Examination of Witnesses (Questions 460
- 473)
TUESDAY 6 FEBRUARY 2001
MR DONNCHA
MAC NIALLAIS,
MR ROBIN
PERCIVAL AND
MR CHARLES
LAMBERTON
460. Your interjection is helpful and it leads
nicely into my next question. The Commission obviously operates
within a climate where from time to time others have taken initiatives
in relation to contentious parades; by others I would place national
politicians and the government within that context. Do you think
that the Commission's own activities have been inhibited at times
by the involvement of others outside of those communities?
(Mr Percival) Are you specifically thinking about
Tony Blair's feelings with regard to Portadown?
461. I do not think I would be specific because
I feel there are enough examples across ordinary contentious parades
where there have been interventions by different groups. I suppose
the generalism being, do you believe that interventions by national
figures are to the detriment as to what agreement could be reached
on the ground locally?
(Mr Percival) It is quite difficult for us to answer
that question in any way that is not more than just speculation.
With regard to our own situation, really, apart from, I suppose,
the initial intervention by John Hume, who is the local MP, who
I know has a national profile, most of the participants, if you
like, of what is happening in Derry have been either ourselves,
the Apprentice Boys, the Parades Commission or the City Centre
Initiative. What I would say is that certainly, as you can imagine,
we are in touch with other residents groups with regard to their
situation. I certainly think we would take the view that there
have been times when people felt that the real decisions were
being taken, for example, over the Portadown issue in Downing
Street. I suppose you can have views on that, after all Downing
Street is the centre of government in the United Kingdom. On the
other hand, if you have a body like the Parades Commission that
is, if you like, being asked to make adjudications, then if things
appear to be going on elsewhere I think that certainly creates
a sense of not being certain of what is going on. Certainly talking
to members of other residents groups that certainly was the worry,
that the deals were being stitched up outside of the involvement
of the local decision-making process, which I think was not particularly
helpful. That is speculation because we have not really had any
involvement in any of that directly.
(Mr Lamberton) Another point about intervention by
people from Britain, particularly Tony Blair, is that it seems
to happen around times of crisis. It is not seen by people as
well-meaning, it is just to get over the summer months, meaning
it literally falls off their agenda come 13 or 14 July. That is
where I see it all.
(Mr Mac Niallais) To add to that, this was most notable
in 1998. We are aware that there was pressure for us to put pressure
on the Garvaghy Resident's Group by certain political figures
to accept an Orange march along the Garvaghy Road, an Orange safeguard
within the Good Friday Agreement. You will recall that the Assembly
had just been elected at this stage. This was followed closely
by Drumcree and fears about what could happen about the whole
process if that was not resolved. We do not think that that type
of pressure is useful, no matter from what source it comes. We
think that people need to stand by particular principles in terms
of resolving the issues. Putting pressure on people because there
is a particular crisis in the political process is the wrong way
to approach it.
462. Thank you. My final question has been partially
answered; it is in respect of the feeder parades and the fact
that the current position is that the Parades Commission must
treat each parade individually as a separate entity. You made
some very clear and helpful points that would suggest that you
feel that that is not always in the best interests of the local
community. Would you go as far as saying that you would like to
see a change in the law so that the Commission could look at parades
other than in isolation?
(Mr Percival) I am not entirely convinced, Mr Clarke,
that a change in law is actually required. If it is then I think
the answer would be yes. I think our general view would be that
the Parades Commission historically, I appreciate there has been
two different Parades Commissions, I suppose legally they are
the same entity—has really made up the rules on this one
as they went along. I gave an example of a situation where the
Parades Commission did make a linkage between a parade in the
Lower Ormeau Road and the lack of one in Portadown. In fact unofficially
it was in terms of the mediation process. It was very clear to
us and we as an organisation had been informed as part of the
mediation process in 1998 that there was not going to be a parade
down the Lower Ormeau Road. The reality was that the Parades Commission
at that time was more than happy to make a linkage, it was only
in 1999 when they chose not to. They used this as an excuse to,
if you like, deny the validity of our argument. I think there
were all kinds of reasons why they wanted to allow a parade down
the Lower Ormeau Road, not least because they wanted to reward
the Apprentice Boys, who had three not very productive meetings
but nevertheless had had three meetings with the Lower Ormeau
Concerned Community. They can make that linkage when it suits
them and they seem not to when it does not suit them. Certainly
the practicalities are they can hunt with the hares, whatever
the cliche is, when it suits them.
