| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
26 Mar 2003 : Column 396—continued
Rev. Martin Smyth: I appreciate the hon. Gentleman giving way. Will he accept it from south Belfast and other parts of the city that one board for Belfast is ideal? When we raise issues of policing in south Belfast, we are told, "We do not have the manpower because they are all up in north Belfast."
Mr. Dodds: I recognise what the hon. Gentleman says, and he is quite right. The same is said to me frequently about the policing resources that are required— unfortunately in some circumstances—to deal with the situation on the ground. Thankfully, in recent times there have not been the same demands.
The hon. Gentleman is right, in that while an argument can be advanced in favour of local accountability, district commanders in Belfast—I often talk to the one in north Belfast—tend to say that the issues involved are not for them, but for the Assistant Chief Constable. If I, as an elected representative, want more resources or want to change policing arrangements, I would do better to consult those whose control relates to the city of Belfast, rather than concentrating on the area in which I have an interest. The same must apply to other Members.
The fact remains that had not Sinn Fein wanted to chalk up another success in terms of their control, or their wish to be seen to be in control, of the west Belfast sub-group, there would have been no question of the proposals that we are discussing.
Lembit Öpik: I understand the hon. Gentleman's concern, but does he accept that for some of us the issue is not so much the possibility of Sinn Fein's seeing this as a victory as the sheer complexity of the Government's proposals? If this were a good idea it would not matter for whom it was intended, but it looks to me like the administrative nightmare that the hon. Gentleman has described.
Mr. Dodds: I have already mentioned the administrative nightmare caused by the practical complexities of this set-up. It cannot have been based on any sound functional argument; it must have been proposed for political reasons.
Mr. Quentin Davies: Is not one of the great advantages of a real, effective Belfast-wide DPP the fact that it would force people from different communities to work together? If they did not, the whole process would be paralysed. Such a DPP would encourage closer, more
effective working relationships between communities. The division and fragmentation proposed by the Government, however, are bound to make people feel that, where they have a preponderant majority, they have their own fiefdom—and does not the requirement for representatives of the community in the sub-group's police district to reflect the predominant political group reinforce that unfortunate tendency?
Mr. Dodds: I agree. It would obviously be easier for people to work together in a Belfast-wide group because there will be an overall balance that would not exist in the sub-groups.
Like the right hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble), the hon. Gentleman mentioned the discrepancy in new schedule 3A between the provisions relating to political members and those relating to independent members. That makes it impossible in, for example, west Belfast for Sinn Fein and their supporters not to have a massive majority in the sub-group. Paragraph 3 of the proposed new schedule 3A says that it should be ensured that
- "the political members of all the sub-groups, taken together, reflect the balance of parties prevailing among the members of the council".
- "In appointing independent members of a sub-group the Board shall so far as practicable secure that the members of the sub-group . . . are representative of the community in the sub-group's police district."
An inevitable and inexorable outcome of the Government's proposals will be sub-groups—certainly that in west Belfast—with a massive preponderance of republican members. That certainly seems to be the intention of the Bill—and the Minister has said that the reason for it, subject to a commencement order, is that it was one of Sinn Fein's demands at Weston Park.
Rev. Ian Paisley: Does my hon. Friend agree that because of the community groups from which most of these independents are drawn, these sub-groups are controlled by paramilitaries—in both Protestant and Roman Catholic areas? So although such people may not be elected members of a political party, they certainly have a political agenda.
Mr. Dodds: I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. It is true that in certain areas and among a certain type of community, some groups include people with paramilitary backgrounds. Indeed, the hon. Member for Newry and Armagh recognised the situation clearly, and spoke in terms that will reinforce the opposition expressed by many of us on these Benches, and by people in Northern Ireland at large. What will happen if these boards and sub-groups are set up in the way that is planned? The hon. Gentleman pointed out that they will consist of members of loyalist and republican paramilitary organisations. That will send a real shiver of fear down the spines of many decent, law-abiding people in Northern Ireland who,
having witnessed the emasculation of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and police numbers decline continuously, are now being told that members of paramilitary organisations will be in charge of monitoring the police and calling them to account. What could be a clearer way of saying to the people of Northern Ireland that the sub-group arrangement to which the hon. Gentleman referred is precisely the road that we should not go down? What he said reflects the reality.7.15 pm
The right hon. Member for Upper Bann said that in the new situation, such things will be in the past and people will have changed, but the reality is that such people could be members of these sub-groups within a very short time. We will have to take their word for it that they have changed. We should remember that these same people were in the Government of Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein were actually in the Government of Northern Ireland—never mind in the policing partnerships. Yet they were quite prepared to continue importing arms, racketeering, intimidating, carrying out murders, and organising spy-rings at the very heart of government. So how are we supposed suddenly to accept Sinn Fein on the policing partnerships, and to accept that then, everything will be all right, as the result of so-called acts of completion, which, as we know, will amount to more statements and more stunts from the IRA?
I have to say that I find very naive the Minister's view that if Sinn Fein members join the Policing Board and the policing partnerships, there will be a completely different attitude, and in the community at large there will be no more attacks on the police, and so forth. As I have said, Sinn Fein's joining the Government of Northern Ireland did not prevent its members from trying to undermine the Government from within, or from importing the materiel of terrorist armoury in order to carry out physical attacks on property and lives, and on the people of Northern Ireland.
Lady Hermon: Is the hon. Gentleman suggesting that if Sinn Fein were to join the Policing Board, his DUP colleagues who are currently members of it will actually leave?
Mr. Dodds: Of course, that is exactly the position and policy of the hon. Lady's party, although she may not agree with it and I should be interested to hear her views. As things stand, if Sinn Fein join the Policing Board and the Ulster Unionist party stands by its policy as set out in a recent UUP council meeting, there will be no Unionists on the Policing Board. One of the paradoxes of this situation is that although so much has been done to bring Sinn Fein-IRA on to the Policing Board and on to district policing partnerships, nothing has been done to take account of the fact that in so doing, the current position could be wrecked. At the moment, according to the Minister and others, there is a good working relationship on the Policing Board, and from what we can tell thus far, a good start has been made to many of the DPPs in local areas.
I end by taking this opportunity to pay tribute to the work of community police liaison committees in Belfast. I attended one such meeting just last week, and earlier
this week I was able to bring a delegation from one of the CPLCs in my constituency to meet the Minister. It was a productive and useful meeting.Over the past three decades, those people have carried out their work dutifully despite intimidation. They have done enormous work in their attempts to create better conditions for local people and the police. They have built good relations between their communities and the police, often at great personal risk to themselves. We should not forget their contribution, which deserves our congratulations. I hope that, in the new environment, there will be a continuing role for CPLCs in Belfast and throughout the Province.
Finally, it seems that former senior and distinguished members of the police—of the RUC and the PSNI—are unable to gain membership of DPPs in Belfast and elsewhere. They are turned down and not considered suitable for appointment, but it appears from today's debate that the Government consider paramilitaries and people with serious convictions—even those convicted of murder—to be more than suitable. If the Bill is passed, the Minister will be opening the gates to allowing that sort of representation on policing boards, and that will go down very badly throughout Northern Ireland.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |