Informers, Agents and the Liberal Ideology of Collusion in Northern Ireland

There is now considerable evidence of systemic and institutionalised collusion between state forces and loyalists paramilitary groups during the Northern Ireland conflict, not least in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Focusing on a critical reading of the 2012 de Silva report into the killing of human rights lawyer, Pat Finucane, this article examines state collusive practices surrounding the handling of agents and informers as evidence of a culture of collusion extending into the highest echelons of state institutions. The article will argue that such practices evidence an approach to state counterinsurgency predicated on a “doctrine of necessity” and what can be understood as a “liberal ideology of collusion”

Why Parliament Now Decides on War: Tracing the Growth of the Parliamentary Prerogative through Syria, Libya and Iraq

Research Highlights and Abstract: Precedents set in debates over Iraq, Libya and Syria established a new parliamentary prerogative, that MPs must vote before military action can legitimately be launched. Tony Blair conceded the Iraq vote to shore up Labour back-bench support, because he was convinced he would win, and because he was unwilling to change course regardless. David Cameron allowed a vote on Libya because he believed parliament should have a say, because UN support meant he was certain to win, and to gain plaudits for not being Blair. Cameron then had to allow a vote on Syria despite its greater political sensitivity. He mishandled the vote, and lost, and felt constrained to pull out of mooted military action. Collectively these three precedents comprise a new constitutional convention, which will constrain the executive in future whether the law is formally changed or not. Parliament now decides when Britain goes to war. The vote against military intervention in Syria on 29 August 2013 upheld a new parliamentary prerogative that gradually developed through debates over earlier actions in Iraq and Libya. While the academic community and much of the British political elite continue to focus on the free rein granted to prime ministers by the historic royal prerogative, this article argues it is critically constrained by its parliamentary counterpart. It traces the way political conditions, individual policymaker preferences, and the conventional nature of the unwritten British constitution allowed parliament to insert itself into the policymaking process without the consent of successive governments. It concludes that MPs will in future expect the right to vote on proposals to deploy the armed forces overseas, and that the legitimacy of military action will depend on the government winning such a vote

Mainstreaming fairness Policy appraisal and fair treatment

A summary of a consultation process around 'Policy Appraisal & Fair Treatment'Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:98/19041 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreSIGLEGBUnited Kingdo

Fair employment for all

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:q97/14231 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

The Irish language in Northern Ireland The UK government's approach to the Irish language in light of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:q94/22825 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

No emergency, no emergency law Emergency legislation related to Northern Ireland; the case for repeal

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:q96/03150 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Racism in Northern Ireland The need for legislation to combat racial discrimination in Northern Ireland

Report of a C.A.J. conference held in Belfast, 30 Nov 1991SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:2952.569(20) / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo