The reaction of unionists to the Patten report has been disappointing, although not surprising. Ian Paisley hopes it will become a cause celebre that will bring Protestants on to the streets and sink the Good Friday agreement. David Trimble, even though he signed the agreement that gave Patten clear terms of reference, sees the report, variously, as "shoddy' ', "a gratuitous insult" and as "running counter to common sense and common decency". According to one opinion poll, a majority of unionists seem to agree.

Unionists have two views of the RUC and the need for reform. On the one hand, there is an ethnocentric view, most popular among supporters of the DUP, that the RUC is "their" police force. Its job is to defend the Union against a nationalist insurgency. Given its task, the RUC should be comprised largely or exclusively of loyal Protestants. It should be adequately resourced, given the full gamut of emergency powers and a free hand against republicans. Reformers who attempt to restrain the police are considered to be either duped liberals or republican subversives.

This ethnocentric view is not articulated as widely in the 1990s as it used to be, and it is doubtful if Chris Patten heard much of it. This does not mean it has lost its popularity. It provides much of the basis for Paisleyite opposition to Patten.

The second view is more civic than ethnic, more generous to Catholics and more likely to be used in public debate. From this perspective, the proper role of a police service is to police impartially and professionally. The RUC, it is believed, fulfils this role. The evidence for its impartiality includes its successful management of loyalist protests against the Anglo-Irish Agreement and during the Drumcree disputes.

In the civic unionist view, Catholics are welcome to join the RUC, although a police officer's impartiality is considered more important than his religion. The chief barrier to Catholic recruitment, it is argued, is not the nature of the RUC, but intimidation by republicans. It is an end to this discrimination, and not the wholesale reform of the RUC, which is needed to increase the number of Catholic police officers.

The Patten report squarely rejects not just the unionist ethnocentric view, but the civic one also. This is because, when subjected to even minimal scrutiny, the civic unionist case falls apart. Opinion polls, including those conducted by the RUC itself, consistently show that a large majority of Catholics want the RUC to be reformed or disbanded. This is also the position of the elected representatives of Catholics, in the SDLP and Sinn Fein.

It is what Patten learned from his research, and what he heard in the submissions he received from nationalists, and in the hearings he attended in nationalist areas. Although the unionist media tried, it was difficult to dismiss all of this as the result of republican intimidation.

Faced with sincere flattery for the RUC from unionists, and sincere criticism of it from nationalists, Patten reached an understandable and correct conclusion: if Northern Ireland's police was to be made widely acceptable, it would have to be made neutral between unionism and nationalism. The concept of neutrality between Irish and British nationalism is at the core of the Patten report. The RUC's title is to be changed to the broadly neutral Northern Ireland Police Service. The practice of displaying portraits of Queen Elizabeth, and of flying the Union flag outside police stations is to be discontinued. The oath of constable is to be changed: in future recruits will swear to be neutral between nationalism and unionism. Training and codes of conduct are to be revamped to ensure respect for both unionism and nationalism, and the composition of the service is to be changed so that it is representative of both communities. According to opinion polls the proposed police service has been welcomed by a significant majority of Catholics. Nationalist leaders should now indicate publicly that they would encourage nationalists to join a police service based on Patten's principle of impartiality.

The leadership of the GAA should also indicate that, in the context of Patten being adopted, they would remove Rule 21. These moves would strengthen hopes that the acceptance of the Patten report would consolidate peace, and may help to reduce unionist scepticism.

The British government would help by sending a clear message that it endorses the principle of a nationally impartial police and that implementation of this principle is not dependent on the survival of the other institutions established under the Good Friday agreement. This will remove the argument of the unionist rejectionists who currently cite Patten's report as another reason to reject the agreement.

John McGarry is the co-author with Brendan O'Leary of Policing Northern Ireland: Proposals for a New Start (Blackstaff: Belfast, 1999).