Northern Ireland Assembly

Tuesday 18 September 2001 (continued)

Mr Shannon:

Once again, the Assembly has returned to the recurring problem of paramilitary activity. Many of us wonder if we will ever come to a day when the word "paramilitary" will be put beyond use.

Last week, we all watched in horror as terrorists flew passenger jets into prominent buildings in the United States. We in Northern Ireland felt all the old feelings of the past 30 years flooding upon us: the heartache, the fear, the panic and - very clearly and honestly - the anger. Sinn Féin/IRA added insult to injury by declaring in the Assembly its heartfelt sympathy for acts of terrorism, when it has participated in the deaths of many residents of this country by committing terrorist attacks.

Sinn Féin spoke of its sorrow at such losses and condemned those who carried out the attacks. That sentiment rang a little false for me and for many others, as it is well known that Middle Eastern extremists have been allies of the IRA for over 20 years. Perhaps Sinn Féin/IRA is trying to distance itself from the Middle East and its extremists to ensure that it will receive the mighty American dollar, or perhaps there has been a falling out amongst this den of killers.

Sinn Féin has tried to tell us that the three men recently arrested in Bogota are not in any way connected to it, yet there are photographs in newspapers of those men participating in Sinn Féin party activities. Of course, rumour has it that they actually got lost. They were looking for the Bogside and ended up in Bogota.

Perhaps Sinn Féin is using the Nazi doctrine that if you tell a lie often enough, people will think that it is the truth, but it will not work this time. In south Lebanon, Irish passports belonging to known terrorists were found in a training camp for wannabe terrorists. It is somewhat disturbing to hear Sinn Féin's president say that he and his party are totally committed to the peace process while his colleagues in the IRA are having up-to-date training in warfare in foreign lands.

Sinn Féin has forged links with Cuba - a country not known for its high regard for democracy, and with even less regard for basic human rights. Mr Adams intends to visit Cuba shortly. I do not see Mr Adams and his Colleagues staying at home to get the IRA to puts its arsenal of weapons beyond use. That would be time better spent. Sinn Féin has been very quiet on that subject since the IRA pulled out of the de Chastelain commission.

Sinn Féin/IRA has been quiet about its organisation. Last week they sent me, and I presume many others, the numbers of alleged Loyalist attacks. It is uncanny that it always remembers Loyalist attacks, but it seems to forget those committed by Nationalists. I condemn all attacks, irrespective of who commits them.

In tandem with the silent Sinn Féin is the incompetent British Government. To my horror, and to that of many others, Mr Blair said on Sunday night past that the world had to learn what motivates terrorism. After 30 years of terrorism here, Tony Blair is still trying to work it out.

That brought two questions to my mind. First, did Prime Minister Blair not learn anything from the Northern Ireland Office or from the members of Special Branch, who put their lives on the line for his Government? Secondly, he has put convicted terrorists in Government positions. Why not ask them what motivates them and their abhorrent friends, the Middle East extremists?

Why is the British Government not like the American Government? Why is it not righteously angry with the terrorists? Why will it not pay any costs or go to any length in the pursuit of justice? Police officers' families have waited in vain to find out who killed their loved ones. At least one widow in my constituency went to her grave without knowing who was responsible for her husband's murder. The Government has also made it possible that this killer will never be brought to justice because terrorists are in Government and negotiating the type of peace this country will have.

This week there have been several gun attacks, and pipe bombs were found. Paramilitary activists judge young people, who are beaten, shot and evicted from their country by organisations who feel that they are the real police forces. Who are these people to tell us and our children how to live? What is more shameful is that youths who come to the attention of the IRA are told to report to Connolly House, the headquarters of Sinn Féin, to hear what their punishments will be. Sinn Féin said that it was committed to democracy, yet it allows an illegal and tyrannical organisation to mete out summary justice to the people of Northern Ireland.

Paramilitary activity and international terrorism are the same in this country, and we need to stop them. For 30 years we have been at war against Nationalist violence in the name of politics. Police, soldiers and civilians have been killed and maimed while trying to live their lives in a democratic fashion. The people of Omagh, for example, still seek the trial of their aggressors in a court of law. Those who take part in violence, or condone it in any way, should not be part of a democratic process.

Mr O'Connor:

I am amazed at the hypocrisy of the DUP. We heard Mr Hilditch, whose constituency is East Antrim, talking about what is going on in north Belfast. In the 1970s, over 400 children attended a Catholic school in Greenisland. When it closed in 1997, there were 27 children. Mr Hilditch talks about ethnic cleansing in north Belfast. What is that if it is not ethnic cleansing?

The DUP has always had an ambivalence about dealing with terrorists - the sharing of a platform with Billy Wright has been mentioned. The inspection of men with balaclavas on a beach in Portrush in 1985 by Coleraine aldermen was talked about also. Those things are true, and no one can claim to be the able to end terrorism having given it so much succour for so long.

Terrorists are active throughout Northern Ireland. They inflict huge suffering on all our people. My home has been attacked on several occasions. Less than a week after my colleague was elected to Larne Borough Council, his home was pipe-bombed. That was his welcome to politics, Northern Ireland-style. The problem is that the UDA in Larne operates an equal opportunities policy - it recruits young Catholics as well.

We need to decommission all those organisations. I agree that terrorism is linked to drug-dealing. We were all horrified by the events in America last week, which prompted President Bush to say that he would hunt down evil-doers worldwide. We have in our country evil-doers associated with the Shankill bomb, McGurk's Bar, Enniskillen, Loughinisland, Greysteel, Omagh - and the list goes on. We are not in an ideal world. Terrorism must be stopped by political means and a better future given to the people in this country who have suffered so much for so long.

In my first speech to the Assembly, I quoted Martin Luther King. He said:

"We are not where we want to be, but thank God we are not where we used to be."

We no longer bury 80 or 100 coffins a year, leaving hundreds and thousands of grieving widows and orphans. There are murders and punishment beatings, but 10 years ago a punishment beating or shooting would not have merited four lines on page 10 of 'The Irish News'.

We have moved forward. We must make politics work. This weekend will tell whether we will. I appeal to those with influence, in light of world opinion and the international groundswell of public opinion against all forms of terror, to give peace a chance. Do what you can to ensure that the people of Northern Ireland do not suffer for another 30 years what they have suffered for the last 30 years.

Each of us is duty bound to try to do something about that. I appeal to all those with influence to use it to ensure that we create the peaceful society that everyone in this country wants.

5.30 pm

Mr Weir:

The Assembly met last week rightly to express its condolences to the victims of the terrorist outrage in America and to condemn international terrorism. It met against the backdrop of many nations' leaders committing themselves to the fight against international terrorism. Like Jim Shannon, I listened with a degree of incredulity to the remarks of our Prime Minister, given his record against terrorism. Despite that, many of us in the Chamber are committed to the fight against inter­national terrorism.

However, if we are to begin that fight, we should do so in our own backyard in Northern Ireland. That is where we must make the change. The motion rightly condemns all paramilitary activity, Loyalist and Republican. I join with many ordinary, decent Nationalists who look with incredulity at the extent to which the Government have been prepared to turn a blind eye to Loyalist violence. It seems that no matter what they do, the Government are still prepared to declare that the ceasefires of all mainstream paramilitary organisations are intact. It is almost as if the only thing that would constitute a breach of a ceasefire is a nuclear strike on part of Northern Ireland. Even then, presumably, the Government would say that it was really the work of dissidents and not mainstream paramilitaries.

In the next few days, people should bear in mind the Government's record on defining ceasefires when they give us the usual assurances about policing: changes will only occur when the security situation allows it.

It is right that there is no moral difference between the bombings last week in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania and the bombing of Canary Wharf. There is also no moral difference between those murders and a murder in an isolated farmhouse or a deserted city centre alleyway. Such murders are often forgotten. We must highlight those people who are committed to democracy and a peaceful way forward.

The events in New York last week and those here are not linked simply because there is a moral equivalence between them, but because terrorism is international. The Republican movement has been linked with various organisations across the world such as extreme nationalist terrorists in Europe, Islamic fundamentalists in the Middle East and drug dealers or Marxists in South and Central America. The Cuban regime has declared that one of the men arrested in Colombia was Sinn Féin's representative in Cuba.

The Cuban authorities are probably best able to judge who Sinn Féin's representatives to Cuba are. However, the reaction of Sinn Féin has been like some latter-day Manuel from 'Fawlty Towers' - they know nothing of these people. They say that they have never met these people.

We must bring a degree of credibility to the debate. We must say that the demand for decommissioning goes beyond the agreement - it is a moral imperative. You cannot be in government if you have arms at your beck and call. However, you also cannot be in government if you have a private mafia, police force or vigilante organ­isation at your back. The paramilitary organisations have all of these things, and they make it unacceptable for any of those organisations to be in government.

Worthy sentiments are expressed in the SDLP amendment. However, the days of the Assembly relying purely on worthy sentiments are long past. The failure of the SDLP to commit itself to excluding these organ­isations means that, sadly, the amendment detracts from the original motion, rather than adding to it. Members can tell us as often as they like that we must encourage people into the democratic fold, but under a policy of carrot and stick there has been concession after concession. There has been a constant diet of carrots in this peace process. It is time put away the carrot and bring out the stick with regard to terrorism. I urge people to take cognisance of what has happened in the past few days; to draw a distinct line between terrorism and democracy, and to support the motion.

Mr J Kelly:

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I oppose the motion and the amendment. On reading the motion I was struck with the thought that the DUP should change its name to "the Party of Déjà Vu". Nothing changes in that party - it is always the same. It has no political realism and no reality, just stagnation. It has the same old story and history that it has had for the last 50 years - [Interruption].

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Order.

Mr J Kelly:

The DUP is a party that has consulted, and continues to consult, Loyalist paramilitaries. In particular, it consults with those Loyalist paramilitaries who are presently engaged in attacking Nationalists through­out the Six Counties. The DUP has connived with, and continues to connive with, those Loyalist paramilitaries who are murdering and attempting to murder Nationalists throughout the Six Counties. And yet they, who sleep in the same bed as the Loyalist paramilitaries, come here with a motion that condemns paramilitary activity. The political hypocrisy of the DUP was amply demonstrated last Thursday - [Interruption].

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Order.

Mr J Kelly:

The political hypocrisy of the DUP was amply demonstrated last Thursday. It trooped out that door when Gerry Adams got up to speak and trooped back in again to listen to the political representative of Loyalist paramilitarism. What message did that send out to the Nationalist population? The crude and stark message that it sent was that it is OK to - [Interruption].

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Order. Everyone is entitled to be heard.

Mr J Kelly:

The crude message they sent out last Thursday was that it is OK to murder taigs. That is what that party is at. [Interruption].

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Order.

Mr J Kelly:

Let us, and let the general body of Unionism, make no mistake about it - there is a viable connection between those Loyalist paramilitaries who are presently trying to murder Catholics and the DUP in its drive to destabilise the political institutions. That message should go out to the Ulster Unionist Party. The DUP's only interest is in destabilising the political institutions. Its sole interest is to further split Unionism and become its predominant voice. Were that to happen, it would be a sad day for Ireland, particularly for this part of Ireland.

If the DUP could exclude Sinn Féin from this establishment, it would consider it a victory. Let me remind the DUP that Sinn Féin has a mandate that is equal to, and perhaps better than, its mandate. That political mandate will not be denied. As I said - [Interruption]

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Order. It is very difficult to hear Mr Kelly.

Mr J Kelly:

With the DUP we experience déjà vu and yet more déjà vu. Take the party back 50 years; that is where it belongs and that is where its political history lies. It does not lie within the context of the present political establishment.

David Trimble said that if my community has a past, it can have a future. Likewise, we could say to David Trimble that if his community has a past, it too could have a future. If our goal is to build new political structures that take responsibility for all the people in this part of the island - and the rest of the island - in our terms we are going about it the right away.

I say this to David Trimble: we have all contested elections under the same criteria. The results may not have been to the liking of some parties, but that is democracy. Although we signed the Good Friday Agreement, it is obvious that we are not yet ready to place trust in each other. We must ask if we still trust ourselves.

Mr Attwood:

My colleagues and I find it profoundly ironic that Gerry Adams could not wait to rush to the microphone yesterday to praise John Hume, yet today in the Chamber, Mitchel McLaughlin could not wait to damn John Hume's values and vision, which are incorporated in the amendment.

The irony of the comments made 24 hours ago, and the inconsistencies of the argument made in the Chamber today, expose the lack of confidence that currently infects the Republican leadership and Sinn Féin. Rather than acknowledge views firmly held and stated, Mitchel McLaughlin tried to demean the contributions of the SDLP by saying that our judgement was influenced and upset by election results or internal party matters. Anyone who reduces a criticism of other contributions to that level reveals a lack of confidence and a lack of certainty in addressing the arguments inherent in the motion and the amendment.

It is significant that in all Sinn Féin's contributions, which singularly concerned the DUP, there was no acknowledgement of the wider international context, nor was there any acknowledgement of the Latin American context. The only point of substance made was that there was a collective responsibility to bring about the disarmament of illegal groups. That collective respons­ibility appears to include all of us, but to exclude Sinn Féin. That is the message that comes across. I see that Mrs Nelis is nodding vigorously.

5.45 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker:

Mr Attwood, you must direct your comments to the Chair.

Mr Attwood:

I have only one comment to make about Mrs Nelis's speech. I ask her to take a pen to her speech and replace the words "Loyalist paramilitary" with "Republican paramilitary", and "Unionist politician" with "Republican politician". She should then give it to Mr Robinson to use as his response to this debate. Everything said by Mrs Nelis could have been said by Mr Robinson with the change of two words only; such is the mirror image at the parties at that end of the Chamber.

Mr Trimble rightly said that the SDLP amendment concentrated on what has to be done. We also outlined that in our response to the Weston Park document. The SDLP singularly outlined a political strategy to get us from Weston Park, through suspension, to the full implementation of the agreement. There must be a new beginning for policing of the citizens and communities of the North. We must ensure that we have a bill of rights that is expansive and inclusive - a charter of rights on the island and a joint committee of the human rights commissions, North and South, to bring about the wider enforcement of human rights on the island. We must restructure our criminal justice system through the criminal justice review. We must address inequality and terror in the national and, belatedly, in the international context. There is also a wider strategy that we need to address, if not in the coming days then in the coming weeks. In the words of Mr Trimble, we must ensure that we concentrate on what has to be done, rather than, as some have done in this debate, on what has been done in the past.

I want to go back to some of the comments that I made about putting weapons verifiably beyond use. Although this might not be a fertile environment for new arguments to get Republicans to address the issue of putting weapons beyond use, I want to try to do so. I do so somewhat cautiously, because I am trying to put those of us who are from a non-Unionist background - from a Nationalist and an all-Ireland background, a background that wishes to share the life of the rest of the island - into the shoes of people from the Unionist tradition. That is something that people from Sinn Féin signally failed to do this afternoon just as, I have to say, the people from the Unionist tradition signally failed to put themselves in the shoes of Republicans.

I want to see the issue of weapons as Unionists see it. I might be wrong, but none the less I want to try. Nationalists and, particularly, Republicans must understand that Unionist unease about the issue of weapons comes from a number of sources - not just from the Unionist leadership. It comes from a much wider range of sources. The unease is shared by Unionist people who, before and since the ceasefires, have spent long hours encouraging to those within their own community who doubted the thinking and intentions of the Republican leadership to move beyond their fears. If we do not address the fears of those who have tried to interpret to Unionists what Republicans are trying to bring about by the ceasefire, and acknowledge that they are beginning to lose confidence, we are not dealing with the issue of putting weapons beyond use.

It is time to acknowledge that Unionist unease is common among people who assess issues using standards of both word and deed, and for whom the concept of putting weapons verifiably and completely beyond use must produce real results. That unease is shared by Unionist people, who have been traumatised by threat and who are adjusting to radical change. They are looking for certainty, as they accept the uncertainties of being a minority on the island of Ireland. The IRA should acknowledge all that, and all the paramilitary organisations should acknowledge that it is time to give real effect to the decommissioning provisions of the Good Friday Agreement.

Peter Robinson may be proved right. This may be the last time that we will debate the issue in the House. I hope that he is wrong. Republicans and Loyalist para­militaries must get decommissioning right, and get it right now. Peter Weir's strategy was exclusion and the stick. We dissent from both exclusion and the stick. Political conflict is resolved by political means and if we go back to exclusion on the one hand and a stick on the other, we go back in history.

The opportunity that is beginning to open up should be exploited and we must resolve all outstanding issues relating to the Good Friday Agreement. A different mindset is beginning to develop on this island and around the world. That mindset is saying that we have travelled far with those who use threat and terror, but we are not going to travel any further. By hanging on firmly to the consequences, implications and requirements of the Good Friday Agreement, we can work out a political strategy that will resolve the outstanding issues and will not see us retreating to the failed policies of exclusion and the stick.

