UK Parliament / Open data

Terrorism (Northern Ireland) Bill

The Bill introduced to the House stands in stark contrast to what the Government have been saying to us about Northern Ireland. They have been telling us that things are good, that there is progress, and that we are almost in paradise. In fact, we are almost in perdition. We feel very hurt about what is happening in Northern Ireland, especially in relation to the victims. We have heard many references to the victims, but the easing of their pain and the alleviation of their state has been very slow. I am not saying that that is the responsibility of the Secretary of State, as he has come lately to the position. I regret that there are those in Northern Ireland who think that when the Government make a nomination, it must be a nomination favouring republicanism and a united Ireland. That must cease. The people who are given jobs should be given them not on the basis of their religion but on the basis of their honour, integrity and ability. We stand to that. I feel very sore about the fact that someone who thinks as I do politically is not allowed to put forward their view. I heard Brid Rodgers, a prominent member of the party of the hon. Member for Foyle (Mark Durkan) and a candidate in the elections for his party, say this morning that she could not believe what the Loyalist Volunteer Force had said, and that she therefore had to put a question mark beside that statement. She is entitled to say that she does not believe it, and to put down the question mark, but the thousands, tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of Protestants who say that we do not believe that the IRA will do what they say are also entitled to say just that. We are condemned out of hand, however, because we put down a question mark, but we need to do that. The House would be deluding itself if it did not know about the rejoicing on the republican side at having pulled the wool over the eyes of the Government once again. I sat in Leeds castle and told the people that I did not like what was happening. I said that I had to swallow hard and convince my supporters of what I was advocating. I was perfectly honest and straightforward. I did not talk to the IRA, and I do not intend to talk to those engaged in violence, whether they come from the IRA side or the loyalist side. The various people in Northern Ireland have a right to state their convictions, and to say, ““I am not convinced””. The Secretary of State tells us that the arsenal of the IRA has been done away with, but the only arsenal that has been done away with is the arsenal that was seen by the people who attended the decommissioning. He has no proof, however, that the IRA does not have 10 other arsenals. He had better keep that in his mind. I remember that when we met the two clergymen, the priest said to us, ““We could only see old arms. We didn’t see arms of a modern nature.”” I think that the IRA has the best possible arms, that it has arms of a modern nature, but that they were not there. The priest also explained to us that the trigger mechanisms of those bombs, which is the all important part, were all screwed off. They were not there. They were all missing. Are they going to be used for some future bombing? Those are the questions that everyone in their right mind is entitled to ask. They are entitled to demand an explanation.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
438 c659-60 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top