uuptoday.org

Mr Nesbitt stated that, to make matters worse, Dublin’s position is not opposed by the DUP – such is the scale of the DUP deception.

In a statement, the South Down MLA said: “Nigel Dodds has claimed that Bertie Ahern’s decision not to pursue the idea of Northern Ireland politicians having ‘speaking rights’ in the Dail is ‘a major set back for the Republican movement’. He then congratulates the DUP by noting that ‘the concerns raised by the DUP’ on this matter ‘have been listened to and acted upon’.

“My advice to Nigel Dodds is simple – read the small print, you are wrong, totally wrong.”

He added: “The DUP has made it clear that if Northern Ireland participation in a Dail Committee is by way of invitation only, and not treatment on an equal basis with members of the Dail, then the DUP would not oppose such a proposal, though the Party would not participate.

“Mr Dodds, read carefully all Bertie Ahern’s comments on the issue and you will see that he has not altered his fundamental principle regarding participation by Northern Ireland politicians. To make matters worse, Dublin’s position is not opposed by the DUP – such is the scale of the DUP deception.

“While the DUP is merely concerned as to the process of participation, the UUP objects in principle to the Irish Parliament discussing Northern Ireland’s affairs – this is against international law, against the Irish constitution and against the Irish Government’s adopted position within the Council of Europe. Such is the nature of the UUP’s fundamental opposition to Mr Ahern’s proposals as they stand today, notwithstanding welcoming comments from the DUP and bluster from Sinn Fein.

“Does Nigel Dodds not recall the DUP’s meeting in Dublin in November 2005? Does he not recall Dermot Ahern stating after the meeting that a lot of the DUP’s misperceptions about ‘speaking rights’ had been dispelled and that MPs would merely be invited to speak and would not be member of any Dail Committee?

“This attitude by the DUP is totally unacceptable. The DUP’s weasel words show only concern about processes and not the more fundamental issue - it is not the business of the Dail to discuss the internal affairs of Northern Ireland. Conducting such discussions is acting against normal good relations between separate jurisdictions and against accepted principles of 21st century democracy, whether MPs are merely invited or are there as of right is of lesser consequence.”

Concluding, he said: “Bertie Ahern may have stated that the constitutional status is settled, but that loses its significance if institutional arrangements - constantly demanded by republicans and likely to be partially granted - undermine that very status.

Describing the meeting as ‘productive’, South Down MLA Dermot Nesbitt said afterwards: “Discussions over a Bill of Rights have been lengthy and drawn out. I voiced my concerns that delays have been created by some who persistently go beyond what was originally envisioned.

“In my view, debate must remain focused on what was intended. That’s why we stressed to the Minister the importance of adhering to the Belfast Agreement as to what a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland should comprise.

“As an integral part of the United Kingdom, the Belfast Agreement recognises that provision should be made to the particular circumstances of Northern Ireland and of issues relating to parity of esteem, cultural ethos and diversity. We support that.

“However, we stressed to the Minister that an essential element for a Bill of Rights should be that all recognise the integrity of the state - and that clearly is currently not the case.”

Mr Nesbitt’s comments follow a report by the Women in Work commission who concluded that the Gender Pay Gap is worse in Britain than anywhere in Europe. The report said that those with child care responsibilities are often forced to take poorly paid, part-time employment below their skill level.

The South Down MLA said:

Dermot Nesbitt said: “I have been assured at my meeting with Lord Rooker, after what could only be described as a robust exchange of views, that it will examine with the Equality Commission the aspect of Protestant under-representation in recruitment to the public sector. This under-representation has occurred in six of the last eight years of public sector appointments and up to now it was a no-go area for government examination.”

“No doubt Government hoped that if it lay low and said nothing that it would escape having to address the issue. Government may well accept that Protestants feel discriminated against and that equality law is not for them, but to date it has refused totally to do anything about it.”

“It is extremely sad and disturbing that Government persistently refuses to act with integrity unless it is pushed and pushed very hard. It gives me no pleasure to engage in heated meetings – no pleasure at all. Only now, at the end of a lengthy series of meetings and written presentations by me, was Government prepared to act. To obtain this commitment was, quite frankly, like getting blood out of a stone.”

“Is it any wonder I am told by some that I waste my time on this issue because Government will never act with integrity when it comes to genuinely expressed concerns from the Protestant community? These Protestant concerns are not just noticed by me, as a public representative, but have also been expressed by church leaders – a point I indicated to Lord Rooker.”

Dermot Nesbitt said: “I view this report, costing £110k, as adding little to our relevant knowledge to help solve our problems in the equality field. Not only did it not deal with important issues, such as whether or not government policy is successful, but it avoided asking important questions. For example, is there a position today where protestants are losing out in the jobs market – this was a no go area for the consultants. Their excuse in this and other matters was that a line had to be drawn somewhere as to what they were able to do. Of course, their priorities were wrong and by not examining the effectiveness of some areas of equality policy suits Government.”

The problems that existed before this Report was produced are still present. The £500m spent on training, which could have helped the disadvantaged: that was money down the drain according to a PAC report. A skills strategy is still awaited. And, addressing the concerns of the Protestant community regarding equality issues, though recognised in the consultants’ Report, was inadequately addressed.