Clause 22 - Suspension and revival of section 3
Northern Ireland (Offences) Bill
3:45 pm
Sammy Wilson (East Antrim, DUP)
Under the Bill as drafted, the scheme can be suspended but later revived. Our amendment would do away with the ability to revive it. As has been discussed, the scheme is extraordinary in nature. It should be given only one chance. There should be no ability to suspend and revive it, time and again.
I suppose the scheme could be suspended for a number of reasons. It might well be that the security situation does not allow it to be carried forward. If there was a return to violence, there might be a desire to suspend it. It would be unacceptable for terrorists to return to violence and for the scheme to be suspended, but for them then to get a second opportunity when they decided to complete their violence or to finish with it.
Another circumstance in which the scheme might be suspended is if the Minister decided that all who were likely to come forward had done so, only for new people to come forward subsequently. The scheme might then be revived to enable them to benefit from it. That would do away with the Minister’s assurance to the Committee that this is not to be a scheme that goes on and on. There is meant to be a time limit to it. Members in all parts of the Committee have said that they want a time limit, but the ability to suspend and revive gives the opportunity for an open-ended scheme.
In one debate, the hon. Member for North Down asked whether we will have this expensive structure in place for 15 years. After a year, the Minister might decide that all the people who will come forward have done so and that the Government do not want the expense, so the scheme will be suspended. A year later, if more people are found or say that they want to benefit from the scheme, it might be revived. That would be nonsensical and it would go against all the indications that have been given that this should be a time-limited scheme.
There is another reason why there might be a desire to suspend the scheme and then revive it. Some people who would have been guilty of terrorist offences before 1998 cannot benefit from the scheme because their organisation is scheduled. At some stage, it might be decided that the Real IRA or the Continuity IRA will no longer be scheduled. That being the case, the scheme might be suspended and then revived to incorporate those people who currently cannot benefit from it.
Those are the only circumstances I can see in which the scheme might be suspended and then revived. Perhaps the Minister can suggest others. Such a provision allows the terrorist to dictate the agenda for the special tribunals and so on. It also makes a mockery of the idea of closure and of the point that there must be an incentive for people to come forward, which the Minister has made time and again. There will be no incentive. When people decide that they want to come forward, their political representatives can put the pressure on to get the scheme revived.
Given that this is an extraordinary arrangement, which we do not want to go on indefinitely, if there is to be a suspension, it should be final. The scheme should be concluded and there should be no chance of resurrecting it.