Reading the Minister's speech one gets the impression that a lot of work went into it. Nevertheless, one wonders if in all aspects the work was well directed towards trying to achieve our aims. I compliment the Minister on his expansionist policy in regard to the creation of more diplomatic missions and offices in various parts of the world. This is a good policy. The previous Government always had it as a basic item of policy to expand as much as possible. At the same time, we should be more selective and we should establish diplomatic relations with countries with which we have something in common, such as the former victims of colonial abuse. We should try to have some kind of rapport with the smaller countries rather than the bigger ones. It may be the "in" thing to have relations with the USSR but I wonder how well this will serve this country? Will it mean we will be a more prosperous country or that we can influence Russia towards coming around to a more democratic way of life? I doubt it very much. When USSR staffs came in here I felt we were adding further to our present troubles.
The British are not noted for their lack of cunning in regard to espionage work. In the circumstances it may be necessary for us to employ more police to watch for possible espionage not against ourselves, perhaps, but against some of our neighbours. It is a disturbing thought that we should be drawn into the web of international espionage but that is the situation we may be faced with.
I agree that is may have served a useful purpose to establish a new relationship with the USSR. It will be of mutual benefit to both countries, but having regard to past activities of that country in the international field, we may well be faced with the task of countering moves by the secret services of other countries. We may be drawn into this game of international espionage and I would deplore that situation. I am pointing out to the Minister that when he is opening relations with other countries he should be more selective.
I agree with the move to open relations with Middle East countries. We have a certain affinity with them from the point of view that they, too, were occupied by colonial powers. It is good also that we should open cultural relations with them. The Minister has been criticised for going all over Europe and the US but my opinion is that the more contacts we make in this way the better for us. We cannot be insular. We cannot cotton-wool ourselves against movements and changes taking place abroad and therefore nobody would question the amount of money we spend on international co-operation and the development of our diplomatic service.
At this point I should like to express appreciation of our efforts in regard to the Third World. Our people have never failed to make sacrifices to help those who are less well-off than ourselves. We must remember that two-thirds of the world population are at or below starvation level. We must therefore express appreciation of the efforts of young and not so young people from this country who have gone out to work in Ethiopia and Bangladesh. These efforts should inspire the Government to increase our contributions to the Third World.
That is my contribution in regard to our efforts abroad. It behoves me, as it does every other Deputy speaking on this Estimate, to devote some time to what is happening in our own country. Every morning one hears and reads news of people being killed and maimed and surely one must ask one's self in what way we can bring peace to the six north-eastern counties. It may be true that the British want to leave the North. I believe they do because if the Northern ports meant something in imperial defence plans, those days are gone. There may still be the remnants of the colonial forces among the wealthier ruling class in the North who still exploit the people in the Shankill Road and other such areas. I see some glimmer of hope that the men and women in Shankill Road as well as the majority in the North will begin to see through his exploitation.
Most of us here, when we hear of a man being shot or blown to bits, do not ask what faith he was. We ask rather why these things happen, with fellow Irish men and women continuing to suffer in the North day in and day out without any let-up. There are the same harrowing stories day after day and we have to ask ourselves what can the Government do in this part of the country to bring an end to this frightful situation. It would be unfair to suggest that the Minister is less interested in the situation than I am. I believe he and the whole Government are deeply interested in the North. However, as far as policy is concerned it seems to be a matter of what we are not doing.
Last year I suggested there should be a special Department concentrating solely on the North and on what we can do to help. I believe that in many a good Protestant heart in the North there is a genuine fear that we want to take over. Nothing could be further from the truth but we are convinced that, until we have a United Ireland, we will not have a peace. In the last 300 years there were constant outbreaks of violence followed by periods of peace and then fresh outbreaks of violence.
Any attempt at patching up would only result in putting off the real solution to the problem for another few years, at the end of which time we would again find ourselves back to square one and violence. I commend Deputy O'Kennedy's remarks yesterday to the Minister. He mentioned a possible phasing out with the British offering financial help. There is a distinction to be drawn between the wealthy few and the bulk of the people who work for their living. The wealthy few play on the fear of the others, manufacturing bogies which do not exist, with the intention of preventing unity because they believe that, if there was unity, they would lose their power. They are the élite of the North.
It should be brought home to the majority they have nothing to fear in being brought into a United Ireland and they should be assured that we are prepared to do all we can to enable them to continue enjoying whatever standard of living they now enjoy. Of course, the standard of living would not deteriorate in a United Ireland, with the 32 counties working together. We would share in the expertise of the North and our workers in our much more diversified economy would have something to give to the North. Working hand in hand, without coercion, we could certainly build a better nation, guaranteeing to each individual in that nation a better standard of living and complete freedom of worship.
As far as I can see from the Minister's brief, he did not mention internment. This is a great pity. This is a subject on which there is tremendous unity. The majority in the North abhor internment just as much as we do and abhor events like those which occurred last night in the prison there and a few weeks back. Some women belonging to the majority occupied a building yesterday to protest against internment.
