The
Committee consisted of the following
Members:
Chairman:
Mr.
Martyn
Jones
Cox,
Mr. Geoffrey
(Torridge and West Devon)
(Con)
Curry,
Mr. David
(Skipton and Ripon)
(Con)
Davies,
David T.C.
(Monmouth)
(Con)
Dean,
Mrs. Janet
(Burton)
(Lab)
Donaldson,
Mr. Jeffrey M.
(Lagan Valley)
(DUP)
Ennis,
Jeff
(Barnsley, East and Mexborough)
(Lab)
Foster,
Mr. Michael
(Worcester)
(Lab)
Gauke,
Mr. David
(South-West Hertfordshire)
(Con)
Goggins,
Paul
(Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern
Ireland)
Iddon,
Dr. Brian
(Bolton, South-East)
(Lab)
Jenkins,
Mr. Brian
(Tamworth)
(Lab)
Keen,
Alan
(Feltham and Heston)
(Lab/Co-op)
Kennedy,
Jane
(Liverpool, Wavertree)
(Lab)
Kidney,
Mr. David
(Stafford)
(Lab)
Lancaster,
Mr. Mark
(North-East Milton Keynes)
(Con)
McGrady,
Mr. Eddie
(South Down)
(SDLP)
Öpik,
Lembit
(Montgomeryshire)
(LD)
Robertson,
Mr. Laurence
(Tewkesbury)
(Con)
Waltho,
Lynda
(Stourbridge)
(Lab)
Wareing,
Mr. Robert N.
(Liverpool, West Derby)
(Lab)
Wills,
Mr. Michael
(North Swindon)
(Lab)
Glenn
McKee, Eliot Wilson, Committee
Clerks
attended the Committee
Fourth
Delegated Legislation
Committee
Wednesday 7
February
2007
[Mr.
Martyn Jones
in the
Chair]
Draft Northern Ireland Arms Decommissioning Act 1997 (Amnesty Period) Order 2007
2.30
pm
The
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Paul
Goggins):
I beg to move,
That the Committee
has considered the draft Northern Ireland Arms Decommissioning Act 1997
(Amnesty Period) Order
2007.
I welcome you to
the Chair, Mr. Jones, this afternoon. A draft of the order
was laid before the House on 11 December 2006. Before I turn to its
substance, I should like to say one or two things about the context in
which we are having this discussion and about the Governments
position on decommissioning more
generally.
Decommissioning
has played, and continues to play, a key role in building the trust and
confidence that is essential for political progress in Northern
Irelandand it is working. In September 2005, the Independent
International Commission on Decommissioning confirmed that the IRA had
put all its arms beyond use. The IICD report published at that time
stated that it
had
determined that the
IRA has met its commitment to put all its arms beyond use in a manner
called for by the
legislation.
Subsequent
IICD and Independent Monitoring Commission reports have confirmed that
the Provisional IRA no longer has the capacity or will to engage in
paramilitary activity. That is a substantial change in a relatively
short period, and I am sure that hon. Members on both sides of the
Committee welcome it. It is essential, of course, that loyalist
paramilitary groups engage with the IICD as well, to make the
transition from conflict to peace.
Finally, on the context of the
order, I shall refer to wider political developments since the last
time that such an order was debated in Committee. The 2006 parading
season in Northern Ireland was the most peaceful for many
yearsno troops were needed to patrol the streets of Belfast on
12 July for the first time in more than 30 years. An agreement was
reached at the St. Andrews talks, and we now stand on the brink of an
election in Northern Ireland on 7 March, with the prospect of the
restoration of devolved government on 26 March. And, only recently, the
Sinn Fein ard fheis made an historic commitment to support policing and
the rule of law. By any measure, those are historic developments on
which we need to
build.
The order
appoints 20 February 2008 as the date before which the amnesty period
identified in a non-statutory decommissioning scheme must end. The
current date is the 23 February 2007. Therefore, if we want the
decommissioning arrangements to continue,
we need to extend the period by another year. The amnesty period is the
time during which firearms, ammunition and explosives can be
decommissioned in accordance with the scheme. Most of the offences
relate to the possession of weapons, but others may stem from
participation in decommissioning, which might not be centred on the
weapons involved, but on the accompanying behaviour, such as
withholding information or making arrangements with
terrorists.
