Security

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Monday 23rd October 2017 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

This is the 11th written statement on the security situation in Northern Ireland since the Independent Monitoring Commission concluded its work in July 2011. It covers the threat from Northern Ireland-related terrorism, rather than from international terrorism, which Members will be aware is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who updates the House separately.

In the 10 months since my last statement, a small number of dissident republican terrorist groupings have continued their campaign of violence. They have planned attacks to murder people who work on a daily basis to serve the public. The vast majority of people in Northern Ireland have consistently demonstrated, through the democratic process, their desire for peace. They reject these groups and want a future free from violence. They recognise and value the increase in foreign direct investment, the enhanced job opportunities and the reduction in the number of victims of terror that has come about as a result of the peace process. Despite this overwhelming support for peace, dissident republican terrorists continue in their pursuit of violence.

The threat from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland remains “Severe” (an attack is highly likely). Dissident republican terrorist groups have continued to attack officers from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), prison officers and members of the armed forces. There have been four attacks so far this year. In one sickening attack a police officer was shot at a busy petrol station in Belfast and sustained life changing injuries. These attacks, endanger the public and harm communities. In Great Britain, the threat from Northern Ireland-related terrorism is “Substantial” (an attack is a strong possibility).

Violent dissident republican terrorist groupings are fluid and they change regularly for a number of reasons. Firstly, the investigative effort of PSNI and MI5 have disrupted the activity of people and groupings who want to commit acts of terror in our community. Secondly, there is a desire for power amongst the individuals involved and this leads to fallouts and fractious relationships.

There will be no let-up in our efforts to pursue these small groups.

Our strategic response

As our Northern Ireland manifesto at the general election made clear, for this Government there are no greater responsibility than the safety and security of the people of Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom as a whole. To this end we are providing £160 million of additional ring-fenced funding to support the PSNI’s work to tackle the Severe threat from terrorism during the current spending round, £25 million to tackle paramilitary activity; and a 30% real term increase in cross-Government spending on counter-terrorism.

MI5, which this month marks 10 years since it assumed responsibility from PSNI for national security intelligence, work in Northern Ireland continues to work hand in hand with PSNI, An Garda Siochana and other security partners in this task. Several dissident republican terrorist attacks have been prevented this year and PSNI have recovered a large amount of terrorist material—firearms, explosives and a range of improvised explosive devices—which has undoubtedly helped to keep communities safe.

In July, we saw the sentencing of Ciaran Maxwell, to 23 years in prison (the last five of which are to be served on license), for producing bombs and other munitions in Great Britain and Northern Ireland which were destined for use by dissident republican terrorist groups in Northern Ireland. I pay tribute to the police and other agencies in successfully bringing this case before the courts. This has undoubtedly saved lives and this significant jail sentence is an indication of the harm he posed.

As of 30 September 2017, in Northern Ireland, there have been 121 arrests and 6 individuals charged under the Terrorism Act this year. There have been four national security attacks, the same as the total number in 2016. This compares to a total of 16 attacks in 2015 and 40 in 2010. Although there has been a reduction in the number of national security incidents in recent years, terrorist attack planning continues with lethal intent and capability. Vigilance in the face of this continuing threat remains essential.

Tackling paramilitary activity

Paramilitary activity by both republican and loyalist paramilitary organisations, continues to be a blight on the communities in which they operate. So far this year there have been two paramilitary related deaths, 19 casualties of paramilitary style shootings and 57 casualties of paramilitary style assaults. Paramilitary activity was never justified in the past and cannot be justified today. These people target the most vulnerable members of their communities. The stark reality is that they are not helping but instead exerting control and fear over them. The perpetrators are criminals who use the cloak of paramilitary activity to line their own pockets and impoverish communities.

The Government are strongly supporting ongoing efforts to tackle the scourge of paramilitarism and organised crime in Northern Ireland. Through the Fresh Start agreement, of November 2015 we are providing £25 million over five years to support a Northern Ireland Executive programme of activity. This resource is being matched by the Executive, giving a total of £50 million over five years—2016 to 2021. We are working closely with Executive Departments and their statutory partners to deliver commitments set out in the Executive’s action plan on tackling paramilitary activity, criminality and organised crime, to rid society of all forms of paramilitary activity and groups. Progress on the implementation of the Executive action plan on tackling paramilitary activity, criminality and organised crime will be monitored by the independent reporting commission (IRC), which was established under the Fresh Start agreement and legally constituted in August. The IRC’s overarching objective is to promote progress towards ending paramilitary activity, support long-term peace and stability and enable stable and inclusive devolved government in Northern Ireland.

Good progress has been made during the last year. Projects and interventions have been developed to provide mentoring support for young men; to promote lawfulness among young people; and to enable more women to become involved in community development work. An indictable cases process was implemented from May 2017 with the aim of speeding up the justice system in certain serious cases often linked to paramilitary groups. In addition to this, the PSNI has made significant progress with regard to the number of arrests and seizures from those involved in organised crime linked to paramilitary groups. It is now working with the National Crime Agency and HM Revenue & Customs through a co-located, dedicated paramilitary crime taskforce.

As of 26 September 2017, investigations have resulted in just under 100 arrests and 200 searches. Sixty-six people had been charged or reported to the Public Prosecution Service. Around £450,000 worth of criminal assets were seized or restrained including over £157,000 in cash. Drugs with an estimated street value of around £230,000, guns, ammunition and pipe bombs and other goods including a Range Rover and a number of mobile food stalls were all seized.

Conclusion

Significant progress have been made, but the Severe threat from violent dissident republican terrorist groups remains and we must be vigilant to this. There are still those who wish to murder public servants and commit acts of terror. Many people still live in fear of paramilitaries. Through the excellent work of PSNI, MI5 and security partners including An Garda Siochana, we will continue to bring those who seek to cause harm in our society to justice. I would like to thank everyone who works to protect the public for their ongoing service. There never has been, and there never will be, any place for terrorism or paramilitary activity in Northern Ireland. We all must play our part in helping to rid Northern Ireland of this blight on our society, so that we can continue to build a brighter, more prosperous future and a stronger Northern Ireland for everyone.

[HCWS189]

Northern Ireland Update

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Thursday 19th October 2017 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

As Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, my overarching objective is a more secure, stable and prosperous Northern Ireland. Having a fully functioning and effective Executive, delivering for all the people of Northern Ireland is critical to meeting this objective.

Northern Ireland is currently in the midst of a period of political uncertainty. At this time there is no devolved government in place and there has not been one for 10 months. This is not what the people of Northern Ireland voted for last March. They want devolved government in place and expect their elected representatives to make decisions to deliver effective public services for all parts of the community. Moreover, they deserve to have a functioning Government and locally elected voices representing them on key issues, including Brexit.

Over the past weeks and months the Prime Minister and I have sought, working with the Irish Government in accordance with the three stranded approach, to bring the parties together to work towards an agreement.

The DUP and Sinn Féin are seeking to find agreement on the issues between them. Those remaining are small in number but highly difficult and sensitive—notably in relation to language and culture.

The outlook for an imminent resolution is not positive. Time is running out. And without an agreement, we are on a glide path to increasing intervention by the UK Government.

The Northern Ireland civil service has dealt with the lack of an Executive with the utmost professionalism to date—including in the face of Storm Ophelia. But by virtue of the legal spending limits imposed in the absence of formal budget, public services cannot be sustained without further legislation for much longer. Indeed the limits set out by the Northern Ireland Act 1998 are such that it is essential for budget legislation to be in place by no later than the end of November. Working from that deadline, the Northern Ireland civil service has assessed that it would still be possible, with political agreement among the parties in the Assembly, for an Executive formed in the week commencing 6 November to take forward its own budget.

Consequently, the last week I could introduce Executive formation legislation in Parliament for an Executive to take forward its own budget would be the week commencing 30 October.

I have made clear that I will only legislate in this way on the basis of a written agreement between the parties. If this is not forthcoming before 30 October, the only option remaining would be to legislate for a budget at Westminster. This is not a step I wish to take, nor one I would take lightly. My strong preference is for a restored Executive in Northern Ireland to take forward its own budget. Without an Executive, though, it would be grossly remiss for the UK Government not to step in and take action to ensure the continued funding of critical services in Northern Ireland.

I, the UK Government and the Irish Government want the parties to reach an agreement and restore devolved government in Northern Ireland. But my ultimate responsibility is to the people of Northern Ireland. The UK Government will do what is necessary to provide the stability required to ensure communities in Northern Ireland are not disadvantaged by the continued absence of devolved government.

Next year will be the 20th anniversary of the Belfast agreement. It behoves us all to do what we can to ensure that that historic date is not marked by an increasingly hands-on UK Government, but instead by a functioning Northern Ireland Executive.

This remains my overriding priority.

[HCWS185]

Northern Ireland Update

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Monday 9th October 2017 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

The DUP and Sinn Fein continue their discussions towards the formation of an Executive in Northern Ireland. The parties have reduced the number of issues between them—including on some aspects of language and culture—but clear differences still remain. The Government are committed to continuing to work with all the Northern Ireland parties and the Irish Government, consistent with the three-stranded approach, towards reaching agreement quickly. I have been in regular contact with party leaders and Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney and will have further meetings in Belfast this week. The Prime Minister has been actively involved throughout this process. This has included her recent meeting with the Taoiseach and discussions with the leaders of the DUP and Sinn Fein. She shares the high priority which I place on the Government being ready and willing to work tirelessly to support the restoration of the Northern Ireland devolved institutions.

It is crucial that, with this support, the parties continue to do their utmost to reach an agreement which allows them to make those decisions which are important to the people of Northern Ireland. The parties have shown leadership and the ability to look beyond their differences in the past to resolve significant challenges which have separated them. I have urged the parties to focus their remaining efforts and energies on closing the outstanding gaps swiftly to find a resolution which will pave the way for the restoration of devolved government in Northern Ireland. With the right spirit of compromise this can be achieved and now is the time to come together and reach agreement.

I stand ready to bring forward legislation to enable an Executive to be formed quickly once agreement has been reached. But the timeframe for this is not indefinite. As Secretary of State, I have a responsibility for good governance and political stability in Northern Ireland—which has now been without a full Executive for 10 months. If devolved Government is not restored in the next few weeks, I will consider carefully what steps are needed in the best interests of the people, the voluntary sector, public services and businesses in Northern Ireland. As a minimum, this would involve introducing legislation later this month to set a budget for 2017-18 putting Northern Ireland on a path towards greater UK Government intervention in its day to day affairs.

We are not at this point yet. It is in the best interests of Northern Ireland and its people to have strategic decisions taken by locally elected politicians in the interests of the whole community. That is why the Government remain resolute in their efforts with the parties to secure the outcome which a majority of Northern Ireland want and need: the restoration of devolution. Ultimately, it is for the parties to reach agreement, but Northern Ireland has come so far and I encourage the parties to keep this firmly in mind as they work towards finding that resolution.

[HCWS147]

Oral Answers to Questions

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Wednesday 13th September 2017 Commons Chamber

[Edward Argar (Charnwood) (Con)]

1. What recent assessment he has made of the political situation in Northern Ireland.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

Northern Ireland remains without a fully functioning, power-sharing devolved Government. Our clear and resolute focus is to re-establish devolved government at Stormont. Together with the Irish Government, we are continuing to support the parties’ efforts to find resolution and form an Executive. However, time is short and I urge the parties to continue to work to reach agreement.

[Edward Argar]

I thank the Secretary of State for that answer, as I thank him, as I hope would all Members, for his clear determination, commitment and hard work in the cause of seeking a return to the power-sharing devolved Administration we all wish to see. With that in mind, does he share my view that it is vital that all parties in Northern Ireland continue to approach these discussions in a spirit of compromise and co-operation, with our eyes firmly fixed on the need to secure agreement?

[James Brokenshire]

I agree with my hon. Friend on the intent that we must have and the approach to be taken. Clearly, we will do all that we can to support the parties in the days ahead. The time for action is now. I stress that we are seeing engagement between the DUP and Sinn Féin. I have been encouraged by the nature of the intensive engagement that they have shown, but agreement has not been reached. A high number of issues remain outstanding and we must focus on finding that resolution and seeing devolved government restored.

[Karin Smyth (Bristol South) (Lab)]

The Prime Minister has been making phone calls, but does she have a date in her diary to make an extended visit to Northern Ireland?

[James Brokenshire]

The hon. Lady is right; the Prime Minister has been engaged, and she spoke to the party leaders of the DUP and Sinn Féin last night and underlined the need to be constructive in discussions and to find that resolution. She will remain closely engaged and will play whatever role is needed to support and find that positive outcome.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

While it lacks its 10 political members, the Northern Ireland Policing Board remains severely constrained. Although I hope that my right hon. Friend’s efforts bear fruit, in the event that the Executive are not restored, what contingency plans does he have to enable the Policing Board to function effectively?

[James Brokenshire]

I welcome my hon. Friend to his place and to his position as Chair of the Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs. I wish him and members of that Committee positive and fruitful endeavours in their work and I look forward to giving evidence to his Committee soon. He makes an important point about the important role of the Policing Board. I am not going to speculate about other options. He highlights the significance—the importance—of the issues that are at stake, and why it is so very important to see an Executive restored.

[Nigel Dodds (Belfast North) (DUP)]

The Prime Minister has been in touch with party leaders in Northern Ireland in recent hours and she will have heard from our party leader a total commitment to restoring devolution immediately, with no red lines or preconditions, to get on with the job of dealing with health, education, jobs and investment in Northern Ireland. Can the Secretary of State indicate whether Sinn Féin continues to adhere to the view that these matters are not as important as seeking the fulfilment of partisan political demands, or whether any progress has been made on that front?

[James Brokenshire]

I welcome the statement that the right hon. Gentleman has made on behalf of his party, and indeed the comments that Arlene Foster has made about seeing that desire to get back into an Executive. I would also point to the comments of Michelle O’Neill, who has said that she believes that, while there are difficulties, a deal is still doable. I would certainly encourage the right hon. Gentleman and his party to engage in the way that they have, and encourage all parties to have that focus on seeing devolution restored.

[Nigel Dodds]

I thank the Secretary of State. Certainly we will continue to engage intensively in those political talks. Northern Ireland needs a devolved Government and it needs its Executive, not least to deal, for instance, with one of the issues on the horizon—jobs in the Bombardier plant in Belfast. I thank the Secretary of State and the Government for the work that they are doing on that already, and I urge him to remain fully committed and involved with us to ensure that those jobs are safeguarded.

[James Brokenshire]

I say to the right hon. Gentleman that there are a number of issues that would clearly benefit from having an Executive with local decision making by locally elected politicians. He highlights the issue of Bombardier. While this is a commercial matter, as he knows, the UK Government are working tirelessly to safeguard Bombardier’s operations and its highly skilled workforce in Belfast. I remain in close contact with the Business Secretary. He has had extensive engagement with Boeing, Bombardier and the Canadian and US Governments, and the right hon. Gentleman knows about the Prime Minister’s engagement, too.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

2. If he will take steps to ensure that departments of the Northern Ireland Executive are accountable and accessible to the Northern Ireland electorate.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

The people of Northern Ireland need a fully functioning Executive where strategic decisions can be made in the interests of the whole community. That is clearly in line with what they voted for in the Assembly election in March and that is the appropriate means to ensure local accountability and accessibility for all the people of Northern Ireland.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the Secretary of State for his response. We have Departments that have been rudderless since March, which is six months ago. The accountability that comes with an elected Minister is sadly lacking. If Sinn Féin continues to hold this Government and the people of Northern Ireland to ransom, will the Secretary of State step in to ensure that proper political oversight is provided for each Department, to ensure that accountability and accessibility are back on the cards, and how does he see that taking place?

[James Brokenshire]

The hon. Gentleman knows that time is running short. There is the lack of a budget in Northern Ireland and that cannot continue for much longer. The more we head into October the bigger the challenges will be. He makes a point about accountability. Obviously, as the UK Government we have a primary responsibility in respect of political stability in Northern Ireland, but I note the point he makes about responses from Departments within the Northern Ireland civil service and I will certainly raise that with David Sterling.

[Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)]

While backing British farming both on the mainland and in Northern Ireland, may I ask my right hon. Friend, in the absence of the devolved Executive, what steps he and his Department are taking to ensure that the views of local politicians are being conveyed to Bombardier, Boeing and the Government of the United States?

[James Brokenshire]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Our priority is to encourage Boeing to drop its case and seek a negotiated settlement. I note that the leaders of both the DUP and Sinn Féin have issued a joint letter to the vice-president underlining the particular circumstances and the real significance of this matter to Northern Ireland, and I would encourage everyone to play their part in seeking a resolution.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

While the Secretary of State is trying to square that circle and get the DUP back to work in the Executive, will he acknowledge the opinion of the House of Commons Library that the Brexit Bill is a power-grab from the devolved Administrations? Will the Government he is a part of be asking the DUP Members here to vote to reduce the powers of the Assembly while it is not sitting? Do the other parties elected to Stormont agree with the power-grab?

[James Brokenshire]

The hon. Lady fundamentally mischaracterises what the EU (Withdrawal) Bill is about. It is about creating UK-wide frameworks to ensure that we have a smooth transition, and I would have thought that was in the best interests of all of the United Kingdom and that everybody should get behind it.

[Chris Philp (Croydon South) (Con)]

3. What recent discussions he has had with the Irish Government on cross-border security.

--- Later in debate ---

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

4. What discussions he has had with the Taoiseach on maintaining the common travel area after the UK leaves the EU.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

The Government’s position on Northern Ireland and Ireland affirmed our commitment to maintaining the common travel area. That is supported by the EU, as confirmed in its recent paper on Ireland. I have regular discussions with the Irish Government and know that they, too, are supportive of maintaining the common travel area.

[Patrick Grady]

Does the Secretary of State acknowledge the warning from Mary McAleese—the former President of Ireland, who was born in Belfast—that maintaining the common travel area in the long term would be impossible, because it is impossible to distinguish between a UK and Irish or any other citizen who holds a CTA entitlement? Does he acknowledge her view that that would inevitably mean border checks and passport control?

[James Brokenshire]

I point the hon. Gentleman to the paper that the EU itself issued, which said:

“The continued operation of the Common Travel Area is fundamental to facilitating the interaction of people in Ireland and the United Kingdom…Continuation of the Common Travel Area arrangements, in conformity with European Union law, should be recognised.”

I encourage the hon. Gentleman to do so.

[Mr Marcus Fysh (Yeovil) (Con)]

Given that neither Ireland nor the UK is a member of the Schengen agreement, and given that security information is already shared whenever members of the public cross the Irish sea, does that not provide a framework for co-operation between north and south?

[James Brokenshire]

My hon. Friend highlights the strong co-operation between the Irish and UK Governments in respect of the common travel area. We want that to continue in the future. It has served us well over many decades, which is why our paper highlights its importance. Indeed, I think that the EU itself recognises that too.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

The Government have produced a thoughtful, imaginative and innovative position paper on the issues of movement of people and goods across the border on the event of exit. Is the Secretary of State therefore disappointed that Dublin Ministers have taken up Sinn Féin calls for a border along the Irish sea, for special status for Northern Ireland and for staying in the customs union, instead of engaging positively with the Government on the proposals?

[James Brokenshire]

The Irish Government recognise the particular challenges. We encourage all those involved to engage positively and proactively with the position paper we published to encourage further discussion. It has workable proposals and we need to get down to having a detailed discussion on them.

[Kevin Foster (Torbay) (Con)]

In his discussions with the Taoiseach, has the Secretary of State reflected on the fact that the common travel area is based on neither country being in Schengen, and that the real threat to Ireland and the UK would come from a part of mainland UK joining Schengen, for which the Scottish National party keeps arguing?

[James Brokenshire]

My hon. Friend makes a very important point about Schengen. Our common framework on the common travel area has operated since the 1920s, and the UK, the Irish Government and the EU recognise its significance. We are determined to find a positive way through, and that can be achieved.

[Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab)]

5. Whether the Government have plans to establish a Northern Ireland powerhouse; and if he will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

6. What steps he is taking to ensure good governance and political stability in Northern Ireland.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

I have pressed the parties on the urgent need to resolve the current impasse in the interests of the entire community and I believe a deal remains possible. Locally accountable government is essential for the delivery of public services, good governance and political stability in Northern Ireland.

[Bob Blackman]

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer and his patience and perseverance in restoring the Executive. How concerned is he about the lack of accountability to locally elected politicians of civil servants who are delivering public services in Northern Ireland?

[James Brokenshire]

I am concerned, because it is not right that we do not have locally elected politicians making decisions and, yes, making sure that civil servants who act to deliver those services are held accountable. That is why we need to see the restoration of the Executive at the earliest possible opportunity, serving all communities, and delivering those public services that people need.

[Lady Hermon (North Down) (Ind)]

Given that we have not had a functioning Northern Ireland Assembly for nine months, why on earth do the 90 Members of the Legislative Assembly continue to receive their full salaries and their full staffing allowance? It is an absolute scandal that that continues to be the case.

[James Brokenshire]

I certainly hear that message loud and clear. There is no direct way in which I can intervene; there is no legislation that would authorise me to do so. As I said in a speech in Cambridge on Friday, if we were to be in the situation where the UK Government have to make direct directions, that is certainly an issue that I would have to consider.

[Mr Speaker]

Having heard the hon. Gentleman regularly expostulating from his seat, it would be good to hear him on his feet. Mr Martin Docherty-Hughes.

[Martin Docherty-Hughes (West Dunbartonshire) (SNP)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. If the Secretary of State is so perturbed by a perceived lack of good governance in the province of Northern Ireland, perhaps he would like to tell his Back Benchers why he and his Government technically gave £1 billion to an unaccountable executive, led by the DUP.

[James Brokenshire]

We have recognised the case for the needs of Northern Ireland, where there has been under-investment in infrastructure and mental health issues. I am sorry if the hon. Gentleman does not acknowledge and recognise that. We firmly do, and act in the interests of all parts of the United Kingdom.

[Jo Churchill (Bury St Edmunds) (Con)]

7. What recent discussions he has had with political parties in Northern Ireland on the UK leaving the EU.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

UK Government Ministers have held a number of meetings with Northern Ireland’s political parties about EU exit. However, our priority remains restoring the Northern Ireland Executive, which will enable direct ministerial engagement on matters relating to the UK’s departure from the EU.

[Jo Churchill]

I thank the Secretary of State for his answer, but people still need food and drink. Six million cases of Baileys and other cream liqueurs are made in Ireland every year. In Northern Ireland, production crosses the border several times, as is the case for most products. What is he doing to ensure frictionless borders for our farmers and for food production, and ensure that Baileys and Guinness get here?

[James Brokenshire]

I note my hon. Friend’s focus on drinks and her preferred tipple. The agri-foods sector is a key component of the Northern Irish and, indeed, Irish economy. That is why we highlighted it in our position paper on standards with regard to the need for a frictionless border. We have set out those proposals, and we want that engagement with the EU.

[Owen Smith (Pontypridd) (Lab)]

The Brexit Secretary borrowed a phrase from the Northern Ireland peace process to describe his approach to Brexit negotiations. He called it generously constructive ambiguity, but on the issue of the Northern Irish border we do not need ambiguity. We need certainty, so will the Secretary of State provide some today. Essentially, he has three options: a hard border in Ireland; a hard border in the Irish sea; or maintaining the UK and Ireland in a customs union through political agreement. Which one does he support?

[James Brokenshire]

I encourage the hon. Gentleman to read our position paper, which sets out the proposals. We do not want a border emerging across the Irish sea. We do not want a hard border, which is why we have set out proposals on the movement of people and goods and, yes, proposals in relation to customs arrangements.

[Owen Smith]

It is precisely because I have read the Government’s paper that I ask for clarity. It has to be made plain exactly what the Government are proposing. The Secretary of State knows that a hard border, either in Northern Ireland or in the Irish sea, would be completely damaging to the Good Friday agreement and the economy of Ireland. The only answer is to maintain a customs union, and I urge him to advocate that today.

[James Brokenshire]

We have been clear about the maintenance of the common travel area, and we have set out two alternatives for the operation of customs arrangements. On the question of clarity, I would encourage the hon. Gentleman to ask for clarity from the Leader of the Opposition, who has been anything but clear about whether his party supports membership of the single market or not. I encourage him to work on his own side to deliver that clarity.

[Sir Henry Bellingham (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

8. What recent assessment he has made of the security situation in Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland Finances

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Wednesday 19th July 2017 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

When the Assembly dissolved in January, no budget had been set for the Northern Ireland Executive for the 2017-18 financial year. Since the end of March it has fallen to the Permanent Secretary of the Department of Finance to allocate funding to Northern Ireland Departments under powers provided by section 59 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

This situation has led to understandable concern and uncertainty among businesses and those relying on public services alike. Since April I have therefore worked closely with the Head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS), in conjunction with the NICS board, to keep under review how to provide ongoing assurance around the budget in the absence of an Executive.

In the first instance this led, on 24 April, to my written statement to the House setting out an indicative budget position and set of departmental allocations. This sought to enable Permanent Secretaries to plan and prepare to take more detailed decisions on cash allocations.

Disappointingly, we remain without an Executive three months on. While progress has been made in discussions between the parties, resolution has not been reached. The parties have, however, made clear that they remain committed to engaging with each other to agree a basis on which an Executive can be formed. If an agreement is reached, I will move quickly to bring forward the necessary legislation to allow an Executive to meet at the next earliest opportunity.

While it is for the Northern Ireland parties to reach an agreed way forward, the UK Government remain committed to working with them and, as appropriate, the Irish Government to secure the restoration of devolved government as quickly as possible. I will maintain close contact with party leaders and the Irish Government over the coming weeks to seek to consolidate progress and encourage continuing discussions towards a deal.

While agreement remains possible, it is clear that an Executive will not be capable of being formed before the autumn. During that time pressures will continue to build, particularly in health and education services. And so as I set out in my written statement on 11 July, I consider it necessary to provide further clarity to support Northern Ireland Permanent Secretaries in addressing those pressures, maintaining public services and continuing to uphold the commitments arising from the Stormont House and Fresh Start agreements.

With that in mind, I set out below adjusted indicative budget positions and departmental allocations for this year. These include resource and capital funding provided in the spring Budget by the Chancellor, as well as resource and capital funding expected to be available from budget transfers and updated forecasts, subject to final data and the usual HM Treasury approval processes.

The allocations do not include any of the financial support the UK Government would be prepared to make available to Northern Ireland following the agreement between the Conservative Party and the Democratic Unionist Party. This Government recognise the unique challenges faced by Northern Ireland as a result of its distinct history and geographical position. However a restored Executive will need to agree how it wishes to allocate these funds to projects within the priority areas.

As previously, the allocations in the table showed in the attachment do not reflect input from UK Government Ministers on priorities nor do they constrain the future ability of an incoming Executive to adjust its priorities. And it remains for NI civil servants to allocate cash under s59 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. It is important to acknowledge, however, that as the year progresses the scope for significant changes will become more constrained.

This statement does not replace the ultimate need for a formal budget for Northern Ireland. The exercise of s59 powers cannot be sustained indefinitely. And though the advice I have received from the Head of the NICS is that we have not yet reached that critical point, it is approaching. It should be for a new Executive to make swift decisions on its budget to make use of the spending power available to it.

At the same time we will not forget our ultimate responsibility as a Government to uphold political stability and good governance in Northern Ireland. Accordingly, I reaffirm that the UK Government remain prepared to take forward legislation at Westminster to give authority for the expenditure of Northern Ireland departments should an Executive not be restored in the autumn. If resolution continues to prove intractable beyond that point, we will take further steps to provide the necessary political decision-making in the best interests of everyone in Northern Ireland.

Attachments can be viewed online at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2017-07-19/HCWS77/.

[HCWS77]

National Security Arrangements: Northern Ireland

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Monday 17th July 2017 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

This is a summary of the main findings from the report by His Honour Brian Barker QC, the Independent Reviewer of National Security Arrangements in Northern Ireland, covering the period from June 2016 to 31 December 2016. His Honour Brian Barker concludes:

“I was appointed by the Secretary of State in May 2016. I have spent time obtaining an overview of institutions, personalities and problems. I have been fully briefed on the security situation. I received presentations from MI5 on the practical effect of co-operation and exchange of intelligence. My visits to various PSNI establishments and to MI5 left an impression of deep commitment and professionalism. Strong cross-border links continue with An Garda Siochana, resulting in effective co-operation and impressive disruption.

The aim of a more stable society, where the effect of local terrorism has a decreasing impact, seemed to have made some progress through 2016 despite a picture of continuing terrorist threat. It is clear, however, that police and prison officers face high risks both on and off duty. The context in which national security activities are performed have been described in the past as challenging, and continue to be so.

In preparing this report I have considered the current threat level, and what I have learned of events of a terrorist nature during the year. The number of shooting incidents related to the security situation for the 12 month period was 49, almost identical to that in 2015, while the number of bombing incidents, 27, was exactly half that recorded in 2015. There were six security/paramilitary related deaths in the period to December 31 2016. This was three times the number of the previous year.

The overall threat is real and enduring and broadly unchanged despite each recognisable group being somewhat disrupted and there being some relaxation of attitude in some communities. The exchange of intelligence and the evident co-operation between authorities continues to make inroads. As in recent years there have been successes and considerable effort devoted to containing and disrupting dissident groups. Nevertheless, planning and targeting continues and attacks occur. The threat from those released from custodial sentences and those given bail continue to present a challenge.

Dissident republican groupings remain interested and involved in criminality, organised crime, and money laundering. They express political purpose, either with conviction or because it is necessary so as to obscure criminality. Loyalist paramilitaries claim political allegiance, although the motivation of many is crime and control through intimidation and violence.

Throughout 2016 I met a range of stakeholders. Representatives of the Northern Ireland Policing Board (NIPB), the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland (PONI) and the Committee on Administration of Justice (CAJ) raised concerns about the use, control and reporting of covert human intelligence sources (“CHIS”) and whether, for example, any CHIS were working without PSNI knowledge. This area that has been reviewed in the past and I will review it in the coming year in light of the new Investigatory Powers Act 2016.

My meeting with the NIPB’s Independent Human Rights Advisor, Alyson Kilpatrick, fortified my predecessor’s high regard for her, and the important role she plays.

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Barra McGrory QC, briefed me on some operational problems inherent in the prosecution of alleged terrorists. The deficiencies in the administration of criminal justice and the limited progress in case management are all too obvious. Applications for disclosure in major terrorism trials and the need for appropriate balance, continue to present problems. Tightening the criminal justice system by streamlining criminal justice processes and faster committal proceedings would increase public confidence.

A topic raised by several politicians was the extent of the activities, as well as the remit, of the National Crime Agency (NCA). The NCA’s Head of Investigations informed me NCA officers in Northern Ireland can only exercise constabulary powers or undertake covert investigatory activity with the agreement of the Chief Constable. The PSNI are sighted on all operational activity. The NCA has no national security function, but is concerned with serious crime, for example child exploitation and drug smuggling, including crime carried out by paramilitary groups. In this regard it has a good working relationship with MI5.1 am satisfied these statutory provisions are adhered to.

Progress on “the past” is still at an early stage while expectations for the proper and balanced understanding of the history in relation to the legacy inquests remain high. Funding is a continuing issue.

The Assistant Chief Constable responsible for policing the marching season reported an overall sense of reduced tension compared to the previous year and the 12 July parades passed off without serious incident. I was encouraged by the dismantling in early October of the Twaddell Avenue protest camp, which had been established and ongoing since 2013.

I was impressed by the standards and commitment of senior members of MI5 and the PSNI who provided unstinting time and access. My thanks are also due to the NIO for its support.

I have measured performance in 2016 against the five key principles identified in relation to national security in Annex E to the St Andrews Agreement of October 2006. My conclusions in relation to Annex E can be viewed online at: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statements/Commons/2017-07-17/HCWS54/.”

[HCWS54]

Northern Ireland Finances

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Tuesday 11th July 2017 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

In my statement to the House on 3 July, I made it clear that the UK Government will always uphold their ultimate responsibilities for political stability and good governance in Northern Ireland. With that in mind, I have been keeping under review the financial situation in Northern Ireland absent an Executive. Having reflected on the situation, and following further advice from the head of the Northern Ireland civil service, I have concluded that it will be necessary for me to provide additional clarity ahead of the summer recess to support Northern Ireland permanent secretaries in addressing financial pressures and maintaining public services. Following the public holidays in Northern Ireland this week, I therefore, intend to lay a further written statement before the House next week with adjusted indicative budget positions and departmental allocations. This will take account of the Barnett consequentials arising from the spring Budget, and funding as may be available from budget transfers and updated forecasts.

[HCWS38]

Northern Ireland: Political Situation

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Monday 3rd July 2017 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the political situation in Northern Ireland.

As the House will recall, following the resignation of Martin McGuinness, the then Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland in January, an election took place to the Northern Ireland Assembly on 2 March. Despite intensive discussions in the three weeks following the election, the Northern Ireland parties were unable to reach agreement on the formation of a new Executive. In order to facilitate further discussions between the parties, Parliament passed legislation immediately prior to Dissolution extending the period in which an Executive could be formed until 29 June. Last Thursday—29 June—I made a statement in Belfast setting out that while differences remain between the parties, progress had been made and that it was still possible for a resolution to be achieved. I urged the parties to continue focusing their efforts on this, with the full support of the UK Government and, as appropriate, the Irish Government. In that regard, I want to recognise the contribution of the Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, and his predecessor, Charlie Flanagan.

In the past few days since the passing of the deadline, some progress has continued to be made, including on the most challenging issues, such as language, culture and identity, but gaps remain between the parties on a defined number of issues. The Government remain committed to working with the parties and the Irish Government to find a way to close these gaps quickly in order to reach an agreement that will pave the way for the restoration of devolved government. The Prime Minister has been actively involved, following on from her meeting with each of the parties, including speaking to Arlene Foster and Michelle O’Neill on Friday night. I continue to believe that a deal remains achievable, and if agreement is reached, I will bring forward legislation to enable an Executive to be formed, possibly as early as this week.

But time is short. It has been six months since a full Executive were in place to represent the people of Northern Ireland. In that time, it has been civil servants, not politicians, who have made decisions on spending. Without political direction, it has not been possible for strategic decisions to be made about priorities in areas such as education and health. This has created pressures that need to be addressed, and it has led to understandable concern and uncertainty among businesses and those relying on public services alike, as well as the community and voluntary sector. This hiatus cannot simply continue for much longer.

There is no doubt that the best outcome is for a new Executive to make those strategic decisions in the interests of all parts of the community in Northern Ireland. It should be for a new Executive to make swift decisions on their budget and make use of the considerable spending power available to them. While engagement between the parties continues and there is prospect of an agreement, it is right that those discussions remain our focus. At the same time, we will not forget our ultimate responsibility as a Government to uphold political stability and good governance in Northern Ireland.

I made a written statement in April that sought to provide clarity for those civil servants charged with allocating cash in Northern Ireland, to assist them in the discharge of their responsibilities. Some £42 million in resources flowing from the spring Budget and budget transfers from the last financial year remain unallocated, and they are intended to provide an incoming Executive with the room to decide how they should best be spent.

If we do not see resolution in the coming days, however, it will become urgent that we reflect further on whether clarity is required for Northern Ireland permanent secretaries about the allocation of those resources. In that situation we would also need to reflect carefully on how we might allocate funding made available to address immediate health and education pressures, as set out in last Monday’s statement on UK Government financial support for Northern Ireland, recognising Northern Ireland’s particular circumstances. If no agreement is reached, legislation in Westminster may then be required to give authority for the expenditure of Northern Ireland Departments through an appropriations Bill.

From my conversations with the head of the Northern Ireland civil service, I know that we have not quite reached that critical point yet. But that point is coming and the lack of a formal budget cannot be sustained indefinitely. Similarly, decisions on capital expenditure and infrastructure and public service reform in key sectors such as the health service cannot be deferred for much longer.

One area on which there is much consensus, however, is the need for greater transparency on political donations. In line with the commitment set out in the Conservative party’s Northern Ireland manifesto at the general election, I can confirm that I intend to propose legislation that will provide for the publication of all donations and loans received by Northern Ireland parties on or after 1 July 2017.

All of that reinforces further the importance of the parties coming together and reaching an agreement. It sets out, too, some of the hard choices we face if uncertainty persists. I am also conscious that, with the deadline now passed, I am under a duty to set a date for a new election. I will continue to keep that duty under review, but it seems unlikely that that would of itself resolve the current political impasse or address the ultimate need for political decision making, however we proceed.

As the Government for the whole United Kingdom, we will always govern in the interests of all those in the United Kingdom. Therefore, if resolution were to prove intractable and an Executive could not be restored, we would of course be ready to do what is needed to provide that political decision making in the best interests of Northern Ireland.

I am clear, however, that the return of inclusive, devolved government by a power-sharing Executive is what would be profoundly in the best interests of Northern Ireland, and that will remain our overriding focus in the crucial days ahead.

The UK Government will continue to govern in the interests of everyone in Northern Ireland by providing political stability and keeping an open and sustained dialogue with the parties and with the Irish Government, in accordance with the well-established three-stranded approach.

I stand ready to do what is necessary to facilitate the quick formation of an Executive once an agreement is reached, and that is where our focus should lie. I commend this statement to the House.

[Owen Smith (Pontypridd) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement and for his welcome efforts to keep me regularly updated on progress in the talks. I know that the Secretary of State, the Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, and all the parties have been working hard to try to narrow the gap on the outstanding issues, in particular on languages, culture and identity. I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State has not come here today to say that the shutters are coming down on the talks and I admire his sustained—if slightly surprising—optimism that a deal might be done this week.

People in Belfast and across Northern Ireland will have heard his contention that there remains the prospect of a deal. If that is achieved, he will enjoy the Opposition’s full support in putting in place whatever legislation is necessary to enable the Executive to reform and the Assembly to meet. But there will be legitimate frustration among many Northern Ireland citizens that fully six months after the Executive broke down, and little more than a week before the marching season reaches its apogee on 12 July, we remain at this impasse. There will also be some scepticism about the likelihood of his surmounting it in a few short days.

Hard questions must now be asked about what more the Government can do to assist the parties in moving forward. It is encouraging that the Prime Minister picked up the phone on Friday night to the leaders of the DUP and Sinn Fein. But I invite the Secretary of State, in the new spirit of free speech that seems to be abroad in the Conservative party, to agree with me that the Prime Minister could do a bit more. He could tell her to get on a plane to Belfast herself. I am sure that Arlene Foster would not mind lending the Prime Minister her plane for the weekend.

History tells us, on both sides of the House, that the direct involvement of the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach can sometimes help to bridge the divide in Northern Ireland and move things forward. It is a surprise to me that the Prime Minister continues to seem reluctant to take personal responsibility to break the deadlock. In fact, I think many in Northern Ireland would feel that the current Prime Minister has a particular duty to take some personal responsibility and get more involved because it was her decision to call an election in April that lengthened the hiatus and has taken us so close to 12 July, and her reliance on the DUP—a legitimate reliance, given the arithmetic of the House—that is being cited by other interlocutors in the talks as part of the reason for the impasse.

I agree with the Secretary of State that the hiatus simply cannot continue for much longer, but I would like to hear more from him about what he will do to resolve it. If it is not with greater hands on involvement by the Prime Minster and the Taoiseach, as I and others have suggested, does he think there is a role for a new independent—and perhaps international—chair for the talks, with fresh eyes and a new mandate? That too has been an important means of shifting things in the past.

I noted the coded warning that the Secretary of State gave, rightly, that if a way forward cannot be found, he will have to bring forward further budgetary transfers to give extra clarity and certainty to the Northern Ireland civil service. That may well be necessary and, if so, he would again enjoy our support, but I am not sure that it would provide much of a spur to the parties, because they are used to this limbo land after the last six months. I know he agrees with me that it is profoundly unsatisfactory for strategic decisions to be put off and for Northern Ireland to be in the hands of unelected civil servants, no matter how competent and well intentioned they are. An appropriations Bill may prove to be a bigger spur, but some—as the Secretary of State knows—will see that effectively as a return to direct rule. I am sure that that will be a position that he will wish to avoid and I would urge him to take all possible steps to avoid it.

I welcome the decision that the Secretary of State has taken today to legislate for publication of all political loans and donations received by parties in Northern Ireland after 1 July. That is an important step in normalising the politics of Northern Ireland, although it may strike some as ironic in the light of the recent deal with the DUP. Does he intend that the thresholds that will apply to that legislation will be the same as apply to donations and loans in the rest of the UK? Will the same requirement apply that all donors are registered voters in the UK?

Finally, I am sure the Secretary of State agrees that Northern Ireland needs its Assembly and Executive up and running as soon as possible. There is no greater illustration of that than the fact that we are now entering the Brexit negotiations in earnest. Northern Ireland effectively has no voice at that negotiating table; certainly not one that reflects all the traditions, culture and heritage of Northern Ireland. There is an absolute imperative to get the Executive back on their feet and to restore Northern Ireland’s voice. I am sure he will join me in urging all Members to urge all parties to make sure that that happens as soon as possible.

[James Brokenshire]

I certainly join the hon. Gentleman in underlining that core message. I appreciate and welcome the support he has given to the Government in trying to reach a point where agreement is concluded and we are able to move swiftly in this House. I appreciate the opportunity we have had to discuss these issues over the last few days and I will certainly maintain that dialogue with him.

The hon. Gentleman raises a number of points. He highlights the frustration of many people in Northern Ireland that no deal has been concluded thus far. A theme that I know binds us together is how we can achieve that conclusion, with an inclusive power-sharing Executive of locally elected politicians getting on and making decisions in the best interests of Northern Ireland.

The hon. Gentleman asked about the engagement of the Prime Minister. She has been involved throughout the process. She met all the leaders of the political parties in London and has maintained contact throughout this time. As I indicated, in recent days she has, as she has previously, spoken to the leaders of the two main parties. He will recognise that particular interventions may not necessarily have the desired outcome. From his previous involvement in Northern Ireland he will know of occasions that did not lead to the outcome he wished for at the time, in places such as Leeds Castle, for example. Different solutions and scenarios present themselves in different cases. A defined number of issues remain outstanding and we need to give them our focus and attention, rather than extending out and changing the whole dynamic. We will continue to keep matters under careful review. Resolution is possible if the willingness is there. It is with that urgency that we must approach the days ahead.

There is opportunity here. I spoke about the additional funding that could be available to an incoming Executive to enable them to act and to take strategic decisions. It is profoundly in Northern Ireland’s interest for locally elected politicians to do that.

I will write to the hon. Gentleman and set out further details on transparency issues relating to political donations—I think that is probably the best way to do it—and I will put a letter in the House of Commons Library. I will also introduce legislation spelling that out so that everyone will be able to see the next steps very clearly.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Mr Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con)]

Regardless of the difficulties or disagreements among the parties in Northern Ireland, should not those issues be sorted out within the Assembly and the Executive, and not in this place? Or is it the case that one party, or maybe more, is actually looking for a rewriting of the rules?

[James Brokenshire]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his continued focus on Northern Ireland, following his chairmanship of the Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs in the last Parliament. I think all parties are focused on seeking an outcome and ensuring a functioning Executive, rather than fundamental changes to the rules. That is where we should focus our attention, because as he suggested, that is where I think he realises that decision making should happen—within Northern Ireland, within the Assembly and within the Executive, acting in the best interests of Northern Ireland.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

It is disappointing to say the least that a deal has not been made and that the proper governance of Northern Ireland cannot restart. Does the Secretary of State accept that his party’s deal with the DUP makes reaching a deal more difficult? Does he consider the link between his ministerial colleague, the Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Wycombe (Mr Baker), and the Constitutional Research Council, which made the questionable Brexit donation to the DUP, to be an additional and unwelcome complication? Why did it take three years from the consultation on increasing the transparency of political donations in Northern Ireland to get to a position where the Government are now announcing that they will be introducing legislation? The murk that surrounds this whole affair at times makes it increasingly difficult to trust that there is true impartiality on the part of the Government. What can the Secretary of State do to clear up the questions around the Constitutional Research Council and its donations, and restore confidence in the Government’s impartiality?

Lastly, the devolved Administrations are supposed to be involved in the Brexit negotiations. Can the Secretary of State tell us who has been providing the input from Stormont and whether it is less or more than the input from the Scottish Government and the Welsh Government? Very lastly—[Interruption]—what representations were made to him by the Secretary of State for Scotland about the deal done between the Government and the DUP?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

Order. That is a matter of stylistic objection—or even, on the part of the right hon. Gentleman, aesthetic objection—but it cannot be said to be a matter of order.

[James Brokenshire]

It may not surprise the hon. Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Deidre Brock) to know that I do not agree with the analysis that she set out in her questions. We stand four-square by our undertakings under the Belfast agreement and its successors, and the agreement relating to decision making here at Westminster does not contravene those important elements—something that is specifically spelled out in that agreement.

The hon. Lady highlights the issue of political donations and transparency. We conducted a consultation with all the political parties in Northern Ireland to seek their views first, and that was the reason for the decision we have taken today, reflecting those views and that input and the commitment in my party’s manifesto.

The hon. Lady highlights the issue of Brexit and contact with the Northern Ireland Executive. Obviously there are not elected politicians there, so we have sought to engage with the Northern Ireland civil service within the Executive, but that takes us only so far. That is why I profoundly believe that we need to see an Executive in place, to be an additional voice for Northern Ireland, strongly making those points, and to ensure that, alongside them, we get the best possible deal for Northern Ireland through EU exit.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

And there I was thinking that the right hon. Gentleman had come up to the Chair and just muttered some prosaic pleasantry, which I readily greeted. It is very honest of him to say that he was late, but I had not known that he was, and therefore as far as I am concerned he was not.

[James Brokenshire]

Regrettably, the answer to my right hon. Friend’s question is that without an Executive in place, the devolution of corporation tax cannot happen. That underlines one of many reasons why an Executive is needed to get on and ensure that that vision of prosperity and further investment can take place, and an Executive would absolutely aid that.

[Sir Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP)]

We welcome the statement, and let me say, for the record, that the Democratic Unionist party was ready last Thursday to form a Government and to appoint our Ministers. There is no question of any reticence in our party about forming an Executive, and we have been encouraged by the Government to do so.

Will the Government proceed to publish the legacy proposals in the event that an Executive is not formed? We welcome what the Secretary of State has said about donations, but will that be extended to include donations to political parties operating in Northern Ireland that are routed via the Republic of Ireland?

[James Brokenshire]

As the right hon. Gentleman may know, our consultation about political transparency concerned the narrow elements that were contained within that, but I know that other issues and other points had been raised, including the matter to which he has referred, and they will remain under consideration. As for the legacy issue, I think there is a growing consensus that we need to get the consultation out there, and show everyone the work that has been done on the implementation of the Stormont House bodies so that we begin to see that coming into effect. I earnestly hope that we will be able to move forward, and that it will take place following the establishment of an Executive.

[Sir Hugo Swire (East Devon) (Con)]

Is not the simple truth that, whereas the Democratic Unionist party has managed to obtain £1 billion from the Treasury to spend on the people of Northern Ireland, Sinn Féin—Gerry Adams and those at Connolly House who are refusing to re-form the Executive—will be in no position to ensure that their constituents receive an equal share of that money, because there will be no Sinn Féin Minister in the Executive, and the money will be spent either by Ministers in this place or by civil servants in Northern Ireland?

[James Brokenshire]

I think the simple point is that an Executive consisting of a First Minister, a Deputy First Minister and other Ministers will be able to make decisions on budgets and all other issues throughout the community. The funds that have been outlined—to be spent on, for example, health, education, mental health, infrastructure and broadband—will be, profoundly, for everyone in Northern Ireland. All communities will benefit from those funds. I think that that underlines the need for the Executive, and the need to ensure that locally elected politicians are the ones who make the decisions.

[Vernon Coaker (Gedling) (Lab)]

We are pleased that the Secretary of State has told us that it will still be possible for the two sides in Northern Ireland to reach a deal within the next few days. He will know as well as I do that trust is imperative in the current talks. Will he explain a little more fully why he is so reluctant to try to seal that deal by asking the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach to go to Belfast and attempt to bring the parties together so that the final measures that are necessary to secure a deal can be taken?

[James Brokenshire]

I hear what the hon. Gentleman says. I stress that the Prime Minister has been actively involved throughout the process, and has been having meetings with all the party leaders. She had a further conversation with the Taoiseach last week about how matters were progressing, and received updates from me and from Simon Coveney, the Irish Foreign Minister, that were received by the Taoiseach as well. There is that continued active engagement, but if further interventions are required we will, of course, keep matters under review in order to establish what will bring about an effective resolution and produce the Executive whom the hon. Gentleman and I want to see in place.

[Sir Oliver Letwin (West Dorset) (Con)]

Of course I understand the points my right hon. Friend has made about the fact that the present situation cannot go on forever. However, one of the virtues that is required, and one of the many virtues that are involved in his arduous post, is patience. I hope he will be able to assure the House that he will be exhibiting that virtue even beyond the level of the proverbial saint, in order to put a power-sharing agreement and a new Executive in place.

[James Brokenshire]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his support, and for his indication that some patience is needed. Let me underline to him, however, that a great deal of patience has been exhibited up to now, and that there is a great deal of frustration among the public in Northern Ireland. They want services to work for them in the way that is necessary; they want to see the transformation that needs to take place in certain key services. That is why an Executive is so desperately needed at the earliest opportunity, so that we can see politics performing in the best interests of Northern Ireland. That change needs to happen.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

You know, Mr Speaker, that I do not often hanker after the days of Tony Blair, but if we had reached this state of affairs under his premiership, we would have seen not just involvement by the Prime Minister, but active leadership, and he would probably have made the statement to the House. With all due respect to the Secretary of State, it is a matter of regret that the Prime Minister is not here today.

The Secretary of State is right when he says that we need greater transparency on political donations, but he must be aware that the House has already expressed its view on that matter. The Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2014 set the relevant date as being 1 January 2014. Why is he now seeking to change that?

[James Brokenshire]

The simple point on that is that it is about compliance with the regulations and seeing that those making donations are able to make those determinations based on the law that is in existence, rather than looking at retrospection. Obviously, there will be further opportunity for the House to debate that issue. However, I think that that is the clearest way of doing it.

[Dr Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

While the political situation remains in limbo in Northern Ireland, elderly and frail British former soldiers are even now being brought before the courts on serious charges, while multiple terrorist murderers walk free, having served either derisory sentences or no sentences at all. Can the Secretary of State assure us that the Government remain focused on rectifying that inequality of treatment?

[James Brokenshire]

I know that this is an issue that my right hon. Friend and others have raised consistently in the House. I commend them for the focus they have provided. The Government remain committed to implementing the Stormont House institutions and that reform which is about fair, balanced and proportionate efforts in respect of the investigations of the past. That is what the agreement sets out clearly in applying the rule of law but, as I have said on a number of occasions in the House, I and others across Government will never tire of recognising the tireless contribution that so many in our security and armed forces made to ensure that we have peace today. Without their contribution, that simply would not have been possible.

[David Hanson (Delyn) (Lab)]

It is not easy to establish devolved government. We achieved that in 2006-07 because the Prime Minister of the day spent 80 hours in St Andrews hands-on, dealing with all parties with the Taoiseach of Ireland. That is just advice to the Secretary of State; it is not a disservice to him and his colleagues to have the Prime Minister engaged heavily.

Given the £1 billion that has been committed by the Government, could the Secretary of State assure the House that in the absence of devolved government no expenditure decisions will be taken by civil servants on priorities for the expenditure of that money?

[James Brokenshire]

There are clear needs in Northern Ireland, which is why I made the point that I did on the potential need for further clarification for the Northern Ireland civil service in respect of budgetary issues. I also underline that last week’s statement recognised the particular needs and circumstances of Northern Ireland and that there are some urgent and pressing priorities. That is why I think an Executive needs to be put into place, but clearly, in acting in Northern Ireland’s best interests, we will keep that very closely under review if it is not possible to form an Executive in the coming days.

[Vicky Ford (Chelmsford) (Con)]

I would like to ask my right hon. Friend about the situation on the border, especially regarding the Brexit negotiations. As a Member of this House who was born in Northern Ireland, I know how important it is not to go back to the hard border that I remember from my childhood. Given that both the British and EU negotiators have said that they do not wish to see a hard border, how soon can we ensure that the situation is resolved to make sure that the people of Northern Ireland know that their future is more certain?

[James Brokenshire]

As my hon. Friend will know from her experience, the issue of Northern Ireland is a priority item in the Brexit negotiations. Discussions have commenced. We continue to work on that to provide assurance on the border and other issues. As a Government, we believe that a solution can be found and that there is good will on all sides in relation to finding that solution, reaching that agreement through the common travel area and looking at the issue of the movement of goods across the border to ensure that it remains invisible and seamless. It is a clear and firm priority of the Government to achieve that.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

My party is also disappointed that the Executive have not been re-established after being brought down by Sinn Féin earlier this year, but will the Secretary of State confirm that only one party in Northern Ireland is insisting on any preconditions on the setting up of the Executive, and if those preconditions are unreasonable––including the prosecution of soldiers and policemen, the establishment of an Irish language Act which would cost tens of millions of pounds, the commitment by that party to overthrow its manifesto commitments, and a refusal to sit with Arlene Foster, who won the last election—they will amount to blackmail, and the establishment of any Executive on that basis would be fragile and could not possibly exist? Will he also confirm this to us today: has he given into Sinn Féin’s demand that there be no transparency on the funds it receives through the Irish Republic from foreign countries to its own party coffers?

[James Brokenshire]

I know that there are strong views on a number of issues. The hon. Gentleman’s party and Sinn Féin continue in discussions to find a resolution to these issues and differences, and they have even been continuing today, shortly before this sitting started. The focus needs to be on that. We must have an Executive performing in the best interests of Northern Ireland; I know the hon. Gentleman’s party has strongly indicated that it wants to see that. We will continue to support all the parties involved in this process to find that resolution, and to look beyond the differences between parties. We recognise also that the political process in Northern Ireland is very special, and that so many people have worked so hard to get us to this point. I think that the hon. Gentleman and others all want to see that progressing into the future, and to see that positive bright future for Northern Ireland across all communities.

[James Heappey (Wells) (Con)]

The additional funds committed to Northern Ireland in recent weeks continue to be wrongly labelled as money for a single party in the Province. Will the Secretary of State reaffirm that this is in fact money for the whole Province, to be spent by all parties, and that it represents a billion more reasons for political leadership to be restored at Stormont?

--- Later in debate ---

[James Brokenshire]

My hon. Friend makes a clear and important point: the funding package announced last week was firmly for the benefit of all communities, so that we see investment in infrastructure, which has not kept pace with other parts of the UK, and to deal with issues such as employment rates, which are behind those of other nations of the United Kingdom, and also to deal with reform in certain key public services. That is to the benefit of all communities in Northern Ireland. We want to see the Executive able to make decisions and feeling the real benefit of that; that provides that real potential and real opportunity which we want to see seized.

[Conor McGinn (St Helens North) (Lab)]

This crisis has meandered across six months, two elections and, as of today, two and a half missed deadlines, but I still do not get any sense of urgency from the Secretary of State. There is a time for passive observation and there is a time for intensive intervention; why will the Prime Minister not go to Belfast with the Taoiseach and find a resolution to this that we all want to see?

[James Brokenshire]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that we do want to see that resolution. Interventions have been made by the UK and Irish Governments and others seeking supportive voices to assist in the community and elsewhere to get the parties focused on seeing that bigger picture, looking beyond difference, and being able to get an Executive formed. We will use all interventions appropriately to get that outcome. That is why I make the point about the work the Prime Minister has done, the work that I have done, the work the Irish Government have done and the work the Taoiseach and Irish Foreign Minister have done, but I also agree with the hon. Gentleman that time is progressing and we do not want to see the sort of interventions I have highlighted in this statement. Time is moving on, and if we do not see resolution quickly, there will be a need to take various steps around the budget and other areas. We are still working hard to support the parties, but ultimately it is for the parties to reach that agreement, to see those divides crossed so an Executive are formed. I can assure the hon. Gentleman of the urgency, attention, time and effort that continues to be made in that regard.

[Nigel Mills (Amber Valley) (Con)]

As the only Member on this side of the Chamber who voted for transparency of donations three years ago, I welcome my right hon. Friend’s decision to bring that forward. In relation to resolving the impasse, can he confirm that the £1 billion announced last week will be sufficient, and that there will be no need for more money from Westminster to get this deal over the line?

[James Brokenshire]

The funds that were announced last week should provide a sense of opportunity and potential for issues that are clearly of relevance to Northern Ireland, such as the lack of transport infrastructure compared with other parts of the United Kingdom and the digital and broadband issue, which has lagged behind other parts of the United Kingdom. The funds should give a sense of incentive and opportunity for an Executive to deliver and get on with so many of the things they want to see.

[Mr Dennis Skinner (Bolsover) (Lab)]

Is the Minister aware that this impasse in Northern Ireland has been complicated by the fact that the result of the general election has meant the Government getting involved in a protection money racketing system of about £1 billion? As a suggestion, may I say that the only way to get rid of that is for the Prime Minister to call another general election? We know that she is frightened to death of doing it, because she knows that the Labour party would win. We would form a Government and get rid of this almighty mess. There would be no protection racket money, and we would have a decent Labour Government that would get rid of austerity. Get on with it!

[James Brokenshire]

It sounds as though the hon. Gentleman has still not recognised the result of the last election. The House will be interested in his comments, but I do not think that they will make a difference to solving the real problems that we are wrestling with in Northern Ireland.

[Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) (PC)]

If the impasse is not broken, and if direct rule is imposed, can the Joint Ministerial Committee on EU Negotiations perform its role without the participation of one of the constituent parts of the British state?

[James Brokenshire]

As I have already indicated in my statement, we are firmly not looking at interventions that even get close to the point that the hon. Gentleman alludes to. It would profoundly not be in Northern Ireland’s best interests to head down that way, which is why I have made my points about the Executive. The best way to address his point is to have an Executive in place with a First Minister and Deputy First Minister who are able to represent Northern Ireland and argue firmly in Northern Ireland’s best interests on Brexit and many other issues.

[Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West) (Lab)]

This is an unusual Parliament, in that, because of the loss of Social Democratic and Labour party seats and the unwelcome continuing refusal of Sinn Féin Members to take their seats in this Chamber, there is no representation here of Irish nationalist opinion from the island of Ireland for the first time in many decades. Given what the Secretary of State has said in his statement about the possibility of having to introduce legislation in the near future, how will he ensure that that strain of opinion from Northern Ireland is fully taken into account in any consideration of that legislation?

[James Brokenshire]

I am certainly conscious, in my role as Secretary of State, of listening to voices from all parts of the community. Obviously the voices of the nationalist community are no longer represented in this House, and I will therefore continue to engage intensively with all parties in Northern Ireland. I will continue to listen and to hear the specific points that they make, and I will ensure that that is reflected in my own considerations and those of the Government more broadly as we look at the legislative programme ahead.

[Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP)]

The Secretary of State will know my utter commitment to devolution, but at some point there has to be a realisation that the parrot could possibly be dead, that it is deceased of life, that it is no more. If that is the case with devolution, will the Secretary of State put a timeframe on the life expectancy that is ultimately left in this dead bird? Will appropriations be moved before the summer recess?

--- Later in debate ---

[James Brokenshire]

The head of the Northern Ireland civil service has indicated that we have not yet reached the point at which an appropriation Bill needs to be passed. We are still a little way away from that. None the less, urgent issues need to be addressed about the financial position in Northern Ireland, which is why I made points in my statement about the potential need for further assurance to be granted. I firmly think that there is still life there, and the engagement that we continue to see underlines that. Having locally elected politicians serving the community in Northern Ireland is profoundly what is in Northern Ireland’s best interests. I know that the hon. Gentleman strongly believes in that, and the Government will certainly not be giving up on it. We are working tirelessly to ensure that we see reconciliation and the outcome that he and I know is what Northern Ireland needs. With the efforts that continue to be made, I earnestly hope that we will see that progress and see the implementation of a power-sharing Executive in a very short time.

Oral Answers to Questions

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Wednesday 28th June 2017 Commons Chamber

[Jeff Smith (Manchester, Withington) (Lab)]

5. What steps the Government are taking to comply with the requirement for rigorous impartiality set out in the Belfast agreement.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

The Government remain steadfast in our commitment to the Belfast agreement and its successors. We will continue to govern in the interests of all parts of the community and to work in partnership with the Irish Government, in accordance with the well-established three-stranded approach, as we have done for the past seven years.

[Kate Hollern]

In the past few days, the deal with the Democratic Unionist party has been described as grubby, dangerous and desperate. Obviously, the situation in Northern Ireland is at a very sensitive point. Can the Secretary of State outline in a clear and cohesive way the steps that his Government are taking to ensure impartiality?

[James Brokenshire]

I say at the outset that I do not recognise the characterisation that the hon. Lady has given the agreement, which is about providing stability here for the UK Government and governing in the best interests of all parts of the UK. But in response to her important question about the Belfast agreement and its successors, I say to her that the Government remain steadfast in their commitment to those agreements and we continue to work with all parties, as I have done over recent days and will continue to do, so that the Government act in the best interests of all parts of Northern Ireland and continue to listen to the concerns of all parts of the community.

[Jeff Smith]

Over the past few days, a lot has been made about the extra money for infrastructure spending. What assurances can the Secretary of State give that that extra funding will be spent across all communities in Northern Ireland, especially the rural communities in the west? What can he do to help make sure that that happens?

[James Brokenshire]

The additional funding that has been outlined is for an inclusive Executive to be able to utilise those funds in the best interests of Northern Ireland. That is the most powerful, effective way to deliver on that. That is why I have been using all my time, energy and efforts to see that the Executive are restored. That is absolutely the best way to ensure that the points that the hon. Gentleman rightly makes are seen.

[Mr Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con)]

Is it not the case that in September 2015 there was a crisis in the institutions in Northern Ireland—long before any deal between the Conservative party and the DUP was struck? Is it not also the case that this particular crisis started long before any deal between the Conservative party and the DUP was struck?

[James Brokenshire]

My hon. Friend highlights the challenges that we have in seeing the Executive restored and the challenges that have emerged over the course of this year. He is right: it is so important that we focus on that task at hand and see that the time available is used so that the Executive are restored and perform in the best interests of Northern Ireland and all communities across Northern Ireland.

[Sir Hugo Swire (East Devon) (Con)]

Surely the point is that, given the additional funding for Northern Ireland, the imperative will be on the Executive to reform and deliver for all people there, and to kick-start more private industry there to make the people of Northern Ireland less dependent on the state and to get better receipts back to the UK Treasury.

[James Brokenshire]

I entirely agree with my right hon. Friend, who makes such an important point about the real opportunity that there is for Northern Ireland. We want to see jobs, growth and prosperity—to see investment in infrastructure and that enterprise-driven economy. There is that opportunity here, and we as a Government want it to be seized and to see Northern Ireland continue to move forward.

[Nigel Dodds (Belfast North) (DUP)]

I wish the Secretary of State well in his efforts in the coming days to restore the Executive to Northern Ireland. For our part, we are absolutely committed to getting the Executive up and running again. We did not collapse the Executive and we are not setting any red lines or preconditions for a reformation. Will he be assured that our focus is on ensuring that money for infrastructure, health, education and the rest of it is spent equally and fairly across Northern Ireland, as has been our record in office over the past 10 years in the Northern Ireland Executive?

[James Brokenshire]

I very much welcome the right hon. Gentleman’s statement of his party’s determination to see an Executive restored and, equally, that funds made available are seen across the whole community. This is about infrastructure, including investment in the digital infrastructure that provides the mechanism for prosperity to continue to grow in Northern Ireland.

[Nigel Dodds]

On the issue of rigorous impartiality, of course we are committed to the agreements that we have entered into, as are Her Majesty’s Government. I particularly welcome the statement in the policy agreement that

“the Conservative Party will never be neutral in expressing its support for the Union”,

and that it

“will never countenance any constitutional arrangements that are incompatible with the consent principle.”

We are united on the great principle that we want to strengthen the United Kingdom, and the Secretary of State will have our full support in measures to achieve that.

[James Brokenshire]

The right hon. Gentleman is right that we will never be neutral in our support for the Union. The Government are proud to take that approach. Equally, we uphold the principles of those agreements, particularly the principle of consent, which has underlined and underpinned the activities of Governments over so many years. It is about the rightful balance between support for the Union and, equally, upholding the principle of consent.

[Mr John Baron (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)]

12. I have seen the troubles at first hand, so I know that the peace process has been integral to progress since then. I very much welcome the agreement with our friends in the Democratic Unionist party, but what more can the Government do to reassure all the people of Northern Ireland that the agreement will not jeopardise this process? That is the chief concern at the moment.

[James Brokenshire]

My hon. Friend makes a powerful and important point. This agreement underlines our steadfast commitment to the Belfast agreement and its successors. Indeed, I have been working with all major parties in the Executive in recent days to see the restoration of that Executive—one of the key bodies under the Good Friday agreement. That remains such an important outcome to achieve.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

It is clear that other parties in Northern Ireland have serious concerns about the Good Friday agreement as a result of the deal that the UK Government have done with the DUP. What guarantees can the Secretary of State offer that the confidence and supply agreement does not threaten the impartiality of the UK Government? What assurances can he give us that the Prime Minister’s reliance on DUP votes to remain in power does not compromise his position? Finally, given the sword of Damocles clause—offering support on a case-by-case basis— how can any of us be sure that the UK Government will not be compromised when it suits the DUP?

[James Brokenshire]

The agreement relates to what happens here at Westminster. I am not part of those discussions or the envisaged committee, but there are important reasons for the role I play in Northern Ireland. The hon. Lady makes various assertions and characterisations. It is worth underlining that I have been working closely with the Irish Government in recent days as part of the restoration of the Executive, and they noted in their response that they welcomed the British Government’s commitment to

“govern in the interests of all parts of the community in Northern Ireland.”

That principle will guide our actions.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

Notwithstanding the commitment to parity in the Good Friday agreement, does my right hon. Friend agree that the military covenant needs to be applied throughout the country, regardless of where servicemen and women live?

[James Brokenshire]

I do uphold the military covenant. The Conservative party has made great strides in rolling it out across the UK, and the Government remain committed to that. We will work with the Executive and all the parties so that the benefit of the military covenant is felt in all parts of the UK.

[Owen Smith (Pontypridd) (Lab)]

May I begin by paying tribute to Northern Ireland Members from all parties who lost their seats at the election? I pay particular tribute to Mark Durkan, who served this Parliament and Northern Irish politics with such distinction for so long. I also welcome all new Members from Northern Ireland to the House.

I do not doubt for a minute the good faith of the Secretary of State, and I wish him well in trying to bring about the power-sharing Executive, but he must acknowledge that his desire to look impartial has been compromised by the arrangements with the DUP. I would like to know what advice he gave the Prime Minister. Did he tell her that she was making his life that much harder?

[James Brokenshire]

May I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his place? I know the role that he has played previously in Northern Ireland, and I welcome his experience on to the Labour Front Bench. I join him in recognising those who served previously in the House. I pay tribute to his predecessor, Dave Anderson, for the very constructive approach that he took. I would also like to recognise my colleague Kris Hopkins, who, as my Minister, played an extraordinary role. I also recognise my colleague Lord Dunlop.

The hon. Gentleman makes the point about Mark Durkan—another colleague who has served in the House—and it is notable that Mark Durkan is reported as saying that there is nothing in the Good Friday agreement that prevents agreements between parties in Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Ireland or the UK Government. It is the principles of those agreements that we continue to uphold in the actions that we take, and we see nothing inconsistent with the agreement that was reached this week in terms of our actions and the role that we play in Northern Ireland.