The time has come when the Government must use all their powers of persuasion on the Government of the United Kingdom to show how foolish that Government are in not ending internment. Is there anything which will convince the minority or the majority in the North that there is another future for them beyond that of brother fighting brother, an exercise which only brings misery to themselves and to the country as a whole? The Minister could well canalise all the efforts of the people and those of our fellow-members in the EEC to bring home to them the fact that what is happening in the North is not something peculiar to this island and not something which could not have repercussions outside. The situation is sufficiently serious to engage the attention of the nine nations together in the EEC. The possibility is that Europe may not be healthy while this festering sore exists in part of our country. Some of those interned without trial may be completely innocent of any crime. Most right-thinking people everywhere believe internment without trial is wrong.
The Government should make an effort to bring home to the British Government that they should end internment. It is wrong. It is causing frightful suffering. The vast majority of the people North and South will back the Government if they are successful in bringing the British Government to their senses and making them realise that the first step towards reconciliation between the people in the North is the ending of internment.
I realise that the Government may have a difficult task in getting the British Government to see the light, but this is nothing new. A tragedy of the history of ourselves and our neighbours across the water is the terrible difficulty in getting them to see the light until it is too late. Last week the Taoiseach spoke in Oxford on the theme that British efforts towards Ireland have been too little and too late. As we approach the end of the 20th century, should we not be able to hope for new thinking and a realisation that the relationship between the two countries is different in the 20th century from what it was in the 17th century?
There is an onus on each of us to say how we think we should work towards total unity. I suggested last year, and I suggest again, that there are men and women in the North who belong to the majority who feel that they will find their common salvation in uniting the people who have suffered. In the North they suffered from unemployment and bad housing just as we did down here. These are the things on which the workers North and South can unite. These are the things that really matter. We must build up the economy so that the man in Belfast, Armagh and Portadown, like his counterpart in Galway, Limerick and Dublin, can look forward to peace and prosperity on this island, an island where their children will be able to play as children are meant to play without any fear that, when a child picks up an old tin can, it will be a bomb which will blow him into eternity. We must realise that the families in Belfast or Portadown or anywhere else feel for their children and for their people just as we feel for ours.
When one reads in the papers or hears on radio or television of another man being shot and one is told that he was a Protestant, one knows that the next day one will hear of a Catholic being shot. I suppose in some people's minds they are meant to cancel each other out. That is not civilisation. People who act in that way are acting out of fear. I believe that 99 per cent of people everywhere are against violence. It is repugnant to us to think of a man, or a child, or an old person being shot or blown to pieces. There are other forms of violence which are practised by the "haves" in most countries who want to maintain a system which gives them the best things of life. They are quite prepared to exploit people who cannot get jobs and housing. If there are not enough jobs to go around they say that "our people", as they call them, will get the jobs.
Through a great educated publicity drive we should try to get it over to the people in the North that they are being exploited and that we have no intention of trying to coerce them into doing something they do not want to do. We should point out to them that at the moment they are being coerced by forces using them to satisfy their own ends and using the economic situation to stir up trouble. They suggest that we have got an ulterior motive in seeking unity. We can say in all honesty that we seek the prosperity of this nation. This can only be achieved when the nation is united as one country.
I do not rule out the possibility of the North, because of 300 years of history, being given some recognition for the conditions which have grown up there. If the majority think back on their history they will realise that their forebears preached to us that Republicanism was a good form of government. Through the Department, the Government should set out to prove to the majority in the North that we simply seek the prosperity of the country and that we believe this can only be achieved in a united country. If we were to tear up the Constitution tomorrow this would not impress the majority in the North. I do not know how many people in the North have read our Constitution. Some very good ideals are expressed in it. If they read it they would find in it guarantees which they lack at present.
There is an onus on us to act quickly, not by trying to persecute the people in the North, and not by trying to coerce them, but by trying to show them what we really mean. The Government have been maintaining a low profile on the North, not saying too much in the hope that things would quieten down. This is like suggesting that if a person is ill their must be silence in the house. Unless you get a doctor to try to cure the cause of the man's illness, you are wasting your time.
The Government have a tremendous opportunity to tackle the question of the North. Up to five years ago what happened in the North did not evoke great interest throughout Europe. I am convinced it does now. With the media giving such great coverage to the happenings there, and with Europe shrinking because of the expansion in travel, people in Europe realise that the Northern Ireland problem, the whole Irish problem, is something to which they will have to give more attention. We cannot have a united Europe with the present happenings in the North. With such a great problem there can be no hope of uniting Europe. Some people think this problem is only confined to a small portion of the country but it should be remembered that a world war resulted from an incident in Sarajevo. Then followed the great holocaust of that world war. I am not suggesting that a world war would follow but I believe that European unity cannot be achieved while this frightful suffering continues in the North.
If I am to blame the British I blame them for not being sufficiently conscious of the happenings in the North. I often regret the fact that Britain did not produce a figure of the ability of General de Gaulle who handled the Algerian situation admirably. The British should study his solution to the Algerian crises to see if there is a lesson to be learned from that.
