TUV Responds to Parading Review
22 August 2008
Note: Click here to read the submission in full.
Traditional Unionist Jim Allister has described the Interim Consultative Report of the Strategic Review of Parading as “disappointing in a great many areas”.
In an 18 page response on behalf of Traditional Unionist Voice the MEP echoed many of the concerns expressed by the Loyal Orders last week and hit out at the political contents of the Report.
Commenting Mr Allister said:
“While there are undoubted positives in the Report – including the proposed abolition of the Parades Commission and the desire to encourage professionalism in bands and the practical recommendations of the Review to achieve this goal – there are many negatives. The report’s fundamental flaw is its failure to acknowledge the key role that militant republicanism played in manufacturing contention surrounding parades. In the words of Gerry Adams: “Ask any activist in the north [sic], ‘did Drumcree happen by accident?', and he will tell you, ‘no'. ... Three years of work went into creating that situation and fair play to those people who put the work in.”
“Additionally, I have grave concerns about the new system proposed by the Review. The joint office of First and deputy First Minister has proved to be seriously deficient when it comes to dealing with sensitive issues. One has only to witness the debacle surround the appointment of the victims’ commissioner / commission to see evidence of this. It would, therefore, be ill-advised to give OFMDFM a role as arbitrator when it comes to contentious parades. Rather, these issues should be decided by DCAL in recognition of the cultural and historical importance of parades in Northern Ireland.
“I am deeply concerned by the suggestion that all assemblies of 15 of more people should be regulated by these recommendations. This constitutes unacceptable interference in both the religious and civil liberties of British subjects in Northern Ireland and in my submission I have made it clear that the Review should clarify now that its recommendations will not apply to non-parade related protests and religious services held in the open air. Failure to exempt gatherings of this nature would result in the curtailing of civil and religious liberties and would smack of a police state.
“I also take grave exception to the suggestion that the current system for dealing with parades can only be changed if and when policing and justice is devolved. This is a transparent attempt by the Review to interfere in an issue which has no relevance whatsoever to its remit. Unionists who oppose any role for a convicted terrorist in the appointment of Northern Ireland’s senior judiciary cannot support any review which does this. In a similar vain, the Review links its recommendations to the suggestion that Northern Ireland should have its own Bill of Rights. I strongly oppose this entirely artificial link and, again, view it as unwarranted interference in the political affairs of Northern Ireland on the part of the Review and would echo the Loyal Orders point that “legislation required to give effect to the final recommendations should not be dependent on other political issues”.
