The agreement signed by the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister on 15 November last represents the remarkable outcome to historic discussion aimed at securing a real change in the whole context of the problem of Northern Ireland. We have heard no more elegant tribute to just how remarkable that outcome is than the one from the last speaker, Deputy O'Malley. For more than 60 years we have witnessed a sterile debate about the divisions on this island. Successive attempts to come to grips with the problem have foundered on the rocks of Nationalism and Unionism, a Nationalism where unity has traditionally and narrowly been defined in terms of territorial unification, and Unionism which has concentrated on the preservation of elitist political and social structures for the benefit of in reality a small minority of the Unionist population of Northern Ireland.
This island cannot become a natural political unit until the deep divisions between communities North and South are reconciled, until a common consensus about the best route forward economically, socially and culturally shall emerge, until the differences in tradition and belief and the diversity of the separate communities are recognised and accepted as a whole. We must understand, as John Hume at the last SDLP annual conference said, that the recognition of diversity is the prerequisite for political unity. It is the people, not the island of Ireland, who are today divided. The people of this island have paid a bitter price for the failure to accept these differences of culture and tradition and to respect the integrity of belief with which they are held.
The core of the problem is manifested in the deep divisions between the two communities in Northern Ireland. A bitter harvest of violence and murder, of economic stagnation and decline has been reaped from the alienation of the minority community in Northern Ireland. An even more bitter harvest would be reaped by any attempt, now or in the future, to enforce any form of political reunification in a wider context without the full assent of the Northern majority.
There has been no tradition of political accommodation in Northern Ireland. This agreement enshrines an unequivocal acceptance of the legitimacy of both traditions in Ireland. It represents for the first time a positive basis for fruitful dialogue and action between the two traditions leading to reconciliation, peace and stability. Moreover, in establishing the Republic's right to regular, formal participation in Northern Ireland's affairs it constitutes an important step towards breaking the political deadlock which has characterised not just Northern politics since 1920 but the politics of this entire island. The agreement primarily represents a framework but it has been widely welcomed for coming at the right time — at a time when mutual trust between the communities is at its lowest ebb.
The novel inter-governmental arrangements do not inhibit the prospect of involvement by the majority community. The framework set out in the agreement represents an historic opportunity. The challenge which we still face is the more formidable task of translating respect for the two traditions into forms of Government and institutions acceptable to each tradition, and ensuring that those traditions are adequately represented at all levels of policy making, administration and social and community activities. The task facing the two Governments is to fill the vacuum that exists in the political life of the communities in Northern Ireland, and to remove the internal tensions and communal fears of dominance and discrimination that need very much to be allayed.
The participants in the New Ireland Forum had identified the need for a new momentum. The Forum said that Britain had a duty to respond now "in order to ensure that the people of Northern Ireland are not condemned to yet another generation of violence and sterility". It also acknowledged that there would have to be some reconciliation between the communities in the North before there could be any reconciliation between the two parts of Ireland.
The parties in the Forum by their participation in its work committed themselves to join a process directed towards that end. The agreement signed last week will bind the British and Irish Governments together in action which will show that this process is more powerful than the IRA and any Unionist extremists who want to take to the streets. It is a matter, as the joint communique said, of determination and imagination. It is not an attempt to wrap up the future of the North by dismissing the majority community and imposing solutions against their will.
The consistent position of the Labour Party has been that progressive politics in Northern Ireland can only be based on a clear understanding of the cultural, civil and human rights which must be respected there, as indeed they should be respected in any truly democratic society. Such a basis links a socialist approach in Northern Ireland to democratic socialist politics elsewhere, and by this link seeks the support of socialists who share a concern for peace and justice. In this instance I was pleased to see that the British Labour party, the main Opposition party in the House of Commons, warmly supported the agreement and that we received messages of support and solidarity from the Socialist group in the European Parliament.
