JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT debate -
Thursday, 2 Feb 2012

Developments in Northern Ireland: Discussion with Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

Chairman

I welcome the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the Right Honourable Owen Paterson, MP. I also welcome Mr. Julian King who until recently was the British ambassador to Ireland and Mr. Andrew Staunton, the deputy ambassador. Mr. King is here in his new role as director general of the Northern Ireland Office. I wish him well in his new role.

This is a cross-party committee which considers a wide range of issues arising from Ireland's role as a signatory to the Good Friday Agreement. As well as examining institutional issues, the committee also considers other issues of common interest such as reconciliation issues, commemoration issues and North-South co-operation across sectoral areas. This committee is the only one of its kind in that it comprises Members of both Houses of the Oireachtas and MPs representing the 18 Northern Ireland constituencies.

As part of its current work programme, the committee has undertaken to visit Northern Ireland and the Border regions on a regular basis to meet with leaders and members of both communities. The committee has already viewed Good Friday Agreement projects on the ground and met with members of the various communities. As joint guarantors of the Good Friday and St. Andrews agreements, the British and Irish Governments have a shared ongoing responsibility to seek their full implementation.

Today's meeting with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is a welcome first and follows on from the first State visit by Queen Elizabeth in May last year which was warmly welcomed and successful. I want to put on the record the committee's appreciation that the Secretary of State chose to address it in public session.

Before I invite the Secretary of State to make his presentation, I must inform him he is protected by absolute privilege in regard to any utterance he makes before the committee. However, if he is directed by the committee to cease making particular statements and continues to so do, he is entitled only to qualified privilege. He is directed that only comments and evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings are to be given and he is asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, he should not criticise or make charges against any Member of the Oireachtas, person outside the Houses or any official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

I thank the Chairman for her kind introduction and the invitation to address the committee. May I begin by congratulating her on her taking over the Chair? I have already seen the firm grip she has on proceedings and I will try not to infringe the rules on privilege.

In a previous incarnation as shadow secretary of state for Northern Ireland, I often came here with Julian King as ambassador and was always unfeignedly greeted with warmth as an unknown Opposition spokesman. Many Oireachtas Members made time available to me which I really appreciated. It made an enormous difference when I took over as Secretary of State that I had good relations and links with a strong feel for their views on many issues and had taken their advice. It is tremendous to be invited to Leinster House to address such an important committee. It does have very important work to do.

I consider myself very lucky to be the first Secretary of State to take over in Northern Ireland when constitutional issues are not the absolute overriding priority. Thanks to man-years of effort from Members of the UK Parliament, Oireachtas Deputies and Senators, and, in fairness, Members of the US Congress, we now have stable institutions in Northern Ireland endorsed by huge majorities both in the Republic and the North at the time. Last years, elections went through in the North with less acrimony than the AV referendum we had on the other side of the Irish Sea. What we now have is an opportunity to build on this.

While we have overwhelming support for the settlement, there is a small exception of, sadly, a number of people who do not accept it. It is appropriate to thank Ministers and the Garda Síochána for the staunch support they have shown to the work of the PSNI and the Northern Ireland Minister of Justice, David Ford, in bearing down on this small number of sadly very misguided but dangerous people who do not accept the settlement. It is very much due to this unprecedented high level of co-operation that several attacks were thwarted in recent months. Lives have been saved and terrible injuries prevented.

When made shadow secretary, I made it my business to come to Northern Ireland on a weekly basis. Not being the least bit complacent about the state of politics, my conclusion then was there was an opportunity to build on the foundations provided by the Agreement and, to use the phrase of the Northern Ireland affairs committee, concentrate on the economy and cement the peace. We have made this a major plank of the new UK Government's policy to work closely with devolved Ministers in helping to turn around the economy which is extraordinarily overdependent on public spending. According to one survey, public spending represents 77.6% of Northern Ireland's gross domestic product. This is clearly unsustainable. We want to work with local Ministers to rebalance the economy which I believe will take possibly 25 years. By doing that, we want to encourage the private sector and steadily replace the dependence on public spending. We have some tremendous businesses in Northern Ireland. Do not underestimate the skill with which the private sector is driven. We have top-class businesses, although not enough of them. One of my campaigns has involved working with local Ministers and businesses on a coalition manifesto commitment to produce a Government paper and consult on the possibility of re-balancing the economy and, possibly, devolve the levying of corporation tax to the Stormont Assembly. A ministerial working group is carrying out a detailed investigation of the cost, mechanics and manner by which we could legislate for these proposals.

Another theme in respect of which we are keen to work with local Ministers is following up the advice given by the Prime Minister to the Stormont Assembly last year to the effect that we would like to see a shared future rather than a shared out future in Northern Ireland. I am sure members will be aware of the severe segregation and polarisation that continues to obtain in Northern Ireland. In the education sector, 85,000 school places remain empty because certain schools from different traditions are no longer viable. We would like to work with local Ministers and encourage difficult decisions to end this polarisation. More than 90% of those in public housing are segregated. These are long-term issues but they need to be addressed. We have an opportunity to do so in the context of stability in Stormont and encouraging statements given verbally by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and contained in the draft programme for Government in regard to community division. Last week the Tánaiste and I discussed the possibility of a peace IV programme. One of the matters we discussed with the First Minister and Deputy First Minister was a review of the large number of community programmes which help to address community division. That is a worthwhile and long-term initiative. Nobody underestimates the difficulty or cost of what is involved, however. A survey by Deloitte estimated the cost of division at £1.5 billion sterling per annum.

Another area in which we can work with members and, certainly, with local Ministers, is the issue of commemorations. We are about to embark on a decade of centenaries, some of which are controversial and will provoke strong opinions. Together they form a pattern resulting in the position I have just described, which I suggest is the best position we have occupied together for decades. I had a good meeting this morning with the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Deenihan, and I have discussed the matter previously with the Tánaiste and with the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Deputy Brian Hayes, at a meeting in Cambridge. When I visited Dublin recently we went to Islandbridge. I was delighted to see how closely we share the view that the centenaries could be very beneficial if handled sensitively. They could be educational in terms of correcting facile or simplistic understandings of what happened during these events. It is tremendous that proposals have been made to begin the centenaries by commemorating the events around the covenant. Recognition of an event does not necessarily mean one is commemorating it or abandoning one's own tradition. One is, however, showing a broader approach by paying attention to it. If we could work together in that spirit we could set the tone for these events so that they can be educational and, ultimately, beneficial. We had a glorious example of how this should be done - I do not see how we can improve on it - when her majesty the Queen and the President worked together on a spectacularly successful celebration of what could have been a very contentious centenary. All of us would agree that, thanks to these enormously respected Heads of State, very good relations between our two countries have become even better.

On that high note, I thank the committee for inviting me to speak and I will try my best to answer members' questions without breaching the rules of privilege.

Deputy Aodhán Ó Ríordáin

I congratulate Deputy Tuffy on her election to the Chair. I commend her predecessor, Deputy Hannigan, on a successful year as Chairman. I welcome our guest, the Secretary of State and pay tribute to his Government's response to Bloody Sunday and the apology his Prime Minister gave in the House of Commons. That meant a lot to the people of Derry.

We were struck on our visits to Northern Ireland by the ongoing problem of sectarianism. Although sectarianism is classless, its most overt and violent interfaces are in areas of social disadvantage. In regard to the poverty alleviation measures being considered for Northern Ireland, the Secretary of State spoke about public housing and education. It is believed that sectarianism is hardening among younger people who never witnessed the Troubles, feel they missed out and are looking for a sense of empowerment. How is the UK Government engaging with the authorities in Northern Ireland in this regard and what role can integrated education play?

We recently met the families bereaved by the Monaghan bombings. We met some brave, articulate and inspirational people but they feel let down by successive British Governments over the past 40 years. The Oireachtas is powerless to assist them without co-operation from the Secretary of State's Government. They want access to State papers and information on the background to the events that led to the death of their loved ones. Those wounds will never heal unless co-operation is forthcoming from the British authorities. We have come very far in terms of relations between North and South, among the various communities in the North and between this country and Britain but a number of issues remain outstanding. Much has been done to heal the wounds of Bloody Sunday but this is an ongoing issue for those affected by the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, who believe there is an unnecessary obstacle in the way of their healing.

Deputy Frank Feighan

I congratulate Deputy Tuffy on her election as Chair and wish her every success. I thank Deputy Hannigan for the great work he has done. He united this committee and we have had numerous cross-Border meetings. I welcome the Secretary of State and the Director General of the Northern Ireland Office, Mr. Julian King. I have met them in other guises over the past several years.

The Secretary of State alluded to the decade of commemorations, including the Ulster Covenant, the 1916 Rising, the great lock-out and the battle of the Somme. I am concerned that some of these commemorations may be taken over by hardliners from both traditions. What is the opinion of the Secretary of State on this concern and how should we approach the commemorations? If a vacuum is left on either side it can be filled by unsavoury elements who will use it for the wrong purposes. What does the Secretary of State believe we can do on either side of the Border on the island of Ireland and also in the UK to try to alleviate that?

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

I thank the members for their respective welcomes. On the first question, the best thing we can do for young people is to revive the economy. That would have an enormous impact not just economic but also social and ultimately political. The highly successful international company, Almac, which is located in the pretty divided communities of Portadown, Craigavon and Lurgan, currently employs approximately 2,000 people. Its chief executive has gone on the record and said if we could reduce corporation tax to levels similar to those in the Republic, it would employ a further 2,000 people. That could have a really significant knock-on impact in those communities socially and ultimately politically because sadly, allegedly, one of those who shot PC Carroll was a 17-year-old from a family that had suffered unemployment for several generations. I have a very strong belief that by reviving the private sector and bringing jobs we will lift all boats across Northern Ireland and that will be fundamental.

The Deputy briefly touched on our welfare reforms which are going through the UK Parliament - we voted on them last night. I cannot think of any measure the British Government is bringing through which would more greatly benefit disadvantaged people across Northern Ireland of all ages. We have a monument to mistaken policies - benign well intentioned policies - of both main parties which have completely failed. We have 5 million people on benefits in the United Kingdom with one in ten citizens in Northern Ireland on a benefit, known as DLA. We are planning to make work pay and to introduce major programmes or rehabilitation and re-education to help people into work. In very simple terms we plan to abolish a whole range of benefits which at the moment incentivise people not to work.

I have been an MP for 14 years and have people come to my surgery telling me that if they work beyond a certain number of hours they go off a cliff and get hit by a 97.5% rate of marginal tax because they lose a number of benefits. By introducing what we call the universal benefit, we will add a taper so that every one of my constituents and everyone in Northern Ireland will know if they work one hour or two hours longer they will be better off regardless of their circumstances, whether we are talking about an unemployed young person who has just left college or a single mother with three children. Whatever their circumstances and background they will be better off if they work. I believe that will have an enormous impact. We are introducing the most ambitious programme of apprenticeships our country has seen. We are also introducing a revolutionary idea called the work programme, whereby private businesses and charities will be incentivised and will only get paid if they can mentor an unemployed person for two continuous years into a real job. These programmes, which are just going through the UK Parliament, will have a very strong beneficial effect.

The Deputy touched on integrated education. Along with Pat Doherty, MP, MLA, I went to west Tyrone to visit an integrated primary school, which we mentioned just before we came in. I am a very strong supporter of integrated education. Sadly the number of children has gone down from 7% to 6%. I do not believe it should be universal but I would like to see all parents having the option, if they believed it was good for their children, to send them to integrated schools. Members should not forget that this function is devolved and many of the questions they might put to me are now in the hands of devolved Ministers. It is not for me to impose. We can give encouragement and on the issue of the 85,000 empty school places, we would encourage the Northern Ireland Executive. I think the Minister is in tune and there is agreement across the Executive that it is not sustainable. However, it is not for me to dictate the detail. We can encourage and discuss the broad direction. It must be remembered that I am the first Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to come in with pretty well all the main competencies devolved. I must be very careful in my new position not to tread on local toes and it is a question of working with local Ministers.

The Deputy mentioned the Monaghan bombing. In other questions we will probably come to the issue of the past. There is a terrible tragic truth. Many of these events were truly awful and have blighted the adult lives of many of those affected, not just, obviously, those who were killed or wounded. Also tragically some of these events happened so long ago that we will never know. I know the issue of the Monaghan bombing is very contentious. When he was over here last year for the Queen's visit, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Mr. William Hague, MP, discussed this at the highest level. He assured his counterpart here that we have made available the synopsis that is relevant to this case. I do not think there is more we can do. There is always a terrible hope in these cases that somewhere there is a file or a pot of truth that exists. I do not think there is in many of these cases. In some of them we will never know exactly what happened.

I briefly touched on the issue of commemorations in my opening remarks. It is very important for the two Governments - the two political establishments actually - to work together by being respectful and ensuring that events such as exhibitions, lectures or conferences are genuinely educational and therefore beneficial. That will fill the vacuum because as the Deputy rightly points out if we do not do this there is a danger that people who do not have such a benign view of the value of these events could hijack them and abuse them. It is very important that we set the right tone. Obviously we cannot dictate the enormous number of activities that will come out nor can we dictate what might be written in books or come out in films or radio programmes. However, we can help set the tone and the right environment. As I said I have discussed this with three senior Irish Ministers so far and we intend to work closely together. The Deputy's point is a very good one - if we do not work together there is a danger there will be a vacuum and the vacuum could be filled by the wrong people which could be very negative.

Deputy Joe O’Reilly

I welcome the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Paterson, MP. We are delighted to have met him on this occasion and many previous occasions. We are impressed by the degree to which he is very hands-on and aware of the minutia of his brief and the local communities. I welcome the director general of the Northern Ireland Office, Mr. Julian King, and the deputy head of mission at the British Embassy, Mr. Staunton. It is good to have the three of them with us. Their visit is a good follow-up to the Queen's visit here, which was, as the Chairman correctly pointed out, an outstanding success and brought Anglo-Irish relations to an even better place than they were. It was an enormous success.

The apology by the British Prime Minister to the Bloody Sunday victims, as mentioned by my colleague earlier, was highly significant in terms of achieving closure. I commend him on that. I also welcome that, as I understand it, there has been progress in the Pat Finucane case. However, I wish to return to the Belturbet bombing of 1972 and the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974. I put it to the Secretary of State that an all-party motion was passed in the Seanad this morning requesting that the papers be made available. I was informed of this by the Leader of the House, Senator Cummins. I take the point the Secretary of State has made about the synopsis but to achieve closure and given the passage of time it should be easier to do this now and I call on him to revisit and re-examine the question. I also appeal to him to consider a meeting with the people we met. Were the Secretary of State to meet them it would have a confidence building effect even if he were to say to them face-to-face what he has said to us. The Secretary of State is that type of person and I mean as much in the best sense; he is hands-on and out with people. I appeal to him to consider a direct meeting with the relatives. The Secretary of State may say that he has had such a meeting and, if so, that is fine but I suggest another one as a follow up to the propositions they put to this committee recently.

In deference to other colleagues who may wish to come in I will move on from that issue to ask some other questions. There was a good deal of alarm and fear about one year ago or 18 months ago with regard the dissident threat. This has abated somewhat in recent months in the media and in our consciousness. Will the Secretary of State comment on what he believes to be the current status of the dissident threat? I appreciate the acknowledgement of cross-Border co-operation in this regard but anything else would be absurd.

My colleague, Deputy Feighan, dealt well with the issue of commemorations. That is his brief and I will leave it at that other than to say that I like the point made about education and that people must get to a level of understanding that they never had before. We should learn about one another a little more rather than do something silly.

All of us accept the efficacy of economic co-operation in terms of our mutual welfare and the good of the island and of our people. From his understanding of cross-Border co-operation and the economic and social areas, would the Secretary of State care to identify whether there are any lacunae? Is there something we could do that we should do? Does the Secretary of State believe he could push this forward and in what way? We should never be content with the status quo and I am keen to hear a comment on this matter.

Chairman

Thank you, Deputy. I call Mr. Pat Doherty.

Mr. Pat Doherty MP, MLA

I add my congratulations on Deputy Tuffy's appointment as Chair and I wish to acknowledge the tremendous role of Deputy Hannigan as the outgoing Chair. I could not move on without making the comment that the top table has finally cracked the gender balance.

I welcome Mr. King and Mr. Staunton to the meeting. Some years ago during the many meetings I held with Mr. Paterson when he was shadow Secretary of State I put it to him that we would all end up in Dublin answerable to the Oireachtas, and here we are. I have three brief questions. The first is on the economy. To have a rounded and informed debate on the economy in the North we must be aware of the Barnett formula and the moneys that come from Westminster to the Assembly and how these are dispersed and accounted for. We are also aware of the welfare system and the moneys that come from London for it and the huge negative impact the current cutbacks are having in this regard. The missing piece is the total tax take from the North in all its component parts. We have never received a comprehensive picture from the British Government of what money comes from the North into the British Exchequer. Will the Secretary of State undertake to provide that information and the associated detail to assist in an informed and rounded debate?

We have just passed the 40th anniversary of Bloody Sunday. It cannot be stated often enough how welcome the words of the Prime Minister, Mr. Cameron, were with regard to what happened that day and the fact that he said the actions were unjustified and unjustifiable. I note that the British Government recently removed honours from Fred Goodwin, who has been convicted of nothing. However, many honours were disposed on people who committed murder on that day in Derry. Will the British Government consider removing the honours from these people?

I am sure the Secretary of State is aware that we held a debate in the Assembly on Monday for one and a half hours on the arrest of Marian Price McGlinchey. It was a lively debate. One thing which we were entirely uncertain about was when the Secretary of State revoked her licence or pardon, on who's advice did he do so? Was it on the advice of the Parole Commissioners in the North or was it on the advice of MI5? Will the Secretary of State comment on this matter?

Chairman

Will the Secretary of State reply to these questions?

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

I thank the committee members for their questions. The first question touched on the Queen's visit. Without sparing his blushes, I believe it is appropriate to thank Mr. Julian King who as the then ambassador played a key role in helping to organise the visit, working closely with many people here. It was a remarkable event and I believe it moved good relations onto an even better plane.

One question touched on the Dublin-Monaghan bombings again. I can discuss this with William Hague but I believe he gave it his best shot. We have given over a digest of this information. I am happy to meet anyone on these subjects but there is a certain point at which one falsely raises hopes. I referred to this earlier. In the case of some of these events, however much time and effort one puts into it, we will never know. Let us consider the Billy Wright inquiry. It cost us more than £30 million and it did not establish what one would think was a rather fundamental fact: how two lethal guns were smuggled into what was supposed to be western Europe's most secure jail. The Bill Wright inquiry went on twice as long as expected. It was altogether professionally run by some rather skilled people. It is absolutely traumatic for those involved but with some of these issues we have to accept that we simply will not know, no matter how much money and effort we throw at it.

On the issue of the current terrorist threat, sadly, there are a number of people who do not accept the current settlement, which this committee is in place to supervise. They do not accept the agreement or the substantial votes in the North and South for the current institutions, which are now up and running and working. When we came to power we were seriously concerned at the increase in terrorist activity and we took some robust measures. We consulted carefully with the Police Service of Northern Ireland, PSNI, and the justice Minister. After what was not an easy negotiation given our current financial problems and the deficit we inherited from the last Government, we reached an agreement to invest £200 million over four years to help the PSNI bear down on this threat. Having done that, working closely with the committee and the Garda we are seeing results. I have no wish to raise hopes unduly but I believe our action has had a beneficial impact and we are bearing down on the problem. However, they are determined and we are in no way complacent. Sadly, we must carry on working on this for some time. This includes working closely with David Ford and the PSNI in Northern Ireland and with Deputy Alan Shatter and Martin Callinan and his colleagues here. This is very much a team effort and it is altogether in all our interests to dissuade these people from their activities. If they will not be dissuaded, we will arrest them, convict them and put them away for some time.

The next question concerned the lacunae in the current economic situation between our countries. One area that would come to mind here is energy. I had a very interesting meeting at our conference in Manchester with the organisation which distributes power here. It was very obvious talking to it that the bigger the energy market, the better. It would be in all our interests if we had more interconnectors between the whole island of Ireland, because the Northern Ireland market is small and the Republic of Ireland market is also quite small. If we had interconnectors between Great Britain, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, that could have a beneficial impact on energy prices, which affect disadvantaged people across the board. Therefore, there are areas where we can work together and I would be strongly in favour of more interconnectors.

On Mr. Doherty's question on the Barnett formula, currently public spending per head in Northern Ireland is £10,706 as opposed to £8,668 in England. Therefore, there is already a big difference, for reasons we understand. We have been clear as a Government that we will stand by Northern Ireland and, therefore, I take issue with Mr. Doherty's comment on the drastic reductions. The reductions in revenue are 6.9% over four years, which comes to 1.72 % a year, as opposed to approximately 25% across most Government Departments and in my constituency in England. We have respected the special circumstances in Northern Ireland, but as I said earlier, we are determined to begin to rebalance the situation. This very heavy dependence on public spending is not sustainable and not good for Northern Ireland in the long term. We know why it exists, but we need to work on reducing it. On the subvention, off the top of my head public spending in Northern Ireland is roughly £19 billion and the subvention is approximately £8 billion, but I can ask my colleagues in the Treasury for a more exact figure on the tax intake.

I thank members for their comments on the Prime Minister. The verdict of the Saville inquiry was clear, but there must be a further judicial police investigation and judicial process. I talked to the Chief Constable about this recently and he is working on it. However, until we have convictions, it is not appropriate to take out sanctions on people. We must wait for the police inquiry to go through and see if it leads to any prosecution.

On Marian McGlinchey, I take advice from the parole commissioners. I know this is a contentious issue, but I have a responsibility for public safety. I work closely with David Ford - I had a meeting with him last week - and we are both well aware that this is a contentious case. My first responsibility, going on information from the parole commissioners, is to respect the priority of public safety.

Chairman

Thank you. Senator Maurice Cummins, Leader of the Seanad, asked me to convey his apologies. He had to leave because the Tánaiste is addressing the Seanad.

Deputy Michael P. Kitt

I congratulate the Chair on her appointment. May I put a brief question before I have to go to the Dáil? I welcome Mr. Paterson to this meeting. At a previous meeting we discussed the Parades Commission and the issue of some parades being less contentious than others at which there were violent demonstrations and rioting. I understand the Parades Commission has one more year of its mandate to run, but will Mr. Paterson give his views on it? I am sorry I have to leave the meeting, but I thank Mr. Paterson again for attending.

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

I will answer that quickly so Deputy Kitt can escape. We were completely clear on the issue of the Parades Commission when in opposition that we welcomed the Hillsborough Agreement and the proposal that there should be legislation in the Assembly to replace the Parades Commission. However, we also made it clear that should that not come through, we would reappoint a parades commission, because we would not allow the PSNI to be put in a position where it not just policed agreed routes but adjudicated on the routes which were contentious. Sadly, the legislation has not yet come through the Assembly, so we reappointed a new Parades Commission with the remit to be robust and fair. The tragedy is that while thousands of successful parades that are community events take place without any comment and are enjoyed by many people, a small number - probably in single figures - are bitterly contentious and in the past two summers these have led to appalling television images which do untold damage to the reputation of Northern Ireland across the world. These often take place in summer at a quiet news moment worldwide and if a vox pop was taken in Singapore asking about Northern Ireland, it would be the images of policemen in riot gear, petrol bombs and armoured LandRovers that would be mentioned, which is completely unrepresentative of what Northern Ireland is really like. The area being contested is probably only about 500 yards square.

I have encouraged the Parades Commission and have had regular meetings with the Orange Order. They have come to Hillsborough and we have had discussions with them. We have made the point to everybody involved in this that they should just think of the consequences for the 1.8 million people who live in Northern Ireland of the damage these television images do, despite the fact they only occur with a tiny number of events. The majority of parades go off without any disturbance and are enjoyed by many people. I appeal publicly, through this committee, for all those involved in the parades to reflect on this - we have a big year coming up with the centenary of the Ulster Covenant - and to ask themselves what benefits come from such events and to consider how with a little thought, restraint, modification and respect these events could be more peaceful.

Deputy Michael P. Kitt

I thank the Secretary of State.

Deputy Martin Ferris

I congratulate the Chair and wish her well and pay tribute to the work done by Deputy Hannigan as previous Chairman. It was very easy to work with him. I would like to thank Mr. Paterson for his presentation and welcome him and his colleagues.

I want to focus on the legacy issue surrounding the conflict over the past 40 to 45 years, particularly from the perspective of how victims can come to terms with what happened. I understand that Mr. Paterson has contacted parties regarding an all-party meeting that would consider an initiative on this issue. Sinn Féin's view is that we need an international truth commission to deal with the outstanding issues. Where does Mr. Paterson stand on that, given that we are three years on from the Eames-Bradley report? We still have to deal with the outstanding issues and need some mechanism that has credibility and with which people will feel comfortable in order to bring those issues to a conclusion. Would Mr. Paterson consider it appropriate, from the point of view of transparency and credibility, if this was done under the auspices of the United Nations? I do not think it would succeed if it was done under the auspices of the British Government or the British and Irish Governments. We need an independent input from outside in order for people to feel comfortable with it. Do the witnesses also agree that if we get to that stage we will need public reporting, findings and recommendations from any truth commission? That would give much credence to the process. Do the witnesses believe that any truth commission should be underpinned by legislation?

There is another outstanding issue regarding the legacy of the Troubles. Last week or the week before four ex-combatants - two from the loyalist side and two from the republican side - made presentations here. Although I am well acquainted with it, the committee was very struck by how the sentences resulting from their actions has inhibited these people from going on holidays or having a job like a taxi driver or a long-distance lorry driver in this State. It is a legacy that must be dealt with. My understanding from the negotiations in the Good Friday Agreement and subsequently was that this would be dealt with at some stage in order to expunge convictions that people have as a result of the conflict. It particularly relates to those who were part of organisations. The issue must be proactively pursued by both the British and Irish Governments, as they have the responsibility.

It does not make much sense that an MP, Deputy, a deputy First Minister and a junior Minister at the deputy First Minister's office - all elected officials holding high positions in government - are inhibited in travelling out of the country on holiday or even to visit immediate relatives, such as sons or daughters who may be in Australia, Canada or the US. Such people are not able to travel because of a sentence and conviction arising from the conflict. Do the witnesses agree that we must resolve all outstanding issues in this conflict, including legacy matters, before moving to a new place? Part of the process will be the truth commission and another part will be dealing with former combatants in the struggle. Mr. Jackie McDonald and Mr. Colin Halliday made a presentation here, and they have felt the effects of the conflict in the same way as those from the republican side.

Deputy Joe McHugh

I congratulate the Chairman and acknowledge the good work done by Deputy Hannigan, the Chairman's predecessor. He wanted to find out more about Northern Ireland and he visited the area. I acknowledge the role he played. I welcome Mr. Owen Paterson, MP. It is great to have him here as this is important. I acknowledge Mr. Julian King and wish him well in his new role. I also note his hands-on efforts with the very successful visit of Queen Elizabeth II, as they were instrumental in the visit going well. His able deputy ambassador, Mr. Andrew Staunton, has a keen knowledge of my county.

I am conscious of the benefits of the visit of Queen Elizabeth II and the bank of good will that has been created following the visit. I am a little concerned about the "Johnny come lately" school of politics, where politicians are playing catch-up on positive interrelationships on an east-west, North-South basis. There has always been good will and friendliness on the ground, with people in England welcoming Irish people over there; that has never been an issue. English people are also welcomed over here. Business people interact on an east-west, North-South basis, and there will be an interconnector between the UK and Ireland in September. There are businesses straddling North and South and business has been working on a North-South, east-west basis for decades.

Politicians, as usual, have been "Johnny come lately" in trying to get their act together on a North-South, east-west basis. In 1998, the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland signed up to the Good Friday Agreement calling for east-west and North-South interaction. We are here today with no Unionist representation. I was in London on Monday and there was no Sinn Féin representation. I know circumstances can lead to certain individuals not being present but there is an apparent reticence - indifference may be too strong a word - on the part of politicians and their total commitment to North-South, east-west parameters, which the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland bought into in 1998.

How important is the North-South parliamentary forum structure that has still not happened if we are to develop positive interrelationships from a business and political perspective, North and South? How important is the British-Irish Council, now based in Edinburgh, but which has still not been officially opened? I know there has been progress on it. Without getting into a discussion on the consultation of Scottish independence, I know Alex Salmond has overtly and publicly committed to that council construct in Edinburgh. How important is the council on an east-west basis, which is tied into the democratic Good Friday or Belfast agreement? How important is the North-South parliamentary forum, which is still not set up, to the North-South relationship on this island?

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

With regard to the past, if one reads David McKittrick's book Lost Lives, there is an indication that agents of the British State were responsible for 10% of the deaths, loyalist paramilitaries for 30% of deaths and republican paramilitaries for 60% of the deaths. One can consider what the British Government has done about the British State’s involvement. At the outset I was asked by my officials what we were going to do about the Saville process and I said we would publish the report as rapidly as possible but in a disciplined, measured manner so that it would get the full debate it deserves and properly recognise the huge effort that went into writing and preparing it. Several members very kindly made complimentary comments about Prime Minister David Cameron’s comments.

We followed up on that, we have had further difficult reports and we have not flinched. There was a very narrow window in our first year, with a strange sitting for ten days in September. We published the Billy Wright inquiry and we have done the same with the Nelson inquiry. The Hamill inquiry is currently held up because of possible prosecutions with a number of figures within it. From our perspective, we have been completely straight and up-front. At every opportunity we have made information available.

There is a bit of an "empty glass" perspective about some of the activities in the past. I pay tribute to the last Government, and particularly Sir Hugh Order, the chief constable, who set up the historical inquiries team, which is considering the circumstances of 3,268 deaths from the beginning of the Troubles to the agreement. That is well over half-way through the process. I have frequently praised the team, as has the Prime Minister, and it is now a devolved competence in the hands of Mr. David Ford. The team is working its way in a progressive fashion. Considering the surveys done on the reaction of families who have received reports from the inquiries team, they are approximately 90% satisfied or very satisfied. They are satisfied often with tragically simple facts, the conditions under which some relative may have been killed or wounded - whether the person was cold, or had something to eat. What is also apparent, following the publication of the Eames-Bradley report, is that there is no consensus. The Eames-Bradley group failed because there was no consensus. One of the recommendations was to establish a commission, which is satisfied in part by the Historical Enquiries Team, HET. I have been engaged in these issues, since I was a shadow Minister and I have been talking about this to large numbers of groups. The recent headline that Owen Paterson was suddenly talking to parties is not factually correct. I have been talking to the political parties since I became Secretary of State. My number two, the Minister of State, Mr. Hugo Swire, MP has been engaging with numerous groups. We have spoken to victims' groups and have established that there is no consensus. There are many people in Northern Ireland, who think we should draw a line in the sand and just stop, as they do not like to see the level of expenditure on inquiries. We were elected on a platform of no costly and open-ended inquiries. There are those, such as the members of this committee who would like to see a full-blooded international commission run by the United Nations and the spectrum in between the two. I think it would be a mistake for the British State to impose a solution because it simply will not work if there is no agreement among local people. That is where this committee's idea of a UN commission would have problems. It would be an imposed solution. The British State does not own the past. The past must be resolved by people across the board in Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Assembly had a debate in November calling on the Secretary of State to convene all-party talks. I went to the Speaker two days later and discussed it with him. As a result, I have written to all the party leaders, asking to meet representatives from their parties. Personally, I think the idea of all-party talks at Hillsborough Castle will lead to the danger of people grandstanding, with the hyped up drama of having international satellite television bands. I think it is much better to discuss it face to face quietly and soberly. I have been doing this for four and a half years and sadly there is no consensus. We cannot impose a solution and the idea of a UN convention would be an imposition that would not be accepted. We must keep working, which is not easy, on the issue. I have no black and white solutions but I hope something will come out of the talks that I will have over the coming weeks.

Deputy Martin Ferris

What is the British Government's preferred position?

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

As I have just said, the British Government cannot impose a view.

Deputy Martin Ferris

That is not what I am asking.

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

The British Government would like to arrive at a consensus. At the Leonard Steinberg Memorial Lecture about a year ago, I made it clear that there was real value in opening up archives and I think professional historians are better agents at arriving at the truth than lawyers. That is the reason we clearly stated during the election that our policy was for no more costly and open-ended inquiries. I go back to the Billy Wright inquiry. There is something wrong about the asymmetry of spending £30 million on an inquiry into one death. I met Mr. Billy Wright's father about a month before and for him, the death of his son was an appallingly traumatic event that probably ruined the later years of his life. Despite spending £30 million on an inquiry into one death, for all the best efforts and endeavours, it did not establish how the guns got into the jail. The opening budget for the inquiry into the 3,268 deaths under the Historical Enquiries Team, HET, is £34 million. It is invidious to have these very asymmetrical cases which absorb enormously more time and money. I would be looking at a broader approach. I think there is merit in getting historians involved in the archives.

Deputy Martin Ferris

What about the issue of prisoners?

Chairman

A question had been tabled by Deputy McHugh on the North-South parliamentary forums.

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

I apologise, I jotted it down, but I do not have my glasses on.

There is merit in these forums. They have been set up for a very good reason, that dialogue is good. When the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly was first set up, there was a shocking lack of communication between Members of the Dáil and Members of Parliament. BIPA does provide a very good forum. New forums are coming forward. We touched earlier on the economy. The British-Irish Chamber of Commerce has been set up recently. That is a beneficial forum. The ideas that have come out of the talks are good and we would like Mr. Pat Doherty, MP, if he is listening, to come to Parliament. The current arrangements were endorsed by 91% in the South and 74% in the North and that gave very considerable competencies over Northern Ireland to the Assembly, but as Mr. Doherty will agree as a Member of Parliament who has yet to take his seat, Westminster has significant competencies over Northern Ireland and I would love to hear his views in the Chamber of the House of Commons, particularly on welfare and our debates yesterday.

Mr. Pat Doherty, MP, MLA

Will Mr. Paterson get them here?

Chairman

First, I call Senator Mary White and Deputy Seán Conlan to follow.

Senator Mary M. White

I congratulate Deputy Joanna Tuffy on her appointment to the Chair. Deputy Tuffy was a Member of the Seanad and I know how my former colleague was exemplary in carrying out her duties.

I thank the delegation from the North for its presence.

I wish to raise two issues with the Secretary of State. This morning in the Seanad we passed a motion on the Dublin-Monaghan bombing inquiry in which we requested the Government to raise the matter of obtaining access to information held by the Government of the United Kingdom. For the information of those present, the motion would have passed through the Office of the Taoiseach before it was raised in the Seanad. I had been pushing to have a discussion on this matter in the Seanad. The organisation Justice for the Forgotten is an organisation of victims and relatives of those who died or were wounded, and 300 people were wounded, in the bombings in the 1970s. When this committee was established I asked that the Dublin-Monaghan bombings be part of its work and I was very pleased to have the support of my colleague for this request. This is an issue that will not go away. We will keep at it until our request is met. I do not know if the Secretary of State ever met the families of those who died or were wounded in this atrocity, but they feel neglected. I remember the day I heard the bombing; it was the largest bombing in any one day in Dublin and Monaghan.

At the previous meeting of the committee, I was taken aback by what I heard. We had loyalist and republican ex-prisoners sitting where the delegates are now sitting, both had faced the same issue of discrimination in getting employment and told how their children and grandchildren were being discriminated against because either their fathers or grandfathers had been in prison. What really shocked me and I could not believe it, is that women who had been released from prison after their child bearing years and were not able to have children were not allowed to foster or adopt a child. I thought I heard everything, but I could not believe that. We must resolve that issue for these women. It probably must be dealt with on a statutory basis as it is denying the human rights of former women prisoners.

Chairman

I thank Senator White. I am conscious of the fact that the Secretary of State has a meeting with the Ceann Comhairle. Therefore, we will have to move quickly.

Deputy Seán Conlan

I congratulate the Chair on her elevation to the position of Chairman and acknowledge the great work done by Deputy Dominic Hannigan in the Chair during the past year. I welcome the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland; the Director General of the Northern Ireland Office, Mr. Julian King, and the deputy ambassador, to the Houses of the Oireachtas.

I am a Fine Gael Deputy from Monaghan and went to school in Monaghan. For five years I boarded the bus at the very location where the Monaghan bombing took place. Recently we met the families of the victims of the Monaghan bombing. A very positive relationship is being developed between Ireland and the UK. As Deputy Joe McHugh said there have always been positive relationships between ordinary English people and Irish people. The experience of the vast majority of the Irish who went to England in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s was positive. They were welcomed by the English and had positive experiences there. They always relate those experiences to us when they return. There has never been an issue between the ordinary people on the ground; it is really only in respect of politicians.

I listened carefully to the reply to Deputy Ó Ríordáin's contribution. If, possibly, the Secretary of State and the ambassador, Mr. Julian King, and some representatives of the British Government were to meet the families of the victims and convey their views on how this issue could be brought to a close to their satisfaction, that would be a positive development.

The North-South interconnector were mentioned and the development of interconnectors North and South. With a view to getting community acceptance for an interconnector, whatever pressure the delegates can bring to bear on Northern Ireland politicians to undergroundthis project would advance the project at a much quicker pace than putting it over ground. It may take ten years to get it over ground with much hostility from the local community, North and South of the Border. Certainly, in County Monaghan there is very little positivity for the concept of an overhead pylon project which would provide little local benefit. It is a North-South interconnector to bring power from the major centres of population in the North, around Belfast, to Dublin. Without converter stations there is no benefit for the people in the communities I represent. Therefore, an underground project would certainly have benefit in getting community acceptance in our region.

I concur with the points raised about developing private industry North of the Border. There is a need to do that also in the counties South of the Border. The local transport networks between Armagh and Monaghan were never developed because of the Border. Peace I did a small amount of work at the start but there are serious deficiencies in the local road network which make it difficult for local traders to act on both sides of the Border. I am aware that bigger projects, such as N2-A5, have been suggested. If the local roads, local networks and local businesses were developed, marginalised and socially deprived communities may get engaged in activities but perhaps they should not. If they were to buy into Northern Ireland and the Republic and had real jobs in the local communities and if they could make a positive effort to live in local communities and work in local industry that would help to resolve legacy issues.

Chairman

I have only two more speakers - Deputy Crowe and Senator McAleese.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I wish to speak on the same issue, the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. In the earlier reply it was indicated that somebody recorded that there was no information. Was it Mr. Hague?

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

The Foreign Secretary, Mr. William Hague, MP, has made a synopsis available but that may not have the information. The idea that there is a golden key is possibly misleading. There is a danger in this of raising people's hopes. Perhaps I could answer the question of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

Deputy Seán Crowe

Perhaps I could finish my point and the Secretary of State could respond then?

Chairman

I think that would be best and then Senator McAleese.

Deputy Seán Crowe

If Mr. William Hague, MP, or the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland was asked if any British security organisation had colluded with loyalist paramilitaries, I do not think any British Government Minister has ever said there was collusion. As the technological know-how for the people who planted these bombs was not in the hands of loyalists - that was the belief at that time - therefore, someone had to supply it. We know there has been collusion. If I was to ask the Secretary of State or Mr. William Hague, MP, if collusion has ever happened would either be able to say "Yes" or "No", because Irish people are not fools? We know what has happened in respect of many people who have been killed down through the years. We know that British sources supplied weapons, supplied information and trained individuals. The motion was passed in respect of co-operation and mutual trust as a way of moving on. The British Government has not been able to do that. Therefore, there are many difficulties. We all know it was a dirty war in respect of matters that happened in the past. People are trying to move beyond that dirty war but these families are seeking answers and they believe the British Government, or elements within the British state, have those answers. Therefore, it is a matter of coming up with the truth. That is what the people want. I appeal to the representatives to meet with Justice for the Forgotten and to go back and look at their own files on this issue. There may not be a magic key but certainly there could be answers in respect of what happened in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

Mr. Owen Paterson is Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. If I asked him whether there was collusion down through the decades, could he say honestly that British operatives have not supplied weapons or information to loyalists? We know they have done so, it is on record and has come out in the courts and so on. It is not just a few rogue elements within the security forces that have done that. I ask the Secretary of State for Northern Irelandto come up with the information and to meet those families.

Senator Martin McAleese

I will be very brief. I welcome the Secretary of State, Mr. Julian King, and colleagues. The Secretary of State commenced his presentation by outlining an ambition and quoted the words of the Prime Minister to the effect that we would hope not to have a shared-out future but rather the building or the establishment of a shared future. What was behind those comments? From what he sees on the ground, are we effectively sharing out the future as opposed to building a shared future? Perhaps he could tease out that issue.

I wish to refer to the commemorations. The Secretary of State said that if handled sensitively they could be very beneficial and educational. I would go a little further and say that how they are handled will be a real test of the success of the peace process to date. The tone of the first commemorations will set the tones of those coming after. It is important that a degree of urgency is applied to this because the first major one is taking place in Belfast on 18 and 19 May, the commemoration of the Balmoral parade, in Ormeau Park. It is a big commemoration. The Loyal Orders are essentially organising that commemoration.

The Secretary of State said it is hugely important that we work together. I presume that is in the context of the two Governments - the British Government and the Irish Government - but I would like to hear his views on the involvement of the OFMDFM. Is it involved at this stage and, if so, are the delegates in contact with it and, more particularly, the Unionist Centenary Committee and the Loyal Orders?

Chairman

I invite the Secretary of State to respond and to make his closing comments.

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

I thank members for their various questions. On the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, I was at the unveiling of the memorial to the man who was killed in Monaghan. I was with the former Deputy, Mr. Seymour Crawford, and Mr. John Hume on the day it happened and met numerous people who were obviously affected by that event. All I can do is repeat my earlier comments. William Hague, as Foreign Secretary, met his counterpart during the Queen's visit and made it clear that the British Government had made available a synopsis of the facts that we have. The difficulty with these types of events is that hope is raised that somewhere there is a golden nugget of information. As I said earlier, according to David McKittrick, agents of the British state were responsible for 10% of the deaths. We have been very straight, as a Government, that at every opportunity we have made information available.

A question was asked as to whether there was collusion on the Finucane inquiry where there was a complete stand-off which we inherited. The phrase "stand-off" was used by Peter Hain, one of my predecessors, whose book was published last week. We have gone for a review of the huge archive amassed by the Stevens inquiry and the Prime Minister invited the Finucanes to Downing Street and apologised to Mrs. Finucane to her face and I made an apology to Parliament for collusion. Yes, where there is wrongdoing by agents of the British state we will front up. While agents of the British state were responsible for 10%, 30% was carried out by loyalist paramilitaries and 60% by republican paramilitaries. This is what is so difficult about the past, namely, trying to get a consensus and for everyone to work together on a level. As far as we are concerned when a difficult revelation has emerged we have been completely straight and come out with it.

On the issue of fostering, a very interesting point was made that no one raised with me before. I believe it must be a devolved competence but I will check when I get back to my office. This is the Good Friday committee but quite a lot of things that we have touched on are now in local hands. I am fairly sure fostering children will be a devolved competence.

With regard to roads, I am about to meet the Speaker and then I have the Northern Ireland affairs committee dinner tonight at Hillsborough and I will whizz up a brand new road so I am aware of the value of roads that bring us all closer together.

When interconnectors were mentioned I thought about ones across the Irish Sea because they would reduce energy prices here. Those that I talked to that run the grid here said it went from one or two but they would really like to get up to five or six interconnectors which would have a real impact on energy prices. All of these communications and improvements must improve lives across the peace divide.

I would like to pay tribute to Senator McAleese's work on the ground in difficult areas in Northern Ireland. He is probably better informed than any of us on how difficult things are. Sadly, he will have seen that since the Agreement the number of peace walls has increased. As the Prime Minister said to the Assembly, it has increased to 48. As we have seen when one councillor bravely said they should come down there was, sadly, quite a vicious vox-pop reaction to the effect that it was all very well for people in leafy south Belfast to ask for the peace walls to come down, but they should come and see what it was like here after dark. The Senator will be aware that on the ground there is still a lot of work to be done and sadly there is still polarisation. We have all got to work on it, not just through projects. As I said, we hosted the Tánaiste last week and we have talked to the First Minister and Deputy First Minister about it and I am pleased that it is in their draft programme. Those programmes are helpful but the real solution is to get the economy moving as prosperity will lift all boats.

A Senator asked a final question on centenaries. Yes, we are aware of the planned events on Ormeau Road and the big one on 29th. I have regular meetings with the Orange Order. We have discussed this with the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and are talking to them on a regular basis. Peter Robinson was with me in Hillsborough last week and we discussed the matter. It is important that the three of us work together, that is, the UK Government, the Irish Government and the Executive in Northern Ireland. That brings us back to one of the first questions that if we leave a vacuum the wrong people could fill it. I pay tribute to what Senator McAleese has done in recent years in working in a difficult area. He will know that these are long-term intractable problems but we have a brief window of opportunity now. This is my final comment. We have got the institutions up and running thanks to many people here to whom I am grateful. We have got this opportunity with the stability of institutions with people from many different backgrounds and traditions really working together. The public expects them to deliver as stability is no longer enough. They have got to deliver on education, health and local roads. That is what the people of Northern Ireland expect because I think they have moved on from the peace process. They are expecting real delivery on a daily basis as they would get anywhere else in western Europe. We have this opportunity and I think the one thing we can provide, working with local Ministers, is to get the economy moving. I will repeat the phrase of the Northern Ireland affairs committee that we have really got to "cement the peace." I thank the committee for inviting me here today and this has been an interesting session.

Deputy Seán Crowe

Will Mr. Paterson meet the families?

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

I did.

Deputy Seán Crowe

Will he meet them again? That is the question he was asked.

Chairman

I will conclude the meeting. I thank the Secretary of State for attending and answering questions in public session. I want to emphasise how much we appreciate that he attended the meeting today. Obviously difficult issues were raised and I welcome his candid answers. Many positive matters were raised in terms of opportunities for us to work together. He mentioned our shared future. We also have a shared past and heritage and much common ground that we can celebrate. I thank him again. It has been an informative and worthwhile meeting and we look forward to meeting him again.

Mr. Owen Paterson, MP

Thank you very much.

Chairman

Is there any other business? No, the meeting is adjourned.

The joint committee adjourned at 4.07 p.m. sine die.