463. Clarification on that point would be helpful.
(Mr Percival) Yes.
Mr Beggs
464. Did the Bogside Residents' Group make any
representations during the Parades Commission Review about this
its composition? What response did the Government make? What particular
imbalances has the Bogside Residents' Group identified in the
Parades Commission?
(Mr Mac Niallais) We made representations to the North
review body back in 1996-1997. In terms of composition we stated
that it should represent the community within the North across
religion, class and gender. We know that when the first Parades
Commission was appointed there were a number of people who you
could describe as broadly representative of the Unionist and the
Loyalist community. There did not seem to be the equivalent within
the Nationalist Republican community. We also noted, and we said
this to the Parades Commission, that the current Parades Commission,
like yourselves, has no women members. We are also concerned about
the class composition of the Parades Commission. We feel that
it is not representative of working-class nationalism, or unionism
for that matter. The Parades Commission themselves pointed out
to us that that was not their role, that that was a government
role and that they had absolutely no say in it. We accepted that,
but we think there should be space. We understand the process
is by public advertisement. We do not know if there were women
who applied and did not meet the criteria. We have no knowledge
of that. If it is the case that there are not a sufficient applications
from particular sections of the community then we feel that there
should be space for co-options, so that you can redress any imbalance
perceived in terms of class, religion or gender.
Chairman: I will intervene in the context of
the remark which you made about the composition of our Committee.
You have touched on a controversy which is raging in Parliament
at the moment, where a number of people think that, perhaps, the
Whips of all of the major parties should not be involved in choosing
a Committee, it would be better if the choice came from within
Parliament itself. We obviously take the point you made. We are
seeking to do something about it.
Mr Barnes
465. From what you tell us, the Bogside Residents'
Group support dialogue as a means of resolving contentious issues
over parades? From the position that we now have, how do you see
that dialogue as being stimulated? What area should it go towards?
(Mr Mac Niallais) I think there are a whole series
of areas in which we need to engage. I believe that we need to
involve a long-term process; it could involve other groups and
organisations as well. In terms of the Apprentice Boys and what
they have been doing over this past few years, organising events
other than marches, such as the pageant that was mentioned, concerts,
reenactments of the Siege, all of those are things that can assist
the process, there still remains the issue of dealing with the
problematic areas and the issue of the marches. In the Derry context
that obviously involves the feeder parades. We want to see it
resolved. We want to see it resolved on the basis, again, of mutual
respect and tolerance. We want to see issues around the behaviour
of band men, the behaviour of supporters, the issue of on street
drinking, all of those issues have to be worked through. The Apprentice
Boys have told us, without going into detail of the discussions
we have had, that some of these issues are beyond their control
to a certain degree, for example street drinking. That is something
that we need to talk through and we need to work that through
and see what can be done. The fact of the matter is that there
are somewhere in the region of between 10,000, maybe 20,000, loyalists
coming into Derry. There is a long history of confrontation and
conflict surrounding this march. Many young nationalists perceive
the Apprentice Boys march as an invasion of Derry City Centre.
If I could throw out a possible comparison, it would be like 20,000
Republicans marching through Ballymena City Centre on a Saturday,
how would the local Unionists feel about that? That may not be
an exact comparison, but that is how many people view this march.
I think there is a lot of difficult work to be done. We need to
keep on talking. I think dialogue is actually the only way to
resolve this, not just the major way, it is the only way. It is
going to take some time to deal with this issue so that we arrive,
in the long term, at an accommodation of the issue of marches.
(Mr Percival) Could I just add very briefly to that,
which is that dialogue must be about meeting people's real concerns
and not a strategy designed to win a Parades Commission decision.
I think that is very, very important. Sometimes, again to come
back to the August 1999 ruling by the Parades Commission, the
feeling is often left with nationalists and non-Unionists, if
only the Orange Order would get involved with dialogue with the
Parades Commission or the residents group then the Parades Commission
would be in a very happy position to allow their parades, that
would effectively mean forcing down, like the Garvaghy Road, and
that would clearly be unacceptable to us. The dialogue has to
take place but it has to be genuine and it has to be about meeting
real concerns. To some degree that has happened in Derry.
466. Are you looking for dialogue outside of
the work of the Parades Commission? That dialogue should be something
that is continuing with the Apprentice Boys and others. You seem
to have a sort of growing admiration for the role of the Apprentice
Boys, I assume you are in various contacts with them and yet a
great concern is that that is not being reflected as far as the
Orange Lodge is concerned and hopefully you are looking for the
changes that we are seeing in the Apprentice Boys to be reflected
more in the Orange Lodge. I was wondering if that is what you
are after and whether there was something that was there on the
other side as well. If there could be dialogue that existed between
the Apprentice Boys and the Bogside Residents' Group, were there
problems that existed in your community as well that meant that
others would keep them away from that type of dialogue and discussion
and the equivalent to the Orange Lodge on the national side?
(Mr Mac Niallais) There is quite lot there. I think
that if we arrive at a situation in Derry where there is no longer
a need for the Parades Commission determination, and it is quite
clear that that would be the case, there would still be a need
for dialogue. I think there would still be issues that would arise.
Part of the reason why we have this situation of contentious parades,
without going into a whole history lesson, is the Apprentice Boys
parade was banned from the West Bank from 1969 until 1975. There
were serious riots and confrontation in 1975, following the first
major Apprentice Boys parade on the West Bank since 1969. That
was the case right up to the mid 1980s, major rioting around the
August commemoration of Derry by the Apprentice Boys. Then the
conflict died away. The underlying issues were all still there.
You know, people might have thought looking from the outside there
is no problem with the Apprentice Boys parades in Derry. There
were problems but no one was talking about the problems. If you
scan back through the local papers at that time you will see statements
from business people, from nationalist politicians, particularly
the SDLP, complaining about the Apprentice Boys parades in the
local newspapers and every week after these parades. Nobody was
trying to do anything about resolving them. We would be convinced
that even if we arrive at a situation where there is no need,
and both sides are agreed, that there is no longer a need for
a Parades Commission determination I think there will still be
a need for dialogue to ensure we do not have this issue resurrecting
itself in another ten years. It might not be us doing it and it
might not be the people currently representing the Apprentice
Boys, it could be other people. I hope we will be doing it, just
not myself, it could be other people who are there dealing with
this issue to ensure it does not come up again.
467. I was very interested in the written evidence
you supplied, because the first two pages are history. As I read
it I thought, here we go again, this is one community's interpretation
of history. I could have received other submissions with the alternative.
Then as it moved on you started to talk about the tolerance and
different moves. Then you said, "In connection with certain
activities and certain changes with the Apprentice Boys we considered
these changes in a very positive light". This is a very hopeful
contribution, especially after that sort of framework. I was wondering
what had been occurring in order to assist those type of developments?
Can I give you one example, Derry has a museum in which there
are the two traditions side by side as you go through them historically
and different interpretations of what it was that has occurred.
There have been lots of people through that museum and it maybe
has helped, amongst other things, to have a bit of an impact towards
mutual understanding. The beauty of dialogue is that you also
understand the other person's position in being involved in that
dialogue without having to agree to it. I was wondering what you
felt were the positive things we could take from your experiences?
(Mr Mac Niallais) A lot of things do contribute to
that process of what is called mutual understanding. I think the
key, and I know we have gone over some of this, is dialogue. If
I go into a room with somebody and this person says, "Here's
what I am about", I have to listen to that. I might not agree
with it, but I have to listen and I have to try and understand
and appreciate it and in the end come back with my opinions on
that and, hopefully, have my thought processes reciprocated. There
are many ways in which we move a situation on. There has been
a movement in Derry, there has been positive developments ,but
there is still a long way to go. We are talking about hundreds
of years of conflict here. Whereas the marching issue is only
one small aspect of that, it still has the potential to have the
major impact which we have seen in previous years. There are a
number of avenues for encouraging mutual respect and understanding
and all of them need to be worked at and all of them will play
their own small part in terms of how we are able to arrive at
that resolution of any area of conflict. I would not want to emphasise
one over the other, the key is the dialogue.
(Mr Percival) Could I just add, I agree that dialogue
is absolutely central to this process. The Apprentice Boys, let
us be honest about this, are the only one of the Loyal Orders
which is actively engaged in dialogue, not just with the Parades
Commission but more importantly with the residents group. That
is helped by the fact that this dialogue takes place in a city
where everybody knows a lot of people quite well. The three of
us would have known members of the Apprentice Boys before this
process began. I think dialogue can only take place within the
context where people realise that we are also representing constituencies
which do have legitimate interests and needs that have to met.