Unfortunately, the difficult and apparently unpalatable realities of political life in Northern Ireland have become an excuse for some in deciding to face only half the issues, leaving the other half to take care of themselves or to be exploited by political and paramilitary forces with scant regard for democratic principles. There has always been a temptation, for instance, to ignore the cultural divide or to dismiss it as some imperialist hangover or as another unacceptable face of capitalism which will disappear as history takes its course on this island. Significantly, the political rhetoric of both communities has often echoed the triumphalism of majorities. By not mentioning the existence of minorities in the south or, indeed, the north, the problem can be glossed over as if it did not exist.
This kind of political rhetoric has a long history here. In the 18th century the Protestant ascendancy in Ireland could regard the existence of the majority nation as being beneath political consideration. When certain Unionist leaders have spoken about democratic rights of "the Ulster people" or "the people of Northern Ireland", they have tended to dismiss the rights of the substantial Catholic minority who are also in Northern Ireland. The Nationalist tradition has also been diminished by attempting to adopt an almost exclusive definition of what it means to be Irish and by allowing a particular religion, namely the Roman Catholic Church, to become too closely identified with Irish identity. Many of the standard phrases of our political culture in every day use, even in this Chamber, convey the impression of a homogeneous people with a singular thread of history. We speak of the Irish people, the people of Ireland, our national tradition. This kind of imagery has one outstanding attraction: its simplicity.
The failure to recognise fully cultural rights is central to the problem of the minorities in all of Ireland; the Protestant minority in the whole island and the Roman Catholic minority in Northern Ireland. In the light of the historic circumstances, it is clear that the cultural traditions in Northern Ireland are a prime political reality and that the unresolved problems relating to their co-existence have to be tackled as a matter of priority. This failure to achieve a stable co-existence hitherto has in large measure explained the failure to effectively tackle the grave socio-economic problems which affect Northern Ireland, to achieve a dimension of co-operative endeavour between North and South even where it is crystal clear that such co-operation on selected economic issues would be to the mutual benefit of both the Republic and the North. One graphic example of that has been the act of fíor-gael Republicans in blowing up the electricity connection between the Northern Ireland Electricity Board and the ESB in the name of a united Ireland.
The possibility of advancing measures which will work to the economic advantage of our communities North and South, and especially in those areas which have suffered most severely as a result of the instability of recent years is a vital part of the framework established by this agreement.
We cannot afford to under-estimate the opportunities which are being offered to communities North and South by this aspect of the agreement and the prospect which it offers for promoting greater communication and more open dialogue between individuals whose political allegiance and opinions might be diametrically opposed but who share a common economic interest which may now, possibly, win support in the form of up to $1,000 million of external economic assistance.
By way of illustration I would point to one small but not insignificant example of how this dimension of the agreement may operate in practice. As Minister for Labour, I have been particularly struck by the potential for broadening the experience of young people and assisting them in their employment needs through establishing exchanges between community training workshops, North and South. I intend to try to build on the limited experience of young worker exchanges between community managed projects in the Republic and Northern Ireland. These exchanges have been developed in recent years and have served both to benefit the individuals involved and to promote greater understanding between communities. The growth of community development in Ireland has given way to local organisations working energetically to identify the employment needs in their area and seeking to harness the resources and potential to meet these needs at local level.
Community groups are well placed to build bridges in a divided society, to look to new approaches, to accommodate a reconciliation of views. It is a measure of the significance of this agreement that, in the process of its implementation, it will enable both North and South to develop and improve the economic links which have been long established.
I should like to turn to the role of the Labour movement on this island and the way it has been involved with the struggle in the last 100 years to try to find accommodation between North and South, between the different traditions. The trade union movement in Ireland has from its origins — which we commemorate in the foundation of the Belfast Trades Council in 1881, the Dublin Trades Council one hundred years ago, and the establishment of the Trade Union Congress in 1896 — been a united nonsectarian force. This unity has survived the weaknesses endemic in a labour movement caught in the vortex of a Nationalist struggle. Throughout the last century memorable occasions have occurred when co-operation was reestablished among the disadvantaged and the unemployed who were traditionally divided on religious grounds. Trade unionists will, I hope, recognise their real interest in putting pressure on their political representatives to endorse political structures and institutions which can draw support throughout the community and avoid the sterilty of Orange and Green exchanges. The inequalities within their communities have been exacerbated through unemployment and dependence on social security. The joint efforts of two Governments to promote the economic and social development of those areas which have suffered most severely can harness the energies of the trade unionists who courageously promoted the "Better Life For All" campaign which was aimed at promoting peace on the factory floor. That is one area in that bitterly divided community of Northern Ireland where sectarian violence is least evident.
