|
UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 621 House of COMMONS MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE NORTHERN IRELAND AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
POLITICAL AND SECURITY DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTHERN IRELAND
Wednesday 26 October 2005 RT HON PETER HAIN MP, MR J PHILLIPS and MR N PERRY Evidence heard in Public Questions 1-92
USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT
Oral Evidence Taken before the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee on Wednesday 26 October 2005 Members present Sir Patrick Cormack, in the Chair Mr David Anderson Gordon Banks Mr Gregory Campbell Rosie Cooper Mr Christopher Fraser Mr John Grogan Mr Stephen Hepburn Lady Hermon Meg Hillier Dr Alasdair McDonnell Sammy Wilson ________________ Memorandum submitted by Northern Ireland Office
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Rt Hon Peter Hain, a Member of the House, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr Jonathan Phillips, Political Director, Northern Ireland Office (NIO) and Mr Nick Perry, Senior Director of Policing and Security, Northern Ireland Office, examined. Q1 Chairman: May I welcome you most warmly, Secretary of State, together with your team. This is the first formal public meeting of the new Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. We have already visited Northern Ireland. We are very grateful to you and your officials for the help which has been given with those visits. However, one of the prime duties of the Committee is to hold the Government to account and to ask you and your fellow ministers from time to time to come before us and ask questions. Today we are going to be dealing with the political and security situation in Northern Ireland and we are very grateful for the memo which you submitted yesterday; thank you very, very much for that. We can announce that the first major inquiry of the Committee will be into the nature of organised crime in Northern Ireland. We thought you would like to know that. Before we move on, would you like to introduce your team? Mr Hain: Thank you. First of all, may I thank you for inviting me to address the Committee and rather than making an opening statement, I have preferred to put in a memorandum to leave more time for you to grill me. My political director, soon to be permanent secretary, is Jonathan Phillips and Nick Perry is in charge of security; two senior officials. Chairman: Gentlemen, you are both very welcome. Yesterday you did make an announcement, not on this particular subject but on rather an important one and one member of the Committee would like to start by asking you a couple of questions on that budget announcement. I am sure you are more than adequately prepared to answer it. Q2 Sammy Wilson: The budget announcement yesterday was obviously a major event in Northern Ireland and a massive impact on people within Northern Ireland, especially given the fact that the rate increase which you announced was well over the rate of inflation, was well above the 8% plus inflation which the old Northern Ireland Assembly had indicated would take place on a year to year basis, yet this announcement did not take place in the House. There could probably have been an opportunity in about two weeks when it could have come to the Grand Committee, where there could have been an opportunity to ask questions about it. Why was the announcement made in the way it was, especially given the significance to people in Northern Ireland and to the economy in Northern Ireland? Mr Hain: As the honourable Member for East Antrim knows, the tradition in the last few years since the Assembly has been suspended is for the announcement to be made by the Finance Minister in Northern Ireland in exactly the same way that I did yesterday, rather than to do it in the form of a Parliamentary Statement. We have actually put copies in the Vote Office and in the Library. With hindsight, I think it would have shown better courtesy to the House to have notified party leaders and placed it in the Library and the Vote Office yesterday and I apologise for that. It is certainly undoubtedly a very important statement and it announces huge big investment increases for Northern Ireland: £450 million going into health in additional money in the next couple of years, £50 million more than the previous draft budget. This is of course a draft budget and when the final budget is announced that will obviously have to be laid before the House. It is £450 million of new health spending, £100 million in education, £20 million greater than previously budgeted for. In terms of the rates increase, which I agree is above the norm, it is to fund three new ring-fenced funds: one for childcare, extending childcare on a massive scale, both enabling parents to work and enabling children to get quality before- and after-school care; secondly, investment in skills and science, crucial for Northern Ireland's competitiveness; thirdly, investment in renewable environmentally friendly energy. When you look at the rates increase you see two things: first of all it has gone to fund essential priorities to take Northern Ireland forward. Secondly, we are dealing with a situation where the average Northern Ireland household rates and water total is £546; in England and Wales it is £1,275. A modest increase of one pound per week, admittedly on a high percentage, is a way of Northern Ireland paying its own way in a way that English council taxpayers and taxpayers will recognise, but also, crucially, doing things we cannot do otherwise. If you take away that money, we cannot invest in childcare, cannot invest in science and skills and cannot do the work necessary to have clean energy in Northern Ireland. Q3 Sammy Wilson: You make the comparisons between Northern Ireland and other parts of the United Kingdom. You do not recognise there of course that first of all average incomes are lower in Northern Ireland and, secondly, that in Northern Ireland we do suffer from higher costs in terms of energy et cetera and that does have to be borne in mind. Given that this was a radical departure from the previous policy, was any equality impact assessment done as to how this is likely to affect particular groups, especially those vulnerable groups under section 75? Mr Hain: As you know, really vulnerable groups, those on the lowest incomes, do not pay this; they get a benefit which actually means they do not pay it. Secondly, when you look even at those on average incomes, which should properly concern the honourable Member as a locally elected representative, you are talking about one pound a week. I think most people will say, particularly given the imbalance between the £500-odd and £1,200-odd between Northern Ireland and Great Britain ... I am not saying that the Government's intention is to equalise that figure, partly for the reasons you have mentioned, but I am saying that a fairer contribution should be paid actually to get the quality of public services which are needed in Northern Ireland, including these priorities which we could not otherwise have done on the old budget. Q4 Sammy Wilson: How much is it expected that we will raise by the above-inflation increase? Mr Hain: It is around £38 million and that will go significantly to help fund big increases, though not on its own: £25 million in each of the next two years on childcare, £15 million and then £20 million on tackling youth unemployment and skills training and £5 million next year, £10 million the year after alongside £10 million and £25 million capital investment on research and development on renewable energy. There is a choice. If there were a devolved administration, which I hope there will be, and the honourable Member may well be able to take a seat on it, then the decisions themselves could be made by that devolved administration. The sooner the parties, including the DUP, negotiate with their fellow parties and make these decisions themselves rather than relying on me and my ministerial team to take them, the better. Q5 Sammy Wilson: Is this a kind of stick to beat us back into Stormont? Mr Hain: No, it is not: it is doing what is needed for Northern Ireland. I would not have thought any elected representative would quarrel with any of those priorities. They were things not being done in Northern Ireland; they are being done in Great Britain. I think Northern Ireland should be world class as well. Chairman: Thank you very much for that and thank you for your apology and recognising that the announcement could perhaps have been made slightly more sensitively. Q6 Lady Hermon: Secretary of State, delighted to see you here today along with your colleagues. May I invite you to break with the tradition of past secretaries of state and actually give a commitment today that you will come and be questioned at length by the Northern Ireland Grand Committee when the rates proposals are actually before the Northern Ireland Grand Committee in about two weeks' time? Mr Hain: I am afraid that I cannot give you that commitment because I do not know what the diary is and the precedent has been that the ministers do that. I have some very able ministers who will be more than able to field even the most adversarial questions; not that the honourable Member ever puts adversarial questions. She puts very firm and forceful ones, as she is entitled to do. Q7 Dr McDonnell: Did you give any consideration to adjusting corporation tax in terms of industrial development and could you in the future perhaps do something like that? Mr Hain: No, I did not because that is not within my remit. The tax level is set on a UK basis. Chairman: We are going to move on now to the subject of your memo, for which again many thanks. I appreciate you doing it this way rather than making a lengthy opening statement. We have all read it and colleagues on both sides of the Committee want to ask questions, starting with Lady Hermon. Q8 Lady Hermon: May I direct your attention to the role and functions of the Independent Monitoring Commission? May I ask what you see as the main purpose of the IMC? Mr Hain: I believe that its main purpose should be to verify whether, in the case of the IRA, the promises made on 28 July, which were historic, to close down its paramilitary and criminal activity, are actually being implemented on the ground. We had an important report last week and I think we shall have an even more significant one in January when it has had a chance to assess not just the first four weeks following 28 July, but the first five or six months. Q9 Lady Hermon: May I kindly and gently remind the Secretary of State that when the legislation was introduced in September of 2003 the purpose of the Commission was to build confidence on all sides because confidence and trust are essential for politics to work in Northern Ireland? That being the case, could the Secretary of State just explain to the Committee what justification there has been for cherry-picking through the recommendations of the IMC, in particular when the IMC recommended after the Northern Bank robbery that the Sinn Fein allowance should be suspended for at least 12 months. They recommended a financial penalty against the PUP. Could the Secretary of State just explain the justification for cherry-picking recommendations of the IMC? Mr Hain: As the honourable Member knows, when the IMC reported on the Northern Bank robbery and the McCartney murder, those terrible events, and recommended that we suspend Sinn Fein's allowance, we did and in fact I moved the motion in my previous role as Leader of the House. What has happened since is not a question of cherry-picking. As Secretary of State I have to consider the recommendations they make and they did not make a recommendation in this case; they were silent on the question of whether Sinn Fein's allowances should be maintained in suspension or reinstituted; they were silent on that matter. I shall come to the PUP in a moment, the Progressive Unionist Party. I think that any fair-minded person would say, notwithstanding the importance of verifying whether the activity has been closed down, that the two events in the summer, 28 July, everybody agrees that the unconditionality of that statement made by the IRA was a clear commitment to ending paramilitary and criminal activity and the armed campaign, plus the decommissioning which General de Chastelaine announced on 26 September, were events of an historic substance which had never occurred before. Of course Westminster allowances will be a matter for the House not a matter for me, though I will obviously put my case it will be a matter for the House, and I felt it was right to announce last week my recommendation that the allowances be reinstated. Q10 Chairman: As it is a matter for the House, will it be determined therefore on a free vote as far as the Government are concerned. Mr Hain: Indeed; as it was last time. Q11 Sammy Wilson: You talked about the silence of the IMC in its latest report about certain aspects of what the IRA are up to. May I refer you to a number of paragraphs? Paragraph 3.14 says that there are indications that the organisation's intelligence function remains active though its folks may be becoming more political - whatever that means. The IRA did organise protests during the summer which led to some disorder and, as in the past, made preparations for weapons to be available. On the decommissioning of weapons, the IMC report indicates that major progress has been made in the direction spelled out some months before. However, it is too early to draw firm conclusions. That is paragraphs 6.3 and 6.4. The IMC report was not silent, in fact if anything the IMC report pointed very firmly to the conclusion that allowances should not be restored and yet you restored those; just as you ignored the views of the Chief Constable, who gave you a strong case for putting Sean Kelly in jail and keeping him there, yet you released him against the evidence of the police. Mr Hain: These are separate issues, but let us take them one by one. I put Sean Kelly in prison on the recommendation of the Chief Constable and then, with the IRA statement due the following day and having seen that statement and knowing that Sean Kelly was signed up to it, I decided that it was right to release him. It was a difficult decision. I was criticised for arresting him, as a prisoner out on licence who was clearly in breach of his licence, on the recommendation of the police and the evidence supplied to me. I was strongly attacked for that. I was then attacked for releasing him again when I thought the conditions had changed radically following that IRA statement. I do understand the resentment and the criticism within the Unionist community which you are quite properly echoing. On the question of the allowances, the IMC report did not make any recommendations on the allowances. It did also report that it is too early to make more than a rather limited assessment of its effect, though the initial signs are encouraging. He did not quote that part of the statement in paragraph 7.2. The report also said that it was a very significant provisional IRA statement of 28 July and decommissioning reported on 26 September. It also made it clear that, in terms of incidents, while there are plenty of reports of disturbing incidents by Loyalist paramilitary groups and indeed dissident Republicans, virtually nothing is reported in the case of the IRA. That is not to say that we can therefore take this report as an invitation to say everything is rosy in the garden; I am not saying that. I am saying that historic progress has been made. Q12 Chairman: You have said on a number of occasions that the really significant report is the one you expect in January. Could it not therefore be said that you have acted perhaps a little prematurely and precipitately in making this announcement last week in advance of that January statement? Mr Hain: It could be said and no doubt will and in fact I think that is just what Peter said and I look forward to seeing what your Committee reports on this. I think it was right for me to make a political judgment to say so far so good. The allowance is reinstated in the case of the Assembly from 1 November and in the case of Westminster that is a matter for the House to decide. It was right to do that to show progress has been made which by anybody's standards is historic even though we need to have a proper independent verification which will be reported by the IMC in January. Q13 Rosie Cooper: You have largely answered part of the question I was about to ask about the reinstatement of the allowances and the fact that you are going to ask Parliament to consider Sinn Fein's MPs' allowances. I note from the memorandum which you supplied that following recent violent scenes in Northern Ireland you decided not to impose a financial penalty on the PUP at this time. Could you say more on the thinking about how that has happened and whether you have had any discussions with other political parties on the issue and with whom? Mr Hain: One of the joys of this post is that everybody attacks whatever you do from both sides and I do not quarrel with that; it is a great job. Q14 Chairman: Good preparation for the highest office. Mr Hain: I am very happy doing what I am frankly. In terms of the Progressive Unionist Party - and I am glad my honourable Friend has asked the question - this is again a very difficult decision to take. The suspension of the PUP's allowances had lapsed in the spring - actually during the General Election campaign. When I came in I had a decision to make on the back of an IMC report due into Loyalist violence as to whether I re-imposed the ban. Worrying signs were starting to build up of the feud between the Ulster Volunteer Force and the Loyalist Volunteer Force. Obviously the Progressive Unionist Party has been linked to the UVF. Then over the summer we had this grisly feud of murders. It was quite clear to me that the Progressive Party Leader, David Irvine, was doing all he could, often without much effect because of lack of influence, to try to stop these murders. It was also clear to me, once the IMC report had been published into that Loyalist feud, that around the Whiterock riots, where Loyalist paramilitaries tried to murder members of the Police Service of Northern Ireland in a quite venomous and orchestrated way, David Irvine was doing his best to try to stop that happening. I thought that I could just follow the recommendation of the IMC and close him down, but I actually thought it was quite important to keep somebody politically linked to Loyalist groups to try to keep the pressure on them to follow the IRA and to end their vicious feud, end their paramilitary activity and decommission. I still think that is the right decision. I am sorry for the long answer, but may I also say finally on this that others were working in the field trying to influence the groups including official representatives, not of my office, and their advice was for us to hold off and let them see whether they could actually achieve a closedown of this feuding and violence. Q15 Lady Hermon: How has the IMC responded to the fact that you have chosen to follow some of the recommendations? Have they felt their work has been undermined by your decisions? Mr Hain: I have not had any formal response from the IMC. I shall keep in touch with IMC members and in due course would hope to meet them to discuss their own assessment in private and how they see things going. Q16 Chairman: Have you not done that yet? Mr Hain: The report was only published last week. Q17 Chairman: I appreciate that. Mr Hain: I only received it a few days before and there is usually a period of assessment of all its recommendations. It has made many others which we still have to consider and obviously I shall want to see them as soon as I can. I do see them quite regularly and indeed I met the chairman Lord Alderdice only a few weeks ago. Q18 Chairman: How regular are your meetings with them? Mr Hain: As regular as they need to be. Whenever they need to see me, my door is open and we are in regular touch with the secretariat. I meet them periodically as well. May I add one other point on this? I receive regular information about what is going on and intelligence reports and others, much the same kind of reports that the IMC receive when they are making their assessments. Q19 Mr Campbell: In your memorandum to the Committee, paragraph 5, you say that you are intending to do all you can to facilitate progress towards restoration of the institutions, but you then go on to say you "will further implement those aspects of the Belfast Agreement where work is incomplete or ongoing". I would imagine you would have been in the job long enough to know that the bulk of the Unionist community is totally opposed to the Belfast Agreement. That hardly sounds like the words of a facilitator to me. Mr Hain: I am not sure to which aspect the honourable Member is referring. Of course I understand that, particularly in the case of the Democratic Unionist Party which opposes the Belfast Agreement, and I respect it. In fact the majority of Unionists voted for it in the referendum and the Ulster Unionist Party backed it, whatever disillusion has happened subsequently with the failure by the IRA until recently to deliver on what it promised and other factors. I think that the fundamental architecture of that agreement, albeit that it needs updating and some account taken of the changes since and the views, including from the DUP, which were expressed in the latter part of last year, the fundamentals of North/South cooperation, East/West cooperation, of the commitment to power sharing and devolved government and an end to violence and paramilitary activity, would have all those fundamentals in it. Q20 Mr Campbell: It might have been preferable if you had said in the memorandum what you have just said now and which is not in the memorandum. To "further implement those aspects of the Belfast Agreement where work is incomplete or ongoing" is not the same as the fundamentals, the Mum and apple pie stuff which everyone agrees with. No-one is going to object to communities working together and trying to get devolved institutions restored, but you are aware that the majority of Unionists are opposed to the 1998 deal. It seems strange for a facilitator to say he is going to fly in the face of that. You have explained that so I want to move on to paragraph 8 in your memorandum. This is the very, very vexed question of OTRs, 'on the runs'. You have explained several times that you understand the sensitivities surrounding 'on the runs'. There is more than sensitivity: there is outrage, unbelievable outrage and anger that people who have never served a day in jail for murder and in some cases multiple murder are not, it would appear, going to have to show up in court but are going to be given what amounts to an amnesty. Can you elaborate on what the OTRs will be and to whom it will apply? Mr Hain: First of all, the Prime Minister made the position very clear - if it was not last week then the week before - on this matter. This is very difficult and I do, as the honourable Member has been fair to indicate, understand the real concerns about this legislation. When you are trying to entrench a new political settlement and to get people to stop killing each other and close down their paramilitary activity, as experience in conflict resolution across the world has shown, sometimes you have to do things that you ordinarily would not want to do. One example of that was the letting out of prisoners on licence following the Belfast Agreement, both Republican and Loyalist prisoners; over 400 from memory were in that position. There is a category of people who cannot return to the United Kingdom jurisdiction whom, in order to entrench and stabilise permanent peace and an end to violence, we feel it is necessary to put through a judicial process and have them, subject to satisfactorily going through that judicial process, in a position to go out on licence. Q21 Chairman: Can you be more specific on what that process will be? Mr Hain: Except to say that there will be a proper judicial process, I think it is important to wait until the legislation is published. Q22 Chairman: Which will be when? Mr Hain: My honourable friend the Member for Delyn will be consulting with the parties including the Democratic Unionist Party. Q23 Chairman: When will it be published? Mr Hain: I am not finally certain of the date, but it will be reasonably soon. Q24 Chairman: Before Christmas? Mr Hain: Certainly before Christmas and probably early next month. Q25 Mr Campbell: How many people will the OTR legislation be applicable to in your estimation? Mr Hain: We will obviously take advice from the police on this. They have a number of suspects for crimes, I readily concede crimes which in some cases were horrific crimes and the individuals responsible are not allowed back into the United Kingdom for fear of immediate arrest by the police, and they will notify us of the people concerned. It goes into dozens at any rate. There is then a separate category of people who committed offences before 1998, like these people did, who might be unearthed, could be Loyalists, could be Republicans, by the police's inquiries into historic crimes, and we have funded the Chief Constable to carry out this specific inquiry. It may be that people are uncovered as a result of that. They will have to go through proper process of being charged and then the judicial process of being let out on licence. May I make one final point about this? I know that it is difficult, very difficult indeed; not least it is going to be very difficult in parliamentary terms for myself and my ministerial team. I understand that. However, this is a situation where if people breach their licence they will be pulled back in, as happened to Sean Kelly. Q26 Chairman: For as long as he was. Mr Hain: I would have thought that if people breach their licence ... I take the point you are making but the circumstances were pretty unique of an IRA statement a matter of weeks after he had been pulled in. I do not think equivalent circumstances would arise. Q27 Mr Campbell: You said a couple of times that some of these categories of people could not return to Northern Ireland until this process. Mr Hain: They could, but they would be locked up. Q28 Mr Campbell: And quite a number of people in Northern Ireland would be quite content with that. Mr Hain: I understand that and if I were a victim of one of these atrocities, I would feel the same way. Mr Campbell: They would either prefer them to be locked up or not to be allowed to return, but certainly not to avail themselves of the OTR legislation. Dr McDonnell: I want to make two points, but the first is now we are discussing 'on the runs', will all those categorised as 'on the runs' be a clearly defined group which will be listed and named at a point in time as those who are considered to be on the run and eligible? Or will it be some now and perhaps some appearing again? Will it be spread over a long period or will there be one bang? Chairman: Will there be a definitive list? Q29 Dr McDonnell: Will there be a definitive list or will it be a list which is --- Mr Hain: I am not sure about a definitive list, but in the case of the suspects the police would like to arrest and charge, the Police Service of Northern Ireland know who they are, so there is a set of people in that category. As to the historic inquiry, by its definition we do not know the people it might uncover: Loyalist - I stress Loyalist - and Republican. It is very likely to uncover both. I just want to stress one other thing to the honourable Member and the honourable Member for East Londonderry who spoke earlier: this is not an amnesty. An amnesty is when you let people out. This is a process people will have to go through, a judicial process, they will have to account for what they have done and in the case of historic crimes they will have to be charged and go through that process and then let out on licence. An amnesty is where you just let people go. This is very different from an amnesty. Q30 Mr Anderson: I asked you earlier in the House about people who are on the run from terrorists and what their rights would be. You made the point in the House that it seems not necessarily to have stopped, but certainly to have calmed down. What about people who want to come back home and are not being allowed to come back home by terrorists? What have you put in place to answer that question, because clearly that is another wrong which should be put right and it goes some way to making people feel there is some balance in the situation? Mr Hain: It is. What we need in many of these communities, Republican especially in this case, but Loyalist as well, because some Loyalists have been exiled too, is a complete change in culture in the communities; for example, some of the treatment of the McCartney sisters and the McCartney family is outrageous, living in Republican communities and recently having to move out of the Short Strand because of intimidation within the community. We need a complete culture change on this and that affects exiling as well. This is something which we have in our sights and we shall be pursuing. To my knowledge - and the IMC has certainly not reported on it; I have not received any reports to that effect either since the period covered by the IMC - there has been no exiling since 28 July. Q31 Gordon Banks: On the issue of 'on the runs' do you agree that the way in which paramilitary 'on the runs' will be addressed in future may well have to be mirrored in dealings with the security services who are alleged, or, maybe through historic inquiries, may be alleged in the future to have taken part in some degree of unlawful violence? Mr Hain: It is important that we do not have one law for one group and another law for another group. The answer is that we need ... My honourable friend will have to wait for the legislation, but this is one of the issues we have been discussing. Q32 Lady Hermon: You have referred to 'on the runs' as a category of people and you have from time to time referred to the fact that you will be taking advice from the PSNI. Can you give a categorical assurance that those who appear within the list of 'on the runs' will not be a list submitted by Sinn Fein or Loyalist paramilitary organisations, but will genuinely come from the PSNI? Mr Hain: These are people whom the police suspect of committing crimes, in some cases very serious atrocities. That is the basis upon which they will be defined and selected. It does just raise the interesting point, however, as to whether in some cases people might be encouraged by this process to confess to things which the police may not have a suspect for. It could be that at least in the case of the victims and the families there is some kind of closure of what have often been historic cases. Just imagine if a loved one had been murdered and there had never been any closure on it, not anybody caught let along brought to justice. It could be that the 'on the runs' process in the case of historic crimes could actually bring some closure because people could see the advantages of at least putting that behind them. Q33 Sammy Wilson: What you have said seems to be at variance with what the police are indicating. As far as the police are concerned, they have actually suggested that the names which were first given and the names which first appeared on this whole 'on the runs' issue were given by the IRA. Indeed the police were surprised at some of the names; they did not know the people who were named were actually people they should be looking at and searching after. So could you just confirm for us whether there was at any stage in this process a list of names given by the IRA which then provoked the promise to introduce this legislation? Mr Hain: I have not seen such a list, if that is the question you are asking. Have there been discussions, including with the police and including with Sinn Fein? Yes, of course there have. I respect the fact that a number of honourable Members on this Committee, including the honourable Member and Lady Hermon, strongly object to this legislation; I understand that. However, I think it is necessary to cement in for good the peace process and I have to make a political judgment on it. There are no surprises in it; this was something agreed between the two Governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic a number of years ago. Q34 Chairman: You are clearly aware, from what you have said and from your uncomfortable body language, that this is not a subject with which you deal very happily and you recognise the sensitivities of large sections of opinion in Northern Ireland. You are going to bring forward this legislation. Is this the sort of legislation which perhaps lends itself to pre-legislative scrutiny by this Committee? Mr Hain: I do not think the timetable would allow for that, though I am a big fan of pre-legislative scrutiny and in other circumstances would have preferred it. We are in a process where it is very important to keep momentum. Q35 Chairman: But that is not necessarily going to delay your momentum. If you are anxious to have legislation which is as broadly acceptable as it can be when dealing with this unpalatable subject, here you have a committee of Members of Parliament drawn mainly from your own party, but from the parties represented here in Westminster, from the Ulster parties who take their seats, plus a couple of members of the official Opposition who would be very unwilling - and I know I can give this undertaking - to look at this expeditiously and to scrutinise it thoroughly and properly. Would this not be a sensible way forward? Mr Hain: As I say, particularly wearing my previous hat as Leader of the House, it is a principle I still adhere to. After all, we as a Government brought in pre-legislative scrutiny on a systematic basis, but we have always been clear that it is not possible to do it, however desirable a mechanism it is, and it is desirable, with every piece of legislation and that is true for legislation right across the board, not just affecting Northern Ireland. Often in Northern Ireland, in order to keep momentum, legislation has had to be brought in quite quickly. What I can assure the Committee, however, is that there will be a committee stage of the Bill in which all of these --- Q36 Chairman: That is hardly a concession. Mr Hain: Let me finish, if I may. --- the committee stage of the Bill in which these matters can be gone into exhaustively. In addition, my honourable friend the Member for Delyn, will be consulting the parties over the coming period before the Bill gets a second reading on precisely these matters. Q37 Chairman: Do I infer from that that the programme motion ... Another innovation of this Government has been that every piece of legislation now has a rigorous programme motion and if this Bill is going to get detailed scrutiny, either pre-legislative or after second reading, then surely the allocation of time must be generous enough to allow of proper consideration? Mr Hain: There has to be proper consideration. Q38 Chairman: On the floor of the House? Mr Hain: The committee stage will be upstairs. There will be a proper second reading, there will be a proper report and third reading and these matters will be negotiated through the usual channels and all parties can make their views heard on that in the normal way. May I give you this assurance at least: there is no intention just to rush this through. Body language or not, this is a difficult piece of legislation. I do not think any of us is approaching it with the enthusiasm with which we normally approach introducing legislation as Government Ministers. Q39 Chairman: May I ask you something on a procedural question which I am very concerned about and you and I have been involved in procedural matters often in the past; frequently in agreement and sometimes not? Mr Hain: Normally you know more about them than I do. Q40 Chairman: Thank you very much indeed for that, Secretary of State, and I rather agree with you. May I just ask you this? You said you were going to bring this legislation before the House before Christmas. It is not your intention to get it through all its stages before Christmas, is it? Mr Hain: To be perfectly honest, I had not thought that far ahead. We are not in a position to know what the various opposition parties will want on committee stages and all of that. I repeat that there is no intention to rush this through. Given the timetable, I rather doubt that it will get through the Commons before Christmas and of course it still has to go into the House of Lords. I think that will be equally difficult, if not more so. Q41 Sammy Wilson: You say that the timetable will not allow this because it is essential - and I quote you - in order to keep the momentum. Keep the momentum towards what? Towards the restoration of devolution in Northern Ireland? Is this the price that Sinn Fein have demanded in order to ensure their cooperation in any such movement? Mr Hain: This is part of keeping momentum towards locking in and putting in concrete a permanent peace and end to violence and terrorism, including the IRA, in Northern Ireland. I think that is a very, very important part of the picture. As I said earlier, and I do not want to detain the Committee by repeating what I said, but if you are ending a conflict as bitter, as engrained and as historic as this one - and we are in that process now; we are in the endgame of that conflict, however long it takes to establish a power-sharing executive - if we are in that endgame, sometimes things have to be done and one does not need to be a great student of world affairs to know that often things have to be done which ordinarily, on a nice sunny day, you would prefer not to be doing. This is part of getting the peace locked in and I just have to emphasise that. The honourable Member represents communities which I know will be angry about this legislation and have suffered, as has his party and the Ulster Unionists as well, more than anybody else in Northern Ireland from the troubles of the last 30 years and the terrorism and the conflict and the murder and the violence. Putting an end to that conflict permanently is an ambition which we should surely share. Q42 Sammy Wilson: I will just make an observation. Since you assured us in the House today that all the guns had gone, I wonder why