Display of Lilies in Parliament Buildings

The Business Committee has allocated two hours for the debate on the motion concerning the display of lilies in Parliament Buildings. A valid petition of concern in respect of the motion was tabled before the Business Office closed yesterday. Having checked the petition, I regard it as fulfilling the requirements of Standing Order 27. Any vote on the motion will be on a cross-community basis. Members wishing to inspect this or any future petition of concern may obtain copies from the Business Office.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. May I ask you to list the names on the petition of concern?

I have told the Assembly that copies of the petition are available in the Business Office.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I presume that the motion was accepted under Standing Order 11(1), which indicates that earlier meetings of the Assembly may be called for specific matters of urgent public importance. Clearly, someone accepted the motion about lilies or flowers in the Great Hall of this Building as a matter of urgent public importance.

Will you confirm, Madam Deputy Speaker, that you accepted the motion under the terms of Standing Orders? It may be appropriate to explain why the display of flowers in the Great Hall is a matter of urgent public importance. Why is the matter distinct from the many crises in previous recesses, such as the blizzards and storms over Christmas, in respect of which no motions were put down?

The motion falls under Standing Order 11(1), which refers to

Thirty Members signed the motion that called for this early meeting. Thus, an adequate percentage of Members demonstrated a sense of urgency sufficient for the motion to satisfy the requirement of Standing Orders. That is not a matter of judgement for the Speaker; the requirement of Standing Order 11 is for 30 signatures, and that requirement has been met.

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. There are two requirements under Standing Order 11(1). First, the First and Deputy First Ministers can summon a meeting, or 30 Members can sign a petition to summon a meeting, as you rightly say. The second qualification for a valid motion is the purpose of the meeting. That second qualification clearly states that a debate can be held

A layman would not think that this is a matter of urgent public importance. Therefore the motion is invalid.

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Is not the criterion for an emergency debate — and God knows that there are many emergencies out there waiting to be debated — not the 30 signatures but whether there is an emergency? The Democratic Unionist Party has tabled this motion for purely sectarian, political reasons.

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Will you confirm that the matter is of such urgent public concern that the Members opposite have signed a petition of concern?

A total of 30 Members signed the motion — a significant percentage of the Assembly — and they see the matter as one of urgent public importance.

I beg to move

I do so in the names of the 30 Members (including myself) who signed the requisition for an emergency sitting. I thank those from a wide spectrum of Unionist opinion who took the time on Friday to come to Parliament Buildings for that purpose. Some went out of their way, and that is appreciated.

Two important points have been raised about the calling of the debate. Some Members say that the holding of a special meeting of the Assembly is a waste of time and money. I would have preferred the matter to be dealt with by the Assembly Commission. For that reason, Rev Robert Coulter and I called a special meeting of the Commision at 11.00 am on Friday. Although the Speaker, myself and Mr Coulter were available for a meeting, the representatives of Sinn Féin, the SDLP and Alliance refused to turn up. As a result, there was no quorum —

Will the Member give way?

I will not give way.

There was no quorum — [Interruption]

Order.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was available for the meeting at 11 o’clock but not for the one o’clock meeting. [Interruption]

The Member has indicated that she wants to make a point of order. I have been unable to hear what the point of order is.

Mr Wells said that I was not available for the 11.00 am meeting. I was available. However, I was not available for the 1.00 pm meeting. It is on the record. Rev Robert Coulter was not — [Interruption]

That is not a point of order.

It is interesting that Mrs Bell has confirmed that she was available but decided not to attend the meeting, thus ensuring that there was no quorum to enable the Assembly Commission to rescind its decision. Mrs Bell, Mr Fee and the other representatives knew that had that meeting been held, Mr Coulter and I, with 52 votes between us, would have been able to ensure that the decision was rescinded. So there was absolutely no — [Interruption]

My understanding is that if I am named, I have an immediate opportunity to respond. For the purposes of this debate, we might as well start with facts, because — [Interruption]

Order. A Member who is named and/or criticised has a right to respond at the end of the debate.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Standing Order 60 indicates how good order is to be maintained in the Chamber. Paragraph (1)(a) states that when a Member "wilfully obstructs" a debate in the Chamber it is up to the Speaker to take action. It is clear that a number of Members from the Nationalist and Alliance Benches are trying to make — [Interruption]

Order.

May I make the point of order?

I have taken the point of order.

You cannot have taken the point of order for I have not made it.

Order. Please resume your seat. I have taken the Member’s advice, and I will ensure that order is maintained on all Benches.

I made it clear that if 11.00 am was inconvenient, the meeting could be held at 5.00 pm, 7.00 pm, midnight — at any time on Friday, in fact. We are here today because those members of the Commission who boycotted that meeting would not allow the democratic will of the Assembly to be exerted. They could do the arithmetic and they knew that Rev Robert Coulter and I between us had the majority of the votes of the Assembly, allocated to us for the purposes of that vote.

It is amazing how many Members have been on radio condemning what they consider to be a trivial matter. Mr McGrady, Mr Close and Mrs Bell have been tripping over themselves to go on radio to comment on something that they consider trivial. Methinks they do protest too much.

Members have referred to the calling of this emergency meeting of the Assembly while there was no such emergency meeting after Omagh. After the Omagh bombing the DUP and others called for an emergency debate, but we were not allowed to have one by the Secretary of State. So let us nail that lie.

The fundamental decision that we will make today is whether this Building, the home of the Northern Ireland Assembly, should be used for a floral display dedicated to the memory of the terrorists who have tortured this community for 30 years. Let us be absolutely clear: this is not simply about a floral display representing the Irishness felt by some Members of the Assembly. If they wanted that Irishness represented, they could have used shamrock. Through the Assembly Commission, Sinn Féin has made it clear that this was to honour the memory of the 300 IRA "volunteers" who have died in action since 1968. [Interruption]

Order.

Let me set the record straight. The decision that precipitated this special debate was not put forward by Sinn Féin. It was a compromise decision.

The Unionists of East Belfast will note once again that Mr Ervine has leapt to the defence of Sinn Féin/IRA. Go to the people of Dee Street and try to explain — [Interruption]

Order. The Member will speak through the Chair.

Through the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, I tell Mr Ervine to go to the people of Dee Street and the shipyard and explain his actions. Not only did he vote for this; he was on his feet immediately to defend Sinn Féin/IRA.

For the first time in the history of the United Kingdom, a Government building will be used to display symbols that honour IRA terrorists. Many people find that an absolute disgrace. The Sinn Féin representative on the Assembly Commission who proposed that lilies should be permitted in Parliament Buildings objected to the sale of poppies in this very building. It was her view that if poppies could be sold, then so should Easter lilies. The money collected would be given to the National Graves Association (NGA), which is purported to maintain the graves and memorials of those who have, in its words, died in the cause of Irish freedom. As Members will note, that is an attempt to peddle the lie that there is equivalence between the poppy and the lily. It is disgraceful that the Assembly Commission has endorsed the view — [Interruption]

Order.

It is disgraceful that the Assembly Commission has endorsed the view that there can be any equivalence between those who died in trenches defending this country from anarchy and Nazism and those who died in ditches having been killed by their own bombs as they waited to murder members of the security forces. The poppy is sold by the Royal British Legion to provide support and care for the many veterans, both Protestant and Catholic, who served in the two world wars. The lily is an IRA symbol sold to maintain memorials to dead IRA terrorists. It is an insult to the dead of two world wars to attempt to draw any comparison between the poppy and the lily.

The Easter lily became the symbol of remembrance for those who have engaged in terrorist activities since 1926. It was adopted by the Republican women’s organisation. When the IRA split in 1970 both the Official IRA and the Provisional IRA continued to use the Easter lily in separate commemorations. Official IRA members wore a lily with a self-adhesive backing and became known as "Stickies", while Provisional IRA supporters secured their lilies to their lapels with traditional pins.

Easter lilies are sold solely on behalf of the National Graves Association. The Easter lily has no other symbolism or use. The NGA, founded in 1898, has three main aims. I quote from its constitution:

The NGA has never deviated from its guiding principle that only a 32-county Irish Republic represents the true aspiration of those who gave their lives for Irish freedom. That is what the lilies are being sold in aid of.

The NGA claims to be a non-political organisation. That is interesting. In January 2000 the NGA proclaimed that it had succeeded in having the remains of Tom Williams released from Crumlin Road Prison. Leading IRA activists such as Joe Cahill and Mr Adams, along with Liam Shannon from the NGA, carried the coffin of Mr Williams to Milltown Cemetery. Why was Mr Williams executed in 1942? He was executed for the murder of a Roman Catholic RUC officer, Patrick Murphy, whose death left eight children without a father. That is the so-called work of the NGA. Over the last three years it has supported the erection of a memorial in Dunleath Park in Downpatrick in honour of IRA activist Colm Marks. Why did Colm Marks die? He was shot by the Army as he attempted to launch a mortar bomb into Downpatrick RUC Station.

I notice that Mr McGrady is no longer with us, but it would be very interesting to know if he supports the work of the NGA in Downpatrick. [Interruption]

Order.

And I have no doubt that the NGA has plans to unveil a memorial to Thomas Begley, the Shankill bomber.

Did Mrs Bell know any of that before she supported the unveiling of lilies in the Assembly? Did she know the association? We are not talking about flower arranging; we are talking about emblems that honour dead terrorists.

When the Assembly Commission decided to check up on the NGA, it discovered some interesting facts. The NGA does not have a phone number; it is not a registered charity; it does not submit tax returns; and it failed to respond to several letters from the Commission. At best, it is a group of deluded Nationalists who collect money to commemorate dead terrorists. More likely, it is a front for more sinister activities. That is what the Easter lily represents.

The second part of the motion deprecates the abuse of the electoral system that allowed the decision to be taken in the first place. No Unionist with all the facts about the use of the Easter lily and the work of the NGA would ever have voted for the display of the lilies in the House. Votes were cast on behalf of one group that — and proof of this assertion will be produced later — had made it clear that under no circumstances was Mrs Bell or any Alliance Party representative permitted to cast votes in the Commission on its behalf.

Another Member was totally unaware that the decision was being made and would not have consented to it. A third group was not properly consulted and, once it was made aware of what was proposed, immediately withdrew its consent and issued a press release denouncing the decision.

Once the full information was in the public domain, and all the Unionists in the House knew what was going on, to a man they united to oppose the decision. That is why they did not permit a second meeting of the Assembly Commission; they knew that democracy would prevail and the decision would be overturned. Many in the House — and outside — will be watching with interest what is going on in the Assembly.

The original decision set democracy on its head. The second meeting resulted in the stymying of democracy, because a quorum could not be obtained. It is clear that a majority of the House will vote against the disgraceful display of lilies in the Great Hall, but the motion will be stymied through the use of the petition of concern. So much for democracy. So much for taking into account the feelings of ordinary grassroots Unionists in this country.

Does the Commission propose to continue with the decision and railroad it through without the consent of the Assembly? If it intends to do that, then it sets a dangerous precedent.

I had the privilege of representing South Down in the Assembly between 1982 and 1986. During that time I had the sad duty of attending the funerals of 13 members of the security forces who had been brutally murdered by the IRA. At one of those funerals, there was so little left of a policeman’s body that concrete blocks had to be put in the coffin to convince his wife that there was a body. There was no body. He was blown into a thousand pieces.

The Assembly is debating a motion about a decision that will allow the Great Hall to be used to honour those who committed those foul deeds. The majority of ordinary decent people in the Province will never accept that decision.

Given the number of Members wishing to participate in the debate and the time allocated by the Business Committee, I ask all to limit their contributions to less than five minutes.

I support the motion. Mr Wells has covered the ground very well, but there are questions that need to be asked. We must decide whether the importance of the Easter lily can be equated to that of the poppy. I, for one, cannot. I see the poppy as a national symbol.

One of the most moving moments of my life was when I walked over the field at Thiepval Wood at 7.00 am on 1 July some years ago and tried to imagine that morning many years before when so many young men lay dead before breakfast time. Can I look upon their courage and sacrifice in the same way as I look upon those who lie behind hedges, trigger bombs, destroy lives and creep away again, some of whom were caught and are now to be remembered by the lily? To be honest, I cannot. The poppy symbolises something far beyond that which is so partisan and so sectarian. That raises a question in my mind — should the House be used for the display of partisan symbols?

Members have agreed that the flax flower should be a neutral symbol which we can all adhere to and support. Why then are we debating an issue that turns the House into a vehicle for the display of partisan symbols? If this goes through, the next request, undoubtedly, will be for a display of orange lilies around 12 July. That raises another question — what was really behind the bringing of this matter to the Commission at this time? Is it that Sinn Féin is following a policy of cultural aggravation? Is it that there is a policy of provocation, knowing that Unionists will react in a predictable way? Sadly, the end product is that Sinn Féin has succeeded in dividing the Assembly on sectarian grounds. That is a tragedy when we have all worked and tried in the Committees and elsewhere to make progress. I say again that this is a tragedy. There will be no winners in today’s debate, and the biggest loser will be democracy.

I plead with Sinn Féin to consider its policy of cultural aggravation. If it begins to hype cultural aggravation we will be back again to the killing fields and to the divisions that plagued the Province for so many years. Today is a sad day for the Assembly. Many people are suffering in the community. Their hurt is still real, and their pain is still great. We need to think about what we are doing when we raise such controversial matters in the Commission. We need to think about what we are doing to those who expect us to make progress with peace and reconciliation. There is no way in which a matter such as this — and I am not talking about the motion before the House today, but about the request to have a partisan symbol in the House — can help peace and reconciliation. The demands of peace and reconciliation cannot be satisfied if we pursue this pathway.

People outside the Chamber are wondering what sort of lunacy has descended upon the Assembly that it has to be urgently reconvened over a bowl of lilies. [Interruption]

That is the reaction in the street — whether Members like it or not. The proposer of this motion has done a great disservice to the House. He has made it look foolish. He has made the House look as if it does not concern itself with taxpayers’ money or with serious issues of politics in our society. That is the reality of the situation. People outside this Chamber are wondering if we are sane in coming back here to discuss such a subject. [Interruption]

Order.

Those responsible are, of course, the DUP. Why? It’s purpose is naked electioneering. It has reconvened the House to promote its election campaigns throughout Northern Ireland. Let us recognise that today, and let us see it for what it is — an abuse of the House.

The substance of the issue is that the Assembly Commission has made a reasoned, fair and balanced decision. We should recognise that. This was a compromise worked out over a series of meetings. Members can see that for themselves — the outline, timetable and minutes of those meetings are available. The Commission worked very hard indeed to reach a consensus on the issue. A fair decision was made, one which could not be challenged, and which, I believe would stand up to serious scrutiny on independent examination. The Commission recognised the problems and the fact that symbols in our society are divisive, but sought to reach an accommodation which would satisfy everybody.

The motion, which was accepted by the Commission, provided that over the Easter period two floral displays in the Great Hall would be replaced by lilies. There was no mention of the National Graves Association, collection of money, terrorism or of any of the things which Mr Wells has brought to the attention of the House today. This was, in effect, an inoffensive motion. The Members on the DUP Benches take offence, but everyone can see that it is simulated — imaginary rather than real. The reality is that the Commission, in its wisdom — a Commission that is delicately balanced and has made fair decisions since its inception — has worked fairly in this instance, as in others.

We need to recognise that there are many political symbols in our deeply divided society. The Commission’s decision is an attempt to do that. It cannot operate effectively if its delicate and unique decision-making process is to be challenged in this manner by parties who do not get their way. The DUP did not get their way, so they are kicking up a row in the House.

We need to work toward the acceptance of one another’s symbols. We must accept complete neutrality, equivalence or parity of esteem, or we must work towards the creation of consensual symbols. The SDLP would support that.

Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I want to set the record straight concerning the recall of the Assembly to discuss this issue.

There are issues out there such as foot-and-mouth disease; the sectarian attacks in Glengormley and north Belfast which left one man dead; the needs of people who are living in poverty; a crisis in the Health Service — and what do the DUP Members do? They bring us back to talk about a floral display of Easter lilies at Stormont. That shows where the DUP Members’ priorities lie. They have nothing constructive to offer but the old, failed politics of the past.

I want to set the record straight on some of the actual details. It has been said by other parties and by the media that this has been brought forward as an election issue. If people care to look on the Internet or at the records of the Commission they will see that this has been an issue since November. As Mr Coulter correctly stated, it arose at the same time as the issue of poppies. My view was that in the interests of parity of esteem and equality, similar provision should be made — [Interruption]

Order.

Similar provision should be made for Easter lilies as a recognition that every single tradition on this island — [Interruption]

Order.

Every tradition and community on this island is entitled to equal recognition and validity. It has also been stated in sections of the media that there was an acrimonious debate within the Commission on the issue. At no time was there any acrimony over this issue. The matter was debated by the Commission at various times; people put forward their points of view, and they were listened to. The Commission reached its decision in a cool, clear and level-headed manner. There was no abuse of the voting system. The DUP know as well as anyone that every Commisssion Member carries a weighted vote. This is a failure on the part of the DUP to accept the Commission’s decision and the principles of equality and parity of esteem.

Regarding the contribution from the DUP Member Jim Wells — who is supposedly from a Christian background — there were a lot of lies in what he had to say, and I would like to refute them. First — [Interruption]

Order.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. As a Member of this House who was ejected for using less robust language, I demand that you ask the Member to withdraw or exact the same punishment. Put her out.

Order. It is unparliamentary for a Member, in referring to another Member, to use the word "lies". I ask her to withdraw that word.

I shall withdraw that particular word and use — [Interruption]

Order. I have asked the Member to withdraw the word; other Members should give her time to do so.

I withdraw that particular word, but I want to point out that what Jim Wells said was inaccurate. First, he said that the National Graves Association failed to contact the Commmission. On 2 March this year the Clerk to the Commmission held a meeting with the National Graves Association to discuss the issue. Therefore that was inaccurate.

I want to turn to the issue of the symbolism of the lily. The Easter lily represents the 1916 rising. It represents those men and women who died fighting for Irish freedom. It is a cherished symbol in the Republican and Nationalist tradition.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. It appears that the clock is not working.

I thank the Member for pointing that out. It was turned off at the last point of order. We will correct it.

The Easter lily represents all those men and women who died for Irish freedom. I am not expecting any Unionist to fully embrace what I and Irish Nationalists believe in. However, as an Irish Nationalist and an Irish Republican who sits in this House, who is elected by a constituency, who represents people and who is part of a community on this island, my views and traditions are entitled to equal validity. I do not expect Unionists to agree with that, but I do expect them to allow me to choose the symbol that I want to represent me. I do not want them to tell me what symbols should represent me.

We are coming out of nearly 30 years of conflict and have a history of conflict on this island. There should be no hierarchy of victimhood. Every person who died in that conflict is entitled to equal respect. That includes people who come from my tradition.

I am disappointed in the lack of generosity from Unionism, not only from the DUP but also the Ulster Unionist Party. The Ulster Unionist Party in particular signed up to the Good Friday Agreement, which enshrines equality and parity of esteem. Unfortunately, yet again, Unionism has failed to show generosity to Irish Nationalism and has shown that it is unable to live on an equal basis with Irish Nationalists on this island. Go raibh maith agat.

Like many people, I believe that the recall of the Assembly is undoubtedly a blatant abuse of the Assembly Rules. I am particularly disappointed with Jim Wells for bringing this forward, because he is someone I have known for many years and hold in respect. I had set this week aside, like many other Members, to catch up on constituency work. That is what we have been elected to do — [Interruption] It is no holiday.

Easter lilies, to me, are a strong reminder of the most important date in the Christian calendar. I do not associate them with Republicanism. Republicans may have hijacked them, but I associate Easter lilies with the supreme sacrifice of Christ on the Cross and his rising from the dead on Easter Sunday.

Easter lilies have adorned Christian churches — both Protestant and Catholic — for many years throughout Northern Ireland at Easter. As someone of the Christian faith, I deplore the DUP’s attempt to demean the Easter lily for electoral purposes. [Interruption]

Order. The Member has a right to be heard.

The DUP’s action verges on sacrilege. It is said that a thing of beauty is a joy for ever. The lily is a beautiful flower. That is why I have grown orange lilies in my garden over the years. At present I am growing yellow lilies — I wonder what connotation is now going to be put on that.

We realise the sensitivity of this issue. Mrs Bell has been charged to represent the non-Executive parties on the Commission. She tried to contact all the other non- Executive parties. She was able to make contact with the UUAP, the Women’s Coalition and the PUP, and she attempted to contact Mr McCartney.

The NIUP, however, decided some time ago that it did not want to be represented on the Commission by anybody. For the NIUP to come out now and criticise the decision that was taken, when it shied away from being represented on the Commission, is blatant hypocrisy. It is unforgivable.

In relation to the issue of symbols, there was no attempt to equate the display of poppies with the display of Easter lilies. We all recognise that poppies are an international symbol of those who made the supreme sacrifice in the various world war conflicts. On this issue, and other issues, Eileen Bell, metaphorically speaking, has more balls than the proposer and those who have supported him here today. These people are nihilists, for the only word in their vocabulary is "no". That is what we are getting here — "no" to a democratic decision that was made by — [Interruption]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In the past when a person has used language deemed not to be suitable for a public place, and particularly for the Assembly, the Speaker has brought it to the attention of the individual concerned and advised him or her to refrain from using such language. Even though the Member in this case is your Colleague, perhaps you should do so.

I thank Mr Wilson for the point of order. I will consider the matter and issue a response to him.

Clearly, the truth hurts.

The fact is that the DUP, along with the others — and the spinelessness of the Ulster Unionists must be highlighted as well — [Interruption]

TOP

Next >>