Debate contribution: Paramilitary Groups: Transition from Violence and Crime

Debate contribution by Mr Doug Beattie MC on 10 March 2025.

MLA

Mr Doug Beattie MC

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

10 March 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Paramilitary Groups: Transition from Violence and Crime

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4841566

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. As I stand here, I am conscious that every person in every corner of the Chamber is united on one thing: there is no place for paramilitary crime gangs. There never was, and they should go now. They must disband immediately. They have no credibility, but they have a negative, coercive grip on our communities. We are united on that, but how do we progress this? The motion proposes that the Assembly:

"categorically opposes proposals from the UK and Irish Governments to appoint an independent expert to scope out a new process of engagement to bring about paramilitary group transition to disbandment".

The motion is premature, not in the sense that we do not want to get rid of paramilitaries — we do — but in the sense that its intent is premature. Indeed, the Justice Minister agrees with me. In response to a question for written answer from my colleague Colin Crawford, she states:

"It would be premature of me to make any commitments regarding engagement"

with the interlocutor

"until further clarity is available."

The Justice Minister is saying, "Let's find out what they are planning and make a decision". Members can shake their heads, but I have it in writing and am happy to read the whole thing out and save their blushes. Our amendment is the right approach. The right approach is to note what the Governments are saying. What we have in our amendment, which is that we should note that, is what Sinn Féin has in its amendment. What we are really saying is, "Give us the details, and we will reserve judgement until we see them." Our opinion is formed by engaging with communities and with the police. Here is where, the police think, we are at this moment. Each paramilitary organisation pretty much has three subgroups, the first of which is the people who are completely inactive but may still have membership. Then there are those who are using their energy positively. Whether we like it or not, I know of some who stand on peace lines of an evening to make sure that communities are not fighting with each other. That is positive engagement. They are out there whether we like it or not. Those are two of the groups. The third group is those who are lining their pockets — those who have their feet on the necks of our communities. Those are the people whom we need to target. If we look at this through primary colours, we could simply suggest that the scoping exercise should target the first two subgroups and, in doing so, separate them from the third. What would that do? We already have that in part. The Communities in Transition programme, which, granted, was in only eight areas, clearly uses and speaks to former paramilitaries and those who are still active. Again, it does that whether we like it or not, and it is done to create community resilience. Having isolated the first two groups, we could then focus our limited resources on tackling the third group, which is those who are intent on lining their pockets and abusing their communities. That means that the funding of the paramilitary crime task force, which is around £5·5 million, could then be focused on tackling those criminal parasites. The first element in dealing with paramilitaries is police, justice, enforcement and jail. If they do not wish to stop their activities, we must systematically dismantle them at source by targeting their structures, recruitment and illegal activities. Nobody — absolutely nobody — is intent on giving a free pass to those involved in criminality, drug dealing, extortion, coercive behaviour, sexual abuse, child abuse, moneylending, murder or maiming while flying a UDA, UVF, INLA or IRA flag of convenience. Nobody is giving them that. We are trying to find the elements whom we can move away from that. Secondly — this is where the initiative has merit — there must be community transition towards empowerment and support for the rule of law. That can happen only if conversations are held and pathways identified. We have to talk, but let us be clear —.

Of course, yes.

I thank the Member for that, but I have to say that the Communities in Transition project, of which the Justice Minister is a part-owner, is giving us outcomes. It is telling us that it is giving us outcomes. Part of the proposal that we have today is your saying that there are outcomes. Your motion states that there are outcomes, and I am saying that there are outcomes. However, I am really saying that we should separate the ones whom we can get outcomes from and target the ones who are not intent on moving. Let us be clear: there can be no further funding; no money inducements; no prisoner releases; and no sentence reductions to incentivise transitioning. Nobody should or can be above the law, and turning a blind eye to past crimes cannot form part of any new process that aims to bring about paramilitary groups' transition to disbandment. What do we have to lose just waiting to see what the Governments propose? What do we really have to lose? John Hume began talks with the IRA to bring about peace. Without his courage and that of David Trimble, we would never have had the Belfast Agreement. They made a decision to talk, and that is what we are talking about now. I notice, even today, that people are saying that talks are going on with the Real IRA to get it to disband. Nobody in the Chamber and no party in the Chamber has stood up to say, "They should stop", so why should we stop trying to target those who class themselves as loyalist paramilitaries? We should not.

I agree with the call in Sinn Féin's amendment for:

"the UK and Irish Governments to set out a short and strictly limited timeline for the scoping and engagement exercise."

That is a fair way of looking at it: look at it and see what we can do rapidly. It goes back to the very premise of what our amendment and the Sinn Féin amendment say: let us note the plans and see what the Governments intend to do. Until we have the details, we simply do not know. As the Justice Minister said, it would be premature to make a decision. I reiterate that the proposal by the UK and Irish Governments is to appoint an interlocutor to see whether there could be a process; it is not the start of a process. It is right to wait and see whether that will bear fruit, while, at the same time, ensure that the paramilitary crime task force — the PSNI, the National Crime Agency (NCA) and HMRC — continue their work with the support of the Assembly. If either Government plan to offer funding, prisoner release, sentence reduction or a crime amnesty, we, as a party, will not support it. In the meantime, I hope that the Justice Minister, using the political advisory group, which is useful to have, can shape that scoping exercise, because we have to do something or else we will be sitting here in another 10 years saying, "How do we get rid of them?". Our amendment is fair. It is long — I did not want it to be that long — but it was important to lay out exactly how we see this. We need to separate the paramilitary groups into the three subsections that I talked about. If we can get rid of two of them, our police can focus on the ones who are intent on criminality and coercive behaviour and who are absolutely destroying our society and communities. They are the ones that the motion talks about, and what we are doing is making sure that we put a plan in place to deal with them.

1,329 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:06 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification