Jump to content

John Hewitt

Conservatives
  • Posts

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

John Hewitt's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Collaborator Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • One Month Later Rare
  • Week One Done
  • First Post Rare

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. Name: John Franklin Hewitt Avatar: Brian Sewell Age: 60 (5/1/1926) Sex: Male Ethnicity: White British Marital Status: Widowed Sexual Orientation: Bisexual Party: Conservatives Faction/Subgroup: Monday Club Political Outlook: Economically and social right, skeptical of Europe, strong supporter of South Africa, anti-Communist Year Elected: 1966 Education: Cambridge (1949) Career: Hewitt’s (1947-1977) Political Career: Member of Parliament for Saffron Walden (1977-) Narrative: Born in London the 3rd child of Reginald Hewitt VC. Father won a VC in the First World War. Grandson of Sir Robert Hewitt a wealthy retail magnet. Estranged from father and very close to grandparents. Volunteered for service in 1944 and served briefly in India and Burma. Graduated from Cambridge 1949 having delayed entry due to the war. Married Elizabeth 1950, widowed 1967. No children. Worked his way through the family business, expanding it to 38 locations by 1974. Largely disinterested in politics until late 1960s when he strongly opposed Harold Wilson. Sympathetic to many of Enoch Powell’s views. Very concerned about Communism, particularly its spread in Africa and the Middle East. Very skeptical of a larger European project not focused entirely on economic interests. Stood for Saffron Walden in the 1977 by-election and was elected with an increased majority. Has a very high Commons attendance rate and is frequently found attending late night, lengthy or less popular debates. Abstained on the Ottawa Agreement vote. Is independently wealthy from the family business as well as a sizeable inheritance left by his grandfather. Personal interests include reading, gardening, animal husbandry and breeding of show dogs. He has owned a large farm in the constituency since 1960. He has been extensively involved with The Kennel Club since 1955 and has entered show dogs in dozens of contests since 1957. His English Setter “The Vicar of Newport” won Best in Show at Crufts in 1964 and his Afghan Hound “Sultana” took it in 1980.
  2. Mr. Speaker, One of the most interesting parts of the Shadow Foreign Secretary’s line of criticism is how detached from reality it is. When she runs into an inconvenience – facts, evidence, the truth – she simply rewrites events to fit her message and insists they are accurate. No matter how detached from reality her claims are, no matter how absurd, no matter how shockingly pathetic – pull a string in her back and you’ll receive a fabricated comment. She states for example we ripped up the Anglo-Irish Agreement and destroyed counterterrorism channels. Yet we did no such thing and substantially improved them. She embarrassed herself in this House but a few days ago by revealing she had absolutely no idea at all what an addendum was. She’s accused me of both ripping up an agreement and taking credit for the very same agreement! I think she may have lost her place in her talking points. She claims we’ve drawn the ire of our allies. Yet we have the support of our closest allies and that support has been unwavering. She claims this government was condemned by the Americans. Where does she come up with this stuff? Absolutely untrue. Completely false and misleading. Dare she claim the Americans do not support this peace deal after they too attended the Ottawa Conference and reaffirmed their financial support for? What about the Canadians? Does she have the audacity to insult the Canadian government and people as she has done repeatedly to the Irish? She claims the Republic of Ireland will run elections in Northern Ireland. This again is a complete fabrication as no ballots will be counted in Northern Ireland and no officials from the Republic of Ireland will be present in Northern Ireland. The Shadow Foreign Secretary demonstrates that Labour has no plan whatsoever for Northern Ireland. In the wake of the worst terrorist attack in our history Labour refuses to support historic and meaningful cooperation to fight terrorism, prevent the spread of weapons and financial support for terrorists, prevent terrorist recruitment and bring criminals to justice. Labour refuses to support the historic recognition by the Republic of Northern Ireland as a constituent part of the United Kingdom. Labour repeatedly attacked free and fair elections and has urged communities in Northern Ireland to be skeptical of the fairness of balloting. I have said over and over again the Shadow Foreign Secretary is reckless and irresponsible with her words and doesn’t understand she is dealing with people’s lives. Under this agreement we’ll work more closely to deny terrorists funding they use to kill. Labour refuses to support it. Under this agreement we’ll work more closely to deny weapons to terrorists they’ve used to kill our soldiers, police and innocent people. Labour refuses to support it. Under this agreement we’ll work to quickly extradite criminals and suspects that commit crimes on one side of the border and flee to the other. Labour refuses to support it. The Labour Party and the Shadow Foreign Secretary have demonstrated their moral bankruptcy. They simply do not care about stopping terrorists, bringing criminals to justice or forging stronger security measures with the Republic.
  3. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Shadow Foreign Secretary for her comments and the opportunity she has given me to draw sharply contrasting visions for the future of Northern Ireland. Throughout this entire negotiating process The Labour Party and the Shadow Foreign Secretary have revealed themselves to be bad actors. They have repeated false claims or manufactured events which have not occurred. They have repeatedly insulted Irish voters and government officials of the Republic of Ireland. They have minimized the important contributions and support from our American and Canadian allies. At a time when we’re encouraging paramilitary organizations to abandon the bullet in favor of the ballot they’ve called into question the legitimacy of democratic elections in Northern Ireland and fanned the blames of discord. All of this not in an attempt to promote a different perspective or an alternative proposal for the peace process but in a pathetic attempt to score cheap political points by gambling with lives on both sides of the border. This government believes in a different path. We believe it is necessary for all stakeholders and all communities to compromise and take part in good faith efforts to bring a lasting peace to Northern Ireland. There will be no perfect deal. There is no magic wand we can wave. What we can do is take bold steps in the direction of a safer, more stable, more cooperative and more prosperous Northern Ireland so that the future does not reflect the violence and division of the past. It isn’t just about vision. It’s about having the determination to see it through. While Labour has neither of these qualities, this government does. We also have the obligation to protect lives and property and promote the common good even when it is difficult to do so. What does this agreement actually do Mr. Speaker? As the Labour party has conducted a campaign of misinformation in an attempt to undermine this agreement, let us take the time to lay out what it really achieves: First, it achieves historic recognition by the Republic of Ireland of the six counties in Ulster as a constituent part of the United Kingdom. This recognition is not just a recognition of the status quo and the long history of Northern Ireland but of the potential for that future to remain indefinitely. This was an unthinkable concession by the Republic just a short time ago and we now have it in hand. Secondly it create a framework for dialogue between the governments of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland and the communities within Northern Ireland. It promotes conversation and solution oriented discussions on a host of issues impacting all residents regardless of their background, faith or political beliefs. It does not impose a foreign authority or undermine the rule of law, it only serves to strengthen the belief that cooperation when and where possible towards a common good will improve the lives of everyone. Thirdly, it recognizes that certain residents of Northern Ireland may wish to have their voices heard in the Dáil Éireann regardless of their political views. It gives Unionists and Republicans alike the power to have their voices heard if they so choose. The Dáil Éireann does not have any authority whatsoever in Northern Ireland. No power to legislate or administer outside of the borders of Ireland. What it does have the ability to do is select its own members and debate issues its members feel important to their future. This is not a strange or inappropriate idea or even one without precedent. Residents of Northern Ireland have already served in the upper chamber of the Irish legislature – I do not recall the Shadow Foreign Secretary clutching her pearls when those individuals took their seats. This agreement clarifies that our responsibility in the United Kingdom related to the functions of the Dail is to merely protect the post. To facilitate the distribution and collection of sealed mail within and across our borders. That is a basic function of the state. This agreement recognizes not just the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and the role of Northern Ireland as part of it but recognizes the legitimacy of the will of the people of Northern Ireland. How do the people express their will and consent to governance? Through free and fair balloting. The 1973 referendum in Northern Ireland was a free and fair poll asking the people to express their views on whether they should remain within the United Kingdom or join the Republic. The Republic of Ireland recognizes the legitimacy of that poll and will recognize the legitimacy of future polls. It is fair that this question is asked for every generation. Every 20 years the people of Northern Ireland will be asked to reaffirm their commitment to the Union or express their desire to leave it. Previously a single community could effectively veto a referendum and disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters. With the threshold of turnout set to 35% it encourages all communities to have their voices heard and pushes us towards further engagement rather than encouraging lack of participation. There cannot be legitimate governance without the expressed will of the governed through regular and free balloting on the most fundamental of questions. This agreement assures millions in international financial assistances for investment and support in the peace process. The United States is one of our strongest and most important partners with deep cultural and historical ties to these islands. They want us to achieve peace. They want us to get round the table and talk about these difficult challenges and come up with real solutions. They understood the concerns this government had about our security, and understood concerns others had as well. They kept their promise to provide financial support if we secured and deal and make good faith efforts to adhere to it. We now keep our promise by advancing this agreement and doing everything in our power to responsibility promote a stable peace. Lastly and perhaps most importantly this agreement secures unprecedented levels of intelligence sharing and counterterrorism cooperation with the Republic of Ireland. For too long paramilitary organizations have been able to avoid prosecution. They have evaded efforts to disrupt their activities and deny them weapons. They have been able to spread their hideous ideology, commit acts of violence and hide behind diplomatic red tape and legal quagmires. No more. No more will we allow this to happen. This agreement strengthens counterterrorism channels with the Republic of Ireland and dramatically expands the scope of those efforts. There is now a broad recognition that in order to keep residents of Britain and Ireland safe we must work together to defeat enemies of peace. We’ve made substantial progress in this area through our actions against the IRA and will make further progress when this agreement is fully implemented. Mr. Speaker, I recognize that not everyone will support this agreement. I recognize there are some Members of Parliament and some parties that have apprehensions about this agreement. But I also recognize that many of them know as we do that this is the only path. This is the only agreement. There is no other deal in the offing. We must tackle these fundamental issues head on and this agreement addresses every area of concern where there is broad agreement, giving everyone something to hold onto and skin in the game while also asking every community to make common sense concessions. There is another reality here Mr. Speaker, and that is those who sit on their hands while others act abdicate their responsibilities. Labour has no vision for Northern Ireland. They have no counterproposals. They have made no meaningful contribution to these discussions whatsoever except to question the legitimacy of balloting, insult communities on both sides of the border and practice political theater in a cheap attempt to score points with the press. We can all see right through that act to the truth. In the wake of the most substantial terrorist attack in our history and the largest defeat delivered to the IRA in decades, Labour: - Refuses to support efforts to deny weapons to terrorists. - Refuses to support efforts to deny financial support to terrorists. - Refuses to support efforts to undermine terrorist recruitment activites. - Refuses to support efforts bring terrorists to justice. - Refuses to support efforts to extradite criminals who flee from prosecution. - Refuses to support efforts to deny terrorists access to resources from abroad. - Calls into the question the legitimacy of free and fair referenda. - Refuses demonstrate the capacity to take part in responsible governance and promote cooperation toward a sustainable peace. Those on the fence regarding this agreement have a choice. They can stand with Labour and leave us less strong, less cooperative and less safe or they can reject the failed policies of the past and support a new framework which will strengthen our security, bring communities together and take bold steps towards a lasting peace. The world is watching.
  4. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to present the Anglo-Irish Agreement Implementation Act 1986 to the House. This legislation will extend the statutory authority of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to implement portions of the Revised Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1986 and further our commitment to resource and intelligence sharing with the Republic of Ireland on the issues of counterterrorism and security. This important legislation will advance the agreement negotiated in Ottawa and take steps to enhance security, improve dialogue, reaffirm our commitment to governance by consent and underscore the rule of law.
  5. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to update the House of Commons on the Ottawa Conference and to present a revised version of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. I would first like to thank the Canadian people, Prime Minister Mulroney and Secretary of State for External Relations Joe Clark for hosting the Ottawa Conference. Their warm welcome and tremendous support throughout the entire process has been invaluable. I would also like to thank our American allies for their continued support and assistance throughout these negotiations. It is clear that Britain and the Republic of Ireland have very strong relationships throughout the global community and the entire world is hopeful that this agreement will be a step towards a lasting peace in Northern Ireland. Above all I want to thank the Irish Foreign Minister and Taoiseach for their willingness to put aside differences and work with us to forge a new path towards peace. The originally proposed Anglo-Irish Agreement was very well intentioned and was an important step in the negotiating process. Yet all of us – this government, the Irish government, and the communities in Northern Ireland all saw the agreement is falling short. It did not contain the necessary security assurances we required. It lacked meaningful channels to combat terrorism and the spread of extremism. It also became a tool of division within the very communities we were trying to bring together. Through good faith negotiating, consensus building and yes at times very difficult and challenging discussions we have achieve a breakthrough that we sincerely hope and believe will serve as a springboard for long term progress. The events of the last several weeks have made clear that to achieve a lasting peace that can endure the trials and tribulations of a tumultuous political and social environment any agreement must be grounded in security. Cooperation on security and counterterrorism between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland is critical to achieving the peace and prosperity we desire for all residents of Northern Ireland. Our cooperation in the fight against extremism is also critical to the safety of the people in the Republic and in mainland Britain as the tentacles of terrorism can spread far and wide. This government was right to demand further security assurances and the government of the Republic of Ireland was right to see these requests as legitimate and agree to unprecedented cooperation in the fight against terrorism and extremism. This revised agreement makes substantial steps towards securing our safety and in fighting terrorism. Ireland and the United Kingdom will now cooperate by statute to prevent the flow of weapons, financing and material support for paramilitary organizations across the Ulster border and from abroad. We will cooperate to prevent recruitment in extremist groups. We will cooperate by sharing intelligence and resources to stop paramilitary activity before it occurs and bring those who do participate in illegal activities to justice. We will further cooperate to ease the extradition process so that criminals cannot commit crimes on one side of the border and hide from justice on the other. We will work together to uphold the rule of law and send a clear signal to criminals and terrorists that we will find you, we will stop you and we will hold you accountable. The Republic of Ireland made clear its position that residents of Northern Ireland should be welcomed to participate in the functions of the Dáil Éireann. There is already established precedent for residents of Northern Ireland to be appointed to the Seanad Éireann. This government believes it is important to use every opportunity possible to promote legitimate debate, inclusive discourse and the sharing of opinions and perspectives to promote cross community engagement in Northern Ireland. These powerful but important discussions take place frequently in this Parliament and we think it fair and right that similar discussions should occur in the Oireachtas. For that reason we have agreed to recognize and assist with the process of seeing residents of Northern Ireland serve as TDs in the Dáil. All candidates and all parties, provided they are not members of a proscribed organization, shall be welcome to stand to represent their communities. Unionists, Republicans, Catholics, Protestants, those who wish to serve and those who will practice Abstentionism will all be welcomed to participate in this process and share their views and those of their neighbors. The Dáil shall continue to have no authority in the administration of Northern Ireland and will pass no legislation with any authority over Northern Ireland. The Irish government through the revised Anglo-Irish Agreement recognizes the current status quo of the United Kingdom’s administration over the 6 counties of Ulster and its place as a constituent part of the United Kingdom until such time as a majority of residents of Northern Ireland may seek a change in that status. We recognize that the future of Northern Ireland must be determined by its residents. All communities must have confidence their governance is by consent and their institutions act in their best interests. All of us further recognize the importance of democratic participation and the legitimacy of popular elections as a reflection of the will of the people of Northern Ireland. In 1973 a referendum was held on the future of Northern Ireland and the participants in that referendum voted overwhelmingly to remain part of the United Kingdom. This is a once in a generation question that must be asked and answered as part of the ongoing commitment to peace and legitimate governance. That is why every twenty years, beginning in 1993, a similar referendum will be held which will allow the residents of Northern Ireland to renew their continued relationship with the United Kingdom or choose a new path. With a turnout requirement of 35%, no single community will have the ability to block a referendum by withholding their consent. Rather all of Northern Ireland, all communities, will be encouraged to participate to have their voices heard and their votes counted. I am pleased to announce this agreement has the full support of the United States which has generously renewed its commitment for financial assistance as part of this peace process. They have further agreed to review their contributions as the peace process continued for potential further investments. Their partnership in support of the peace process should be welcomed gratefully by all. Mr. Speaker, There is no perfect deal. There is no magic wand we can wave which will end violence forever and see us all around the same dining room table. I sincerely wish there was. While there may be no perfect deal we can be certain that this revised Anglo-Irish Agreement is a substantially better one. It gives each community skin in the game as they say – support for their prosperity, assurances for their security, recognition of their right to democratic participation and the ability for all residents of Northern Ireland to have their voices heard on both sides of the border. It cements cooperation between the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom while recognizing the status quo and the ability of the people of Northern Ireland to choose their own destiny. I am pleased to present this agreement to the House for debate and in short order will be introducing legislation to facilitate its implementation.
  6. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to provide a statement to the House of Commons regarding a counterterrorism operation in Northern Ireland. Earlier this year our intelligence and security services were directed to be more assertive in their efforts to degrade the IRA’s capacity to conduct paramilitary operations. New and existing intelligence gathering operations and military resources were refocused on denying the IRA weaponry and capturing or neutralizing terrorists with the eventual goal of destroying the IRA’s effectiveness as a terrorist organization. Following the recent IRA attacks in London our security services were able to launch a significant counterterrorism operation along these lines, the details of which are as follows: Yesterday two companies of Royal Marines launched a large scale operation against 9 IRA weapons caches in Northern Ireland. While conducting this operation a significant number of armed IRA operatives were discovered at multiple locations. It was determined the IRA was in the midst of planning several large scale attacks and had been interrupted by the raiding Commandos. While all attempts were made to capture these terrorists with minimal loss of life, the IRA operatives resisted and opened fire on our forces. Our forces were instructed to use appropriate force to bring an end to the firefight and minimize the risk to civilians. During the firefight IRA operatives began firing indiscriminately into surrounding buildings which were occupied and resulted in the deaths of up to 10 civilians. Shortly afterwards a terrorist weapons cache which had been located near a populated area detonated which results in the deaths of a further 20 civilians. Emergency medical personnel were able to assist the wounded and bring those with injuries to local hospitals for treatment. Our forces were able to successfully seize and destroy the 9 weapons caches and neutralize the IRA operatives. Initial reports on casualties, which I stress are subject to revision are: 80 armed IRA operatives killed, 30 IRA operatives captured and 30 civilians killed either directly or indirectly by IRA actions. We mourn the loss of life of the civilians that were killed as part of this operation. Our armed forces made every effort to avoid civilian causalities. Regrettably the IRA’s placement of explosives near populated areas and indiscriminate targeting of civilian buildings further stained their hands with the blood of innocent people. The IRA’s savagery and barbarity knows no limits and they are willing to stop at nothing to achieve their goals without regard for the lives of innocent men, women and children. This successful counterterrorism operation represents one of the most significant defeats delivered to the IRA in its history. It is a stunning setback for an organization which will take many years to recover. Our military and intelligence commanders believe the operation has effectively “crippled” the IRA in the short-term - denying it access to weapons, preventing it from conducting substantial terrorist operations and denying it recruitment abilities and manpower. I cannot stress the importance that the success of this operation will have on the safety and security of the British people now and in the future. I pay credit to our intelligence and security personnel, the brave members of our armed forces and those who risked their lives to face down these terrorists. At great personal risk they placed themselves in harm’s way to bring an end to the IRA’s campaign of terror. We owe them a debt of gratitude and I know I join all members of the House in recognizing their service. This operation sends a clear signal to terrorists everywhere: we will find you, we will stop you, and we will bring you to justice. I urge all paramilitary organizations to recognize that armed resistance is a futile effort and will only lead to your destruction. Call an immediate cease fire, abandon your weapons and come to the negotiating table so that together we may secure a lasting peace. I commend this statement to the House.
  7. Mr. Speaker, If the current version of the Anglo-Irish Agreement were a path to a sustainable peace process, the motion before us would have near unanimous support. The difficult reality is that the current version of the agreement will not achieve any meaningful path to peace. It is not supported by the Unionist community in Northern Ireland. It is not supported by the Republican community in Northern Ireland. It is not supported by the elected Irish government. This government does not support the current version because we believe it must include additional assurances on security, counterterrorism and a host of other issues so that it can be broadly supported by the people in Northern Ireland. This motion before the House asks us to endorse an agreement that is already off the table. How could any of us reasonably do that? What we must do is oppose this motion and support instead the use of the Anglo-Irish Agreement as a framework, a steppingstone towards a revised agreement that can have the support of all communities and give us a real opportunity at a lasting peace.
  8. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that the House is united behind this government's vision for a more democratic, more transparent and more accountable future in Europe. This rare unity behind our vision represents a consensus that Britain's place in Europe must be grounded in a relationship that strengthens our economy, protects our sovereignty and promotes British interests.
  9. Mr. Speaker, It disappointments me that the members on the benches opposite have nothing meaningful to contribute whatsoever to this very important debate. The future of our relationship with Europe is being considered and they have nothing to add? Extending meaningful powers to the European Parliament is not worthing of discussion? Firming up the single market, reducing barriers to trade and investment and paving the way to reduce unemployment in Britain is met by deafening silence? Absolutely shameful for Labour to be absent.
  10. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments. Among the most important areas of the agreement which requires revisiting is related to intelligence sharing, security cooperation and counterterrorism planning. There is a deeply rooted belief that not enough is begin done to share intelligence, combat arms smuggling, disrupt paramilitary operations and recruitment. The heart of any agreement must be the protection of lives and property and the upholding of the rule of law. Residents of Northern Ireland and indeed the Republic of Ireland must have confidence that they are safe in their communities and Dublin and London are doing everything they can to further that aim. This is a point which has been raised previously and I will raise it again at the proposed summit. I am extremely optimistic that the Irish Foreign Minister will see the need to strengthen this area and will negotiate in good faith towards our shared aims.
  11. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the House regarding the recent IRA attack on London. One week ago our intelligence services were able to intercept paramilitary chatter regarding a potential IRA operation set to take place somewhere in mainland Britain. While details regarding this operation were limited, our intelligence and security services began extensive planning for potential scenarios out of an abundance of caution. Three days ago additional chatter was intercepted which indicated that London would be the likely focus of any attack and additional security measures were put in place. These measures included additional security around government facilities, Parliament, Royal Residences and other potentially high value and high traffic targets. Additionally, rapid response and anti-explosive units were forward deployed to London in the event they should be needed and the BIKINI status was reviewed. What follow is an outline of the chronology of the attacks as we understand them insofar as details can be released without jeopardizing national security: At some point prior to the attack 10 suspected IRA operatives traveled to London of which 7 were identified by police and surveillance began. At approximately 6:00 PM, two terrorists armed with Kalashnikovs which had been concealed in briefcases opened fire in Westminster tube station immediately killing three police officers. The terrorists then began firing into the crowd and took up ambush positions and laid explosives in anticipation of emergency responders. One minute later Cabinet received reports of the incident and authorized the evacuation of the station, the deployment of armed rapid response units, and the blocking of surrounding roads except for emergency vehicles. Two minutes later a shelter in place order which had been recommended by security services was made for the areas surrounding the tube station. Many members of the public, including 3 Members of Parliament take refuge in the Red Lion Pub. At that time police are authorized to arrest the previously mentioned IRA operatives which had been under surveillance. Those individuals are then take for questioning. At approximately 6:15 PM, an explosion occurs at the Red Lion. The Cabinet room is secured, evacuation and security alerts are extended and police begun moving members of the public further away from the new incident site. At approximately 6:20 PM an armed response unit is in place to breach the Westminster tube station with force and the operation to neutralize the terrorists in the station begins. Faced with overwhelming numbers of police the IRA operatives choose to shoot themselves dead rather than be taken into custody. Given the likelihood of explosives, bomb squad units then clear the tube station. Police and intelligence services begin to confirm the whereabouts of MPs and Peers and it is later determined three MPs are unaccounted for. At approximately 6:35 PM, one of the IRA operatives that had been taken into custody confesses to his involvement in the operation and reveals details regarding the attacks. It is revealed that two IRA operatives left London due to the increased security measures that had been put in place prior to the attacks. It is further revealed that Parliament was a target for an attack but the plan was abandoned due to increased security measures. It is unclear whether the attack on the Red Lion was previously planned or was a target of opportunity. With this information in hand a full sweep of Parliament is initiated out of an abundance of caution and any individuals without proper credentials are temporarily held. This allowed police to cross check these individuals with lists of known and suspected terrorists. This group is later released once it is determined no one within the group matched existing lists. At approximately 10:00 PM, the search and rescue operation at the Red Lion concludes and it is determined the three MPs which had been unaccounted for - The Labour MP for Islington South, Rebecca Hopkins, The Conservative MP for North-West Croydon, Sir Anthony Bagginsly, and the Conservative MP for Crosby, David Marshall were killed in the attack. The process then began to inform the families of the deceased, the offices of the MPs and parliamentary leaders. The total number of individuals killed in the IRA attacks on London is confirmed at 56 though many people remain in hospital. While we have no evidence that any additional IRA attacks are currently planned, security measures remained heightened and members of the public are asked to remain vigilant. Mr. Speaker, We condemn in the strongest possible terms the attacks against civilians, police officers and elected officials. These acts of evil unveil the savagery and inhumanity of the IRA and further demonstrates to the world their willingness to kill and injure as many innocent men, women and children as possible to advance their political agenda. There is no romanticism in terrorism. There is no justification in the intentional targeting of defenseless people – only brutality. I wish to praise the actions of the intelligence services, police and emergency responders that were involved in responding to these incidents. Through their bravery, commitment to the rule of law and compassion for their fellow man they overcame incredible odds and saved countless lives. Heroism has many faces but all too often it is ordinary people that find themselves in extraordinary circumstances and muster the courage to carry on whatever the odds. We know of many acts of heroism yesterday but we will never know others. Our thanks to those who gave their lives or were willing to give their lives can never be enough. Mr. Speaker, I wish to stress two points to the House as I conclude this statement: First, that the operation against the IRA can be considered a success. Every death is a tragedy and 56 deaths is unquestionably a terrible loss, but the measures taken by the police and security services speak for themselves. This attack could have been much worse if not for the measures taken. 70% of the IRA operatives were identified and surveilled once they arrived in London. 20% of the operatives abandoned their plans entirely and 50% of the operatives were taken into custody without incident. The IRA was unable to succeed in targeting Parliament or carrying out further attacks due to the measures put in place and the bravery of our responders. Secondly, this attack highlights the importance of securing a sustainable peace agreement that can be supported by all communities and all stakeholders in Northern Ireland. The deeply held concerns many of us have had regarding agreements on security and counterterrorism are even more deeply held today. More must be done within and across borders to combat terrorism, cooperate on intelligence and reject violence. The attack represents the truth we know – that words on paper are not worth the ink they are printed with until all sides can embrace a path to peace. Paramilitary organizations must lay down their arms and recognize that their acts of violence will not succeed and the only path forward is through ceasefire and negotiations. The Prime Minister will make a further statement in the near future. I commend this statement to the House.
  12. Mr. Speaker, I of course thank the Shadow Foreign Secretary for her comments on this matter for she has demonstrated the very reason why this agreement in its current form is not workable – it has the support of everyone except the Republican and Unionist communities involved. If the path to peace in Northern Ireland were simply a matter of agreement between Westminster, London and Washington the Troubles would have been brought to a conclusion long ago. However; we cannot force through an agreement which is not supported by the communities it seeks to bring together. The Shadow Foreign Secretary says she notes “concerns” in the Republican and Unionist communities. “Concerns” is quite the turn of phrase to use for widespread, deeply rooted opposition. Republicans do not support this agreement because from their perspective it legitimizes British involvement in Northern Ireland. Unionists do not support it because it is seen as a closer step to Dublin’s involvement in Northern Ireland. That is why Unionist leaders as we speak are prepared to go to significant lengths to display their dissatisfaction and substantial unrest is very much a possibility. No one expects any agreement to be perfect or to be presented without opportunities for improvement. Yet what has been made abundantly clear is that the Anglo-Irish Agreement in its current form does not significantly alter the trajectory of violence in Northern Ireland, does not sufficiently tackle cooperation on paramilitary organizations and has become a tool of division in the very communities we seek to bring together. That is why this government has reached out to Dublin seeking further discussions at another summit – to find a path forward that can achieve the lasting peace we all desire. That is why when the next Irish Foreign Minister and Taoiseach are in place, whoever they may be, we will again extend that invitation for further discussions and have the full expectation that an Irish government committed to the peace process will join us. Let me remind the Shadow Foreign Secretary that while she can screech and squeal at the dispatch box as much as she likes attempting to score cheap political points, people’s lives are at risk. This government has an obligation to protect lives and property for all Britons and a duty to advance the difficult cause of peace in a complex political and social environment. Any agreement is simply words on paper, worth as much as the member opposite’s opinion, unless an agreement can be a basis for disarming paramilitary groups and bringing Unionists and Republicans together. We will continue to work diligently towards that aim and I will update this House further as meaningful progress is made.