All the
decommissioning arrangements being debated this afternoon fall within
the overall framework agreed in section 2 of the Northern Ireland Arms
Decommissioning Act 1997, which, of course, allows for the extension of
the decommissioning period every year, until 27 February 2010. We have
introduced the order because the Government want to secure the
decommissioning of all weapons in Northern Ireland.
I am pleased
to report that discussions are ongoing with the Ulster Political
Research Group and the Progressive Unionist party, which represent the
two main loyalist paramilitary groups in Northern Irelandthe
Ulster Defence Association and the Ulster Volunteer Force
respectively.
I am
also pleased to confirm that the IICD has confirmed that it has direct
contact with the UDA and some indirect contact with the Loyalist
Volunteer Force, although it reports that the UVF has yet to get back
in direct contact with itsomething that it, and we, would wish
to happen. To enable those discussions to bear fruit and lead to
further decommissioning, we need to provide the necessary statutory
framework. The order will do
that.
2.35
pm
Mr.
Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con): I, too, welcome you
to the Committee, Mr. Jones. It seems that some hon. Members
are doing little other than Northern Ireland business this week. I am
pleased to respond to the Ministers wider remarks. Of course,
we recognise that the situation in Northern Ireland isvery
different now even from 18 months ago, as the Secretary of State for
Northern Ireland said this morning. We welcome that the IMC recognises
that the IRA has given up all its arms. Of course, it is essential that
that remains the case, that it does not attempt to obtain further arms
and that the waras it puts itis over for good,
regardless of what happens to the political process. That must be the
case. It is not conditional; it has to be over for absolute
good.
I echo what the
Minister says: we have constantly called forI have personally
done so, as has my hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Mr.
Lidington)the loyalists to give up their weapons entirely.
There is absolutely no need for illegally held weapons in a civilised
society. As part of the democratic process, all criminality and all
paramilitary activity should be ended. There can be no question about
that.
The Minister
touched on the Sinn Fein ard fheis, which was held recently. I was a
little bit disappointed by the Secretary of States response to
me in the Chamber this morning, when I said that I welcome the
statementevery right-thinking person would do sobut
that it must be backed up with action. Over the weekend, the press in
Northern Ireland reported that the IRA had carried out an investigation
into the
murder of Mr. Robert McCartney. It had gathered evidence and,
indeed, identified three volunteersas it called themwho
had been involved in that murder. I called for that file to be handed
over to the police. I was a little disappointed that the Secretary of
State did not support me in that call. Indeed, he implied that I was
being negative about the process in not fully welcoming the Sinn
Feins statement recently.
I repeat that I welcome the
statement made at the ard fheis, but the words mean nothing in
themselves if the IRA is not prepared to hand over that file or to tell
the police whom it believes carried out the Northern bank robbery. I am
not saying that the IRA carried out the Northern bank
robberyalthough the Government and the Police Service of
Northern Ireland are. Surely, if that is the case, the IRA must deliver
on the ground what it promised for two reasons: first, as I said
earlier, so that the people who are involved in those crimes are
brought to justice; and secondly, to give confidence to the
constitutional parties in Northern Irelandas represented by my
hon. Friend the Member for Lagan Valleythat they can be trusted
on their word and that they are a party now fit to share Government
with. We need to see a little bit more movement than we have seen
already, but I welcome the progress that has been made and the words
uttered so far.
We are
again debating such an order. I supposethat, in an ideal
world, such an order would not be necessary, but none of us lives in an
ideal world. After a long period of unrest in Northern Ireland, the
situation there is certainly not as we would wish, so we have to accept
the order. Of course, as ever with such orders, we do so with some
reluctance. However, I recognise that, because we have not made as much
progress as we need to make, the order is necessary, so I have no
hesitation in supporting
it.
2.39
pm
Mr.
Eddie McGrady (South Down) (SDLP): It is with great please
that I participate in this debate, Mr. Jones, under your
expert guidance, tutelage and perhaps
correction.
Consideration
of the order is a repetition for all of us and it is difficult to find
something new to say about it. We are in the 10th year of the most
extended period of remission from a cancer that has infected Northern
Ireland for decades, if not centuries. Before, dealing with the order
per se, I wish to say that I am slightly disappointed by the tone of
some of the comments made by the hon. Member for Tewkesbury. I have
been a strong public opponent of Sinn Fein and the IRA all my life; I
make no compromise with them. However, I have to recognise that the
decision made at the ard fheis on Sunday week was truly a huge change
in centuries of attitude for the so-called rebellious in Northern
Irelandfrom the United Irishmen of 98 to 1916 through
to today, although I do not make any connection between some of the
lofty ideals of the earlier rebellions and those that have blighted our
society for the past 30 years.