I look forward to the operation of the Inter-governmental Conference as a means of addressing key issues in such areas as job discrimination and job creation. As an instrument for promoting cross-Border co-operation it will function somewhat on the basis of the Council of Ministers of the European Community, an arena in which I have worked closely with the present Northern Ireland Secretary of State, Mr. Tom King, when he held the United Kingdom brief on employment issues. I have a high respect for his ability and, indeed, his commitment to find a practical solution to problems that previously evaded all solution.
Both the legal systems of the Republic and Northern Ireland are underpinned by legislation emanating from the European Community and by the requirements of many international conventions to which the Republic and the United Kingdom Governments are signatories. I am eager to build on the sharing of experience between AnCO and the Northern Ireland Authority and in industrial relations where the Labour Relations Agency in Northern Ireland already plays a variety of roles which I have identified in proposals for industrial relations reform.
Here in the Republic of Ireland the Conference will also provide a framework for reviewing the work of the regulatory bodies designed to reduce inequality of employment opportunity between the two religious communities — the Fair Employment Agency and also the Equal Opportunities commission for Northern Ireland. These are critical areas in which law enforcement can provide an instrument for reform. Unemployment often breeds a cynicism about the equity of legal remedies. This in itself can become a major source of alienation and result in a reluctance even to pursue legitimate complaints.
I want to address my comments to those people, North and South of the Border who feel that this entire debate and entire issue is something that has nothing to do with socialists or those who would espouse a left wing philosophy because I believe that they are wrong in that view. It is my considered opinion that the Anglo-Irish agreement should be recognised by the left in Ireland as an unique opportunity to break out of the sterile world of civil war politics in the South and the sectarian politics in the North so as to establish a strong socialist and labour movement on this island. The labour movement in Ireland, both North and South, is industrially strong and politically weak.
The absence of a strong labour political presence in Ireland has contributed directly to the low level of living and working conditions here today in comparison to the rest of Europe. No labour movement, no matter how influential economically can sustain and consolidate the interests of its members and their families if it does not have direct political power as well. Nationalism and Unionism have been cynically exploited by gombeen merchants in the South and sectarian industrialists in the North to divide and weaken the strength of the labour movement. In the short term, their actions resulted in temporary success, but the very failure of native Irish capitalism North and South has been borne most heavily by the working populations of both communities and indeed both traditions.
Poverty does not discriminate on the grounds of religion. The absence of a strong politically based labour movement has seriously inhibited the successful economic development of our economy since 1920. Despite our protestations of independence or having broken the link with Britain too often we look for comparison to the United Kingdom and draw our political models from its experience, which because of its size and economic history, is both misleading and unhelpful.
I would put a counter-view for consideration to this House. The smaller countries of Northern Europe with a strong labour movement, both economic and political, give us a better indication of what Ireland has lost because of the divisions of 1920 and the failure and ineptitude of both Unionist and Nationalist conservative parties. It is a matter of historical record, in fact, that in 1920 — the time when we were first about to get our independence — Finland, Denmark and Belgium had an economic and social position similar to ours. Today, we lag far behind them, socially and economically. The labour movement has played a major, yet quite different role in each of these three countries since 1920. Today, politically strong, the labour movement and the left in these three European countries have ensured a standard of living and economic development which has so far eluded us on this island.
For me, as a democratic socialist, the real tragedy of the division of this island has been the resultant economic backwardness which our working people have had to endure at a time and during an era when it was not necessary and could have been avoided. To add insult to injury, the social and economic exploitation by Irish capitalists, in the name of either Nationalism or Unionism, was eased by the way in which romantic ideals and irrational fears were cynically manipulated to ensure the division of the Irish working class.
What has been achieved in Denmark, in Finland and in Belgium since 1920 has been denied in Ireland largely because of the failure to establish an acceptable political unity on this island and the consequent deliberate exploitation of that division by native capitalists who, in the final analysis, were not even successful in creating a stable economy, North or South.
Since 1920, however, and particularly since 1969, the left in Ireland has been uncomfortable in dealing simultaneously with the issues of Nationalism and Socialism. A 32-county Workers' Republic appeared unacceptable to Loyalist workers in East Belfast, and the advocacy of the two nation theory in effect condemned the Republic to the perpetuation of the sterility of civil war politics. Many Irish socialist thinkers have preferred to ignore, or wish away, the ideological problems of the national question and have sought simply, as democratic socialists, to decry violence and terrorism. I do not think that is an adequate response, and our lack of a clear position on this issue has confused and disillusioned many of our supporters.
I have always argued for radical democratic socialist politics on this island as I am convinced that that holds the only prospect for real social and economic progress. We certainly need such a policy. We have the highest level of unemployment and today, both North and South the fastest growing labour force of all the European Community countries.
Let me turn now to the agreement and to the way in which it emerged. I was, I think, the first Southern politician to formally endorse, on behalf of the Labour Party at the 1983 SDLP Conference, John Hume's call for the establishment of a Council for a New Ireland which subsequently became the New Ireland Forum. I did so because socialism in Ireland needs a new framework within which a revitalised labour movement North and South can demand and obtain real social and economic progress.
It is my considered view that the Forum report and the Anglo-Irish agreement provide a framework within which both traditions can be accommodated and whereby the labour movement can advance. Accordingly, I appeal particularly to Unionists in the North, who have at heart the real interests of their working class constituents, to give the framework of the agreement a chance to work. The guarantees in the agreement for the political and cultural position of the Unionist community have been openly and warmly given by us, perhaps not by all of us, but certainly by the majority in this House. I believe and am sure that the Dáil will substantially endorse this agreement and will want, as generously as is possible, to ensure that it works for the benefit of all the people on this island.
It is a matter of demographic history and for most families a degree of loss that our people, North and South, have of necessity travelled to the four corners of the world, driven by the social and economic failure of Irish politics at home over the last 100 years. They were spurred on to ensure political success in the new lands to which they travelled. The success of the Irish in the politics of the United States is well known, but today, Canada, Australia and New Zealand as well as Britain have in their Governments and their Parliaments, politicians of clear Irish origin who have successfully operated in large and culturally diverse countries. Are we incapable of emulating their success and do they not all wish that the divisions which drove away their grandparents should at last be resolved by this generation of Irish politicians on this island? It is some time now since the former Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, James Prior, shortly before his departure from that post, told the House of Commons: "The dangers for the people of Northern Ireland of sitting back and doing nothing are greater than the obvious risks of seeking to make some political advance." This agreement confirms a remarkable act of faith in the scope for political initiative. It should not be seen as any abandonment of the Unionist people. Indeed, the undertakings given by the Republic recognise the integrity of the Unionist and give the lie to any threat of domination of one community over the other. It is a clear indication of the seriousness and the potential success of the agreement.
I listened with respect to the contribution offered here today by Deputy O'Malley. He articulated what the supporters of Fianna Fáil feel around the country which, regrettably, is not being articulated for reasons that are entirely due to the decisions of the Fianna Fáil party here — and which are entirely their affair because it is not for me to comment on the internal affairs of that party. Whilst he said that he may not articulate the views of those people in Fianna Fáil who are allowed to speak in this debate at present, I put it respectfully to the Deputy who represents Fianna Fáil in the House at present, Deputy O'Rourke, that Deputy O'Malley has certainly represented the views of many Fianna Fáil supporters whom I happen to know. He did so in a spirit, not of going over to the Government side as he clearly indicated, but of simply supporting something that should in his view be supported.
This agreement should be given a chance to work. Most importantly, it is the only agreement that is available to us and, as he said, is the only one to emerge over the last 11 years in a manner that enables the prospect of some progress to occur in Northern Ireland. I strongly commend it to the House.