  13. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce to the House The European Communities (Amendment) Act of 1986. Britain’s relationship with Europe was fundamentally changed in 1973 when the government headed by my friend the Right Honourable Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup brought the United Kingdom into the European Economic Community. Two years later the British people gave a full throated endorsement of membership in a national referendum. Since that time successive Prime Ministers and Foreign Secretaries have sought to strengthen the bonds of connection with Europe while also protecting national sovereignty I am pleased to say that the European Communities (Amendment) Act of 1986 represents a strengthening of the institutional systems and a positive step towards increased democracy and transparency in Europe, while it enshrines national sovereignty. This act will be the first substantial revision of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community with the goal of transitioning the common market to a single market by 1992. By implementing many of the recommendations of the so called Dooge report, the aim is to reduce barriers to trade and investment, streamline policy making and create what is essentially a free trade block within the member states. This legislation would also provide the necessary legislative and regulatory reforms to implement the proposals by the target date. At a very high level when considering what this act would achieve it can be condensed into a few words: prosperity, transparency, accountability and sovereignty. The goal is to expand prosperity and reduce barriers to trade and investment. Freer trade has been the backbone of our economic policy for generations and rightly so as a rising tide lifts all boats. We want to encourage free flow of goods and money between member states so as to promote economic growth, reduce prices and create wealth at all levels. Unemployment across the whole of Europe has remained stubbornly high when compared to other industrialized countries and this is one of the tools available to us to put more people to work, more goods on the shelves and more money in the pockets of ordinary people. The European project had been spoken of in the abstract for many years. Yet now need only look around us to see it for the tangible reality that it is in places as simple as market and shop shelves. This act would expand the powers of the European Parliament, increasing transparency and accountability by subjecting decision making to a greater deal of scrutiny. Not just more accountability, but through a more democratic means as well as for the first time the European Parliament’s members would be directly elected and be given real, meaningful powers to block proposals and agreements to serve as a legislative balance in the community. Issues such as membership expansion would require review and approval. Multiple readings of policy proposals may be required by the European Parliament – giving the opportunity for many voices and perspectives to be heard. Representatives of the people elected by the people acting in the interests of the people is something that everyone – supporter and opponent alike should be incredibly proud of. In order to ease decision making through collaboration and broad consensus, the Council of Ministers would move away from unanimity in decision making in many areas towards qualified majority voting in areas spanning from health and worker safety, to environmental concerns, economic cohesion and other areas. This shift encourages further cooperation and discussions between member states and through a series of give and take individual states such as Britain can forge consensus to achieve its aims even in the face of some opposition. It has been said that sunlight is the best disinfectant. I am a subscriber to this belief. By throwing open the doors of our institutions to inquiry, allowing representatives from member states small and large to bring forward their concerns for consideration and by amplifying the voices of citizens and their representatives we clear out smoke filled rooms and amplify the importance of the individual and the public interest. Mr. Speaker, that is one of the great aspects of creating institutions from the ground up through consensus – we’re empowered and emboldened by the freedom to create solutions and prevent problems. Lastly but perhaps most importantly this act would protect vitally important national sovereignty by retaining our effective veto on matters related to taxation, the free movement of people and employment rights. Parliament is sovereign and it is right and fair that on the most important issues the ultimate power on decision making in the most important areas comes from this place, reflective and representative of the will of the people through their elected government. The argument made in the previous decade was that by giving up some sovereignty in limited areas we would see substantial economic benefit, increased cooperation in Europe and an increased likelihood of a lasting peace. That argument remains the same today and is strengthened, not weakened by this act. This legislation represents a carefully considered and thoughtfully negotiated initiative to achieve a more prosperous, more democratic, more transparent and more accountable European community working in the interests of individual citizens and individual nations. Through our shared values and common purpose we can and will achieve the hope of a better, stronger and indeed ultimately safer tomorrow. I look forward to the debate ahead and consider it a high honor and distinct privilege to present this legislation to the House.
×
×
  • Create New...