St Patrick’s Day and Northern Irish Affairs

Seamus Logan Excerpts

Thursday 27th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

I thank the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) for securing this debate. I feel I must check his entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, though, to see whether he is on the board of Irish Tourism or Tourism NI. It was a marvellous tour we had of so many wonderful places in Ireland.

I want to identify with all the sentiments that the hon. Gentleman expressed. I apologise for missing the start of his speech, but I think he was referring to Michael from the Irish embassy. Would that be correct?

[Adam Jogee]

indicated assent.

[Seamus Logan]

I endorse the hon. Gentleman’s remarks and pay tribute to all the embassy staff here in London.

I rise as a proud Irishman to speak in this debate celebrating the life and legacy of the late fourth or fifth-century man we know as St Patrick. But be aware that there may have been a number of people from the so-called dark ages who might have at least contributed to the legacy we now know. There is absolutely no doubt that it was Irish monks and missionaries who throughout that period kept Christianity alive, spread the good news and taught so much to so many through early versions of what we now call universities.

The efforts of St Patrick’s disciples, maybe contemporaries, are felt to this day. Columba and Drostan had such an influence in Scotland, and my own church is named for St Drostan, while another local church celebrates Columba. Members will have heard of the book of Kells, but they may not have heard of the book of Deer—a handwritten copy of the Gospels written a little later. It is now in Cambridge University library, but it was written in the north-east of Scotland in a local village. I was raised within sight of the slopes of Slemish in County Antrim where, according to his own account, Patrick spent six years as a shepherd having been kidnapped by Irish pirates. They allegedly came from Dalriada, a Scottish kingdom ruled by the McDonnell clan.

There is much uncertainty about where Patrick was born. Was he Roman? Was he Welsh? Who knows and, to be honest, does it really matter? Patrick apparently escaped back home, and years later, now as a cleric, dreamt that the people of Ireland were calling him to return and walk among them. There are many stories about his life in Ireland. The one that always appealed to me was how he broke the law by lighting a pyre on the slopes of the Hill of Tara in County Meath—a privilege reserved to the high king of Tara at the time, as a fire on that spot could be seen for many miles and many counties across Ireland. But so impressed was said king by St Patrick that he allegedly converted on the spot.

Patrick is credited with teaching Christianity to the Irish people using the shamrock, with fasting for 40 days on top of Croagh Patrick in County Mayo, thus earning the right to judge the Irish at the end of time on the day of judgment. I think the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme may well have secured his future.

Patrick’s legacy requires little acknowledgment from me other than to credit the eloquent speeches of other hon. Members speaking today, so in my brief contribution I will recall some personal St Patrick’s day memories from the past 67 years. It was always a day on which one was released from the usual Lenten pledges, so as children we fogged the chocolate and sweets into us so hard that we almost made ourselves sick. Later, it became a day on which we would make the pilgrimage to Dublin, not necessarily for the St Patrick’s day parade but for the all-Ireland club championship finals in football and hurling, which were played at Croke Park. I am pleased to say that my own local hurling team, the Cuchullains of Dunloy, contested that final on no fewer than five occasions; an amazing feat for a small village in north Antrim.

On other occasions I attended the schools’ rugby cup final at Ravenhill—a tradition still carried on to this day on St Patrick’s day, so for me, as Father Ted would have said, that would be an ecumenical matter. There are many other memorable moments on this day, but a special one was sitting in a bar in Bariloche in Argentina listening on the radio to a live performance by my singer-songwriter daughter Aislinn at the London Irish Centre in Camden several thousand miles away.

I say to hon. Members: let us recognise and celebrate the life, legend and legacy of the man, or men, we call St Patrick—not least because it means so much to the more than half a million people who said in the last census that they were Irish and living on this island.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Allister]

I am aware that the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) is in residence at his second home. I am, however, the only Member present who represents a Northern Ireland constituency, if that satisfies the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee).

Of course, St Patrick is a very important figure historically. No doubt over the generations he has been even more greened than he ever was, but I do find it a little rich in irony that St Patrick, being a Brit, is celebrated with such enthusiasm by the Irish. I think it is important, in talking about St Patrick, to recognise and remember that his primary contribution was in bringing the Christian message: the message that fallen man needs reconciliation with God, and that can come only through the mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ. That was his essential message to Ireland and elsewhere.

It is also right, of course, that there are many intertwining relationships between the various parts of Ireland and the various parts of Great Britain. One can think of some of the standout indications of that, not least in the currency of the second world war, when the ports of Northern Ireland were so vital to the battle in the Atlantic and to defending our freedoms. Indeed, Northern Ireland welcomed the first American soldiers to be encamped, and they ran to many, many thousands in those years.

At the same time, sadly, the Republic of Ireland held to a strategy of non-involvement and neutrality. Therefore, it is always right to remember that in Great Britain’s greatest hour of need—the United Kingdom’s greatest hour of need—it was in fact the people and country of Northern Ireland who came swiftest to its aid. Whereas the Government of the Irish Republic formally, and quite shockingly, expressed regret at the death of Hitler, it was from within Northern Ireland that the contribution was made that the then Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, so generously recognised.

Of course, the relationships are multifaceted and it is easy to be cosy and sentimental about those relationships, and there is a place for that, but I do have to say to this House that there is also a dark side to the relationship, because the undoubted source for much of the initiation, conduct and carrying forward of the brutal IRA terrorist campaign of the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s was the aid and assistance given from the Republic of Ireland. Indeed, the historical records show that the Provisional IRA was first armed by those associated with the Irish Republic—even in government. Those are factors that I, representing constituents who lost family members at the hands of the IRA, cannot easily forget, and nor should we.

We talk about co-operation, and co-operation is good, but it is also a salutary fact that at the peak of those terrorist campaigns we did not have the co-operation we needed. Between 1969 and 1981 there were 81 extradition applications for wanted terrorists in respect of terrorist deeds committed in Northern Ireland—81 applications to the Dublin authorities—and only one was granted. Of course, the truth was that many of the cross-border terrorist attacks were carried out from the Irish Republic, among them the most infamous, that of the greatest loss of military life: the attack at Warrenpoint, where the bomb that killed all those Parachute Regiment and other regiment soldiers, was triggered from the Irish Republic. That was but a reflection of what happened time and again. When co-operation was sought, there might have been nice words but there was very little action, as indicated in the matter of extradition. So I think we have to inject into our reflections upon that relationship some of the cold realities that cost the lives of British citizens in Northern Ireland. That cannot not be written out of our history.

If we are to debate Northern Ireland affairs properly, it is surely impossible to ignore the incredible constitutional situation that Northern Ireland is now in: namely, that although I stand in what is called the sovereign Parliament of the United Kingdom, there are 300 areas of law pertaining to Northern Ireland in relation to which neither this Parliament nor the devolved Parliament can make the law, because those powers, covering much of our economy, have been surrendered to a foreign Parliament, the European Parliament.

In pursuit of that, we now have the obscenity of an Irish sea border, shortly to be reinforced with the insult of a parcels border. A granny cannot send her new grandchild in Northern Ireland a teddy bear without registering it through the processes of the Irish sea border. Businesses in my constituency—small engineering businesses or craft industries—depend on supplies that come by parcel from their age-long suppliers in GB, but those parcels will now be subject to the demands of the foreign EU border. Those that send them must be a member, at cost, of the trusted trader scheme; they must make a customs declaration; and they must record what is moving, where it came from and where it is going. And yet this is said to be a United Kingdom. It is a United Kingdom sadly partitioned by a border in the Irish sea.

The point I am coming to is that much of that is at the behest of the authorities in the Irish Republic. It was the Taoiseach of the Irish Republic who pushed, cajoled and forced the EU into its irrational demands. At the beginning of the protocol negotiations, the EU was prepared for—indeed, it originated the idea—mutual enforcement to control the movement of goods. Sadly, it was Taoiseach Varadkar who saw the opportunity of partitioning the United Kingdom and who insisted on the border being pushed to the Irish sea, where the IRA could never push it in its 30 years of terror. It was the Dublin Government that made those irrational demands and repudiated the very thing that made that unnecessary: namely, mutual enforcement.

So yes, there is lots of nice fuzzy sentiment about how the Irish Republic and the UK have good relations in many areas, but the reality is that there has also been a malevolence to the detriment of Northern Ireland.

[Seamus Logan]

I may be getting on a bit now, but I do not recall some of the accusations that the hon. and learned Member is making about the role of the Irish Government in the negotiations that followed the Brexit vote. Will he clarify, for the purposes of the record, whether many Unionist elected representatives, some of whom sit in this Chamber, encouraged their supporters to vote for Brexit in June 2016? Did they not?

[Jim Allister]

They did, but they did not get Brexit—that is the fundamental issue. The question on the ballot paper was, “Do you want the United Kingdom to leave?” It was not, “Do you want GB to leave and to leave Northern Ireland behind?”, but that is what we got. We were left in the single market, under their customs code. Never forget that their customs code decrees that GB is foreign—a third country—so its goods must pass through the EU border because Northern Ireland is treated as EU territory. That was not on my ballot paper, and that was not what I voted for, but that is what the last Government left us, and that is what this Government seem unprepared to do anything about, even though it is not what they brought about.

So yes, let us celebrate the international relations that we would expect between neighbours, but let us not get so bleary-eyed that we do not recognise the realities and the legacy of the history. We are talking about the wonderful relationship with the Irish Republic, but who is taking the United Kingdom to the European Court of Human Rights? It is the Government of the Irish Republic, over a legacy Act that this Government are not even pursuing. In any relationship, people look for two-way co-operation. They certainly do not look to try to exploit a situation to achieve the disassembly of part of the neighbouring country. Sadly, that is what is happening in respect of the Brexit negotiations.