Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1-19)
RT HON
PETER HAIN
MP, MR NICK
PERRY AND
MR ROBERT
HANNIGAN
10 MAY 2006
Q1 Chairman: Could I call the meeting
to order and could I welcome you, Secretary of State, to this
further witness session. We are grateful to you for coming. After
the events of last week, we are particularly delighted to see
you, and could I say how glad I am personally, and I think I speak
for most members of the Committee in saying this, that at this
crucial time in Northern Ireland's development there has not been
a change in your office, that you have kept your head when all
of those around you were losing theirs. You are very welcome.
Mr Hain: Thank you. Could I say
how delighted I am to stay in the job. I know this will not make
the questions to me now any less hard, but I am really pleased.
Q2 Chairman: Good. A very warm welcome
to Mr Perry and Mr Hannigan as well. Obviously it is entirely
up to you, Secretary of State, how and when you call in your officials.
We do stand at a very critical juncture in Northern Ireland's
history. How optimistic are you that the talks that are going
to begin, we hope on Monday, will result in success on or before
24 November?
Mr Hain: I am optimistic. You
mentioned November 24. That is a real deadline and we might want
to explore that later on. Why am I optimistic? Because I do think,
on the side of unionism, the DUP leadership recently visited Washington
and Killarney and made important statements, and the very act
of those visits, I think, indicated a new atmosphere. They have
also acknowledged in the House itself during the recent legislation
that there have been significant historic moves by the Provisional
IRA in terms of decommissioning and inter-paramilitary activity
and we are on the way to completely ending criminality, as identified
by the Independent Monitoring Commission report, and the DUP has
also indicated its willingness and its desire to make this particular
process that we have now initiated, which will open up on Monday
with the new assembly beginning on Monday, work. I think there
are other brief signs of encouragement. The Loyal Orders have
for the very first time met myself as Secretary of State, and
not just myself, I do not think they have ever met any Secretary
of State before. They also met the leadership of the SDLP and
they talked to nationalist resident groups in Belfast. I think
there is also a new understanding that the Parades Commission
is working in a different way to try and build consent rather
than simply to deliver judicial judgments from on high. On the
Republican/Nationalist side, obviously the IRA statement last
July was historic, as was the decommissioning which followed it.
The success of IMC reports, the most recent one, has indicated
a direction of travel which is positive, and the statement by
the IRA over Easter, in which it said that it had "no responsibility
for the tiny number of former republicans who have embraced criminal
activity. They are doing it for self gain. We repudiate this activity
and denounce those involved and the IRA remains committed to the
peace process", was very positive, as was the denunciation
by Martin McGuinness of the vodka heist in the Republic. Martin
McGuinness, again, saying that those responsible, if I could summarise
it, in the case of the Tohill absconders, the people who absconded
when they were prosecuted, should return and face justice. And
there is reassertion of the commitment to power sharing; so I
think there are a variety of factors which are positive, and I
am encouraged by those.
Q3 Chairman: There are, of course,
other factors that are less positive. We are conscious, conducting
our inquiry into organised crime (which I know is not a subject
for this afternoon's session), having just come back from Northern
Ireland—we were in South Armagh on Monday—that whilst,
of course, there has been, without any doubt, considerable progress,
there is quite a long way to go, and you would accept that?
Mr Hain: Indeed.
Q4 Chairman: Whether the number involved
in organised crime is tiny or not is something that would, I think,
be questioned by quite a number of those who have given evidence
either publicly or privately to us. Without digressing into detail,
there is still quite a credibility gap as far as the law-abiding,
fully constitutional, fully democratic politicians are concerned,
and there is a perception, Secretary of State—I do not put
it any higher than that—that there has been a tendency on
the part of government to lean over backwards to assist those
whose embracing of the democratic process is not the same as that
of the Northern Ireland parties represented around this table
today. What would you say to that?
