Order. The Member is entitled to be heard.

Clearly, the truth hurts, and that is the truth. The DUP is here today to overturn democracy in the Assembly. I will be voting against the motion.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. During Mr Neeson's speech I clearly heard Mr Wells say that Mrs Bell had stolen their votes. It appears to me that an allegation of theft is an allegation that would be regarded as unparliamentary in other places. I ask you to rule on it.

Thank you for that point of order.

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I stand over that allegation. The minutes of the Assembly Commission show that Mrs Bell had 16 votes on every occasion. Those votes included the three votes of the Northern Ireland Unionist Party that had made it clear that it did not want her to vote on its behalf.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. If Mr Wells was reading from the draft minutes, perhaps it would have been better to have read from the beginning of them. In relation to our putting the original suggestion they state

I must say that, and I will comment on it later.

I have been asked to rule on a number of points of order. On the point raised by Mr Ford and confirmed by Mr Wells, I am assuming that it was a figure of speech that was used. However, I will look at Hansard and give the matter consideration.

I am sad that the debate is rapidly turning into a farce due to the behaviour of some Members and the language of others. It is, of course, the wish of our opponents on the other side of the House that that should be the case, because they want to trivialise a debate on an issue that is of grave concern. The Easter lily to be displayed in the foyer of this Building is quite clearly a symbol of terror. No attempt by anyone, including Mrs Bell, to equate it to, for instance, the poppy, will diminish the view of the people of Northern Ireland who are aware of the history of the Easter lily.

Mr Alban Maginness of the SDLP said that this debate has been brought about because of some nonsense on this side of the Floor. The history of this debate goes back to when Mr Alban Maginness's party decided to enter into an unholy alliance with the Sinn Féin/IRA movement. While he chides this side of the House for being afraid to deal with issues, we have witnessed over the last number of weeks and months, and no doubt will continue to witness through the run-up to the election, the SDLP being led by the nose by Sinn Féin on serious, major issues such as policing, decommissioning and now terrorist symbols.

The SDLP is not able to stand against Sinn Féin simply because it is slightly concerned about its electoral support. It thinks that playing to the gallery and to the nationalist community is likely to gain it a few additional votes and stop the meltdown of the SDLP. It will engage in whatever tricks, and go through whatever hoops, the Sinn Féin/ IRA movement presents it with.

This matter could not have been brought to the Commission, and it would not have come onto the Floor of the Chamber had it not been for the antics of Mr Maginness and, indeed, Mrs Bell of the Alliance Party. She brought forward what she termed a "compromise", but the end result was the same - the display of an offensive symbol of terror in the Foyer of this public Building.

With regard to Mrs Bell's role in this, there was a misappropriation of votes, as it is quite clearly recorded in the Commission's minutes that both Bob McCartney's vote -

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In view of the comments made by Mr Wells, is it in order for a Member to suggest, or to say that votes were misappropriated by Mrs Bell? It is absolutely unacceptable, in parliamentary terms, to suggest that.

The clock continued running while the point of order was made.

We will stop the clock for the point of order.

The minutes of the Commission meeting are available and they should not be referred to on the Floor of the House. They are a matter for the Commission, not for the Assembly.

There are two aspects to Mrs Bell's hand in this. The first issue is the misappropriation of the United Kingdom Unionist Party's vote and my party's vote. Quite clearly, she would not have had the support of either of those parties.

Also, it was the foolishness of some of those who represent the Unionist community on the Commission that allowed this to go through. They gave Mrs Bell the authority to claim that she had the majority vote necessary to support the motion.

Finally, we have in this Chamber today Ulster Unionists and others who rushed to sign the petition because of the publicity that they were likely to get from it by showing how staunch they were in opposing all aspects of Sinn Féin/IRA terror and all of their symbols.

There is another motion in the Business Office which calls for the exclusion of Sinn Féin/IRA from the Executive and from the Assembly. The sad fact is that they have not rushed to support that motion. What we are witnessing in the Hall is a manifestation of the cancer that is within the body politic in Northern Ireland - terrorists in government. Is it any surprise? What did David Trimble and the Ulster Unionists expect when they signed up to the Belfast Agreement? They signed up to give these people the right to come into these institutions and to propagate their beliefs and to bring these symbols of terror into Parliament Buildings.

You cannot play with terrorists. You cannot allow those who are inextricably linked to terrorism to come into government and then expect them to behave in a house-trained, proper and orderly democratic fashion. My appeal to the Ulster Unionist party and to the Democratic Unionist Party is that if they cannot remove terrorists from government then they should remove themselves from the institutions of government. It is playing about with those institutions -

Order. The Member's time is up.

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Is it appropriate for Members to refer to other Members as not being house-trained? I ask that you take a ruling on that and ask the Member to withdraw the remarks.

Order. There have been a number of requests for me to look into the use of language, and I will give the matter consideration.

I still have half a minute left. The clock did not stop when the point of order was made.

Out of order. The time is up. I will move on to -

I have to challenge that. I want to ask if the timekeepers can -

Order. You have no right to challenge a ruling of the Speaker.

I am conscious that we are here on what people describe as an emergency - an issue of grave concern to the community. Has anyone noticed the sombre tone of those who brought this emergency to the Chamber? Has anyone noticed their dismay? Rather has anyone noticed their glee and excitement? It seems that we may be here for a foolish and unreasonable cause, the furtherance of individual hopes and dreams for the election.

Some things should be clarified, although five minutes, unfortunately, is not a lot of time. We have already heard that this issue has been before the Commission since November. We were nearly at Easter, and no decision had been made. My understanding is that a proposal by Sinn Féin concerned the free availability, or the sale, of Easter lilies to prove equivalence with the poppy. Another proposal was for a bunch of flowers and a card to explain what the Easter lily is. Neither of those, I believed, was acceptable. A group of people then tried to do what politics is supposed to do - to reach some formula that would get us beyond the difficulties that epitomise this divided society. What was advocated was that there would be two flower arrangements containing - but not necessarily solely comprising - Easter lilies. There would be no explanation of the Easter lily. In many ways, since the House was to have been in recess, one might argue that it was a very minimalist response to what was originally requested. It achieved enough support to be successful.

There are those who would like the Easter lily to be treated as equivalent to the poppy, and they are matched by those who foolishly allow them to do exactly that. They should not be mentioned in the same book, never mind in the same sentence. The actions of the DUP, followed on hands and knees behind by the UUP, enable Republicans to see this issue thrown into abeyance again, to be argued over again and again, whether we like it or not. As a Unionist, I have no particular desire to appreciate or venerate the Republican dead - some of my colleagues and I might like to have added to their ranks. As members of the DUP slid about the "Armagh desert" with rolled- up manifestos determined to destroy the Republican movement, there were those of us who tried to do exactly that, more efficiently. I am sorry to say that we did not have as much success as I would like to have been able to report. However - [Interruption]

Order.

I appreciate Mr Ervine's dilemma, but is it appropriate for him to rattle on about wanting to murder more Catholics or more Nationalists?

Order. Will Mr Ervine please clarify his remarks.

I do not believe that I need to clarify my remarks. I have not used unparliamentary language.

Those who venerate the Republican dead will do so whether I like it or not. My experience of this society - as perhaps we are about to see on the lower Ormeau Road, when Republicans try to stop a people from expressing its culture - is that when you try to stop something, the problem does not go away. It gets worse.

The motion that was put forward was an attempt to reach a compromise wherein some people would accept that that was an appreciation for them and a veneration of their dead. For others it was a way to make politics work, and to take us on to the next undoubtedly problematic item on the agenda.

I am not surprised, but deeply disappointed, that when people were dying last year, none of the Members who asked for this emergency debate cared enough about seven dead people to ask for the recall of the Assembly.

I do not think that we are in a crisis. However, I take a different view from all the Members who have spoken so far. I think that none of the Members in this Chamber understand the importance of symbols. Not only in this country, but in many other countries, symbols represent ethnic and political identity. Indeed, wars have been fought over them. It would be hypocritical of Members to go out into the communities and expect people to resolve their differences over symbols, if they cannot resolve them in this Assembly. That was what the Commission was asked to do.

The Commission was asked to resolve the dilemma of what happens in November and what might happen at Easter. Eileen Bell was put in a very difficult position. Let the record show - before anyone talks any further about those parties that could have done something about taking their votes away - that there was an opportunity for them to give their votes to another party. They could have done that before this decision was made. I understand - and the Member is not here - that Roger Hutchinson has done that. He has taken his vote from one party and given it to the DUP.

Two parties.

No other party has actually done that. As Bob McCartney says, there may be some confusion at times about how Roger Hutchinson uses his vote.

Let the record show that we might not be having this debate if those Members who had the opportunity to do so had taken their votes, blocked them, moved them and allowed another party to use their votes instead.

Will the Member give way?

Mr Wells wants me to give way. As the mover of the motion, you will have an opportunity to respond at the end of the debate. I say to you that I found -

The Member will speak through the Chair.

I found Mr Wells's remarks very intimidatory. He asked another Member to go into the shipyard and ask people how they would like to be represented. He should know that we have had debates in this Chamber about jobs in that shipyard. Those jobs do not belong to Protestants or Catholics; they are jobs for this community. Mr Wells should be ashamed of himself for, in another debate, asking people to go into a workplace and find out how they would like to be represented. We have legislation in this country about that. Perhaps he would also like to address that in his summing-up.

People are here because they have been given a mandate to come here. I too, take exception to some of Mr Ervine's remarks, but what he no doubt is pointing to is the fact that this was a dirty, rotten war. In that dirty, rotten war people fought over how they wanted to be represented. If we are to move on, those are the remarks that we should reflect on. We should understand now how far we have come, given that we are even discussing this issue in the first place.

Mrs Bell has my total support. If she did anything, she operated in the most democratic way that I have seen to date. She actually sent a memorandum around those parties that she represents on the Commission and asked us to attend an emergency meeting. We all attended that meeting - the parties that were represented at the meeting are named - and we debated a number of options. The option of selling the Easter lily was opposed at this stage. The National Graves Association is not a charity. Charities have permission to sell their products in the Assembly. That being the case, the next option was a display of lilies. That was the option that those four parties agreed, and Mrs Bell went to that meeting of the Commission and put that consensus and compromise forward. That is what won the day, and that is what will still win the day when this debate is over.

I thought that in a fairly lengthy career at the Bar I had heard every possible form of hypocrisy, cant and dissimulation, but this debate really takes the biscuit. How anyone in their right mind can conceivably say that the Easter lily, as the Sinn Féin representative described it, is not a symbol of Republicanism in all its forms, both democratic and violent, is beyond me. For someone to say, as Mr Neeson attempted to say, that the Easter lily is a religious symbol supervening all other symbols at Easter, is rank nonsense in the context of this debate.

There is no doubt that the SDLP shares many of the political and irredentist objectives of Sinn Féin. I am sure that for many of its members, for private, political and electoral purposes, the Easter lily is just as much a symbol of their hopes for a united Ireland as it is for Sinn Féin. One can therefore understand the view that they take upon it. However, for anyone to suggest for a moment that a proposal that Easter lilies be displayed within this Building was not tantamount to the gravest provocation to those whose relatives, friends and political colleagues have been mutilated and murdered by the people who hold that Easter lily as a symbol is rank hypocrisy.

What this debate has enabled me and, I hope, the public to see is the democratic values of some of those who pontificate in this Chamber, who take a lofty attitude far above the likes of those who have a clear party affiliation. I refer to Mr Ervine, who unfortunately, while claiming to be a democrat, while constantly posturing in the media and speaking on the radio about his credentials, actually comes here - and for once I am in total agreement with the intervention made by Sinn Féin - and suggests that he regrets that he was not more successful when wearing his terrorist hat in removing more human beings from the face of this earth. That is something that everyone here should view with grave disquiet.

I am totally and utterly opposed to the activities, views and political aspirations of Sinn Féin, but I will never ever for one moment countenance that its members be dealt with other than in accordance with the rule of law, because I am a democrat. In this Chamber I have condemned violence, from whatever source it emanates, and the patronising, lofty, holier-than-thou attitude taken by some.

All this trouble stems from the fact that a symbol of violent Republicanism - a symbol adored and adorned by those who have committed the most brutal acts of terrorism and violence - is to be displayed in a building allegedly dedicated to the democratic process and the observation of the rule of law. I have heard much about the inclusiveness of this process and that it is a healing process - I heard that today from Mr McGrady on the radio - but nothing could be more calculated to provoke, to divide and to re-emphasise sectarian differences than this proposal.

In conclusion, had the proposal been to fill those vases on 01 July with orange lilies, which, like the Easter lily, have a specific political connotation, I would have objected to that. Anyone who endeavours to equate the poppy with either of those symbols is desecrating, misjudging and misrepresenting the purpose of the poppy.

Critics of my Colleague Mr Wells have said that this is a trivial matter. For such a trivial matter, I am amazed at their turnout today. We have almost a full turnout from the SDLP and Sinn Féin, and a very high turnout from the Alliance Party and the other minor parties. I am absolutely amazed by their turnout. Indeed, most of the Galleries are also packed - some of them, I am sure, in support of the parties who say that this is a trivial matter.

To all the members of the SDLP, Sinn Féin, and the Alliance Party who are here, the question should be put as to where they were last week when this Assembly was taking very important votes and making very important decisions on agriculture and the economy. Their Benches were empty last week, but on a trivial matter they do take the time to turn up. Who is electioneering today? That is the question that should be asked.

A lot of people, not only in this Assembly but across Northern Ireland, will be disgusted by the remarks of Mr Ervine. He takes on a new label today as "Easter lily-livered" Ervine. Mr "Easter lily" Ervine, who today admitted that he is a failed terrorist - and I hope that after the next election it will be demonstrated that he is also a failed politician - came to the House to encourage actions that he claims he should have taken. That is disgraceful. This is the person that the Alliance Party wants to side with.

The Alliance Party should search its soul this morning. The deputy leader of the Alliance Party was on the radio this morning. He is not in the House today - perhaps he is down at SD Bell's. I am not sure where he is, but he is not taking part in this debate. He should hang his head in shame, as should his party colleagues, for allowing themselves to be aligned with people who, quite clearly, are justifying generosity to terrorism. That is exactly what they are doing. His party colleague, Mrs Eileen Bell, tried to usurp the votes of other Members of this House that, quite frankly, are not her votes.

The statement by Mr Neeson, trying to in some way equate the Easter lily with Christ's crucifixion, verges on blasphemy. It is absolute and total nonsense. No one equates that symbol with Christ's crucifixion.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the SDLP has been hijacked by Sinn Féin -

I remind Mr Paisley Jnr that I am not Madam Deputy Speaker.

I apologise for the gender mistake. I am sure you are a man - I will take your word for it. My Colleague says you are better looking than the previous Deputy Speaker, but I will make no comment.

The SDLP has been hijacked by Sinn Féin in this debate. Its members have never worn Easter lilies on other occasions. Weeks before a general election and a local government election the SDLP is too frightened to challenge Sinn Féin on this issue, to challenge the display of a symbol that is akin to the Nazi swastika. It is being used to encourage terrorism. It would be placed opposite a plaque that pays homage and respect to Edgar Graham and Sir Norman Stronge. That is what they are equating this with. But it is not equal to that, and it never will be. If Members of the House vote against the motion that has been brought by my Colleague, they will not only do themselves a disservice, but also do Ulster's honoured dead the gravest disservice.

This is a divisive and unnecessary debate. The Belfast Agreement was supposed to draw a line under the past 30 years and allow us to move on. Sinn Féin, however, is acting against the ethos of the agreement. It is conducting a form of cultural warfare in place of its former occupation. We saw that in the run-up to the commemoration of the hunger strikes; we saw it yesterday when a plaque was unveiled in Enniskillen of all places, an extremely insensitive thing to do. It is hyping the tension leading to an election, and Easter lilies are part of that cultural warfare campaign.

It is accepted that Easter lilies and orange lilies are cultural symbols. The poppy is not. The poppy is not only a national symbol; it is an international symbol recognised across the world as a commemoration of those who made the supreme sacrifice in two world wars. These issues should not be linked.

Sinn Féin needs to appreciate that actions such as this damage attempts that are being made to bring us out of the past 30 years and damage the confidence that communities are trying to build.

I would like to comment briefly on the voting system. I was involved in the Standing Orders Committee where discussions took place on how the Commission should operate. As Members will know, a system was only recently devised that everyone was completely happy with. I stand to be corrected, but my understanding is that it is based on the number of Members who were here on the first day. However, I find it confusing. I would welcome Mrs Bell's explaining how she thought she had all the votes that she had in her pocket. The Commission has traditionally operated a system whereby decisions are taken on a consensual basis. I do not know how we arrived at a position where votes were cast for this on behalf of Members who have indicated clearly today that they were not in favour of a floral display of Easter lilies. Mrs Bell should address this matter.

We are tearing ourselves apart. It is unfortunate that we have had to have this unnecessary debate in the lead-up to an election.

I wish to set straight something that Mr Wells said at the outset. He said that we were here because the Assembly Commission could not meet, as it could not get a quorum. I point out to him that I wrote to the Clerk to say that, having cancelled all my meetings for that day and rearranged a flight home from Brussels where we were discussing foot-and-mouth disease, by 5.00 pm on Thursday evening I could not ascertain whether the meeting was to be at 11.00 am or 1.00 pm the following day or which other Members would be attending. I could not, therefore, consult all my Colleagues, nor had I the luxury of reallocating my votes to anybody else. It was impossible for me to attend.

However, I fully understand why we are here. I do believe that this is a very important issue. [Interruption]

Order.

It goes to the very heart of how we treat each other in this institution and the example we give to our communities of how society should treat its members. This is about inclusion. It is about including all sections of the community. It is about recognising the symbols that are dear and important to all sections of the community. It is not simply about recognising the middle ground; it is about recognising and including as far as is possible those people who may have felt marginalised or alienated in the past. It is an attempt to recognise everybody's place in the new democratic society in which we live.

The Assembly Commission, in its decision, was extremely conscious of the fact that it was not suggesting equivalence - and I certainly would not suggest it - between the lily and the poppy, or indeed any other symbol. They are two unique symbols that mean something entirely different and are of extraordinarily potent emotional significance to different sections of the community in which they are held in high regard and esteem.

The Assembly Commission, in the absence of any clear direction, came up with what was very much a compromise. We did not accept, under the circumstances, that the National Graves Association should be involved or that the symbol should be sold in the building. We did accept that the Easter lily has a greater significance than that which the Republican movement has attached to it. As in the past, when the Assembly adopted the flax flower, when poppies for very important reasons were available here in November, we felt that a benign floral symbol was a sufficient compromise.

TOP

In my view, this is about putting up with things that we do not necessarily like. This very building is anathema to a large section of my community, but we put up with it. To many people who visit this building, the statues of Carson and Craigavon and other symbols are anathema, but we ask them to put up with them - they are part of our history.

The Assembly has debated the Union flag on many occasions. The Assembly Commission agreed that in the absence of any clear direction we would have to put up with the fact that it flies over this Building on designated days. We have also had a commemoration of the bicentenary of the Act of Union, and we have asked Members and visitors to put up with that. In divisive circumstances, the Assembly Commission's only option is to try to find a compromise we can all put up with. I feel that we achieved that in this case, and we are asking the Assembly to put up with that decision.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I am sorry that the phrase "cultural aggravation" was used. Many of us will remember - or perhaps not - Leading Seaman Magennis, the only man from this part of this island to receive a VC in the second world war.

For years, a Unionist-controlled council in the city hall refused to recognise the heroism of that man. It made cultural aggravation out of the poppy in relation to him.

This debate is not about the Easter lily. It is about the continuing struggle in Unionism between those on the Unionist side of the House that support the inclusive principles of the Good Friday Agreement and those on the Unionist side who want to return to the negative and politically suicidal philosophy of a Protestant Parliament for a Protestant people.

This debate is about those on the Unionist side who want to return to the political and religious fundamentalism that has bedevilled this society since partition. This debate is about DUP triumphalism, DUP sectarianism and DUP racism. I intervened during David Ervine's contribution, but I understand what he was saying. There are those on the DUP side of the House who have engaged in violence and sabre-rattling and who have attempted to encourage young Protestants - young Loyalists - to get involved in violence. They did not do the fighting - and I understand where David Ervine is coming from in that regard - yet they sit in this House and fancy dress themselves with debates on an Easter lily.

Whatever the outcome of this futile, negative debate, and regardless of the politically confusing coalition of pro- and anti-agreement Unionists voting against the display of the Easter lily in this Building - a Building from which Nationalists, Republicans and their traditions have been excluded, a Building that is awash with negative cultural traditions, a Building in which attempts have been made to exclude Catholics and Nationalists from participating in the politics of this part of Ireland - [Interruption]

Order.

Whatever the outcome and regardless of the negative political forces that we have here today, one thing is certain -

Bobby Sands would not be in here today.

Bobby Sands was a courageous man. There is one thing that cannot be negated - [Interruption] Am I going to get silence, A LeasCheann Comhairle?

Order. Please continue, Mr Kelly.

One thing is certain: the transition in this part of Ireland to the equality and the parity of esteem contained in the Good Friday Agreement is irreversible. The transition to respect for the cultural and religious traditions of those who live in this part of Ireland and who by race and conviction are part of a concept of a sovereign Irish nation is irreversible. It cannot be turned back by any bogus attempt by the DUP and their Colleagues - [Interruption] - Yes, and Billy Wright -

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Are you in control of the meeting, or are the people across the Chamber in control? I cannot hear the debate.

That is not a point of order. I will attempt to maintain order, but I cannot guarantee - [Interruption]

I am asking you for a response.

Mr Maskey, I am speaking.

So is everyone else.

Order.

Mr Maskey has a point.

This text appeared on a poster in 1925:

Order. The Member has a right to be heard.

A LeasCheann Comhairle, are we going to have order in the House, or is this rabble -

Mr Kelly, I am giving you an opportunity to continue. Please do so.

Throughout the debate we have not had order from the DUP rabble on that side of the House.

Listening to the last Member, one wondered for a moment if one was listening to a speech in the Assembly or an oration at Milltown.

Some Members have said that this is not the most important issue facing Northern Ireland, and I agree. On the third anniversary of the Belfast Agreement there has still been no decommissioning; we have seen the destruction of the RUC; there are terrorists in Government; the criminal justice system has been damaged; and paramilitaries have increasing control of our society. All those issues are more important than the motion that is before us today. However, those issues, together with a wide range of economic and social issues, are dealt with in the day-to-day business of the Assembly. This issue is timely because of the approach of Good Friday, and it is important for a number of reasons.

First, today's debate highlights the weakness of the Assembly's voting system. Mention has already been made of the votes in the Assembly Commission, but there is also the absurd sectarian system by which, whether this motion passes by one vote or 101 votes, it will be negatived simply because Nationalists are voting against it. At the time of the referendum Unionists were told that their great prize was to get power back into their own hands, yet today we find that we cannot even pass a motion dealing with Easter lilies because of the system.

Secondly, a number of parties have shown their true colours today. The SDLP is rushing headlong after Sinn Féin in the pursuit of electoral success. The Alliance Party and the Northern Ireland Women's Coalition have, unfortunately, shown their usual true colours of having greater sympathy for the Nationalist cause. The PUP has shown that its true bedfellows are Sinn Féin/IRA.

David Ervine said earlier that he regretted not having been more successful. Those were not just off-the-cuff remarks. Last night Mr Ervine said on the radio that Mr Wells and the supporters of this motion, unlike him and others, had not made Republicans cower behind steel doors. It is not my ambition in life to make anyone cower behind steel doors. I am a democrat, Sir. It ill behoves any Member of the Assembly to make that sort of boast -

The Member will please direct his comments through the Chair.

On my third point, I find myself very much at odds with Mr Neeson. The Easter lily has been used for a political purpose, and it has been used to hijack the true meaning of Easter. That is something that borders on the blasphemous. Republicans have politicised Easter. We see at one extreme the theories of Patrick Pearse - the blood sacrifice - which is a clear-cut example of blasphemy. However, to use any symbol connected with Easter for a political purpose is to deprecate the meaning of Easter and to verge on blasphemy.

Finally, the key point is not what individuals take as their view; everyone is entitled to take whatever action they want. Members opposite are wearing what appears to be a Blue Peter-type badge of a cardboard cut-out nature. If they want to wear some sort of green-and-white badge then that is a matter for them, but what we are debating today is the role of the Assembly.

I thought the problem with the notion of parity of esteem was that it placed my British citizenship on a par with an aspiration towards a united Ireland, thus denying the principle of consent; but it is far worse than that. Today we are placing the Easter lily, which is a symbol that has been associated with violent Republicanism, alongside the symbols that commemorate the sacrifice of all people, Catholic and Protestant, in the face of fascism. We are equating the soldiers who made that sacrifice with cowards who cowered and killed in a most despicable way, not just in the past 30 years but throughout this century, in the name of Irish Republicanism.

Esteem for terrorists is being sought today. That is utterly unacceptable and why this motion needs to be passed. A clear signal needs to be sent that the ordinary, decent people of Northern Ireland - whether Protestant or Catholic - simply will not put up with terrorists hijacking Easter for their benefit.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>