UK Parliament / Open data

Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill

It was only towards the end of the remarks of the noble Baroness, Lady Harris, that I took on board that she fully understood what she was asking for—that is, a completely separate arrangement in Great Britain to Northern Ireland. I have to say—and I want to give a decent answer—the issue is just non-negotiable. The position is as in the Bill. It would be quite untenable to have a different arrangement for these issues in Great Britain. Notwithstanding that, the noble Baroness, answered one of her own questions. She asked, ““Where can the human rights aspects of the security services be raised?”” She then referred to the fact that RIPA, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, is there to consider, among other things, complaints against the intelligence services, including matters relating to human rights. She answered her own question. The point is that nobody would argue that it is important that the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission can carry out effective investigations. No one would argue against that, and it is important that it should not be unnecessarily impeded. However, it is also important that we do not allow individuals or organisations to access or consider material that might jeopardise the interests of national security. Noble Lords have not questioned the exemptions relating to national security material. Without access to such material, the commission could not provide effective oversight of the intelligence services. That oversight is provided by another body, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, which was set up by the RIPA 2000. I repeat the point I made on the previous amendment; this exemption is the same as that which applies to the Commission for Equality and Human Rights in Great Britain. As such, if we were to remove the provision, it would create a difference between the ability of Great Britain and Northern Ireland bodies to investigate the intelligence services. We are simply not willing to create such a difference. So, unlike on the first amendment, I cannot promise to take this away and come back having considered it again. The position is simply non-negotiable and I have to be quite clear about that.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

690 c143-4GC 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top