Mr Hain: I would not accept that
we are bending over backwards for anybody. If you look at the
recent activities by the Assets Recovery Agency, including its
raid on a border farm, and if you look at all of its activity
recently, as well as the activity of the police in arrests, whether
it is on the Northern Bank robbery or on other matters, I think
you see a relentless clamping down on criminality by paramilitaries
under whatever label they claim to act or whatever label they
attach to themselves, including, of course, UDA members as well.
I do agree that there is still a gap to be filled in terms of
the Rule of Law and policing consents, a consent for policing
in South Armagh. I was in South Armagh myself in late December,
including in Crossmaglen, and there is still some way to go, but
the travel is in the right direction. The police are now policing
in areas of South Armagh that they have not policed in for generations.
They are doing so without Army support. I know there is some anxiety
about that—there would be if you are walking down a road
which you have never done before without armed soldiers alongside
you—but they are doing so safely and are not having a problem,
by and large, and, when I have talked to the local commander,
Bobby Hunniford, he has been confident that they can do this in
a way that is successful; but I do agree with you that, in particular,
Sinn Fein have to start co-operating with the police, and it is
my view that those communities, themselves communities which you
could describe as Republican communities, will in the end require
this: because as the IRA's, as it were, paramilitary hold on these
communities is drawn back and released, then you get the problems
of normalisation, some of the bad problems of normalisation. Some
say there is a problem of drunken youths in some of these communities
now on a Saturday night where there was not before, and things
like that, so we need to deal with those.
Q5 Chairman: I want to bring my colleagues
in, but let me ask you one final question, for the time being
at any rate. You invited this question in your comments when you
talked about the deadline. We have now legislated for a deadline
of 24 November for the election of the First and deputy First
Ministers. Can you envisage any circumstances at all where you
might come to Parliament and ask for an amendment to that legislation?
Mr Hain: No. I have said that
there will be provision, and I have already put in a bid for provision,
for an emergency bill to deal with the strands amendments that
have followed the review of the Good Friday Agreement and the
negotiations which took place in 2004, and everybody understands,
whether they agree or not, that some of these technical changes
will be needed in order to close the deal. There will be a need
for an emergency bill, and if the deal is in sight by November
24, a bill of that kind will need to be taken through Parliament
at a very quick rate. I was not able, within the bill that received
royal assent on Monday night, to get agreement on a cross-party
basis (and, indeed, elsewhere) to put an Order in Council provision
to make the necessary technical amendments. I regret that, but
I understand it as well—that just imposes a logistical nightmare
in November—but, no, the answer is there is no proposal
to change the November 24 date, and there will not be. It is for
real, and, as I have said before, if people expect us to blink
first, they will be disappointed, and I will be disappointed if
anybody approached that timeframe other than knowing that it is
set in statute and the thing is closed down at midnight on November
24, which I do want if the parties cannot produce the agreement
necessary.
Q6 Dr McDonnell: On that issue, although
I appreciate your frankness and your desperateness as to 24 November,
surely the legislation that we are operating to provides for the
dissolution of the Regional Assembly of November 2003 with a view
to re-election to take place at any time between November and
May 2008. Does that not allow the opportunity to flip the current
Assembly out?
Mr Hain: Clearly the Assembly,
as it is defined under this particular Act that received royal
assent on Monday night, comes to an end in November. The existing
legislation still applies, obviously, but I have made absolutely
clear, and this not to threaten anybody or to act in a high-handed
fashion, that we cannot continue a process which is an end in
itself where MLAs continue to draw their average of £85,000
salaries and allowances for not sitting in the Assembly. So all
that will end and in the late summer I will be reminding MLAs
of their good employer responsibilities—they employ staff;
I think there are around about 216 staff employed in advice centres
and constituency offices—that that employment will come
to an end if they do not think an agreement is possible by 24
November, and they will need to notify landlords about rent arrangements
and things like that. I say that, not that I want that to happen
but to underline that it is for real. Therefore, to return to
your question, the existing legislative requirements and the legislative
basis for the Assembly remains as it was before this particular
legislation came into force, and the Assembly opens up in that
form on Monday, but I am not going to be beating a path to anybody's
door to try and drag them back into a process again.
Q7 Dr McDonnell: Going back to the
Prime Ministers in Armagh, they indicated that detailed work was
beginning to prepare for things not working by 24 November and
the deadline not being met, and the indications were that detailed
work would begin on north-south issues. What is entailed there?
What is the step-change that was mentioned at that stage? What
was that about?
Mr Hain: First of all, let me
make it clear what it is not. It is not about joint authority
with the Republic in the south, it is not about joint government
or anything like that—I would not support that—but,
something more important, it would actually be an infringement
and a violation of the Good Friday Agreement which was endorsed
in the Referendum; so we are not going there. What we will do
is just take forward the sort of things that we have in mind in
any case: the North-West Gateway initiative, which is a step-change
from both governments to tackling development needs in the North-West
of the island of Ireland; then there is our renewable energy strategy
where we are trying to identify how we can co-operate on off-shore
wind farms; infrastructure and spatial planning—there is
a whole new approach there. Those are the practical examples of
what we will do, and, of course, what we will also do, because
we will be obliged to do that, is to take forward and drive forward
the programme of reform as Direct Rule Ministers to which we are
committed, but it will be done with greater energy and determination,
because any tendency to take the foot off the accelerator in the
anticipation that this is work that the Assembly should do, which
it is, the foot will be put back on the accelerator after midnight
on 24 November.
Dr McDonnell: Chairman, can I apologise
to yourself and the Secretary of State. I may have to leave early.
Chairman: Of course.
Q8 Mr Campbell: I want to ask you
a question about the deadline, but before I do, you referred in
your introductory remarks to improving the situation in Northern
Ireland. I think there is widespread opinion that the security
situation is improving, as you have alluded to, particularly in
relation to the early part of the troubles. There is also widespread
support for what may be regarded as easily reversible security-based
decisions in the context of an improving security environment,
but you surely would not regard today's decision by the Ministry
of Defence to close the Army bases and leave 1,100 civilians unemployed
as an easily reversible security-based decision, would you?
Mr Hain: I realise there are employment
consequences, and I regret those, but these were decisions which
were driven by the military—they simply do not have a use
any more for these bases—and that has also been done in
conjunction with the Chief Constable. As you would expect, and
we are absolutely meticulous about this, I would not agree to
any of these changes if they were not put up to me by the General
Officer Commanding, as they were, if they did not have the support
of the Chief Constable; so it is his judgment as to what he needs
to maintain security in Northern Ireland. I do not see those base
decisions as being reversible, no, but they are not really a matter
for me, they are a matter for the Ministry of Defence, and, in
particular, for the GOC, who feels that, frankly, if he did not
close them, he would be hauled before the House in another committee,
probably the Public Accounts Committee, having to explain the
waste of tax-payers money; but on the people made unemployed,
we are committed to working with the unions to seek to identify
decent packages for them.
Q9 Mr Campbell: I appreciate your
response, Secretary of State. The MoD may well have to answer
in terms of the continuing improvement of the situation, but they
may also have to answer if, for some reason, there was a reversal
of the improvement and we had the bases closed, but perhaps we
will come back to that. On the issue of those who are unemployed,
do I take it that every facility will be offered and made available
to the 1100 civilians who will be made unemployed to try and get
them retraining in alternative employment?
Mr Hain: Indeed, and that is already
being put in train. Any civil servants made redundant are entitled
to a generous compensation package under the normal redundancy
entitlements, and the MoD are also in correspondence with the
unions on a possible additional package for MoD civilian staff.
Announcements on this will be made in due course.
Q10 Mr Campbell: On the deadline
of 24 November, you said you were optimistic, and you have given
your reasons for being optimistic. There are those who are not
quite as optimistic as you are, but, if you are optimistic and
if you are saying that the deadline is set in statute, why are
you proceeding with all the legislative proposals that are causing
so much angst in Northern Ireland, like the water charges; the
RPA Seven-Council Model and education changes? If you are so confident
that movement is going to be made by then, why proceed in advance
of that date?
Mr Hain: If we take water charges,
for example, water charges which do not apply in Northern Ireland,
I know there is an argument from some that they are there somehow,
but they apply in Great Britain. My constituents, for example,
and, Chairman, your constituents have to pay water charges and
the constituents of members around the room. If we do not do this,
then a huge big funding gap opens up in two respects: (1) water
charges will, over the course of three years when they are phased
in from next April release around £200 million to spend on
hospitals, schools and skills, and whatever else you want to do,
so that money will not be available, and that is factored into
the budget that we have already announced for next year; (2) the
second thing that will not be available is the money to finance
the desperately needed, as I am sure you will agree, extra investment
in the sewage system, in the water system, to make sure our water
in Northern Ireland is as clean as in the rest of the UK and that
the sewage system, which is in a pretty bad way, meets modern
standards. The reason I am doing it is because I think it is absolutely
necessary and, unless we got restoration of the institutions before
the actual orders went through, and even if we did, there would
still be an issue to be addressed by the Assembly, and one of
its early-on decisions would be how to fill that funding gap,
not just for next year but for the years afterwards. That is my
response on water, but I am happy, and I would hope that we can
discuss with all the parties, ideally in the Assembly, some of
the detail, for example, low-income households and the protection
for them and that kind of thing.
Chairman: What about your response? I
think Mr Banks wants to come in on the RPA.
Q11 Gordon Banks: On the understanding
that the Assembly gets up and running, what role do you see the
Assembly playing in, say, the education, the water and the council
proposals that have been set in train?
Mr Hain: I have indicated the
important role that I think should be played on the water, not
so much on the principle, because, frankly, and I hope this will
not be taken wrongly, a lot of people say to me privately that
they are pleased that I have taken this decision, taken the flak
for it, rather than it being an immediately tough decision on
the plate of the new Assembly in respect of water. On the review
of public administration, in particular the reduction of the number
of councils from 26 to seven, the order has already gone through
Parliament and gone through the Privy Council, which gives a remit
to the Boundary Commission to draw up new boundaries for the seven
councils. That figure was not arrived at for political reasons,
it was arrived at because of the independent assessment; it has
had wide support from the business community, from the voluntary
sector, and so on.
Q12 Chairman: Not from the political.
Mr Hain: Not from the political
parties, I accept that. One party, Sinn Fein, came to support
that number very late in the day, but, frankly, that played no
role in our decision. It was done for objective reasons: you have
got seven councils that have got a strong revenue base, do not
need to be cross-subsidised, you can have co-terminosity with
policing and health, a unique thing compared with anywhere else
in the United Kingdom, we can all see the advantages of joined
up government in terms of social services, and so on, and policing
and health at a local level. I think it makes a great deal of
sense, but there would still be a mountain of work for the Assembly,
a restored Assembly especially, to address, and I do remind everybody
that if the Assembly was stalled next week or the week afterwards,
none of the stuff would have gone through beyond the remit to
the Boundary Commission, and nothing would have gone through on
water and nothing would have gone through on education or anywhere
else. However, in respect of the RPA there are still big issues
to be addressed: the internal governance, the powers that have
been devolved, planning and things like that, what should be the
timeframe for housing if at all, given the history of housing;
it is very controversial if you did decide to devolve it. We have
got no timeframe in mind. It could not happen, I do not think,
for a very long time, but the Assembly may take a view on that.
I think there is a lot of work to do, as there is on education,
which I am happy to support.
Q13 Chairman: You are saying to the
Assembly you can have any colour car, but it has got to be a Ford.
That is, in effect, what you are saying to them. You are not allowing
the Assembly to determine the future structure of local government
within Northern Ireland. Even though, in your estimation, there
is a very good chance that the Assembly will be up and running
by 24 November, and you are optimistic about that, you are still
not going to let them have a real say on the principle.
