asked the Taoiseach whether the declaration made by the Government in paragraph 5 of the agreed Communiqué following the Sunningdale Conference on 2 December 1973 is accepted by the Government as still expressing Government policy.
2.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Sunningdale Agreement.
1.
asked the Taoiseach in which respect, if any, the Government are dissatisfied with the declaration made by the British Government in paragraph 5 of the agreed Communiqué following the Sunningdale Conference on 2 December 1973; whether it is the Government's present policy to seek from the British Government a commitment or undertaking clearly distinguishable from, and going clearly beyond, that declaration; and, if so, in what substantial, rather than merely verbal respect, such a new commitment or undertaking would differ from that declaration.
I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The Government believe that change in the status of Northern Ireland will only come about with the consent of a majority of the people there. As I have said before this is a simple recognition of the practical realities of the situation.
We believe, however, that a declaration by the British Government favouring Irish unity would open the way towards a just and lasting peace, through negotiation between the two Governments and representatives of both major traditions in the North — to the benefit not only of the people of this island but also of relations between our two countries.
I think the Taoiseach answered the first two questions together. I could not hear all of what the Taoiseach said — it is not his fault I know — but I believe he said that he would wish from the British Government an expression of their favouring a solution which would integrate Northern Ireland with this State. But would such an expression on the part of the British differ in substance from what they already declared in 1973 and from which I have not understood them ever to have departed?
I think it would differ, yes, but apart from that I think it is important that a declaration of that sort should be renewed from time to time.
Would the Taoiseach and his Government be then perfectly happy if the British were to renew the commitment given at the time of Sunningdale in the terms in which they then gave it? Would that not meet the substance of what the Taoiseach says he is looking for now?
No.
Would the Taoiseach explain to the House what is the difference of substance — I am not talking about flapdoodle; I am talking of a difference of substance — between their indicating willingness to support the wish of the majority for unity, should the majority ever wish it, and their favouring the idea of unity. What is the difference?
I see the difference as being the difference between negative and positive. The Sunningdale declaration by the British Government was in the following terms: The British Government solemnly declare that it was and would remain their policy to support the wishes of the majority of the people of Northern Ireland — that is the first statement. The present status of Northern Ireland is that it is part of the United Kingdom; that is the second statement. If in the future the majority of the people of Northern Ireland should indicate a wish to become part of a united Ireland the British Government would support that wish. I want them to go further than that and to indicate that they favour the unity of this country. I think there is an important difference.
Does the Taoiseach not agree that the difference is next to invisible if they have nearly nine years ago committed themselves, as they did here to support a majority wish in the North for change when that wish emerged? Does the Taoiseach suppose that if they were to say in advance of that emerging, "We would like to see it emerge" that would make it emerge any faster?
What I am saying in my reply is that what I would like to see is a declaration by the British Government favouring Irish unity. In the Sunningdale declaration there is simply a statement that if the people of Northern Ireland wished to become part of a united Ireland the British Government would support it. I think there is a very important difference between the two statements.
What I am trying to get the Taoiseach to concentrate on is this: He said in his original reply if I heard it properly that he accepted that the wish of the majority of the people in the North was a precondition to a change in that status. I understood him to say that he accepted that just as the Government of 1973 accepted it. What makes him suppose that a different form of words now adopted by the British and incorporating the word "favour" rather than the word "support" would make that majority wish emerge one minute sooner than it otherwise might?
That is a different question.
It so clearly arises out of this and is so clearly of the substance of it that I can only conclude that the Taoiseach does not want to answer and that he is hoping that he can play to the Gallery in his usual way on this subject.
I cannot do more than state my position. If the Deputy does not wish to accept that, it will cause disagreement between us but he must accept that I see a clear difference between the Sunningdale declaration by the British Government to the effect that if the people of Northern Ireland indicated a wish to become part of a united Ireland the British Government would support that wish, and what I would now like to happen, namely, that the British Government would declare that they favour Irish unity.
I must accept — and I think this moment is important to record — that it is the first time, if I am not doing him an injustice, that I can remember hearing the Taoiseach say in so many words that he accepted that the will of the majority of the people of the Six Counties was essential, that their willingness to accept a change in their status was essential before such a change could come about. I never heard him say that before, I believe. But what I want to know is this, and I cannot see it as a separate question or that he should be inhibited from dealing with it: what is there in the formula which he now wants the British to substitute for their Sunningdale formula, a thrawneen — anything, the smallest iota — which will push anybody in the North of Ireland one minute sooner towards a willingness which they do not now entertain to change their status?
I think it would make an enormous difference.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that a declaration by the British Government which he is urging to the effect that they wish to work towards or should work towards a united Ireland may, and indeed would be interpreted by the majority in Northern Ireland as a form of coercion? Does or does not the Taoiseach rule out coercion as a means of solving this problem, unequivocally rule it out whether by himself or by other Governments?
I do not think it would amount to coercion.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that it would be viewed by the majority in Northern Ireland as a form of coercion?
I do not think so.
Is it in fact not encouraging, by proxy, coercion?
Ceist a cúig.
I should like a reply before we go to the next question.
Just one question——
Could I have my request?
The question was answered for you and I have now gone to question five.
I did not hear the answer.
I heard it answered.
The sound is bad; would the Taoiseach repeat his answer?
Would the Deputy repeat his supplementary question?
Certainly. Does the Taoiseach not agree that if he is urging the British Government or any other Government but particularly the British Government, to declare in favour of a united Ireland, that this could and would be regarded by the majority in Northern Ireland as a form of coercion? Does or does not the Taoiseach unequivocally rule out coercion as a means of solving this problem? If he does, does he not see it as using coercion by proxy to try to get some other Government?
I do not see the concept of coercion as being involved at all. It would be very helpful if the British Government were to make such a declaration. I understand that my view in this regard is shared by most Deputies of the House, including the Leader of the Opposition.
Would the Taoiseach say if he would welcome and encourage, at this time, any attempt to get a form of devolved Government?
That would depend on the form of devolution which was in question.
Could I ask the Taoiseach——
Deputy Blaney, please.
Might I ask the Taoiseach whether in fact it is his view that the continued statement by successive British Governments to the effect that they would stay in Ireland so long as the majority in the Six Counties want them to, means that they are saying that they will stay until Tib's Eve? Further, is it in keeping with what the Taoiseach has been saying in reply to various questions here that it would be very helpful if the British Government were to indicate, without conditions, that they themselves would wish for the unity of this country — in other words, that they would stop giving assurances and would declare their wish for unity? Until then, there is no possibility of talking to the very people to whom we wish to talk.
That is inherent in my reply, in which I said that we believed that the declaration of the British Government favouring Irish unity would open the way towards a just and lasting peace.
Hear, hear.