[Owen Smith]

I acknowledge all the points the Secretary of State has just made, but he knows from his experience and mine that trust is absolutely vital in Northern Ireland, and there is a danger that that trust between parties and in the Governments will be eroded over time if one party is seen as having the ear of the Government. Transparency is the key to avoiding that, so can he commit that, in addition to being transparent in the initial agreement, all subsequent agreements and all the minutes of the DUP-Tory co-ordination committee will be published so we know exactly what is going on?

[James Brokenshire]

This issue of impartiality, and the principle of working across all communities and with fairness to all communities, is one that we steadfastly uphold. That is why I will continue to work and engage with all parties and, indeed, community groups and sectors across Northern Ireland in the role that I uphold. I think the hon. Gentleman has seen from the actions that we have taken in publishing the confidence and supply agreement and the financial statement that sits alongside it that that transparency has been provided.

[Mr William Wragg (Hazel Grove) (Con)]

2. What progress has been made on discussions on power sharing in Northern Ireland.

[Victoria Prentis (Banbury) (Con)]

10. What progress has been made on power-sharing arrangements in Northern Ireland.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

The overriding priority for the UK Government in Northern Ireland remains the restoration of devolved power-sharing government in Stormont. The UK Government are working with the main Northern Ireland parties and, in accordance with the well-established three-stranded approach, the Irish Government to restore a fully functioning inclusive Executive and Assembly. But time is short. I would urge all concerned to use the narrow window that remains to look beyond their differences and to see that an Executive is formed.

[Mr Wragg]

Like many Members, I have been assisting constituents who are former members of Her Majesty’s armed forces and who served in Northern Ireland with distinction during the troubles. Will my right hon. Friend tell the House the extent to which disagreement over reforming the unfair legacy case process is a sticking point in restoring power sharing?

[James Brokenshire]

I think that there is a growing consensus that the next stage needs to be the publication of a consultation around the Stormont House agreement bodies, which are founded on the principle of fairness and proportionality, and it is that that has come through from the discussions that we have had.

[Victoria Prentis]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that any return to direct rule in Northern Ireland would be a huge backward step and that devolution is really the only good way forward?

[James Brokenshire]

I do agree with the comments of my hon. Friend. An Executive—an inclusive Executive—acting in the best interests of Northern Ireland is profoundly what Northern Ireland needs and what the people voted for, and that is where our focus must lie.

[Emma Little Pengelly (Belfast South) (DUP)]

The Secretary of State will be aware that the armed forces covenant has been the subject of talks in Northern Ireland because of the lack of full implementation. Does he agree that the party blocking that implementation talks a lot about rights and respect? It needs to do the right thing and stop being a barrier to the support that the veterans in Northern Ireland need.

[James Brokenshire]

May I welcome the hon. Lady to her position? I am sure that the experience she has—over legacy, and over so many parts of Northern Ireland—will enrich the debate in the House.

We obviously stand by our commitments in relation to the military covenant—wanting to see that felt in all parts of the UK—and we look forward to working with all parties and all communities across Northern Ireland and the UK to see that that happens.

[Lady Hermon (North Down) (Ind)]

Will the Secretary of State confirm that the vast majority of the public in Northern Ireland are very interested to see who actually pays and funds the political parties in Northern Ireland? As part of his ongoing discussions, will he therefore have the courage of his convictions and make sure that there is an end to the anonymity of political donations in Northern Ireland?

[James Brokenshire]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for making that point, which she has made on a number of occasions in the House. I think she will have seen the commitment in my party’s manifesto over the transparency of political donations. I look forward to moving ahead and seeing that that is actually implemented.

[Mrs Sheryll Murray (South East Cornwall) (Con)]

13. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that the disgraceful treatment of my constituent, Major Dennis Hutchings, and other ex-service personnel will continue to be an important element of his discussions?

[James Brokenshire]

I recognise the way in which my hon. Friend has championed the cause of her constituent. I know she will appreciate that there are legal proceedings outstanding that mean that I cannot comment in detail, but I hope she appreciates the Government’s desire to see fair, balanced and proportionate mechanisms put in place for dealing with the issues of the past.

[Stephen Pound (Ealing North) (Lab)]

May I associate myself with the generous comments the Secretary of State made about Kris Hopkins, who is a good and decent man? I welcome the Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Norwich North (Chloe Smith), my seventh opponent, to the Government Dispatch Box. Unlike all her predecessors, she lacks a little close combat experience, except, of course, from her time in the Whips Office.

We all hope that there is a re-establishment of the Executive tomorrow, but should that not happen, Ministers must obviously be undertaking some contingency planning. What structures would they like to see in place to ensure impartiality in the disbursement of the additional money?

[James Brokenshire]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind comments about Kris Hopkins, who served in the House with distinction, including in the role that he played in the Northern Ireland Office.

I hope the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that our focus is on seeing that an Executive is restored. I have been clear on not wanting to pre-empt what may happen should that not be the case. Obviously, there would be profound and serious implications in that context. I can assure him that we will work with all parties, and indeed have discussions with his party and others across the House, to see that these issues are considered very carefully, but our focus—

[Mr Speaker]

I am very grateful. Mr Ranil Jayawardena.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stuart C. McDonald (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)]

4. What assessment he has made of the implications of exiting the EU for the free movement of people between Northern Ireland and the (a) Republic of Ireland and (b) rest of the UK.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

The Government want to protect the ability to move freely between the UK and Ireland, which is an essential part of economic integration and daily community life. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister confirmed in this House last November, there will be no change, alteration or impediment to movement within the UK.

[Stuart C. McDonald]

The simplest way to ensure that free movement continues unimpeded across these islands is to accept that there will in reality be no increased border checks or in-country controls on EU nationals after Brexit—any controls occurring in-country. That is what the Home Secretary has previously suggested. Will the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland confirm that that remains the Government’s thinking?

[James Brokenshire]

We want to maintain the common travel area, which has served us so well over so many decades. Equally, we want to work with the Irish Government to ensure that the external border is upheld and strengthened. That remains our focus.

[Gareth Johnson (Dartford) (Con)]

6. What steps he is taking to ensure that there is no hard border with the Republic of Ireland after the UK leaves the EU.

--- Later in debate ---

[Patricia Gibson (North Ayrshire and Arran) (SNP)]

9. What assessment he has made of the potential effect on the peace process of an agreement on confidence and supply between the Government and the Democratic Unionist party.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

This agreement provides stability at a vital time for our country and is in the interests of all of the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland. It in no way changes the UK Government’s commitment to the Belfast agreement and its successors.

[Alison Thewliss]

We are now in the slightly odd position that each DUP Member is worth more than Ronaldo: I do not know what that says about their footballing skills. Does the Secretary of State agree with Jonathan Powell that it is now impossible for the UK Government to be even-handed in Northern Ireland?

[James Brokenshire]

No, I do not.

[Patricia Gibson]

Can the Secretary of State not see that the UK Government’s credibility with the other constituent parts of the United Kingdom has been destroyed following the £1.5 billion bribe for Northern Ireland, subverting the Barnett rules, as the price of staying in office?

[James Brokenshire]

No, I cannot.

[Jo Churchill (Bury St Edmunds) (Con)]

14. Will the Minister join me in welcoming the Government’s commitment to use our high commissions and embassies to promote Northern Ireland as a place to do business, to ensure that Northern Ireland is fully included in any UK-wide initiative to boost exports and prosperity?

[James Brokenshire]

I strongly support the point that my hon. Friend makes. Northern Ireland is a great place to do business and as a Government we will continue to support that in all ways that we can—and in all other parts of the UK.

Government’s Legislative Programme (Northern Ireland) 2017-19

James Brokenshire Excerpts

Thursday 22nd June 2017 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (James Brokenshire)]

The Government’s legislative programme for the first Session was outlined by Her Majesty on Wednesday 21 June. The legislative programme will deliver legislation required in relation to exiting the European Union, in addition to delivering on important domestic policy.

The following Bills contained in the programme are likely to extend to Northern Ireland in whole or in part:

Agriculture Bill (Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs)

Armed Forces (Flexible Working) Bill (Ministry of Defence)

Automated and Electric Vehicles Bill (Department for Transport)

Courts Bill (Ministry of Justice)

Customs Bill (HM Treasury)

Data Protection Bill (Department for Culture Media and Sport)

EU Approvals Bill (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)

Financial Guidance and Claims Bill (Department for Work and Pensions)

Fisheries Bill (Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs)

Immigration Bill (Home Office)

International Sanctions Bill (Foreign and Commonwealth Office)

National Insurance Contributions Bill (HM Treasury)

Nuclear Safeguards Bill (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)

Repeal Bill (Department for Exiting the European Union)

Space Industry Bill (Department for Transport)

Trade Bill (Department for International Trade)

Travel Protection Bill (Department for Transport)

There are currently no plans for the provisions in the following Bills and draft Bills to extend to Northern Ireland:

Civil Liability Bill (Ministry of Justice)

Draft Domestic Violence and Abuse Bill (Home Office)

Draft Patient Safety Bill (Department of Health)

Draft Tenants’ Fees Bill (Department for Communities and Local Government)

Goods Mortgages Bill (Law Commission)

Smart Meter Bill (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)

Although the High Speed Rail (West Midlands—Crewe) Bill sets out the route of the railway from the West Midlands to Crewe, its provision may have consequential effects relevant to Northern Ireland.

The programme will also include three Finance Bills to implement budget policy decisions, which will apply to Northern Ireland.

The Government will continue to work with all of the parties in Northern Ireland to support the return of devolved Government. We will also work constructively with Northern Ireland Departments Bills as part of the process of securing legislative consent motions where appropriate.

[HCWS5]