I caution the Committee that
we, particularly the Opposition, could again be entrapping ourselves in
conditionality. Conditionality has been the trap into which progress
has fallen for many years. We must give credit where credit is due. We
cannot test absolutely the
sincerity of the words until time has elapsed. We need
to work together to build confidence and
partnership, and that can only be achieved by doing it.
I would like to think that the
Democratic Unionist party and Sinn Fein will do the job on 26 March.
That is what the order is all about. Those of us who live in the
community know that it has been absolutely transformed in the past 10
years. It is hard to have any conception of what it was like to live
before thento go out of the door every day and be stopped by
the paramilitaries, the military or the police, and to have handbag and
body searches no matter where we went. To go out for a nights
entertainment was a danger in itself, whether one was in a rural or an
urban area. The rejuvenation of economic development in Belfast and
throughout the six counties has been remarkable.
We have an opportunity, and we
are giving ourselves a further opportunity by extending the order.
The10 years since 1997 have probably constituted the longest
amnesty period in history, but, as is typical of Irish affairs, we are
moving slowly. It is very important, because we have a lot of
decommissioning to do. Let me give a practical example. In my home town
of Downpatrick, there is a fortification attached to the police
barracks that protrudes out into one of the main streets. The
authorities cannot take it away, no matter how much I plead with them
to do so, because they assure me that there is still a real threat from
dissident IRA groups. I do not know whether there is a threat: I do not
see it, but they presumably have intelligence.
The dissident IRA groups, the
Real IRA, the Loyalist Volunteer Force and the Ulster Defence
Association all have weapons. If those organisations are a threat, the
weapons they have must be significant, and that is what worries me. My
theme is that a blind eye has been turned. I do not mean that
offensively. Perhaps I should say that there has been a focus only on
Sinn Fein weaponry and capability. There has been no perceptible drive
to encourage dissident republicans and loyalist paramilitaries in
particular to complete their decommissioning.
It was interesting that both
the UDA and the UVF were to benefit from previous legislation, such as
the Northern Ireland Offences Act 2006 and the Northern Ireland Arms
Decommissioning Act 1997, even though they did not decommission. Not
only did they not decommission, they said specifically and publicly
that they had no intention to decommission. The response from the
Government was nil. There was absolutely no comment from the Northern
Ireland Office on the statement that the UVF and the UDA would not
decommission.
I
understand from the IMC that the Provisional IRA has now fully
decommissioned. The Government and the security forces must therefore
turn their attention to those organisations that will not decommission.
Total normality cannot be achieved in Northern Ireland without
demilitarisation in all its aspects. Certain republican
communitiesI am not expert enough to comment on loyalist
communities because I do notlive in onehave until now
been threatened by godfatherism, extortion, protection, drugs, money
laundering and all the rest. That must be stopped. I have not heard of
an arms or explosives discovery of any significance in the past few
years.
There is a lot
to be done yet, but to underscore the point on which I started, the
community in Northern
Ireland, socially, economically and in the way we live, has been
transformed. Decommissioning is part of that process. A little bit of
further transformation to bring the loyalist paramilitaries into
decommissioning and disbanding should now be the drive of Government. I
have no doubt that the dissident republicans of the IRA and the Real
IRA can be picked up in that process. It is significant that those
individuals erstwhile fellow volunteers are
now poachers turned gamekeepers, if we are to believe the ard fheis
resolution of last Sunday.
People who now allegedly
support law and order have a wealth of information that should be
available to the police. Human nature being human nature, I do not
expect a huge surge of new information, as the hon. Member for
Tewkesbury suggested might occur, but I think that there should be a
cessation of all involvement in illegal activities. The communities
should be freed to express openly their support for policing and to
take their problems to the police, so that can return to normal
society.
We totally
approve the extension of the amnesty to February 2008, but I have one
final plea. Although certain difficulties remain, minor preconditions
must not stall us in reaching the partnership that would allow us to do
two thingsto grow together as a community and to heal together
as a community. I would like to think that, before my term in this
House ends, I will be able to stand on the Floor of the House and say
the community of Northern Ireland rather than
the two communities of Northern
Ireland.
2.48
pm
Lembit
Öpik (Montgomeryshire) (LD): It is an honour to
serve under you, Mr. Jones. As you will know, due to minor
boundary changes, I have managed to snaffle a small part of your
constituency, so it is symmetrical and appropriate that you should have
power over me
today.
We have been
here before, as the hon. Member for Tewkesbury pointed out, and I hope
that we will not be here again, but it seems to me that the most
implausible thing in Northern Ireland politics is deadlines. I remember
the cast-iron nature of the original deadline for decommissioning, the
amnesties and everything that went with it. Like many deadlines in
Northern Irish politics, that fell by the wayside for understandable
reasons. Although I do not condemn the Government for continually
extending certain aspects of the deadlines, it is symptomatic of the
deadlock that we have sought to work through in recent
years.
Like others, I
am more optimistic than I have been for a long time. I think that March
will be a positive time, not least because I genuinely believe that
Sinn Fein have made a qualitative shift in their feelings about
policing. It remains to be seen, but I sincerely hope that that will
make it easier for the loyalist parties in particular to find a way
forward for power sharing, even if they do not feel particularly
comfortable with their partners in that
arrangement.
In that
context, it seems that the call to arms in Northern Irish politics
should be regarded as all but
pointless to even the most hard-bitten cynic of democracy. I concur that
the past 10 years have seen a peace of sorts. The longer it continues,
the more it seems that the new habit of politics in Northern Ireland
reflects what we in the rest of the United Kingdom might call
normality.
The
Independent Monitoring Commission has given us quite a lot of good news
in the past few years. It appears that the Provisional IRA has at least
decommissioned its weapons, though it made the effort to commission a
few million Bank of Ireland banknotes for itself, which in theory could
always be converted into weaponry at relatively short notice.
Nevertheless, the underlying cause for optimism derives from the change
in attitudethe decommissioning of the desire to wage war. That
has been replaced with democratic processes, which, it has to be said,
have served fairly well both Sinn Fein and those whom it
represents.
It seems
that the loyalist paramilitary groups have been rather more tardy in
decommissioning. That is worrying, as is the continued belief of
dissident republican groups that weapons are more effective than the
ballot box. Without the order it is hard to see how Parliament could be
regarded as sending anything other than a mixed message to those
dissident groups. With the order, there is at least an avenue for such
groups to take the sensible and constructive option of decommissioning,
should they wish to do
so.
Organised crime is
another consideration, because we know that there is a relationship
between paramilitary activity and such crime, including cross-border
smuggling. I am less optimistic that the order will encourage those
whose primary objective is illegal profiteering to hand in their
weapons, but in as much as there is an overlap with the various people
who dress up their paramilitary activities under the guise of
ideological causes, those individuals may ultimately be persuaded by
the force of the argument, or indeed by peer group pressure and by
developments in Northern Irish politics, that their weapons are
pointless.
For those
reasons, we once again find ourselves renewing and supporting the
renewal of an orderone that we hope will be able to lapse in
the near future. The crucial change is the one I mentionedthe
decommissioning of an attitude that embraces violence. When we achieve
that, we achieve
peace.
2.52
pm
Mr.
Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP): Thank you for
the opportunity to speak this afternoon, Mr. Jones. My party
will support the renewal of the amnesty provisions as dealt with in the
order.
As other hon.
Members have said, renewal has become an annual occasion, which is a
symptom of the lack of progress that has sometimes occurred. This year
is qualitatively different, however, because of the progress made since
the last extension of the order. I believe it was in July last year
that the Provisional IRA issued a statement in terms that it was
standing down its active service units and beginning the process of
dismantling its paramilitary structures. The IMC reported last week
that further progress is being made towards the day when the
Provisional IRA will no longer exist as a terrorist organisation, which
is
something that everyone in the House will welcome. It is sad to report
that there has been lack of progressin relation to loyalist
paramilitary groups and the dissident republican groups, but it is
worth noting that the IRA engaged last year in a substantial act of
decommissioning, which has brought us to a point of substantial
political progress in Northern Ireland.
As other hon. Members have
said, Sinn Feins conference met a couple of weeks ago and
passed a motion supporting both the police and justice system in
Northern Ireland and, notably, in the Republic. The terms of the motion
cover not only the Police Service of Northern Ireland but the Garda
Siochana and the courts on both sides of the border. I agree with the
hon. Member for South Down that that marks a major shift, at least in
mainstream republican thinking. In the past, it would have been
unthinkable for many republicans that the republican movement should
reach the point of endorsing the Police Service of Northern Ireland,
together with what amounts to British justice in the form of the
Northern Ireland
courts.
The hon.
Member for Tewkesbury was right to point out that there is some
conditionality attached to the motion. We hope that that can be dealt
with and resolved, because it is important that there is unequivocal
support from all political parties in Northern Ireland that aspire to
be in government. That does not mean that we give the police or the
courts a blank cheque. I am sure that all of us here today have had to
raise cases where we believe that the police may have treated someone
unfairly, or that there may have been an injustice as a result of the
judicial process. The system is not perfect. Yet it is important that
those whose responsibility it is to make the lawthe Assembly is
a legislative body and will be when devolution occursthose
whose responsibility it is to govern should support the people who are
tasked with upholding the rule of law. That is why the Democratic
Unionist party made it a precondition of entering Government that all
parties, including Sinn Fein, should give their support to the police
and the ruleof
law.
We are pleased
with the progress that has been made. We have stated publicly that we
recognise that what Sinn Fein has said in the motion is significant,
but we need to see those words now matched with action on the ground
and to see that Sinn Fein is genuine and demonstrates that clearly.
There have been statements already: Gerry Adams, the Member for
Belfast, West, stated that nationalists and republicans should assist
the police in investigating crimes such as rape, burglary, car theft,
and so on. We would like Sinn Fein to take the next step, which is to
support the police in investigating organised crime and paramilitary
related crime, because that is also important. We know that organised
crime in Northern Ireland continues to be a major
problem.
This morning
I met representatives of the retail petrol industry in the Province,
who pointed out that last year some 60 retail petrol stations closed in
Northern Ireland. There are more vehicles on the road today than there
have ever been in the history of Northern Ireland and more people are
buying fuel, so why are petrol stations closing? It is because there is
a huge black market controlled by organised crime, mainly directed by
paramilitary groups. It is important
that Sinn Fein gets behind the police and supports the Organised Crime
Task Force and the Assets Recovery Agency in the crucial work that they
are doing to tackle organised crime. We are seeing the Sinn Fein motion
being rolled out and we hope that that will be extended to include all
areas of crime, because that would represent real progress in a
practical way on the
ground.
The Minister
has set out the context of the order on decommissioning. I remember
when we debated the initial primary legislation in the House in 1997.
It was my first year as a Member of Parliament, as itwas for
the hon. Members for Tewkesbury and for Montgomeryshire. For our entire
terms as Membersof Parliament we have been talking about
decommissioning and extending the amnesty period. It is necessary to
extend that period if we want to achieve our objective, which is to
remove all armed groups from our society and to remove the threat of
terrorism from whatever quarter it
comes.
I listened
carefully to what the hon. Member for South Down said about loyalist
paramilitary groups, and I entirely endorse his comments. We have a
major deficit: on the one hand, the Provisional IRA has substantially
decommissioned, has declared its intent not to return to violence and
is dismantling its paramilitary structures; but on the other hand, the
major loyalist paramilitary groups have yet to declare their future
intent, have yet to decommission a single bullet and have yet to
dismantle their paramilitary structures. Those loyalist paramilitary
groups have stated time and again that their existence is a response to
the IRA and that their raison dĂȘtre is to protect
loyalist communities from the threat from the Provisional IRA. They
might say that there is an existing threat from the dissident groups,
but I do not think that anyone believes that the security forces are
not capable of dealing with that threat properly. No one has ever come
into my constituency office and said, If it were not for the
loyalist paramilitaries, the dissident republicans would be giving us a
hard time. There is a threatwe acknowledge
thatbut it is for the police to deal with it, supported, if
necessary, by the
Army.
Loyalist
paramilitary groups really do need to move on decommissioning, and we
urge them to do so. The hon. Member for South Down said that it is a
problem. I am not seeking to score points, but we need to learn lessons
from past mistakes. One of those mistakes, and one of the reasons that
I voted against the Belfast agreement in 1998 even though I was there
negotiating and wanting to move forward, was that no clear linkage was
made between the release of prisoners and the decommissioning of
weapons. In my opinion, that was our only opportunity to create the
leverage that would put pressure on paramilitaries, particularly the
loyalist paramilitary. It was clear that they were not going to get the
kind of political reward that Sinn Fein stood to achieve if it
completed its journey, ended its violence for good and committed itself
to exclusively peaceful means. What was in it for the loyalist
paramilitaries? An opportunity was lost in the Belfast agreement to
have a stronger linkage between decommissioning and the release of
prisoners.
It is
acknowledged that the release of prisoners was difficult for everyone.
It was a really tough moral issue
for many people, particularly the victims of violence on both sides of
the communitythat applies equally to loyalist and republican
prisoners and their victims. Such a major concession was made, yet the
linkage that was necessary to ensure that the paramilitaries delivered
on their side of the bargain was not pinned down. That is why, today,
the hon. Member for South Down and I and others lament the fact that
the loyalist paramilitaries have not moved. One would be hard pressed
to find a reason for them to move, apart from their moral obligation to
our society. There is no political motivation for them to move, nor is
there a political imperative. In very simplistic terms, as they see it,
they have nothing to gain. We have to make it clear to them that
society expects them to move and that the political parties stand
united in requiring them to move. Let us hope that there is a
response.
The Ulster
Volunteer Force has indicated that it is having an internal debate. Let
us hope that it moves to the point at which we will soon get an
announcement of its future intentions, including what it intends
todo with its weaponry. Similarly, the Ulster Defence
Associationthe largest of the paramilitary groupsis
having an internal debate. We want to encourage those organisations to
take the necessary steps. Whatever justification they may have felt
that they had for their existence in the past, I, as a Unionist
representing the Unionist communitya community they claim to
come from and to defend say to them clearly that in the new
dispensation that we are trying to create in Northern Ireland, which I
share with the hon. Member for South Down, I want there to be a day
when we move beyond the debate about united this and united that to a
united Northern Ireland. I want a Northern Ireland where there is one
community; where people feel that they can live in peace with their
neighbour and do not feel threatened; where they have confidence in
their identity and in where they have come from and they can step out
and engage across the community with others who may not share their
culture and their identity. There is common ground where we can work. I
want to see those things happening. The message that we want to send to
the paramilitary groups is that their presence in Northern Ireland is a
major stumbling block to achieving that objective. The kind of Northern
Ireland that we want to build for the future really is a Northern
Ireland that is free of paramilitarism.
By extending the amnesty, I
hope that the loyalist paramilitary groups that have not yet
decommissioned, and the republican groups that have not decommissioned,
including the Real IRA and Continuity IRA and so on, recognise that the
day of violence has gonethat the gun and the bomb have no part
to play in resolving difficulties in Northern Ireland. There will
continue to be difficulties and differences, but the way to resolve
them is by exclusively peaceful meansthrough, I hope, the
establishment over time of stable, durable political institutions that
have the support of both sides of the one community in Northern
Ireland.
As I said at
the beginning, we are prepared, perhaps with a degree of reluctance, to
support the extension of the amnesty for a further period, but we
cannot extend
it for ever. We must make it absolutely clear that we are not just going
through the motions. We are serious and we need people to move. In the
current climate andthe new political situation that we hope to
create, paramilitarism and guns have no place. The sooner both are
decommissioned, the better for all of
us.
3.5
pm
Paul
Goggins:
In opening my response to the various
contributions, and prompted by the hon. Member for Lagan Valley, I pay
tribute to those who have been engaged with these issues far longer
than I have. I am still a relative newcomer; indeed, this is the first
time that I have moved such an order. The hon. Members for Lagan Valley
and for Tewkesbury and my hon. Friend the Member for South Down have
been involved in these issues throughout their time in the
House.
My right hon.
Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree, who is here today, also
played a significant role. She may well have been in my position some
time ago, moving similar orders. Other hon. Friends have played their
part as well. The comments made this afternoon reinforce the seismic
shift that has recently taken place in Northern Ireland, as does the
fact that people who have engaged with the issues for so many years and
through such difficult times are now recognising that things have moved
on.
I shall respond to
a number of the points and questions that have been raised. I agree
with the hon. Member for Tewkesbury, and I welcome the
factthat he also underlined the changes, shifts and
improvements that have occurred. I agree that decommissioning is only
the start of a process that must become permanent, and that strong
democracy and devolution underpin the long-term peace and prosperity
that we wish to see for the people of Northern
Ireland.
I am sorry
that the hon. Member for Tewkesbury was disappointed by the Secretary
of States response this morning, but I do not think that he
could have been clearer. For the record, the Member for Belfast, West,
Gerry Adams, in relation the McCartney case, has made it absolutely
clear
that
Anybody
who has any information on the McCartney killing should give it to the
police.
That could not
be clearer. They should give information to the police if they have it.
Others have commented on his general remarks about other forms of
criminality. He has encouraged people to co-operate with the police
when they are aware that a crime has taken place. That is how it should
be. That is how democratic politicians should stand on crime and
disorder. Let us hope that it leads to the kind of progress that we all
wish for.
My hon.
Friend the Member for South Down pointed out that he is a long-term
critic of Sinn Fein. He has fought many elections and made his position
clear over many years. The fact that he made thepoint about
how substantial the change has been reinforces its significance. He
mentioned a number of organisations and groups that still possess
weaponry. All of them should be decommissioning. I agreed strongly with
the hon. Member for Lagan Valley when
he said that there is no role for the gun, the bullet and the bomb. We
must use democracy and pursue a peaceful way forward.
We all recognise that some
groups are more likely to be encouraged by the extension of the amnesty
than others. Those pledged to criminality and ongoing struggle, in
their terms, will make their own decisions, but the amnesty will
encourage those who are on the point of peace or the transition from
conflict to peace to make the important decision that will mean so much
for the peaceful future of Northern
Ireland.
My hon.
Friend asked specifically about what action the Government are taking
to engage with the UDA and the UVF, in particular. I hope that I can
reassure him by saying that the Minister of State, Northern Ireland
Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson) has
been taking the lead in bringing together Departments to reach out to
those communities that perhaps, because of poverty and other forms of
exclusion, are reluctant to come forward. They need to feel a
partnership with the Government and others, so that they can see that
there is no future in paramilitary activity. My hon. Friend is taking
such action.
The
police are also taking action and bearing down on criminality and
paramilitary activity. They are trying to gain confidence in certain
communities that, in the past, might have looked at paramilitary
support for their communities, so that they turn not to those people
but to the police. The work of the police is important, too. The
discussions to which I referred earlier between the UPRG and the PUP
are important. We want to open them up and keep communication going to
encourage people to move towards decommissioning and a peaceful
future.
I welcome the
positive comments made by the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire about the
wider political scene. I was encouraged by his assessment. He has
followed such matters closely over a long time. The prospects for March
and the election for the restoration of devolved institutions are
positive. I am sure that we all share his view and hope to see a
successful outcome of the elections and a new Executive in
place.
The hon.
Gentleman emphasised the links between paramilitary activity and
organised crimeindeed, so
did the hon. Member for Lagan Valley. There must be no let-up in the
fight against organised crime. He is right: one feeds on the other. If
we want to deal with paramilitary groups, we must deal with the
organised criminal activity that underpins their operation. The hon.
Gentleman mentioned fuel smuggling. There are also issues of
counterfeit goods and extortion, all of which are a high priority for
me and the organised crime task
force.
It was
encouraging that the latest IMC report concluded that PIRA has set its
face against organised crime. Furthermore, it noted that the leadership
of the UVF and the UDA are making encouraging noises and signs towards
moving away from organised criminal activity. The message must be clear
that there is no place for such criminality in Northern Ireland. We
shall bear down against
it.
The hon. Member
for Lagan Valley used the phrase qualitatively
different when describing some of the developments in the
recent past, such as the statements by the IRA and the reports from the
IMC. They are indeed qualitatively different, and it was good and
encouraging to hear him use such language. He said that things that
were once unthinkable are now happeningsomething that, again,
should bring encouragement to us
all.
The hon.
Gentleman made the point that no institution is perfect, which is why
it is important that the people of Northern Ireland know that there is
a stronger degree of oversight of the police than in respect of any
other police force in the world. That should encourage confidence in
the ordinary people of Northern Ireland to know that law and order are
on their side, to make sure that we have a peaceful and prosperous
future, a future in which paramilitary activity has no further role to
play.
Question put
and agreed
to.
Resolved,
That
the Committee has considered the draft Northern Ireland Arms
Decommissioning Act 1997 (Amnesty Period) Order
2007.
Committee
rose at thirteen minutes past Three
oclock.