Mr P Robinson:

In my winding-up speech, I will deal with two further issues, namely the Florida gunrunning by the Provisional IRA and its exploits in Colombia, important aspects of the IRA's international terrorist activity. Before doing so, however, I must respond directly to the mover of the amendment, who decries Mr Weir's recommendation of the use of exclusion and the stick. Presumably, he is recommending inclusion and the carrot, and therefore I must question the SDLP's ability to sign up to the section of the Belfast Agreement that appears ostensibly, to offer the stick of excluding any organisation or party that does not commit itself to exclusively peaceful and democratic means.

The SDLP tells us that the agreement should be fully implemented. But it does not want that section to be implemented, because it does not want to use the stick. There is nothing that Sinn Féin/IRA could do that would cause the SDLP to use the stick and exclude. Even if the IRA took the nuclear option, the SDLP would still piously tell us that we should go for inclusive politics and try to encourage people into the democratic process.

There is nothing wrong with the wording of the amendment. It is just weaker and less effective than the motion, and the purpose of deleting elements from the motion is to weaken it in order to avoid saying that organisations that are not committed to exclusively peaceful and democratic means should be excluded. That is the purpose of the amendment, as demonstrated by the attack on Mr Weir's remarks.

Now we know where the SDLP stands. Perhaps we are not surprised that has consistently been its position over the years. What I cannot understand is why the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party is going to support the amendment. By supporting the amendment, the UUP will be going for a weaker version, letting Sinn Féin off the hook. That can be the only outcome if that party's members follow their leader into the lobbies and support the SDLP's avoidance amendment.

The leader of the Ulster Unionist Party beat his chest in the Assembly and told us how he had called Sinn Féin/IRA to account. He even had the audacity to say that because of his actions Sinn Fein/IRA would be put out of office. He seems to be blind to the fact that it was because of his actions that Sinn Féin/IRA is in office in the first place. Then he boasted that, having put Sinn Féin/IRA into office, he had taken some action to call it to account.

There was an article in 'GQ' magazine about the Florida gunrunning. A detailed investigation of the events in Florida was carried out. Siobhan Browne said:

"I kept quiet and they destroyed me. If I had said what I knew, if I had testified at the trial about the things I'm going to tell you now, the boys would have got it much worse and the Good Friday agreement - the sham that it was - would be over."

Later in the article, there is clear evidence that the writer of the report has come to conclusions about the so-called Good Friday Agreement. The report says that it is now starting to appear that in his rush to depict himself as the peacemaker in Northern Ireland, President Clinton delivered an inherently flawed, if not flat-out fraudulent treaty. Again, the article says that the Florida attorney, Richard Scrugs, had an ironclad case. He had surveillance photos, a confession from Bluestein, a copy of the wish list, mail and gun receipts, DNA evidence, fingerprints and fibre linking Claxton and Mullen to the packages. Thanks to assistance from Scotland Yard, Scrugs also had intelligence files on Claxton, Smyth and Mullen's IRA/Sinn Féin activities.

Is it any wonder that they were convicted and that Judge Wilkie Ferguson, passing sentence, criticised the sentencing guidelines approved by Congress, saying that they made it impossible for him to impose a longer sentence? He went on to say that if a person could get a life sentence for possessing $400 worth of cocaine, this kind of offence ought to carry the death penalty. Yet, the Assembly was not prepared to take any action over something that a Florida judge thought was worthy of the death penalty.

In the same article, Unionist Ken Maginnis is inclined to give Sinn Féin the benefit of the doubt. He said that with an operation as big as that of the IRA, it would probably take time to reel in gunrunning operations set up before the Good Friday Agreement. The article goes on to say that Mr Maginnis was ignoring the fact that Claxton and Mullen arrived in the United States on 22 January 1999, a full eight months after the agreement was signed. It also makes clear the role of President Clinton and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in attempting to cover up the activities of the Provisional IRA in the United States, lest it do harm to the so-called peace process.

Some of the Sinn Féin Members who spoke in the debate were very uneasy, wriggling in panic. Some of them went into an incomprehensible rant. Mr John Kelly, almost foaming at the mouth, talked about Sinn Féin's mandate being greater than the DUP's. Where are the Sinn Féin Members of the European Parliament? How many Members of Parliament do they have, as opposed to the DUP? How many Assembly Members do they have, as opposed to the DUP? How many councillors do they have compared to the DUP? He should go back to the record books and learn for himself that Sinn Féin does not have the mandate that he seems to think it has.

6.00 pm

Mr McLaughlin gave us a pious homily on the peace process. He, incidentally, thinks that people go with false passports on their holidays to Colombia. Although he has never been in Castlereagh Holding Centre - he is one of the IRA's draft dodgers - he had a similar experience, during his 'Newsnight' interview, when he was clearly embarrassed by the position that he was being asked to defend.

He had the audacity to try to link the Democratic Unionist Party with events in north Belfast. I want to commend my Colleague, Nigel Dodds, for the sterling efforts that he and other constitutional politicians in the area have made to overcome the problems in north Belfast and to repair the damage done to community relations there. The Sinn Féin position is "if we say it, it is true". Whether the facts are absent or whether they contradict it, Sinn Féin is quite prepared to peddle a lie in order to cover its embarrassment. It kicks up as much dust as it can to conceal its embarrassment.

The Provisional IRA was clearly involved in inter­national terrorism, training, and experimenting in bomb making in Colombia. It was involved at the highest level; its chief engineer was involved. The sanction of the IRA Army Council was needed; an IRA Army Council that has three Sinn Féin Assembly Members on it - the leader of the party, Gerry Adams the Minister of Education, Martin McGuinness and Pat Doherty, the former head of southern command of the IRA. All three of them were involved in the decision to send people to Colombia to take part in international terrorism and to bring death and destruction to the cities in Colombia; just as they brought death and destruction - and still do - to the streets of Northern Ireland.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

The Assembly proceeded to a Division.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley:

On a point of order. Is it in order for a Member to enter the Chamber when the Doors are secured?

Mr Deputy Speaker:

I will secure the Doors in four minutes.

The Assembly divided: Ayes 54; Noes 35

Ayes

Ian Adamson, Billy Armstrong, Alex Attwood, Roy Beggs, Billy Bell, Eileen Bell, Esmond Birnie, P J Bradley, Joe Byrne, Joan Carson, Seamus Close, Fred Cobain, Robert Coulter, Annie Courtney, John Dallat, Duncan Shipley Dalton, Ivan Davis, Arthur Doherty, Mark Durkan, Reg Empey, Sean Farren, John Fee, David Ford, Sam Foster, Tommy Gallagher, John Gorman, Tom Hamilton, Carmel Hanna, Joe Hendron, Derek Hussey, Danny Kennedy, James Leslie, Patricia Lewsley, Alban Maginness, Seamus Mallon, Kieran McCarthy, David McClarty, Alasdair McDonnell, Alan McFarland, Michael McGimpsey, Eddie McGrady, Eugene McMenamin, Monica McWilliams, Jane Morrice, Sean Neeson, Dermot Nesbitt, Danny O'Connor, Eamonn ONeill, Ken Robinson, Brid Rodgers, George Savage, John Taylor, David Trimble, Jim Wilson.

Noes

Paul Berry, Norman Boyd, Gregory Campbell, Mervyn Carrick, Wilson Clyde, Nigel Dodds, Oliver Gibson, William Hay, David Hilditch, Roger Hutchinson, Gardiner Kane, John Kelly, Robert McCartney, William McCrea, Barry McElduff, Gerry McHugh, Mitchel McLaughlin, Pat McNamee, Francie Molloy, Maurice Morrow, Mary Nelis, Dara O'Hagan, Ian Paisley Jnr, Ian R K Paisley, Edwin Poots, Iris Robinson, Mark Robinson, Peter Robinson, Patrick Roche, Jim Shannon, Denis Watson, Peter Weir, Jim Wells, Cedric Wilson, Sammy Wilson.

Question accordingly agreed to.

6.15 pm

Main Question, as amended, put and agreed to.

Resolved:

That this Assembly deplores the ongoing catalogue of paramilitary activity and calls on all parties who profess to be committed to exclusively peaceful and democratic means to unequivocally repudiate any and all such violence and to call on all paramilitary groups to give real effect to the decommissioning provisions of the Good Friday Agreement.

Adjourned at 6.18 pm.

<< Prev

TOP

17 September 2001 / Menu / 24 September 2001