Sometimes it may not be possible to reach accommodations which
can deliver to both sides what they both want out of it. What
we have certainly tried with our engagement with the Apprentice
Boys is to ask of the Apprentice Boys things that we think they
can deliver. We have mentioned some of them in terms of issues
that lead to them developing their own system of marshals, issues
round drink, issues round music, flags and emblems, all those
kind of things. Unfortunately we still have the outstanding issue
of the feeder parades. Nevertheless, I am sure we will eventually
resolve that one too, hopefully.
Mr Grogan
468. Following on from Mr Barnes, I read the
memorandum carefully and one sentence which struck me was, "We
believe that the Parades Commission should base its decisions,
when required, on what is best in terms of promoting the possibility
of finding an accommodation". I am just trying to get to
the bottom of that and how the Commission could achieve that.
Was there a hint there that they should—obviously because
they have to make a decision when accommodation has not been reached—look
at the long-term, play the long game, and that they should expect
that accommodation will be easily reached. Is that what you were
hinting at? What were you getting at in that sense?
(Mr Mac Niallais) What we were getting at was the
Parades Commission should not allow itself to be influenced by
short-term considerations, we mentioned some of those earlier
on. The long-term resolution of this issue will come about whenever
those who want to march through particular areas show respect
and tolerance for people affected by the marches. The Parades
Commission, in our opinion, may encourage this, and they need
to encourage that process of arriving at long-term accommodation.
At times it may be the case that the Parades Commission go well.
We have banned the Garvaghy Road march since 1997. Maybe we will
encourage them to talk to the Parades Commission or talk to whoever.
In our opinion that would be necessary. We think that the Parades
Commission need to stand fast to particular principles about this
issue. They need to look at the issue in the round and they need
to, where required, take a long term view of it, even if that
means that there are no parades down the Garvaghy Road ever again.
That is our view of it. What the Orange Order in turn need to
do in this regard is they should take a leaf out of the Apprentice
Boy's book. The Apprentice Boys are looking at this issue and
saying, "The marching tradition is very important to us,
what other ways can we commemorate the siege". The Orange
Order need to update. Why do they exist? Do they exist to march
down the Garvaghy Road or do they exist to uphold Protestant values
and cultural values. If that is what it is about, if that is all
it is about, the Protestant values and culture, the Orange Order
should take a leaf out of the Apprentice Boy's book and look back
to why they were formed and start to deal with the issue. In my
opinion, I have no way of knowing how widespread this view is
held, I have listened to Orange Order members ringing local radios
shows and saying things like, "This is not what I joined
the Orange Order for". What I think the Parades Commission
need to do is make sure they do not put the ball back in the court
of those people who do not want to move into the 21st century,
who do not want to have any other type of process other than one
of violence and sectarianism.
469. Thank you. Also in the memorandum, in the
section at the beginning Mr Barnes was referring to, you go through
the history and different context of different marches in different
communities, and so on. Ultimately is the long-term resolution
dependent on resolving wider social difficulties or could it be
that if communities can reach resolutions on marches that might
lead to progress in other areas as well? It is a bit of a chicken
and egg, I suppose.
(Mr Mac Niallais) In our opinion they are all interlinked.
Part of the reason why the nationalists in Derry do not have the
same sense of outrage about Apprentice Boys marches through Derry
is that the nationalists do not feel unequal within the city of
Derry. Whatever about the political inequalities, nationalists
do not feel that they are second class citizens within the city
of Derry. That is a stark contrast to the situation in Portadown
where nationalists do feel they are treated like second class
citizens. Nationalists in the Garvaghy Road, the way they view
the Orange Order marches there is a prime reason, in some way
there is inequality. Whenever there are parades through Derry
City Centre people do not see those as a reason of inequality,
they see them as something that is annoying but tolerable, it
would depend how the political climate is and how things are elsewhere.
They are prepared, more or less, to tolerate it. There are negligibles
with other issues, if you remove the inequalities within society
around that issue, say those people are prepared to accept the
notion of equality it is my opinion that the people in the Garvaghy
Road might not object to an Orange Order parade. Also, if the
Orange Order accept the position of equality they would not want
to march down the Garvaghy Road.
470. One final question, Mr Percival expressed,
fairly confidently, the hope that the problem with the feeder
parades could be overcome eventually. Is it possible to envisage
on the current rate of process that in 10 years' time is it possible
to envisage a situation where the Parades Commission became slightly
superfluous and did not need to make a determination, at least
in your own context.
(Mr Percival) I suppose the short answer could well
be yes. Having said that I am not entirely certain about the wisdom
of speculating about what will happen in 10 years' time. My own
feeling is that certainly we have made some progress in regard
to the Apprentice Boys parades. Having said that, the feeder parade
issue is a difficult one. While most of the focus has, for understandable
reasons, been on the parades or the attempted parades in the Lower
Ormeau Road, there are a number of Apprentice Boys parades that
are scheduled for around 12 August, where the local Apprentice
Boys have shown absolutely no willingness to engage with anybody,
specifically at Dunboyne, and that is not the only example. My
own view is that at some point in time those local Apprentice
Boys clubs will need to change their way of thinking and maybe,
who knows, if there is quite considerable overlap of membership,
if the Orange Order makes a shift and agrees to engage with the
likes of the residents groups, then maybe some of those local
Apprentice Boys groups will as well.
Mr Beggs
471. I would just like to put a point to Mr
Percival first and ask if he would accept that one of the reasons,
perhaps, for reluctance on the part of the Loyal Orders to engage
with residents groups is because of their understanding that residents
groups did not happen by chance in the first place?
(Mr Percival) You are quite right residents groups
did not happen by chance, they arose out of context. I think Donncha
explained the context in which the Bogside Residents Group arose.
We arose in a situation whereby there had not been a parade around
the entire walls of Derry for the best part of 20 odd years, 25
years and that situation changed rather suddenly. I think a lot
of people were caught on the hop. The residents group grew out
of the feeling that since part of the walls, the west walls ran
through the Bogside very close to the Bogside residential areas
that were predominantly nationalist, there ought to be some engagement.
There was also the situation in Portadown. I am aware that the
Portadown Residents' Group has not given evidence to this Committee,
but I am sure you have been reading around the subject and the
issue of parades in Portadown go back many, many, many years,
in fact decades. I will not say centuries, but we are were almost
getting there as far as centuries. I do not think it is a fair
comment. I appreciate that Unionists believe that the residents
groups were created particularly by Sinn Féin in order
to promote Sinn Féin's agenda. I accept that many Unionists
believe that, but I just have to say to them that it is not true.
Mr Beggs
472. What changes would you like to see in the
powers of the Parades Commission or its mode of operation to enhance
it effectiveness?
(Mr Mac Niallais) We have already dealt with some
of those issues, basically speaking we would like to see a situation
where the Parades Commission will attempt to facilitate that accommodation.
They need to give due regard to the rights of those directly affected
by these parades. In that context I do not think that the Parades
Commission should have the power to force marches through areas
where there is clear opposition to those parades. It has been
said that that does in effect give a veto over marches to local
residents. I think that in many ways local residents should have
a veto over these marches. I think that it is the case, and you
see this in the Derry context, that local residents, where conditions
exist, are prepared to enable accommodation in relation to these
parades, even though they still do not have any problems with
them. In particular the Parades Commission should not force parades
through. It should seek always to encourage accommodation and
a process of dialogue. I think they need to take the emphasis
away from the dialogue of those which we consider to be necessary
and helpful. It is not going to resolve the issue. They need to
be careful that they do not have a list where people tick off
particular boxes in terms of dialogue or in terms of any process,
then they will get a favourable determination. They need to be
very careful not to turn the clock back in terms of the progress
that has been made, and in other areas as well over these past
few years. They need to keep an eye on the end of August. For
many years all Orange Order parades were banned throughout Ireland,
not only in Ulster. We need to consider that context, what actually
happened was that public processions became an issue of contention
and were allowed to be an issue of contention for many years and
there was no effort to resolve this. No effort was made to ensure
that the rights of people affected by these parades were protected.
We need to make sure and the Parades Commission need to do this
as well, we need make sure that this issue is resolved once and
for all so we are not coming back in 20 or 30 years' time, or
some other groups of poor unfortunates, to try and deal with it.
Chairman
473. Thank you very much, indeed. There has
been some conversation in the course of the dialogue about who
should be talking to whom. We can only say that we are extremely
grateful you came to talk to us and the fact that we have overrun
slightly is a testament to the dialogue we have had. We are genuinely
appreciative, for the reasons I gave at the beginning of this
session, that you have come to talk to us. You have made your
position very clear and we shall certainly look forward to reading
the transcript in places. Thank you very much, indeed.
(Mr Mac Niallais) Thank you.
|
