The
Committee consisted of the following
Members:
Chairman:
Dr.
William McCrea
Boswell,
Mr. Tim
(Daventry)
(Con)
Burgon,
Colin
(Elmet) (Lab)
Carmichael,
Mr. Alistair
(Orkney and Shetland)
(LD)
Crabb,
Mr. Stephen
(Preseli Pembrokeshire)
(Con)
Donaldson,
Mr. Jeffrey M.
(Lagan Valley)
(DUP)
Drew,
Mr. David
(Stroud)
(Lab/Co-op)
Goggins,
Paul
(Minister of State, Northern Ireland
Office)
Joyce,
Mr. Eric
(Falkirk)
(Lab)
Luff,
Peter
(Mid-Worcestershire)
(Con)
McCarthy,
Kerry
(Bristol, East)
(Lab)
McGrady,
Mr. Eddie
(South Down)
(SDLP)
Mactaggart,
Fiona
(Slough) (Lab)
Marris,
Rob
(Wolverhampton, South-West)
(Lab)
Robertson,
Mr. Laurence
(Tewkesbury)
(Con)
Slaughter,
Mr. Andy
(Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush)
(Lab)
Twigg,
Derek
(Halton) (Lab)
Mike
Clark, Committee Clerk
attended the Committee
Ninth
Delegated Legislation
Committee
Wednesday 3
March
2010
[Dr.
William McCrea in the
Chair]
Draft
Police (Northern Ireland) Act 2000 (Renewal of Temporary
Provisions) Order
2010
2.30
pm
The
Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Paul Goggins):
I beg to
move,
That
the Committee has considered the draft Police (Northern Ireland) Act
2000 (Renewal of Temporary Provisions) Order
2010.
I
welcome you to the Chair, Dr. McCrea. I am sure that the Committee
feels deprived, because you will not be participating in this debate in
the same way that you took part in one on a similar issue in the
Assembly on Monday. None the less, I am sure that you will keep us in
good
order.
This
renewal order continues the temporary provisions for the appointment of
police officers and police support staff for a further, final year to
March 2011. There are two main reasons for the renewal order. First,
the Government remain committed to achieving our target of 30 per cent.
Catholic composition within the Police Service of Northern Ireland.
Secondly, we need to ensure that appointments from the most recent
recruitment campaign, which began in January, are made on the same
basis and under the same provisions as any remaining appointments from
earlier
campaigns.
I
recognise that some have principled misgivings about the policy and
have been vocal in their opposition to it. I also sympathise with those
individuals who, though qualified, have not been appointed as a direct
consequence of the provisions. It is important to remember, however,
that the vast majority of applicants who are unsuccessful are
unsuccessful because the demand to join the PSNI is extremely
high.
Let
us take the latest recruitment campaign as an example. It was launched
on 14 January this year, less than a week after the murderous attack on
Constable Peadar Heffron. When the campaign closed on 12 February,
there had been 9,008 applications. That is a clear and welcome
indication that the sentiments of the minority who carry out such
attacks and who remain intent on disrupting the peace process are not
shared by the majority of people in Northern Ireland, who want peace
and want the politics to
work.
In
the 16 competitions since the PSNI was formed in 2001, there have been
in excess of 107,000 applications from across the community. An average
of 37 per cent. of those have been from the Catholic community, which
is significantly higher than the 23 per cent. Catholic application rate
in the last campaign before the introduction of the temporary
provisions.
No
one should underestimate the tremendous progress that has been made
since the temporary provisions were introduced. At the time of the
Patten report, Catholic composition within the police was 8.23 per
cent. Today,
it stands at 27.88 per cent., with 3,807 officers having been selected
for appointment under the provisions. It is clear that the provisions
are achieving their aim of a more representative police service within
the time scale set by
Patten.
This
is the third renewal of the provisions. Much has changed since the
first renewal in 2004. At that time, some elements of Northern
Irelands community remained uncommitted, unsupportive and
unco-operative with the police service. Today, the climate is
noticeably different. All the main political parties support policing
and the rule of law, and all take their rightful place on the Policing
Board and the district policing partnerships. Indeed, such is the level
of confidence in policing that we can now all look forward to the
Assembly vote on 9 March, and to the devolution of policing
and justice powers on 12
April.
Of
course, the community in Northern Ireland is becoming increasingly
diverse. The PSNI has implemented a number of outreach measures aimed
at encouraging recruits from ethnic minority backgrounds, including
attendance at community events such as the Belfast mela. The average
application rate from ethnic minority applicants is 2.27 per cent.
There are currently 32 ethnic minority officers in the PSNI from a
variety of backgrounds, including Indian, Chinese and black
Caribbean.
The
proportion of women in the PSNI has also increased significantly since
2001. At the time of the Patten report, female composition stood at
just 12.6 per cent. Today it is 24.87 per cent. The PSNI gender action
plan will ensure that measures are put in place to retain those female
officers and monitor their progression through the
ranks.
The
benefits of a more representative police service will be felt by all
people in Northern Ireland, as the PSNI engages consistently and
effectively with all sections of the community. The Governments
policy is wholly in keeping with the intention of the Patten
commission. That envisaged that Catholic composition could be
quadrupled over a 10-year period by the implementation of the 50:50
provisions. It anticipated that that would mean reaching a range
between 29 and 33 per cent., which would represent a critical mass
capable of ensuring
that a minority
does not find itself submerged within a majority organizational
culture.
I
believe that the PSNI is set to achieve that aim. The numbers are
important, but the most important change is the cultural change that
makes the police service a shared space for officers and staff from all
community backgrounds. Renewing the provisions for a final year will
ensure that the 30 per cent. target is achieved within the 10-year
model suggested by Patten.
The
commission also recommended that, in the light of recruitment
experience and other developments, a judgment would need to be made
after 10 years on whether special measures were still needed. Having
considered the high numbers from all sections of the community who are
now applying, and the widespread support for policing across all
communities, we have concluded that we should maintain our
long-standing commitment to the 30 per cent. levela commitment
that was re-affirmed in the St. Andrews agreementand then bring
the special measures to an end.
The renewal
order that we are considering today will continue the temporary
provisions and keep them in force for a final year. That will ensure
that we reach our
target of 30 per cent. Catholic composition by March 2011, and that all
appointments from outstanding competitions are made on the same basis
and using the same provisions. The renewal order is due to end
on 28 March 2011. However, I want to emphasise to the
Committee my commitment to return to Parliament and end the provisions
at whatever point in the year it becomes clear that we shall reach the
30 per cent. target. I commend the order to the
Committee.
2.37
pm
Mr.
Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con): I welcome you to
the Chair, Dr. McCrea. May I echo the Ministers comment that
your points in the debate will be sadly missed? However, I do not doubt
that there are others on the Committeeespecially the right hon.
Member for Lagan Valley, should he be fortunate enough to catch your
eyewho will make an extremely good
speech.
The
order is one that I have spoken to many times, in almost five years in
this job. I have had deep misgivings about it and demonstrated great
reluctance to go along with it. However, I recognise that the
Government are the Government and that they have information. This
Minister is always willing to share whatever information and knowledge
he can, but there are perhaps issues that the Opposition are not aware
of, and we have to rely on his judgment. That was particularly the case
when we debated the amnesty order, which, until last month, allowed
time for paramilitary organisations to hand over their weapons. I came
out with some very strong words at the time, when we agreed with that
order. I said that it was on the Ministers own head if that
went wrong. That was very strong language, but progress was made and we
supported the Minister and the Government at that
time.
I
want to make a number of comments that might appear not to be
supportive, but it is important that we make those comments. The
Minister referred, I think four times, to this being the final year
that the order will be in operation. As I understand the legislation,
that is not necessarily the same case as with the amnesty order. The
amnesty order would have required primary legislation to extend it
further, but I do not think that that is the case with this order. It
could be extended further and I think that the Government have the
ability to extend it for three years. The order allows for one year,
but I do not think that this is necessarily the final year.
The Committee
ought to be aware that this might not be the final time that this
so-called temporary provision, which has lasted a long time, will be
extended. That is the first point that I want to make, because the
Minister touched upon the final-year point four times. If the House of
Commons Library and I are incorrect in our analysis of that point, I
will stand corrected, but that is how I understand
it.
The
real concern is that all of us in the Committee and in the House of
Commons want to see Northern Ireland move towards becoming a normal
society, but it cannot be a normal society if, when one applies for a
jobin the police service, it is perhaps best described as a
careerone is asked what ones religion is. That cannot
be right; it is not normal by any stretch of the imagination or by any
measure. It will not be a normal societyin the schools, the
police service or any other
aspect of Northern Irelanduntil we move beyond that to a point
at which it does not matter whether one is Catholic or Protestant. If a
Protestant fell down with a heart attack while walking down the road in
Northern Ireland, he would not be concerned about the religion of the
doctor or paramedic who turned up in an ambulance to treat him. That,
and not this order, is a measure of normality. This is difficult to
accept.
However,
I understand the background and that there were unacceptable abuses of
Catholics going back a number of years. I also understand that the 8
per cent. representation of Catholics in the then Royal Ulster
Constabulary was unacceptable, given the make-up of the population in
Northern Ireland and the historic tensions. I understand the
background, but I had hoped that we would now be in a position where we
and Northern Ireland politics and society had moved forward to a point
where that did not
matter.
I
attended last nights all-party Northern Ireland group meeting,
during which the new Chief Constable gave a speech and answered many
questions. It was very engaging and interesting. I asked
himthere were no Chatham House rules; there never are in these
thingsnot whether he supported this measure, but about his
general attitude towards the proposed situation. I want to quote a
particular word that he used in his response: he said that he was
nervous about it because, in his words, Protestant
applicants who were turned down last year for no other reason than
because they were Protestantsthey were perfectly able and
capable, but were turned down because of their religionwould
reapply this year. What is he to do with those perfectly good
applicants? He will have to turn them down again because they are
Protestants.
Mr.
Tim Boswell (Daventry) (Con): Would my hon. Friend not
agree, following the figures quoted by the Minister in relation to
applications, that one of the many sad effects of the current recession
is that it is likely to aggravate the number of applicants,
which is welcome in some respects, but equally, particularly
while quotas continue to be applied, it is going to increase the number
of disappointed applicants who would otherwise be admirably
qualified?
Mr.
Robertson: I thank my hon. Friend and I am delighted that
he has joined us on the Committee. He makes a very strong point that
will probably add to the Chief Constables nervousness about the
situation. That said, the Chief Constable has something of a
cop-outagain, I am advised by the House of Commons Library,
which is excellent on these issuesin that even if the Assembly
votes to devolve policing and justice next Tuesday, and even if the
House of Commons subsequently endorses that a couple of weeks later, as
I hope it will, the recruitment policy, as I understand it, will not be
devolved. The Minister may correct me, but the advice that I have
received is that the policy will not be devolved. Therefore, when we
talk about devolving policing and justice, we are devolving only some
of it, not all of it, and we are not devolving a crucial aspect. That
is what I am advised. I would like to hear the Ministers
remarks on that.
I understand
why we are trying to redress the problem and get more Catholics into
the PSNI, and I totally support any fair attempts to do that. However,
very
senior officers in the PSNI, whom I have not mentioned by name today,
tell me that the paramilitaries are still actively discouraging
Catholics from joining the police service. Surely that is the root of
the problem and the problem that we have to address. To be clear, it is
not the Chief Constable who told me that.
I have
referred to the fact that I want to see schools, the police service and
all sections of society in Northern Ireland move away from the
situation in which we have to ask what someones religion is.
South Africa used to have the Population Registration Act 1950, which
required people to determine what nationality they were. In Rwanda,
people had to state what background they were. We have that situation
in Northern Ireland. We have state-sponsored sectarianism, and I use
that term having thought about it for quite a while. If the state
requires sectarianism to exist, how on earth can we get rid of it? We
must move
on.
I
am deeply concerned about passing the order today, for the reasons that
I have given. Hon. and right hon. Members on this Committee might ask,
Why arent you going to tear the walls down?,
Why arent you going to force a vote on it? or
Why arent you going to vote against the Government on
it? This is the last time that we will come to it and the last
time that I am prepared to go along with it. I understand that the
Minister is determined to get the figure over 30 per cent., and we are
almost there now. However, if the order is necessary to get us above
that figure, how do we maintain the figure if we are not going to
extend the order beyond another year? Surely, if the order is necessary
to get us to 30 per cent., it is necessary to keep us there. I am not
supporting the order; I am returning to my first pointthat the
order may not be only for a
year.
What
if the figure goes to 31 per cent. and then drops to 29 per cent.? What
do we do then? Do we reintroduce this discriminatory order? I hope not.
I hope that society will have moved on to the point where it does not
matter whether someone is a Catholic or a Protestant. That is the kind
of Northern Ireland that I want to see, and I do not believe that we
will have a normal society or make the proper progress in Northern
Ireland that we all want to see until we get to that
position.
2.48
pm
Mr.
Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): I will not
detain the Committee for long. Like the hon. Member for Tewkesbury, I
have been through a number of these Committees over the years and they
have not always been the measured and thoughtful proceedings that we
have heard today. I share many of the misgivings that the hon.
Gentleman has outlined, which are now well on the record. Like him, I
have come to the conclusion that as the Government are determined to
pursue and have pursued this course, it would be wrong of us to
obstruct them unnecessarily, with the destabilisation that would
result. On the basis of the undertaking that the Minister has given
that when he reaches his 30 per cent. target it will be the end of
50:50 recruitment, I am prepared to see the order go through today. I
hope that this will be the last time that we are here.
The hon.
Member for Tewkesbury asked what would happen if the percentage went up
to 31 and then fell back to 29. That is a perfectly legitimate
question. My
expectation is that the Government will have made a significant
achievement by getting to 30 per cent., and the level of nationalist
Catholic participation in the PSNI should be self-sustaining. If it is
not, that will be because it is not a sustainable position. The
Government would then need to look seriously at finding some other
mechanism to achieve the same aim, because that would be a mark of
failure. On the basis of the undertaking that the Minister has given us
today and conversations that I have had with him previously, I would
not be minded to divide the Committee on this debate. As I said, I hope
that after a considerable number of such Committees, this is the last
time that we will have one of these
debates.
2.50
pm
Mr.
Eddie McGrady (South Down) (SDLP): Thank you for calling
me, Dr. McCrea. You may suffer a severe case of dÃ(c)jà -vu
this afternoon in terms of your massive contribution to the debate last
Monday in the Northern Ireland Assembly, which I read with interest. It
will not surprise you to know that I will not be near the same
wavelength from which other Members will be contributing. I agree with
the Minister in his opening statement that the provisions for 50:50
recruitment have been effective in achieving a more representative
police service. However, there is a significant way to go before we
have a representative police service, not only in respect of the
officerswhich we are always talking aboutbut more
particularly the serious situation in the civil employment in the PSNI,
which is very much behind schedule and has not been addressed in the
same way.
I do not want
to rake up old history, but it sometimes has to be done to put in
context where we are today. I remind hon. Members that 50:50 was a
compromise. The history of policing in Northern Ireland was so
abominable that the demand was for the abolition of the previous Royal
Ulster Constabulary. It was a compromise that that would not be done,
in spite of all the history and in spite of all that went before. The
compromise was that we would keep the existing officers in place,
although there were many charges against many of them. Many other
officers were genuine, serving, honest, hard-working men and women, but
there was a definite unacceptability, generally speaking. The 50:50 was
the compromise to allow time for change to take place and not to have
the radical approach. In fact, we as a party were bitterly opposed by
people then engaged in violenceparties now not engaged in
violence, who would not accept that as a compromisebut we
forced it through and we worked with it. So let us get the context
right.
The Minister
said in his opening remarks that he seeks a renewal for a final year.
He underscored the words final year and then went on to
underscore them even further by saying that he would come back before
whatever date it was that he mentionedI think it was February
nextif he was satisfied that approximately 30 per cent. had
been reached, and he quoted the figure of nearly 28 per cent. at the
moment. I feel, and my party feels, that there are compelling reasons
for the renewal of the order, not just now but possibly in
the future, because one of the basic tenets of Patten at the
time, for the reasons that I mentioned earlier, was that it should be a
police service that
commands the
confidence across the community.
That is an essential
function. Patten did not target 30 per cent. as the ultimate
and the appropriate. He saidin fact, the Minister quoted it
earlierthat he reckoned that 29 or 30 per cent. would be a
critical mass at which point it was conceivable that the PSNI would not
be totally deemed to be, let us say, one-sided under one direction. But
that was not the ultimate, because he went on to say, and I would like
to quote this paragraph which is never
used:
We
have not taken our model beyond ten years. As we have said in the
previous chapter, we would expect the question of the size of the
police service to be revisited by that time. In the light of
recruitment experience and other developments between now and
then
not
then and
now
a
judgment would need to be made as to whether special measures were
still needed to achieve a police service representative of the
community or whether this could now be expected to develop
organically.
I
emphasise that he
said:
Either
way we envisage that the composition of the police should continue to
move towards a closer resemblance to that of the community as a
whole.
That
was the thesis of Patten and that is what people across the community
endorsed as a way forward, some with reluctance, some with compromise
and some with
enthusiasm.
Have
we arrived anywhere near that? The 2001 census figures state that the
Catholic community is 44 per cent. and that the Protestant community is
53 per cent. The figures are not, therefore, 72 and 28 per cent. There
are still huge variations in that community representative and
proportionality role. That is why this process was needed and why it is
possible, and, with due consideration in time, it might have to
continue. I have referred to the question of civil employment in PSNI,
which is miles behind where we are at in terms of police officer
recruitment. It has not been successfulI will say no more than
thatin its
presentation.
I
know that this is not an ideal situation, but we did not come from an
ideal situation. We came from a horrible situation and we are trying to
address it. Of all those people who are now saying that this is wrong,
discriminatory and everything else, not one of them suggested at the
time how we could go from where we were to where we hope to be. There
is opposition to everything all the time and this is the compromise.
The proof of the pudding is that the compromise has worked and is
working.