---

Lembit Öpik (Montgomeryshire) (LD): I thank the Secretary of State for early sight of his statement and
 
22 Feb 2005 : Column 176
 
our constructive meeting this morning. As he knows, I have become increasingly frustrated because, despite eight years of Liberal Democrat support for the peace initiative, the Government have regularly not involved us and other Opposition parties on many issues at key stages of the process. I acknowledge that he and his fellow Ministers have gone some way towards rectifying that.

Given the gravity of today's statement, will the Secretary of State share evidence that shows that the IRA carried out the Northern bank robbery, at least with my party leader, the right hon. Member for Ross, Skye and Inverness, West (Mr. Kennedy), on Privy Council terms? I do not understand why that would not be possible.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the Irish Government, Lord Alderdice, the IMC, the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the Government share the view that the IRA was responsible for the Northern bank robbery? Does he have evidence to suggest that paramilitaries, specifically the IRA, have been involved in other serious breaches of law and order in the Province, for example, by protecting the killers of Mr. Robert McCartney from justice, and that they are responsible for a catalogue of other criminal activities in previous months? If he can prove and connect those breaches with the IRA, we will consider the sanctions sympathetically. However, I personally feel sad that it has come to that, given the unquestionable contribution that Sinn Fein has made to the peace process on many occasions.

Will the sanctions affect only allowances? The hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) also asked that question. Will Sinn Fein Members of Parliament still be entitled to use their offices? Will their staff be entitled to retain their passes?

Paragraph 13 of the joint declaration was mentioned. Does the Secretary of State regard it as the true touchstone for what is expected from the IRA and, indeed, Sinn Fein, if the sanctions are to be lifted? I emphasise that paragraph 13 covers criminality in all its forms and is therefore a clear statement of what is expected.

Should not we distinguish between the lawless behaviour of republican paramilitaries and the rights and interests of the Catholic community in the north of Ireland? Does the Secretary of State agree that we must recognise that nationalism and republicanism are legitimate political viewpoints, whether one agrees with them or not? In that context, does he accept that, even with the sanctions, Liberal Democrats will try to continue to work with representatives of those communities, including Sinn Fein representatives? Will he give an assurance that, notwithstanding the sanctions, he and the Government remain committed to working with Sinn Fein and other parties in the interests of peace?

Mr. Murphy: On the last point, I said in the statement that we intend to continue to talk to all parties in Northern Ireland. The hon. Gentleman is right to point out that nationalists and republicans have every right to express their political point of view democratically. However, it is not legitimate for paramilitary activities or criminality to be linked to such parties. That is the difference.
 
22 Feb 2005 : Column 177
 

The hon. Gentleman referred to paramilitary activity in all its forms. He will recall that, when discussions were held between parties before Christmas, criminality formed an important part of any agreement that was to have been finalised. I failed to mention that in an earlier answer.

I share the hon. Gentleman's sadness on this occasion. I feel no joy or pleasure in coming to the House to make today's statement—far from it. Everybody who has been involved in the past few years in trying to bring political stability and peace to Northern Ireland will experience no joy at today's statement. However, we must accept the reality of the current position.

On sanctions, the resolution that the Government will present to the Chamber deals with Sinn Fein Members' allowances. Hon. Members will have an opportunity to discuss the detail when the debate takes place on the Floor of the House soon.

I take the hon. Gentleman's point about briefing his party leader. I shall discuss that with the Chief Constable.

Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire) (Lab): Will my right hon. Friend look at the total finances of Sinn Fein and the Provisional IRA with a view to extending mainland provisions on the monitoring and control of the funding of political parties to Northern Ireland? Will he also ensure that the Assets Recovery Agency directs its attention to Sinn Fein, the Provisional IRA and various individuals? That can be done on an all-Ireland basis because the legislation on which the Assets Recovery Agency is based was taken from legislation in the Republic of Ireland.

Mr. Murphy: I understand my hon. Friend's point about the funding of political parties. My right hon. Friend the Minister of State is dealing with the Irish Government on that matter. Dealing with party funding generally on the whole island of Ireland, and ascertaining where their income comes from, is obviously an important issue. I take great account of the point about the Assets Recovery Agency. Part of the discussion that I had yesterday with the Justice Minister and the Garda commissioner related to how the agency in Northern Ireland could work with its counterpart in the Republic of Ireland, the Criminal Assets Bureau.

Rev. Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP): May I put it on record that the law-abiding citizens of Northern Ireland are greatly insulted by the attitude taken by IRA-Sinn Fein over these recent events? The Secretary of State said at the end of his statement today that IRA-Sinn Fein

"need to step forward and tell us how they will demonstrate their full commitment to all the principles of the Good Friday agreement and how they intend to demonstrate to all the other parties in the political process, and to the people of Northern Ireland, that the kind of behaviour identified in the IMC report is in the past."

We have listened to nothing else but apologies from IRA-Sinn Fein, and every person who has raised their voice for equity, decency and law-abiding principles has been maligned and lied about by the IRA-Sinn Fein
 
22 Feb 2005 : Column 178
 
leaders. The law-abiding people of Northern Ireland are sick of these insults. The leaders of IRA-Sinn Fein have stepped forward, and they have lied about the things that were brought to their attention. All that they could do was to malign the people who brought the charges. The time has surely come for this Government and this House to set their own affairs in order, and to say that there is no place in a democracy for armed terrorists and their campaign of crime against the decent citizens of Northern Ireland.

The Minister of Defence in the south of Ireland has said plainly that two of the people in question are in the army council. If that is so—and I believe that it is; these charges were made long ago by those of us who come from Northern Ireland—this House should rid itself completely of those who are in the IRA or any other terrorist organisation. They should not have membership of this House. I trust that, when the Bill comes before the House, we shall have the opportunity to deal fully with these matters. Those people should not receive any money from the House, and they should be stripped of their privileges here. The time has come for stern, straight action to deal with this matter, and until it is dealt with, there cannot be proper, democratic rule in Northern Ireland. I am disgusted with the attitude of the Liberal Democrats here—

Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): Order. I must ask the hon. Gentleman to pose a question to the Secretary of State.

Rev. Ian Paisley: My question is: why should I not, as an Ulsterman, denounce the Liberal Democrats for apologising for IRA murderers—bloody murderers?

Mr. Murphy: I shall keep out of that one, I think. I have to tell the hon. Gentleman that I could not agree more with his first point about the ordinary people of Northern Ireland who are decent, law-abiding citizens, whether they be nationalist or Unionist. Today must be a huge disappointment to those people in Northern Ireland who have taken great strides in the development of cross-community reconciliation, both in economic and social terms. I think that the hon. Gentleman would be the first to agree that every city, town and village in Northern Ireland has great examples of development and progress that many of us would have believed impossible many years ago. What we are having to discuss today is in many ways a slap in the face for the people who are making that progress. I also agree with the hon. Gentleman that we need demonstrable evidence of change. That is where the IMC comes in. Of course, I also agree that there is no place for armed terrorists in a democracy.

Mr. Eddie McGrady (South Down) (SDLP): The Minister said in his statement that the Government's objective was to have an "inclusive power-sharing Executive" in Northern Ireland, and that the test for such inclusion was a "demonstrable commitment to non-violence" and non-criminality. Does this mean that the Provisional IRA, which the Government state is indistinguishable from Sinn Fein, must decommission, de-structure and decriminalise before such an Executive can be set up? That appears to have been the intention of the joint declaration of April 2003, to which the
 
22 Feb 2005 : Column 179
 
Secretary of State has referred. Yet the Government were willing to ignore criminality as recently as up to 8 December, in spite of the knowledge of three major robberies attributed to the IRA and of other criminal activity. Will the Secretary of State tell us whether this is a permanent change of Government policy?

---