Mr. Andrew MacKay (Bracknell): In paying the most handsome tribute to the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the

19 Jan 2000 : Column 849

With that in mind, does the Secretary of State share the widespread dismay that one of the most disappointing and hurtful aspects of the Patten report is its failure to pay proper testimony to the sacrifice and achievements of the RUC? The Patten report is nevertheless a useful basis for what policing could be like if peace were firmly established. The overwhelming majority of its recommendations are non-controversial, have been foreshadowed by the Chief Constable himself and should be implemented quickly, but there are aspects of the statement that we cannot support.

We do not believe that the name of the RUC should go. It is a name of which past and serving officers and their families are justly proud. The evidence used to support change is not convincing. The most recent Police Authority survey shows conclusively that changing the name will cause major offence in the Protestant community and will not lead to significant improvements in support from the Catholic community. The hugely respected Monsignor Denis Faul has argued for retaining the name. The Secretary of State should accept the compromise name recommended by ourselves, the Police Federation and others: the Royal Ulster Constabulary--the Police Service of Northern Ireland. If it is right to honour the force for seeing us through the past 30 years, surely the Royal Ulster Constabulary, with its proud name intact, has earned the right to be Northern Ireland's police service in what we all hope will be a new era.

The Secretary of State referred to a number of security-sensitive measures. Does he agree that it would be dangerous folly to introduce them before there is a real and lasting peace and substantial decommissioning? Will he assure us that, at a time when the capacity of the main terrorist organisations remains totally undiminished, there will not be substantial cuts in the size and capability of the force, including the abolition of the full-time Reserve?

We of course want greater representation of the Catholic community in the RUC. Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that the greatest disincentive to Catholic recruitment remains IRA intimidation? Like him, I call on the leaders of the Catholic community to encourage their young men and women to join the police force.

We welcome what the Secretary of State said about the district policing boards, but what guarantees can he give that they and the new Policing Board will not lead to greater politicisation of policing, rather than the removal of politics from it? Will he give me this afternoon an absolute guarantee that the operational independence of the Chief Constable will be fully preserved?

Everyone, including the RUC, recognises that there must be changes. We all share the goal of building a police service that is genuinely representative of the community, routinely unarmed and has no need of flak jackets and armoured vehicles; yet for many people, the

19 Jan 2000 : Column 850

Mr. Mandelson: I say straight away to the right hon. Gentleman that I certainly share his views about decommissioning. The Good Friday agreement is not there to be cherry-picked; its parts stand or fall together. It is not acceptable for some parts of it to be implemented and for others to be overlooked or forgotten. Decommissioning, as Sinn Fein itself has acknowledged, is an essential part of the peace process. If it is to be completed by the deadline in the Good Friday agreement of May this year, an early start is absolutely necessary.

On the right hon. Gentleman's overall response, I am glad that he shares our vision and goals for a new beginning for policing in Northern Ireland. The problem is that, although he shares the ends, he is not prepared to will the means of getting there and of achieving that new beginning for the police service that we all want.

I, as it happens, regret that the Patten commission did not say more about the sacrifices of the RUC. I have said that before, and it remains my view. I understand why it did not, but it is a deficiency in the report, and an unfortunate one.

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman--I have already said this--that one of the factors, and an important one, in discouraging people from the nationalist community from joining the RUC was straightforward IRA bullying, thuggery and intimidation. However, other important factors are that Catholics and nationalists in Northern Ireland do not identify with the RUC and that the nationalist community does not encourage its young people to join. People from the nationalist community who have thought of joining have feared a loss of family and community support for joining. We have to tackle that problem and make changes to make the police force in Northern Ireland acceptable to the nationalist community as a whole if we are to persuade individuals from that community to come forward and join that force.

I can say quite honestly that in a perfect world I, too, would have kept the name of the RUC. I would have liked it to be maintained. It is a proud name that represents a fine tradition and is rightly honoured by the whole RUC family, but I am afraid that it is not owned by both communities in Northern Ireland. I realise the hurt that is involved in giving up the name, but I equally recognise that the police service will never be entirely accepted unless that change is made, so change there must be.

Mr. John Hume (Foyle): I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. My party will study it in detail. We look forward to working with him and with the other parties to implement the Patten report in full.

This is a time for reflection. It is worth reflecting on the fact that the basis of order in any society is not the police force but agreement on how we are governed. That is the most fundamental principle of democracy. When there is no agreement on how people are governed, no matter where that is, the police force will be seen as on one side or the other.

There have been victims of past failures to reach agreement on how we are governed. That has been the situation in Northern Ireland since it was founded. There

19 Jan 2000 : Column 851

The parties must take the opportunity to have meetings with the Secretary of State and talk to everyone who needs to be talked to about implementing the Patten report in full. That will give us a police service that has the loyalty of the entire community and a membership drawn from the entire community, so that when policemen walk the streets in Northern Ireland, no matter what district they are in, they are walking among friends. That would be a real change. It is an enormous challenge to us all, and I hope that we are up to it.

Mr. Mandelson: I do not think that the hon. Gentleman said a single word with which I disagree, but I have something to add. When we have studied what I have said, debated the detail, considered exactly how the proposals are to be implemented and all reached the conclusion that a new beginning for policing has indeed been created in Northern Ireland, that will be the time when leaders of the nationalist community, like him--both political and religious leaders--must stand up, speak up and back the police, and call for people from the nationalist community to support the police. He is right to take time to look at the details of what I have said. I hope that in due course, when he has studied them, that call will be forthcoming.

Mr. Lembit Öpik (Montgomeryshire): Will the Secretary of State accept the support in large part of my party for the proposals in the Patten report? I brought up the matter recently in Northern Ireland questions, and I am encouraged to see that progress will now be made on the proposals to try to resolve some of the issues that he has just highlighted.

We support some of the specific elements of the report: for example, the very strong emphasis on human rights, including the commitment to uphold human rights in the oath. That gives Northern Ireland a real opportunity to lead the United Kingdom in terms of the attitude and character of the police force.

Will the Secretary of State also accept our support for the concept of district policing, which puts a greater emphasis on community policing? The latter might in turn help to dismantle the power of the military vigilante operations in some parts of Northern Ireland, which lead to the completely unacceptable paramilitary beatings that have been going on for so long.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also accept our support for the introduction, at long last, of video recording in custody suites? We have criticised the Government for failing to implement that for some time. It is good to see the promise of a generous retirement and severance payment scheme. The details of the scheme will determine whether those eligible will agree to it.

Is the Secretary of State sensitive to the real and genuine concerns felt by many people, not merely in the Chamber but in Northern Ireland, about the change of name and symbols? While I recognise the difficulties and sensitivities that surround the matter, we tend to agree with the right hon. Gentleman that something needs to

19 Jan 2000 : Column 852

I have two further concerns. Will the Secretary of State reassure us by reiterating that the police force will not be reduced in size until it is clear that the peace is long lasting and sustainable? Otherwise, there could be instability.

Will the Secretary of State commit himself to asking about quotas? Does he realise that getting more Catholics into the police force cannot be achieved simply by having a 50:50 quota in place? As he said, the key issue is that Catholics have been dissuaded from applying. Will he consider adding to the Patten recommendations by doing something to promote such applications in the first place?

Finally, the Patten report is, by and large, uncontroversial, as we have heard. Therefore, the Secretary of State will need to give us an assurance that the matters that are so controversial and provoke such strong emotional as well as intellectual reactions will need to be handled with the greatest sensitivity in the House.