| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mark Durkan: I remind the hon. Gentleman that it was his party that agreed with Sinn Fein and the two Governments in the comprehensive agreement not only to go into government with Sinn Fein but potentially to be in government alone with Sinn Fein, because the exclusion principle would have meant that no other party would have been included. It would essentially have been a voluntary coalition between Sinn Fein and the DUP.
Mr. Dodds: The hon. Gentleman has repeated that line so often that he is beginning to believe it. If he reads the comprehensive agreement, he will find that we made sure, through the provisions that we enunciated and the safeguards that we introduced, that the criminality and paramilitarism had to be over for good. However, his party was prepared to vote terrorists into government at a time when no decommissioning was taking place and criminality was ongoing. That was not even mentioned by his party. He voted for that, so it does not behove him to lecture the DUP on such matters.
We have concerns about political donations that are permissible under Irish law. That opens up the possibility that what is permissible and legal is defined not by debate, discussion and vote in this House and in the other place but by what is decided in Dail Eireann. Laws could be made that apply to parties in Northern Ireland over which we would have no control. The clause that allows that needs careful consideration in Committee. It is far too wide-ranging; it opens up possibilities whereby we are handing over power in this matter to another jurisdiction without any real safeguards at all and without any opportunity to curtail it or to revisit the issue, even within the Bill. That needs to be looked at.
Finally, I allude to the point I raised when the Secretary of State opened this debate: the exemption for foreign donors when they are Irish or Irish corporations. The Secretary of State indicated that it is not just
13 Mar 2006 : Column 1213
Sinn Fein that will benefit and which had made representations. He said that there were others, but he did not elaborate on that. It would be useful to know who else he was referring to in that regard—
Mr. Dodds: The hon. Gentleman invites me to guess, so I presume that he invites me to look in his direction on this matter. If he is holding up his hand and admitting guilt in this matter, I think he is rather short-sighted. He is providing cover to Sinn Fein, which will be by far the main beneficiary of this provision. Far from helping his own party, he will disadvantage it vis-à-vis Sinn Fein in the long run. Many people in Northern Ireland regard this as being designed purely and only to benefit republicans and nationalists. It will give them an unfair advantage and should be looked at carefully.
In Committee, we will want to look at many matters, not least that raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, East (Mr. Robinson) when he mentioned the changes to the institutional arrangements for the working of the Assembly. We might yet have to deal with those arrangements in Committee. It seems bizarre that during this Second Reading we are not able to discuss that matter, but we may spend a considerable amount of time in Committee on provisions that have not been proposed. Nevertheless, we will await developments on that and see what transpires.
7.42 pm
Dr. Alasdair McDonnell (Belfast, South) (SDLP): I wish to confine myself to the miscellaneous aspects of the miscellaneous provisions in the Bill. The slightly more main aspects have been discussed at length. Before I get into the detail of what I want to say, I wish to emphasise to my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, North (Mr. Dodds) that the SDLP has been consistent since Leeds castle and before about the criminal activity of paramilitary organisations; as they moved away from more lethal operations they were diverting their energies into crime and associated matters. The SDLP has no need to apologise to anyone for that.
I shall take a brief look at the all-Ireland energy provisions, the renewable energy provisions and electoral registrations, and I may say a word about political funding. I welcome the parts of the Bill that refer to the all-Ireland energy market and congratulate the Secretary of State on the move towards the creation of a single electricity market for the island of Ireland. That is something that the SDLP has long campaigned for. The Bill acknowledges our argument that we cannot operate efficiently with two small energy markets on a small island. The creation of an all-Ireland electricity market creates better value energy and power through economies of scale and provides security and diversity of supply, making the island of Ireland, north and south, a better place to do business. I compliment the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington) who, during his contribution earlier, raised the issue of wider connectivity within the British Isles and to Europe. In modern energy markets we need a minimum market of 10 million to 12 million people and the all-Ireland market needs to be better opened up to Wales and Scotland.
13 Mar 2006 : Column 1214
The energy sector in Northern Ireland faces many challenges. We are far too heavily dependent on fossil fuels, and we need to do much more to encourage the development of diversity and more sustainable energy supply. We need to tackle our global warming commitments more sincerely and genuinely through the reduction of carbon emissions. For many years we have been lumbered with—indeed, if I dare use the term, murdered by—badly negotiated contracts for electricity generation. We pay an overcharge of 40 or 50 per cent on the normal market rates. We have that millstone around our necks until 2010, 2012 or 2014 when various guarantees to suppliers come to an end. In recent months, gas and electricity costs have increased substantially throughout these islands, but these price increases are particularly severe in Northern Ireland because they come alongside a draconian 19 per cent. rise in the regional rate and the prospect of water charges. They threaten poverty. Far from poverty being reduced, particularly fuel poverty, we are now faced with an increase, and increased fuel poverty in particular.
While the development in energy markets is welcome, obstacles of many other kinds continue to impede useful, pragmatic and practical north-south co-operation and partnerships, commonsense partnerships that should carry no political burden or baggage whatsoever. It is my understanding that they are as useful and beneficial to those who see themselves as Unionists as to those who see themselves as nationalists. These partnerships are necessary across a wide range of matters. Some of them are minor, others substantial. They include double-charging—particularly roaming telephone charges where people are charged an arm and a leg to make mobile telephone calls over a distance of a mile or two—and taxation anomalies arising from being resident in one jurisdiction and working in another, which create further difficulties. All these matters need to be tackled with a commitment to resolving the problems and removing barriers so that people, goods and services can move throughout the island for the benefit of all.
That is why the SDLP has published detailed proposals, including plans for transport and infrastructure, suggestions of an all-Ireland research alliance, marketing and investment co-operation and a public safety body. We could perhaps go as far as a joined-up anti-poverty strategy across the island. I could go into other issues, but it would unfair of me to drag on now. I have made the point.
In Northern Ireland, we have some of the best renewable energy resources in Europe, yet, according to the Carbon Trust, only 0.2 per cent. of the north's primary energy requirement comes from renewable sources. That is a scandal. The threat of global climate change ensures that we must quickly change the way that we source and use energy. Financial assistance is required. There is some around, but it is not massive and we need to extend it further. There is a desperate need to develop, initiate and innovate around the renewable energy sector on a major scale to ensure that we are not as dependent on fossil fuels and the traditional electricity-based fuels of the past. That would allow Northern Ireland to meet its global commitment by increasing the energy available from renewable sources, reduce carbon emissions, improve air quality and
13 Mar 2006 : Column 1215
ultimately improve health. While I am pleased to see the commitment to renewable energy, legislation should be in place by now for a sustainable development strategy for Northern Ireland. Such a strategy would have broader implications to ensure that all areas of Government policy would meet the needs of today's society while protecting resources for future generations.
The SDLP welcomes the decision to review arrangements for electoral registration and elections in Northern Ireland. In the past, electoral fraud has been widespread and in some areas it has skewed or affected election results. Proper regulation of the electoral process is crucial to ensure that as many as possible of those eligible to vote are registered, that elections are fair and that the democratic will of the people is reflected as accurately as possible. More than 91 per cent. of those eligible should be registered; I should like the figure to be 97, 98, 99 or even 100 per cent.
In the past, my party has campaigned vigorously for measures to combat electoral fraud and we welcomed the Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Act 2002. We argued that any measure to target fraud must be carefully monitored to ensure that the citizen's right to vote and the need to guard against fraud were upheld. The three elections since the introduction of the Act were cleaner and fairer than those held previously. The requirement for individual registration, with personal identifiers, has significantly tightened the electoral register and closed down the fraud that had been ongoing over many elections.
We welcome the high level of public support for measures to combat electoral fraud. According to recent research, 72 per cent. of people endorsed the changes. However, the SDLP believes that although the proposal to allow some individuals to be registered anonymously because of concerns for their safety is sensible, it should be monitored closely. The Order in Council that will define criteria for qualification for anonymous registration needs to be strict to ensure that it is not open to abuse. The criteria must be robustly applied, so that the process protects only those who are genuinely vulnerable.
Although public support for clearer, cleaner and fairer electoral registration is high, the requirement for people to register annually has led to a decrease in the number of people registering; as I said earlier, research indicates that only 91 per cent. of eligible people make it on to the register. Although we believe that individual registration should continue on the current basis, using identifiers, as the strongest safeguard against fraud, annual registration is not required and we support its relaxation.
The carry forward of people already on the 2004 register was extremely useful, and allowed many people to vote in elections in 2005 who would otherwise have been denied a vote. It was a sensible move that encouraged significantly higher electoral participation.
Withdrawing the annual canvass should enable the electoral office to focus better on groups that tend not to register, especially people living in disadvantaged areas and young people, as well as people who have difficulty in completing forms—of whom there are many more than we realise. That is where resources are needed and can best be put to good use to ensure maximum
13 Mar 2006 : Column 1216
participation. In the context of the abolition of the annual canvass, the necessary resources must be delivered and allocated to registration.
I am a little worried by the suggestion that a blanket canvass be carried out every 10 years. It should be held every three or four years, or there should be a rotational canvass that covered different areas every year. I am worried that relaxing the requirement would mean a reduction in district or regional electoral offices.
I welcome the proposal for greater data sharing between the chief electoral office and other Departments and public sector bodies. That enhanced sharing of information will ensure greater accuracy and will help in identifying correct addresses and responding quickly. I welcome the proposal for easier registration before an election, but I am concerned that 11 days before polling would not give the electoral office enough time to verify applications properly and could lead to a degree of fraud. A slightly longer period—perhaps 18 days—might be more realistic and responsible, to ensure that only those people genuinely entitled to a vote received one.
I want to address political funding, about which my hon. Friend the Member for South Down (Mr. McGrady) put some well-made points. There is no suggestion that there is a grand orchestrated plan for intimidation. For example, a donation may be demanded of a decent honest person in the public eye—of whom there are many in my constituency—such as a publican, the owner of a small building firm or a small business man or woman; they are not subject to direct intimidation, but a parallel donation can sometimes be demanded for a paramilitary organisation, with the suggestion that it be treated as a business investment. However, if they do not make the donation, their building site or bar can be wrecked or the business can be interfered with or undermined in some way.
My colleagues and I are making a genuine plea for sensitivity about that issue. Our party is the most vulnerable. We have fought and stood our ground for 30 years for sanity, democracy, peace and progress in Northern Ireland. We are extremely vulnerable. We do not want those who stand alongside us in support of democracy to be subjected to threats. We have no objection to lists if they are treated as confidential, but their publication is extremely dangerous and exposes people.
The Chairman of the Select Committee is fully aware of the implications of the investigation that the Committee is undertaking at present. It is not a great leap from the organised crime that we are talking about in the Select Committee to organised pressure and threat in respect of elections.
I thank the House for the opportunity to speak and urge Members to take the electoral and fund-raising provisions seriously. I should like an undertaking that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Belfast, North said, we reconsider the provisions in 2007 or 2010 to ensure that people who want to support democracy and donate to a democratic party are allowed to do so without fear of intimidation.
7.57 pm
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |