|
UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 1107 House of COMMONS MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE NORTHERN IRELAND AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
POLITICAL AND SECURITY DEVELOPMENTS IN NORTHERN IRELAND
Wednesday 10 May 2006 RT HON PETER HAIN MP, MR NICK PERRY and MR ROBERT HANNIGAN Evidence heard in Public Questions 1 - 69
USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT
Oral Evidence Taken before the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee on Wednesday 10 May 2006 Members present Sir Patrick Cormack, in the Chair Mr David Anderson Gordon Banks Mr Gregory Campbell Rosie Cooper Mr Christopher Fraser Mr John Grogan Mr Stephen Hepburn Lady Hermon Dr Alasdair McDonnell Stephen Pound Sammy Wilson ________________ Memorandum submitted by Northern Ireland Office on behalf of Mr Peter Hain
Examination of Witnesses
Witnesses: Rt Hon Peter Hain, a Member of the House, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr Nick Perry, Security Director, and Mr Robert Hannigan, Policing Director, Northern Ireland Office, gave evidence. Q1 Chairman: Could I call the meeting to order and could I welcome you, Secretary of State, to this further witness session. We are grateful to you for coming. After the events of last week, we are particularly delighted to see you, and could I say how glad I am personally, and I think I speak for most members of the Committee in saying this, that at this crucial time in Northern Ireland's development there has not been a change in your office, that you have kept your head when all of those around you were losing theirs. You are very welcome. Mr Hain: Thank you. Could I say how delighted I am to stay in the job. I know this will not make the questions to me now any less hard, but I am really pleased. Q2 Chairman: Good. A very warm welcome to Mr Perry and Mr Hannigan as well. Obviously it is entirely up to you, Secretary of State, how and when you call in your officials. We do stand at a very critical juncture in Northern Ireland's history. How optimistic are you that the talks that are going to begin, we hope on Monday, will result in success on or before 24 November? Mr Hain: I am optimistic. You mentioned November 24. That is a real deadline and we might want to explore that later on. Why am I optimistic? Because I do think, on the side of unionism, the DUP leadership recently visited Washington and Kalani and made important statements, and the very act of those visits, I think, indicated a new atmosphere. They have also acknowledged in the House itself during the recent legislation that there have been significant historic moves by the Provisional IRA in terms of decommissioning and inter-paramilitary activity and we are on the way to completely ending criminality, as identified by the Independent Monitoring Commission report, and the DUP has also indicated its willingness and its desire to make this particular process that we have now initiated, which will open up on Monday with the new assembly beginning on Monday, work. I think there are other brief signs of encouragement. The Loyal Orders have for the very first time met myself as Secretary of State, and not just myself, I do not think they have ever met any Secretary of State before. They also met the leadership of the SDLP and they talked to nationalist resident groups in Belfast. I think there is also a new understanding that the Parades Commission is working in a different way to try and build consent rather than simply to deliver judicial judgments from on high. On the Republican/Nationalist side, obviously the IRA statement last July was historic, the decommissioning which followed it. The success of IMC reports, the most recent one, has indicated a direction of travel which is positive, and the statement by the IRA over Easter, in which it said that it had "no responsibility for the tiny number of former republicans who have embraced criminal activity. They are doing it for self gain. We repudiate this activity and denounce those involved and the IRA remains committed to the peace process", was very positive, as was the denunciation by Martin McGuiness of the vodka heist in the Republic. Martin McGuiness, again, saying that those responsible, if I could summarise it, the Tohill absconders, the people who absconded when they were prosecuted, should return and face justice, and there is reassertion of the commitment to power sharing; so I think there are a variety of factors which are positive, and I am encouraged by those. Q3 Chairman: There are, of course, other factors that are less positive. We are conscious, conducting our inquiry into organised crime (which I know is not a subject for this afternoon's session), having just come back from Northern Ireland - we were in South Armagh on Monday - that whilst, of course, there has been, without any doubt, considerable progress, there is quite a long way to go, and you would accept that? Mr Hain: Indeed. Q4 Chairman: Whether the number involved in organised crime is tiny or not is something that would, I think, be questioned by quite a number of those who have given evidence either publicly or privately to us. Without digressing into detail, there is still quite a credibility gap as far as the law-abiding, fully constitutional, fully democratic politicians are concerned, and there is a perception, Secretary of State - I do not put it any higher than that - that there has been a tendency on the part of government to lean over backwards to assist those whose embracing of the democratic process is not the same as that of the Northern Ireland parties represented around this table today. What would you say to that? Mr Hain: I would not accept that we are bending over backwards for anybody. If you look at the recent activities by the Assets Recovery Agency, including its raid on a border farm, and if you look at all of its activity recently, as well as the activity of the police in arrests, whether it is on the northern bank robbery or on other matters, I think you see a relentless clamping down on criminality by paramilitaries under whatever label they claim to act or whatever label they attach to themselves, including, of course, UDA members as well. I do agree that there is still a gap to be filled in terms of the Rule of Law and policing consents, a consent for policing in South Armagh. I was in South Armagh myself in late December, including in Cross McGlen, and there is still some way to go, but the travel is in the right direction. The police are now policing in areas of South Armagh that they have not policed in for generations. They are doing so without Army support. I know there is some anxiety about that - there would be if you are walking down a road which you have never done before without armed soldiers alongside you - but they are doing so safely and are not having a problem, by and large, and, when I have talked to the local commander, Bobby Hunniford, he has been confident that they can do this in a way that is successful; but I do agree with you that, in particular, Sinn Fein have to start co-operating with the police, and it is my view that those communities, themselves communities which you could describe as Republican communities, will in the end require this: because as the IRA's, as it were, paramilitary hold on these communities is drawn back and released, then you get the problems of normalisation, some of the bad problems of normalisation. Some say there is a problems of drunken youths in some of these communities now on a Saturday night where there was not before, and things like that, so we need to deal with those. Q5 Chairman: I want to bring my colleagues in, but let me ask you one final question, for the time being at any rate. You invited this question in your comments when you talked about the deadline. We have now legislated for a deadline of 24 November for the election of the First and Deputy First Ministers. Can you envisage any circumstances at all where you might come to Parliament and ask for an amendment to that legislation? Mr Hain: No. I have said that there will be provision, and I have already put in a bid for provision, for an emergency bill to deal with the strands amendments that have followed the review of the Good Friday Agreement and the negotiations which took place in 2004, and everybody understands, whether they agree or not, that some of these technical changes will be needed in order to close the deal. There will be a need for an emergency bill, and if the deal is in sight by November 24, a bill of that kind will need to be taken through Parliament at a very quick rate. I was not able, within the bill that received royal assent on Monday night, to get agreement on a cross-party basis and, indeed, elsewhere to put an Order in Council provision to make the necessary technical amendments. I regret that, but I understand it as well - that just imposes a logistical nightmare in November - but, no, the answer is there is no proposal to change the November 24 date, and there will not be, it is for real, and, as I have said before, if people expect us to blink first, they will be disappointed, and I will be disappointed if anybody approached that timeframe other than knowing that it is set in statute and the thing is closed down at midnight on November 24, which I do want if the parties cannot produce the agreement necessary. Q6 Dr McDonnell: On that issue, although I appreciate your frankness and your desperateness as to 24 November, surely the legislation that we are operating to provides for the dissolution of the Regional Assembly of November 2003 with a view to re-election to take place at any time between November and May 2008. Does that not allow the opportunity to flip the current Assembly out? Mr Hain: Clearly the Assembly, as it is defined under this particular Act that received royal assent on Friday night, comes to an end in November. The existing legislation still applies, obviously, but I have made absolutely clear, and this not to threaten anybody or to act in a high-handed fashion, that we cannot continue a process which is an end in itself where MLAs continue to draw their average of £85,000 salaries and allowances for not sitting in the Assembly, so all that will end and in the late summer I will be reminding MLAs of their good employer responsibilities - they employ staff; I think there are around about 216 staff employed in advice centres and constituency offices - that that employment will come to an end if they do not think an agreement is possible by November 24, and they will need to notify landlords about rent arrangements and things like that. I say that, not that I want that to happen but to underline that it is for real. Therefore, to return to your question, the existing legislative requirements and the legislative basis for the Assembly remains as it was before this particular legislation came into force, and the Assembly opens up in that form on Monday, but I am not going to be beating a path to anybody's door to try and drag them back into a process again. Q7 Dr McDonnell: Going back to the Prime Ministers in Armagh, they indicated that detailed work was beginning to prepare for things not working by 24 November and the deadline not being met, and the indications were that detailed work would begin on north-south issues. What is entailed there? What is the step-change that was mentioned at that stage? What was that about? Mr Hain: First of all, let me make it clear what it is not. It is not about joint authority with the Republic in the south, it is not about joint government or anything like that - I would not support that - but, something more important, it would actually be an infringement and a violation of the Good Friday Agreement which was endorsed in the Referendum; so we are not going there. What we will do is just take forward the sort of things that we have in mind in any case: the North-West Gateway initiative, which is a step-change from both governments to tackling development needs in the North-West of the island of Ireland; then there is our renewable energy strategy where we are trying to identify how we can co-operate on off-shore wind farms; infrastructure and spatial planning - there is a whole new approach there. Those are the practical examples of what we will do, and, of course, what we will also do, because we will be obliged to do that, is to take forward and drive forward the programme of reform as Direct Rule Ministers to which we are committed, but it will be done with greater energy and determination, because any tendency to take the foot off the accelerator in the anticipation that this is work that the Assembly should do, which it is, the foot will be put back on the accelerator after midnight on November 24. Dr McDonnell: Chairman, can I apologise to yourself and the Secretary of State. I may have to leave early. Chairman: Of course. Q8 Mr Campbell: I want to ask you a question about the deadline, but before I do, you referred in your introductory remarks to improving the situation in Northern Ireland. I think there is widespread opinion that the security situation is improving, as you have alluded to, particularly in relation to the early part of the troubles. There is also widespread support for what may be regarded as easily reversible security-based decisions in the context of an improving security environment, but you surely would not regard today's decision by the Ministry of Defence to close the Army bases and leave 1100 civilians unemployed as an easily reversible security-based decision, would you? Mr Hain: I realise there are employment consequences, and I regret those, but these were decisions which were driven by the military - they simply do not have a use any more for these bases - and that has also been done in conjunction with the Chief Constable. As you would expect, and we are absolutely meticulous about this, I would not agree to any of these changes if they were put up to me by the general officer commanding, as they were, if they did not have the support of the Chief Constable; so it is his judgment as to what he needs to maintain security in Northern Ireland. I do not see those base decisions as being reversible, no, but they are not really a matter for me, they are a matter for the Ministry of Defence, and, in particular, for the GOC, who feels that, frankly, if he did not close them, he would be hauled before the House in another committee, probably the Public Accounts Committee, having to explain the waste of tax-payers money; but on the people made unemployed, we are committed to working with the unions to seek to identify decent packages for them. Q9 Mr Campbell: I appreciate your response, Secretary of State. The MoD may well have to answer in terms of the continuing improvement of the situation, but they may also have to answer if, for some reason, there was a reversal of the improvement and we had the bases closed, but perhaps we will come back to that. On the issue of those who are unemployed, do I take it that every facility will be offered and made available to the 1100 civilians who will be made unemployed to try and get them retraining in alternative employment? Mr Hain: Indeed, and that is already being put in train. Any civil servants made redundant are entitled to a generous compensation package under the normal redundancy entitlements, and the MoD are also in correspondence with the unions on a possible additional package for MoD civilian staff. Announcements on this will be made in due course. Q10 Mr Campbell: On the deadline of 24 November, you said you were optimistic, and you have given your reasons for being optimistic. There are those who are not quite as optimistic as you are, but, if you are optimistic and if you are saying that the deadline is set in statute, why are you proceeding with all the legislative proposals that are causing so much angst in Northern Ireland, like the water charges, the RPA7 Council Model, education changes? If you are so confident that movement is going to be made by then, why proceed in advance of that date? Mr Hain: If we take water charges, for example, water charges, which do not apply in Northern Ireland, I know there is an argument from some that they are there somehow, but they apply in Great Britain. My constituents, for example, and, Chairman, your constituents have to pay water charges and the constituents of members around the room. If we do not do this, then a huge big funding gap opens up in two respects: (1) water charges will, over the course of three years when they are phased in from next April release around £200 million to spend on hospitals, schools and skills, and whatever else you want to do, so that money will not be available, and that is factored into the budget that we have already announced for next year; (2) the second thing that will not be available is the money to finance the desperately needed, as I am sure you will agree, extra investment in the sewage system, in the water system, to make sure our water in Northern Ireland is as clean as in the rest of the UK and that the sewage system, which is in a pretty bad way, meets modern standards. The reason I am doing it is because I think it is absolutely necessary and, unless we got restoration of the institutions before the actual orders went through, and even if we did, there would still be an issue to be addressed by the Assembly, and one of its early-on decisions would be how to fill that funding gap, not just for next year but for the years afterwards. That is my response on water, but I am happy, and I would hope that we can discuss with all the parties, ideally in the Assembly, some of the detail, for example, low-income households and the protection for them and that kind of thing. Chairman: What about your response? I think Mr Banks wants to come in on the RPA. Q11 Gordon Banks: On the understanding that the Assembly gets up and running, what role do you see the Assembly playing in, say, the education, the water and the council proposals that have been set in train? Mr Hain: I have indicated the important role that I think should be played on the water, not so much on the principle, because, frankly, and I hope this will not be taken wrongly, a lot of people say to me privately that they are pleased that I have taken this decision, taken the flack for it, rather than it being an immediately tough decision on the plate of the new Assembly in respect of water. On the review of public administration, in particular the reduction of the number of councils from 26 to seven, the order has already gone through Parliament and gone through the Privy Council, which gives a remit to the Boundary Commission to draw up new boundaries for the seven councils. That figure was not arrived at for political reasons, it was arrived at because of the independent assessment; it has had wide support from the business community, from the voluntary sector, and so on. Q12 Chairman: Not from the political. Mr Hain: Not from the political parties, I accept that. One party, Sinn Fein, came to support that number very late in the day, but, frankly, that played no role in our decision. It was done for objective reasons: you have got seven councils that have got a strong revenue base, do not need to be cross-subsidised, you can have co-terminosity with policing and health, a unique thing compared with anywhere else in the United Kingdom, we can all see the advantages of joined up government in terms of social services, and so on, and policing and health at a local level. I think it makes a great deal of sense, but there would still be a mountain of work for the Assembly, a restored Assembly especially, to address, and I do remind everybody that if the Assembly was stalled next week or the week afterwards, none of the stuff would have gone through beyond the remit to the Boundary Commission, and nothing would have gone through on water and nothing would have gone through on education or anywhere else. However, in respect of the RPA there are still big issues to be addressed: the internal governance, the powers that have been devolved, planning and things like that, what should be the timeframe for housing if at all, given the history of housing; it is very controversial if you did decide to devolve it. We have got no timeframe in mind. It could not happen, I do not think, for a very long time, but the Assembly may take a view on that. I think there is a lot of work to do, as there is on education, which I am happy to support. Q13 Chairman: You are saying to the Assembly you can have any colour car, but it has got to be a Ford. That is, in effect, what you are saying to them. You are not allowing the Assembly to determine the future structure of local government within Northern Ireland. Even though, in your estimation, there is a very good chance that the Assembly will be up and running by 24 November, and you are optimistic about that, you are still not going to let them have a real say on the principle. Mr Hain: Chairman, I do not agree with that. If restoration occurred this summer, pretty well all of these things would not have been decided. That is my answer to that. What I am not willing to do, and I think I have said that across the floor in the debate on the emergency bill, is delay decisions which I think are absolutely necessary when there is no certainty, despite my optimism, that we will ever get restoration. It may be that the parties chose not to, chose to walk away. I think these things need to go through and they have big support, all of them, including the education reform, but even if the education reform went through this Parliament as an Order in Council in the summer, that is to say abolishing the 11-plus and establishing the new 14-19 curriculum - I do not think there is a lot of argument over the latter, but there is of controversy over the former - there is then a huge agenda to decide how we preserve the excellence of the grammar school system, which I have no desire to interfere with; they have got a fantastic record. There are actually ceasing to be grammars increasingly, because falling rolls have meant they have opened up their intake beyond those who have passed the 11-plus, so there is an issue there. There is a whole question to be decided, which could be decided by the Assembly and, even if restoration takes place on 24 November, will still be decided by the Assembly in terms pupil profile, the new admissions arrangements, all those sort of things which are critical to the regime you have in place of a couple of hours exam deciding a child's future. Q14 Lady Hermon: I am delighted to see you here, Secretary of State. I had the great pleasure of sitting on the Standing Committee for the local government Boundaries Commission Order in Northern Ireland (I think it was 18 April). Would you care to confirm for the record and for accuracy that it does require a resolution of the Assembly: if the Assembly were to differ from the recommendation of the local Boundary Commission, that seven super councils is not set in concrete but does require, under that order, a resolution of the Assembly? Mr Hain: I think what happens - and I will have to check this, and I may seek inspiration from behind, but if I am wrong about this I will write to you, Chairman - is the Boundary Commission on the timetable would, if restoration occurs before November 24 or on 24 November, report to the Assembly. The Assembly will obviously have to receive the report and decide to proceed with the objective of the new councils being in place for the elections in May 2009. I do not think there is a precedent for overturning a wholesale recommendation of a Boundary Commission, so we will have to cross that bridge when we come to it. Q15 Lady Hermon: If it is any consolation to you, Secretary of State, the minister who was replying to that debate did indicate that she was not "100% certain whether the resolution was cross community" or not, but there is definitely a resolution of the Assembly in the order? Mr Hain: I will take your word for it. Lady Hermon: I would be delighted to receive your letter following this committee. Q16 Gordon Banks: Whilst we are on the issue of political development, the Northern Ireland Offences Bill, Secretary of State, was withdrawn in January of this year. Is it your understanding that there is a need to reintroduce some legislation along these lines at some point in time in the future? Mr Hain: No, I have no plans to do that. Chairman: That is slightly taking us off the point, but it is good to have that on the record. Q17 Sammy Wilson: I think that there are totally confusing and contradictory messages coming from what the Secretary of State has said to us today. On the one hand you started off quite confident that devolution would be restored by 24 November, on the other hand you are telling us that all of the massive changes which are in the pipeline have to be progressed with because he does not know if it will happen on 24 November. On the one hand, and I use your own words, Secretary of State, you have said that after 24 November the step-change would be putting your foot back on the accelerator, while you have indicated not one wit here today how you are going to lift your foot from the accelerator in regard to the changes which are going through at present or give a role for the Assembly in that. I want to ask two questions. First of all, in the interim period, because I do not think anyone expects the Assembly to be in full executive mode from the very start anyway, what role is there for the Assembly? Second, given the attitude which you have displayed here today, are you not simply reinforcing the approach that Sinn Fein have outlined only today, namely that they will have nothing to do with the Assembly up until 24 November and, indeed, will not take part and it is not worthwhile taking part? Are you not simply reinforcing that behaviour on their part? Mr Hain: No, on the contrary, the business committee of the Assembly, and it has already had a number of very constructive meetings, I think there is another one tomorrow chaired by the presiding officer, the Speaker, can decide to discuss education, or the RPA, or water charges or anything it likes. In terms of education, I think, if I may say so, you are exactly wrong, because there is a huge agenda, which will not be decided and which I would be very happy to put off after November 24 if there was any prospect of a positive stance on reaching successful restoration by then. Take, for example, the curriculum, I can go through the detail here: the entitlement framework, the timing of implementation, the admissions arrangements to post primary schools, the annual process by which parents express preferences for schools, the use of the pupil profile, including whether it could or should be seen by schools on the preference list so that they can advise parents on suitability, the nature and content of the menu of admissions criteria to be used by schools that are oversubscribed. Those are just some examples of things which I would be more than happy to be put into the Assembly, because one of the things I feel about the abolition of the 11-plus, and I respect the DUP's position and the UDP's position on this, but there is strong feeling on the other side of the argument, including from the professions, including from the Council for Integrated Education and the two Nationalist and Republican parties as well. This is a very divisive issue and it may be that the particular order that we have in mind to take through is actually best done so that consent can be built subsequently in the Assembly on all these other things on exactly how the system would operate without this divisive issue getting in the way. Q18 Sammy Wilson: You have outlined all the things that are still undecided. What part of the order is so important that you feel you have got to push it through? You have told us the bits that you say are going to be left. What part of this order is so important that you have got to keep your foot on the accelerator and push it through? Mr Hain: First of all, the abolition of the 11-plus, but it does not say what takes its place in detail. That is what I have been saying is the prospect for the Assembly and for negotiations and consultation. Second, the post-14 curriculum, but I do not think there is a real argument about that. I certainly have no representations from you about that or from any of the critics of the abolition of the 11-plus decision. I think there is a consensus around that, and I think it is essential because you have got a big weakness in technical skills, vocational skills and a big weakness in the bottom third. The bottom third in Northern Ireland do worse by every measure compared with the rest of the GB. We have a lower level of qualifications overall, a lower level of people taking university degrees, a lower level of literacy and numeracy rates, and we have got to get things up if we are going to compete with the Chinas and Indias of this world. Chairman: I want to move on, because there is a lot of ground to cover, but Rosie Cooper, you wanted to come in briefly on this section. Rosie Cooper: No, I will wait. Chairman: Could we move to David Anderson, because the IMC and its reports are extremely important and you have attached very great importance to them, understandably. Q19 Mr Anderson: Obviously we all took quite a lot of confidence from the report, but some concerns have been raised during this investigation we have been doing into organised crime and it is clear from the report that some senior members of PIRA are still involved, albeit probably in an independent way, in organised crime and in serious crime, and the people we have spoken to and taken evidence from, in both public and private, have reinforced that. Does that not in some way reduce the confidence you have got in the activities that they are involved in? Mr Hain: I quote from paragraph 2.16 of the IMC report. It says, "We found signs that PIRA continues to seek to stop criminal activity by its members and to prevent them from engaging in it. We believe that some of the senior PIRA members may be playing a key role in this." It also says, "That said, there are indications that some members, including some senior ones, as distinct from the organisation itself, are still involved in crime and that the increasing proportions of the proceeds may now be going to individuals rather than to the organisation." There is an issue there and we need to tackle it, but I do not think that it is a reason for saying that we do not recognise the huge momentus change that there has been for the direction of travel of Republicans, provisionals that is, in getting rid of crime, in rooting it out and, from an organisation or leadership level, actually putting a stop to it. Q20 Mr Anderson: On a similar line, the report said that not all arms have been handed in and that some people have retained control, mainly at a local level. Is there a worry that these arms may well be used in both organised crime and, perhaps even more worrying, may get into the hands of dissident republicans, terrorists? Also, is anything being done through the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning to account for these weapons? Mr Hain: Again, I have not seen any evidence or any intelligence suggesting that there has been any leakage to dissident groups either of individual members of the Provisional IRA going over to the dissident groups, which themselves are small, fragmented and disorganised, though still a threat, as we saw from the Lurgan bomb, a 250lb bomb last month. I think that answers that point, but in respect of the IMC report, it is said that its present assessment (and I quote from paragraph 2.17) "is that such of the arms as were reported to us as being retained would have been withheld under local control, despite the instructions of the leadership, and the amount of unsurrendered material was not significant in comparison to what was decommissioned and that the reports they received do not cast doubt on the declared intention of the PIRA leadership to eschew terrorism and to follow the political path." The point I am making is, yes, it appears some arms, according to the IMC, were kept at a local level, but this was against the leadership's wishes and they are not significant in the overall picture. Q21 Lady Hermon: Secretary of State, you very kindly provided the Committee with a memorandum before coming before us this afternoon as a live witness, and in paragraph 16 you did refer to the IMC report, and I am slightly disconcerted by the description taken about the IMC report: "The report provided an extremely encouraging picture." May I take you to the issue of loyalist paramilitaries? My colleague here, David Anderson, has asked about the provisionals and all the rest of it. Could we deal for a few minutes with loyalist paramilitaries. At page 36 of the IMC report the IMC said, "The last three months have shown little tangible evidence of progress and the recent statement from a spokesman of the UVF that it does not intend to do more before 24 November 2006 is not encouraging." May I ask you, Secretary of State, what precisely is the strategy within the Northern Ireland office for bringing about loyalist decommissioning? Is there a strategy, and, if there is, could you disclose a little bit of it to us? Mr Hain: There is a strategy, and you are quite right to point out that there is still a big problem in terms of criminality by members of the UDA and the UVF. You have been very clear about bearing down, criticising that and exposing it as well, and I commend you for that. I think the IMC report said that there were efforts by elements of the UVF leadership to tackle criminality and there are signs that some people in the UDA who were associated with it wanted to steer the organisation away from crime into community development. Certainly, as it were, the political leadership of the UPRG and the PUP are clearly putting all the pressure and influence to bear that they can to seek to get the UDA and the UVF to decommission and, in particular, to end any connection with criminality. I sense that the UDA is probably divided between two groups, the one just committed to gangsterism, and there have been some arrests recently, and the other which wants to follow the Provisional IRA in decommissioning and then dealing with its paramilitary activity. We continue to put pressure on both organisations, as do the police and the security forces, who maintain a pretty beady eye on their activities and seek to stop criminal activity or paramilitary activity if it shows any signs of taking place. Q22 Lady Hermon: Do you have any information that leads you to believe that any of these loyalist paramilitary organisations, whether they be the LVF, presumably definitely not the UVF because they have issued a statement, are on the brink of beginning any decommissioning? Mr Hain: Certainly elements are in touch with John de Chastelain's Commission, and we continue to urge them to engage, because that really is the completion of the process. Whatever the justification originally for these organisations to form, and they claimed a political objective, whatever that objective, it does not exist any more because the IRA's campaign has ended, and so I fear the real problem is gangsterism. Q23 Lady Hermon: Secretary of State, may I pursue that a little bit, picking up on some of the points you have raised. You will know how angry the UVF were with the joint statement that was issued by the Prime Minister and Taoiseach on 6 April 2006 in Armagh. They particularly took exception to, and I am not a spokesman for the organisation but it is in the public domain, and disliked the term "the joint stewardship of the process". Do you regret, and is there any regret in Downing Street, that that phrase "the joint stewardship of the process", was actually used, pushing back and delaying the possibility of loyalist paramilitaries, particularly the UVF, coming in from the cold and beginning the process that they should have done a long time since? Mr Hain: I hope my friends and colleagues on the other side of the border will not take offence at this, but I think there was some unhelpful spin from some elements in Dublin which hyped up the interpretation of "joint stewardship. "Joint stewardship of the process" was a very carefully chosen phrase. It did not imply joint authority, as I said earlier, joint governance: it implied joint stewardship of the process of bringing peace, of putting in concrete the peace and seeking restoration of the devolved institutions. That is what it meant, and that is what it will mean, that and nothing else. I do agree that interpretation seems to have been the reason that, in the case of the UVF at least, they would not do anything until after 24 November. I think that is an excuse, frankly, and now that they know that that has been clarified by myself in particular, there is no reason for them to delay at all. Q24 Lady Hermon: There is no regret in Downing Street or within the Northern Ireland Office at the use of that phrase? Mr Hain: Not the use of those words. I do not think anybody could really object to those words. I think the unhelpful spin around them, which certainly did not come from Number Ten and certainly did not come from the Northern Ireland Office, as it were, created all sorts of instability amongst loyalist ranks, but now that they see that it does not mean that, I think they should have a second thought. Q25 Chairman: I want to bring in Rosie Cooper and Gordon Banks. You have already answered Lady Hermon's questions about the loyalists. There does, of course, remain this fundamental difference that they have no credible political party to speak for them in the way that Sinn Fein, inextricably linked with the IRA and all that, has in the past. All the evidence that we are receiving is of a significant number rather than a tiny number of those who have had paramilitary involvement continuing to have an involvement in organised crime. Would you accept that an absolute repudiation of this going further than we have had up to now and a repudiation of any attempt to benefit from the financial proceeds is fundamental to creating a climate of trust in Northern Ireland? Mr Hain: I do, and I was encouraged, as I indicated earlier, by Martin McGuiness' criticism of those who had undertaken the vodka heist in County Meath, and he said, "I condemn it unreservedly and I do believe that anyone involved in criminality of any description should be arrested, should be charged and should be brought before a judge or jury." That is quite an important statement. Similarly, in respect of the Tohill kidnappings, the four men who admitted their part in kidnapping a dissident republican, he said they should make themselves available in court and they should present themselves to face the charges that they pleaded guilty to. I think that is an indication, as well as the Provisional IRA's Easter statement that I quoted earlier. Those things have never been said before. Q26 Chairman: No, but what we need also is a commitment to helping to uphold the law and playing a part in the policing. We will come on to that in a minute, but I think we have got some way to go, have we not? Mr Hain: We have got some way to go. I do not know whether you want me to address that specific issue. Chairman: Yes, in a moment I am going to ask colleagues to lead off on that, but I just put down the marker. Q27 Rosie Cooper: Secretary of State, you talked about gangsterism and when talking to people in Northern Ireland they have often referred to the Mafia now. There is an increasing awareness that paramilitaries are turning to organised crime - that is what we have been looking at - but really they are using very, very sophisticated methods, professional accountants, lawyers to cover their tracks. How would you see the Northern Ireland Office dealing with that? There is a second part to the question which will link it with policing and normalisation. Mr Hain: For example, the Organised Crime Taskforce is taking forward a whole raft of measures to strengthen controls on charities, on liquor licensing and taxis, with the active support of the Northern Ireland Office. We are also, as I indicated earlier, taking action to clamp down on assets that have been built up, and still are in some respects, in respect of the loyalist in particular, but Provisional IRA members have acquired considerable assets over the years and the Assets Recovery Agency is bearing down on them, as we have seen, as is the CAB in the Republic. That activity will all proceed, and we are proceedings to clamp down on smuggling as well, so there is no letting up on that, and, indeed, the action over the past year indicates that it has been done with considerable verve and energy and quite a lot of success as well. Q28 Rosie Cooper: The confiscation of assets is really welcomed in Northern Ireland, but people are worried that when the military are removed from Northern Ireland they will need a massive increase in the number of police officers. This comes from the police themselves, maybe, and maybe organisations which have been hit, often vast quantities of booze and cigarettes stolen, and it is the protection that they feel they need. I think, very clearly, that they would suggest a huge increase in the number of police officers. Is that realistic or not? Mr Hain: Police numbers are already twice the average that they are in Great Britain per head, so policing is at a very high level, and rightly so. There is no argument about that. The Chief Constable has always made clear what his needs are and we have always sought to resolve his requests satisfactorily and so far we have been able to do so. I see no reason why that will not occur in the future. As I said earlier, the drawing down of the Royal Irish Regiment and that whole process of normalisation is due to conclude in the summer of next year is all being done step by step with the agreement of the Chief Constable who has responsibility for policing and with his active support. Chairman: We might come on to that later in this session. Q29 Sammy Wilson: We are moving on to policing now. You have mentioned unhelpful statements or unhelpful spin. There was another rather unhelpful statement from the Foreign Minister in the Republic this week when he indicated that it would be possible for an executive to be set up in Northern Ireland, or he believed it was possible for an executive to be set up in Northern Ireland, with ministers from Sinn Fein, even though Sinn Fein had not at that stage given their support for policing. Do you accept that is possible, Secretary of State? Mr Hain: On the policing issue, I think there is a difference between wanting to resolve difficult issues like policing, which we have all got to do, Sinn Fein included, and wanting to erect new hurdles to power sharing. I am in favour of the former but not in favour of the latter. In other words, everybody knows what needs to be done on policing, all the democratic political parties need to sign up to it, and that means Sinn Fein signing up to it, but I do not want to make this a pre-condition, and it will not be made a pre-condition, for the restoration of the institutions; but there is no question that it is unsustainable in the medium-term, let alone the long-term, for parties to seek to have ministers in an executive when they are not co-operating with the police even at the most basic level or at a local level, their councils and MLAs not actually co-operating with the police on day-to-day crime matters. So, that leads to change. Sinn Fein, to be fair, have made a number of statements recently which have indicated a positive direction of travel, not fast enough and not deep enough, but they are encouraging; things that have never been said before. They have also said that once the legislation that is currently going through Parliament gets royal assent that they will call a conference and seek to take their policy on policing forward in a direction which we would all welcome, and so let us pursue that. Q30 Sammy Wilson: I am not clear what your answer is there. You do not want to make it a pre-condition but are you saying that you can envisage a situation where someone could be a minister and not support policing? Mr Hain: All I am saying is that everybody needs to support policing. I am not clear what you are asking. Are you saying they should have joined the policing board, they should have done this or that? I think what we need to do is move these things forward in sequence and in parallel so that we are able to get universal support for policing but we are also able to get restoration of a power-sharing executive, which is an intrinsic part of building the trust and operating, in a way. It is inconceivable to me that, over the medium-term, ministers doing their jobs properly in the executive will not support the police. It is inconceivable to me that a successful power-sharing executive could operate without the Rule of Law applying and being supported, but let us not erect hurdles when problems are best resolved in other ways. Q31 Sammy Wilson: This, I believe, is one of the difficulties that we have in getting Sinn Fein to sign up to policing. If you are saying that it is conceivable in the short run for someone to be a minister without supporting the police, then what incentive is there for Sinn Fein ever to support the police? Mr Hain: Sinn Fein know, for a start, that their objective, which they share with the SDLP, of getting devolution and policing and justice is completely out of the question until they sign up properly to policing, and when I say "sign up properly to policing" I mean the whole lot. There is that issue. I am also saying, and I think we may be more in agreement than not, that I do not want a late pre-condition established on top of the absolutely correct demands that have been made of republicans that they decommission, that they end their paramilitary activity and they end their criminality. To say that unless you join the Policing Board, or whatever the demand may be and the goal posts are moved in that way there is no prospect of a power-sharing executive being agreed - and I do not think that you are saying that, to be fair - but I do agree that all parties ought to support the police. Q32 Sammy Wilson: But you do not believe that it is essential for them to be supporting the police to be ministers? Mr Hain: I believe that all parties, whether they have ministers or not, ought to support the police, and that is the best way in which a devolved government could function effectively. Q33 Chairman: The question you are being asked is---- Mr Hain: I am well aware of the question I am being asked. That is my answer. Q34 Chairman: It is a slightly less than unequivocal answer. Mr Hain: I do not agree with that. I am not clear what I am being asked. Q35 Chairman: What you are being asked is, is it essential for a minister in a devolved administration anywhere in the United Kingdom to be wholly committed to the Rule of Law, and is it necessary, if you are wholly committed to the Rule of Law, to be in support of a lawful police force and not an alternative police force? Do you accept that? Mr Hain: Let me put it this way and answer the question using different language to the way I answered earlier on. If we are to have devolved governments working with real credibility and real effectiveness, then clearly signing up to the Rule of Law and support for the police is an absolute essential. Does that mean that to get to that point by 24 November, let us say, Sinn Fein members have to have taken up their positions on the policing board, have to, as it were, have climbed over a series of additional hurdles put in late in the day in a political process which has been incredibly difficult to take forward and we are now on the brink of succeeding with, then, no, I do not think so. I just remind the Committee that when there was last a power-sharing executive, and you may say that was one of the reasons it collapsed, that pre-condition was not there, but I do not want any late pre-conditions suddenly assembled so that they effectively become impossible hurdles so you might as well write restoration out of the picture. I am not willing to agree to that and that will not happen, but I am absolutely clear that all parties, Sinn Fein included, and they know this, and they will deliver on this, need to support the police and need to support the Rule of Law 100%. Q36 Gordon Banks: In the House on 26 April you talked about the need for cross-party political support for the criminal justice system and the police before devolving any of these policy areas. Does that mean that the political parties between now and 24 November will not have sight of any potential proposals in this area as they negotiate the future? Mr Hain: I do not think there is any prospect of devolving policing and criminal justice certainly before 24 November, even assuming a restored institution to devolve it to. I think this is going to take some time to work through and there is a triple lock on it. It requires across community votes in the Assembly, it then requires a Secretary of State to agree it and Parliament to approve the necessary legislation. I do not expect that to happen quickly, and I think it will require trust to be built and people's commitment to be absolutely clear. What the bill does is to put in place the constitutional basis for devolution subsequently by a series of Order in Councils so it creates the statutory framework, but you then need a process, as I say, with that triple lock on it. Q37 Gordon Banks: So there will be no development of guidelines or anything between now and 24 November? Mr Hain: We have already published, as you are aware, a detailed document, which is out for consultation, on the options for how things might be done. We are still in the process of taking that consultation through and that will take some time. Q38 Gordon Banks: Another policing question, but maybe taking us away from the type of policing you have been talking about. How effective do you believe anti-social behaviour policy has been in Northern Ireland? Mr Hain: It has been effective but not effective enough. I would like to see anti-social behaviour orders, not as a dogmatic end in itself but the whole process around it being applied more vigorously, and I think that will increasingly be done. In a way, it is a point I made earlier, Chairman, as you get normalisation, which there is increasingly, even in areas like South Armagh, then, paradoxically, you get maybe a rise in some of the anti-social behaviour that we have experienced in communities in Great Britain. I do not welcome that, on the contrary, but you therefore need to deal with it. Q39 Gordon Banks: Do you think the relationships between the police, the councillors and the housing bodies are clear enough in the role of anti-social behaviour legislation? Do you feel that maybe one of the reasons why it has not been as successful as maybe you would have liked is that the relationship between the bodies is a little bit murky when it comes to Anti-Social Behaviour Orders? Mr Hain: I know that your Committee is looking at the whole question of crime (and I do not know whether it will include anti-social behaviour, and I would certainly be interested in your views if it was) but I think there is some way to go. It may well be that that partnership where anti-social behaviour measures work best in England and Wales, and I think Scotland too - but certainly in England and Wales - is where you have those partnerships of the kind that you pointed to. Q40 Gordon Banks: You mentioned the investigation that we are doing, and it is an organised crime investigation so the chances of us touching on anti-social behaviour are probably quite remote. In relation to organised crime from the point of view of the police, I think you mentioned it briefly in response to an answer to Rosie, do you consider that the police, much as Revenue and Customs and everybody else involved in law and order because it is not just the police services involved in law and order, are playing the part and doing enough to counteract the developments of organised crime, as we see it being more sophisticated and more professional people involved in it? Do you think everybody is working to capacity or can things be improved? As the criminals get smarter, surely the police, the Revenue and Customs and everybody else have got to get smarter as well? Mr Hain: Yes. If you look at what has been done with the organised crime taskforce, it is considerable progress. If you look at the recent expansion by the Assets Recovery Agency in its Northern Ireland operations both in terms of its financial investigations, lawyers, cases and so on, you do see a really concerted bearing down on this, as you describe it, sophisticated crime and I think that is certainly with my enthusiastic support. Q41 Sammy Wilson: I am disturbed at the response which the Secretary of State has given. I think if there is going to be a prospect of devolution at least all democratic parties will expect support for the police from anyone who is involved in that government, and I think you have equivocated on this. Mr Hain: Briefly, if I may intervene on that. I am not equivocating at all. I think there will be rightly increased pressure on Sinn Fein to deliver their end in terms of commitments. That is to say, once the Bill has received Royal Assent there is then no reason for them not to move on policing, and I think they will. I think it is positive that you are asking these questions, and it is positive that there is pressure on all parties, and Sinn Fein in particular, to cooperate with policing from the most basic level up until full support for all the structures. Q42 Sammy Wilson: What is not positive is that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has indicated to this Committee today that he envisages a situation where someone could be a minister whilst the organisation and the party which they are still involved with is refusing to support the police. Mr Hain: I did not actually say that, and I am not clear what set of preconditions you wanted, Sammy. It is not clear to me what question I am being asked to answer. We have been around the houses on this repeatedly. I am not saying that at all, I am just saying be careful of erecting a whole series of detailed extra hurdles and preconditions on a process which has already delivered massive gains in terms of an end to paramilitary activity in closing down almost completely criminal activity by the Provisional IRA. Those are big wins, and promises that have been made are being kept and just be careful of erecting further preconditions of a detailed kind. I agree with you in the general sense that Sinn Fein, especially seeking to have ministers in the devolved government, should support policing. There is no question about that. Q43 Stephen Pound: Secretary of State, I will come back to an equivocal statement on your part. When we debated this on the floor of the House, there was much discussion about the imposition of tertiary and additional oaths, additional raisings of the bar. Is it fair, when we are trying to draw a group of people into the democratic progress who have not been part of the democratic process, for us to expect them to sign up for the entire package in its totality, or is there an argument to be made for an incremental involvement in the democratic process? I almost get the impression that there are some people who would rather not see the involvement of all elements in the politics of Northern Ireland and that there is an element of roadblock construction going on. Is that unfair? Mr Hain: No, I do not think it is unfair at all. The great prize here, whatever your politics, whatever the history, whatever the bitterness - and I understand that, especially from the Unionist community after all the suffering that has gone on - is getting everybody signed up to an absolutely fully democratic and peaceful culture where the rule of law is transparently observed by everyone. I think the sentiment behind your question is absolutely right which is why I was answering the earlier points in the way that I was, and that applies also to the pledge of office and whether it should be amended, which I think is the point you were raising to include support for the rule of law or something like that. The pledge already contains "a commitment to non-violent and exclusively peaceful and democratic means", and if the parties want to agree on the form of words in the context of an agreement on a package of other strand one issues, then we have indicated our willingness to look at those and if necessary to take them forward by legislation. It is precisely this point: do we go into this seeking to erect a mountain of obstacles, which means we will never get a restoration, or do we go into it expecting everybody to sign up to and obey the rule of law in all its effects but recognising that we need to get the process on the road? Q44 Mr Fraser: Secretary of State, if, as you say, Sinn Fein come to the table on the policing board in the way you have described, what happens if, after that, Republican paramilitaries resume an armed campaign? We hope, hypothetically, it never happens but if it did, what contingency plan do you then have and what penalties do you then apply to those people on the board that may in some way be connected to that? Mr Hain: First of all, I am not anticipating that. On the contrary, the evidence from the IMC is, as I think I am always quoting verbatim, that the IRA poses no terrorist threat; it has dismantled its engineering operations and its capabilities. That gives us the confidence that the scenario you have described will not arise. Q45 Mr Fraser: Further to that point, is there a contingency plan? Should something happen? I accept totally one does not anticipate something but one never knows. It is always very handy to have something up one's sleeve that you can use in terms of "what if". Mr Hain: Put it this way, that would create the most almighty crisis in politics, the good governance, of Northern Ireland from policy development right the way through to policing - of course it would. Let us not anticipate the worst, let us work for the best. Q46 Mr Fraser: Can I turn to the point of the issue of 50/50 recruiting. The decision taken to look at that I, personally, have some problems with. If you have got potential recruits who are qualified to do the job but technically come from the wrong religious background, that surely is an illogical way to move forward, is it not? Mr Hain: First of all, let us look at the big achievements of this policy. When the Patten Report concluded and reported, there were only 8.3% of regular officers in the Police Service from the Catholic community. Today that figure stands at 19.68% and is rising, and will rise up to 30% when the 50/50 recruitment basis will come to an end. We will review it next year in any case and it will come to an end in 2010/11. I think that is a magnificent achievement and it has helped to create cross-community support for policing which simply did not exist in the past. We do intend to continue with that policy. Q47 Mr Fraser: At the same time, retain a pool of officers who have already been vetted from whichever background they come from? Mr Hain: There is no policy of pushing people out, this is a question of new recruits. It is very interesting: the Police Service is a very popular organisation to try and join. We get on average 13,000 applications a year for the PSNI for only 440 trainee constable posts, so inevitably there is a huge disappointment level, as those figures self-evidently show, but it is not a question of penalising any one community, it is just impossible to fit 13,000 people in to 440 jobs. Q48 Mr Fraser: What do you say to the former Vice Chairman of the Policing Board who is quoted as saying: "50/50 recruitment is an aberration that should be got rid of as soon as possible"? Mr Hain: I do not agree. As I say we are due to review it next year, I think it has been hugely successful and it will come to an end in 2010/11 when it will have served its purpose. Q49 Mr Fraser: On a wider issue, are there any new developments regarding the Northern bank robbery that we should know about? Mr Hain: I have got some information here and I will happily unearth what I can. There have been arrests, we are pursuing the investigation. It is quite a complicated investigation. As you remember from the gold bullion robbery that took place in England - I think at that point the biggest robbery - it took years to come to court and we hope that it will be a lot quicker in this case. Q50 Stephen Pound: Do you mean the Brinks Mat robbery? Mr Hain: Yes, indeed. Q51 Stephen Pound: We have had a few of them recently. Mr Hain: We have had three individuals charged in connection with the Northern bank robbery already and some money has been recovered - I think about £50,000 at a sports ground in Belfast and in the Republic of Ireland £3.2 million, although it has not been attributed to the robbery. The inquiries are continuing but it is inconceivable to imagine that amount of money not somehow coming out of the Northern Bank but who knows. Q52 Lady Hermon: May I take you back to your remarks about the 50/50 recruitment procedure. You said that, in fact, it was a big achievement. Let us look at the big achievement. Can I ask you to reflect for a moment on the achievement in terms of credibility and confidence instilled within the Unionist and wider Protestant community by the fact that the Northern Ireland Equality Commission - it calls itself an Equality Commission - and the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission both supported legalised religious discrimination in Northern Ireland? How do you think that has impacted on their status and the respect in which those institutions are held in Northern Ireland? Mr Hain: I do not agree, with respect - and I normally do respect you and the points you make enormously - with the premise. Behind that question there is a suggestion that there is enormous discrimination against Protestant applicants, and, in fact, the real issue is when you look into the figures, that, first of all, there are a very limited number of posts available in the way that I have described; the figure of 13,000 applicants for 440 jobs is an average per year. Secondly, of these who are not selected (it is not the case and there is only a tiny handful of them that are rejected) less than 2% of all non-Catholic applications will have been rejected as a direct result of the 50/50 provisions. If you look, for example, at the 28,235 applications from non-Catholics in the period that this covers, only 541 will have been rejected directly as a result of the 50/50 provisions. With people who find themselves unsuccessful, the impact of the 50/50 policy in less than 2% of cases is the reason for their lack of success. The reason for their lack of success either is lack of suitable qualifications or simply lack of available posts. Q53 Lady Hermon: First of all, I would be delighted if you would meet some of my constituents who have received the letters repeatedly indicating that it is their community background which means that they have been turned down from a career that they have always wanted to pursue. Mr Hain: I am sure the security minister would be happy to receive a delegation like that. Q54 Lady Hermon: Thank you. He would be delighted to have been committed to this but he has not though that is very kind of you. Mr Hain: He has been. Q55 Lady Hermon: Secondly, can I ask you again, what do you genuinely believe to be the impact on the credibility, the status and the respect that the Equality Commission and the Human Rights Commission are held within the Protestant community in Northern Ireland as a direct result of their support for this obviously discriminatory recruitment procedure to the Police Service. It is a simple question. Mr Hain: Again, I do not accept that it is a discriminatory practice. What we are trying to do, and I am sure you agree with this and I am sure all Unionists would applaud the subject, except most people holding really extreme views, is we want a police force that reflects the community on a cross-community basis. When you have got a history in which the Catholic community was not within the police force and felt it was excluded from it (we are going to get into a historic debate now but the facts speak for themselves) only 8% as recently as 1998 were from the Catholic community. That is simply not a sustainable basis for policing by consent. Q56 Lady Hermon: Secretary of State, I do hope you would accept that it is not because there was any discrimination practised within what was the Royal Ulster Constabulary, it was as a consequence of intimidation by the Provisional IRA and the murder of many Catholic recruits and those who might have wished to --- Mr Hain: Of course, that was certainly an important factor but I am saying now that I do not accept that it is discrimination to try and ensure we have a PSNI that reflects the community - not exactly but has a big, big proportion, which we will achieve within the next few years, around 30% of members of the PSNI from the Catholic community. I think that is healthy for Unionists, I think that is healthy for the rest of the police right across Northern Ireland and I am sure that that will be supported including by you. Chairman: Secretary of State, I have received a message that a division in the House is fairly imminent and I am most anxious to bring in Stephen Hepburn on parades. You have kindly said you would meet the Committee privately and perhaps we could return to some of these subjects then, but would you like to come in on that? Q57 Mr Hepburn: One over-arching question on parades, what is your assessment so far on the work of the new Parades Commission? What would they do differently to avoid a Y-block situation? Mr Hain: I am encouraged by the new Parades Commission and its Chairman, Roger Pool. I think they quickly established a reputation. I do not want to exaggerate this because the tensions and feelings run incredibly high around parades or can do. I am encouraged that they have established a mode of working in which trust has been built in a way that it has not before. That is not to criticise their predecessors, it is just to say they are meeting the demands of the new situation. As a result, we have seen initiatives from the loyal orders, all three of which came to see me and talked to the leadership of SDLP and to nationalist community organisations; this has not happened before. There are signs that the stress on mediation and on dialogue which has long been the demand from Unionist representatives, as I think colleagues here will confirm, and from the Parades Commission is now being prioritised to an extent that almost subsumes everything else, so I am encouraged so far. Q58 Mr Grogan: On the Parades Commission, are there any indications that the Orange Order is more likely to engage directly with the new Commission? Mr Hain: To meet the Chairman of the Commission? Q59 Mr Grogan: Yes. Mr Hain: I have seen no indication of any formal meeting. I hope for, and I have urged, the representatives of the loyal orders to engage with the Commission. I know why they find that difficult, but really dialogue in the end is the solution to these problems. We saw that in Londonderry last year when the two communities of Derry engaged, talked to each other and produced a solution. There was some evidence at the more recent Apprentice Boys' parade, and the fact that the loyal orders met the SDLP for the first time to discuss the marching season. These are encouraging signs and let us hope we can take it further. Q60 Sammy Wilson: Chairman, I think anybody listening to this discussion, to hear the Secretary of State say - and I do not accept the figure - that only 541 people have been sent letters in Northern Ireland that they were excluded from a job because of their religion and that somehow is acceptable, it really beggars belief that 541 people have been told they were not good enough for a job and, because of their religion, they were not accepted for the job. That is your own figure now, Secretary of State, and I believe that the figure is much greater than that. Mr Hain: If you want to take figures out selectively, then that is your choice. Let me remind you that over 93% of all Catholic applications have also been unsuccessful. It is only a tiny minority of all these applicants, simply because of the 13,000 who apply each year and the availability of only around 440 or so slots, it is only a tiny minority that succeed; 93% of Catholics fail as well. Q61 Sammy Wilson: Secretary of State, we are not talking about people who fail to qualify for the job, we are talking about the 541 which refers to people who went through the process, who were deemed to have qualified for the job and who were then rejected on the basis that they were the wrong religion. Although you say it is not discriminatory, the Chief Constable has said frankly he believes it is discriminatory, as has the Deputy Chairman of the Police Board said it is discriminatory. I do not think anyone looking at this objectively can say it is not discriminatory. Mr Hain: Let me put a question back to you then. Do you think it is a good thing there are more Catholics in the PSNI? Q62 Sammy Wilson: I think it is a good thing that people are applying from all communities and I believe people from all communities should have equal access. Mr Hain: The record speaks for itself. We have gone from 8% to 20% in a very short space of time, so we will reach 30% in a short space of time and then the policy will be put on ice. Q63 Sammy Wilson: We have gone from one figure to another because of a policy of direct discrimination. Mr Hain: We have to disagree on that. Q64 Sammy Wilson: I do not believe it will be acceptable here in England. All I can say is, you have indicated to this Committee today that letters have gone out to people saying that they cannot get a job because of their religion. Given the fact that for most of the advertisements for jobs in the police, we have about 10,000 people responding and a good mix of people from all parts of society in Northern Ireland, why can we not at this stage, because we are getting applicants from across the community, let people be chosen on merit? Mr Hain: Fifty-five thousand people have applied to join the PSNI since it was brought into existence. Only a handful of those, relatively speaking, have been able to be appointed. The reason for the rejection of applications is simply overwhelmingly - including 93% of Catholics that applied - because they are not the jobs for them or they do not qualify. In the case of only a very small minority, the figure you are quoting, that is a result of the policy, but I think it is in the interests of effective policing that the PSNI is representative of the whole community. Q65 Chairman: But you are confirming that, as a result of the policy, Secretary of State, there is a small number of people, 500 and something, who effectively have been barred because of who they are and what they are? That is the situation. It is an unfortunate result of the policy, but you are confirming that is the case? Mr Hain: That clearly is the case, I am not denying the fact, but it is a very small proportion of the number of Protestants who apply that are rejected for that reason. It is less than 2%, so that means that over 98% do not succeed for other reasons, either they are not the jobs for them or they are not suitably qualified. I come back to this figure, which I will quote back to anybody who puts this point to me, that 93% of Catholics also do not succeed. Q66 Sammy Wilson: I think the Minister of State is playing with figures here. It is a third of the people throughout all of the campaigns from the beginning of the recruitment until now who qualified, who got through the assessment, who were deemed as being capable of carrying out a job, but who were turned down on the basis of their religion. Mr Hain: As I say, less than 2%. That figure you quoted, Sammy, comes from without taking into account the number of jobs that are available. There are a limited number of jobs available. Q67 Stephen Pound: In my constituency, Secretary of State, I have a very large African-Caribbean community and a South Asian community and, until very recently, 100% non-South Asian and non-African-Caribbean police force. If two people with identical qualifications applied to Hendon today, somebody from an African-Caribbean or a South Asian background will get the job over someone else simply because we are trying to get a police force that looks like the constituency. I am asking whether you had any consultation with the Metropolitan Police Service who have been operating precisely this policy not just in the lifetime of this Government but in the previous Government with the consent of virtually everybody involved. Inevitably, some people will say Passé(?) in the American Presidential Election a few years ago would say, "Did I not the get the job because of my colour?", when demonstrably this is positive discrimination. If it does have a negative corollary, that is inevitable. Mr Hain: I think that is a fair point. Q68 Lady
Hermon: Secretary of State, may I ask
whether you have ever discussed this issue of positive discrimination in police
recruitment with your, regrettably, former colleague, the Mr Hain: Not in general terms when I reported to him did we discuss the success of the PSNI, including the increasing cross-community support, partly because of this policy. Q69 Chairman: Secretary of State, I am grateful to you. We have some interesting things on the record. I think it would not be an unfair summary to say that you are fairly confident that you will achieve your desired goal on 24 November. Obviously many people throughout the United Kingdom, Great Britain and Northern Ireland hope that is the case. I think there will be some concern with some of the answers you have given, but obviously people will be able to reflect on those, but we are grateful to you for the frankness with which you have sought to answer the questions. It is the duty of this Committee to hold the Government to account. Mr Hain: Indeed. Chairman: Therefore, you cannot expect you will always have an easy ride or agreement from members of this Committee. At least we have certain things now on the record; we are grateful. We are grateful too for your agreement to meet the Committee now privately for a short session, so could I, in thanking you and your officials, now ask the public to withdraw. |