House of Commons Hansard Debates for 1 Jul 1993

Hansard

House of Commons

Thursday 1 July 1993

The House met at half-past Two o'clock

PRAYERS

[Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]

PRIVATE BUSINESS

Croydon Tramlink Bill

[Lords] (By Order)

East Coast Main Line (Safety) Bill

(By Order)

Woodgrange Park Cemetery Bill

[Lords](By Order) Orders for Second Reading read.

To be read a Second time on Thursday 8 July.

British Railways

(No. 4) Bill-- (By Order) Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [8 February], That the Bill be now read a Second time.

Debate to be resumed on Thursday 8 July.

London Local Authorities Bill

[Lords]

(By Order) Order for Second Reading read.

To be read a Second time on Thursday 8 July.

SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE

Ordered,

That there be laid before this House a Return of correspondence between Mr. Attorney-General and the honourable Member for East Hampshire concerning the Serious Fraud Office, and related papers.-- [Mr. Attorney- General.]

Oral Answers to Questions

NORTHERN IRELAND

Cross-border Security

1. Mr. Duncan Smith : To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the current position regarding cross-border security co- operation ; and if he will make a statement.

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Sir Patrick Mayhew) : The Government continue to work closely with the Government of the Republic of Ireland to achieve further improvements in cross-border security co- operation. Both Governments recognise the importance of keeping existing measures under review and making further progress whenever possible.

Mr. Duncan Smith : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that what we need now is constitutional certainty? In the light of his answer, does he agree that Labour's recent discussion paper shows too amply to us all their cynicism about our current Northern Ireland talks?

Column 1092

Sir Patrick Mayhew : I think that constitutional certainty is very important. It is represented by the Government's guarantee that the constitutional status of Northern Ireland will not change without the consent of the majority of the people living there. That is reflected in article 1 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

It is alarming to find that the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) was reported in The Irish Times yesterday as confirming a report that Labour's policy on Northern Ireland is moving towards joint sovereignty or shared responsibility. The infamous policy paper "Options for a Labour Government" expressly acknowledges that such a change could not be achieved without imposing it against the will of the majority of Northern Ireland citizens.

Mr. Maginnis : During the Prime Minister's recent welcome visit to Northern Ireland, did he advise the right hon. and learned Member that cross-frontier security co-operation is a mere figment of a fertile political imagination and that the continuing unresolved debacle over extradition is a more accurate measure of the perversity and carelessness of the Irish Republic?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : We are disappointed with yesterday's statement that the Irish Government are not able to fulfil their commitment to amend their legislation in this session of the Dail. We will be seeking assurances that the Bill will be introduced early in the next session. Both Governments share a common concern to ensure that terrorists cannot avoid extradition by claiming that the crimes they commit are political, and both Governments wish to close a loophole revealed by an Irish Supreme Court decision in 1991.

I do not share the hon. Gentleman's ultra-critical view of cross-border co- operation, and I have previously in the House commended what the Garda have done recently by way of substantial finds of munitions and weapons.

Rev. Ian Paisley : Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that the first paragraph of the Anglo-Irish Agreement does not spell out that Northern Ireland is a integral part of the United Kingdom? Does not he also agree that, as long as the south of Ireland insists on its legal claims over Northern Ireland, we will have this question over Northern Ireland's constitutional position?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : The first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is correct. One of the reasons why I believe that it would be helpful to have a successor to the Anglo-Irish Agreement is that it would provide an opportunity to express, by agreement, a unambiguous statement of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom. I have said previously that I consider that those two articles in the Irish constitution are unhelpful to the process in which all participants in the talks last year were engaged. I hope that it will be possible for them to be changed in a way that will remove that obstacle.

Mr. Hume : Does the Secretary of State agree that the reaction that he has just given, and that which the Prime Minister gave yesterday, to that academic document, which I understand is not a Labour party policy document and which I have never seen--[ Hon. Members :-- "Ooh!] Those words are very clear--which I have never seen.

Column 1093

Does the Secretary of State agree that his overreaction has more to do with the politics of the House than with the politics of Ireland? The Official Unionist brothers McGimpsey yesterday alleged that there was a plot between the Labour party and myself before the last election to stop the talks, in the hope that there would be a change of Government. The truth--which can be confirmed by the hon. Members for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble) and for Antrim, North (Rev. Ian Paisley)--was that before the election we requested the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) and his former leader to issue a statement saying that if there were a change of Government, the talks would resume on precisely the same basis, and that the hon. Member made that statement.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the Government have signed an international treaty, called the Maastricht treaty, which commits the British and Irish Governments to an ever-closer union, not just of the peoples of both Irelands but of the people of 10 other countries as well, and that that is, in effect, shared sovereignty over a much wider range of issues than Northern Ireland ; and that the implication--

Madam Speaker : Order. This is Question Time. The hon. Gentleman has done very well with his questions. There are other Members seeking to ask questions.

Mr. Hume : Does the Secretary of State agree that the implication of that treaty is that there will be an ever-closer union of the people of Ireland within Europe--from a nationalist point of view--and of the-- [Interruption.]

Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Gentleman must now resume his seat. This is not a debate ; it is Question Time. A number of Members are seeking to come in on this particular question.

Mr. Hume : It happens to be a very important question.

Madam Speaker : Order. That is why I am seeking cross-party interest in the matter. Will the hon. Gentleman now come to his point?

Mr. Hume : Will the Government, instead of acting as a facilitator, be a Government and declare that their objective is to promote agreement--I underline that word--between the people of Ireland, the people of Northern Ireland and the people of Britain and Ireland, and convene talks for that, and tell the hon. Member for Antrim, North

Madam Speaker : Order. The Secretary of State.

Sir Patrick Mayhew : I did not assert that the hon. Gentleman had seen the document "Options for a Labour Government". If I were him, I should feel that I ought to have seen it. A great many other people felt that they ought to have seen it before the last general election, because the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) is reported as saying that the policy of the Labour party is "shifting towards joint sovereignty or shared responsibility'." Paragraph 7 of the document says :

"Shared responsibility has been condemned as undemocratic--since it would have to be imposed against the wishes of a majority of Northern Ireland citizens."

That is an anxiety-making statement and we are entitled to know--as is the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume)--whether that is the policy of the Labour party.

Column 1094

As to the Government's policy regarding talks, everyone knows that we wish to resume those talks with all participants present, with a view to securing the agreement that was everyone's objective in April or March 1991.

Sir James Kilfedder : Has the Secretary of State brought pressure to bear on the Government in Dublin to take urgent and necessary measures to apprehend IRA snipers who, operating from the safety of the Irish Republic, have killed a number of members of the Northern Ireland security forces? Surely it is time for the Irish Republic to introduce selective internment at the same time as it is introduced in Northern Ireland?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : The last part of the hon. Gentleman's question raises profound issues of great difficulty.

There is no evidence of which I am aware that the recent disgraceful killing of a soldier near Newtownhamilton was by a shot fired across the border. There is, however, no question but that the border is one of the greatest assets of terrorists of a republican character--in fact, it is their greatest asset. I make no criticism of the willingness of the Garda to bring all their resources to bear to the detection and arrest of people of that character. It may well be the case that they could do with more resources, but I emphasise that co-operation between the two police forces has never been better than it is at the moment.

Mr. Alton : Does the Secretary of State appreciate that many in the House and outside it were disappointed at his overreaction and that of the Prime Minister on Tuesday? They welcome honest intellectual debate about some of the options that might move us away from the certainty-- [Interruption.] --the certainty that the right hon. and learned Gentleman described today, and which represents sterility because there is no movement at all in the politics of Northern Ireland. If joint sovereignty were one of the options to be explored, surely it is legitimate that it should be on the table for people to discuss--just as much as the retention of Northern Ireland in its present form or even a united Ireland.

Sir Patrick Mayhew : I agree with the hon. Gentleman to the extent that if a debate is going on in the Labour party about whether a change in the constitutional state of Northern Ireland should be imposed against the wishes of most people living there, we should all know about it. That is what we want to know.

Mr. McNamara : Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware of the document, "The future of Northern Ireland : A paper for discussion", produced by the then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. William Whitelaw? Is the Secretary of State aware that the introduction to that paper states that it is to be seen as "a comprehensive basis for further discussions"?

There follows a whole host of possible options for the future of Northern Ireland including, in paragraph 40,

"a partial or incomplete transfer of sovereignty"--

of parts of Northern Ireland--

"either in geographical terms or in jurisdictional terms" ; in paragraph 42(a), the possibility of total integration of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom ; in paragraph 42(b), a British Government declaration

"To admit the possibility of change, either towards Irish unity or some form of condominium" ;

in paragraph 42(c), the Government laying down

Column 1095

"a theoretical path towards closer integration, and possible ultimate unity in Ireland" ;

and in paragraph 42(e),

"some form of joint machinery, either at inter-parliamentary or inter- governmental level"?

Will the Secretary of State confirm that such discussion documents make a useful and positive contribution to debate on solutions to the Northern Ireland conflict? Will he confirm that his Government have imposed an Anglo -Irish Agreement on an unwilling majority? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman confirm that the union of Ireland with Great Britain was imposed, and that not one Irish Member--not even a Northern Ireland Member--voted for the Government of Ireland Act 1920 and for the start of Stormont? Will the Secretary of State therefore repudiate the suggestion that such discussion documents are a recipe for disaster, although the Opposition accept that the Prime Minister-- [Interruption.]

Madam Speaker : Order. I think that the hon. Gentleman has put his question.

Mr. McNamara : I can assure you, Madam Speaker, that this croppy does not lie down before a pile of Tories behaving like that. The Opposition accept that the Prime Minister has provided us with a substantial menu from which we can choose a variety of disasters--both a la carte and table d'ho te.

Sir Patrick Mayhew : The document that the hon. Gentleman produces, as though it were a killer rabbit out of a hat, was a discussion document published without a contemporary expression of Government policy at that time. The Labour document was not published before the general election, and has not been published. We now have the reported confirmation of the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) that the Labour party's policy is shifting towards "shared responsibility". The document asserts that shared responsibility can only be imposed against the wishes of a majority. Despite his lengthy intervention, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North carefully refrained from telling us whether that is his policy. We need to know.

As I am answering a lengthy question, perhaps you, Madam Speaker, will allow me to raise another matter, which is not unapposite, from page 29 of the full document. Having stated that it would be possible fully to reform the economy of Northern Ireland by affirmative action, it goes on to say that that might reduce the differential between Catholic and Protestant emigration rates and that the

Catholic-nationalist electorate of Northern Ireland would expand. There then follows a remarkable sentence :

"However, such a transformation would take time and might have the unintended effect of reconciling Catholics to Northern Ireland's present status as part of the UK."

Is that the Labour party's policy towards reconciliation? Will the hon. Gentleman condemn that and disown it or is it the case that reconciliation has to conform to the party's declared policy of unity in Ireland?

Mr. McNamara rose --

Madam Speaker : Order. Another time.

Mr. Hunter : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that, whereas cross-border security co-operation is invaluable, the sort of co- operation envisaged by the secret

Column 1096

paper that is causing so much discussion amounts to a callous disregard for the democratically expressed wishes of the majority of Northern Ireland and, therefore, could not possibly be the foundation for a secure and better Northern Ireland?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : My hon. Friend is absolutely right.

Mr. Cryer : What about the Anglo-Irish Agreement ?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : The Anglo-Irish Agreement is an agreement on how two sovereign Governments who share a land border should co-operate. Nothing in the Anglo-Irish Agreement derogates from the sovereignty of the British Government. I very much agree with my hon. Friend.

Law Officers

2. Mr. Campbell-Savours : To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what proposals he has for strengthening the powers of Law Officers as they relate to Northern Ireland.

Sir Patrick Mayhew : None at present.

Mr. Campbell-Savours : Are not the ideas set out in the discussion document of my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara), particularly as they relate to future law and order enforcement in Northern Ireland, a breath of fresh air which the British people will welcome, as they want to see British politicians break the logjam in Northern Ireland ? To confirm that, I must tell the Secretary of State that we have constituents in the north of England who spend their time patrolling the streets of Northern Ireland. They, more than any others, want the logjam to be broken. Should not all British political parties look constructively on the very good work that has been done by my hon. Friend ?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : We do not know--that is the trouble--whether the policy document constitutes fresh air, hot air or the declared policy of the Labour party. I believe that we are entitled to know that. The hon. Gentleman's constituents-- [Interruption.] If I may attract the hon. Gentleman's attention. I assumed, in his favour, that he might be interested in an answer. The hon. Gentleman's constituents who serve gallantly in the British Army in Northern Ireland will want to know whether it is the policy of the so-called alternative Government that there should be imposed upon Northern Ireland, against the wishes of the majority--a constitutional change which would ensure that the hon. Gentleman's constituents had a much harder task on their hands when they next serve there.

Mr. Peter Bottomley : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the best thing for the Law Officers and for the paper is for it to be published openly by the Labour party rather than be hidden and for the Leader of the Opposition to say where he stands and where his party stands and whether it is the same as where the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara) stands ?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : That would be interesting. It would also be interesting to know what connection this topic has with the Law Officers.

Column 1097

Mr. Molyneaux : Given that 20-minute display of reconciliation and bipartisanship, and given the requests made by many authoritative institutions in Northern Ireland for a strengthening of the law against terrorism, will the Secretary of State assure us that when the royal commission reports, which will probably be next week, he will take speedy action on those matters, which have been in the pending tray for too long?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : The right hon. Gentleman refers to suggestions made recently by the Chief Constable for changes in the law. It is perfectly true that those are under consideration. They are bound, I would guess, to be considered by the Runciman royal commission which is reporting shortly. It would be sensible to see what that report says about those proposed changes. The law must be kept under review and any changes must meet the test of being effective in the control of terrorism and proportionate to the harm that is sought to be redressed. That is a test which would generally apply.

The document has some relevance to the Army because paragraph 13 says :

"Security would initially be the joint responsibility of the Great Britain and Irish nominees to the Executive Joint Authority. Responsibilities for the police force and the army would rotate between them."

That is a good example of joint authority towards which the Labour party's policy is evidently moving.

Mr. McNamara : I have a great number of replies to give to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, though I thought that I was asking the questions. The hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Duncan Smith) who asked Question 1 left after the reply from the Secretary of State. [Hon. Members :-- "So what?"] I should have thought that he might at least have waited to hear the supplementary questions.

Let me make the position of the leaked document clear. It was a discussion document. In my party, party policy is not made at the whim of official spokesmen, but by party conferences, after free discussion and properly gathered. The spokesmen have a duty to lead forward discussion-- [Interruption.]

Madam Speaker : Order. I called the hon. Gentleman because he indicated that he wished to put a supplementary question to Question 2. I must ask him to put his question in relation to Question 2.

Mr. McNamara : You have put me in a difficult position, Madam Speaker, because-- [Interruption.] I have had questions put to me by the Secretary of State and I thought that he wanted answers. I have questions to ask. Let me observe, before I put my question, that the right hon. and learned Gentleman did not answer the point that the Anglo-Irish Agreement was imposed and gave the Irish Government the right to ask any question they wanted concerning the affairs of Northern Ireland.

Coming to the question of the Law Officers and of legality, following last year's disturbances in the Lower Ormeau road on 12 July, has the Secretary of State had any discussions this year about re-routing the march from that highly sensitive area? Given that the Secretary of State told reporters on Monday night that the issue of parades had never been discussed at the Anglo-Irish conference meetings, will he confirm that he put his name to the last communique of the intergovernmental conference which stated :

Column 1098

"The conference discussed a number of particular issues including parades"?

Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman only have a selective memory and should we prefer Sir Hal Miller's?

Sir Patrick Mayhew : The hon. Gentleman refers to an answer I gave to journalists on Tuesday. I understood that I had been asked whether there had been a discussion in London at the last IGC meeting about the route to be taken by the parade that took place on Saturday. That was how I was understood by journalists present. That was confirmed, incidentally and interestingly, yesterday in a question put by Eamonn Malley of Downtown Radio when I was in Antrim, who said that, on Tuesday, I had rightly said that there was no discussion of the route taken by that march in Belfast on Saturday. Of course, it is right that the general topic of marches and their effect on public order falls within the ambit of what is properly discussed under intergovernmental policies. That comes under what is agreed in the Anglo-Irish Agreement, and the most recent communique makes that perfectly clear. If the hon. Gentleman is seeking to get out his muck rake again, he has chosen the wrong heap.

Northern Ireland Electricity

3. Mr. McGrady : To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what assessment he has made of the privatisation process of Northern Ireland Electricity.

The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Mr. Robert Atkins) : The privatisation of Northern Ireland Electricity has been a great success, especially in relation to the Government's objective of seeking to broaden and deepen share ownership. Two thirds of the shares on offer were allocated to the general public ; that represents the highest percentage allocated to the public in any electricity privatisation.

Mr. McGrady : I thank the Minister for his reply, in which he has lauded the people who want to make a few quick pounds on the transaction. Does he share the concerns of the ordinary householder in Northern Ireland, of those in commerce and of those in industry about the terms of the sell- off? The high-cost, long-term contracts, the £50 million required for gas conversion at Ballylumford, the £100 million required for desulphurisation at Kilroot and many other aspects that were not previously revealed will lead to a very high acceleration of electricity costs in Northern Ireland. Is not the Minister now honour bound to withdraw the remarks and undertakings given by his predecessor, the hon. Member for Wiltshire, North (Mr. Needham), who said that electricity prices in Northern Ireland would not rise beyond inflation before 1997? They have already done so.

Mr. Atkins : I am sure that my predecessor, who is now Minister for Trade, will be more than happy to defend his position as and when he chooses to do so. I am sure that he can speak for himself. I reiterate that the privatisation was a major success for the Government and, above all, for the people of Northern Ireland. Many people bought shares. Over 50 per cent. of the shares allocated to the general public were allocated to Northern Ireland people and about 1,800 NIE employees also bought shares. It is worth making the point that registered customers applying for 300 shares or fewer, which represents 44 per cent. of the total, got their full allocation. All in all, this is an excellent

Column 1099

story for Northern Ireland. It will help to ensure that in future, the benefits of competition, of the gas interconnector and the electricity interconnector and of other ways to generate power will contribute to a more efficient way in which to provide electricity to all who wish to use it.

Mr. Ian Bruce : Has my hon. Friend noted that although in English, Scottish and Welsh privatisations, the industries concerned have had quite large restructuring costs, the productivity increase and money saved by the reduction in the number of staff and the improved efficiency in using fuel are now coming through and are leading to large decreases in the cost of electricity to consumers? Has my hon. Friend made any judgment about when electricity prices will start to fall in the same way in Northern Ireland?

Mr. Atkins : My hon. Friend makes a jolly good point ; I wish that I had thought of it myself. We shall look at that point. Although we have problems in Northern Ireland because of the peripherality of the Province, I hope that, in time, the benefits of privatisation will lead to the objective to which my hon. Friend referred.

Mr. John D. Taylor : In view of the Minister's praise for the flotation of shares in Northern Ireland Electricity, which was overwhelmingly oversubscribed and which attracted the support of hundreds of thousands of Northern Ireland investors, will he reconsider the flotation of shares in the proposed privatisation of the Northern Ireland Airports Authority for private individuals?

Mr. Atkins : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for making that point. Of course, I share his desire to offer possible shares in the airport to as wide a range of people as possible. The problem is that it is a relatively small flotation. The advice that we have from the specialists is that a flotation would not be the most cost-effective way to carry out the process. None the less, the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has raised the matter will cause me to ask questions as severely as I can. If there is a way in which to carry out such a flotation, I should like to do so.

Government Housing Initiative

4. Mr. Dowd : To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many properties were purchased under the Government's housing initiative announced earlier in the current year (a) by the Housing Executive and (b) by housing associations ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Atkins : As a result of the housing initiative announced by my right hon. Friend the former Chancellor of the Exchequer in his autumn statement, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive was able to purchase 141 properties with its £3 million allocation, while the housing associations--including the Northern Ireland Co-ownership Association-- purchased a total of 599 properties with their allocation of £15 million. That represents a total of 740 houses purchased under this initiative, and is, yet again, an excellent good news story.

Mr. Dowd : I welcome that statement by the Minister, but is not it patently clear that, while those initiatives have been taking place, the numbers of people on the housing waiting lists and homeless in Northern Ireland have been

Column 1100

increasing? Given all the demographic information about the increasing housing need that will occur in the Province in coming years, is not it patently obvious that the actions that the Government are taking are no more capable of meeting the problems of housing need and homelessness in Northern Ireland than they are in the rest of the United Kingdom?

Mr. Atkins : I am sure that if the hon. Gentleman knew anything about Northern Ireland, he would know that the Housing Executive is one of the most authoritative and capable bodies, probably, in the western world. It is respected--

Mr. Dowd : Not according to the figures.

Mr. Atkins : Most certainly ; the hon. Gentleman shows his ignorance. He ought to talk to his own Front Benchers, who will confirm the view across the divide in Northern Ireland that it is an entirely respectable and reputable body which does an amazingly good job. The hon. Gentleman ought to consider very carefully before he casts slurs on that body. This announcement, providing more houses for people who would otherwise not have them, shows just how much the Government, whether at national or at Northern Ireland level, care about the problem that the hon. Gentleman is flippant about. of the lack of housing associations in certain areas. In view of what he just said about the Housing Executive, could not a better scheme have been devised, giving people in those areas where there are no housing associations an opportunity to purchase or sell their homes through the Housing Executive? Does not the hon. Gentleman consider that that should have been done?

Mr. Atkins : The hon. Gentleman always speaks with great authority on housing matters. I understand his concern about his constituency. Certainly, as part of this exercise, we shall look closely at ways in which we can build on and improve the present position. If the hon. Gentleman would like me to take up particular points over and above what he has suggested today, I should be more than happy to do so.

Mr. William O'Brien : Has the Minister had the opportunity to study the report published by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive on the tens of thousands of people who are living in substandard accommodation? Has he considered the Rural Housing Association's report on the dirft of people from rural areas into towns and cities because of the lack of housing in rural areas? What is the Minister doing in the way of housing initiatives to stop the substandard houses from falling down around the people and to stop the mass exodus from rural areas because of the shortage of housing?

Mr. Atkins : The hon. Gentleman, who normally speaks with great authority on these matters, is painting a picture that does not seem to fit in with the truth. We are in no sense complacent about the need for rehousing, particularly in the case of rural areas, but the Housing Executive's efforts, both in the past and in its plans for the future, are directed specifically towards such areas. Although we are never complacent about what has to be done, I believe that the Housing Executive, with the

Next Section

Home Page