Official Report: 7 February 2000
Northern Ireland Assembly
Monday 7 February 2000
Contents
Assembly Member:Declaration of Interest
Equality (Disability, etc) Bill: Second Stage
Financial Assistance for Political Parties Bill
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development
The Assembly met at 10.30 am (Mr Speaker in the Chair).
Members observed two minutes’ silence.
Assembly Member:
Declaration of Interest
Mr Speaker:
At the last sitting of the Assembly, Mrs Robinson asked on a point of order whether Mr Benson should have declared an interest when tabling his question to the Minister of Education. I have taken advice on this matter from the Clerk to the Committee on Standards and Privileges, and I believe that there are grounds for Mrs Robinson’s point of order. I am therefore referring the matter to the Committee.
As Mr Benson is in his place, he will have heard what I have just said. Mrs Robinson is not present, so I shall write to her about the matter.
Assembly Business
Motion made:
That Standing Orders 10(2)(b) and 10(6) be suspended for the sitting of the Assembly on Tuesday 8 February 2000. — [Mr Morrow]
Mr Speaker:
Members will note the motion under Standing Order 70, which is item two on the Order Paper. Business motions of this kind are not subject to amendment or debate. The purpose of this motion is to suspend the Standing Order relating to Adjournment debates and breaks on Tuesdays, which are from three o’clock until six o’clock. Should the motion, standing in the name of Rev Dr Ian Paisley and Mr P Robinson, in respect of exclusion receive sufficient support to be debated tomorrow without our changing Standing Orders, there would have to be a recess from three o’clock until six o’clock, despite there not being a subject for the Adjournment. This does not seem a particularly profitable way of proceeding, and it would not allow proper time for the debate. That is the basis on which this business motion stands.
Mr Morrow:
I moved the motion on the clear understanding that it is to facilitate debate.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That Standing Orders 10(2)(b) and 10(6) be suspended for the sitting of the Assembly on Tuesday 8 February 2000.
Equality (Disability, etc) Bill: Second Stage
Mr Speaker:
Assembly Bills that refer to reserved matters, as defined in schedule 3 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, require the consent of the Secretary of State before we may proceed under section 10 of the Act. It is my intention to seek approval for all such Bills after their introduction. In future, when a Bill contains provisions on reserved matters, its Second Stage appearance on the Order Paper will signify that the Secretary of State’s consent has been obtained.
The Bill that we are about to debate contains a number of such reserved matters. On 25 January I wrote to the Secretary of State seeking consent to proceed with consideration of the Bill. This was granted on 26 January. If the arrangements for the future are clear I will now proceed and call the Member in charge of the Bill to move the motion.
The Deputy First Minister (Mr Mallon):
Before addressing the important business before the Assembly I should like, on behalf of the Executive Committee and the Assembly, to express shock and anger at last night’s bombing in Irvinestown. This Assembly, along with the other institutions, was established as a result of a process designed to end violence on these islands, and last night’s act was a calculated attempt to place them in jeopardy.
I beg to move, on my own behalf and on behalf of the First Minister,
That the Second Stage of the Equality (Disability, etc) Bill (NIA 4/2000) be agreed.
The Second Stage provides an opportunity for a general debate on the Bill and for Members to vote on its principles. The Good Friday Agreement promised equality of opportunity for all, and this Bill is the first legislative step by the new Administration and the new Assembly towards delivering on that promise. It is my fervent hope that it will not be our last.
The agreement’s promise of equality has engendered high expectations. At last, with the institutions of the agreement up and running, we have the chance to deliver on this promise and to live up to those expectations. Many people in this Chamber, myself included, have complained about how the delay in establishing the institutions has hindered the equality agenda. I ask some of the people involved in that delay — and they know who they are — to reflect on the high price that we will all pay if the institutions designed to implement that agenda are suspended because of the outdated dogma of the organisations to which they may be related. Throughout our society there are those who are marginalised, those who cannot participate and those whose voices go unheard. These people will be sold short if this Administration is unable to get its work under way.
In any event, the Bill’s main purpose is to expand and strengthen the disability functions of the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland, and its provisions closely mirror those of the Disability Rights Commission Act 1999 in Britain. It will ensure that disabled people in Northern Ireland have access to a disability rights enforcement body. To appreciate the significance of the Bill, we have to look back to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. That Act gives disabled people real and important protections against discrimination. Nonetheless, it is flawed. Perhaps the greatest and most controversial flaw is that it did not establish a body to enforce the new rights that it conferred on the disabled. At that time the Fair Employment Commission could enforce fair employment law. The Equal Opportunities Commission could enforce sex-discrimination law. Later the Commission for Racial Equality was established to enforce race relations law. Yet no similar body was created to enforce the rights of the disabled.
Instead, the Act established the Northern Ireland Disability Council. However, the council was merely an advisory body; it had no real powers. Despite this, it did excellent work in raising our awareness of disability- related issues, and I would like to pay tribute to its members for their hard work and commitment to disability rights.
In October 1999 the Fair Employment Commission, the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Commission for Racial Equality and the Northern Ireland Disability Council were merged into one body: the Equality Commission. This served to highlight the inequity of the situation. The Equality Commission was able to give assistance to those complaining of sex or religious discrimination but was powerless to do anything for the disabled.
This Bill seeks to remedy that inequity. It is a measure of the commitment that this Administration attaches to the cause of the disabled that we placed it at the top of our recently announced legislative programme. Yet the groundwork for it has been well laid. Indeed, it represents the culmination of many years of hard work and campaigning by disabled people, their representative organisations, Northern Ireland MPs and Assembly Members.
The Bill, like the Disability Rights Commission Act, reflects proposals put forward by the UK Disability Rights Task Force on the role and function of a Disability Rights Commission. The Labour Government established the task force in December 1976 to advise on how comprehensively civil rights for disabled people could be achieved and how enforceable they could be.
Monica Wilson, chief executive of Disability Action, represented Northern Ireland’s interests on the task force, and I would like to take this opportunity to thank her for her valuable contribution to its work.
In March 1998 the task force put forward proposals on the role and functions of a Disability Rights Commission. These formed the basis of the White Paper ‘Promoting Disabled People’s Rights — Creating a Disability Rights Commission fit for the twenty-first century’, which was launched in July 1998. The White Paper made it clear that the Equality Commission should have powers similar to those of the proposed Disability Rights Commission in Great Britain.
Interested organisations in Northern Ireland commented on the White Paper’s proposals and had an opportunity to discuss them at a special consultation conference in Belfast in October 1998. At that conference there was widespread support for the principle of a commission to enforce disability rights.
This Bill represents the outcome of that process. It is all the more important when one considers that it is estimated that there are more than 200,000 disabled people in Northern Ireland. One in six adults in Northern Ireland has a disability. That represents 17%, compared to 14% in Great Britain.
The Bill makes provision for the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland to assume a number of vital functions. First, it would oblige the commission to work to eliminate discrimination and promote equal opportunities for the disabled as well as to encourage good practice. This is crucial, given the low awareness of disability issues in Northern Ireland and the formidable problems faced by the disabled in their day-to-day lives here. Research by the Northern Ireland Disability Council shows that 50% of disabled people face difficulties in accessing services that the rest of us take for granted. Things that everybody should be able to do, such as going to the cinema, eating out, and going shopping, are difficult for them. Even more disturbing is that 78% of those who experience difficulties are offered no help.
Secondly, the Bill would allow the commission to help vindicate the rights of the disabled in practice by offering advice and support in taking cases and undertaking investigations. These new functions recognise basic realities. Disability discrimination law is too complex for many to understand, and litigation is often too expensive for many to afford.
10.45 am
Thirdly, the Bill would enable the commission to perform a number of functions that would be good for the disabled and good for those who employ them or provide them with services. It would allow the commission to provide information and advice to employers and service providers and to prepare statutory codes of practice providing practical guidance on how to comply with the law. It would also allow the commission to arrange independent conciliation between service providers and the disabled. Because the Bill is aimed simply at ensuring that the existing law is complied with, it imposes no regulatory burdens on business.
Fourthly, the Bill would oblige the Equality Commission to keep the Disability Discrimination Act under review. This is important, since we know that the Act has many shortcomings. These were identified by the Disability Rights Task Force in its second report ‘From Exclusion to Inclusion’. Already our junior Ministers have written to all Ministers in the Executive asking them to consider the task force recommendations and report back.
It is my hope that the Assembly will be able to take these recommendations forward. Indeed, I wonder if it is desirable for the Assembly to consider equality laws more generally. We now have one Equality Commission, yet we have four separate equality laws. It might be better for us to create a new, single equality Act covering all forms of discrimination, based as far as possible on the highest standards of protection. But that is a matter for another day.
Finally, in this Bill we have also taken the opportunity to include some miscellaneous clauses in relation to the powers of the Equality Commission. The first is to provide for the terms and conditions of appointment of additional commissioners appointed to carry out formal investigations; the second is to enable the Equality Commission’s annual reports to be made on a financial-year basis, in line with its accounts; and the third is to amend the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 to enable the Equality Commission to continue investigations initiated by the Fair Employment Agency under the Fair Employment (Northern Ireland) Act 1976. The first two clauses require the consent of the Secretary of State. That consent has been obtained. All three clauses are technical in nature, and none is controversial.
All parties in Northern Ireland are committed to strengthening disability rights. The Equality Commission supports the legislation, as do Disability Action and other voluntary bodies in this field. Our aim is to have this new legislation come into force in Northern Ireland on the same day as in Britain: 25 April 2000. The Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister has worked to give this Bill priority, as has the Executive. I would be grateful if the Assembly were to do likewise.
I ask the Assembly to approve this Second Stage of the Bill and to support the motion which will allow the Committee of the Centre to take the Committee Stage.
Ms Lewsley:
This is the first opportunity the House has had to consider the important issue of disability. I am conscious of the time, but I must tell the House that I will return to many of the issues I am touching on today.
The Good Friday Agreement had the foresight to affirm, in the human rights section,
"the right to equal opportunity in all social and economic activity, regardless of class, creed, disability, gender or ethnicity."
The inclusion of the disability issue in the agreement was ground-breaking for Northern Ireland. For the first time it shifted the definition of disability away from being a health issue, which it is not, to being one of human rights and equality. It is disappointing that the medical definition of "disability" has not been replaced by something more acceptable. The challenge for this House in the future will be to ensure that when discussing policy and legislation relating to disability, Members look at things from a very different perspective than that applied by civil servants when they were taking decisions in the past.
I welcome the establishment of the Equality Commission. However, I am sure that the House will agree that, given the umbrella nature of the Commission, some safeguards will need to be put in place relating to the funding and structure of the new body, safeguards that will ensure that specific problems relating to disability are not lost or subsumed in the wider remit of the commission. Members must ensure that that will not happen.
The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 is already on the statute book. However, for this excellent law to have real teeth in the future it will be essential to establish an enforcement commission in Northern Ireland. Without such enforcement it will not be possible to make serious inroads into the present levels of discrimination.
This House has much to do to empower and liberate disabled people in Northern Ireland. Members have a responsibility to ensure that people with disabilities are able to play as full a role as possible in society. It is incumbent on this House to lead by example. In addressing the needs of the disabled, Members must start by making Parliament Buildings much more accessible. We must remember that disability is not manifested just in people using wheelchairs. The vast majority of disabled people in Northern Ireland have a hidden disability. The time has come for this Building to be made more accessible, both inside and outside. Doorways, ramps, signage for the partially sighted, audio loops for those with hearing difficulties and provision for people with learning difficulties are issues which we can and must address. An audit of the Building has been carried out, but sadly it seems to have been buried somewhere. Why?
It is nearly two years since the Assembly was set up, and a person with a disability still cannot use the front door. Interpreters have been employed for Irish and Ulster-Scots, but there is no sign language interpreter. The issue of access includes not just physical access to the Building but access throughout the Building.
The Disability Discrimination Act remains a flawed piece of legislation. People with disabilities require full and comprehensive anti-discrimination measures, giving them full civil rights. The Assembly should state that this is its objective and should publish a timetable for the implementation of such a commitment.
Finally, Members should not forget that should the work of the House be suspended later this week, the effect on the disabled people of Northern Ireland will not be mentioned in the news headlines, but the impact of the suspension of the institutions will be immense. As the rest of the UK and Ireland moves ahead with the equality agenda, disabled people here will have nothing in place to assist them. This must not be allowed to happen. In the coming weeks, it is to be hoped, our hopes will overcome our fears so that we can set about underpinning the new beginning by enabling people to have full access to Parliament Buildings and the democratic process — access in the most liberal sense.
Mr Campbell:
There is no doubt that the Equality (Disability, etc) Bill addresses a great many of the issues which for many years have lain buried beneath equality legislation. Aspects of religious discrimination were addressed in the 1970s and 1980s — whether satisfactorily is a matter for another debate. The gender issue has also been addressed, and progress has been made in that area.
However, before the passing of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 no serious attempt was made by society either in Northern Ireland or in the United Kingdom to address disability discrimination. There has been substantial progress since 1995. Greater awareness has been shown by employers, and there has been significant progress on aspects of access to public places. However, there is much, much more that can be done.
I welcome what the Deputy First Minister said about the numbers of people involved. Very often society thinks — as was the case in the 1970s and 1980s — that only a small minority of people are affected by disability. The fact is that in Northern Ireland one in every six adults has some form of disability.
It is a huge problem that is only beginning to be addressed, and this Bill will go some way towards doing that. I hope that the Committee of the Centre, in conjunction with Disability Action — I have talked to Monica Wilson of that group — and the other interest groups that are involved can address some of the issues that are referred to, albeit not in sufficient detail, in the Bill. If we are still here and get to the Committee Stage, I hope that we can bring back a Bill that everyone is able to accept.
Rev Dr William McCrea:
Does Mr Campbell agree that the issue of leading by example in respect of this Building, as referred to by Ms Lewsley, should be addressed? There has to be a more disability-friendly attitude towards access to Parliament Buildings. We should not put demands on other businesses throughout the Province without giving a lead ourselves. Many people would frown on any other approach.
Mr Campbell:
I agree entirely. Only in recent years have local authorities begun to make access for the disabled an important issue. If this Building, which is regarded as the premier public building in Northern Ireland, is inaccessible in any way to those with a disability, some people will say "We hear what you are saying, but what action are you taking in relation to Parliament Buildings?" We should look urgently at this matter — it should not have to await the deliberations on the Disability Bill.
Other disabled persons have said that inaccessibility in public places is still a problem. This matter has not seen the progress that it should have since the 1995 Act. Even over the last five years disabled persons have had restricted access to public buildings. Public buildings should be as freely accessible to the disabled as to others. I welcome the Bill. Even if we cannot debate it in full, I welcome its coming into effect in the near future.
Ms Gildernew:
Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh.
I welcome the Second Stage of the Equality (Disability, etc) Bill. It is imperative that the needs and the rights of the disabled be fully recognised. I, like other Members, am disappointed that this Building is still inaccessible to wheelchair users.
The Bill does not go far enough, but it will allow us to further the debate and put what we have discussed into practice. Unfortunately, the disabled do not have a strong voice. Often they have to rely on Members to speak for them. I have invited the Southern Forum for Disability to come to the Assembly on 13 March. I know that I should not be plugging this visit now, but I ask all Members to come and meet members of this group and hear what they have to say.
It is regrettable, given that equality is being placed with the Committee of the Centre — and its Chairman has talked about leading by example — that that Committee has not been able to get off the ground because of the inequalities that are practised in it. I find it hypocritical that the Chairman can say that he is leading by example, yet treating members of that Committee in a disparaging fashion.
The disability issue needs to be given more time in the Assembly. Debating this issue is one thing, but unless we put what we say into practice the Bill will not be worth the paper that it is written on.
Go raibh maith agat.
Mrs E Bell:
I endorse most of the comments that Members have made, especially those of the Deputy First Minister about Irvinestown. That attack was not just against the people of Fermanagh; it was against the right of every citizen to live in safety.
11.00 am
I formally welcome the Second Reading of this Bill, insofar as it is another belated step forward, as Colleagues have said, in eliminating discrimination against and improving the situation of people with disabilities.
The fact that the legislation is specifically designed to include such areas as employment and access to goods, facilities and premises means that a large section of the community will be supported by the law in their attempts to increase their active participation in public life. It will take much work, as the Deputy First Minister and other Members have said, on the part of the Government, the Equality Commission and, of course, employers and providers of services to ensure that this legislation is complied with by all. I hope that this will happen immediately.
As a temporary occupant of a wheelchair some years ago, I can say from first-hand experience that I could not go anywhere in my area — for example, to the shops — without someone to help me to open doors, and so on. [Interruption]
I am sorry, but I cannot hear what I am saying, never mind being heard.
I was made very aware of the shortage of practical support and advice. I hope that this legislation will remove such attitudes and perceptions. I will reserve more detailed comments until the Bill gets to Committee Stage. If the Committee of the Centre gets off the ground, I hope that it will be discussed there. I am not sure whether that will happen, but the matter should be dealt with urgently.
I welcome this legislation, which will consolidate good practice and good conduct towards all citizens, whatever their background or ability.
Ms McWilliams:
Before devolution, there was a discussion about merging the various equality commissions. My party’s argument was that that should not happen. It was our belief, and it remains our belief, that there should be a hierarchy of equality in Northern Ireland. It will probably still be the case that religious and political identity will top that hierarchy, and because of the activism of those involved with sex discrimination we may find that gender and race will come next; disability will come at the bottom of the ladder. With the merger of existing bodies into the Equality Commission, that is something that concerns us. Indeed, we will scrutinise this new Equality Commission to see that disability is given the treatment that it will have in Great Britain, that it will have its own commission, its own resources, its own secretariat and its own investigatory powers.
I welcome the legislation in that, for the first time, it allows the commission to undertake formal investigations. It is my belief that although people would have paid lip-service to the legislation, without that power they probably would not have done anything to enforce it. For me, it is not just about passing the legislation but also about monitoring, evaluating and enforcing it. There should also be penalties in place when people do not sign up to it. That is the way we can change not only people’s attitudes but also their behaviour towards those who are disabled.
I remain concerned about the Committee of the Centre and its current inability to function. I note that there is a proposal to refer the Bill to that Committee, but as it is currently not functioning I do not think we should have to refer it there if we want it passed as quickly as possible.
Those of us in the Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee thought that it was the more appropriate Committee to which to refer this Bill. However, the Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment Committee would also be appropriate. I can understand that those who were trying to decide which Committee the Bill would be best placed with finally decided that since equality crossed all of those Departments —
Mr A Maginness:
I accept all the points the Member has made about the so-called hierarchy of concern in relation to various disadvantages in the community, but, given the importance of this Bill, does she agree that it would be a disaster for those who suffer from disability if the Committee of the Centre were unable to deal effectively with the legislation?
Ms McWilliams
That is the point I am trying to make. I am greatly concerned that that Committee will be unable to deal with the legislation. There may come a time when the matter has to be referred to another Committee that can deal with it more effectively. Perhaps we should propose that the Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee take the Bill forward.
Those of us on other Committees will need to look at this matter very carefully. The Committee of the Centre does not have a representative from every party, though those of us in the smaller parties came together in order to facilitate representation on that Committee. The smaller parties need a mechanism for liaising about how other Committees could pick up aspects of this legislation. This is a matter of major concern. I am putting down a marker that if the Committee of the Centre is not functioning we need to take serious notice of that fact and find a more appropriate Committee to consider the legislation.
Disabled persons should not simply be defended —
Mr Speaker:
Order.
Ms McWilliams:
Their rights should be promoted. If we are not in a position to promote the rights of the disabled we will come in for severe criticism.
Mr Speaker:
It is open to the Assembly to make a different kind of referral at a later stage if it so chooses. This is covered in Standing Orders.
Mr Shannon:
The Committee of the Centre will meet on Wednesday at 2.00 pm, when there will be a full programme of business. We hope we get this chance. That is what the Committee is for.
I commend this Bill to the Assembly for a number of reasons. Disability affects everyone. Those of us who are in full possession of our faculties are nonetheless very conscious of those who are not. For this reason alone, the Bill is worthy of recommendation.
Our duty as elected representatives is to look after those in society who are less well off and those who need help, and today we have an opportunity to do that. People with disabilities have been ignored for years; the able-bodied have closed their eyes to them or turned their heads. However, some people have worked very hard to bring the disability issue to the attention of the public and their elected representatives, and they should be commended.
Not everyone is able-bodied or has full possession of his or her faculties. It is important, therefore, that elected representatives recognise the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. We want to improve the quality of life of the disabled. That is our goal and our responsibility.
One Member has said that one in every six adults has a disability. This should put the issue into perspective. Our duty is to do our best for these people, whether they are senior citizens or folk with mental, physical or learning disabilities. It is important that every opportunity be afforded to them all.
One thing which concerns me is that the care which has been available over the last 10 years is not as good or extensive as it should have been, and the number of beds in residential homes has decreased. Why? Is it because the Government have been hoping that more people will volunteer to look after those who are less well off?
A number of my friends have children with Down’s syndrome. They do not regard their children as having a disability; they look on them as being a special gift. Perhaps we should be looking at this issue in that way. Those who have this disability and have a real need for help from society should be given the opportunity.
Another big issue which is raised in our advice centre is that of public accessibility, whether of this Building or of other public buildings such as council offices. Ards Borough Council installed a lift as part of its last scheme for the town hall. This made the building disability-friendly, and people who are wheelchair-bound can have access to all its facilities. That is our council’s policy, and I hope that many other councils will adopt a similar one.
The third issue that I would like to highlight relates to those who are in need of benefits. Over the years they have been discriminated against in many ways. Through our advice centre we have had the opportunity to hear some of their problems — the problems of people who are in need of benefits and who are not getting all they are entitled to. We want to highlight that issue. The week before last, we heard of a lady who had a disabled brother and who, for 31 years of his life, got no financial assistance whatsoever. There is something seriously wrong there, and we must address such issues. I commend this to Members for their consideration, and I look forward to meeting them on Wednesday and discussing these issues.
Dr Hendron:
I support Prof McWilliams’s point that this Bill should have been referred to the Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 came about largely through embarrassment and public pressure on the Conservative Government. For years prior to that, Private Members’ Bills were brought before the House of Commons and were either directly opposed by the Government or not given the time or space for discussion.
I very much welcome this Bill. For the first time disabled people have the power of investigation, and the law is on their side. Like the Deputy First Minister, I congratulate Mrs Wilson, who has led this campaign for many years. My Committee, and I am sure every Member in the Assembly, will be very carefully monitoring how the legislation is acted upon on behalf of those who are disabled.
Junior Minister (Office of First and Deputy First Ministers) (Mr Nesbitt):
Mr Initial Presiding Officer —
Several Members:
It is Mr Speaker.
Mr Nesbitt:
My apologies, Mr Speaker. If that is my only wrong utterance I will be most gratified. There are often errors of a much more substantial nature.
Anyhow, Mr Speaker, I wish to endorse what the Deputy First Minister stated — that we view this Bill as being of such importance that it has been placed at the top of the legislative programme. I wish to put on record my thanks to Monica Wilson for her contribution. I also note that the Chairman of the Committee of the Centre looks forward to engaging with Monica Wilson in deliberation on the Bill at the Committee Stage.
The whole thrust of the Bill is to add powers to the Equality Commission. I was struck by Ms Lewsley’s comment that it was not so much to do with health as with rights. Indeed, there was a thread running through the discussion as to whether this was a health issue. Some Members said that it should be for the Health, Social Services and Public Safety Committee as distinct from the Committee of the Centre.
11.15 am
However, that matter will be deliberated by the Committee of the Centre. The main aim of the Bill is to create a body to which people in Northern Ireland can turn for assistance. Every organisation or entity in Northern Ireland must provide facilities for the disabled. The Committee Chairman, Mr Campbell, said that people hearing our words will be asking what we are doing about Parliament Buildings.
Ms Lewsley raised the question of funding, which is always uppermost in many minds. We are in consultation with the Department of Finance and Personnel about this. The Member is right in wanting the disabled to be liberated.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Centre pointed to the fact that one in six people is disabled. Another Member said that not all disabled people have a wheelchair. We must be very conscious of that. Patricia Lewsley said that the vast majority have a hidden disability, which is also something that we must address. She asked about the timetable too. We hope that the Equality Commission in Northern Ireland will assume responsibility for additional disability rights at the same time as the Disability Rights Commission.
Questions were also asked about this Buildings. One Member said that you cannot even get through the front door easily. The Assembly Commission is currently addressing that matter. It is to be hoped that there will soon be much easier access for the disabled to this Building.
Ms McWilliams raised the issue of funding. She said
"religious and political identity will top that hierarchy",
and added that disability will come at the bottom. I assure Members that disability will not be at the bottom of the agenda. The Deputy First Minister said that the fact that this is the first item for the Assembly means that it is at the top of the agenda.
At workshops on inequality I was heartened to hear how people were bringing matters to do with inequality and disability to the fore. I note Members’ concerns about bringing all the agencies under one umbrella — the Equality Commission. I also note Prof McWilliams’s concern that the remits of the former commissions would be subsumed under the greater body. I assure her that that will not be the case.
I have covered most of the comments that were made. Any that I have not addressed I will determine from Hansard and address them in detail later.
All of this applies because many questions were raised about the Assembly Building. Every public utility and every organisation must make provision for the disabled, so the Bill will apply to the Assembly Building. There is therefore responsibility on us as well as on everyone else. That is why I reiterate what Mr Campbell said: words from this Building are not enough; we must have action on disability.
I want to restate the Assembly’s commitment to disabled people in Northern Ireland. We wish to ensure that they have access to a disability rights enforcement body no later than their peers in the rest of the United Kingdom. Enforcing disability rights is another step towards achieving equality of opportunity. That goes to the heart of the Belfast Agreement, which was not just for the able-bodied.
The Bill will reinforce the Disability Discrimination Act by providing mechanisms for rights to be enforced more effectively. It will put the enforcement of disability rights on a par with the enforcement of rights in the other main areas of anti-discrimination law: fair employment, gender and race. There will be equality — no hierarchy of equality but equality of opportunity for all.
I support the motion.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That the Second Stage of the Equality (Disability, etc) Bill (NIA 4/2000) be agreed.
Resolved:
That the Equality (Disability, etc) Bill stand referred to the Committee of the Centre and that, for this purpose, Standing Order 31 be construed as referring to the Committee of the Centre. — [Dr McDonnell]
Financial Assistance for Political Parties Bill
Mr Speaker:
As this is the first time a Bill has come to Final Stage I shall explain the procedure.
The debate shall be confined to the content of the measure. No amendments may be made. If passed, the Bill will be forwarded, after review by the Attorney- General, to the Secretary of State, for submission for Royal Assent, as required by section 14 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
Mr Fee:
I beg to move
That the Financial Assistance for Political Parties Bill (NIA 3/99) do now pass.
Mr Campbell:
Clause 3 states that there is no provision for financial assistance for political parties after 31 March 2000 unless the scheme under the Bill is approved before that date. For that purpose we need a scheme. I therefore support the Bill.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That the Financial Assistance for Political Parties Bill (NIA 3/99) do now pass.
The sitting was suspended at 11.24 am.
On resuming —
Oral Answers to Questions
Agriculture and Rural Development
European Union Payments
2.30 pm
1. Mr C Murphy
asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to address the difficulties arising from current regulations governing European Union payments to the agriculture sector which inhibit flexibility.
The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ms Rodgers):
It is not clear what the Member has in mind with this question. EU payments must comply with state-aid rules. Those rules relate to all state payments, whether EU-funded or not, and to industry in general. They apply across the European Union, and their purpose is to prevent member states putting their industries at an unfair advantage by paying state subsidies. Northern Ireland Ministers will be able to influence decisions on the reform of state-aid rules as they fall due for such reform, but at the moment, we have to work with them as they presently stand.
Mr C Murphy:
In the rural farming community there is a real sense that the rules and regulations coming from Brussels are unduly inhibiting and are resulting in a decrease in the amount of money going into that community. Will the Minister assure us that in any negotiations with the European Union she and her officials will do what other member states do — try to negotiate as much flexibility as possible into the delivery of European payments? There is a real sense that money is being lost, and although these may be small grants, when taken across the industry as a whole they add up to a substantial sum each year.
Ms Rodgers:
As I have already stated, when the next round falls due, I will ensure that our voice is heard. Flexibility is not a route that is open to us at present. Once the rules have been agreed, they apply equally across the European Union, and we have to be careful that we do not fall outside them. Were we to do so, we would be penalised, which would leave us in a worse situation.
Mr Poots:
Does the Minister recognise that the current rules governing the sheep meat regime actually work against farmers in Northern Ireland? The sheep annual premium is calculated on a European-wide basis, as opposed to a regional basis, and consequently farmers are losing £7 to £8 per head. Does she intend to support the Irish Government, who have already asked that the rules in the EU regime be changed?
Ms Rodgers:
I am not sure that I heard the last part of the question clearly, but I know that it was about the sheep premium. I am aware that there are difficulties here, and, as I have stated, the rules are as agreed. We have no option but to follow them. When it comes to the next round my officials and I will be arguing the case which Mr Poots has mentioned.
Mr Bradley:
The first payment on the suckler-cow premium and the beef special premium paid out in November 1999 was reduced from 80% to 60%. Was this a European decision, or was it made by the British Government or locally?
Ms Rodgers:
It was a European decision.
Mr Paisley Jnr:
The Minister must recognise the problems facing the agriculture community, in terms of both young entrants to the industry and established farmers unable to receive compensation. Will the Minister commit some of the £30 million of additional money secured under the modulation scheme from 2001 to 2006 to the development of an early-retirement scheme for farmers or to a young entrants’ scheme for those not yet on the farm?
Ms Rodgers:
Under modulation it is open to me to have an early-retirement scheme, but if I were to use the modulation money for such a scheme, there would be nothing left for anything else. The industry has made it clear to me that it wants the maximum number of winners and the minimum number of losers. If I were to opt for the early-retirement scheme most of the money would be going to a small number of farmers — about 740, I believe — leaving 29,000 out. Much as I would like to have such a scheme, I believe that the industry itself would consider it on the whole unfair when taken across the board.
Less-Favoured Areas
2. Mrs E Bell asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to set out the environmental benefits the less-favoured area scheme is intended to deliver.
Ms Rodgers:
The new scheme, which will be based on land area, should make a positive contribution towards reducing the risk of environmental damage from — for example, on-farm pollution or the overgrazing of land. Importantly, the new payments will be conditional on adherence to statutory environmental obligations and to standards of good farming practice. Payments will be reduced where breaches of these conditions are established through on-the-spot inspections of the land.
Mrs E Bell:
I thank the Minister for her response. I am not an expert on livestock farming, but does the Minister agree that most urban dwellers wish to see the environment being protected by direct grants to farmers to help them to improve their land rather than having them depend on an uncertain side effect of a change in regulations?
Ms Rodgers:
I am not sure what the Member means by "an uncertain side effect". The change in the regulations is intended to ensure that environmental considerations are balanced with farmers’ needs and the necessity to compensate them. I do not accept that it will be harmful. The new regulations will work in the interests of both the environment and the farmer.
Mr Dallat:
Does the Minister accept that the farming community is critical to the future environmental well-being of the community?
Ms Rodgers:
I certainly do. The interests of the farming community and the interests of environmentalists coalesce. They are complementary, as should be recognised.
Mr Wells:
Does the Minister accept that these changes are extremely welcome, in that they will continue to put money into the agricultural and rural community and also protect the environment? Is there not a need, however, to combine the policies of the less-favoured area scheme with the environmentally sensitive area (ESA) scheme to provide a single package which would put money into the rural economy and protect the environment at a higher level?
Ms Rodgers:
The ESA schemes and, indeed, the countryside management schemes are geared towards protecting and enhancing the environment while, as the Member says, putting money into the farmer’s pocket. These things are encouraged to go hand in hand. Both matters are dealt with under the direction of the Department, and this will help both the environment and the farmers.
Local Agricultural Produce
(Public-Sector Catering)
3. Mr Armstrong asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what she has done to encourage public-sector catering establishments to use more locally produced agricultural products.
Ms Rodgers:
I have recently written to local public-purchasing bodies in Northern Ireland highlighting the excellence of locally produced pig meat and pointing out that our pigs have been reared in welfare-friendly conditions and have not been fed with mammalian meat-and-bone meal. I appreciate that purchasing bodies have to take many factors, particularly value for money, into consideration when purchasing, but it is to be hoped that my approach will encourage a greater uptake of domestic product.
Mr Armstrong:
Does the Minister feel that we are being hypocritical today by saying that we should support our own industries when we do not even know what type of food we are eating in the staff restaurant?
Ms Rodgers:
I am not quite clear what the Member means by saying we do not know where the food comes from.
Mr Armstrong:
We do not know if the product we are eating in the restaurant is produced in Northern Ireland. Even today there are two new cases of BSE in France. I am told that there is a lot of French meat coming into our Province.
Mr Speaker:
I have to rule that question out of order. It is properly a question for the Assembly Commission, not for the Minister of Agriculture. The Member may wish to redirect his question.
Mr Shannon:
Can the Minister confirm if an officer has been appointed within the Department of Agriculture whose sole purpose is to liaise with supermarket chains and the catering industry to promote Northern Ireland produce? I understood that a person was to have been appointed, but that has not happened so far.
Ms Rodgers:
There has not been an officer appointed specifically for that purpose. With regard to the matter of locally sourced produce, I have arranged meetings with the retail sector to discuss this and to point out the importance of using locally sourced products.
Mr McMenamin:
Can the Minister tell us what other steps she has taken to help primary producers?
Ms Rodgers:
I have done a number of things since I came into office. The most important step that I have taken to help the primary producer is that I am working on achieving low-incidence BSE status. I have had meetings with the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Nick Brown. I have twice met Commissioner Fischler. I have spoken to the Prime Minister and also had a meeting with Mr Mandelson to put forward the case for low-incidence BSE status.
Nick Brown has already accepted that Northern Ireland has a compelling case for low-incidence BSE status, and he has said so. My officials are already working on a proposal that might be brought forward. I have also spoken to Commissioner Fischler about the problems within the pig sector. I have put views and proposals to him on aids to private storage and on increased export refunds, and I am awaiting his response. I have taken forward initiatives on a number of levels to ensure that something is done to help farmers in the short term, and I have also set up a strategic review group to look at the situation in the long term.
Mr Foster:
In the public sector there is evidence that the supermarkets are increasing their own profits — little of which are ploughed back into the local economy — at the expense of producers in all areas of the agriculture industry. I call on the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development to initiate an investigation into supermarket practice and pricing policy versus farmgate prices to help stop the destruction of many small producers.
Ms Rodgers:
I recognise the tension in the industry about the equality of profit throughout the food chain. The Member will be aware that the Competition Commission is looking at that particular issue. There should be a report shortly, and I await that report.
Rev Dr Ian Paisley:
Does the Minister agree that it would be a good thing if she were to consult with the three MEPs? The MEPs could perhaps go along to her next meeting with the Commissioner.
Ms Rodgers:
I have not had any approach from the three MEPs. Clearly, if there is an approach from them I will consider it.
Mr McHugh:
Does the Minister agree that the achievement of low-incidence BSE status will be an almost impossible mountain to climb for the farmers of this country so long as we are tied to the very high level of BSE in Britain?
2.45 pm
Could more be done by way of labelling produce to help us to define what is local and what is foreign and not produced to the same welfare standards, and will the Minister be raising this issue in Europe?
Ms Rodgers:
The Member has asked two questions — one relating to BSE, and the other to labelling. The issue of labelling was discussed at the last agriculture council meeting which I attended, and my hope is that it will be brought to a conclusion in August. This should help consumers to know precisely what they are buying and where it was sourced.
With regard to low-incidence BSE status, this is a very difficult mountain to climb, but that is no reason for not attempting to climb it. That is what I am trying to do. Nick Brown has already accepted that there is a compelling case, which is a little step in the right direction. I hope to take that forward, and Joe Walsh has said that he will support us if we bring the matter to Europe.
The Member has asked a constitutional, political question about the North/South issue. My views are no secret, but we are working under the Belfast Agreement, within which there are opportunities for enhanced co-operation between North and South. I will ensure that under the new structures, everything that can be done to help the agriculture industry will be done.
Farming Industry Crisis
4. Mr McCarthy asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development what approaches she has made to the Executive Committee and the Department of Finance and Personnel to persuade them that extra funds are needed to alleviate the current crisis in the farming industry.
Ms Rodgers:
Since my appointment I have taken every opportunity to secure additional resources for Northern Ireland agriculture. I was pleased to secure an additional £6·7 million in the December public expenditure monitoring round. During the forthcoming expenditure review and during the collective discussion of our programme for government I shall be pressing the Minister of Finance and Personnel to treat agriculture and rural development as a priority to which extra resources must be committed.
Mr McCarthy:
I welcome the Minister’s response. Does she accept that, while the UK Government have a role in seeking assistance such as monetary compensation, there is also a desperate need for local action? Will she make a start by transferring modulated funds under the rural development regulations from her Department’s core expenditure into schemes that directly benefit our farmers?
Ms Rodgers:
The European component of the modulation funds comes with specific conditions and can be used only in four prescribed areas: early retirement, forestry, less-favoured area schemes and agri-environmental schemes. I do not have the freedom to use it for anything else. I reiterate that all those schemes pay money directly into the farmers’ pockets.
Mr Byrne:
Given that Northern Ireland needs to export over 70% of its agricultural produce, does the Minister accept the need for a task force to examine all aspects of production, including the associated food-processing sector? Such a task force should also examine the marketing of the finished food products and make sure that they are safe and of the highest quality.
Does the Minister accept that all sectors of agriculture in Northern Ireland need Government support to rebuild confidence in the future of farming in the context of the European Union’s Agenda 2000 common agricultural policy proposals?
Ms Rodgers:
I agree with much of what the Member has said. In my view, one of the problems is that Northern Irish agriculture has been trying to manage crisis after crisis. I have set up a strategic review group to look at all areas of the industry. This is made up of people from the industry and some from outside who will be able to take a strategic, non-sectoral view. I hope that they will come forward with a broad, balanced view of what is required for both the farmers and the agri-food industry at this time. I agree that it will have to be broad-based and look at all aspects of the industry.
Rev Dr William McCrea:
Can the Minister detail the percentages of the additional moneys that have gone directly to the farmers’ pockets, to rural development, to her Department and to the processors? Will additional moneys, if agreed by the Executive, be allocated in a similar fashion? Does the Minister agree that at present it is the farmer who is in greatest need?
Ms Rodgers:
I do not have the figures requested in the first part of the question to hand. I will try to obtain them and give them to the Member later. As regards the second part of the question, I do not think that the agri-food industry, the processors or the farmers should necessarily be seen as being in competition with each other. One of the problems for pig farmers at present is the lack of processing capacity following the burning of the Lovell & Christmas factory. Therefore if the processors are moving and improving, opportunities are being created for the farmers. I see them as being complementary rather than in competition. I see all these aspects as being worthy of assistance from my Department.
Mr Leslie:
I wish the Minister every success in her efforts to elicit further funding for the sector. However, does she agree that the agriculture industry will be best served in the long term if any extra funding is used as an incentive for lower production, as excess production has been the principal cause of the output pricing problems and a major cause of environmental damage?
Ms Rodgers:
One of the current problems, particularly in the pig sector, apart from the collapse of world markets, is overproduction. That aspect of the problem will be one of the issues that will be looked at by my strategy review committee to see how it can be addressed.
Mr Speaker:
Question No 5 has been withdrawn.
Agri-Environment Schemes
6. Mr Ford asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how her Department intends to fund the increased uptake of agri-environment schemes.
Ms Rodgers:
The agri-environment schemes will be supported from existing baselines and funds raised from modulation. While existing budget baselines are sufficient to support the continuation of the environmentally sensitive areas scheme, meaningful development of the organic farming scheme (OFS) and the countryside management scheme (CMS) depends largely on the additional funds delivered by modulation. I will also be seeking additional funds for a range of agricultural priorities in the year 2000 spending review and the programme for government.
Mr Ford:
I thank the Minister for her response, and I note very clearly her comment that if CMS and OFS are to be expanded, the money will have to come from additional modulated funds. Can she explain, in the light of her reply to my Colleague Mr McCarthy, how using modulated funds for her Department’s forest service will directly benefit farmers?
Ms Rodgers:
There has been much confusion relating to the reallocation money, particularly that given to the forest service. I did not give money to the forest service. There was a shortfall in the budget, as expected revenue from the forest service was not realised. This was because of the high price of sterling and the damage done to the forests by the 1998 storm. A shortfall occurred in that budget, and that had to be rectified. Therefore what looked like giving money to the forest service was really using money to plug a gap in the budget. This had to be done.
Mr Kane:
At what stage does the Minister anticipate a payback for farmers from rural development initiatives? I ask this question in the light of the gravity of the economic crisis and the urgency with which a solution must be found.
Ms Rodgers:
I would like to think that there will be, as the Member has said, a payback to farmers in the area of rural development. The money from the modulation funds that relates to the rural development regulation will increase in the next few years up until 2006, and during that time, I expect to see money going back into the farming community.
Mr Gibson:
Does the Minister accept that there is an urgent problem in respect of drainage in rural areas? Some 15 or 20 years ago a great deal of improvement work was carried out on drainage systems in rural areas, but due to the clogging of the systems, all this good work has now been undone, and water is pouring out on to the roads, thus causing a great deal of damage. Would the Minister be prepared to co-operate with other relevant Departments and introduce an agri-environmental scheme to restore the good work that was done some 15 or 20 years ago? Water on the roads is causing millions of pounds’ worth of damage, and the drainage system should be improved urgently.
Ms Rodgers:
That was a lengthy question, and I did not quite hear a part of it. The acoustics in this Chamber are not the best — unless it is my hearing. Will the Member please repeat the question.
Mr Speaker:
This is not the first time a Minister has found it difficult to hear a Member. There is no difficulty hearing what some Members have to say — they are absolutely clear — but others are much less clear. I appeal to Members to speak clearly and to use the microphones — which is difficult if their heads are down in their papers. When asking supplementary questions Members should not need the assistance of papers and written notes. Perhaps on this occasion, for the benefit of the Minister, Mr Gibson will repeat his question.
Mr Gibson:
Some 15 or 20 years ago a great deal of improvement work was done on drainage systems in rural areas. Many of these drains have now become ineffective. Water is pouring off the land and on to the surface of the roadways, causing great damage. Will the Minister help remove this excess water by increasing land-drainage grants?
Ms Rodgers:
I will consider what needs to be done to improve this situation. I cannot give an exact answer today. I will consider the matter, but I will not make any promises, as I will have to look at the expenditure and the benefit to the environment.
Mr Speaker:
The next question for oral answer was asked as a supplementary to a previous question — not best practice. We will therefore move to the following question.
Over-30-Months Scheme
8. Mr Savage asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development how long after culling farmers have to wait until they receive payment under the over-30-months scheme.
Ms Rodgers:
The Intervention Board Executive Agency operates the over-30-month slaughter scheme. It is therefore outside my responsibility as Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development. I have referred the Member’s question to the chief executive of that agency, and I have asked him to provide an answer direct to the Member.
Mr Savage:
I understood that when this contract was put out the payment to the farmer was to have been made in less than four weeks. I know for a fact that many of these payments take two months to issue. That is totally wrong. Three months ago they seemed to be on top of the problem, but now, whenever people have their cattle taken away and they enquire about the delay in payments, they are told that the computers were down. That is not a valid excuse, and it needs to be investigated very seriously. I understand that the firms that lift the cattle get the cheque but hold it back for a time and use the money for themselves. That is the information I have been given, and I have no reason to disbelieve it.
3.00 pm
Ms Rodgers:
I understand the Member’s concern. However, it is not within my remit, and for that reason it is a matter for the Intervention Board. I have asked the Intervention Board to respond to the Member.
Mr Speaker:
Given that the Minister has made it clear that this is not within her remit, it is difficult to pursue the question.
Fishing Industry
9. Mrs Nelis
asked the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development whether she will address the inequalities in licence fees for drift-net fishermen compared with their counterparts in the Republic of Ireland and if she will investigate the decline in the traditional fishing industry in the Foyle area.
Ms Rodgers:
Drift-net licence fees in the Foyle area are higher than those in the Republic of Ireland, but there are good reasons for that. Fishing during the permitted period is very intensive and effective, so the number of licences is limited in the interests of conserving and protecting salmon stocks. The Loughs Agency has done much to enhance the productivity of the Foyle system to the benefit of all fishery interests in that catchment area. The fee also reflects the agency’s need to meet as much of its running costs as possible.
Mrs Nelis:
Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh.
I thank the Minister for her response and appreciate the information she has given. Small fishermen are penalised in comparison with the larger ones. I understand that the SPARD deal and the licence fees are about £150.
Go raibh maith agat.
Mr Speaker:
The time is up. I can ask the Minister to respond in writing only to the part of the question that was asked within the time.
Culture, Arts and Leisure
Act of Union
1. Mr Davis asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what plans his Department has to mark the bicentennial of the Act of Union.
The Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure (Mr McGimpsey):
My Department will play a full role in celebrating this important event. I intend to establish a working group to co-ordinate activities organised in connection with the bicentenary - [Interruption]
Mr Wells:
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. We cannot hear the Minister.
Mr McGimpsey:
I could shout.
Mr Speaker:
It sounds as though that may be what is required.
Mr McGimpsey:
Shall I go back to the beginning?
Several Members:
Yes.
Mr McGimpsey:
My Department will play a full role in celebrating this important event. I intend to establish a working group to co-ordinate activities organised in connection with the bicentenary to ensure the historical accuracy of information that will be collated for the celebrations. The group will also take an overview of the relevant artefacts associated with that period in history.
Furthermore, the National Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland and the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland are currently involved in an Act of Union virtual library project. This is an initiative to increase public awareness and understanding of that important event in Irish history.
Mr Davis:
I thank the Minister for his response. Who sits on that project team, and why is the Ulster Museum not staging a major exhibition as it did when it commemorated the 1798 rebellion?
Mr McGimpsey:
I will take the second part of the question first. The museum has little artefactual evidence of consequence, and that is its difficulty with staging an exhibition along the lines of the ? exhibition. However, that is one of the areas to be looked at by the working group I am establishing.
We are aware that some artefacts are available - for example, the Broighter Horde that was discovered in the River Bann in the 1890s, which is in the National Museum in Dublin. We will be looking for an opportunity to display that. Interestingly, that display is in the National Museum as a result of the intervention of Edward, Lord Carson, who persuaded the British Museum to send it back to Dublin, whence it had come. The Public Record Office of Northern Ireland also holds a large collection of Lord Castlereagh's papers.
Furthermore, we are aware that a table purchased by the Northern Ireland Government in 1957, on which it is likely that the Royal Assent to the Act of Union was given by Lord Cornwallis, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, is available. It is in storage and in the possession of this Administration.
Those are some of the artefacts that we have been able to discover so far. I intend to ensure that the working group explores what can be collated for display.
With regard to the virtual library project, the membership has already been established. This was completed before the current Executive and Administration took over. The membership comprises the Public Record Office, Queens University library, the Linenhall Library and the National Museums and Galleries of Northern Ireland. They are working on the production of a virtual library project and in doing this they are receiving assistance with digitalisation from experts in Northern Ireland and the British Library. It is believed that this is a powerful way of telling the story of the Act of Union.
Mr McMenamin:
Does the Minister agree that a special exhibition of the magnificent artefacts originating from Northern Ireland, which is currently held in the National Museum in Dublin, could be brought North to a suitable venue? Given our historical divisions, surely this could be part of the healing process.
Mr McGimpsey:
I concur with the Member's sentiments. I have referred to some of the things we are looking at in relation to the Act of Union, and during a recent visit to Dublin I spoke to Miss de Valéra about the possibility of migrating various exhibitions. The reason for my trip was to open an exhibition called "The Way We Wore", which, I believe, is as relevant to people in Belfast as to those in Dublin. My suggestion about migration met, I believe, with a favourable response, and there is no reason why some of the very important artefacts held in the National Museum should not also migrate for exhibition in Northern Ireland.
Odyssey Project Science Museum
2. Mr Dalton asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what provision his Department has made in its budget for the science museum in the Odyssey project.
Mr McGimpsey:
In the financial year 2000-01 my Department has made provision for £5,040,000, which represents capital funding for the Odyssey project. Provision has also been made for £150,000 to go towards any operating deficit at the science centre should it be required.
Mr Dalton:
Will the Minister join with me in welcoming this development? Does he agree that it will have great potential benefit for Northern Ireland and especially the city of Belfast? Will the Minister also provide details of the total cost of the project, explain how it will be financed and state what revenue stream is expected to be generated by the project?
Mr McGimpsey:
I welcome this development, which will produce such a wide variety of resources for Northern Ireland. The cost of the project is £91·1 million. Private funding accounts for £16·9 million, and the balance will come from a variety of sources. The Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure will put in £16·9 million; the Millennium Commission will contribute £45 million; Laganside Corporation £9·25 million; and the Sports Council £2·5 million.
These are very considerable sums. In terms of development, this money will provide a covered arena for indoor events including those of a sporting nature. The arena will seat more than 10,000 people. A state-of-the-art science centre will be a high-technology venture, and it will tell a science story with an educational impact. There are also a number of entertainment provisions including cinemas and IMAX centres.
Mr Dallat:
Does the Minister agree that given the difficulties, including those of a financial nature, facing the Millennium Dome in London, we should exercise extreme care to ensure that this great project for Northern Ireland does not face the same problems? How sure is the Minister that this public money is being wisely spent, and will the project be economically viable?
Mr McGimpsey:
It would be unwise to give an opinion, since this was a provision that was made long before the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure was established. It is a very considerable sum of money, and there was a great deal of debate about the provision. The Millennium Commission determined that this was the bid best suited to Northern Ireland, and I am a great believer in not looking a gift horse in the mouth.
There are possible revenue consequences for us, and the Department has budgeted for deficit funding of up to £450,000 a year for the science centre. This is based on a total visit of under 3 million for the outlets and facilities in the Odyssey project, and in respect of the science centre, we are looking at a figure of 221,000 a year. We are not clear at this stage how much of that will be concessions to school-children, and so on, and how much will be attributed to fee-paying customers. The figure of £450,000 is a guesstimate of the total liability to the Department. The others are expected to be operated as private ventures by private operators and will not represent a drain on the public purse.
Mr Speaker:
I commend to questioners and respondents alike the commendably concise and brief responses of the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development.
Mr S Wilson:
Will the Minister confirm that the amount of public money which has gone into the Odyssey project is about £45 million at present? Will he also elaborate on whether the £450,000 subsidy a year, which he mentioned - I may have missed this - extends only to the public-sector parts of the project? Or is it intended that, for example, the arena will need public-sector subsidy, or, indeed, the bus service which is to bring people from all around the city to the facility, which has, I understand, inadequate car-parking?
Mr McGimpsey:
The figure of £450,000 is our projected worst-case scenario after year five. We anticipate that the deficit will be £150,000 in year one. When it has begun to operate we will be in a better position to judge.
As regards transport, we do not anticipate having to fund public transport to and from the Odyssey project, nor is it anticipated that there would be any form of revenue consequence regarding the operation of the arena, the pavilion or the IMAX theatres. Our total revenue consequences will relate only to the science centre.
Mr B Hutchinson:
In an earlier answer the Minister said that the contribution to Laganside was £9 million. Is that public money, and from which Department does it come?
Mr McGimpsey:
I mentioned a figure of about £45 million, which is roughly the investment to date. The total investment will be £91·1 million. That is made up of £45 million from the Millennium Commission, £9·25 million from the Laganside Corporation, £2·5 million from the Sports Council, £16·9 million from the Sheraton Group, which is a private-sector organisation that will operate the IMAX theatre, a matching £16·9 million from the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure and an Odyssey Trust Company deficit-fund contribution of £550,000. Of the £91·1 million, only £16·9 million will come from outside public funding. The remainder will come from a variety of public-funding sources.
3.15 pm
Mr B Hutchinson:
The Minister misunderstood my question.
Mr Speaker:
We must move on to the next question.
Mr B Hutchinson:
I was asking which Department the Laganside money is coming from.
Mr McGimpsey:
I understand that Laganside Corporation money comes out of the budget, but from which Department it comes I am not qualified to say. Under the new arrangements it may come from the Department of Social Development. The Member would probably know the answer to that better than I.
Mr Speaker:
When a Minister is not clear in a response, he or she will normally write to the Member.
Football: Sectarianism
3. Mr McCarthy asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will introduce legislation similar to the Football (Offences) Act 1991 in a bid to combat sectarianism in football in Northern Ireland.
Mr McGimpsey:
I will be considering proposals for the introduction of legislation on safety at sports grounds in Northern Ireland in line with the rest of the UK. In so doing, I will take into account the provision of the Football (Offences) Act 1991. Similar legislation here would make it an offence to engage in unruly, indecent and sectarian behaviour at sporting events and would seek to deter unacceptable and disruptive behaviour among those attending sporting events.
Mr McCarthy:
Does the Minister believe that it is vital to make our main sports arenas neutral environments, where people from all traditions can enjoy a diverse range of sporting activity without threat of intimidation? Does he agree that sectarianism in Northern Ireland is equivalent to racism in football grounds across the water and is amenable to similar solutions?
Mr McGimpsey:
I am not prepared to equate racism and sectarianism. However, I agree with Mr McCarthy that this is a problem which needs to be addressed. The Sports Council and the IFA are currently discussing this issue and looking for ways and means of addressing it. As I said, we will be looking at the Football (Offences) Act 1991, which is applicable in the rest of the UK. We will also be looking at another Order, which came in a few years later, making it illegal, for example, to throw any object towards the pitch or a spectator area without lawful authority or excuse - I am surprised this is not the case at present - to take part in indecent or racist chanting or to go on to the pitch without lawful authority.
Under the 1999 amendments it is also an offence for an individual to engage in racist or indecent chanting, either alone or in concert with others. It is clearly a matter for legislation and also for those who operate the grounds. There are 20 football grounds, seven Gaelic grounds and one rugby ground. There has never been a problem in the rugby ground. There can be in some of the others, but most grounds are free from such behaviour and such chanting. It is essentially a management problem in the various stadiums, but we will be looking at legislation where appropriate.
Mr ONeill:
I welcome the Minister's statement on the legislation. However, does he not agree that there is much more to be done outside the legislative process in terms of education, not just in schools but in adult education as well? This could perhaps be in the form of a PR presentation to try to get the damage that sectarianism does to our society across to the community at large. Might it not also be a further argument in favour of creating a neutral national stadium in which at least the international competitions could be run without the blight of secretarianism?
Mr McGimpsey:
Sectarianism is not simply a matter for sport. Sadly, it is an obscenity throughout areas of society. We all want to contribute to its eradication and to see it disappear. With regard to the sports grounds, I have already said that that this may be a management problem in the stadiums where it exists. The IFA, for example, takes this seriously and is currently working with the Sports Council, discussing the issue and looking at ways to address it outside the legislation which the Department might consider appropriate in due course.
I have asked for an update, and when I receive that I shall be happy to write to the Member.
Mr Gibson:
Is the Minister aware that in my constituency of West Tyrone there is cause for alarm with regard to the allocation of money from the Millennium Fund by the Sports Council? Only 3% of that funding has gone to football, whereas 49% has gone to the GAA. Would he admit that that could be a cause for concern, if not dissent, among a large number of people? Will the Minister investigate that and say what redress he hopes to provide in the next tranche of funding?
Mr McGimpsey:
I cannot address that question. I will make enquiries and write to the Member about it. In terms of local provision, from the figures and the breakdown between football, Gaelic games, rugby, cricket, and so on, I am satisfied that the grants that I have so far looked at are equitable and fair. Perhaps Mr Gibson is highlighting a West Tyrone problem that the Department and I do not know about. I will ask questions and write to the Member in due course.
Mr Speaker:
I caution Members against moving well outside the terms of the original question, which is on football legislation. Supplementary questions about tranches of money take the Minister in a completely different direction, and he would be quite entitled to say that that is not pertinent. I encourage Members to stick to the subject of the question.
Mr C Murphy:
Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh.
I am sure that the Minister is aware of a debate, largely through the media, a month or two ago between officials from the FAI and IFA about the tendency for young Nationalists to opt for the FAI and to play for the Republic of Ireland rather than Northern Ireland. It was suggested that perhaps the FAI was engaged in some underhand tactics to poach young players. Does the Minister agree that a more likely explanation is the sectarian atmosphere of Windsor Park, which many people from a Nationalist background find a completely hostile venue for either playing or watching?
Mr McGimpsey:
I am not able to fully respond to that, other than to say to Mr Murphy that the current Northern Ireland soccer team clearly does not have a problem about attracting young Nationalists to play for it. The question was about the ability of the IFA to attract young footballers from a perceived Nationalist background to play for the Northern Ireland soccer team, but it is quite clear that the IFA's capability to do that is one of its strengths. I do not agree that a sectarian element is impeding the Northern Ireland soccer team from performing to the best of its ability.
The Member mentioned a perceived chill factor in Windsor Park. I repeat that sectarianism at any sports ground - it is not just in soccer grounds, as the Member is aware - is unacceptable to us all. I repeat that the IFA and the Sports Council take this matter very seriously and are currently working together to find ways to address that problem over and above any legislation we may deem to be necessary.
Lough Erne Salmon
4. Mr J Wilson asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure if he will undertake to make representations to his Irish counterpart regarding unfair allocation of Lough Erne salmon between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
Mr McGimpsey:
There is no allocation of adult salmon between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. I assume that the Member is referring to work carried out under the EU-funded Erne salmon management programme. Of the 7 million juvenile salmon stocked into the Erne catchment area under this programme, the distribution was 33% in Northern Ireland tributaries, 40% in Republic of Ireland tributaries and 27% in tributaries which lie in both jurisdictions.
Irrespective of the jurisdiction of the placement of juvenile stock, smolts will descend to the Upper and Lower Lough Erne, and adults should return to these Northern Ireland fisheries. The objective of the Erne salmon management programme is to reintroduce a self-sustaining population of wild salmon to the Erne to support a quality salmon-rod fishery. I am aware that there is a problem with returning adults to the system, and I will address this with my counterpart in the Republic of Ireland when I see the final results of the study.
Mr J Wilson:
I tabled the question in the knowledge that there have been problems in the Erne for a number of years and that management operations are very unfair. The Minister gave some figures. I too have some figures. Will the Minister comment on the widely held view that it is unfair that in 1997, 1·2 million salmon ova and fry were stocked in Erne feeder streams in Northern Ireland and that in 1995-96 just over 1,000 adult salmon were recorded as having returned to the Erne system. I do not have any more up-to-date information-it is hard to come by.
Is it fair that adult salmon have difficulty moving upstream through the power station? Is it fair that great numbers of salmon are trapped in the Erne estuary and in the river and that Donegal netsmen - not Northern Ireland netsmen-have a rich harvest at the expense of the Northern angler?
Mr Speaker:
Order. It is for the Ministers to give information, not for questioners to supply it.
Mr S Wilson:
Even the Ministers do not do that very often.
Mr Speaker:
It is important that questions should not provide information. Questions should seek information.
Mr J Wilson:
May I finish?
Mr Speaker:
I think the Minister has more than enough to answer.
Mr McGimpsey:
I think the question concerned the stocking of the Erne catchment area with approximately 1·7 million fry. With a normal migration return of 10% one would expect there to be 170,000 coming back. The figures show there are a very small number coming back into the Erne estuary. The salmon management programme is meant to investigate why the wild salmon fishing industry has virtually collapsed in the Erne catchment area over the last 35 years.
At roughly the same time in the 1960s the Ballyshannon hydroelectric dams were introduced. While they had proper fish traps to allow the salmon to migrate, there is concern that this is why the smolts are not able to leave the system and get into the sea and why, when they make the return, they cannot get into the Erne catchment area.
The salmon management programme is under way, and I expect a report by June this year. The report should confirm the belief that there has been a dramatic reduction in migration. This is the reason for the lack of salmon in the lakes. The next stage will be to investigate the reasons. We hope this investigation will be carried out with the co-operation of the Electricity Supply Board around the area of the Ballyshannon hydro-works. This contributes roughly 1% of the electricity in the Irish Republic and appears to be contributing to the reduction in the wild salmon runs in the lough.
Local Museum and Heritage Review
5. Mr McGrady asked the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure when the local museum and heritage review will be completed and if he will make a statement.
Mr McGimpsey:
The local museum and heritage review is currently in progress, and I expect to receive initial proposals from the review steering group by the end of June 2000.
It has long been recognised that the existing multiplicity of museums and heritage facilities managed by a disparate range of organisations lacks co-ordination, co-operation and strategic direction. The aim of the review is to strengthen the arrangements for the preservation, interpretation, promotion and educational use of Northern Ireland's heritage in accordance with the principles of quality, access, complementing each other and value for money.
The review will produce an inventory of heritage facilities in Northern Ireland, a policy framework and a strategy for development. The steering group appointed to oversee the review is chaired by a senior official from my Department and includes representatives from the Department of the Environment, the museum and heritage sector, local government, education, and the voluntary and community sector. Consultation will be an integral part of the review process.
3.30 pm
Mr McGrady:
I thank the Minister for his reply. Even in his short time in office he will have realised the absence of a proper museums policy in Northern Ireland. Does he intend to adopt the recommendation of some years ago that there be a category-two or regional museum in Northern Ireland? Will the Down County Museum, which preserves, receives, educates and researches - indeed, everything that a central museum does - be designated a regional museum, notwithstanding the rather bizarre answer he gave to me in writing on 12 January 2000? This contradicted the museum report of 1978, which recommended regional-museum status for museums which carry out a full range of activities, such as the Down County Museum.
Mr McGimpsey:
A number of museums are operating regional services as defined by the Northern Ireland Museum Advisory Committee Report, and I can confirm that the Down County Museum is among them.
Mr Speaker:
Order. The time is up. Perhaps the Minister will provide Mr McGrady with another letter.
Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister
Government Departments: Decentralisation
1. Mr Fee asked the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister whether, in the light of the Irish Government's intention to decentralise Government Departments, they will ensure that a review is undertaken to identify the potential benefits of a similar policy for Northern Ireland.
The Deputy First Minister (Mr Mallon):
Responsibility for the provision of office accommodation and the policy on the dispersal of Civil Service jobs falls to the Minister of Finance and Personnel. He appreciates the contribution which public-sector jobs can make to the economic and social development of local communities. He therefore proposes that, as part of the programme of government, a Civil Service office- accommodation strategy should be developed, incorporating a review of the current policy on job dispersal.
Mr Fee:
I thank the Deputy First Minister for his answer. He will be aware that the Irish Government's policy on decentralisation may place up to 10,000 public-sector jobs in rural constituencies and border areas, where their impact on the local economy will undoubtedly be massive. Can he assure us that the review in Northern Ireland will seek to spread similar benefits to rural and border constituencies? Can he confirm that the number of public-sector jobs in Belfast in particular is wholly disproportionate and has been to the extreme disadvantage of district towns such as Newry, Armagh and others in the constituency we share? Can he also confirm that on the Civil Service register of applicants for transfer, Newry is the most popular destination sought by public-sector employees?
The Deputy First Minister:
I am indeed aware of the intentions evident from the Irish Government's recent announcement about relocating up to 10,000 public-service jobs out of Dublin to the western, midland and border counties. This will come on top of the 4,000 which have been relocated since 1986. I am sure that this will have a very positive economic impact on those regions.
The Member asked specifically about the Northern Ireland staffing levels in Belfast, Newry and Armagh. Staffing levels, as he knows, are given by district council area. Belfast City Council has 14,715 Northern Ireland Civil Service staff in its area, constituting 62%. Armagh has 247, which is 1%, and the Newry and Mourne area has 336, which represents 1.4%.
The Member's knowledge of working population statistics for those areas mentioned will enable him to identify the disparities properly. He will also be aware that the North/South Ministerial Council recently announced that the headquarters of the Trade and Business Development Body would be in Newry. This will lead to approximately 40 jobs. The North/South Ministerial Secretariat is already established in Armagh, and the number of civil servants to be located there is under the consideration of the respective Ministers of Finance.
Finally, I am aware of the attractions of Newry, Armagh and all the other rural towns throughout the North of Ireland.
Mrs Carson:
Can the Minister confirm that some towns, including Londonderry and Omagh, already have a share of Civil Service jobs?
The Deputy First Minister:
I can confirm that. The Member mentions Derry specifically. The figure for Derry is 1,142 or 4·8%. Omagh has 545, which is 2·3%. Four hundred of the jobs that have gone to Derry have gone there recently. The lesson that we should all learn from this is that we must look at it in its totality and in terms of what should be considered when deciding the location of government functions. We need to try to ensure that decentralisation is managed equitably.
Mr McMenamin:
Does the Minister agree that as a matter of priority the Assembly must recognise how neglected West Tyrone has been in the past and put it on an even footing with more advantaged parts of the North? Is he aware of how important the positive economic impact of relocating Civil Service jobs will be for border areas such as Strabane, the town that I represent?
The Deputy First Minister:
I do. As I have already said, responsibility for the location of offices within the Northern Ireland Civil Service is a matter for the Minister of Finance and Personnel. The Member, like others, will also be aware that equality and the new TSN are factors to be taken into account in future accommodation planning, as are such factors as the regional planning strategy, service delivery and cost. I fully appreciate that the Strabane District Council area, with 105 Civil Service jobs - less than 0·5% - feels that it has a case to make. Many other towns - not only border towns - also have cases to make, and I look forward to hearing them. The decision to locate the North/South Implementation Bodies' headquarters in Enniskillen, Newry, Derry and Omagh indicates recognition of this.
Mr K Robinson:
Does the Minister agree that considerable caution needs to be applied in any relocation of government offices to avoid dislocation of the families of civil servants who may be affected? Does he agree that there is under-representation of Government offices in Newtownabbey, which is the fourth-largest borough in Northern Ireland?
The Deputy First Minister:
Newtownabbey has 163. That is 0·7% of the population - not quite the lowest, but verging on it.
I appreciate the Member's point that there should not be relocation at the expense of families or people. This has been one of the factors that have been applied in the Republic of Ireland. Those moves have been made on a voluntary basis with no compulsion on staff, and that must happen here. The implication of the Member's question is that there are many places in the North of Ireland that have to be looked at, including Newtownabbey. When potential members of staff and members of the Civil Service look at the attraction of all of those areas, they may look upon any relocation very favourably.
Ms Gildernew:
Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh. Given the commitment to equality in the Good Friday Agreement, will the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister guarantee that many more Government jobs will be decentralised, allowing the people of Armagh, Derry and especially Fermanagh and Tyrone to access them properly in order to help redress the discriminatory employment practices of the past?
The Deputy First Minister:
Equality and new targeting social need are factors to be taken into account in future accommodation planning, as are other factors, such as the regional planning strategy, service delivery and cost. The Department of Finance and Personnel new draft targeting social need action plan includes proposals to enhance statistical information on Civil Service location and possible host areas for job relocation. We have to translate that statistical information into the concrete reality that the North of Ireland and its administration are for all of its people, wherever they live within Northern Ireland.
Economic Development Policy
2. Mr Byrne asked the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister to explain how the economic policy unit will be involved in devising and implementing a radical economic development policy.
The First Minister (Mr Trimble):
The role of the economic policy unit is to assist the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister in a number of strategic economic tasks. These include co-ordinating the Executive's economic policies and monitoring the effectiveness of public spending in achieving the Administration's economic goals.
The economic policy unit is currently engaged in assisting the Executive Committee in developing the programme for government. That document will enable us to define both the nature of our economic development policies and the most effective form of co-ordination that is needed to achieve the agreed goals. Already a number of Ministers are working together on areas of common concern. The programme for government will help us to agree other areas where we need to develop new approaches. In this work the economic policy unit will play an important role.
If we are to make a difference, if we are to strengthen our economy while ensuring opportunities for all, it will be essential for Departments and agencies to co-operate on common objectives and deliver new, focused policies. The economic policy unit will be central to this new approach.
Mr Byrne:
I thank the First Minister for his answer. Does he agree that the biggest challenge facing everyone in Northern Ireland, including the Assembly, is to devise an enterprise-driven regional approach to the economy? Does he accept that the economic policy unit has a central role in co-ordinating that and making sure that we have better value-added production so that we can lessen our dependence on public transfer payments?
The First Minister:
I agree entirely with the Member. The challenge is to shift away from subsidy-based activity, from the public sector to the private sector, and within the private sector to higher-value-added areas. This is the key objective for the future. The work of the Administration needs to be focused on that. We need the capacity to co-ordinate policies across Departments to avoid the silo effect that has slipped into some elements of the Administration.
Mr McClarty:
Does the First Minister agree that we need to focus on radical new economic development policies?
The First Minister:
I agree. This is largely the same point that Mr Byrne was making. It is essential that we refocus the economy in that way. The best cure for social exclusion is a well-paid job.
Dr McDonnell:
Does the First Minister accept that while the role of the economic policy unit is to assist him and the Deputy First Minister, its funding appears to be a matter for the Department of Finance and Personnel? Will he say to which of the House Committees the economic policy unit will be accountable and explain how we will deal with the complicated matter of communication between the economic policy unit and the Department of Finance and Personnel?
The First Minister:
I do not foresee any great difficulty in communication. The two elements will work closely together. In essence, the economic policy unit, which has a co-ordinating role, is located in the Centre and consequently is subject to oversight by the Committee of the Centre. It is clear that the Administration needs something equivalent to the Cabinet Secretariat in Downing Street, which has a Minister. However, I would not like to draw an analogy between Mr Haughey and Mr Nesbitt on one hand and the Cabinet's Minister of State for Enforcement on the other.
3.45 pm
Ms Morrice:
The stress that the First Minister has put on the need to co-ordinate policies is appreciated. Can he explain in more detail to the House how the economic policy unit will interact with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and, in particular, the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee? We want to avoid duplication and allow as much co-ordination and co-operation as is possible.
The First Minister:
It should be borne in mind that the economic policy unit does not have an administrative function. It is there as a source of advice for the First and Deputy First Ministers and to assist co-ordination.
Mr Davis:
The First Minister has given very comprehensive answers. What resources will the economic policy unit have?
The First Minister:
It is essentially a small think-tank with research budgets, and it will work with Departments to provide better co-ordination. The staff of the Public Service Office, who work on improving public service efficiency and effectiveness, are part of the team. However, for the new responsibilities, such as economic policy and co-ordination on European matters, four senior staff have already been recruited, and we are starting to recruit more.
'Publicly Funded R & D
and Economic Development'
3. Mr McGrady asked the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what assessment they have made of the recent publication by the Northern Ireland Economic Council entitled 'Publicly Funded R & D and Economic Development in Northern Ireland', and if they will make a statement.
The Deputy First Minister:
While the Office of the First and Deputy First Ministers has responsibility for appointments to the Northern Ireland Economic Council and for its funding, this recent report has implications for several Departments. Since its focus is particularly on economic development, it is of most relevance to the work of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Department of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment. I understand that the Ministers, Sir Reg Empey and Dr Farren, have already met to discuss it. They will be putting a joint report to the Executive Committee. This will enable us to come to a collective view on how its recommendations might fit into the new programme of government.
Mr McGrady:
I thank the Deputy First Minister for his reply. Is he aware of the comments made by the chairperson of the Northern Ireland Economic Council on 18 January? She stated
"Research and Development (R&D) will be critical to determining Northern Ireland's economic success in an increasingly global and knowledge-driven economic environment."
In his answer to my question, he indicated that a team is operating to produce a report. Will he ensure that that team follows the advice of the Economic Council that an effective partnership be developed between business, the Government and the universities, with public and private investment, on research and development to spearhead economic progress?
The Deputy First Minister:
We will be encouraging the Departments involved along those lines. Perhaps one way of doing so, as the Member has suggested, is to encourage much greater collaboration between universities and industry and partnerships between the universities, industry and the Government, so that research can be placed in the technological chain which leads to development and entrepreneurism. It has worked in less-developed regions in Europe, and it can, and will, be made to work here.
The Member will be aware that we have inherited a level of university research funding that is low in comparison with that in other regions. However, our universities are now benefiting from substantial new investment in research across the United Kingdom. In the current academic year this includes an additional £1·5 million for research infrastructure, £2 million of university challenge money and part of the investment of £10 million towards the Northern Ireland science park.
This additional new funding is helpful, but Northern Ireland is lagging behind, as the council has pointed out. We will have to ensure that industry, the private sector, the public sector and the education sector are equipped to deal with research and development because, in today's world, we will not stand a chance of competing without it.
Freedom of Information
4. Mr Maskey asked the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister if there are any proposals to provide for freedom of information.
The First Minister:
The Freedom of Information Bill, which is before Parliament, extends to Northern Ireland. This measure provides, for the first time, a statutory right of access to information held by a wide range of Northern Ireland public bodies in the transferred field, including Departments, district councils and executive and advisory non-departmental public bodies. It also provides for the enforcement of that right of access and for an appeals procedure.
The extension of the Bill was agreed following a consultation exercise in Northern Ireland last year. However, freedom of information is a transferred matter, and it is for the Executive Committee to decide whether to introduce separate legislation on freedom of information in Northern Ireland. It is hoped that the Executive will discuss freedom of information in the near future.
Mr Maskey:
A Chathaoirligh. I thank the First Minister for his reply. Does he agree that this issue is of immense importance, given that one of the key principles of these institutions is openness and transparency? Good governance means that everyone should have access to information. I suppose the First Minister has already answered the question in that he said he hopes that the Executive will deal with this as a matter of urgency.
Go raibh maith agat.
The First Minister:
The legislation going through Parliament at the moment is very similar to that introduced in the Republic of Ireland and in a number of Commonwealth countries. We will have an opportunity to look at it and consider whether its provisions need to be extended.
Mr S Wilson:
Does the First Minister remember that on 9 January 1999 he wrote to members of his party a letter stating that the North/South bodies would be minimalist and completely accountable? Is he aware that the agendas for two North/South Ministerial Council meetings held last week were put in Members' pigeon-holes only today, or possibly on Saturday? Does he agree that that does not smack of accountable government? Will any Freedom of Information Act that is introduced in the Assembly ensure that, instead of being told of the agendas for North/South Ministerial meetings after they have taken place, Members are informed in advance?
Mr Speaker:
Order. As far as I am aware, the papers were in Members' pigeon-holes last Thursday. The First and Deputy First Ministers and their Department cannot be held accountable for any administrative delay. I will, however, check whether there was such a delay.
Mr S Wilson:
The meeting took place on 1 February.
The First Minister:
The Member knows - or ought to know - that there is more openness about North/South Ministerial Council material than about the rest of the public administration. This was deliberately arranged by us. As to his comment about knowing the agenda in advance of the meetings, if his Colleagues bothered to attend the Executive meetings they could take part in the discussions that take place in advance of the North/South Ministerial Council meetings.
Several Members:
On a point of order, Mr Speaker.
Mr Speaker:
Order. Members know that I cannot take points of order until the end of Question Time.
Sir John Gorman:
Does the First Minister agree that freedom of information should also apply to the families of those victims of terrorism whose remains have yet to be recovered? Does he agree that it would be contemptible if paramilitary organisations and their political backers were to withhold such information from the victims' loved ones?
The First Minister:
Of course I agree. There should be freedom of information for all the victims of terrorism, and the various paramilitary organisations, along with those who established and assisted them, have a lot of explaining to do.
Mr A Maginness:
Does the First Minister agree that for the healthy development of any democracy it is necessary to have a Freedom of Information Act? When is the legislation at Westminster likely to apply to Northern Ireland?
Further to that, in relation to the Freedom of Information Act in the Irish Republic to which he has previously referred, are there any provisions in that Act that we could usefully include in any legislation here? What does the First Minister think of that legislation?
The First Minister:
I understand that the Freedom of Information Bill that is before Parliament is likely to be brought into operation in mid-2001. The legislation in the Republic of Ireland is broadly similar. There may be differences in detail that we could usefully examine. Indeed, the Committee of the Centre could do likewise.
Mr Beggs:
Does the First Minister agree that in order to have freedom of information people must have freedom to meet without harassment or intimidation and that some political parties and, indeed, terrorist organisations should respect that principle?
The First Minister:
The Member's point is very well made.
Civic Forum
5. Mr Ford asked the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what criteria they will use to determine their nominations to the Civic Forum.
The Deputy First Minister:
The Good Friday Agreement includes provision for the establishment of a Civic Forum to act as a consultative mechanism on social, economic and cultural matters. The Forum will comprise representatives of the business, trade union and voluntary sectors and such other sectors as agreed by the First and Deputy First Ministers.
Under the terms of the report which was agreed by the Assembly in February 1999, nominees for the Forum will be drawn from the following areas: business, agriculture and fisheries, trade unions, the voluntary and community sectors, the churches, culture, arts and sports, victims, community relations and education. In addition, as First and Deputy First Ministers, we will appoint six persons and the chairperson. Our nominees will be people who, in our view, have a range of insights, expertise and experiences that will inform the deliberations of the Forum in the social, economic and cultural spheres. We will ensure that the Forum has the appropriate balance to enable it to represent fully all sections in Northern Ireland.
Mr Ford:
I thank the Deputy First Minister for that response. In the light of the cynicism that now exists about some of the appointments already made - there have been allegations not only about jobs for the boys but about jobs for the entire family - can he give an undertaking that no member of either of their political parties will be appointed to any of the six positions in the gift of himself and the First Minister?
The Deputy First Minister:
We will apply the principles that I have already enunciated to the appointments that are open to the First and Deputy First Ministers to ensure balance in the Civic Forum. To date, we have embarked on consultation, and the junior Ministers have had discussions with NICVA, Disability Action, the Rural Community Network and the Women's Resource and Development Agency. I assure the Member that everything will be done in a way that will contribute to the Forum and nothing else.
Mr Paisley Jnr:
Can the First and Deputy First Ministers assure the House that only genuine victims and their representatives, who know what it is like to suffer at the hand of terrorism, will be appointed to serve in a victims' liaison capacity? Can they assure us that they will consider appointing a representative of Families Acting for Innocent Relatives?
The Deputy First Minster:
No decision has been or will be made about any sector of the Civic Forum until all the nominations have been received. The Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister is very aware of the victims. We have already had a meeting with the Minister of State, who shares that responsibility with us, and we have taken steps to ensure that there is a dedicated sector in the equality unit to deal with the issue.
I want to make a final point in relation about the sting in the Member's question. In many ways we are all victims of the past 30 years, and there are many groups that have suffered in various ways. We will ensure, through the equality unit and the nominations put forward for the Civic Forum, that all groups are represented, in the wider interests of everyone in Northern Ireland.
4.00 pm
Mr Speaker:
We must proceed to the next item of business.
Mr Dodds:
Mr Speaker, I have already indicated that I want to raise a point of order.
I am sure that it is in order to point out to the First Minister that, unlike him, DUP Ministers are adhering to their manifesto commitments. I would like you to give a ruling on whether, by urging Ministers to breach their ministerial code and divulge Executive business, the First Minister is giving a green light to Members to breach confidentiality.
This is a very interesting precedent, which we will note carefully in the record. I would like to thank the First Minister for his indulgence in this matter.
Mr Speaker:
It is not for me to speak about the conduct of Executive Committee business, which is what the First Minister was referring to. There is no question about the need for confidentiality in Committees. That is clear, and I trust that all Members, including those who are Chairmen, recognise that.
St Patrick's Day
Mr McCarthy:
I beg to move the following motion:
This Assembly calls on Her Majesty's Government to proclaim each year St Patrick's Day a public holiday in Northern Ireland.
I wish to explain to the Assembly the words of the motion. Unfortunately, under current constitutional arrangements, the declaring of public holidays remains a responsibility of the British Government. Therefore, regrettably, it is not possible for the Assembly to take a decision on the matter. The only course of action open to us is to lobby our Prime Minister and our Secretary of State directly and hope that the Taoiseach and the Irish Government can also use their good offices to enable us to achieve the desired result. The Assembly does, however, have an important representative role in that it can express the authoritative voice of the people of Northern Ireland to other levels of government.
Why should the Assembly push for St Patrick's Day to be made a public holiday? Put simply, St Patrick's Day is an important day for people throughout Northern Ireland. It celebrates the man who is historically associated with bringing Christianity to Ireland. His importance is recognised by Protestants, Catholics and many others. St Patrick is the great unifier.
St Patrick's Day is also significant in a number of non-religious ways throughout the island. Throughout the world it is regarded as Ireland's national day, North and South. Around the world it is something for people of Irish descent to celebrate. And why not?
In Northern Ireland many people from all traditions wear shamrock. Indeed, shamrock is traditionally presented to the Irish regiments every St Patrick's Day. Sometimes at parades and festivals we have the great traditions of music, Irish food and green Guinness, which are enjoyed by many people. More importantly, religious services are celebrated throughout the length and breadth of the island, and it is also the day on which schools' cup rugby, soccer and gaelic football finals are played.
There is no doubt that St Patrick's Day contributes to tourism in Ireland, both North and South, which is so important to our economic well-being. I welcome the news that the Apprentice Boys of Derry are planning a St Patrick's Day festival this year and are to encourage their members to wear shamrock. That is progress that we can all support. I draw the House's attention to the fact that the Apprentice Boys are set to go green for St Paddy's Day. Who could fault people for that? Quite rightly they are recognising that St Patrick's Day is a celebration for the whole community, and not just for one part of it.
St Patrick's Day is a bigger event in some parts of the world than here, especially where there are large populations of Irish descent. One of the biggest annual parades is in New York, and there are parades in many other American towns and cities as well. The St Patrick's Day pilgrimage to the White House is now an annual event for many of our leading politicians, and they all seem to enjoy the festivities. Surely it is strange that St Patrick's Day is celebrated more enthusiastically internationally than at home and that it remains only a bank holiday, not a public holiday, in Northern Ireland.
Some workers, such as civil servants, bankers and, indeed, Assembly Members, will have the day off and can join in the celebrations. But many others, such as the shipyard workers, the aircraft and other factory workers, will have to plod on. Indeed, many children still have to go to school.
I have spent many years working in industry, and I always felt it an injustice to have to clock in on St Patrick's Day when others were on holiday. In this era of equality all people should be given the same opportunities and privileges. We discussed equality issues this morning. Now is the time to show our sincerity and treat everyone in the same way. To do otherwise would be barefaced hypocrisy.
There are other reasons for St Patrick's Day's being made a public holiday. St Patrick's Day unites all sides of the community in Northern Ireland. We should cherish and promote this in what is otherwise a deeply divided society. The Good Friday Agreement seems to be built on a vision of two separate but equal communities working together with mutual respect. This is not a vision that is shared by us; nor is it sufficient for Alliance. Not only does it ignore the much greater pluralism that exists; it does not encourage the emergence of common bonds and loyalties among our people - something that should concern not just the liberally minded but everyone. Unless the things that unite us begin to dominate those that divide us, it will be too easy for society to be torn apart at some time in the future by those who thrive on suspicion and mistrust.
To counter this danger we need to develop a stronger sense of common regional identity. This should draw upon, reflect and respect the diversity of cultural traditions right across society. It cannot and must not be based exclusively on one or other of the two main political and religious sections. Promotion of what the people of Northern Ireland hold in common is something that the Secretary of State himself touched upon in a speech that he made to the Institute of Irish Studies in Liverpool last Friday. He said that he wanted to see a Northern Ireland with two self-assured traditions but one body of citizens united by
"shared language, shared values and shared land with bonds that are strong enough to encompass diversity of religion, of politics and of custom."
He cautioned against outsiders trying to impose this but recognised that within the institutional framework of the Good Friday Agreement the people of Northern Ireland, and their representatives, can help to shape the values, identities and symbols of our society.
We can now do this by speaking with one voice. A call from the Assembly to make St Patrick's Day a public holiday could be an important first step towards trying to recognise and enlarge our common bonds. However, we must recognise that not every citizen in Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland is of Christian origin. As far as I am aware, St Patrick was neither a Unionist nor a Nationalist, nor was he a card-carrying member of the Alliance Party, the Women's Coalition or any other party, North or South.
All people in Northern Ireland, Unionist and Nationalist and those of us from the centre, should be able to associate with St Patrick, in comfort. It should be open to those from all religious backgrounds - Christian, non-Christian - and none.
This motion gives the Assembly an opportunity to send an important message asking that St Patrick's Day be made a public holiday, and I commend it to the House.
[Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr McClelland) in the Chair]
Mr J Wilson:
I beg to move the following amendment: At the end add
"and to add that day to the list of official flag days".
I am moving this amendment because I believe that if the Assembly were to support it we would be taking a step towards what is custom and practice in other parts of the United Kingdom. The Union flag is flown in Wales on St David's Day (1 March), in England on St George's Day (23 April), and in Scotland on St Andrew's Day (30 November).
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr McClelland):
I intend to allow five minutes for each Member who wishes to speak so that the proposers of the motion and the amendment may have 10 minutes each at the end of the debate.
Mr McGrady:
It will not surprise the Assembly that I am speaking in favour of the motion, being a native of, and coming from, Dún Phádraig (the fort of Patrick), where his mortal remains and those of St Brigid and St Colmcille lie in the cathedral grounds under the auspices of the Church of Ireland.
Anyone who has taken the trouble to research the history of St Patrick will agree with the proposer of the motion that he should be a unifying force, an important part of the Christian heritage of the people of Ireland. It does not matter that that Christian heritage diversified and has different connotations today - it had a common origin in the preachings of St Patrick and his disciples. Indeed, non-Christians in our community have very high regard for that tradition and would not oppose the celebration of St Patrick in any way, if only because on his day, throughout the world, Irishmen, from North or South, commemorate together their origins in the island of Ireland.
I always find it sad to look across the Atlantic and see the enormity of the celebrations there, and the exodus from this island to America. We should be celebrating the day here ourselves in harmony and comradeship.
4.15 pm
The Irish diaspora, which is not often mentioned but is very much Patrician, is that which spread from this island, and particularly from the North - Down, Antrim and Armagh - through western and eastern Europe to the Dalmatian coastline of the Adriatic. People from here founded monasteries, towns and all sorts of institutions, and that has never been tapped.
If we want to be commercial about it, we could harness that enormous link with people around the world. The people of Ireland have touched not only the 40 million people in America but huge numbers of people in Western Europe, the Middle East, the Far East and Australia. They would be only too happy to celebrate that wonderful day with us if we got our house in order.
I believe I heard the melodious voice of Sammy Wilson on the radio this morning saying that he intended to oppose the motion. I am not sure if I interpreted him correctly, but it puzzled me somewhat because I remember my esteemed parliamentary Colleague, the leader of the DUP, asking in the House of Commons some years ago that St Patrick's Day be made a public holiday. I support him entirely in that. This should not be a party issue; it should be a matter of us all getting together to celebrate the day.
I would hate to think that this debate might later involve divisive issues. That is not the intention of the motion. The intention is to create something that we can celebrate together without confrontation, a national day that we can invite people from all continents to join with us in celebrating.
Mr Hussey:
I know that the Member is talking to the motion, but I would appreciate a word about the amendment, remembering that the Union flag incorporates the cross of St Patrick.
Mr McGrady:
I do not know if I should thank the Member for his intervention. I accept the fact. I have just been handed -
Mr Deputy Speaker:
I must ask the Member to bring his remarks to a conclusion.
Mr McGrady:
Let us support the motion. May I invite all Members to Downpatrick in July this year to celebrate the opening of the first Patrician centre in Ireland and in the world - a £6·3 million development which will explain to all of us what St Patrick is all about. Ergo Patricius.
Rev Dr Ian Paisley:
My views on this subject are well known. I have expressed them in the House of Commons, and I proposed an amendment to a motion on the matter in the Forum. The amendment was carried. I support the amendment to this motion.
I, like all other right-thinking people in Ulster, regret the sectarian and political label that has been put on St Patrick. Prof Barclay was a well-known historian and a leader in the Irish Presbyterian Church who wrote a book which asked the question "Was the early Irish Church subject to Rome?". He answered "No. The independence of the early Irish Church is one of the most indisputable facts in history". How did Rome come to Ireland? Rome first gained an entrance - [Interruption]
Mr Deputy Speaker:
Order. Members have been reminded before about the use of mobile phones in the Chamber.
Rev Dr Ian Paisley:
Yes. I forgot about it. I humbly apologise to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and to the House for disturbing my speech.
A Member:
Perhaps it is St Patrick on the telephone for you?
Rev Dr Ian Paisley:
St Patrick has such a wonderful place in heaven that he would not return to a place like this.
Rome gained entrance into Ireland in the eleventh century, 600 years after Patrick. When the Danes who had settled in Ireland became Christians they refused to acknowledge the authority and jurisdiction of Patrick's Church and sent their bishops to be consecrated as Roman Catholic bishops.
Rome gained hold of the whole of Ireland because in 1155 Pope Adrian IV, the only Englishman who was ever Pope - and look what he did to you people - gave Henry II of England permission to conquer Ireland to enlarge the bounds of the Roman Catholic Church. I regret that Rome has put chains around St Patrick and said he was a Roman Catholic -
Mr McCarthy:
Rubbish.
Rev Dr Ian Paisley:
The Member has not read the history written by the priests of his Church. Otherwise he would know that what I am saying is true.
When he proposed the motion Mr McCarthy did not tell us about the sectarianisation and politicisation of Patrick. If you go to New York you will see the great parade he refers to. Is there anyone in that parade who would give one cent to a Unionist, or to a person wanting to maintain the Constitution? The Member knows there is not. St Patrick has had a Hibernian suit and sash and an IRA suit put on him. An IRA man, well known for his terrorist activities, has led that parade. If that is not making political capital out of a certain figure who was not political at all, I do not know what political capital is.
I refuse to hand St Patrick over to the Roman Catholic Church and the embrace of the Pope, or to the IRA and Nationalists. He is a figure to be honoured and remembered. He brought the Bible gospel. In his works - the Confession, the Epistle and the Hymn - one finds set forth the simple gospel of Jesus Christ:
"God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
We should honour St Patrick and have a public holiday declared by the Secretary of State.
Mrs Nelis:
Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh. I thank Mr McCarthy of the Alliance Party for moving the motion. I have major difficulty with the part of the motion calling for St Patrick's Day to be made a public holiday that is dependent on the imprimatur of the Queen or the British Government. The Alliance Party was at pains to point out that the wording of the motion was completely out of its control.
I support the spirit of the motion that St Patrick's Day should be for all Irish people. It should be for those people born on the island of Ireland who identify themselves variously as Scots, Scots-Irish, British, Chinese, Asian or of any other ethnic group, who, like those from all races around the world, join with the Irish annually in celebrating St Patrick's Day.
Seamus Heaney, in his poem 'From the Canton of Expectation', recalls a St Patrick's Day of his childhood in the North:
"Once a year we gathered in the field of dance platforms and tents where children sang songs they had learned in the old language, and stories were told of the history of Ireland. At the end of the day we sang the National Anthem, and then we went home to the usual harassment by militiamen on overtime at roadblocks".
The St Patrick's day Seamus Heaney spoke about in his generation is not that different from the present St Patrick's Day for Nationalists.
The Derry businessman Gerry Murray wrote in the 'Derry Journal' last year
"For the last number of years the people of the North have looked in awe as the Celtic Tiger of the Republic surged ahead with economic growth of 8%. In the week of the feast day of St Patrick half a million people from all over the world participated in the parade in Dublin, watched by a further quarter of a million."
The tourist industry in the South, recognising the potential of cultural celebration, made St Patrick's Day a celebration for the Irish economy, so increasing its share of the gross national product to 7%. The North's tourism lags behind at a mere 2%.
As well as in Dublin, St Patrick's Day is celebrated all over the world, from Sydney to New York, from Washington to Paris - the list could go on. Indeed, in recent years we have seen many Members jetting off to the United States to join in the St Patrick's Day celebrations there. If we were to make St Patrick's Day a public holiday here we could give Washington a miss and kick off our tourist season at home by funding and extending the celebrations - in particular, those denied to people in Belfast and Derry. Over the years, Unionism has made successive attempts to deny Nationalist people the right to their cultural identity and the right to uphold that identity by celebrating St Patrick's Day as a public holiday, but it has only postponed the day of reckoning against the bleak cultural monolith of Six-County Unionism.
What we have seen in the amazing St Patrick's Day parades in Belfast over the last few years is what we know from our history. One can strip a people of everything except their culture. They will still have enough culture buried deep in their psyche and in their imagination and enough skill to bring tens of thousands of people on to the streets of Belfast to celebrate their diversity, their talent, their imagination and their love of the country which gave them birth. If nothing else, the success of the St Patrick's Day carnival in Belfast, despite Belfast City Council's refusal to fund it, should indicate the support in the community for its being declared a public holiday.
What a surprise it must have been to the narrow-minded begrudgers that a few tricolours should appear at the St Patrick's Day parade in Belfast, or that people should resort to wearing green. Sure it happens all over the world.
I wish to congratulate the organisers of the St Patrick's Day carnival in Belfast. Their efforts during recent years have paved the way for this motion. In line with the South, St Patrick's Day should indeed be a public holiday. There are many reasons for this, not least of which is that Nationalists will no longer accept being told how or what they should do to celebrate their identity.
Mr Deputy Speaker:
I must ask the Member to bring her remarks to a close.
Mrs Nelis:
I should like to finish by saying that, as St Patrick indicated to the people of Ireland, the shamrock represents the Holy Trinity. It could also symbolise a uniting of Protestants, Catholics and dissenters.
Mr C Wilson:
In normal circumstances the subject of how St Patrick's Day could best be commemorated, given the saint's legacy, would be an extremely appropriate matter for the House to consider. Patrick was indeed a saint in the true biblical sense. He was a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ and dependent upon Him for his salvation. That is beyond dispute. I am sure that St Patrick would be absolutely aghast if he were here to witness how people currently celebrate his time in this land - with green beer and pagan parades. That has nothing to do with what Patrick believed or how he would have liked to be remembered.
However, this debate seems most inappropriate when we consider that last week the Ulster Unionist Party Leader, Mr David Trimble, refused the House the chance to debate the most important issue facing this community, one which requires urgent attention: decommissioning and how to remove terrorists and their guns from the democratic process.
Mr Deputy Speaker:
The Member is out of order. I ask him to confine his remarks to the subject of the debate.
Mr C Wilson:
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I shall do so.
Mr Deputy Speaker:
I also remind the Member that I expect him to sit down when I am on my feet.
4.30 pm
Mr C Wilson:
I will indeed.
I simply make the point that St Patrick did not have a flag. Regardless of what colour people are trying to attribute to St Patrick, or what flag, be it the tricolour or the Union flag, people here would like to associate him with, he did not have a flag. Those who attempt to politicise Patrick or attribute colours of any hue to him do him and his message a grave disservice. Patrick came to know his Saviour under the banner of the cross. That is the only standard behind which he rallied, and that is what he would wish all in this community, whether Catholic, Protestant, Unionist or Nationalist, to do also.
Dr Adamson:
As the people of Northern Ireland take their first tentative steps on a new road to a pluralist society and endeavour to come to terms with the divisions which have been created, rightly or wrongly, over the last few hundred years of their history, it is indeed timely to remind them that they have another, more ancient, legacy - a shared historical and cultural inheritance of which most of them are largely unaware. This is embodied in the figure, mythological or real, of St Patrick - Patricius, the "gentleman".
Among the oldest named population groups of Ireland were the Cruthin, an ancient British people dominant in large parts of old Ulster. Their most powerful dynasty was the Dal nAraidi whose territory became known as Dalaradia. According to legend, Patrick was first brought to Ireland as a slave from Romanised Britain and sold to a Cruthin chieftain called Milchu, a petty king who ruled over part of Dalaradia near Mount Slemish in present day County Antrim. It was later, at Kells and Connor rather than Downpatrick and Armagh, that the cult of Patrick developed in its present form. The story of Christian Dalaradia is not confined to its religious or political aspects but, indeed, embraces a quite remarkable literary tradition. Proinias MacCana, who was reared in the Falls Road area of Belfast and is our finest living Gaelic scholar, summed up this rich cultural legacy of Ulster when he wrote
"In Ireland the seventh century is marked by two closely related developments: the rapid extension of the use of writing in the Irish language and an extraordinary quickening of intellectual and artistic activity, which was to continue far beyond the limit of the centuries."
The immediate sources of this artistic renewal were the scriptoria of certain of the more progressive monasteries and their direct agents, those monastic literati, whom the Irish metrical tracts refer to by the very significant title "Nualitride" - the "new men of letters". While there is no reason to suppose that these individuals were confined to any one part of Ireland, the evidence strongly suggests that it was only in the east, or more precisely in the south-east, of Ulster that their activities assumed something of the impetus and cohesiveness of a true cultural movement.
In this land of Ulster, conservation and creativity went hand in hand. In Ireland the relatively new skill of writing in the vernacular began to be vigorously exploited, not only for the direct recording of secular oral traditions - heroic, mythological and the more strictly didactic - but also as a vehicle for the imaginative recreation of certain sections of that Irish tradition. One may, with due reservations, speak of this region of south-east Ulster, where Members are presently sitting, as the cradle of written Irish literature. It was in Bangor in County Down that there seems to have been an intellectual centre whence the cultural dynamic of the east Ulster region emanated.
As Mr McGrady said, Dalaradia's legacy and Ulster's legacy was not confined to these shores. Not only was there a highly productive relationship with nearby Scotland, but when Columbanus set forth from Bangor on his great missionary travels he was embarking on a journey which was to have profound significance for the rebirth of European civilisation following the collapse of the Roman Empire.
Most importantly, however, the story of Dalaradia and of that British slave who is credited with founding Christianity within it offers us hope that the people of present-day Northern Ireland may one day cease to view their different aspirations of Britishness and Irishness as a constant source of conflict and division -
Mr Deputy Speaker:
I must ask you to draw your remarks to a close.
Dr Adamson:
- and begin to celebrate them as proof of their divergent but shared inheritance, one which links all the peoples of these islands. When this symbiosis of their identities is established, it will provide a solid foundation for the peace they so richly deserve.
I commend the motion, and I support the amendment.
Mr A Maginness:
Congratulations on your new office, Mr Deputy Speaker.
I sympathise with Dr Paisley's remarks about how some people have sought to sectarianise the celebration of the cultural and religious inheritance of St Patrick for political ends. On occasions, the celebration of St Patrick's Day has been a chauvinistic exercise, which any democratic person who is sincerely patriotic would condemn. Those of us who admire St Patrick wish to see St Patrick's Day used to celebrate the diversity of Irishness rather than the narrow identification of Irishness which some would like to impose upon us.
As I have said, I sympathise with Dr Paisley, but, of course, he overreacts. St Patrick's Day is a celebration that we can all enjoy and involve ourselves in. Thanks to St Patrick, this island has traditionally been called the land of saints and scholars referring to its being an island of spirituality and learning. We should try to rediscover those things, and in that way St Patrick could once again be a unifying rather than a divisive figure.
I listened to Sammy Wilson this morning on the radio. He is opposed to this motion, and one of his arguments is that he is not Irish. How absurd. When Mr Wilson was Lord Mayor of Belfast he wore the chain of office that was presented to the city in 1874. That chain, as Dr Adamson will confirm, has a Celtic design with representations of the four provinces of Ireland. It is inscribed "Erin go bragh", meaning "Ireland for ever". The chain was presented by the Protestant and Unionist councillors and aldermen of the Corporation of Belfast because they regarded themselves very much as Irishmen. They regarded themselves as Unionists but as Irish Unionists. Being a Unionist does not mean that one is not Irish or that one should deny one's Irishness. People should celebrate their Irishness. To deny the political connotations is fair enough, but do not deny that cultural inheritance.
I cannot support the amendment. The Good Friday Agreement says about flags and emblems
"all participants acknowledge the sensitivity of the use of symbols and emblems for public purposes, and the need in particular in creating the new institutions to ensure that such symbols and emblems are used in a manner which promotes mutual respect rather than division."
Unfortunately, any flag, whether it be the Union Jack or the tricolour, creates divisions in this society. That is the unfortunate reality. We must move beyond that to a situation in which we either respect both flags on an equal footing or we create new symbols to unite the entire community -
Mr Deputy Speaker:
Order. I ask the Member to address the Chair rather than Members across the Chamber.
Mr A Maginness:
Alternatively, we create a situation of complete neutrality, and such neutrality might well contribute to a greater sense of harmony. I regret that this amendment has been moved because it clouds what might otherwise have been unanimous support for the motion.
Mr Gibson:
I have listened to some of the contributions with interest. I support the amendment, particularly as Members are talking about a person who came from the mainland and who, on his return, brought Christianity to this island. I mentioned in an earlier debate how we, at Christmas, had not acknowledged our Lord's birthday. We were celebrating the second millennium but could not raise our flag in its recognition. That was despicable and irresponsible. The First Minister and the Deputy First Minister abandoned their responsibilities. They should have ensured that the flag was flown. The First Minister pointed out that the flying of the flag is a matter of royal prerogative. For that reason, the flag should have been flown.
This is another occasion on which a unique personality should be celebrated. As Mr Alban Maginness quite rightly said, a contribution was made, not just in these islands, but to the whole of Western Europe through the movement that St Patrick set up. He brought Christianity to the Celts. Those people who are members of the Church of Ireland or, indeed, Presbyterians will have sung 'St Patrick's Breastplate'. It is almost a confession of their faith - a confession that is shared by all of the reformed faith. We should, therefore, unhesitatingly give our support to this remarkable person. He established a culture of scholarliness which, in later centuries, the Roman Catholic system, when imposed, did everything in its power to eradicate. Early Christian writings are rare and extremely difficult to find. The early contributions of many of these people are perhaps the rarest and most important relics of that age.
Dr Adamson referred to St Columbanus, who was a product of the university set up in those days. The Black Death was probably the greatest contributing factor to moving our saints on crusades to evangelise the rest of the British Isles and the greater part of Europe.
However, while recognising St Patrick and acknowledging the great part that he played in our history, in shaping a land of saints and scholars, we know that much has been eradicated and that standards have been lowered. Who can honestly associate green beer with a Christian saint? And I have no more time for a person drinking orange beer underneath an Orange banner than for someone on green beer underneath a green banner. They are lowering the standards set by the good saint who brought us Christianity.
4.45 pm
My constituency has a particular association with St Patrick. We have a St Patrick's law. We had a monastic settlement from where it is said he borrowed a white horse which he used to eradicate the snakes in Ireland. However, when I look around I know that Homo sapiens "snakeanus" remains in abundance.
This is a serious occasion, and if we accept the motion that this day should be a holiday, we have every right to celebrate it in freedom. We should be able to celebrate it without mockery from Nationalism, without mockery and hypocrisy from Republicanism and without anything being imposed by others who appear to have given nothing when their contributions are seen alongside the good man's bringing of Christianity to Ireland.
I support the amendment, and I hope that it will succeed.
Mr McElduff:
A LeasCheann Comhairle. Cuirim fáilte roimh an rún seo. Mar Phoblachtánach, ní thaitníonn cuid den téarmaíocht liom-ní gá a rá-ach tá mé ar aon intinn le spiorad an rúin. Tá Lá Fhéile Pádraig thaire a bheith tábhachtach dúinn uilig mar Éireannaigh.
I support the spirit of the motion. It serves to highlight the nonsense of St Patrick's Day's not being an official public holiday in this part of Ireland. Why should St Patrick's Day not be a public holiday in the Six Counties? It could only happen in this part of Ireland.
It has been well ventilated, hitherto in this debate, that St Patrick's Day is celebrated throughout the world. It is a day on which people express great pride in being Irish, both in Ireland and abroad, in places like New York, Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Sydney, Paris, Moscow and even Tokyo. St Patrick's Day is a wonderful statement of Irish national pride, inclusive of all religions, exiles and emigrants. It would be an odd state of affairs if Irish people who reside on the island of Ireland could not properly and officially celebrate their national day.
I agree with Mr McCarthy and Mr Maginness that St Patrick is a unifying symbol for all Irish people and that he is an important part of our common heritage, as outlined so well by Mr Adamson. His memory and image are a threat to no one. Any opposition to this motion is rooted in pettiness and in the desire to deny parity of esteem to every class and section of people here.
St Patrick's Day is for the Irish, and it would be reasonable to anticipate cross-party support for the motion. It should not be contentious.
Sin mo mhéid. Go raibh maith agat.
Mrs E Bell:
As other Members have said, St Patrick's Day should be recognised by all of us as a day for celebration and an opportunity for reconciliation. It should not be hijacked by anyone - [Interruption]
Mr Deputy Speaker:
I ask some Members to my right not to carry on private conversations when others are trying to speak.
Mrs E Bell:
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. We all have different ideas of equality.
St Patrick's Day should not be hijacked by any one group, Church or tradition. Many of us personally identify with St Patrick's Day. I remember as a child putting on shamrock to commemorate our patron saint. In later years, I remember celebrating St Patrick's Day with many of our voluntary organisations and peace groups in the Church of Ireland's Down Cathedral in Downpatrick and then watching the parade pass through the town. It was a wonderful feeling, and I wish that it could be repeated in the future.
I also remember St Patrick's Day was a cross-community celebration. At the ceremonies in Downpatrick and elsewhere we all came together - believers and non-believers from different background and traditions - to remember the man who came to unite all the people in a spirit of goodwill and tolerance.
St Patrick's Day should not be used as a tool to divide us. This would fly in the face of the Christian message that St Patrick sought to promote. That is why it is wrong for some sections of the community to try to associate St Patrick's Day with narrow or sectional political causes.
Parades should be inclusive and representative of the various groups and organisations in the towns and cities in which they take place. That is why the Alliance Party had considerable difficulties with the proposed parade for Belfast, although it supports the concept of the Belfast parade in principle. All sections of the community recognise the important contribution made by St Patrick to Christianity in Ireland, and that view has been echoed today by other Members.
It is somewhat unfortunate that Protestants, unlike Catholics, have felt inhibited about celebrating St Patrick's Day. Catholics have never tried to hijack St Patrick. He is not a Catholic St Patrick - he is St Patrick.
I hope that in supporting the motion on a cross-community basis we can send a firm message that St Patrick should be for everybody. The case for making St Patrick's Day a public holiday is a strong one.
First, it would enable everybody to have the day off work and school and take part in the various events being held around the country. Secondly, it would enable people to celebrate St Patrick's Day with the same vigour and enthusiasm with which it is celebrated in other parts of the world. Surely it is strange that St Patrick is commemorated more abroad than in parts of his own land? Thirdly, it would enable the Government to declare a public holiday for which there is considerable cross-community support.
It is vital that we, as an Assembly and a Government, take this opportunity to promote what this community holds in common to counter what divides us all, and St Patrick can really be for all of us. Therefore, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the motion.
Dr Birnie:
I support the motion and the amendment. Why? Basically because, if passed, the amended motion would encourage the Government to act more consistently in their treatment of people in Northern Ireland and would enable greater consistency between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom.
In terms of consistency within Northern Ireland, a substantial percentage of employees currently gets St Patrick's Day as a holiday, but not everybody does. In terms of consistency within the United Kingdom, as my Colleague Mr Wilson has already pointed out, it is the case that St Andrew's Day in Edinburgh and St David's Day in Cardiff are already so-called national flag days when the Union flag of the United Kingdom is flown. Also, if a public building has a second flagpole, the flag of the appropriate country or principality - in our case, Province - is also flown.
As a Unionist, I do not regard the remembrance of St Patrick with any particular discomfort, though I do share the reservations that some people on this side of the House have expressed about the way in which St Patrick has been remembered in certain quarters over the years. At one time I would have approached the question of the celebration of St Patrick with some degree of agnosticism. At one point I would have agreed with those commentators who doubted if he existed at all. But I have moved beyond that point, and I now see that he may well be buried in at least two places - a formidable achievement!
As someone who was born in Great Britain, I also note with some amusement that Patrick may have been a native of the Bristol area, or south Wales, or the Scottish shore area of Solway Firth. Dr Adamson, Mr Alban Maginness and other Members have pointed out St Patrick's contribution to wider European history. Indeed, the notable historian Norman Davies, in his recent 'Europe A History', writes of St Patrick's life's work
"In this way Ireland had been secured for Christianity before the blanket of Anglo-Saxon heathenism fell over the rest of the British Isles. The Irish would repay their debt."
In a sense Mr Gibson has anticipated me, for if it is indeed true that Patrick banished the snakes from Ireland, then a modern application does perhaps suggest itself as we consider some of the wider political issues facing us this week.
Let me summarise the reasons for having a public holiday to commemorate St Patrick. As has been pointed out by a number of Members, he was a Christian saint who pre-dated our Protestant and Catholic traditions, and in his life he expressed both the tragedy and triumph of relations between the two islands of Britain and Ireland.
For these reasons I support the motion and the amendment.
Mr Attwood:
First, may I express some regret about the comments made by my Colleague Mary Nelis, who referred to the bleak cultural monolith of Six-County Unionism.
While there are cultural monoliths in the North, they are not exclusive to Unionism, and Members on this side of the House should recognise that cultural monoliths, and their bleakness, have been common to both of our traditions in the past - and they are not exclusive to one tradition now.
The comment was also inappropriate given that in the Chamber today we are going to have an example not of bleak cultural monoliths but of inclusive cultural thinking. It was inappropriate for that sort of comment to be made, on this day of all days. I recognise that Barry McElduff acknowledged the comments made by Ian Adamson. He is not an advocate of bleak cultural monolithism, and that was reflected in his speech.
Unfortunately, the SDLP will not support the amendment moved by the Ulster Unionist Party. However, it is important to acknowledge the reason for that. There is quite a degree of cohesion and agreement about St Patrick and what he represents in terms of culture, community and religion, and that has been reflected in the debate and in the wider community. This differentiates the issue of St Patrick from the issue of flags, and it was inappropriate, and unnecessary, to parachute into this debate something that was bound to cause a degree of division. For those reasons, as well as for those outlined by my Colleague Alban Maginness, we will not be inclined to support the amendment.
However, some comments made in this debate are a signpost to how we should conduct ourselves here and in the wider community in future.
The Nationalist people, of whom I am one, have to recognise that their identity is in a process of evolution because of our political and constitutional agreement. What it is to be Irish - and that includes our wish to share in the life of the island - is different now from what it was before. As Nationalists we have to recognise that we are being influenced by the various diaspora around the world and by our wider European identity.
Nationalists must also acknowledge that our sister island influences our identity and what it means to be Irish in the new millennium. While we are not sure what those influences mean for us, and we are not sure about how our identity will change because of them, there are influences upon our values, our culture and our way of life which have redefined us as Irish people in this part of the island.
This means that there are influences from the British island on our identity and on how we perceive ourselves that we, as people of this island, are going to have to acknowledge more fully. As we begin to acknowledge this, we must also acknowledge that there are people in this Chamber, and in the wider community, who are beginning slowly and painfully to acknowledge other influences upon their identity, influences from the whole island, which are going to mean for them a period of growth and development.
Finally, if we do not sign up to a wider celebration of St Patrick's Day and all that that means, in narrow terms, we will be letting all the community down.
5.00 pm
St Patrick's Day, more than any other day, is the day on which this island is in the eye of the world. The world identifies with it and shares in it. This is not just a religious event. Religion is in decline, and that is a matter of regret. This is the day on which the world can see our economic opportunity, our commercial initiative and the wider opportunities that are there for the people of this island to enjoy if we grasp them. By developing our notion of what it is to be Irish and by sharing in the concept of St Patrick's Day, whatever that means to us, we can create opportunities for all the people of this island for the future.
Mr S Wilson:
I support the amendment to the motion, and I want to make my reasons clear. Any proposal before the Assembly to encourage the United Kingdom Government to permit the flag to fly over this part of the United Kingdom, especially at a time when we are being stripped of our British identity, will always have my support. I will not be supporting the motion.
When Mr McCarthy was proposing the motion, he apologised for its wording. I thought that he was apologising for his grammatical contortions, but he was doing what the Alliance Party does best: crawling to Sinn Féin. I am sorry that we have to appeal to Her Majesty's Government. I know that this may be offensive to Sinn Féin, but, unfortunately, this is the way in which it has to be done.
The motion itself does not make sense. If one reads the couple of contributions that Mr McCarthy has made in the Assembly one will see that he is the master of grammatical contortion. When the Hansard staff get to work on his two speeches they will be unable to get rid of his split infinitives.
I want to refer to points already made. In one sentence Mr McCarthy paid lip-service to the fact that St Patrick's Day has something to do with a religious figure. He said that St Patrick had a role in bringing Christianity to Ireland.
In the rest of his five or 10 minutes he dealt with other reasons, the non-religious aspects of St Patrick's Day, and they were well explained by himself, the SDLP and Sinn Féin. They all centre around the celebration of Ireland's national day, our national day, the day on which Irish people express their culture. Alban Maginness has, in his arrogance, tried to tell me that it is absurd to say that I am not Irish. I am not Irish, and all the arrogance and all the contorted logic of Alban Maginness will not make me Irish. I do not wish to celebrate Ireland's national day. I do not wish to celebrate the day on which Irish people celebrate their culture. I am British, and proud of it. Wearing a chain with "Erin go bragh" round my neck did not make me Irish.
[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Morrice) in the Chair]
Secondly, no self-respecting Protestant would be comfortable in a parade which claims to celebrate a national saint and which has at its head gunmen and gun-runners -
Madam Deputy Speaker:
I ask the Member to draw his remarks to a close.
Mr S Wilson:
That parade has people celebrating the resistance of the Garvaghy Road residents and bans the flag of St Patrick in favour of the Irish tricolour. No self-respecting Protestant could call an event like that inclusive, and for that reason I will not support the motion in the name of Mr McCarthy.
Mr B Bell:
I do not know how to begin after that speech. I have always been of the opinion that St Patrick's Day should be celebrated and should be a public holiday. I support the amendment because the motion does not go far enough. Some mention has been made of the chain which I also wore as Lord Mayor of Belfast. During that time I attempted to have the Lord Mayor's parade brought forward to St Patrick's Day. Unfortunately, I was unsuccessful. Had I been successful, we might not have had the sectarianism in the Belfast parade last year that will probably be present this year. Mrs Nelis mentioned funding. I walk on 12 July in the biggest parade of all, and I do not have any funding. I have to pay my dues before I am allowed to walk, so I do not see why anybody needs funding for a parade.
There has been much talk about Irish and British. I am both Irish and British. I believe that anyone who is born on the island of Ireland is Irish and that anyone who is born in Northern Ireland, a part of the United Kingdom, is British. I belong to the Church of Ireland, which is founded on the principles of St Patrick. I also belong to the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland and am very proud of that. It is wrong for Members and Friends opposite to lecture us on what it means to be Irish. I do not need any such lectures. I know what I am, and I have always shown it.
The dispute about what an Irishman actually is has been going on for a long time. One English dictionary described an Irishman as a hunter, and another as a moorsman. I think it was the poet Patrick Kavanagh who described an Irishman as a sophisticated mechanism for turning Guinness into urine. Those who are Murphy's drinkers, like me, will find that it is a superfluous exercise anyway.
In 1921 the first Prime Minister of Northern Ireland said that Ulstermen were Irishmen, the best Irishmen - aye, the very best. I agree.
I have no problem with the motion in principle, but it does not go far enough. If you have a public holiday here you fly the Union flag. Wales, Scotland and England have public holidays commemorating their saints, and the Union flag is flown. Since we are part of the United Kingdom it should be no different here.
When the Lord Mayor of Dublin was in Belfast with his chain of office, which carries a motif of King William of Orange, I offered to swap, but he would not agree.
I support the amendment.
Mr ONeill:
The issue of St Patrick's Day's becoming a holiday has been well examined by Members in an erudite way and in other ways. I can but add one or two comments about the importance of St Patrick to Ireland in another sense - and I make no apologies for saying this. St Patrick has international appeal and recognition. It was John F Kennedy, I think, who said that there were some 47 million people of Irish descent or who would claim Irish connection. President Reagan pitched it at 70 million. Whatever it is, there is an enormous potential for tourism, and I am talking about using the patron saint's day and the image of St Patrick to attract tourists. We have been working on this in Downpatrick in a number of ways. We are very proud of what we have achieved so far and are optimistic about the future. This is something that we should not forget.
Downpatrick's St Patrick's Day parades have been very successful. The reason for that - other Members have noted this - is that no national flags of any kind have been flown. We asked people not to bring them, and 99% did not. The council provides St Patrick's flags, and that has been successful because it has been seen as neutral: people participate without any fear of being in awe of any one side.
That is why, as my Colleagues have explained, we cannot support the amendment. I have no doubt that there were good intentions behind the amendment, but it has escaped the notice of those who proposed it that of all things in Northern Ireland flags are perhaps the most divisive. That is because of the way in which they are used.
Flags originated with Roman standard-bearers. A bearer in the legion held the standard against all odds, and the legion would defend the standard-bearer to the very last person. The image of the standard-bearer was carried forward by the Normans with flags that we know and see today and by Governments into nation states. In the last and previous centuries, regiments fought with their colours and defended them to the last man if necessary. They honoured and respected their flags and gave them their allegiance.
What happens in Northern Ireland? Flags are an in-your-face political taunt for both sides.
This is a primeval urge which reminds me of wild dogs urinating to mark their territory, and that is the image of flags on both sides. When you drive around Northern Ireland you see the tatters on the masts and flagpoles. Who has any respect or honour for his flag when he allows that to happen to it? Those flags are a political taunt. That is why we cannot support the amendment to the motion. The motion is a good and sound one which has my full support, but the amendment is divisive by its very nature.
5.15 pm
Mr Campbell:
I am unable to support the motion, but I support the amendment. At the moment St Patrick's Day is a bank holiday but not a public holiday, and there are many who want to see it become a public holiday which they can enjoy. I do not have any difficulty with that. If that is their wish they should be granted it.
Patrick's theology and religious practices have come up quite often in the debate. There are relevant in that they are often overlooked on the streets of New York, Washington and elsewhere, where St Patrick's Day seems to be a bigger day than it is on the island of Ireland. However, Patrick's theology and religious practices are not an issue. The issue is whether Patrick remains the patron saint of the Republic of Ireland. If he does, how can British citizens feel part of the celebration?
The comments by Mr Maginness, the Member for North Belfast, almost beggar belief. If we are not part of an ethos or an identity, whatever is done to attempt to widen that identity does not matter, because we are still simply not part of it. It is like asking the people who live alongside the Great Lakes or on the borders of Canada if they want to be part of the 4th of July. They would say "Why on earth should we? We are not Americans." And if someone pointed out that they lived in North America they would reply "Yes, but we are Canadians." It is the same in Northern Ireland. We may be Irish because we live on the island of Ireland, but we are British by birth and will remain so.
Can Bastille Day be celebrated in Spain? Why not? If those whose identity is not Irish can be expected to celebrate Irishness, why can we not expect the Spanish to celebrate Bastille Day? Is the modern St Patrick's Day for everyone regardless of his religion? It should be for everyone who regards himself as Irish. I do not and never will, now or in the future, and my children, grandchildren and great grandchildren will not regard themselves as Irish either. We treat with contempt this attempt to widen Irishness to include Protestants and the thought that if the parade is made less contentious, perhaps the Protestants will join in. That is the issue. That is the nature of this agenda.
I close my remarks by referring to the last Member's comments about flags. I endorse some of what he said, for there has been too much flag-waving and in-your-face triumphalism with flags. The Member does not seem to understand, however, that they hauled down the Union flag in his council area following precedents set by other local authorities who had done likewise. Unionists saw that as the exit sign. It was time to go. They were not wanted. They were not welcome. They should leave. That is what they did in Londonderry. That is what they did elsewhere along the border. Where the Union flag cannot fly, British citizens are not welcome. Until people realise and accept that, we will have grave difficulties.
Rev Robert Coulter:
Nearly everything that needed to be said has been said already. First, it strikes me as somewhat ironic that we are discussing the celebration of a "Brit" as the patron saint of Ireland. Given the oft-heard battle-cry of "Brits out", this could pose a difficulty for certain people in the years ahead, when they may have to look for another patron saint for Ireland.
Secondly, as has been pointed out, we are formalising the flying of the Union flag. Since the removal of the irredentist claims in articles 2 and 3 of the Republic of Ireland's constitution, we feel that we are merely normalising this part of the United Kingdom in that regard.
Thirdly, and most importantly, having St Patrick's Day as a national holiday would remind us of the true spirit of worship. To love the Lord our God with all our being and our neighbour as ourselves should be the principle which supersedes and influences every aspect of our lives, including politics. If the challenge of St Patrick and the message he had about our personal lives and our relationship with our God and our neighbours were to enhance the quality of our lives and our politics, it would be worth it. I support the amendment.
Mr Morrow:
I listened with interest as this debate unfolded. I listened particularly to the Member who moved the motion and observed with even greater interest how he failed to address certain questions when asked to do so. I look forward to his addressing those questions, particularly the one about the sectarian nature of St Patrick's Day parades in Northern Ireland.
The parade from which he derives the greatest joy is the one in New York. Can anyone with half a head on his shoulders not wonder what planet these people came from, given the coat-trailing exercise carried out in the name of celebrating St Patrick's Day, particularly in Belfast?
I listened to the rant from Mary Nelis. It was nothing more than a sectarian rant, but one would hardly expect anything else from that quarter. It seems to be that Lady's hallmark. She boldly declared that St Patrick's Day was for the Irish. Then she got succour, comfort and support from the pan-Nationalist front spearheaded by Mr Maginness. He said that we on this side of the House have an identity crisis and are not really British at all. We are simply Irishmen just as he is.
He has been told in clear and unambiguous terms that we are not Irish bigots like him. Members such as Mr Campbell have said that. In fact, we are British and proud of it. We have no apologies to make for that.
If Mr Maginness is up to it, I will throw down the challenge to the SDLP today to separate itself from Sinn Féin/IRA and take a bold and courageous stand against that sectarian organisation. Mr Attwood confirmed that it would not be doing that, and Mr ONeill seemed to think that it was for him to reinforce that. As far as the SDLP is concerned, the sectarian nature of St Patrick's Day will continue as boldly as ever.
Mr ONeill said that flags divide people. He is quite right - they do. They single people out. In the part of the world where I live they mark out territory. The flag of my country is taken down, and the flag of a foreign, hostile nation is raised. That is the encouragement that Unionists get along the border. Maybe Mr ONeill has never been there, but he should go and see it for himself. Of course, the council that he sits on wants to compound the matter and insult us even more. It took down the Union flag of the country that pays all the grants and gives all the comforts that Mr ONeill wants to enjoy. It had to be pulled down. This is how he says he can unite the people and bring them together. Where does he live anyway?
Mr Gibson:
Cloud-cuckoo-land.
Mr ONeill:
This just shows how successful flags have been in Northern Ireland in bringing people together. I am talking about both sides, as I have made clear.
Mr Morrow:
Does Mr ONeill watch the St Patrick's Day parade on television? Does he see the thousands of Republicans who flaunt themselves as they march in triumph behind the tricolour? Can he say that that has brought the two communities together?
I congratulate Belfast City Council on having used its discretion to turn down the grant application for that coat-trailing exercise. I have no hesitation in supporting the amendment. Militant Republicanism in this Province has abused the name of St Patrick, and this is another opportunity for it to extend itself and the support that it feels it deserves.
I will be supporting the amendment.
Mr J Kelly:
Go raibh maith agat, a Leas Cheann Comhairle.
Having listened to Dr Adamson's learned dissertation on the historical background to St Patrick, I hesitate to add to the debate. Dr Adamson's speech contrasted favourably with Mr S Wilson's pantomime and with Dr Paisley's rather interesting fundamentalist contribution. I find it difficult to understand how anyone can speak for his grandchildren. I never know what my grandchildren are going to do from one minute to the next, never mind from one century to the next. Sometimes when Mr Campbell speaks, his mind forgets where his mouth is.
Sinn Féin could have been churlish and argued about the wording of the motion. We could have said that we did not agree with the wording but that we would support the motion anyway because we agree that there should be a public holiday on St Patrick's Day. It is unfortunate - and we have heard this from the DUP - that the issue of the flag has been introduced to the debate, for all the churches (Church of Ireland, Presbyterian, Methodist and Roman Catholic) accept the Christian influence that St Patrick had on this island and regard him as a saint. It would have been good, a unifying force, if we could have agreed, without any great debate that was going to divide orange and green or bring in elements of sectarianism, that St Patrick's Day should be a public holiday.
5.30 pm
It would be appropriate for St Patrick's Day to be a public holiday - and I say so not because I am a Catholic or even because I am an Irishman. When we say "Brits out" we are not talking about the people who inhabit this part of the island; we are talking about the institutions of British governance on this part of the island. I wonder if Billy Bell would think the flying of the Irish national flag alongside the Union Jack acceptable, as flying the Union flag alongside the Scottish flag is accepted in Scotland. I do not want to talk about the flag; it should not be dragged into this debate. It should not be relevant to an issue that is intended primarily to bring about consensus or even introduce ecumenism into the debate.
I support the motion, a Leas Cheann Comhairle.
Mr Shannon:
I support the amendment. As some Members have said, St Patrick's Day could be an occasion for community participation and enjoyment if it were done properly. St Patrick is remembered in history as a saint, and many churches celebrate his bringing Christianity to Ireland. He also has pride of place on one of the Orange banners. The cross of St Patrick is paraded in Belfast every 12 July by a religious organisation. This shows that it recognises the part played by St Patrick.
What do we see whenever a St Patrick's Day parade takes place? We see the promotion of Nationalism. If St Patrick were here today to see the float representing prisoners' organisations, would he see that as part of his Christianity? Would he see the flaunting of tricolours - and that is what happens - as promoting the religion that he brought here? Would he see the picking of marshals on the grounds of their Republican credentials or on account of their being ex-prisoners as Christian behaviour?
These parades are an organised attack on our British heritage. I would like to make it very clear that I am not Irish. I have no wish to be Irish. I am British by birth, British by persuasion and British by choice. That is the way I want to be. Some Members mentioned their children. I want my children and my grandchildren - if there are any, as I hope there will be - to have the same choice and the same freedom that I have.
It is clear from their comments today that some Members see the St Patrick's Day parade as an opportunity not to bring the community together, or to recognise the bringing of Christianity to Ireland, but to promote a Nationalist ethos and Nationalist sentiments. By their promotion of the political ideals that they have espoused here today and on the parades which already take place, they have excluded people like me from participating or from even wanting to participate. If they were to take out the politics and the national aspirations and focus entirely on St Patrick's Christianity, many more people could and would enjoy the occasion. The quicker they put the focus on Christianity rather than on Nationalist aspirations and Nationalist politics and on rubbing our noses in the dirt, the quicker they will have that participation.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
Mr J Wilson:
I did not intend to politicise the debate or cause division during its course, nor have I attempted to do so. There is no need to. I have no discomfort - that was a good word used by my Colleague Dr Birnie - with St Patrick. I never have had, and I have no intention of having discomfort with St Patrick in the future.
I have no discomfort with St Brigid or St Bride - the name of my parish church and the townland where I was born. How could I have discomfort with that? I believe, however, that if this is to be a public holiday, the Union flag, the flag of this country, should be flown. It is as simple as that.
I thank all Members who have contributed to the debate. It has been useful and constructive. In particular, I thank those Members who have indicated that they will support the amendment, and I commend it to the House.
Mr Ford:
The motion and the debate today have highlighted the unsatisfactory situation that the day on which we celebrate our national patron saint is only partially recognised as a public holiday. There have been some examples of that in the divisions between the public sector and the private sector and in the divisions between controlled and maintained schools. Sometimes it seems that Protestant schools only get the day off when they are playing in a Schools' Cup final.
This is why it is so important that St Patrick's Day be made fully inclusive, a day which can involve every citizen. We do not need divisive debates - [Interruption]
Mr Speaker:
Order.
Mr Ford:
- any more than we need two parades in Belfast.
We need to apply some of the more positive examples that have been given during the debate, such as using the day to bring people together to celebrate their shared history. Mrs Bell and Mr ONeill gave the example of the Downpatrick parade. As Mr Kieran McCarthy said when he moved the motion, Patrick was neither a Unionist nor a Nationalist, nor was he a card-carrying member of the Alliance Party. Dr Birnie pointed out that Patrick was neither a Protestant nor a Catholic in the sense that we understand them these days. Rev Robert Coulter reminded us that Patrick was actually a Brit, born on the western shores of the adjacent island. For me, it does not really matter whether they were the shores of the Solway or the Severn, for he was an adopted Irishman.
A Member:
A blow-in.
Mr Ford:
He was indeed a blow-in, but to regard someone who has such a distinguished record and who brought Christianity to this island like that is fairly cheap.
I was very interested in Dr Ian Adamson's linking Patrick very specifically to a small area around Kells and Connor. Even though I live in the parish of Connor, it is totally irrelevant whether he herded sheep on Croagh Patrick or pigs on Slemish. Patrick was brought here as a slave. He came back bringing Christianity with him. He lived, he taught and he died here, and we need to find a way to celebrate properly all that he brought to us.
It is funny how, in a debate where people seemed to be united, quite a few divisive remarks were made. Without recalling the remarks of every Member who spoke, I thank those who gave a broad general welcome. They started with Mr McGrady, and then I lost track.
I was interested in Dr Paisley's comments. He made it clear that he supports the motion, and he respects the idea of honouring St Patrick. He complained about sectarianism and the politicisation of St Patrick's memory, and that is entirely consistent with the motion. We do not want a divisive St Patrick's Day. We want one in which the entire community can unite, because there are cultural reasons - whatever Mr Campbell and some other members of the DUP may think - for being united in this, regardless of feelings about national citizenship.
There were other expressions of support which perhaps I should gloss over, as they seemed a little thin at times. The exchange between Mr Maginness and Mr Gibson on the difference between cultural and political Irishness and the roots of Celtic Christianity was fascinating.
The fact that Mr McElduff managed to join in the debate without being heckled too much by the DUP is, perhaps, evidence of our have gone a stage further in the Assembly today.
Mr Bell made a very practical suggestion when, referring to his time as Lord Mayor of Belfast, he said that he had hoped that the Lord Mayor's parade could be rescheduled to take place on St Patrick's Day. The Assembly should suggest this to future Lord Mayors as one way of overcoming the divisions in Belfast on this issue.
We had the usual knockabout comedy from Mr Sammy Wilson. I gather that he does not like Alliance Party grammar. I do not particularly like the contorted way in which we have to phrase motions and amendments either.
I was fascinated by his session on the radio this morning. I gathered from the broadcast that he is concerned that people get drunk on St Patrick's Day. He had barely finished speaking when my telephone rang and the lady on the other end of the line went on to inform me that she was a Protestant and that she had seen people drunk on the Twelfth. In fact, I have it on good authority that some people get so drunk on the Twelfth that they have to take the thirteenth off as well. This motion does not propose that 18 March too be a holiday. [Interruption]
I have news for the DUP: people get drunk at Christmas too. Do we now have to go out and tell people that Christmas is cancelled because people get drunk and misuse a Christian celebration? Perhaps Sammy Wilson will tell the children of Northern Ireland that Santa is not coming this year because adults get drunk.
The amendment needs to be taken seriously. However, I believe that it is unnecessary because, as I understand it, St Patrick's Day is already a flag day in Northern Ireland.
Mr Speaker:
Mr Ford, please bring your remarks to a close, as the time is up.
Mr Ford:
Mr Speaker, I was given 10 minutes by your Deputy.
Mr Speaker:
These Deputies are so generous.
Mr Ford:
What is my position?
Mr Speaker:
I will give in to their generosity.
Mr Ford:
The amendment will bring division to the Chamber where there is largely unity. It is unnecessary, and it is divisive. I wonder if Ulster Unionist Members watched the rugby match at Twickenham on Saturday when the English fans, who for so long have arrogated the Union flag to themselves, finally seemed to have discovered their third of it - they were waving the St George cross.
A Member:
Will the Member give way?
Mr Ford:
No. I am afraid that I am under a time limit.
If we are looking at the issue of flags it is time that people stopped arrogating the Union flag to one section of society. We could perhaps take our third out of it and use St Patrick's flag as a unifying force instead of the two national flags, which are divisive.
I also believe that Mr Wilson is wrong and that in Scotland the Union flag and the saltire are flown beside each other on the Scottish Parliament. In Cardiff, they even fly the European flag beside the Union flag and the Welsh dragon, so some of the remarks that were made about practice in other parts of the UK are inaccurate.
I want to see a future in which we start to move away from divisions, from the "them and us" society that has been our lot for 30 years. We have "their" schools and "our" schools, "their" churches and "our" churches, "their" estates and "our" estates, and "their" clubs and "our" clubs. This motion at least gives us a chance to show that we want to get away from the idea of "their" holidays and "our" holidays. I urge the Member who moved the amendment to withdraw it in the interests of unity in the Assembly, and I urge the Assembly to support the motion.
Mr Dodds:
On a point of order, Mr Speaker.
I want to raise a point of order relating to the issue of flags. Yesterday was one of the designated flag days, and I understand that the national flag was flown from this building, but, sadly, not from Rathgael or Castle Buildings. Members will recall that on 17 January this House passed a resolution condemning the Health Minister's refusal to grant permission to fly the national flag. Assurances were given - this is my point - by the First Minister, among others, that this matter would be dealt with before the next designated flag day.
Yesterday was such a day, and Sinn Féin still refuses to fly the national flag. What can be done about this? When will the First Minister be required to tell us what he is going to do?
5.45 pm
Mr Speaker:
I give an immediate response, but I will check up. My recollection is that Sunday was the flag day and that the flag was flown. However, I am not clear that the House can make demands of Ministers. That is something that the Member and the House may wish to reflect upon, not only in respect of this matter but in respect of other matters as well. I will study what the Member has said and will respond as best I can.
Mr Dallat:
If that was a point of order, it was a very liberal one.
Mr Speaker:
I am a very liberal man.
Question put That the amendment be made.
The Assembly divided: Ayes 50; Noes 32.
Ayes
Ian Adamson, Fraser Agnew, Billy Armstrong, Roy Beggs, Billy Bell, Tom Benson, Paul Berry, Esmond Birnie, Norman Boyd, Gregory Campbell, Mervyn Carrick, Joan Carson, Wilson Clyde, Fred Cobain, Robert Coulter, Duncan Dalton, Ivan Davis, Nigel Dodds, Reg Empey, Sam Foster, Oliver Gibson, John Gorman, William Hay, David Hilditch, Derek Hussey, Billy Hutchinson, Roger Hutchinson, Gardiner Kane, Danny Kennedy, James Leslie, David McClarty, William McCrea, Alan McFarland, Michael McGimpsey, Maurice Morrow, Ian Paisley Jnr, Ian R K Paisley, Edwin Poots, Iris Robinson, Ken Robinson, Mark Robinson, Peter Robinson, George Savage, Jim Shannon, David Trimble, Denis Watson, Peter Weir, Jim Wells, Jim Wilson, Sammy Wilson.
Noes
Alex Attwood, P J Bradley, Joe Byrne, John Dallat, Arthur Doherty, Pat Doherty, Mark Durkan, Sean Farren, John Fee, Michelle Gildernew, Carmel Hanna, Joe Hendron, John Kelly, Patricia Lewsley, Alban Maginness, Seamus Mallon, Alex Maskey, Donovan McClelland, Alasdair McDonnell, Barry McElduff, Eddie McGrady, Gerry McHugh, Eugene McMenamin, Francie Molloy, Conor Murphy, Mary Nelis, Danny O'Connor, Dara O'Hagan, Eamonn ONeill, Sue Ramsey, Brid Rodgers, John Tierney.
Question accordingly agreed to.
Main Question, as amended, put and agreed to.
Resolved:
This Assembly calls on Her Majesty's Government to proclaim each year St Patrick's Day a public holiday in Northern Ireland and to add that day to the list of official flag days.
The sitting was suspended at 5.57 pm.