Mr Hain: Chairman, I do not agree
with that. If restoration occurred this summer, pretty well all
of these things would not have been decided. That is my answer
to that. What I am not willing to do, and I think I have said
that across the floor in the debate on the emergency bill, is
delay decisions which I think are absolutely necessary when there
is no certainty, despite my optimism, that we will ever get restoration.
It may be that the parties chose not to, chose to walk away. I
think these things need to go through and they have big support,
all of them, including the education reform. But even if the education
reform went through this Parliament as an Order in Council in
the summer, that is to say abolishing the 11-plus and establishing
the new 14-19 curriculum—I do not think there is a lot of
argument over the latter, but there is of controversy over the
former—there is then a huge agenda to decide how we preserve
the excellence of the grammar school system, which I have no desire
to interfere with; they have got a fantastic record. There are
actually ceasing to be grammars increasingly, because falling
rolls have meant they have opened up their intake beyond those
who have passed the 11-plus, so there is an issue there. There
is a whole question to be decided, which could be decided by the
Assembly and, even if restoration takes place on 24 November,
will still be decided by the Assembly in terms of pupil profiles,
the new admissions arrangements, all those sort of things which
are critical to the regime you have in place of a couple of hours
exam deciding a child's future.
Q14 Lady Hermon: I am delighted to
see you here, Secretary of State. I had the great pleasure of
sitting on the Standing Committee for the local government Boundaries
Commission Order in Northern Ireland (I think it was 18 April).
Would you care to confirm for the record and for accuracy that
it does require a resolution of the Assembly: if the Assembly
were to differ from the recommendation of the local Boundary Commission,
that seven super councils is not set in concrete but does require,
under that order, a resolution of the Assembly?
Mr Hain: I think what happens—and
I will have to check this, and I may seek inspiration from behind,
but if I am wrong about this I will write to you, Chairman—is
the Boundary Commission on the timetable would, if restoration
occurs before November 24 or on 24 November, report to the Assembly.
The Assembly will obviously have to receive the report and decide
to proceed with the objective of the new councils being in place
for the elections in May 2009. I do not think there is a precedent
for overturning a wholesale recommendation of a Boundary Commission,
so we will have to cross that bridge when we come to it.
Q15 Lady Hermon: If it is any consolation
to you, Secretary of State, the minister who was replying to that
debate did indicate that she was not "100% certain whether
the resolution was cross community" or not, but there is
definitely a resolution of the Assembly in the order?
Mr Hain: I will take your word
for it.
Lady Hermon: I would be delighted to
receive your letter following this committee.
Q16 Gordon Banks: Whilst we are on
the issue of political development, the Northern Ireland Offences
Bill, Secretary of State, was withdrawn in January of this year.
Is it your understanding that there is a need to reintroduce some
legislation along these lines at some point in time in the future?
Mr Hain: No, I have no plans to
do that.
Chairman: That is slightly taking us
off the point, but it is good to have that on the record.
Q17 Sammy Wilson: I think that there
are totally confusing and contradictory messages coming from what
the Secretary of State has said to us today. On the one hand you
started off quite confident that devolution would be restored
by 24 November, on the other hand you are telling us that all
of the massive changes which are in the pipeline have to be progressed
with because he does not know if it will happen on 24 November.
On the one hand, and I use your own words, Secretary of State,
you have said that after 24 November the step-change would be
putting your foot back on the accelerator, while you have indicated
not one whit here today how you are going to lift your foot from
the accelerator in regard to the changes which are going through
at present or give a role for the Assembly in that. I want to
ask two questions. First of all, in the interim period, because
I do not think anyone expects the Assembly to be in full executive
mode from the very start anyway, what role is there for the Assembly?
Second, given the attitude which you have displayed here today,
are you not simply reinforcing the approach that Sinn Fein have
outlined only today, namely that they will have nothing to do
with the Assembly up until 24 November and, indeed, will not take
part and it is not worthwhile taking part? Are you not simply
reinforcing that behaviour on their part?
Mr Hain: No, on the contrary,
the business committee of the Assembly, and it has already had
a number of very constructive meetings, I think there is another
one tomorrow chaired by the presiding officer, the Speaker, can
decide to discuss education, or the RPA, or water charges or anything
it likes. In terms of education, I think, if I may say so, you
are exactly wrong, because there is a huge agenda, which will
not be decided and which I would be very happy to put off after
November 24 if there was any prospect of a positive stance on
reaching successful restoration by then. Take, for example, the
curriculum, I can go through the detail here: the entitlement
framework, the timing of implementation, the admissions arrangements
to post primary schools, the annual process by which parents express
preferences for schools, the use of the pupil profile, including
whether it could or should be seen by schools on the preference
list so that they can advise parents on suitability, the nature
and content of the menu of admissions criteria to be used by schools
that are oversubscribed. Those are just some examples of things
which I would be more than happy to be put into the Assembly,
because one of the things I feel about the abolition of the 11-plus,
and I respect the DUP's position and the UUP's position on this,
but there is strong feeling on the other side of the argument,
including from the professions, including from the Council for
Integrated Education and the two Nationalist and Republican parties
as well. This is a very divisive issue and it may be that the
particular order that we have in mind to take through is actually
best done so that consent can be built subsequently in the Assembly
on all these other things on exactly how the system would operate
without this divisive issue getting in the way.
Q18 Sammy Wilson: You have outlined
all the things that are still undecided. What part of the order
is so important that you feel you have got to push it through?
You have told us the bits that you say are going to be left. What
part of this order is so important that you have got to keep your
foot on the accelerator and push it through?
Mr Hain: First of all, the abolition
of the 11-plus, but it does not say what takes its place in detail.
That is what I have been saying is the prospect for the Assembly
and for negotiations and consultation. Second, the post-14 curriculum,
but I do not think there is a real argument about that. I certainly
have no representations from you about that or from any of the
critics of the abolition of the 11-plus decision. I think there
is a consensus around that, and I think it is essential because
you have got a big weakness in technical skills, vocational skills
and a big weakness in the bottom third. The bottom third in Northern
Ireland do worse by every measure compared with the rest of the
GB. We have a lower level of qualifications overall, a lower level
of people taking university degrees, a lower level of literacy
and numeracy rates, and we have got to get things up if we are
going to compete with the Chinas and Indias of this world.
Chairman: I want to move on, because
there is a lot of ground to cover, but Rosie Cooper, you wanted
to come in briefly on this section.
Rosie Cooper: No, I will wait.
Chairman: Could we move to David Anderson,
because the IMC and its reports are extremely important and you
have attached very great importance to them, understandably.
Q19 Mr Anderson: Obviously we all
took quite a lot of confidence from the report, but some concerns
have been raised during this investigation we have been doing
into organised crime and it is clear from the report that some
senior members of PIRA are still involved, albeit probably in
an independent way, in organised crime and in serious crime, and
the people we have spoken to and taken evidence from, in both
public and private, have reinforced that. Does that not in some
way reduce the confidence you have got in the activities that
they are involved in?
Mr Hain: I quote from paragraph
2.16 of the IMC report. It says, "We found signs that PIRA
continues to seek to stop criminal activity by its members and
to prevent them from engaging in it. We believe that some of the
senior PIRA members may be playing a key role in this." It
also says, "That said, there are indications that some members,
including some senior ones, as distinct from the organisation
itself, are still involved in crime and that the increasing proportions
of the proceeds may now be going to individuals rather than to
the organisation." There is an issue there and we need to
tackle it, but I do not think that it is a reason for saying that
we do not recognise the huge momentous change that there has been
for the direction of travel of Republicans, provisionals that
is, in getting rid of crime, in rooting it out and, from an organisation
or leadership level, actually putting a stop to it.
|
