It is interesting to follow the hon. Member for Blaydon (Mr. Anderson). I am sure that throughout my time in the 1980s and 1990s our views on the position in Northern Ireland would have been diametrically opposed, but we certainly agree today.
I was an Army intelligence officer in Northern Ireland in 1994. I therefore had a unique insight not only into the thinking of the Government of the day and the efforts that they were making towards peace, but into what was going on inside the terrorist organisations. It is right to pay tribute at this time to the men and women of the Royal Ulster Constabulary’s special branch, the military and the security services, who not only worked to achieve justice and catch criminals and terrorists, but had worked towards peace for many years before the 1994 ceasefire. They continue to work towards peace, whatever their titles are today, because we always worked not just to catch members of the IRA or the loyalist paramilitaries but to achieve a settlement.
Ministers will be aware, although they may not be allowed to say it in a public forum, of the work that has taken place, and is taking place today, to ensure that the Government of the United Kingdom are in the best position to use information to achieve peace. There was no great conspiracy to make war and continue conflict; the conspiracy was only to achieve a good resolution for peace.
I must give some credit to a man to whom it is not easy for me to give credit. I must give credit to Gerry Adams, and to Sinn Fein. I know from experience, from members of Gerry Adams’s organisation and indeed from the IRA, how much horror and murder was inflicted by some of those individuals, but I must give Gerry Adams credit for what he has achieved in persuading a terrorist organisation to come to the table to talk and, moreover, commit itself not just to a ceasefire but, apparently, to a permanent ceasefire. The constitution of the IRA army council has always denied any form of peace. It was a military organisation, and what Gerry Adams has achieved deserves some credit in this arena.
I can say that because I have had many experiences of Gerry Adams’s organisation, none of them jolly. Indeed, I think I remember arresting his cousin at some stage, or possibly his nephew. I have not met him in the House to ask him which it was, but I do know that we are here today partly because of that organisation’s actions. I can say that in memory of people such as Tim Parry and others who lost their lives on this side of the argument.
More importantly, I want to pay tribute to the right hon. Member for North Antrim (Rev. Ian Paisley) and the DUP. Throughout the process people were keen to say ““Appease, concede, give in, make the gesture, go for peace””, and every time it was said the right hon. Gentleman responded ““Not until we achieve the best deal for our constituents, our electorate: not until we are sure that these people mean peace.”” Actions speak louder than words in Northern Ireland. They always have, to Ulstermen. Those who forget that may find themselves in the position of the Secretary of State today. I believe that the slipping of the deadline was probably nothing more than an Ulsterman’s wish to have the last word. That is very much the way of Ulster. The Secretary of State may have thought that he was in charge of all the blackmail and the bullying, but in the end the Ulstermen will tell him when they want to start the process. So I pay tribute to the DUP, which stuck to its guns.
I never agreed with all that the DUP said in my time. I remember stopping the right hon. Member for North Antrim one day; he was not a Member of Parliament at the time. It was a Sunday, so he would not speak to me, a member of the security forces. He was on his way to do God’s bidding. When I saw the press trying to interview the party leader on yesterday’s television news, I knew that nothing would be said on God’s day. The right hon. Gentleman has stuck to his guns, and I believe that without that, Sinn Fein would never have recognised the Police Service of Northern Ireland or worked with the forces of law and order; but no doubt it will be tested by the DUP in the Assembly, to establish that its words mean actions.
We should not, however, forget the efforts of the United Kingdom Government under this Prime Minister and those of a number of previous Conservative Governments to ensure that we achieved what we have achieved today: a peace process with, hopefully, a conclusion. Last March I went to Northern Ireland and stayed in Headquarters Northern Ireland. I remember it as a pulsating citadel of the power of the United Kingdom, under threat sometimes, and sending men and women out to risk their lives—but it was a ghost town. Much of it was empty: many of the places that I recalled having purpose and function no longer existed, because there was no longer any purpose and function.
I went to visit my old bases, but I could not do so because they are now housing estates. In Cookstown there are a number of houses and no base, which is ironic because it was in Cookstown, in 1994, at the time of the first ceasefire, that I made the decision to close two vehicle checkpoints for a couple of hours. That was interesting, because the habit among the population of that town was to stop at the checkpoints; they were not used to being able to drive on. As a result there was a traffic jam, although no soldiers were present.
I think that others are sometimes quicker to kick the habit of violence and recrimination than our politicians. During my visit last Easter, I rang for a taxi from Headquarters Northern Ireland. I asked in the guardroom how I could book an ““approved”” taxi. In my day, to risk a taxi that had been booked by telephone might be to take one’s life in one’s hands, if the taxi had been booked from the wrong part of town. I was told, ““There is no approved list. Just dial a number.”” I dialled a number, a taxi duly appeared at the gates of Headquarters Northern Ireland—I was not used to that either—and I was driven to the centre of the city.
I did not look at the driver’s tattoos, terrified lest I catch sight of the Red Hand of Ulster, ““God Loves the UVF””, a tricolour or ““IRA”” on his arms. Instead, I engaged him in conversation about what he thought of the current peace deal, or peace process. He did not mind—he wanted it to happen—but he was most aggrieved at the act that politicians were receiving allowances for doing nothing. If anything could have told me that normality was arriving in Northern Ireland, it was that. It sent a signal that the Daily Mail might have a circulation in Northern Ireland in future; that people were obsessed with, and angry about, the fact that politicians were wasting time rather than dealing with the issues of the day.
There is a challenge for the Assembly. As a former Member of the Scottish Parliament, I have seen devolution in action, and I am not opposed to it. I have also seen nationalists in action, on a far better footing than I have in Ulster. The challenge for the Assembly and the Assembly parties is not to become bogged down in petty squabbling. If on day one the parties in Northern Ireland become involved in discussing whether they should have green, orange or blue tablecloths, or whether there should be lilies in the hall of Stormont, they will betray not only themselves but the electorate who sent them there.
When at a time of peaceful politics the nationalists’ agenda is to exploit such difficulties—such tiny, petty differences—for their own ends, my advice will be to ignore it. The best way in which to counter nationalist pettiness is to say, ““You can argue about whether the cross of St. Andrew or the Union flag should go on top of a Government building all day long, but it will not give people a better health service, a better education and a better transport system.”” That type of real politics usually puts the nationalists down. I advise people not to play into the nationalists’ hands if that is what they set out to do—and I am sure everyone knows from what happened the first time that that is exactly what some of them set out to do. I say, ““Be better and bigger than that, and I believe that the electorate of Ulster will, in the end, reward you for it.””
The role of the Northern Ireland Office must change. With devolution a success, it must give up the bullying and the blackmail that has sometimes characterised trying to get the Ulstermen to the table. It needs to become the strong voice of Ulster in Westminster, not Westminster’s voice in Ulster. It needs to be at the top table of the Cabinet and to say, ““We need a fairer corporation tax so that Northern Ireland can compete better with the south of Ireland.”” If it is the champion of Ulster in the constitutional environment of Downing street and the House of Commons, the electorate will again be less tempted to move towards a nationalist agenda. If it does that, the symbol that we are all chasing—a handshake—will become a reality, Stormont will become a lasting, successful settlement, and in the end peace will be achieved. Then the electorate, who have throughout this put up with death, murder and threats, will be able to focus on what is really important in Northern Ireland—education, health, industry, business and a future for the Province, which, as a Unionist, I hope will remain in the United Kingdom.
Northern Ireland (St. Andrews Agreement) (No. 2) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Ben Wallace
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 27 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Northern Ireland (St. Andrews Agreement) (No. 2) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
458 c1340-3 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:49:44 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_388485
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_388485
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_388485