Part of the debate – in the House of Lords at 8:00 pm on 10 November 2003.
My Lords, I am sure that the noble Baroness would agree that the degree of trust in the future that electors feel when they go to elections is important. I therefore return to the issue of decommissioning. The Prime Minister, the Taoiseach and Mr Trimble were clearly expecting that hard facts and figures would be given by the commission on the latest quantity and nature of the arms supposed to have been put beyond use. But in the event, General de Chastelain said that under the agreement with the IRA he was committed to give no detail either publicly or, as it turned out, even to the two Prime Ministers.
However, the decommissioning scheme based on the Northern Ireland Arms Decommissioning Act 1997, states at paragraph 26:
"Disclosure of information received by the Commission may occur where disclosure is necessary . . . for reasons of public safety"—
I should have thought that that would apply given the present situation in Northern Ireland—or,
"to fulfil the Commission's duty to report to the two Governments".
In August 2001, it was the commission, announcing the putting of some arms beyond use, that said without giving any detail that it was,
"satisfied that it would not further the process of putting arms beyond use to provide further details of that event".
That was a unilateral decision by the commission; it was not based on the legislation. That is one more example of the commission—unwittingly and for entirely honourable but, I think, innocent motives—following the IRA's agenda.
I raise that point because it concerns the issue of trust. The Government are still free to advance that matter and insist that something should be said. It makes nonsense of the whole issue of decommissioning if people cannot know what is the outcome. The Government believe in transparency, and I respect that. They owe it to the people about to vote using their legislation to say exactly what was decommissioned and how often the commission carries out the duty placed on it by the legislation to inspect all the arms caches that it has been shown.
That is one issue. The other is that on 3rd November, Mr Adams said in New York:
"anti-Agreement Unionists must accept an all-Ireland agenda if they want to see the return of devolved Government".
That is a formidable threat, and a clear one. He continued:
"Efforts to restore the institutions of the Agreement must proceed urgently after the election".
I can agree warmly with that; I hope that the Government do too.
My last question has been posed in a general way by my noble friend Lord Glentoran: has the machinery to ensure against vote-rigging that was planned almost two years ago—the computerised method—been put in place? Is it working? The last time we asked about that we were told that it required testing and was not quite ready. I should be reassured to know whether it is now ready and able to work.