It is difficult to believe that the award of the George Cross for gallantry to the Royal Ulster Constabulary is not connected with pending decisions on the Patten report and the battle of political wills to be fought out this weekend in the Ulster Unionist Party Council. If anyone thought that the gesture would be interpreted as anything other than a political tactic, they only had to await the predictably partisan reactions to the announcement. Mainstream unionists were pleased. The SDLP declared they could understand why many in the Unionist community would be happy with it. Sinn Fein said it was an affront and called again for the force to be disbanded. Dr Ian Paisley saw it as a sop before the implementation of Patten's recommendations.
The Chief Constable, Sir Ronnie Flanagan, however, probably spoke for most of the force and their families, when he accepted the honour graciously and with dignity. The gesture is appropriate and goes some way towards remedying the deficiencies in official policy highlighted by Patten. The report urged tangible and explicit recognition of the bravery and sacrifice of RUC members and their families, with appropriate practical measures to alleviate past suffering and loss. If Northern Ireland today stands on the threshold of a new era of peace and democracy, it is in large measure because the RUC held the line over the past 30 years against those whose values were very differently based.
The award of the George Cross is important, especially in a community which places such a high value on symbolic links with the British crown. But it must be matched with practical measures to meet the real needs of police officers and their families in the post-Patten era. Generous cash terms must be arranged for retiring officers and equally generous provision must be made for dependants, for those who have been physically injured and for those in need of ongoing care and support, including counselling. The Patten report highlighted, as an example of official neglect, the poor quality of official prostheses issued to amputees and observed that in many cases, injured officers have been obliged to procure better quality products at their own expense.
But the British Government and, in particular, the Secretary of State, Mr Mandelson, must avoid any temptation to water down the core elements of the Patten report, including the proposals for the new police authority, linkages between the police and local communities and changing the name and the symbols of the force. These are all critically important if the new democracy of Northern Ireland is to have policing arrangements which reflect its inclusive character and which represent a break with the era of unionist domination.
Symbolism may be important for the unionist community. It is no less important for nationalists, for whom the traditional RUC represented the visible, every day face of a State which relegated them to the status of second-class citizens. Contrary to the arguments which have been made in certain British newspapers, and elsewhere, the badge and title of Northern Ireland's police force since 1922 are not regarded as unifying symbols by most nationalists. The prefix "Royal", inherited from the RIC, was awarded by Queen Victoria for the force's effectiveness in suppressing Fenianism. The harp, shamrock and crown were juxtaposed as a political statement signifying the Union. Such icons should have no place in the imagery of the police service which Northern Ireland needs and deserves. It is to be hoped that those with political responsibility will not be led to apparently harmless gestures of appeasement at a difficult time politically. The sacrifices of the RUC must be fully and generously acknowledged. But the Patten report must not be cherry-picked.