Declassified Files: NIO deceived the public as it tried to manipulate opinion on parades

The Northern Ireland Office deceived the public over its central role in a poll which it claimed was independent and which it attempted to use to manipulate attitudes to parading, declassified files reveal.
Orangemen protesting after being prevented from parading along the lower Ormeau RoadOrangemen protesting after being prevented from parading along the lower Ormeau Road
Orangemen protesting after being prevented from parading along the lower Ormeau Road

Many of the most senior figures in the department, including the secretary of state and one of his ministers and its top civil servants, were aware of the deception.

Polls tend to cost between £10,000 and £20,000, meaning that a considerable sum of taxpayers’ money would have been used as part of the strategy, although the figure is not disclosed in the declassified file.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The polling company, Coopers and Lybrand – which is now PricewaterhouseCoopers – would have known that the poll was being paid for by the NIO but went along with the government’s desire to hide its role and instead presented the work as solely being its own.

Sir John Chilcot.Sir John Chilcot.
Sir John Chilcot.

Among hundreds of files declassified at the Public Record Office in Belfast under the 20-year rule, there is an eight-page memo from a J McGimpsey in the NIO’s Security Policy and Operations Division.

That June 17, 1996 memo set out what had happened and asked for ministerial authorisation for the results to be made public in a way which hid the NIO’s involvement.

The official’s account was addressed to NIO security minister Sir John Wheeler but also went to the secretary of state, Sir Patrick Mayhew, the NIO’s permanent secretary, Sir John Chilcot, the head of the civil service, Sir David Fell, and several other senior officials.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The civil servant made clear that at least Sir John already knew what was going on, saying: “As you are aware a survey was carried out on 5, 6 and 7 June on the lower Ormeau Road to get information from the residents on their opinion on marches.

“The purpose of the survey was to collect data in [an] attempt to seek a way forward on the parades problem which presently appears to be at stalemate.”

The official said that “local people in the area and others with an interest in the parades issue saw merit in carrying out such a poll and after consideration, and your approval, Coopers & Lybrand were commissioned to carry out a survey in the lower part of the Ormeau Road.”

The memo said that the questions in the survey had been “drawn up by Mr Steele [another official] and myself and fine tuned by Coopers & Lybrand” before 10 trained interviewers carried out the survey.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“The polling company managed to secure responses from 90% of occupied homes in the area and there were “no reports of intimidation”.

However, the memo said that “within 40 minutes of the team arriving in the area, Gerard Rice (LOCC) [Lower Ormeau Community Centre] made an appearance seeking information about the survey.”

He was told as per team briefing that the survey was independent and conducted by Coopers & Lybrand as a pilot study with a view to (maybe) selling the results to the media. (The interviewers were not informed that the NIO had commissioned the survey.)

“Mr Rice requested an interview, and on completion commented that it appeared to be fair.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“He asked for a copy of the final results and was told that it was not possible. He accepted this. He also contacted Colin McIlheney (our contact in Coopers & Lybrand) and was given the same information.”
J McGimpsey then set out three options for the government – doing nothing, getting the polling company to release some of the results while suppressing others, or getting the company to publish the full results.

Advocating for the full results to be published, the civil servant said that one of the benefits of such a strategy would be that the poll – which had been secretly commissioned and controlled by the government – would “provide ‘independent’ verification to the loyal institution that parades in such areas are unwelcome by the significant majority of the people living there”.
“The fact that the NIO are responsible for this survey is confidential and will need to remain confidential to ensure its independence.

“By retaining its confidentiality, the NIO can continue to argue its policy free from criticism against the results.”

They said that in discussions with press officer Colin Ross about how to get the government poll into the public domain it was agreed that the polling company could give the poll to The Sunday Tribune but that “no attribution will be made to the NIO”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The minister was then presented with comments which could be released in his name in response to the poll.

The civil servant suggested that the minister say that he welcomed the publication of the poll and had “read the results with interest”.

It was also suggested that the minister mislead the public by saying: “The results of this independent survey may help inform all those engaged in discussion about parades...and form a basis on which an agreement based on compromise may be reached.”

Related topics: