| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Anderson (Blaydon) (Lab): I apologise to Members for having had to leave the Chamber for a short time earlier.
Everyone in the House should welcome the Bill and if there is a real argument here, it is that the Bill is long overdue. The blame for that can be laid at many doors, and we have heard some of that already tonight. We have spent far too many years being involved in the blame game. The time is right to move forward and those who can shift the roadblocks to peace and progress should get on with the job now.
Lembit Öpik: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Lembit Öpik: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. Gentleman at such an early stage, but I think that he said that the Bill is overdue. Which parts are overdue?
Mr. Anderson: Any part that relates to the impasse that we have been in for the past seven years or to anything that prevents us from moving forward and giving people a sense of control over their own destiny, which they voted for seven years ago.
There is no doubt that the Bill is a challenge to the right hon. Member for North Antrim (Rev. Ian Paisley)—indeed, the devolution process has been a challenge from day one—but the people of Ireland and their politicians have shown in recent years that they can rise to that challenge when given the opportunity to do so. The fact that at times the process has stalled and, worse, gone into reverse, must not stop us making progress now. This is not just about Northern Ireland. It is about everyone in Great Britain: everyone who wants to see progress, everyone who wants to see peace and security, everyone who wants to see a massive reduction in the number of troops in Northern Ireland, and everyone who wants to see the people of Northern Ireland moving together in a positive and modern manner. The Bill lays the foundations for such progress. There is a long way to go, but it lays those foundations.
Once again, the people of Northern Ireland will be represented by people who are directly accountable to them, with real control over things that really matter to them. Once again education, health, social services and transport will be part of the local remit. Local people and their representatives will control economic development, agriculture and regeneration. Culture, arts, leisure and planning matters will all be the responsibility of an Assembly with real links to the people who matter.
As one who is involved in the whole devolution process in every part of these islands, I believe that this is a real chance for us to deliver what people really want and need. As one who was sadly disappointed when the
13 Mar 2006 : Column 1206
people of my part of the country rejected devolution, I can only say that I believe the result would have been different there had we been given the range of powers and responsibilities that are once again within the grasp of the people of Northern Ireland. The Bill goes further, however. I have heard what has been said today and I understand all the issues, but if the Assembly agrees and if the people give the Executive the right to proceed, it will be possible to run the police and criminal justice system on the ground in Northern Ireland.
Mr. Wallace: Does the hon. Gentleman think it wise to provide for Martin McGuinness, for example, possibly to be responsible for policing firearms and explosives as a result of the devolution settlement?
Dr. Alasdair McDonnell (Belfast, South) (SDLP): He is an expert.
Mr. Anderson: He may well be. Besides, it is called democracy. If the people decide that Martin McGuinness is the man to do the job, that will be the will of the people. The right to control the police and criminal justice system should be given to the people on the ground. The problems that have been raised so far should be seen as problems, but not as problems that cannot be overcome.
Mr. Hanson: Can my hon. Friend confirm my understanding that again there is a triple lock on the devolution of policing? First, the Assembly must want it; secondly, the Government must support it; and thirdly, the political parties themselves need to take it forward. There will be a vote on the Floor of the House or in Committee. There is a triple lock to ensure that the matter is resolved by all parties in the interests of devolution.
Mr. Anderson: That is what I meant when I said there might be discussions to establish how the devolution of policing would take place. But the principle is that, once all the hoops have been jumped through, the people on the ground will have control. That is what is important, and what our debate is about.
It is clear from the discussions mentioned by the hon. Member for South Staffordshire (Sir Patrick Cormack) that the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee's inquiry into organised crime has shown that any improvements in the criminal justice system should be welcomed. It is true that, as Sir Hugh Orde told us recently,
but organised criminal activity is still far too common, and the police and other bodies involved in the fight to defeat crime must be given all possible support.
There is a clear demand that the House must make unanimously. If any political party is involved in any way with criminal activity, organised, paramilitary or—that curious word—pure, it must cease immediately. If it does not do so, its members should not be recognised as democratic politicians. It is all well and good for the leaders of Sinn Fein to demand the reinstatement of the devolved Assembly, and to insist that failure to reinstate it should result in the withdrawal of Assembly Members' salaries. That party must convince us all that the loss of its members' salaries will not be cushioned by
13 Mar 2006 : Column 1207
a backhander from the paramilitary branch of the Northern bank. We need deeds as well as words if we can ever hope to move forward. I agree with the right hon. Member for North Antrim (Rev. Ian Paisley) that it is not possible to be a terrorist and a democratic politician at the same time. You must take your pick: you are one or the other.
It is right and proper for us to welcome transparent election processes that will give confidence to all involved. The old concept of "Vote early and vote often" will not wash in the 21st century. It is also right for us to institute legislation that allows people to vote safely, without fear of threat or reprisal. We should therefore welcome a limited use of anonymous registration for those who are genuinely in need of such protection, and we should want to reach, as quickly as possible, a stage at which such safeguards are no longer needed.Other changes to the electoral system, including the process of donations to parties, should also be welcomed. All our people, throughout the country, need to be assured that our political processes are as transparent as possible, and the Bill takes us a long way in that direction.
We hope that the energy market will become more open and produce efficiencies and savings in the cost of energy to people on the ground. I would have loved to stand here and say that we have a nationalised energy market controlled by our country and our people, but sadly that is not the case. Thanks to the efforts of the Conservative party when it was in power, we have a market-based energy system under which people struggle to supply energy. I can see the potential for our lights to go out over the next few days because we have put our faith in the market. However, the market may well work in this context if it allows people throughout Ireland access to cheaper energy supplies than they have had in the past, and that must be welcome.
Mr. Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con): Is the hon. Gentleman aware that an action taken by his own party—the creation of the new electricity trading arrangements—further liberalised the market, causing energy prices to fall even more? That was not just due to our good work, but also due to his party's good work.
Mr. Anderson: We can all learn from our mistakes. I have learnt from mine. That is why I am here: otherwise I would still be digging coal to keep the lights on.
Since I came to the House, I have been closely involved in most of the debates on issues involving Northern Ireland. I lobbied hard to become a member of both the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and the Northern Ireland Grand Committee. I did that because for many years I had worked with people on the ground in Northern Ireland—good, hard-working people who were trying to find a resolution to end years of misery and strife that, as always, hit the least well-off worst. I am talking about public sector workers, great folk, people who were on the front line in every sense, people who really knew what the word "interface" meant.
During many of the debates that we have had over the past 10 months, I have continued to observe and understand the deep-seated feelings that have been expressed today by Members throughout the Chamber. I also understand that we must try to move forward, and
13 Mar 2006 : Column 1208
the Bill may well constitute a big step in that direction. We cannot pull back at this stage. The Bill removes many legislative barriers to progress. It introduces a more transparent and accountable electoral process; it gives people and politicians the tools with which to do the job; it gives us a chance once again to give direct control of day-to-day life to the people who really matter; it gives us a chance to build on the process that was apparent during the short time in which the Assembly sat during the final days of the last millennium; and it gives us a chance to show the good work that was done when the Assembly reconvened after the suspension in 2000.
One of the things that kept me going throughout the debates when the devolution process broke down was being told by colleagues that, during the time when the Assembly sat, they were amazed at how well people worked across community and cultural barriers. I believe that that was because people were directly accountable. No longer were they dealing with representatives who were remote; their representatives could stand up and speak on their behalf, and affect their lives in a way that had not been possible before. That is the pressure that real accountability puts on politicians. If they are one step removed, they can always blame someone else, but when they have the power, the responsibility and the means to deliver for people, it certainly focuses their minds.
The time has come for us to re-engage with that accountability. We owe it to the people of Northern Ireland and to the people of Great Britain. Any ideological or structural objections need to be sorted out and removed. This is the way forward, and we can move forward by supporting the Bill.
7.19 pm
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |