It is more than seven years since I spoke in this House and I am happy that the opportunity arises for me to propose something which I have no doubt has support across both this House and the other House and which stems in no small way from the work of my predecessor. The fact that we are in a position to propose the lifting of the state of emergency is in major respect due to work done by my predecessor, Deputy Reynolds, and others to bring about the ceasefire by both the Provisional IRA and the Loyalist organisations. It is important that I should start my speech by paying tribute to the work of others in this regard.
I assure the House that it is my intention to work on what has already been achieved. I see this process as being essentially a two stage process and the two stages are quite felicitously identified in the title of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. There are two elements here — peace and reconciliation. The first stage, peace, is an absence of violence. Reconciliation, however, is what is necessary if we are to make sure that the peace is permanent and not just a truce.
The reconciliation that we are talking about here is a reconciliation between the two traditions which exist on this island, unionism and nationalism. It is important for us who come from the Nationalist tradition to understand what unionism is. Unionism is a sense of being British. People who are Unionists feel that they are British. They are not some form of aberrant Irish people who have a slightly different and antique interest in certain ceremonies such as Orange parades and such like and who just need a little bit of jollying along and polite talk for them to fully realise that they are not British after all but are in fact slightly misled people who belong to the same one true understanding of Irish nationhood which we have.
They have a very different sense of their nationhood. They feel a genuine sense of being British and until we come to understand what they are and how they see themselves there will not be a full and true reconciliation. Equally, of course, they have got to come to understand the sense of loyalty, the sense of Irish loyalty that is felt by their neighbours and friends on the Falls Road, in Newtownards, in Lisburn, in Portadown and in all the towns which they tend to see as their own but which they share with people who have a very different loyalty to theirs.
Both sides have to fully understand the loyalty of the other. It is not sufficient for Unionists to say that everything would be fine if only the Nationalists would fully and completely accept being part of the UK, in a spiritual sense as well as a legal sense. That is not possible, because for that to happen the Nationalists in question would have to deny, in a sense, their Irish nationalism.
However, if that is an unreasonable request of them to make of Nationalists, it is equally unreasonable for us to demand of Unionists that they in some way, depart from their sense of being British. The task we must set ourselves in building from the stage of peace towards that of reconciliation is one of coming to understand the other point of view more fully than we have done in the past.
That is the context in which I attend the Seanad today to ask it to agree to this motion, which has already been debated and agreed in the Dáil, in order to bring an end to the national emergency resolved by both Houses of the Oireachtas on 1 September 1976.
An end to the national emergency at this point in time is not just significant in terms of its legal effects. It has very great political and symbolic significance also. It is appropriate, therefore, that I should recall the events which have brought us to this moment in history.
Effectively, this country has been under a state of emergency since 1939. The emergency declared at that time, in accordance with Article 28 of the Constitution, was in response to the outbreak of World War II. It remained in place until 1 September 1976 when both Houses of the Oireachtas passed resolutions bringing it to an end.
A new emergency was resolved to exist at that time arising out of the armed conflict then taking place in Northern Ireland and against the background of a number of violent incidents in this State in the summer of that year, 1976. The horrific murder of the then British ambassador, Mr. Christopher Ewart-Biggs, and of Miss Judith Cooke, and the detonation of explosions at the Special Criminal Court, represented disturbing new elements which presented a direct challenge to the authority of the institutions of the State and their continued ability to discharge the functions entrusted to them under the Constitution.
In the face of that challenge the Government of the day was compelled to act to secure the public safety and preserve the vital interests of the State. The ending of the national emergency is therefore a matter of great significance. I have great hope that it will serve as a marker in the chapter of our history, recording the lifting of a threat and the beginning of new era of peace for the people of this island.
The importance which the Government places in the development of the peace process is evident in the programme. A Government of Renewal. In that programme the Government has made the consolidation of the process towards peace and reconciliation on this island its primary task. To that end the Government has committed itself to a number of important legislative measures, of which the lifting of the national emergency is the first. Other measures directed to that objective will include the introduction of legislation to give effect to the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons and the review of all legislation and court arrangements associated with the management of the conflict in Northern Ireland in the past 25 years.
The motion before the House gives effect to the first of those commitments. A decision to move such a motion was signalled by the former Government on 25 October 1994, but had not been acted upon prior to the change of Government. The ending of the national emergency will help to signal our confidence in the developing peace process and our continuing determination to harness the opportunities for a just and lasting peace which have emerged in recent times. Declaring the end to that emergency will, moreover, help underline the return to normality which the developments of recent times represent and the new hope and opportunities that they mean.
The ending of the national emergency will have more than symbolic meaning, however. It will have legal consequences also. The Emergency Powers Act, 1976. enacted immediately following the declaration of the national emergency in 1976, will, in accordance with the provisions of section 3 of that Act, automatically expire on the passage of this resolution by this House today. Moreover. section 15 of the Criminal Law Act, 1976. which empowers members of the Defence Forces to arrest and search in certain defined circumstances when acting in aid of the civil power, will also cease to have effect. That is because that section has effect only as long as the Emergency Powers Act, 1976, is in force.
The powers conferred on the security forces of this State by those legislative provisions are, of their nature, exceptional in our or, indeed, any legal system. That is evident from the fact that the extended period of detention for up to seven days allowed by the Emergency Powers Act was allowed to lapse in 1977, although the possibility of bringing it back into force was preserved. It is right, therefore, that they should go now.
Ending the national emergency and the consequent expiry of the Emergency Powers Act, 1976, will equally represent an early response to the comments made by the United Nations Human Rights Committee on Ireland's report under Article 40 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The committee recommended, among other things, that the State "critically examine the need for the existing state of emergency". We have done so and acted upon it.
The ending of the national emergency is, as I have already indicated, the first in a number of legislative steps which the Government proposes to take to consolidate the peace process. The Government will also be acting quickly on the commitment in its programme to introduce legislation to permit the country to ratify the Convention of the Transfer of Sentenced Persons.
While the ending of the national emergency has no direct implications for the continued operation of the Offences against the State Acts, 1939-85, the Government, nevertheless, intends to review that legislation as well, in accordance with the commitment contained in its programme to review all legislation and court arrangements associated with the management of the conflict in the last 25 years.
The economic and social consequences which a lasting peace presents to the people of this island should not be underestimated. The effects of the cessation of violence are already evident in terms of increased cross-Border traffic and trade. The reopening of Border roads is also having significant effects in terms of the reintegration of Border communities which have been physically divided for a long number of years, especially since the commencement of violence. The social and economic benefits of an increased level of cross-Border commercial activity and economic co-operation are incalculable.
Consolidating the peace process will also create significant new opportunities for using those Garda resources which have until now had to be committed to security related duties arising from the situation in Northern Ireland. I have no doubt that Members of the House will have many suggestions on where these gardaí might be deployed; I might have a few suggestions of my own. Peace holds out the opportunity to use a proportion of those resources to address other pressing needs in our community such as the fight against drugs and organised crime. Changes in that regard are already under way. I am optimistic that a worthwhile redeployment of resources will become increasingly possible as peace is consolidated.
I want — as I am sure all Members of the House will want — to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the security forces of the State for their dedication and professionalism in safeguarding our security during what has been a troubled and difficult period in our history. When I spoke in the other House I mentioned by name each of the members of the Garda Síochána, Army and prison services who lost their lives in the last 25 years. I will not do so again but it is appropriate that this House should remember the supreme sacrifice which these people have made over that prolonged period. We hope that a similar roll of honour will not have to be recorded at the end of the next 25 years. We remember at this time, in particular, those members who made the ultimate sacrifice.
The IRA and Loyalist ceasefires marked a turning point of enormous significance. Each new day of peace increases the prospects that violence will never again be used in pursuit of political aims. The lifting of the national emergency is an expression of the Government's confidence in this new era and signifies in a very concrete way our determination to advance the peace process. It also symbolises the readiness across the political spectrum here to respond in an imaginative way to this new era.
Peace has transformed the climate for political dialogue towards an agreed settlement. The Irish and British Governments have been working closely together for some time now to assist in the process of building a better future on this island. We want each tradition to feel a real sense of security and belonging. We know from past experience that the achievement of this requires accommodation instead of isolation, agreement instead of imposition, consent instead of coercion and parity of treatment instead of domination. These realties have guided all our work in the joint framework document negotiations.
I wish to again record my appreciation of the detailed and painstaking work which has been done on the framework document, particularly by the Tánaiste, who has been working on this matter over his entire term of office as Minister for Foreign Affairs with his officials. He has brought this document to a very advanced stage and each time a meeting takes place between him and his counterpart, Sir Patrick Mayhew, or between his officials and the British officials, further progress towards the conclusion of this document is made. I also wish to pay tribute to the officials on the other side who have helped us so much in this process.
However, we should not overstate what this document is. This document is not a blueprint to be imposed on anybody. It is simply a statement of the understanding about the position between the two Governments, creating a foundation or framework within which the people of Northern Ireland, through their own political representatives with the support and understanding of the two Governments and the two communities south of the Border and in Britain, can build their own future. It is a matter for each community to have confidence in its own political representatives that they will be able to build on the framework document. If they have reservations about the document, let them talk about those to the Governments and to their partners in dialogue across the community in Northern Ireland. Let them not withdraw from discussion because it is very important that we learn the lesson of 25 years of violence, which is that it is through dialogue that problems are solved.
It is also important for us on this side of the Border to recognise that 25 years of violence leaves a scar. If it took the IRA, the Provisional Sinn Féin movement, approximately eight years — from the publication of the book A Path to Freedom in 1986 to last year when they eventually gave up violence — to adjust their thinking to understand that violence was not the way to advance their views, we should not expect other communities to respond in eight days or eight months. This process of recognising that the threat is over and that a new process of reconciliation is needed will take time. The Government and I do not expect that the day after the framework document is published everybody will embrace its provisions and say that everything in it is fine and to agree new arrangements based on it. I do not expect anything of the kind.
I know that a painful and difficult process of reassessment is required in both communities. I would be disappointed, in some senses, if people did not find something in the document to complain about because that would be a sign that the document was not challenging them. As the Tánaiste has said elsewhere, it is important that this document should be seen to challenge both communities to revise their thinking. However, they will revise their thinking — and, perhaps, help to revise the thinking of the Governments if that is what is needed — through dialogue; they will not do so by absenting themselves from dialogue. I ask all those who have views about this matter to have confidence in themselves, the validity of their views and the quality of their political representatives and to encourage those political representatives to engage in the dialogue which will advance their views within the context of a peaceful settlement for which the framework is just a framework.
The violence of the past 25 years has brought into clearer focus the fundamental need to achieve a political balance across many issues. It will comprehensively reflect that need and thereby greatly assist a new political beginning. The document should be viewed as a facilitator of dialogue and not as a political settlement in itself. The final outcome of such dialogue will be put to referendum and the principles of political agreement and popular consent will apply.
This is a very important point. Each tradition has the ultimate right to say "No" because both parts of Ireland must vote on the settlement which emanates from the framework document. If the Unionist parties are ultimately unhappy with what is agreed or what is on offer, they can say "No" in the referendum. Equally, if the Nationalist community is unhappy, it knows that the people of this State will say "No" in their referendum and the matter will not proceed. There is no reason for either community to be tardy in entering into dialogue because ultimately they know that the people will have the final say. They cannot, therefore, be in any sense isolated in making compromises because there is the reference back to the people at the end of the process. This should give the politicians concerned more confidence to compromise because they will not have the last word.
The work of the two Governments on the framework document is almost complete at this stage. I urge all to exercise patience and restraint until its publication. This, in my view, is a reasonable request when set against the background of violence over 25 years. The final document will contain a complex of balances to reflect the sensitivity of the many issues involved. It will reassure and challenge the two main traditions on this island. Reassurances will be given in respect of identity and convictions. At the same time the document will challenge both traditions to rise above the constraints of the past and forge a new political destiny for all on this island and between this island and its neighbour. In essence, it will offer real hope for a durable political settlement, yet demand realism and generosity on all sides. When the document is published, it will, I believe, become clear that it is manifestly fair to both the Nationalist and Unionist traditions on this island. In the meantime, I ask all concerned to withhold judgment.