lodges whose own parades were being confronted,
being challenged, and almost you could see a response to a protest:
"We are going to make our point more firmly." I do not
think the parades necessarily of themselves should cause offence.
The vast majority of parades do not cause offence, have not historically
caused offence, and I think there is a considerable degree of
toleration and acceptance of the parades, acceptance of the disruption.
You can see that when people cite events of the Thirties, Forties
and Fifties—although there is a sense of rose-tinted glasses
going about that, there is also an element of truth in it, and
by and large people do not object to the parades, they object
to some of the parades. That is certainly our experience of talking
to people in some of the areas where residents groups are being
set up. In the early days they were not objecting to all parades,
they were objecting to one or two specific parades. When their
objections were not acknowledged in any way as being legitimate,
they tended to escalate. There was a sense of escalation about
the protest.
(Mr Hamilton) Can I agree with Neil on that point.
And, I think, to sketch the converse of the situation that you
outlined, where there was a parade but nobody there to object
to it, as Neil said there are situations in rural communities
where parades take place and they are not considered to be offensive.
Residents in many areas have made the distinction between church
parades and parades which do not foment the kind of disorder or
disruption that some band parades, for example, might. I think
the Commission has been keen to take that on board as well and
in some instances actually has gone as far as saying that to protest
against such a small church parade would be extremely unreasonable.
Mr Grogan
153. We have received evidence critical of the
consistency of the Commission and its ability to follow its own
rules. What assessment have you made of the consistency of Parades
Commission determinations and have you any evidence to suggest
that the Commission deviates materially from its own procedural
rules?
(Mr Hamilton) There are a number of points to be made
about consistency, I think. The first is that if you are looking
for purist consistency, then you probably will not find it. The
reason for that is that the different factors in section 8(6)
of the legislation will mean different things in different situations.
What may ostensibly be similar or analogous considerations will
often in actual fact reflect very different local dynamics and
will have different implications or consequences for the two areas
that are being compared. If you take disruption, for example,
disruption can be caused for any number of reasons—the timing
of the parade, its duration, its route, the numbers taking part,
the policing operation which is deemed necessary—and it
can affect both domestic and commercial lives to varying degrees,
and yet this is all lumped under the term disruption of the life
of the community. If you take a hypothetical scenario, if you
think of two different towns where the Commission in both states
there is a potential for disorder, yet in one town imposes no
conditions on the parade and in the other town imposes route restrictions
on the parade, it may be that assurances given by the parade organiser
in the first town persuaded the Commission that the potential
for disorder had been offset to a degree, or that the Commission
on the advice of the police, say, considered that in the second
town there was the potential for disorder to spread more widely
across Northern Ireland, or, indeed, that in the second town there
was an obvious alternative route which would effectively minimise
the risk of disorder, and the Commission has to make a qualitative
assessment on those bare facts. Past experience might, for example,
lead the Commission to conclude that the stewarding at a band
parade in Downpatrick is less likely to be as effective as the
marshalling of the Apprentice Boys parade in Londonderry, and
the impact of disorder would be more in some areas than in others.
One of the other points to be made is that consideration of the
consistency of the application of the statutory factors cannot
be done by isolating the Commission's consideration of individual
criteria in any single determination. Compliance with the Code
of Conduct may appear to be the main factor in persuading the
Commission not to impose route restrictions on a parade in West
Belfast or Crumlin or Ballycastle, but in each of those cases,
even though compliance with the Code of Conduct may be the overriding
consideration, it is still being balanced against the consideration
of the potential for disorder and disruption and the impact on
community relations, and whether or not it is a traditional parade,
and, therefore, in apparent contrast, but not, I would argue,
inconsistently, compliance with the Code of Conduct at a parade
in Newtownhamilton might not attract sufficient weight to outweigh
the consideration of the other statutory factors and that will
result in a different outcome where in one location there is a
route restriction and in another there is not. That touches on
the next point, that the significance of the restrictions themselves
will greatly vary. A route restriction can mean anything from
directing that a parade should proceed one way around the top
of a traffic island at the top of Edward Street in Lurgan, to
saying that a parade cannot go down the Garvaghy Road or cannot
go past the 30 mile an hour speed limits in Dunloy. This final
point picks up on a point that we made earlier and a point that
was raised by the evidence given by Mr Holland. It was put to
Mr Holland that public order is public order in Kilkeel, in Belfast,
and in London. I would respectfully disagree with that assertion
because, as some would say, order, like beauty, exists in the
eye of the beholder, and competing definitions of public order
are in reality functions of power relations in different communities,
and in each community, in each town, in each city there will be
an underlying community equilibrium which is implicitly different.
Disorder in Portadown is not the same as disorder in Rosslea.
