SAOIRSE32

NEWSHOUND

Brian Feeney, Irish News
December 14, 2006

Among all the other criminal offences reported last week, two received substantial publicity – a rape in Woodvale Park and on a much more mundane level the vandalised parking meters in the Sandy Row no-go area for traffic wardens.

You can bet your life that if either or both of these offences were reported in north or west Belfast or in Derry the meedja would have sought out some ‘hapless’ Sinn Féin councillor, not to hear condemnation of the crimes but to ask why Sinn Féin doesn’t support the police and if Sinn Féin would tell anyone who knew anything about the events to give their information to the police.

In this line of questioning the north’s unionist-dominated meedja unquestioningly follow the unionist line and avoid the real issue.

Unionists like to claim, as they have always claimed, that they are the ‘law-abiding community’, as if nationalists are a kind of sub-species who enjoy criminality and endorse lawlessness.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact northern nationalists have always wanted but never enjoyed, proper policing.

The quest for properly accountable policing is the real issue, not whether you can find someone in SF to support the PSNI.

The simple fact is that if all elected Sinn Féin members lined up at Stormont and chorused their support for the PSNI and urged all their constituents to tell the police anything they knew about crimes it wouldn’t make a blind bit of difference.

It’s taken for granted that all unionists support the police. Does that mean all their constituents report what they know to the police? Of course not.

Are unionists any more law-abiding than nationalists? Of course not. Did the people of Sandy Row provide evidence to the police about who sliced off the parking meter coin-holders in their district? Not a chance.

Furthermore, we had a unionist councillor trying to tell us that it hadn’t happened, that the DoE had removed the meters at the request of local traders.

Did he call on his constituents to pass information to the police?

Not a bit of it. Was he asked? Natatall.

Are we really supposed to believe that crime in nationalist areas would plummet if SF announced their support for the police?

Is there anyone who does not realise that this demand, dutifully put to SF by the meedja on every possible occasion, is the DUP’s demand, a demand concocted simply and solely to postpone the evil day when they have to share power with SF?

For some reason no-one puts to the DUP this question – Is it their policy to share power with nationalists and if not, when will it become so?

Instead, the DUP is allowed to hide behind the false pretext of demanding support for policing, which is nothing other than the traditional unionist demand since Norn Iron was invented.

Sinn Féin have made a mess of their response to this demand.

Their demand is that justice and policing be devolved. They need to explain why this must be so.

All they’ve said is that they want an end to political policing. What they need to spell out repeatedly is the following.

Policing in the north was created by and for unionists. Policing always belonged to unionists because they believed the very existence of their northern state depended on a police force created to defend it.

Nationalists knew that the RUC would treat any nationalist protest like an insurrection and would attack nationalist communities at the drop of a hat as they did on many occasions with the help of the B Specials and later the RUC Reserve. OK. That’s over.

Now, in order to ensure all that can never happen again, nationalists have to run a ministry in the north which is in charge of policing and justice. That’s why Ian Og will not be the minister for police and justice. It’s quite elementary.

If nationalists are to share in running the northern state, they have to participate in running the police so that they are seen to be their police and not just a re-structured unionist police.

It’s an essential condition and SF are quite right to make it a deal-breaker.

________________

This article appeared first in the December 13, 2006 edition of the Irish News.

BN.ie

13/12/2006 - 14:03:00

Plans for an Irish Language Act will outrage the “vast majority” of people in the North, Democratic Unionists warned the British prime minister Tony Blair today.

Mr Blair said the proposals were only at consultation stage and insisted that nobody would be forced to speak Irish under any such legislation.

The exchanges in the British parliament came after Blair’s government published a document setting out possible approaches to the legislation.

An Irish Language Act was part of the deal agreed at the St Andrews talks and would put the language on an equal footing with English.

The British government is consulting on the plans - which reflect on the experience of the Republic and also Wales - until March 2.

However, the DUP’s Iris Robinson said the measures would “outrage the vast majority of people in Northern Ireland”.

She asked Blair: “Would you confirm that in the event of devolution it would be entirely for the Assembly to determined whether such a Bill would proceed and in what terms?”

Mr Blair replied: “I can assure that nobody is going to be forced under the provisions of any such Bill to speak the Irish language. Of course not.”

He added: “In relation to the consultation document that has been put out, we will obviously wait for responses.

“But the sooner it is possible, of course, to get devolution up and running again the easier it will be for these decision to be taken where, I am sure, the people of Northern Ireland would wish them to be taken.”

BN.ie

13/12/2006 - 16:19:33

Plans to retain search, arrest and entry powers for British troops in the North despite the improved security situation came under fire in the British parliament today.

Northern Secretary Peter Hain said from August next year the military would take on a “fundamentally different” role in the province and routine military support for the police would cease.

But he said soldiers would remain available for “certain specialised tasks” in support of the police, to maintain public order and carry out searches.

Opening second reading of the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill, Mr Hain said: “The Bill provides these powers. It creates powers of entry, search, arrest and seizure necessary for the military to carry out their role effectively.”

SDLP leader Mark Durkan warned, however, that the measure was “pregnant with implications and potential complications” for the devolution of policing and justice.

“These powers were previously contained in the Terrorism Act 2000. The British government made commitments to repeal those provisions.

“This Bill effectively recycles the very powers the Government had previously committed to repeal,” he protested.

Mr Hain said only eight of the 48 provisions in the previous legislation had been put in the Bill and the vast majority had lapsed.

The powers were the “minimum necessary” to manage parades, tackle organised crime and terrorism and other outbreaks of violence.

They would be reviewed each year and repealed when judged to be no longer necessary.

The SDLP’s Eddie McGrady said the move potentially created a “hugely difficult political situation” as the actions of the army would not be subject to the same scrutiny as the police.

Mr Hain said the objective was not to have the army involved at all. But where they were, in “isolated” incidents, it would be in support of the police.

The Bill also moves towards a presumption of trial by jury with stronger safeguards for juror anonymity.

Mr Hain said the process towards devolution had been a “long and difficult road” but he was confident the “remaining obstacles” could be negotiated before “journey’s end” next March.

“This Bill helps Northern Ireland further along that road to normality. It puts arrangements in place that are designed for the Northern Ireland of the 21st century, not the Northern Ireland of the 1970s.”

For many years trial by jury was not possible because the North was in the grip of a “nightmare of paramilitary terror on a massive scale”.

The Borth had now “moved forward enough to enable a return to a presumption for jury trial in all cases, even those that would currently be heard before a Diplock court”, said Hain.

Mr Hain said that although the paramilitary threat had greatly reduced it had not gone away completely and there was still a risk of “perverse verdicts - either by intimidation or by ’stacking’ a jury to influence its decision”.

To minimise the risk the jury system would be reformed with restrictions on the disclosure of personal information about jurors, better routine checks to identify disqualified jurors and better use of screening of jurors from the public gallery.

He said there would still be “exceptional cases” where the risk of “paramilitary and community based pressures” meant a case could not be tried before a jury but the approach to these would be radically changed.

“The decision to move to a non-jury trial will be made by the DPP for Northern Ireland in future.”

He will be required to apply a defined statutory test. Non-jury trial would only be possible where there was a risk to the administration of justice.

“There has been a downward trend in the number of Diplock trials and we want to get to a point where there are no cases at all that must be heard without a jury. However, it would not be appropriate to remove that option entirely.”

Mr Hain said considerable progress had been made in “normalising” security in the North with most routine patrolling by troops now ceased and military bases and installations being closed.

Shadow Northern Secretary David Lidington said he supported the extension of particular powers for the military in the light of the remaining terrorist threat.

He told MPs the most recent summary of the Independent Monitoring Commission said that the IRA was no longer involved in terrorism and it had disbanded some of its structures.

But he warned there were “continuing threats” from other terrorist groups “which, in my view, do justify the retention of certain special powers for the limited circumstances that the Secretary of State has described”.

The IMC said the Real IRA remained “active and dangerous” and on the loyalist side the UDA was involved in violence and crime while the UVF was “active, violent and ruthless”.

He said: “I think in the context set out by the IMC that the House has to assess the need for changes in the law.”

Mr Lidington said he accepted arguments from the Government that there was still “a need for judge only trials to counter the risk of the intimidation and subversion of the jury system”.

He added that he was “predisposed” to the view that a single judge should hear cases where juries were not present rather than three.

Labour former Northern Secretary Paul Murphy said the Bill extended the normalisation process and “hit the right note” in ending most Diplock courts.

However, he argued that jury intimidation would necessitate some trials without them.

Liberal Democrat spokesman Lembit Opik said his party agreed with much of the legislation but it could do a lot more to ensure jury trial became the norm in the North rather than the exception.

Another concern was the “vagueness” of the language in relation to the certificates issue.

This put a “considerable onus” on the Director of Public Prosecutions on whether to use a jury.

Mr Opik said Lib Dems would oppose third reading unless ministers dropped the bar on appeals against decisions to hold jury-free trials.

Mr Durkan attacked the Bill for allowing Diplock courts - in which judges sit without a jury - to remain.

“Diplock courts remain unjust and with this legislation Diplock courts will remain,” he said.

He warned: “The decision as to whether a trial goes to a Diplock court will be taken by the DPP with absolutely no check or challenge available in a court or by a court.”

Mr Durkan said that was a “significant change” from what ministers promised before.

“It is continuity Diplock that is now provided for in this legislation and really what we’re having is the abnormal relations are now being normalised.”

BN.ie

13/12/2006 - 18:07:28

The head of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission should be removed from office, Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) leader Ian Paisley claimed today.

During the second reading of the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill in the House of Commons, Mr Paisley launched a hard-hitting attack on the chief commissioner Monica McWilliams, questioning her suitability because she was at the centre of a libel action he won during the last Assembly.

He also called on the British government to rein the Human Rights Commission in rather than give them new investigatory powers in prisons under the Bill.

Mr Paisley told MPs: “I think she is not fit to be that and she should not be there.

“The sooner the Government removes her from her position and puts in a neutral person into that position the better for everybody.

“I think the Human Rights Commission has failed. Having a debate about the legality of war in Iraq, what is that going to do to the ordinary people on the streets of Belfast trying to get human rights and trying to go about their business?

“Then, there’s Northern Ireland involvement in the 11-Plus - you all know my views about that anyway - I don’t think that’s a matter for the Human Rights Commission and there are other matters.

“They are always putting their foot in matters that are no business of theirs and I think it is time that they were reined in.

“I would make a plea to the minister he has got to rein in this commission and say there is your bailiwick.

“You have not a worldwide global appointment. You have a job to do in Northern Ireland. Go on and do the job for Northern Ireland.”

The DUP’s East Antrim MP Sammy Wilson continued the barrage of criticism, claiming he would be hard pressed to come up with any high profile cases the Human Rights Commission had been involved in.

In a reference to the previous commission before Monica McWilliams took charge, he told MPs: “I think if you spoke to people in Northern Ireland if they were aware of the Human Rights Commission at all, the only thing they would be aware of is the in-fighting which has occurred - where half of the people who served on the Human Rights Commission dropped out halfway along and refused to even go to the meetings.

“The chief executive or chairman of it or whatever it is called left or was put out because of the way in which the Human Rights Commission operated.”

Mr Wilson was challenged by Ulster Unionist MP Lady Sylvia Hermon whether the DUP had any influence over one of its party members, Jonathan Bell, who served on the current commission.

The East Antrim MP replied: “It would be most bizarre, I think, and I think we might come in for some condemnation if we were seen to be pulling the strings of someone who is supposed to be an independent member in it, albeit coming from a particular persuasion.”

The SDLP’s Eddie McGrady said the investigatory powers granted to the commission were one of the positives in the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill.

However he noted the Equality Commission, the North’s Police Ombudsman and Children’s Commissioners had such powers but for six years the Human Rights Commission had been denied them.

The South Down MP added: “What Government gives in one hand, too often it claws back with the other.

“And that, regrettably, is what is happening with this Bill.

“Because, for example, the commission can only use its investigatory powers for matters arising after January 1, 2008.

“The commission cannot get access to any information or documents before that date, even if relevant to situations arising after that date.

“So it will be years before the commission will be able to carry out proper investigations and get the full picture.

“Six years of waiting for these powers it seems has not been enough. It might be another four or five before the commission will, in practice, be able to carry out proper investigations.

“And even then, this Bill provides for huge exceptions to the commission’s powers.

“Extraordinarily, the commission is expressly prohibited from considering whether any of the intelligence services has acted in a way which is incompatible with human rights.

“And they are prohibited from dealing with any other matter concerning human rights and the intelligence services.

“Now let’s be clear about this. It’s not merely that the commission will not have the power to demand to speak to MI5 officials or see their documents. They can’t even ask.

“So in this regard the commission will actually have fewer powers than it already had.”

BN.ie

14/12/2006 - 07:31:09

A 300-year-old “peace tree” donated by Yoko Ono will be unveiled in Dublin’s Temple Bar later today.

The tree, to be planted on Cow’s Lane, will raise awareness of human rights abuses in Darfur.

The ceremony will be part of a three-day event transforming the cultural quarter into a multi-cultural venue.

More than 50 stallholders from 12 countries, including Morocco, Peru, Brazil and China, will be displaying their traditional crafts, gifts, clothing, jewellery and food during the event.

An ethical and fair-trade Green Santa and performers dressed in traditional Burundian costume will also bring some festive cheer to the city.

The Christmas Fete, on Essex Street West in Old City Temple Bar, will run until Sunday.

Belfast Telegraph

Brian Rowan
Thursday 14, December 2006 - 11:58

A member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board has described yesterday’s PSNI-Sinn Fein meeting at Stormont as “the beginning of the end of a long road”.

Brendan Duddy was commenting after Sir Hugh Orde and Gerry Adams, accompanied by senior delegations, met at Parliament Buildings to discuss a range of policing issues.

The meeting took place yesterday more than four years after the PSNI stormed Sinn Fein’s offices in Stormont and arrested Denis Donaldson - an incident which brought the power-sharing Assembly down in its wake.

Mr Duddy - a Derry businessman - was the secret link between the republican leadership and the British Government in the pre-ceasefire years.

On Sinn Fein’s efforts to achieve republican support for policing, he said the leadership “need and deserve support”.

“They need understanding for the journey that they have taken to bring the republican-nationalist community to this point,” he told the Belfast Telegraph.

“They have a major contribution to make and the sooner and quicker the last barriers are cleared, the happier I will be. I’ve waited a lifetime for this,” he said.

He described the senior PSNI officers involved in yesterday’s talks as ” professional” and as people who “want policing to succeed” and to be “admired” across the world.

On republican moves towards involvement in policing, he said, “There’s no other road to take”.

“The war’s over,” the Policing Board member said. “There’s nowhere else to go.”

On the policing issue, he said Sinn Fein should not be treated as ” special” - they should get “what they are entitled to”, a view echoed by a police source, who spoke to this newspaper.

“There will be no pandering to them. They will be treated like everybody else.”

Republicans are still negotiating on a range of issues including a timeframe for the transfer of policing and justice powers to local politicians and the future role of MI5 here.

Gerry Adams has made clear he will only call a special Sinn Fein ard fheis or party conference to debate and decide on policing when he has answers to his questions.

No handshakes on camera, but there were in private

It’s a picture that speaks a thousand words and more - a picture full of detail and significance.

Forget that Gerry Adams and Sir Hugh Orde have met before. In the past it has been behind closed doors.

Yesterday was different - the beginning of something new - “the beginning of the end of a long road”, to quote the Derry businessman and Policing Board member Brendan Duddy.

There was no political cover for the Stormont meeting, no one in the room to hold their hands.

It was the peelers and the Shinners € Gerry Adams and Hugh Orde with senior delegations.

And, this time, there was a picture € a photograph that was taken to be shown and seen.

The chief constable had his deputy Paul Leighton with him.

They were both in uniform, and, beside them, in a suit, was Peter Sheridan € the senior officer who has command of the Special Branch, the policing ” dark side” as far as republicans are concerned.

Gerry Adams brought his policing and justice spokesman Gerry Kelly, the MP Michelle Gildernew and MLA Caitriona Ruane.

There were no handshakes on camera, but there were in private.

Mr Adams opened the discussion, and, in the comments afterwards, we heard what we expected.

It had been frank, professional and useful; a good meeting, which at times was testing, and the chief constable thought that was OK.

He’s not interested in “nice conversations”.

Yesterday was all of the above and more, and that picture that set the scene was probably as important as anything and everything that was said, when that door was closed and the cameras left.

Why?

Because it tells republicans, shows them, lets them see where this is going, and it does exactly the same within policing.

Two sides need to be convinced about this process - not just one.

And, after all that this place has been through, relationships and trust are things that will take time to grow.

You’d give a thousand pennies and more for the private thoughts of those in that Stormont room yesterday - not just the republicans, but also those sitting at the policing side of the table.

Their meeting is part of a process–a process of making peace after the fighting of the war and after so many deaths on both sides.

For a long, long, time these two sides were enemies.

And they could spend forever talking about yesterday and never getting to tomorrow.

Yes, of course, the past is important, but so are the present and the future, and the looking back can’t just be about all of the stuff that republicans want to talk about - the stuff that includes collusion and inquiries.

We have heard lots about how difficult this is for republicans, about how tricky it is to manage this issue of policing inside that community, and we know about the threats to Gerry Adams and Gerry Kelly.

Ten years ago when he was based in Derry, the IRA was targeting Peter Sheridan - the now assistant chief constable, who sat in that Stormont meeting yesterday.

Who wants to talk about that now?

Who knows what he and his family had to live through those ten years ago?

And there are many other similar stories.

This can’t be about one side talking at the other.

It has to be about the two sides talking with and to each other about the policing model of tomorrow and how republicans fit into that.

“That photograph and that meeting was the beginning of the end of a long road,” Brendan Duddy believes, and he’s very clear about what now needs to happen.

“We all need to support dignified policing,” he says.

And at the top of the police and at the level of the republican leadership, he is convinced that there are people who want to make this work.

“The leadership of the republican movement need and deserve support,” the Policing Board member argues.

“They need understanding for the journey that they have taken to bring the republican-nationalist community to this point.”

And what about the three senior PSNI officers who sat in that Stormont room yesterday?

“They are professional,” says Mr Duddy.

“They want policing to succeed,” he continues, and he believes they want it to be “admired” across the policing world - admired for being good.

Getting republicans inside will be a huge achievement, and it will take some more work - more talking and negotiation.

It’s not done yet, and even, if the i’s can be dotted and t’s crossed, the Adams-McGuinness-Kelly leadership will still have a job of work to do inside their movement and across their community.

It can be done; will be done, because as Mr Duddy says “there’s nowhere else to go”.

So, remember the photograph - that picture of detail and significance that was taken yesterday.

Remember who was in the photograph and what it was and what it is they are talking about.

Think about how difficult such a meeting would have been not that many years ago.

And ask yourself, would Mr Adams have gone into that room if he didn’t intend going further and taking others with him?

We know the answer to that question, and that’s why Brendan Duddy has got it right when he talks about this being the beginning of the end of a long road.

The real talking on policing has begun, and it will continue.

Belfast Telegraph

By By Tom Calverley and Dominic O’Neill
Thursday 14, December 2006 - 11:34

More than 2,300 people moved abroad from Northern Ireland last year, according to a report published by a leading think tank.

The Institute for Public Policy Research study calculated that at least 5.5 million people born in the UK now live elsewhere.

‘Brits Abroad: Mapping the scale and nature of British emigration’ revealed that Australia and Spain are the most popular destinations, with 1.3 million and 761,000 resident Britons respectively.

The US and Canada have over 600,000 Brits each, while the Republic of Ireland took fifth place with 291,000 UK citizens.

While English speaking countries topped the list, the poll found increasing numbers of emigrants heading for Asian nations.

The overall number of UK citizens moving permanently abroad doubled between 2001 and 2005, from 53,000 a year to 107,000.

And a BBC national poll this July claimed that more than half of UK citizens have considered emigrating in their life time, with 13% hoping to in the near future - almost twice the number asked the question in 2003.

Young people were the most likely to want to leave with a quarter saying they were hoping to live abroad.

But increased emigration is matched by rising immigration. The Northern Irish and Statistics Research Agency recorded a net gain of 6,671 persons in Ulster in 2005.

Dr Patrick Fitzgerald, lecturer at the Centre for Migration Studies, Omagh, revealed: “Our focus on inward migration has overshadowed continued emigration.

“We are getting ‘lifestyle’ migration with people moving in significant levels for warmer weather, cheaper fuel and property, particularly in the Costas of Spain.

“‘Brain Drain’ is a major issue. Students are still reliant on universities in Britain and the Republic of Ireland. Internal migration can lead to onward migration and a loss of skills to the Northern Ireland economy.

“People still need to leave Northern Ireland for educational economic and employment reasons, though perhaps not to the extent they did in the seventies and eighties.”

Young looking abroad for future in the sun

With a recent poll suggesting one in four young people want to emigrate abroad, we asked students at Belfast’s Queen’s University why so many people are seeking better lives abroad, and if they would consider it.

Rick Colligan (18), from Newtonabbey, working in PR, said: “I was planning to live abroad, maybe Spain. I was going to go out there to work. I haven’t changed my mind, I’ll probably go next year. Why do people leave Northern Ireland? It’s too cold for a start. People want a change of life.”

Brett Zych (18), from Ardglass, studying management and Spanish, said: ” I have to go away and live in Spain in my third year anyway. That’s why I picked the course. Northern Ireland is cold and the people are all the same. I fancy a change. I need to meet new people. I want to do something different. I don’t want to live at home all my life.”

Sophie Dinsmore (19), from Belfast, studying social anthropology, said: ” The opportunities are very limited in Northern Ireland. It’s getting better. It’s getting more diverse. But me and my boyfriend are planning to start up a clothing company and the market here is restricted.”

Rachel McKinney (20), an exchange student from Pensacola, Florida, studying chemistry and psychology, said: “I’ve been here four months, it’s cold but I like it. I’m going home in a few weeks, though I don’t know if I’m staying there. I think people move abroad just for new, different things. Everyone thinks somewhere else is better, no one’s happy where they are any more.”

Laura Sands (19), from Warrenpoint, studying computer science, said: “I would like to go away for a while for the experience and to broaden my horizons. But I’ll always want to return to Northern Ireland. All my family and friends are here.”

Liam Gault (19), from west Belfast, is studying English at Queen’s. He said: “Yeah I’d definitely live abroad. For work when I leave university, I reckon I would. I’d like to work in journalism or to teach English in other countries. I like northern Spain, Barcelona, I’m thinking of studying over there. It’s such a small place here, there’s not many opportunities.”

BBC

The Prison Ombudsman is to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death of an inmate in Magilligan Prison in County Derry.

The body of Thomas McKenzie-Quinn, 45, from Belfast, was found in a special supervision unit in the jail. He was serving six years for robbery.

The news came after a report found that conditions at the jail need to improve.

Robin Masefield, Director of the NI Prison Service, expressed his sympathy to Mr McKenzie’s family.

The Prison Ombudsman is appointed by the secretary of state and investigates complaints from prisoners held in Northern Ireland who are unhappy with the answer they receive from the Prison Service.

The Ombudsman is independent of the Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS).

The current Ombudsman is Brian Coulter, and a team of investigators and other staff supports him.

Details of the prison death came on the day a report by the Chief Inspector of Prisons and the Chief Inspector of Criminal Justice said that the jail should be rebuilt.

They made an unannounced visit to Magilligan in May and found unsafe and unsanitary units among unsuitable buildings and recommended that the existing H-blocks be demolished.

The report also said the amount of prisoners who said they felt unsafe in the jail had risen.