asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the implications of the violence in Northern Ireland on Monday, 3 March, and the manner in which the situation was handled by the British Government and the security forces; and in particular, if he is aware that adequate protection against obstruction, intimidation and physical violence was not afforded to those members of the community who wished to go about their lawful affairs.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Northern Ireland Violence.
1.
Following a review of events in Northern Ireland on 3 March, the Government issued a statement on 4 March which I will now repeat:
It is the Government's intention to press ahead with the implementation of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. In this way practical action will result which will benefit both communities in Northern Ireland and Ireland as a whole.
Strikes and demonstrations lead only to violence, as the events of Monday, 3 March demonstrated. The Government are of the view that only the path of constitutional politics can bring reconciliation, peace and stability to Northern Ireland. We appeal to unionists to enter into talks with nationalists with a view to working out together a system of devolved government for Northern Ireland. The Government are open to any constructive views that the unionist leaders wish to put forward.
There was widespread obstruction, intimidation and physical violence in Northern Ireland on 3 March and many members of the community were unable to go, unhindered, about their lawful affairs. It is also clear that many people were enabled to go about their business, including to work and that many did so. There were many incidents in which members of the security forces acted correctly and, indeed, courageously; and there were others where they did not, but in a situation as difficult and as tense as that which obtained, commendation from the sidelines is as futile as condemnation.
I share the repugnance expressed by Secretary of State King in the British Parliament on 4 March when he referred to representatives elected to that parliament making common cause with people in paramilitary dress.
As the House will recall, the Anglo-Irish Agreement provides that the Inter-Governmental Conference have no operational responsibilities for police matters, and that in Northern Ireland responsibility for these matters remains with the Chief Constable of the RUC who maintains his links with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
The agreement, however, provides that the conference shall consider security policy and relations between the security forces and the community; that they shall consider the security situation at their regular meetings and thus provide an opportunity to address policy issues, serious incidents and forthcoming events. The agreement envisages that the Irish side will put forward views and proposals on these, as on other matters.
In this sense, the events in Northern Ireland on 3 March were discussed with the British authorities at a meeting of the conference today. In accordance with normal practice especially in relation to security matters, it is not proposed to comment in public on the detailed content of these discussions.
The Taoiseach has acknowledged in his reply that there was widespread intimidation, obstruction and violence. Will he agree with me that one of the important aspects of this matter is whether he is satisfied with the attitude of the British authorities? In particular I ask whether any steps have been taken to ascertain whether the non-activity by the RUC in a number of cases, and the complete absence of any military presence, were a result of a definite direction by the British authorities to that end and, in that regard, whether he is satisfied that this general approach of the British Government and the resultant directions they would have given to the security forces was satisfactory?
There are continuing close consultations between ourselves and the British authorities so I do not intend to add to my reply on the aspects of the matter raised by the Deputy.
The Taoiseach would agree, I am sure, that what has hustled a number of people is the fact that the British Army were not involved in any way in clearing road blocks or anything of that nature and in a number of cases the RUC did not intervene; they stood by. These facts are known, but the important thing in regard to them, and I ask the Taoiseach if he will agree that the important thing in regard to them, is whether they indicate a specific general direction by the British Government? That is important from all points of view. Will the Taoiseach give me his views on it?
Not wishing to go further into details, I will say merely that I am satisfied of the determination of the British Government to maintain order in Northern Ireland and to implement the agreement.
If that is so, it leaves me with no alternative but to conclude that the RUC did not carry out their instructions, universally at any rate. Arising from that, has the Taoiseach's attention been drawn to the statement by the Deputy Leader of the SDLP to the effect that last Monday the RUC had forfeited all credibility with the Nationalist community? Would he care to comment on the implications of that statement by Séamus Mallon? Can he reconcile that statement and the appeal by his newly appointed Minister for Justice to the Nationalist community to join the RUC? Perhaps he can give me some indication of the Government's views on these self-contradictory aspects of the matter.
On the points initially raised by the Deputy, I would point out that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in the Commons on 4 March said that the Chief Constable was preparing a full report on all the policing aspects of the previous 24 hours.
Is the Taoiseach saying that the Chief Constable of the RUC is preparing a full report on the whole situation?