So, in conclusion, I am not saying that the Commission's determinations
have been perfect, but what I am saying is that from examining
the determinations in 1998 and 1999 and that is as far as I have
gone, I have not looked at the 2000 ones and therefore not the
new Commission, but inconsistency on the whole is not a criticism
that I would support.
Mr Thompson
154. Good morning, gentlemen. What in your view
are the alternatives to a body such as the Parades Commission
regulating parades? Could we not revert to responsibility going
to the police, given the fact that the Human Rights Act has now
come into force, and would there not always be redress to the
judiciary in relation to their decisions as well as the Parades
Commission?
(Dr Bryan) I think that move would be disastrous for
the police. I think it puts them in a position in which they should
not be placed. I think dealing with these issues is the responsibility
of the judiciary and it is also the responsibility of the political
process and you are asking the police officers to make decisions
that it is not reasonable for them to make. My quick answer would
be: giving it back to the police would be about the worst decision
that could be made. I think one can look around the world and
look for alternative ways of going about this situation. You could
look at the situation in Scotland, where it becomes the role of
the local authority to start making these decisions, and that
involves and brings in local councillors to try to deal with these
issues and if people do not like the decisions that are made they
could then take them to court. And the importance of that is that
that creates a sense of responsibility within the communities
that are dealing with this situation. A similar sort of structure
is utilised in South Africa—although I have to say we have
yet to see evidence of it either being successful or not successful
in South Africa, where there were still considerable problems.
Or one could look to see whether the Parades Commission should
take on a more judicial role or tribunal role than it has at present.
But I personally think it would be putting extreme pressure on
the police and asking the police to make decisions that they really
should not be being asked to make. It should be the political
and judicial processes which are dealing with those sorts of problems.
155. Do the police not deal with them in other
parts of the United Kingdom, other than in Scotland?
(Dr Bryan) They do not deal with them in Scotland
and under the Crime and Disorder Act there has been a growing
sense of responsibility given to authorities to start dealing
with what is called public safety—and I have to say that
you will find police officers in England who would really rather
that alternatives were found. If I could give you an example,
the New Year's Eve celebrations at Trafalgar Square for years
just took place, people just turned up, and the responsibility
for dealing with this was left to the police and I know—the
Metropolitan Police have said this to me—that they thought
it was an abrogation of responsibility by the local authority
there that they were left to pick up the pieces. A lot of these
complicated events are not things that police officers alone can
be asked to deal with. It is important that both the local authorities
take full responsibility for what is taking place and that the
judicial processes are brought in. Using the police to make decisions
has been shown not to work. The Parades Commission has only been
around for two years—this is the third legal year of determinations.
The police were making decisions in 1996 which proved to be the
most disastrous year in terms of this issue.
156. Is the Parades Commission's practice of
viewing parades as individual events a strength or a weakness?
Might it be easier to find agreement if an overall package was
negotiated covering either periods of time or a range of locations?
(Dr Jarman) We were involved in some of the discussions
prior to the setting up of the Parades Commission and the drafting
of the legislation. At that time we were in favour of the possibility
of any such body taking a bigger view, not just of parades in
one location but also of parades across Northern Ireland. Personally,
I think that would be a beneficial move. I think at the time it
was viewed as legally unsound and not able to be sustained under
the legislative process. It would probably help a sense of the
way in which the Loyal Orders feel they are being attacked and
all their parades are being challenged, if you could get to a
stage of saying, "We are looking at the full season here,
what is reasonable down the Ormeau Road?" for example. "At
the moment it is one parade at a time coming along—no resolution.
OK, we stop that one. Next one?" and then" Next one?
Next one?" If you took an overview and said, "What is
reasonable here?"—coming from the benchmark of: "We
have stopped all the parades" and moving to a position—which
some people have suggested—where some parades go down this
area—you could maybe start to put that programme in place.
But our understanding was that legally it was not possible to
do that.
Mr Robinson
157. Thank you, Chairman. Earlier you said that
you did not take the view that the opposition had been generated
and was orchestrated, and that effectively there was discontent
there. While there may well have been discontent and certainly
no affinity with the people who were on parade, is it not the
fact that Mr Adams has publicly indicated that these things did
not happen overnight, they had been working on them for several
years, and was taking what in his terms there might have been
considered to be credit for orchestrating the opposition to the
parades.
(Dr Bryan) I find this, when it is thrown up, a very
odd matter, because of course there are times when Unionists will
believe nothing that Gerry Adams says and when he says something
that seems to fit in with your argument you then believe what
he says. Gerry Adams is a politician, he was talking in particular
circumstances when I suspect that it served him very well to appear
to be taking credit for what was taking place. I am not saying
that it is without orchestration—clearly it is a political
movement which has involved Sinn Fein, it has also involved communities
themselves coming together and making decisions. However, what
I am suggesting is that it is a whole combination of factors that
have come together, and simply to see what has taken place as
somebody very cleverly in Sinn Fein sitting down and saying, "Here's
the way we are going to manoeuvre things over the next five years"
I do not personally buy in to those sort of big conspiracy stories.
I do not think it works as simply as that.
158. The former part of your answer was very
political. I asked you a specific question; I did not ask you
for your perception on how Loyalists or Unionists would view Mr
Adams. In fact, Unionists would not regard Mr Adams as being a
liar. They may regard him as many other things, they may not agree
with his views on the matter but that would not say that they
would not accept what he said as being his view of the truth.
The reality is that it is his workers on the ground who are being
seen as orchestrating the opposition and therefore I think people
would be justified in accepting his view that the Sinn Fein/IRA
organisation have been managing the situation in those areas.
(Dr Bryan) I am simply saying that I do not see it
is as simple as that. Using one quote from one politician in one
particular circumstance to underpin a whole argument about complex
communities in complex situations simply to me destroys the very
complexity of what is taking place. My understanding is that there
are some areas where the residents groups developed quite independently
of residents groups developing in other areas, and they did so
because this was an issue within certain sections of the Catholic
community. That has to be dealt with and understood, and, by simply
concentrating on it as a Sinn Fein conspiracy, means that I do
not think one looks at the feelings and attitudes within that
community. I am not denying that there is clear political involvement
in what has taken place—there clearly is.
159. And I think to ignore it also is rather
simplistic as well. I wonder if you could perhaps look at the
wider issue—and I grant that I look at this from a Unionist
perspective. Already we have had some of the statistics on a number
of parades indicated by other members who have asked questions,
and there seems to be relatively few of those parades that might
be described as being intractable, of which obviously Drumcree
would be the best known. But in those cases that are regarded
as being the most difficult, it is usually the ones where there
is the greatest degree of opposition, where the opposition is
to a parade of any kind at any time and it is absolute. Is there
not a greater difficulty when the Parades Commission invariably
go with the opposition to a parade—no doubt from their point
of view for very pragmatic reasons. What likelihood is there then
of parade organisers being involved in mediation, when they recognise
that on every occasion the upper hand is given to those who object,
providing they can give the indication that there will be some
kind of community upheaval unless the Parades Commission give
into their point of view.
(Dr Jarman) Can I answer that partly in conjunction
with the previous question, to say that, while the Republican
movement, I think, have been very astute in exploiting the parade
dispute issue—they have taken a very imaginative approach
tactically, in astute terms tactically—similarly I think
the Loyal Orders have walked up cul-de-sacs time and time again
on this issue and have not been astute tactically in seeing the
bigger picture and seeing how to get through it. I think, in terms
of the engagement of the Parades Commission, to which you are
referring in this item, is one of those issues. I think by refusing
to engage with the Commission, by refusing to seek to cut deals—effectively
to look at the bigger picture, as Mr Thompson asked about it previously,
in terms of trying to address the totality of parades in an area—that
the Loyal Orders have, in effect, shot themselves in the foot
time and time again. If ever you did see that there were two choices,
for a positive tactic or a negative tactic to be taken, I think
the Loyalists by and large have taken the negative tactic and
taken the worst view, the worst approach they possibly could.
If they were prepared to grasp the situation and confront the
residents groups, they would find themselves in a much stronger
position. I think the failure to take up the challenge and to
refuse to meet and to engage has given the residents groups greater
opportunity to move the issue further into their court than they
might have done. I think you cannot fail to recognise that
(Mr Hamilton) If I could just add to that as well,
first of all I do not think it was fair to say that the Parades
Commission have invariably sided with the opposition. But, even
to go back to the previous question, I would agree with what Dominic
said in that there is certainly a degree of orchestration, and
nobody is trying to deny that, while at the same time not confusing
that with genuine opposition in some areas. But I think that does
mask the real question—and Mr Robinson you have hit upon
the question of whether disorder as a threat should effectively
veto the right to march. Consideration of the threat of public
disorder, as the Commission has considered it, has not really
distinguished between the source of disorder, and in many cases
it is fair to say that the threat of disorder from a residents
group has ultimately led to a parade being re-routed or other
conditions being imposed upon it. I think that if you want to
get away from the idea of a law-breakers charter—which is
a criticism which was also levelled at the 1987 Public Order (Northern
Ireland) Order—the first thing that, as Neil said, would
play into the Orange Order's favour would be to engage with the
residents and I think that would place them in a much stronger
position. Secondly, as I have already suggested, it would be to
place greater reliance on the Code of Conduct, because that in
itself places the responsibility for ensuring that disorder does
not happen with the organiser. I would also say that the threat
of disorder has not been the overriding factor which has influenced
the Commission. The threat of disorder has only been a factor
pertinent to the Commission's decision in 63 per cent and 61 per
cent of its determinations in 1998 and 1999.
2 Editorial Footnote: See Ev p 48. Back
|
