Northern Ireland Bill (Allocation of Time)

That is the point. If the Secretary of State’s argument is that we want the legislation in place for when the Assembly is ready to accept the devolution of policing and justice, there is no indication of that being a cause for urgency from Northern Ireland. My next point was raised by the right hon. Member for Neath (Mr. Hain), the former Secretary of State, who is not in his place now. He went even further in making the case for why what I have mentioned was essential. He talked about the commitments given at St. Andrews, the fact that Sinn Fein had come on board on policing and supported the police only because of certain commitments on the devolution of policing and justice, and the fact that in the past that kind of method had been used because it was an absolute necessity for progress. If we take the right hon. Gentleman’s argument to its logical conclusion, we reach the point mentioned by the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey): it all becomes tantamount to blackmail—"If you do not do this, somehow or other the commitment that Sinn Fein has given to policing will evaporate. It will no longer be prepared to sign up to policing. This is necessary for progress." I am not accusing this Secretary of State of employing that argument; nevertheless, it was employed by those who support the pushing through of this legislation as the Secretary of State is seeking to push it through. By and large, we are content with the thrust of this legislation. We are also content that other legislation put in place in this House addresses the fears of people in Northern Ireland and ensures that a Member previously associated with a terrorist organisation, even with acts of terror, could not be the Minister for policing and justice. We are content with all that, but I accept that some Members have difficulty with this legislation, wish to move amendments or, in the case of the hon. Member for Thurrock (Andrew Mackinlay), want to use the mechanism available to probe the legislation and ensure that there are no mistakes or weaknesses in it and that any changes to improve it can be made. All that requires that there be proper debate and a proper system to deal with the issues. I make one last point, which was also made by the hon. Member for Vauxhall. As a Unionist, I wish Northern Ireland to be treated in the same as any other part of the United Kingdom. That means that Northern Ireland legislation—technical or not, politically important or not, ordinary and mundane or not—should be treated in the same way as legislation for the rest of the United Kingdom. We deserve that. In the past, there were excuses. There was what was described as "temporary direct rule" and we used Orders in Council. Those days are past; the Northern Ireland Assembly is dealing with most of the legislation that we were told had to go through in that form. The House has no massive time commitments on Northern Ireland legislation. Indeed, what makes it more galling is that there is plenty of time. It is not as if we are being squeezed out because the House has to deal with other issues of such national importance that Northern Ireland has to be dealt with differently. Yesterday the House finished early, and I do not know how many times this Session we have not used up the full allocation of time. It is even more insulting for people in Northern Ireland to find that, when there is time, it cannot be allocated for important legislation that will put in place structures for the administration of policing and justice when it is time for those to be devolved to Northern Ireland. I hope that the Secretary of State will rethink the position for that reason, because the arguments have been weak and spurious, and because he owes the people of Northern Ireland the same treatment as that received by those in other parts of the United Kingdom.