you need to lock people in. Currently the Police Service of Northern Ireland are spending £50 million and have engaged 50 additional officers in looking at cold cases, the cold case review, many of those prompted by requests from families whose relatives have been killed and no-one ever brought to justice. Are you telling us today that this legislation will ensure that if anyone is identified during those investigations, they will not go to jail? If that is the case, even if they are identified as having been involved in murder, what is the point of the £50 million being spent, the 50 officers spending their time and the victims asking the police to try to get to the bottom of these crimes? Mr Hain: What I can assure the honourable Member is this. If any individual is identified and charged by the police, as we hope they will be, from whatever quarter, in the course of this historic inquiry which we have funded, they will be charged. Q43 Sammy Wilson: Will they go to court? Mr Hain: They will be charged. Q44 Sammy Wilson: Will they go to court? Mr Hain: They will go through judicial process. I understand that there is a judgment to be made here and the honourable Member has made a different judgment to me. We have to bring closure on this whole awful dark period of terrorism and violence and murder and mayhem in Northern Ireland. Our judgment as a Government is that this is one of the ways in which that is finally done. Q45 Chairman: The question is: are you determined to be even-handed among villains? Mr Hain: I do not feel like being even-handed towards any villains, if I may say so. Q46 Chairman: That really has been the inference one draws from those answers. Mr Wilson has asked you about these people who are being investigated by the team of police. You gave an indication earlier in answer to Rosie Cooper that it would be wrong to treat one group of villains preferentially to another. That was the effect, the substance of your answer. I am merely asking you to confirm that; that is all. Mr Hain: Yes, in the sense that Loyalists and Republicans could be equally caught by this process of inquiry and I expect will be, if that is even-handedness. We are not talking about non-paramilitary criminals here; we are talking about people of a particular category. Q47 Dr McDonnell: I note in paragraph 7 of the memorandum you gave us that there is a note on reinvigorating discussions with political parties on the shared goal of devolving criminal justice and policing. Could you tell us a little bit more about that, about the exploration and what your scheduling might be on that in terms of devolution returning, should devolution return? Will the criminal justice and policing return very rapidly or will it only return after a considerable time lag? As a rider on that, could you make some comment on community policing and support officers? Mr Hain: First of all, I cannot make anybody take part in political discussions. I cannot frogmarch any particular party into talks about power sharing against their will. That would not work and I would not attempt it. Clearly it is up to each of the political parties to decide in what way they wish to engage on a forward process towards the goal we have all subscribed to, each political party in Northern Ireland and the British and Irish Governments obviously, which is the resumption of a power-sharing executive and the Assembly and all the institutions up and running. We have all committed ourselves to that goal. The question is when people feel able to engage in that. What I want to see is not a process resting on side deals with a few of the parties, but a process which is inclusive. That is the first principle. On the first question of community policing, and you asked about community support officers - I think that was the burden of your question. Q48 Dr McDonnell: Yes. Mr Hain: I want to stress that if we follow the very successful practice in Great Britain - I have seen it work in Wales and in various parts of England - of community support officers in support of the police - and I hope we do, but it is a matter for the Policing Board - they will only be recruited on the basis that they fulfil the same criteria as are necessary for the recruitment of conventional police officers. Q49 Gordon Banks: Just on the matter of community support officers, as and when they are introduced into Northern Ireland do you see the role and responsibilities of these CSOs mirroring that in England and Wales or is it possible that they could have a different range of powers than they have on the mainland? Mr Hain: I see them very much on the model of Great Britain, England and Wales in particular. I know there is some scepticism in Northern Ireland about it and all sorts of rumours are flying around which frankly are baseless in terms of our intentions. I have talked to police officers and I can think of one example in Colwyn Bay in North Wales where they were initially quite hostile to the idea, because they saw it as undermining their own professional leadership role as police officers. Now they are absolutely thrilled with it, because it releases them from certain duties, enables them to focus on the most serious crime and to come and support community support officers when they are needed. It means people are out on the street, they are visible, local neighbourhoods like them and I think Northern Ireland could benefit from this model. Q50 Gordon Banks: Basically just mirroring the job which is done in England and Wales. Mr Hain: Very much so, subject to any recommendations that the Police Service makes and the Policing Board makes. Q51 Mr Hepburn: That may be all right in the real world, but unfortunately in Northern Ireland things do not work the way they possibly should. If I were a paramilitary walking around one of these estates unofficially policing them, all of a sudden all I would have to do would be to don this uniform and take over that role on an official basis. Mr Hain: There is no way that is going to be allowed to happen. I would not allow it to happen, the Chief Constable, Hugh Orde, would not allow it to happen and the Policing Board would not allow it to happen. There is no way that a paramilitary can lay down an armalite one day and put on a community support officer uniform the next day. That is not going to happen. If we proceed down this road, community support officers will be recruited on the very strict criteria which apply to conventional police officers. No ifs, no buts about that. Q52 Chairman: There is no question of these people being armed, is there? Mr Hain: No; they are not armed in Great Britain. Q53 Chairman: I realise that. Mr Hain: No. Q54 Chairman: You talked about scotching rumours and this is an opportunity for you to scotch some of the rumours. You have said unequivocally that you are going to guarantee that no paramilitary turns up in a community support officer's uniform in either Loyalist or Republican, Catholic, communities and that is an undertaking you are giving this Committee absolutely fair and square, is it? Mr Hain: Yes; yes it is. Q55 Sammy Wilson: You are not referring to paramilitaries with convictions. Are you referring to people with paramilitary connections, regardless of whether they have had convictions or not? Perhaps you would clarify how you will ensure that such people are not included? Mr Hain: In the end it is a matter for the police to make sure they select people according to exactly the criteria which apply to police officers now. Secondly, they will be subject to exactly the same standard security checks that would-be recruits to the police are subject to now; exactly the same ones. It is not in the interests of Government or the Police Service of Northern Ireland to have paramilitaries somehow recruited into the Police Service. If, however, Sammy Wilson is saying to me that, let us say, a youngster from a Republican background wants to join the police, as many Catholics of Nationalist persuasion have increasingly done over recent years, which is a good thing, as I am sure he will agree, if a young person from a Republican family decides he wants sign up to the police and be recruited by the police, I am not putting up a ban saying "No way". However, he will be subject to exactly the same security checks, standards, rigorous criteria that apply to all people wishing to be recruited to the police. Q56 Lady Hermon: You have emphasised that exactly the same criteria will be applied to the recruitment of community support officers. Would you kindly take this opportunity to assure the Committee and the wider public in Northern Ireland that the morally repugnant 50/50 recruitment procedure will not actually be applied to community support officers? Mr Hain: In the end this is a matter for the Policing Board and for the Police Service of Northern Ireland. I understand from what she has said the vehemence which she feels about this matter. Q57 Lady Hermon: Yes, I do. Mr Hain: The truth is that Catholics have been under-represented in the Police Service in the past. I know she will agree with that; it is a fact. Q58 Lady Hermon: Yes. Mr Hain: To get a Police Service which is genuinely supported across the community in the future, it is an advantage to have more and more Catholics joining. The 50/50 recruitment policy has meant a big increase from 8% to 18% in the proportion of Catholics now in the Police Service of Northern Ireland, which is very positive, because it actually builds confidence and confidence now in the Police Service of Northern Ireland is higher than it has ever been as all the statistics and surveys show. What is also the case is that less than 2% of people from a Protestant background have been turned away for reasons of the 50/50 recruitment policy; a very small proportion of the 28,000-odd recruits who apply to the police every year have been turned away. They have been turned away because there has been a massive number of people wanting to join up and sign up to the police and that is a good thing; it is a popular force and people want to do the job. However, you cannot recruit everybody and that is the reason why people have been turned away: the large numbers applying rather than the 50/50 policy. Q59 Mr Campbell: I want to finalise this recruitment business of community support officers. It is a misnomer to talk about a 50/50 recruitment to the police because the figures I have obtained through Parliamentary Questions would indicate that there is a minority Protestant recruitment to the police, that less than 50% of the people recruited to the police are Protestant and more than 50% of those recruited are Catholic. So while 50/50 is a nice cliché, it is not actually accurate: it is minority police recruitment. Is it going to be the case then that the merit principle will apply to the community support officers, as it should do to the police? For example, if there were 26%, as there would have been had the merit principle been applied to the police, that would be a very healthy increase in the number of Catholics. Will the merit principle be applied, whether it is by the Policing Board or whatever the system is? Will it be a merit oriented principle for the community support officers which will necessitate purely ability to do the job as it should be for the police? Mr Hain: Of course. There is already a merit principle embedded in all police recruitment. Perhaps I might give the Committee the headline figures here. Since 2001 there have been nearly 44,000 applications to the police. Only 6,034 have been suitably qualified, that is to say they meet the merit principle which Gregory Campbell is asking about. Only 1,980 have been appointed and the increase in the number of Catholics has been from 8.3% to 18.69% of the total force. It may be of assistance to the Committee if I send in a detailed breakdown of these figures giving more information. Chairman: That would be very helpful; I am sure we shall return to this on future occasions. Q60 Mr Grogan: How likely is it that Sinn Fein will take up their seat on the Policing Board next April? If they do not, what will happen to those seats? Mr Hain: I think it is important that Sinn Fein do sign up to proper policing in Northern Ireland, including in those areas, for example South Armagh, where the police do not yet operate properly. They are moving southwards through Armagh and making progress neighbourhood by neighbourhood and that is encouraging, but I think Sinn Fein should support the police right across the board. Indeed any party seeking to assume ministerial office would surely be subscribing to that principle and that includes joining the Policing Board. In terms of the reconstitution of the Policing Board, which you asked about, I was always asked by the Democratic Unionist Party amongst others to reconstitute the Board to reflect the 2003 election result, which, if you apply the d'Hondt formula, gives four DUP members and two each for the other parties, including Sinn Fein. If Sinn Fein do not take up their seats before the Board is reconstituted on 1 April, obviously I have a decision to make about what to do with those two seats. I also have an imperative to ensure that there is a balance on the Policing Board across the communities. Q61 Lady Hermon: Could the Secretary of State just confirm that he has read the Patten report, particularly the recommendations about the composition of the Policing Board, that there should be a political majority of members on the Policing Board? Could the Secretary of State confirm that he has read the Patten report? Mr Hain: I have and this is a point which Lady Hermon has made to me before and I have noted. Q62 Chairman: Have you read it, marked it, learned it and inwardly digested it? Mr Hain: I cannot promise that. Q63 Sammy Wilson: More importantly, are you going to apply it? Mr Hain: The Patten recommendations in their entirety. I am glad to see the DUP wants them applied right across the board. Q64 Lady Hermon: Yes; we are thrilled. Mr Hain: That is exactly what this Government are committed to doing and why policing in Northern Ireland has made so much progress in recent years. Chairman: I am sorry to move from a note of rejoicing to one of more sombre investigation, but Stephen Hepburn on Whiterock. Q65 Mr Hepburn: On a recent visit to Belfast we visited the scenes of that particular disorder which or course was the worst disorder for many, many years. It was caused by the Parades Commission's decision to reroute an Orange march. We have seen the distance of the rerouting and it seems such a small distance for all the trouble and chaos which happened afterwards. Obviously I do not know the area, so I am not an expert and am asking your opinion. Do you think the Parades Commission made an error on this particular point? If so, do you have any plans to change the existing structure of the Parades Commission in the future? Mr Hain: You are absolutely right that this was a dispute really about 120 yards, or thereabouts and it produced an horrific riot and systematic attempts by Loyalist paramilitaries to murder police officers; really horrific. The Parades Commission is independent and makes its determination and obviously as Secretary of State I cannot criticise its determinations because that would be to undermine the Parades Commission, therefore I shall not accept your invitation to do so. What I do think we have to do, however, is learn some of the lessons, about the process which led up to that Parades Commission determination. I have had lots of representations made to me by Dr Paisley on behalf of the DUP and by Sir Reg Empey on behalf of the UDP and others associated with the preparations for that Whiterock parade that the dialogue with the Parades Commission was not what it should have been. That is what they have said to me. I think there is scope, whilst retaining the essential principles of the Parades Commission, that is to say rather than the Chief Constable making decisions, or the Secretary of State seeking to micromanage each of the contested parades, which only amount to half a dozen compared with the 3,000 or so which march perfectly peacefully every year. I have no desire to go back to those days when they were micromanaged on a political basis or by the Chief Constable and he does not either. The principle of an independent body making these decisions is the right one, but we need to build in a dialogue process which has been absent from the Parades Commission in the way that it has conducted its affairs up to now. We are reconstituting the Parades Commission with new members and there will be an opportunity for a fresh start. Q66 Dr McDonnell: Would you care to comment on the overall success of the Parades Commission over the years and the way in which it has handled and reduced the amount of contention which has been around? Maybe it would be unfair to ask you to be subjective, but do you not think it is a bit rich talking about dialogue when for many years the Orange Order did not even meet and would not have dialogue with the Parades Commission and will not even dialogue with any of the community groups around and they avoid the opportunity of dialogue with the likes of the SDLP? Mr Hain: I am very grateful for the role played by members of the Parades Commission; they have had a difficult job. I have been encouragingly astounded by the large number of applications there have been to take the places on the Parades Commission, because I do not think it is a job which I should be particularly keen on. Whatever you do, you are criticised, such as the determination they made in the case of the Ardoyne and where the march went last on 12 July. While it was peaceful in the morning there was trouble in the evening. I was heavily lobbied by Republicans and Nationalists to change that route, but I said it was a matter for the Parades Commission, as it was in the case of Whiterock. I think we should place on record our gratitude for the very, very difficult job which the Parades Commission has performed. There are lessons which can be learned, different procedures which ought to be applied with a new board and let us see whether we can do that. I should be grateful for advice from any quarter to take that forward. On dialogue, I think he is right. There should be no reason why, across the community divide, as was done in Londonderry, where the people of Derry and their representatives found a way, with the chamber of commerce in the lead, to get an apprentice boys parade which went off very well. Everybody's cultural traditions were respected, but also local community concerns about being intimidated were safeguarded and it was very successful. Let us apply that more right across the board and end the situation where this minority of contested controversial parades spoils the summer. Q67 Gordon Banks: On the issue of the recent disturbances, obviously we know some of the reasons which are cited for the recent outbreak of Loyalist violence, in particular the high level of deprivation in working class Protestant communities. We also saw on our recent visit to Belfast Catholic areas with a demand for additional needs for housing and facilities and Protestant areas where these demands seem to be falling inasmuch as demolition was going on and new build. How do you propose to address these conflicting needs? How are you planning to engage both sides of the Northern Ireland community in this process? Mr Hain: There is deprivation in both Nationalist areas and Loyalist areas and in fact the record probably shows greater deprivation still in isolated pockets of Nationalist areas. That is not the point. The point is that there is still severe deprivation, high levels of economic inactivity and unemployment in a minority of areas. There are more jobs in Northern Ireland than ever in its history; true of the whole of the United Kingdom under our Government, certainly the case in Northern Ireland and more prosperity. It is extraordinary when you travel around Northern Ireland just to see the prosperity in rural and urban areas alike, but there are these isolated pockets of really severe deprivation and high unemployment. I have asked my honourable friend the Member for Delyn to lead a task force on this and to come up with recommendations and he has been very busy leading that delivery to seek to engage. Indeed, only yesterday I met the organisers of the Love Ulster rally, which is planned for the Shankhill area of Belfast on Saturday. I had a very good meeting with them and they explained their own concerns and assured me that they wanted a peaceful protest, which was very welcome. Chairman: We all hope that happens. Q68 Gordon Banks: The point I was really trying to make was that I understand there is an expanding Republican need for housing which in many areas is ring-fenced by the pure physical barriers which are there in Belfast and Northern Ireland. How do you plan to cope with that ever increasing demand when there are such obvious restrictions to that expansion? Mr Hain: This is a real problem, the problem of separation. There are some areas where there is a demand for housing in Catholic communities and there are empty houses in neighbouring Protestant communities and vice versa. That is just one of the tragedies of Northern Ireland. We are determined to provide extra housing and indeed have done so under our Government and will continue to do so. Q69 Mr Campbell: I get the impression, and I know many people in Northern Ireland get the impression, that there is not the acceptance by the Government of the extent of the alienation amongst the Unionist community. We have heard a few questions now about the parades issue and there have been discussions between the Orange Order and Nationalists, but still no parade in those areas. There is the whole cultural issue between the funding of Ulster Scots and the Irish language, where there is a huge disparity which has not been addressed as yet. When you get in the public sector of employment the Protestant community, we have already talked about the police where 49% of the recruits are Protestant, the Civil Service has 45% in the general service grades, the biggest employing authority in Northern Ireland, 18,000 civil servants and only 45% of the recruits there are Protestant. That is the sense of alienation. In the Housing Executive, which is the largest social housing authority in the United Kingdom, only 39% of their recruits are Protestant. In the Child Support Agency only 36% of recruits are Protestants. When you take the entire public sector you can see that there is a simmering resentment which has layers, whether cultural, parades, jobs, and nobody can justify any of the violence, nobody is attempting to or to condone it, but is there an acceptance by you, Secretary of State, of this simmering resentment? If so, is your honourable friend, whom you have mentioned now three or four times, going to be able to analyse and do something about it in the next few months? Mr Hain: I accept that there is a simmering resentment, in some cases it bursts out into anger. I have spent quite a lot of time seeking to engage with that. Indeed that is one of the reasons why I have moved forward on a whole series of issues, including those put to me by the DUP, such as appointing a new chairman of the Ulster Scots Agency, such as exempting Orange halls from paying rates, such as the appointment this week of a Victims' Commissioner - I know Unionist communities have been very anxious to see an interim Victims' Commissioner - such as reconstituting the Policing Board. These are all things which Unionists have asked me to do and I have moved forward on that, partly because they are things which should be done anyway and therefore I wanted to do them in any case. What you find in this job - and I do not ask for sympathy - is that every time you make a concession to one side you get criticised by the other side. It is just a shame that although most of these advances and concessions are for the benefit of Northern Ireland as a whole, they are not often interpreted that way. Q70 Chairman: It is a hard life, Secretary of State; a hard life. Mr Hain: A hard life, almost as hard as being Chairman of a Select Committee. Chairman: Almost. I have a quarter of an hour to get some very important subjects in. Q71 Mr Anderson: We met last week with the organised crime task force and a number of the issues raised were really worrying. They raised the issue of the illegal fuel smuggling. I was not aware of the size of the problem. I saw a report in Friday's Belfast Telegraph which said that in the four years, 2000-2003, the total was £1.4 billion. I am not quite sure what the budget is in Northern Ireland but that would go a long, long way. What is being done to address the problem? I know it has been raised in this Committee before and has been raised by the IMC before. What, if anything, is being done? Mr Hain: A great deal is being done by the organised crime task force and just over the past year 28 top level organised crime gangs were disrupted or dismantled, assets totalling nearly £12 million restrained or confiscated, drugs worth around £9.5 million seized, counterfeit goods worth around £7 million seized and legitimate fuel deliveries increased by 6%. As I told the House today in Northern Ireland Question, we have increasing success in cracking down but there is a long way to go on petrol smuggling. We have 160 or so customs officers dedicated to breaking up the criminal gangs involved in oil frauds. We are moving forward on all of this and the Assets Recovery Agency recently moved quite significantly forward on this. Indeed over the last six months it has seen nearly £1 million of assets seized from criminals associated with Loyalist groups involved in drugs, blackmail and counterfeit goods. There is quite a lot of progress on this and we intend to drive it forward. Q72 Mr Anderson: Coming back to fuel, the report this week suggests that both Governments should introduce licence regimes which will enable a quota of businesses to be involved in the trade. Has there been any discussion so far on that? Mr Hain: That is something we are looking at. Local councils do have powers to stop smuggling and we are working with them to implement those powers. We are very happy to consider changes, including those recommended by the IMC, to extend those powers if necessary. Q73 Gordon Banks: In parallel to the issue which has just been raised by David, my point is regarding the actions of the Government in combating cigarette smuggling and imports of counterfeit cigarettes, but also, moving on to the wider issue of what we are doing to publicise the health risks related to these counterfeit and smuggled cigarettes. It was an issue which was raised with Revenue and Customs when we were in Belfast. It was dismissed inasmuch as they could not be seen to be saying one set of cigarettes was better than another set of cigarettes. Do you not think that there should be some kind of publicity campaign related to the contents of the counterfeit cigarettes which are coming into Northern Ireland? We have already heard on our visit - not being a smoker I take this on good advice - that the taste and the effect of the cigarettes are not that of normal cigarettes, but also the health effect is significantly damaging. I am not advocating we run an advertising campaign which says smoke these instead of these, but we have to get across that smoking the counterfeit cigarettes is actually potentially so much more damaging to health than legitimately produced cigarettes. Mr Hain: I agree very much, indeed Customs and Inland Revenue are looking at precisely what to do about this to alert the public to it. I do not want to intrude on the private grief of the Cabinet at the moment, but, as we announced, we are intending to implement a complete ban on smoking in enclosed public places across Northern Ireland in due course and this would help. Q74 Mr Fraser: You talked about momentum, expediency, closure on issues. It has been almost a year since the Northern Bank robbery. Can you bring us up to date on the investigations and when we can expect some arrests? Mr Hain: This is the biggest bank robbery in British history and, as people will recall, it has taken a long time, years if I recall rightly, to get to the bottom of some of the previous ones such as the gold bullion robbery from Heathrow. We are making quite a lot of progress on the Northern Bank robbery and investigations are proceeding. It is very complex and resource intensive and we are working with the police in the Republic of Ireland. Indeed the Garda commissioner recently stated that a large quantity of money had been recovered in raids in Cork and that that money was believed to be stolen from the Northern Bank. We are fully committed to pursuing this and we are confident that we can bring about a successful outcome to the investigation, including arrests. Q75 Mr Fraser: You likened it to other robberies, which is most unfortunate, because there is a subtle difference. Mr Hain: Only that it was bigger. Q76 Mr Fraser: Fine, but there is a subtle difference. It is common knowledge that we know the IRA were involved with that. Mr Hain: The Chief Constable has made that clear. Q77 Mr Fraser: So that does give you a distinct advantage. Are you happy with the progress which has been made at the moment? Mr Hain: I am. I am not quite sure what point you are making. There is a vigorous police investigation and cooperation across the border and it is meeting with success. Q78 Mr Fraser: I will tell you what point I am making. I said just now that you have talked about momentum, expediency, closure on issues and then you have gone on to give us evidence of things which are not particularly expedient, momentum slowing down on other issues and we have not had closure. That is the point I am making. You have used words in your evidence which imply speed and efficiency. Mr Hain: I do not know what you are saying. Are you criticising the police? Q79 Mr Fraser: No. Mr Hain: I am glad. Q80 Mr Fraser: I am in no way criticising the police. I am asking you whether you are satisfied with the way things are going and you seem to be telling me that you are. Mr Hain: Yes; I am. Chairman: Are you getting cooperation from the IRA? Q81 Mr Fraser: That was my next point. Mr Hain: What is happening in this police investigation is that extensive progress is being made and I know that for a fact. I think that there will be arrests and the investigation will be successful, but it is a very complex, difficult matter, as are all investigations. I was not seeking to equate the Northern Bank robbery with the gold bullion one, except in the sense that it takes time to track down those responsible. Progress is being made. Q82 Rosie Cooper: When we were in Northern Ireland I was actually delighted to hear that the investigation into the Northern Bank robbery was progressing well and arrests would be made. My difference with my honourable friend is that the bit which caused me dismay was the fact that we were told that the intelligence services had no idea that the Northern Bank robbery was going to happen. I wonder how that failure can be explained. I know you will not tell me in detail how you could make good that deficit, but although I do believe and understand that the police will be making very speedy progress towards arrest, my fear is before that. How did we let it happen? Mr Hain: Some hard questions were asked and are being asked about that. May I say, against that, I make decisions almost every other day in response to requests from the security forces which result in crimes not being committed and people apprehended and preventive action being taken to stop murders and crimes. The fact that this went undetected beforehand is worrying. Q83 Chairman: You could put it that way. Mr Hain: At least the police deserve our full support for the investigation which they are pursuing and the determination with which they are doing it. Chairman: I must bring in Meg Hillier. She has been exceptionally patient. She wants to ask about the Victims' Commissioner and we are nearing the end of a very fascinating session. Q84 Meg Hillier: Obviously we are all interested in the appointment of the Victims' Commissioner, but is her interim status linked to the suspension of the Assembly or the fact that victims will be involved in a permanent appointment? Mr Hain: No, it is not linked to the suspension of the Assembly, but I am glad that you have raised this matter because it gives me an opportunity to explain exactly on the record why we have done what we have done. I appointed an interim commissioner to scope out the work for a permanent appointment and to do so in close consultation with victims' groups. I think she is an excellent appointment. She has herself suffered personal loss - this is Mrs Bertha McDougall - and when I went with her to launch the appointment on Monday it was very clear to me, as she faced the paparazzi and the might of the assembled Northern Ireland media, that she was extremely astute and very, very sensitive to the concerns across the community divide and the concerns of the many, many thousands of victims who have suffered so grievously from death and tragedy. On Monday I met, for example, a victim who had been blinded in a bomb attack and it was very moving to hear her account. Q85 Meg Hillier: You talk about her looking at the groups which receive government grants. Is she actually going to be charged with evaluating the effectiveness of those groups, or is that something a permanent Victims' Commissioner will do? Mr Hain: No. If she is able to, she is to look particularly at the services provided to victims and the standards which have been set and to advise on how we can establish a victims' and survivors' forum through which they can properly be consulted and receive counselling and receive the sort of support which victims' groups such as the group FAT, which I met in Lisburn on Monday, provide admirably with enormous energy and dedication. We want to learn the lessons of that. Q86 Meg Hillier: In your memorandum to the Committee you talk about her considering "the modalities of establishing a Victims' and Survivors' Forum". Perhaps you could explain what you mean by that, because I am not sure about the English. Do you have in your mind an expectation of what that forum will look like, or does she have carte blanche to set that up herself? Mr Hain: She has carte blanche to advise on how we set that up. I look to her in consultation with victims' groups to do so. She herself has worked in the field for many years and is highly respected and will do an excellent job. Q87 Meg Hillier: Do you envisage that in due course the permanent position will move to be a statutory position, appointed on a statutory basis? Mr Hain: Yes. In that case it will be subject to the normal public appointments procedures of open advertisements, application and the best person chosen for the job. Q88 Meg Hillier: How long do you expect it to be before you get to that? Mr Hain: She has taken on the job for about a year. I do not want to be more precise than that, because if she reports in under a year that is to be welcomed; if it flows over a bit to do a proper job, that is fine by me. Q89 Meg Hillier: May I ask a couple of quick questions on the review of public administration? Could you give us the timeline for Northern Ireland Office decisions on the review of public administration which has been going on really since October 2003? We are two years in and have made some progress. Mr Hain: I intend to announce where we are going after this extensive period of consultation and you are absolutely right that it has been extensive. One thing people in Northern Ireland do not suffer from is a lack of consultation. We will then probably announce the outcome on 22 November. May I just make one brief point and that is that Northern Ireland is desperately in need of public service reform. There are 26 councils, there are 18 health trusts, there are four health authorities, there are five education library boards and around 100 quangos. It is very over-administered and I want to transfer service resources from bureaucracy and back-room work to the frontline. This will help us do that and we shall be putting forward some radical proposals based on the consultation, recommended through the consultation, which will take Northern Ireland forward into a sustainable public service for the future. Q90 Meg Hillier: Have you liaised at all with colleagues at the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister about the pitfalls of different reorganisations in England, some of which have been debated quite recently? Do you think there is going to be an impact on the reinstatement of the Assembly of having more powerful local government, given that we now have 108 Members of the Assembly all drawing their salary and allowances but not meeting, who all want to see it back in place. Do you think there is going to be any impact of moving the timescale for renewed local government on the role and function of the Assembly? Mr Hain: I hope not, because I think there is a consensus that we need to reduce the number of councils. There is an argument about exactly what number you reduce it to. After all we have 26 local councils covering a population of 1.7 to 1.8 million; it is a very large number of councils for that size of population. There is a consensus on reducing the number and a consensus on having more powerful local councils and devolving some of the policies and delivery out to the local level from the centre. Q91 Chairman: This is a subject to which we shall return. Before concluding, may I ask whether you are willing for us to publish this document you sent us yesterday? Mr Hain: Yes; of course. It is for the record. Q92 Chairman: Thank you very much indeed. We are very grateful to you, Secretary of State. You have answered our questions with good humour. I know that we all wish you well in your difficult task, although there will inevitably be issues on which we shall wish to probe you very, very much. I do hope that you will give a little thought to pre-legislative scrutiny, whenever it can be applied and specifically to the issue which came up this afternoon and not entirely shut your mind to that. Thank you and your officials for coming and thank you for fielding all our questions. We look forward to the next session with you. Mr Hain: Thank you. I look forward to being grilled by you in the future, working with you and to your reports. Chairman: Thank you very much indeed. |