Yes, that is what the Secretary of State told the Commons on the following day, 4 March.
Is it the position of the Government that they are refraining from comment until that report is issued? Is that the Taoiseach's position?
I did not say that the report would be issued, but I do not propose to comment further, for the very reason that I gave in my initial answer that, given the difficulty and tenseness of the situation, commendation from the sideline and condemnation from the sideline are equally futile.
I appreciate that sentiment on the part of the Taoiseach. He will perhaps accept that on this side of the House we, too, have refrained from any sort of inflammatory comments. Would he not agree that the important thing from our point of view is, first, the attitude of the responsible British authorities to the implementation of security policy and that in regard to these matters grave doubts have to be raised either as to the instructions given by the British Government or as to the manner in which those instructions, if given, were carried out? Would the Taoiseach not agree that in regard to the Anglo-Irish Agreement the role and intentions of the RUC are crucial? If Séamus Mallon's statement is correct, that the RUC have forfeited all credibility in the eyes of the Nationalist community, this has important implications from the point of view of the implementation of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. The Taoiseach should be more forthcoming with the House at some stage about this whole aspect of the matter. He has mentioned in his reply statements made by the Secretary of State, Tom King, on a number of occasions. In this context does the Taoiseach accept that it is British policy, as stated by the said Secretary of State, that the Anglo-Irish Agreement is a bulwark against a united Ireland? Does he accept that as being stated British Government policy?
Stated British Government policy is incorporated in a binding agreement between our two Governments. That agreement, in Article 1, says, as the Deputy is well aware, that the reunification of this country would come about only with the consent of the majority, that that consent does not exist at present and that, should that consent come into existence, the two Governments would introduce and support the necessary legislation to give effect to it. That constitutes the policy of the British Government as incorporated in the agreement. Within the British Government and the British Parliament, or elsewhere, there may be different opinions as to what people would like to see, but there is a clear recognition in the agreement by the British Government of their responsibilities and obligations in the matter, whatever may be the individual views of individual members of the British Government or Parliament. Some of them may feel that the future would best lie with a united Ireland and some may hold a different view. The relevant matter is not the views held but what is in the agreement.
Next question.
Is the Taoiseach therefore stating to me now that, when the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland says that the Anglo-Irish Agreement is, in fact, a bulwark against a united Ireland, he is in contradiction of the terms of the Anglo-Irish Agreement? Is that what the Taoiseach just said to me?
No.
What then? How does the Taoiseach reconcile what he has just now claimed to be the contents of the Anglo-Irish Agreement with this very specific, categoric statement by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland of British Government policy that they intend to interpret and implement the agreement as a bulwark against a united Ireland?
He did not say that. I heard the broadcast. The Deputy is quoting out of context. Having said that, I do not, of course, share the opinion expressed by the Secretary of State and, indeed, when he expressed it in a somewhat different form at an earlier date and sought to attribute it to me, the British Government formally repudiated the statement made by him at that time.
A final supplementary question, please.
If, as the Taoiseach has indicated, the events of Monday week last are the subject of discussions today at a meeting of the Anglo-Irish Conference, is it the intention of the Government to seek any reassurances during the course of those discussions about the protection from obstruction and intimidation of the Nationalist community in Northern Ireland on similar occasions which are likely to arise in the near future and in the months ahead? As a result of the outcome of today's conference, will he be in a position to give this House any reassurances? The Taoiseach is aware that we have not yet put in place—and I am not blaming him in any way—our arrangements for discussing the work of the Anglo-Irish Conference. In advance of such arrangements, would the Taoiseach tell me if assurances are being sought today and if in due course we will be given some indication of what assurances this House can have about the situation of the Nationalist community in what seems to be the threatening period immediately ahead?
As stated in my initial reply, in accordance with normal practice, especially in relation to security matters, it is not proposed to comment in public on the detailed contents of the discussions. I would, however, add, at the conclusion of these exchanges, that the Government naturally share the concern of the Deputy and his party about the events on 3 March, the intimidation and violence involved and the impact they had on both communities—not merely on the Nationalist community, with whom we have of course a particular affinity, but on members of the Unionist community, many of whom also are intimidated and prevented from going to work and many of whom resent that bitterly.