The tabling of the motion by members of IRA/Sinn Féin represents a new height in monumental, gut-wrenching hypocrisy. Mr Adams might like to tell the House what contribution he made against sectarianism when he carried the coffin of a man who murdered nine innocent people in a fish shop. The Minister of Education might like to inform the House of the part that he played in the death of Mr Gillespie at a checkpoint in Derry. Various others could make contributions about the La Mon House Hotel, Kingsmills, the Droppin' Well and countless other atrocities.

The truth is that every party in the Assembly has its own definition of sectarianism, and every party thinks that sectarianism comes from the other side. Therefore, no party has any difficulty in condemning sectarianism, as the various shades of condemnation in the motion and the three amendments demonstrate. The only dispute is about the exact form of words to be used in that condemnation.

The truth is that the Assembly is a cathedral of sectarianism. That is shown in the institutions, the communal designations of Unionist, Nationalist and Other, the d'Hondt principles for the selection of Ministers, and the ritual and dogma of the sectarianism that is practised in the Assembly. The truth is that no one wants to admit that the Assembly is founded on institutionalised sectarianism. No one should be surprised that a political system that is based and built on sectarianism encourages and magnifies that sectarianism throughout society. That is happening on the streets as the relationship between the two communities deteriorates.

The Belfast Agreement has not brought peace. It has not brought reconciliation. It has brought into being institutions that are guaranteed to increase division and community hatred, and to foment the sort of confrontation that is seen on the streets. The public is entitled to be dissatisfied with the efforts of a political class that aggravates a problem and then blames everyone else because things are getting worse. I referred to that yesterday in a question to the Deputy First Minister during Question Time.

Mr Attwood spoke about purging and prosecuting everyone, including parties and Members. What has the SDLP done about Sinn Féin? It has protected Sinn Féin on every occasion that an attempt was made to purge it.

What have the Ulster Unionists done about the PUP? They utilised their votes to have the First Minister - an Ulster Unionist - elected. The truth is that sectarianism is rife and manifest throughout all the institutions of the Assembly.

An American politician was once asked, "What is your position on sin?". He readily replied, "I am agin it." In a similar way, all parties in the Assembly are piously queuing up to condemn sectarianism.

Mr Ervine, whose usual performance is an amalgam of Martin Luther King, Mother Teresa and the local probation officer, tells us of dreadful sectarianism in the drawing room while the organisation that he fronts is shooting, murdering, beating, exiling and intimidating its own co-religionists. Exactly the same thing is happening among the party and Members of the group represented by that other newfound member of the piety association, Gerry Kelly.

The truth is that the Assembly should be leading the way by purging those representatives in the Assembly who front the paramilitaries, who in turn benefit from the exploitation of the people on the street. That must be our first step.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the Sinn Féin motion, which simply seeks the support of Members in rejecting sectarianism and committing ourselves to provide leadership in practical ways on that issue. All three amendments seek to avoid the issue by turning the debate on sectarianism - the sickness that has afflicted the north-eastern part of Ireland for hundreds of years - into a debate on whether the RUC, or whatever name it now goes under, is acceptable.

Should we be surprised? Politicians who have refused to acknowledge their part in the sectarian violence of the past years and have abandoned any attempts to address the issue can only seek to hide behind an organisation founded on the sectarian headcount of a Protestant state for a Protestant people and a Protestant paramilitary police force, whose inbuilt allegiance was to uphold that state.

The ethos is still the same. Where else in the world would an assistant chief constable unequivocally state that an illegal organisation, the UDA, is behind the sectarian violence in north Belfast, which resulted in shots and blast bombs being fired from Tiger's Bay at the police and army, and do nothing about it? There were no house searches or arrests, and no UDA leaders were even questioned.

Can you imagine what would happen if the Assistant Chief Constable said that the IRA was responsible for throwing blast bombs at the police? Unionists would be fighting their way to John Reid and the media demanding action, and we would be picking the bodies of Nationalists off the ground.

People looking into the communal disturbances, which are the essence of the motion, may wonder at the utterances from Unionist politicians who, rather than confront sectarianism, are seeking to excuse the violent excesses of their community that Alan McQuillan talked about, and which they euphemistically describe as law-abiding citizenship.

What's new? Religious violence, sectarianism and Unionism are inextricably linked - it has been that way since 1830. If people want to understand the connection, they should read Andrew Boyd's book, 'Holy War in Belfast', which says a great deal about sects and even more about clergymen fermenting sectarianism. He attributes the rise in sectarian violence then as a reaction to the tolerant and liberal alliance between Catholics and Presbyterians in the early 1800s; an alliance that the English and the wealthy landlord class sought to destroy through the vehicles of Orangeism and class conflict.

The Orange Order generated the first religious sectarian riots in Belfast, and it still generates them.

The essayist Robert Lynd once wrote that all history is but a repetition of the same story, with variations. We can trace the history of sectarianism and violence from the Sandy Row riots in 1835 to Drumcree, the Ardoyne, Tiger's Bay and all the interface violence that has inflicted so much suffering on those communities that have been on the receiving end. Sectarian murder, intimidation, threats and violence, whether against schoolchildren, workers or community leaders, are evils that must be eradicated.

It is sad to see a new generation of Loyalist paramilitaries - many of whom are no more than young people - involved in violent sectarianism that does not even attempt to disguise itself as a political front. Why should people be surprised if the pathological nature of sectarianism, especially in the working-class Unionist population, is worked out against that small Catholic enclave in the Short Strand, Skegoneill or Holy Cross Primary School? It merely carries on the tradition of Harryville, Garvaghy Road and the burning of the little Quinn children in Ballymoney. After all, they are carrying on the tradition of the north Belfast community that spawned the Shankill Butchers. It is not surprising that the majority of sectarian violence takes place in the traditional Unionist strongholds of north and east Belfast, Coleraine and Antrim, which are areas represented by DUP Assemblymen - [Interruption].

Order. The Member will resume her seat.

I support the UUP amendment, which seeks to address the democratic view of civic society, namely that sectarianism from any quarter deserves to be rejected. The amendment affords every party and every individual who believes in the democratic process an opportunity to publicly register their rejection of sectarianism. It will also provide Members with an opportunity to expose the blatant hypocrisy of the Sinn Féin motion, which has revealed the party's true agenda, highlighted its failure to grasp the central tenets of democracy and exposed its political bankruptcy. It has shown Sinn Féin's inability to decommission that bunker mentality that leads it to deny that those to whom it is inextricably linked are up to their necks in the orchestration of sectarian violence where and when they want it.

Perhaps the pertinent question is why they want it and, more specifically, why they want it now. Could the scandal of sectarian attacks in Cluan Place literally have provided a convenient smokescreen to divert attention from those embarrassing adventures in Castlereagh, Cuba and Colombia? Could the Sinn Féin/IRA dilemma be so serious that, not content with 200 serious attacks on Orange Halls and with preventing Orange parades passing along major thoroughfares, the only way that it can find to employ its foot soldiers is to engage them in physical attacks on Orangemen and isolated Protestant communities?

Perhaps it is a cynical attempt to divert media attention from the continuing failure of Sinn Féin/IRA to honour its commitment to decommission fully. I am sure that the mover of the motion can offer an insight into that situation. After all, he appears to have been present at more Orange parades than the Grand Master himself.

The continuing Republican pogrom against the elderly and vulnerable residents of the White City, Glenbryn and Twaddell Avenue was suddenly switched, as if by magic, to include the isolated communities of Thistle Court and Cluan Place. Why? Perhaps it was not for the reasons that I have outlined. Perhaps Republican habits die hard and the tactics that led to the expulsion of Protestants from the border areas, the west bank of the Foyle, and Churchill Park, Ballyoran Park and Garvaghy Road in Portadown are too engrained in the Republican psyche.

Perhaps they are not democrats at all, but are merely pursuing their war by other means. That is why they have such difficulty saying that the war is over. Today presents an opportunity for the mover of the motion and his Colleagues to assure the House that they totally and unequivocally reject attacks by Republicans on those besieged communities. They may also avail themselves of the opportunity provided by this debate to call for the immediate and total cessation of those attacks.

At this point I should mention that when a Catholic workman in my East Antrim constituency was murdered by Loyalists I, together with the local community, unreservedly condemned that killing. On President Clinton's second visit to this Building, I referred to that killing to illustrate the need for total decommissioning by all paramilitaries, using the following words:

Needless to say, President Clinton agreed to work towards the cessation of such acts.

I was under the impression that every Member was pledged to remove such violence from our streets. Sadly, it is obvious that some still cannot decommission that mindset and are willing to pursue the "blame game" approach. They remind me of the alcoholic, whose first step towards salvation is to admit that he has a problem. Until Sinn Féin members admit that they have a problem, they are caught in their straitjacket. They blame the Loyalists, the Unionists, the Orange Order, the RUC and the PSNI. Only last night, they blamed the police ombudsman. It is no wonder that they oppose the installation of closed-circuit television cameras at interface areas, or that existing cameras are subject to sustained attack to put them out of action. Why the sudden reluctance to use the power of the media, after so many successful years of manipulating it? The video cameras and other evidence from the White City and Twaddell Avenue show a very different face of the real Republican approach to sectarian violence, and it is not a pleasant sight.

Moreover, Mr Maskey, whose name is also on the motion, has failed to grasp that the activities of his organisation over the years have led to the perception of the flag which he recently installed in his office as a sectarian symbol rather than the flag of a neighbouring European state.

Order.

It is seen as a shameless symbol of sectarianism after decades of misuse at the hands of Sinn Féin - incidentally, a point which the Republic of Ireland has failed to grasp.

Order. Order.

The origin and definition of sectarianism have been stated clearly. Sectarianism is the creation of Roman Catholicism. In Ireland, that was always a stated doctrinal position. Some Members will remember the slogan repeated in this generation: "A Catholic school for Catholic pupils by Catholic teachers". Cardinal Connell got it right. He was stating the sectarian, domineering position that the Church always aspired to hold. That meant that, although it could be lax in its doctrine, it was always intolerant of the legitimate demands of others.

That is the hallmark of sectarianism, and it has been injected into the political life of practically every century of our history. The greatest sectarian position was taken in universities and schools. It was followed, however, by the very serious destroying, disestablishing and dismantling of anything that was considered an obstacle to the Church's domineering position.

That pursuit and that position are being repeated. Violence, intimidation and all other expedients can be accommodated as long as they assist in the pursuit of domination. That is the theological equivalent of those who moved the motion today, a political statement of a theological position. In 1904, "Ourselves alone" was the political equivalent of the theological position of the proposer's church. More recently, the term "Tiocfaidh ár lá" may have been used, but it has the same meaning and domination and is the sectarian equivalent.

Will the Member give way?

No, I have only a few seconds left.

There are those who try to escape and deny their sectarian heritage. I was amazed to hear some of the statements made here today. Robert McCartney was right to say that the Belfast Agreement is institutionalised sectarianism, and Members must accept that, because it was the wish of many. Advocates of the Belfast Agreement view it as the road to their aspiration of a united Ireland, whether under the slogan "Tiocfaidh ár lá" or "Ourselves alone", or through another sectarian creation of the church. Perhaps the greatest example of this last occurred just over two decades ago when, on the command of the Sinn Féin/IRA leadership, the hunger strikers committed suicide to order. The church could not allow such sectarian domination to be hijacked and, therefore, it provided the golden cross of absolution.

Institutional sectarianism is a part of their church, but it is also practised in their politics and enunciated in every slogan. Just as, then, I had nothing whatsoever -

Did Patsy Kelly get absolution?

The Member should confess his sins to someone else. He will have a long list.

I support the amendment in the name of Alex Attwood. I have some reservations about the motion, which addresses sectarian murder only. I would like to expand its remit to include all murder, because all murder is wrong, regardless of the circumstances in which it occurs. The words "in recent times" also cause me concern. Has a line been drawn in the sand under a time before which murder was acceptable? Murder is wrong, regardless of when it is committed or by whom.

Other Members who spoke mentioned hypocrisy, which has been plentiful. The DUP has attempted to blame the Catholic Church for everything that is wrong with society. Did the Catholic Church make the death threats that stopped Neil Lennon playing at Windsor Park? Sectarianism has been institutionalised since this state's foundation in a Protestant parliament for a Protestant people. Robert McCartney rightly said that the Assembly was founded on sectarianism, but the institutions are seeking to change that.

Mary Nelis was right about the institutionalised sectarianism of the Orange Order. When it realised that Catholics and Presbyterians could unite under the common name of an Irishman, it did what it could to divide and conquer by admitting Presbyterians for the first time.

I have the greatest respect for Ken Robinson, but his speech disappointed me. He spoke about Twaddell Avenue, the White City area, Glenbryn and other Loyalist communities in north Belfast. Mr Attwood's amendment mentions the protection of vulnerable communities everywhere. Mr K Robinson and I represent the East Antrim constituency, but he has not said one word about Greenisland, Carrickfergus or Larne. There have been hundreds of attacks against Catholic communities in those areas over the past few years. In the 1970s, over 400 Catholic children attended a school in Greenisland, but that school closed in 1992 with only 27 pupils. That is ethnic cleansing. We have seen -

What about White City?

I do not represent that area - I am concerned about the area that I represent.

Order. Members should understand that in a debate of this nature it is reasonable to expect some cut and thrust across the Chamber. However, I shall only tolerate that up to a point.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker - my apologies to the Chair for disregarding that.

Mr Attwood's amendment seeks to protect vulnerable communities. Some of what has been cobbled together to protect vulnerable communities actually benefits those who live in ghettos. For example, the Department for Social Development, through the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, has cobbled together schemes that allow people who live on interfaces to receive £1,500 to support the security of their homes. However, minority communities living in majority areas receive nothing. I would like to see such schemes being extended to everyone to ensure that proper community support is available to all: we have a duty to promote good relations.

We must oppose sectarian displays such as those mentioned in Mr Attwood's amendment. People begin by marking the kerbstones in their colours, be they green, white and orange or red, white and blue. Then flags go up on lamp-posts and murals appear on walls to create a chill factor for the minority living in those communities. The institutions and Departments are reluctant to intervene and remove such symbols of hatred: that must be addressed.

However, the underlying issue is sectarianism. It is a cancer in our society, and it must be rooted out if we are all to move together to a more prosperous and beneficial society.

After all that has been said today, sincerity may be a big word to consider. I must ask whether the Sinn Féin motion represents a road to Damascus conversion or is merely for the optics. It is difficult to comprehend the mindset of the Republican movement, particularly because it has been associated with so much terrorism over the years and still jumps to the defence of terrorists when the net is closing in on them. Is Sinn Féin involved in mere oratory; making deep noises from the chest sound like important messages from the brain? Take, for instance, the Colombia trio, Castlereagh, and the commemoration activity that occasionally occurs for those who terrorised this community over the past three decades.

Terrorism occurred all over the Province, but I refer to my own constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone. When we talk about peace, I must ask if people who live along the border in my constituency had the right to live free from violence and intimidation whether they were at home, school or work. In Fermanagh alone, terrorists who were on a mission to put British citizens out of their homes, farms and businesses murdered 106 people. There was never a cheep about ethnic cleansing then - I wonder what Mrs Nelis has to say about that?

I could read a litany of deaths, but I do not have time to do so. However, can we ever forget the Enniskillen bomb of 8 November 1987? Twelve good people were murdered by the infidels whom members of Sinn Féin would pay tribute to for fighting a war, as they wrongly call it. Let us not forget that after 15 years nobody has been made accountable for the atrocity in Enniskillen. That is shameful and disgracefully hurtful to those in the town who lost their loved ones on that fateful day.

I also feel hurt personally, and I know that the wife and family of my cousin, Charles Johnston, are heartbroken at the murder near St Anne's Cathedral in Belfast in 1981 of a dear husband and father. To this day nothing has been seen or heard of the murdering scum who, for no reason, committed that terrible act against someone who did a decent day's work for a decent day's pay. That family, like many others in the community, never enjoyed a long life together, because terrorism roamed the streets and byways of our country, and murdered and maimed remorselessly.

Sectarianism is still being perpetuated by the continued thrust of Republicanism despite the Belfast Agreement, which committed those who accepted it to recognise Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland so long as the majority so declare through the ballot box. By hoisting the tricolour in the city hall, Alex Maskey further perpetuates sectarianism, and Alex needs to realise that there is equality and parity of esteem within the system, but not of the system. There is but one sovereignty - that of Her Majesty The Queen. There is but one sovereign flag - the Union flag. Alex should try to fulfil the agreement fully, and he should not try to claw back what he and his party have accepted, or said they accepted, in 1998 - or perhaps he is as insincere as this pretentious motion really is.

In my home town of Enniskillen, Sinn Féin, along with the SDLP, is taking down all emblems of Britishness in the town hall. That is sickening. It even extends to removing Somme and British Legion certificates, which is disgraceful. I hope that the motion is genuine, although Sinn Féin has still to convince me, because, on past and present experiences, there is no spectacle as ridiculous as Sinn Féin in one of its periodic fits of morality.

It is common knowledge that Sinn Féin, over the years, has associated itself with those who have burned our towns, doomed Northern Ireland to destruction and murdered our people. It is said that "by their fruits ye shall know them". Why does Sinn Féin not declare its intent to recognise the state of Northern Ireland, as provided for in the agreement? Regrettably, it instead continues to perpetuate division by its continued thrust against this jurisdiction, and hence sectarianism arises. Why can we not all work together peaceably so that all our citizens can enjoy better times ahead?

There are four freedoms that should apply throughout the world. The first is freedom of speech and expression. The second is freedom for everyone to worship God in their own way. The third is freedom from want, and the fourth is freedom from fear. Who wants violence? We should never think about violence or war again, no matter how necessary or justified it may seem. Some say that it is not a crime, but ask the infantry or ask the dead. Ernest Hemingway wrote:

All good citizens should speak for Northern Ireland and be good citizens -

Order. The Member will resume his seat.

This is an obnoxious motion put forward by IRA/Sinn Féin. It states that it expresses

That is disgraceful. It is saying that only those who have been murdered and terrorised in recent times should receive sympathy, and should receive it from this source. Sinn Féin wants to forget the past and introduce political amnesia. It is saying that sectarianism is not all right today, but it was all right yesterday. According to Sinn Féin, sectarianism was fine before April 1998, and it was all right to terrorise and to murder up to that date. IRA/Sinn Féin would not want to condemn the La Mon House massacre or those of Bloody Friday, Teebane, Shankill, Claudy, Whitecross or Kingsmills, to name a few, because Sinn Féin was up to its eyeballs in it. There are people sitting in this Chamber who helped to organise, and who were involved to the highest level in setting off, some of those bombs, murdering people simply because they were Protestants. Here they are today, crying crocodile tears about sectarianism and terrorism, after they have terrorised the community to get what they want over the years. That has not just affected Protestants. Roman Catholics have been, and still are being, terrorised by IRA/Sinn Féin.

If people wanted to see what was in the heart of IRA/Sinn Féin today, they had only to listen to the sectarian bile pouring out of Mary Nelis as she made her sectarian speech. Sinn Féin/IRA recommends that the Police Service of Northern Ireland be treated in the same way that the RUC was treated. What happened to the RUC? More than 300 members lost their lives, and almost 10,000 were injured in attacks by the IRA and their cohorts. Sinn Féin tells us that the Police Service of Northern Ireland should be treated in the same way, and in the next breath it tells the Assembly that it is against sectarianism and violence. It is up to its eyeballs in violence right now.

I have obtained some information about how the conflict began in the Short Strand area. The Army and police moved in to make several house searches in Short Strand. Sinn Féin was concerned because weapons were being held in safe houses in that area, and immediately instigated a riot to divert the Army away from its legitimate business. That riot began the sectarian conflict at the Short Strand interface.

Sinn Féin deplores Protestants and says that the Protestant UDA is up to its eyeballs in the conflict. However, it claims that the Roman Catholic IRA has nothing to do with it. I use that term because Sinn Féin introduced the term "Protestant UDA" earlier in the debate. The facts are that of the 22 houses in that east Belfast area that have been vacated, 19 were vacated by Protestant families, and three by Roman Catholic families. All five people shot in that area were Protestant - none were Roman Catholic. Sinn Féin/IRA has been involved in that. It is responsible for starting the sectarian tension in Short Strand and for a great deal of the sectarian tension that exists.

The DUP amendment is best placed to state Northern Ireland's position. The Assembly has not previously affirmed its commitment to non-violent and exclusively peaceful means, and therefore it is not appropriate for Members to reaffirm something that they have not already affirmed.

I encourage everyone to support the DUP motion, and to reject the crocodile tears of Sinn Féin/IRA, which is the most sectarian party in Northern Ireland and in this Chamber.

This has been a disheartening and disappointing debate. The issue of sectarianism goes to the very heart of our political problem, and therefore it is perhaps not surprising that we have had such a disappointing debate. We heard from the DUP that the Catholic Church has stirred up sectarianism, and we heard from Sinn Féin that this is primarily a Unionist problem that stems from Loyalist paramilitaries. Others have cast blame on other sections of the community. The fact is that our society is structurally sectarian. That sectarianism is endemic, and if we were all honest enough we would accept that we all, to some extent, have a degree of sectarianism in our lives.

We must face up to the realities of sectarianism. We must admit that it exists, and, rather than deny it, try to address it. Bob McCartney said that the Assembly represents institutionalised sectarianism. There may be some truth in that. However, if we are to free ourselves of the problems of our society, we must learn to manage that sectarianism in order to transform our society. I hope that the Assembly and the Executive will address sectarianism in a concerted fashion so that we can change this society.

The means for tackling sectarianism are in the agreement and in our hands. We can transform this society by creating a living partnership based on friendship and justice between the two political traditions in our society.

Unfortunately, what we have at present is not true partnership. We have cold co-existence - some might even refer to it as benign apartheid. However, that is unacceptable. We have to build a partnership between both traditions to get out of the quagmire of sectarianism. Our amendment puts forward practical ways of doing that. I welcome the Sinn Féin motion, but I cannot agree with it all because it is selective: it qualifies murder, and it emphasises the recent instances of sectarianism. However, at least it is a step forward for Sinn Féin to now commit itself to non-sectarianism, because, unfortunately, its history as a party is one of extreme sectarianism. The Republican movement became an engine of extreme sectarianism in our society. That is the reality.

If we see an end to the daubing of streets, the misuse of flags, sectarian graffiti and hostile language, then we can go forward and redeem our society. Sectarianism is a disease - a pathology that affects every aspect of our society. Dr Dunlop, the former Moderator of the Presbyterian Church, said that sectarianism was a sick form of communal identification. If we realise that we have more in common with those on the other side of the sectarian divide, then we are taking a step in the right direction. Reconciliation must be the goal of the Assembly. Today, at least, may be a start in examining the problems of sectarianism -bad-tempered and negative though some of the comments have been. Perhaps we have taken a step forward.

I welcome the debate as it gives us the opportunity to focus on the root causes of sectarianism in Ireland and to set in context the interface violence in my constituency, East Belfast.

On Saturday 15 June 1991 Portadown District LOL No 1 held a mini-twelfth Orange pageant in commemoration of the drowning of Protestants in the River Bann in November 1641. Portadown bridge, coupled with the contemporary massacre of 17 men, women and children in the parish of Drumcree, has come to epitomise for them all that occurred throughout Ulster in the year of the 1641 rebellion. It was at that time that the sectarian battle lines that have dogged Ulster to this day were drawn.

It is often forgotten today that towards the end of the 18th century Belfast Protestants first promoted the idea of an insular Irish nation to unite all classes and creeds, while fully supporting Catholic emancipation and attempting to revive the ancient music and literature of Ireland. However, after Daniel O'Connell's campaign for a Catholic parliament for a Catholic people, Irish Nationalism became identified with Catholic Nationalism. By the middle of the 19th century, writers of romantic fiction had incorporated the ideal into medieval Gaelic Ireland and fostered the mythology of Gaelic patriotic racialism into a new Gaelic Nationalism.

In 1926, de Valera formed his Fianna Fáil (Warriors of Destiny) party. The Free State Party (Cumann na nGaedheal) lost power to Fianna Fáil in 1932 and changed its name to Fine Gael (Tribe of Gaels) the following year. How many of either party were Gaels in language, culture or ethnic origins is open to discussion. However, de Valera's basic Catholic Nationalism was highlighted by a radio broadcast on St Patrick's Day, 1935, when he said:

According to Conor Cruise O'Brien, this statement demonstrates

There has been a widespread diffusion of the Irish Nationalist mythos, which has progressed from being a political to an intellectual and finally a spiritual ideal. Genuine Loyalist and Unionist fears for their ancient British heritage, for their economic well-being, for their religious freedom and, last but not least, for their fundamental right to self-determination have been dismissed by Nationalist apologists as sectarianism.

Furthermore, the basic failure of the Northern Ireland intelligentsia to promote the Ulster identity has led to an inevitable clash between the two sections of our community. Thus, Ulster Protestants have been left to relive their past instead of using it to build up a normal national consciousness for the present. Derry has been besieged and the Battle of the Boyne fought in Belfast over and over again, with Ulster Catholics still fighting for Ireland. The complete expression of a native Ulster tradition, broader than Irish Protestantism and Catholicism and populist in sentiment, could assist our political development of a new Ulster based on co-operative democracy. That and that alone would allow the consensus in Government necessary to end at last sectarianism in Ireland.

Sectarianism is ugly and unacceptable in all its forms. That does not need declension, categorised definition or qualification. In this debate, and using every means at our disposal as an Assembly and at our respective disposals as parties, we should make that unambiguously clear. Sectarianism attacks the vulnerable - vulnerable communities, families, workers and children. Sectarianism does not just hurt its victims; its also corrupts its carriers. We see the corrosive effect of sectarianism in the divisions and tensions in the community. We also see sectarianism in the arrogant strut of paramilitary violence.

This debate has involved some heated exchanges. We must ensure that in our work in the Assembly we respond to the violent divisions that are apparent in our community. We will not do so through pointing the finger in blame at each other, nor by engaging in "whataboutery" in relation to different aspects of sectarianism but in making clear that we repudiate and renounce all aspects and forms of sectarianism.

It is not a matter of trying to use a debate such as this to define sectarianism as belonging predominantly in one end of the political spectrum. It is not a matter of using this debate to say how clear and pure each of us is from sectarianism and that the problem really belongs to someone else. It is not a matter of deciding in this debate or elsewhere that sectarianism is confined to those streets and areas that most graphically suffer from violent sectarianism at the hands of paramilitaries. It is not good enough for people in some areas to smugly decide "Thank God we are not like some of those interface areas in Belfast where people cannot get on."

We must recognise the scale and nature of sectarianism, and of the response needed from political leadership.

I welcome much of the content of the motion and the amendments. I will be supporting the SDLP's amendment, as it gives the most rounded, truly balanced and clear-headed response to sectarianism. The motion and the other amendments are more pointed and partial in different aspects.

Nevertheless, I welcome these declarations that Members are opposed to sectarianism and want to stand against it. That may be new light out of old windows as far as some parties are concerned. When I hear the statements and the renunciation of sectarianism I am tempted to recall the observation of Groucho Marx that he knew Doris Day "before she was a virgin". People cannot bathe publicly in the waters of a new interest in reconciliation while continuing to shower in sectarian attitudes at other levels and on other fronts. Many of us can stoke sectarian sentiment in our own community by how we say and do things. Let all parties ask whether, in some of the things that we have done and said, we have been stoking sectarian sentiment inside our own communities.

Our words and actions can stoke sectarian resentment in other communities as well. Instead of lecturing each other, let us question ourselves and lay down markers and standards that we and our parties can adhere to.

Sectarianism manifests itself in many ways. Not least is the clutter of flags, symbols and ugly, violent graffiti that is passed off as a normal and acceptable expression of community identity and affinity. It is not. We should not allow national flags that mean a unity of different territories to one community, and a unity of different religions to another, to continue to be abused and used as visual aids to sectarianism in the way that parties in this House do.

Mary Nelis has shown that she never lets the truth get in the way of her speeches. I will correct her. She said that there had been no searches or arrests in north Belfast, and that is wrong. The figures from January to May show that there were 66 searches in north Belfast - 55 in Loyalist areas and 11 in Nationalist/Republican areas. That search policy is not enough to reassure people about what is going on there, but it is also unhelpful and inaccurate to say that there were no searches and no arrests in north Belfast when the evidence - whatever that may be - flatly contradicts that. The sooner we start to tell the truth, rather than a collection of lies to sell some party-political approach, the better it will be for us all.

It is a similar story with Gerry Kelly, although he made a speech that was markedly dissimilar to that of Mary Nelis. Sinn Féin must reconcile itself to its opposition to "violence and intimidation" as stated in its motion. Even the best speeches will ring hollow until it can reconcile its warm words with what is actually happening in parts of the North, where Republicans are involved in the intimidation of PSNI trainees and of future SDLP and civilian members of district policing partnerships; and until it can demonstrably confirm that it is opposed to that intimidation.

Several others suggested that people should simply support the police. That has not been, and is not now, the approach of the SDLP, even now that it is represented on the Policing Board. The rigorous and correct approach is to acknowledge the police when they get things right, and to criticise and challenge them when they get it wrong. If Unionism in particular would take that perspective in this debate, we might be better informed and better placed to deal with policing and sectarianism.

How does this debate end? It ends with Sinn Féin condemning sectarianism and blaming the Protestant community for it. The DUP condemned sectarianism and blamed the Catholic Church for it. The UUP condemned sectarianism and listed constituencies under threat - all of them were Unionist. As Mark Durkan eloquently pointed out, sectarianism infects all sections of society. Each side is guilty of it, and each side has suffered from it. Combating sectarianism has to begin with an acceptance that none of us, inside or outside the Chamber, can afford to adopt a high moral tone on sectarianism. All of us, to a greater or lesser extent, have contributed to the position that we are now in, and we must all contribute to its undoing.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>