Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 15 Dec 1993

Vol. 437 No. 3

Joint Declaration on Peace in Northern Ireland: Statements.

The Taoiseach

Today, we pray, will be an historic day for peace in Ireland. This morning, the British Prime Minister John Major and I, at our third meeting this month, made a joint declaration which creates a framework for the beginning of a peace process. This, we hope, will be the fist step on the road to a just and lasting peace.

The Joint Declaration, which I am laying before the House, contains a central message for people of every political outlook in Northern Ireland, Republican and Loyalist, Unionist and Nationalist. That is, that their ideals for the future and their interests in the present can be pursued and protected much more effectively through the democratic process, and need not resort to violent threat or coercion.

My guiding principle has been that we should not seek to prejudice or predetermine the shape of a final political settlement. Finding a political solution is a matter for all-round negotiations between the Governments and the democratic political parties in Northern Ireland, the prospects for which would be transformed by peace. The Declaration preserves a careful balance between the rights, identities and aspirations of the two political traditions on this island. I consulted very widely in both communities in order that this might be achieved. It would be my hope that people of every political outlook would be able to identify with the Declaration and with its overall thrust.

This is an unusual declaration between Governments. It does not just reflect the views and interests of the two Governments or provide some compromise between them. Instead, it seeks to comprehend the deeply held positions of all who find themselves caught up in the narrow ground of a conflict with ancient roots within a part of this island. It makes clear that the British Government is in no sense an enemy to the rights of the Nationalist tradition, and the Irish Government is in no sense an enemy to the rights of the Unionist tradition.

The overriding objective, the overriding criterion for the language of this Declaration is whether each statement in it makes a contribution to peace, and whether it adequately reflects deeply held fears and essential interests.

I am convinced that nobody should be afraid of peace. The purpose of this Joint Declaration is to help remove conflicts of interest, and fundamental differences in the sense of identity out of the arena of violence, and to place them purely in the political and democratic arena. There are many on different sides, who feel that up until now the framework has been loaded against them, undermining, as they see it, the normal rules of democracy. The Declaration in my views helps to create a level political playing field, which no longer leaves any excuse for violence. The road is open, on the one hand, to a united Ireland, if it can be achieved by agreement and consent. But equally, it is clearly reaffirmed that there will be no change in the constitutional status of Northern Ireland without such agreement. It is the essence, indeed the unique virtue of the democratic system, that it allows peaceful competition between conflicting ideals and provides a civilised method of settling conflicts and disputes.

The purpose of a framework for peace would be to advance general principles accepted by the two Governments, which guarantee to all the right to pursue their aims by democratic means and to have the results of the democratic process put into effect. The Declaration does not replace or affect the validity of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, nor is it a substitute for a more comprehensive agreement which might transcend it.

There was never a better opportunity for everyone to bring the troubles and appalling violence of the past 25 years to an end. That violence has created intense human misery. It has wrecked lives and caused wanton destruction. It has divided communities. It has cast a pall of shame over the whole island. It has held back the whole country in terms of economic opportunity, especially tourism, trade and investment. The conflict has also been senseless. No one engaging in violence has been able to further their political aims to any worthwhile degree. Both sets of paramilitaries have directly or indirectly inflicted, no doubt unintentionally, considerable damage on their own communities as well as on others.

Everyone wants peace. Peace has been the paramount consideration for me. A political settlement, which will involve difficult negotiations, will come much more easily in conditions of peace. What Ireland needs now above all else is peace. We all appreciate that the political differences in Northern Ireland run very deep. Every attempt over the past 20 years to construct a political settlement has failed. There have been many ambitious efforts, the most imaginative being Sunningdale and the Anglo-Irish Agreement. But none of them succeeded in their central objective of creating conditions for peace.

Continuing violence has made the ongoing search for a political settlement difficult, and would probably work to try to frustrate the effect of any poitical agreement that was reached. Can we not agree, as a first step, a framework for peace where all could recognise their basic concerns were reflected, and which all could properly and honourably avail of, without prejudice to their principles, in the necessary task of negotiating our future?

I was not prepared through inaction to condemn the people of Northern Ireland to another 25 years of violence. They deserve better. I am convinced that peace cannot and need not wait upon the uphill task of trying to find a comprehensive political settlement in the midst of all the violence, unless there is no other path available. What is necessary is to convince those engaged in violence that there is no point to that violence, and that their basic political objectives can be more effectively pursued exclusively by democratic political means, whether they are republican or loyalist.

There has also been a policy of placing in political ghettos and marginalising, not only the people directly engaged in violence, but very often the communities from which they spring. That too has failed. Belatedly, we have had to try to reach out to the marginalised and the alienated, and to try to comprehend the motives of those whose acts have filled us all with abhorrence. It has involved on the part of the two Governments, and many of the Northern political and church and community leaders, the taking of risks, and acts of courage. Those involved in the paramilitary groups and those responsible for leading them will also show the greatest courage, if they now seize the new opportunity for peace.

There are two sets of paramilitaries engaged in violence, both republican and loyalist. The loyalist paramilitaries claim that their violence is reactive. I am informed on reliable authority that their violence would cease after a cessation of republican violence. It would seem to me that if a cessation of republican violence could be procured, in a manner that does not in any way prejudice the democratic rights of the Unionist population, then a cessation of violence should follow. In this regard, I deplore the tendency on the part of some politicians to exploit the threat of a loyalist backlash, in a way that is often, I am informed, disapproved of by the same loyalist paramilitaries.

This country has up until now never enjoyed a sustained period of peace. The two traditions, while they agreed to differ at the time of the first Anglo-Irish settlement in 1920 and 1921, have never yet reached in four centuries a mutual accommodation on how they are to share this island peacefully in harmony and co-operation. The ideals of Wolfe Tone and the United Irishmen were unfortunately quickly frustrated at the time, though they may yet come to inspire us more in the future.

Creating a satisfactory mutual accommodation is our task over the coming generation, to which all of us must apply ourselves, if we are to create a far better future on this island for all our people, especially the young. We need to create a new political framework, built on respect of difference and a desire to engage in fruitful partnership and co-operation.

At my first press conference on being elected leader of Fianna Fáil in February 1992, which was in the aftermath of particular atrocities, I declared the achievement of peace in Northern Ireland to be my foremost priority. As I have recounted elsewhere, at my first meeting with Prime Minister John Major shortly afterwards, we agreed that we would make a real effort to bring peace to Northern Ireland, and to spare the people another 25 years of bloodshed and conflict. Anyone who goes back over my speeches will note that I, for one, spoke from the very beginning of the importance of finding a formula for peace. I have also had a passionate desire to try to bring about peace.

The leader of the SDLP, John Hume, ably supported by his deputy leader Séamus Mallon, and other members of his party, have throughout played a crucial role in the development of this process. I would like to pay tribute to John Hume's tremendous courage over the years, not merely as a persistent advocate of peace and purely democratic methods, but as somebody who has been prepared, especially in recent years, to take enormous personal risks in the pursuit of peace. More than any other political leader over the past 20 years, his has been the voice of sanity in Northern Ireland. He rightly enjoys respect throughout the world for him immense contribution. Despite his unremitting opposition to paramilitary violence, accepted by all, I believe, he enjoys the thrust and respect of the entire Nationalist community, for having been willing to come to grips with their most deep-seated problems, recognising this as the price which has to be paid for leading that community, as a whole, away from violence.

Having explained the backgrounds to our proposals, I now want to explain the proposals themselves for the benefit of the House. They take the form of a Joint Declaration by the Irish and British Governments.

Paragraph 1 is a statement of the problem and the need for the development of an agreed framework for peace, based on a number of key principles enunciated by the two Governments over the past 20 years. Paragraph 2 speaks of the inestimable value of healing divisions and ending conflict. It states as their aim the fostering of agreement and reconciliation, leading to a new political framework. Paragraph 3 is a brief reference to the importance of the European dimension.

Paragraph 4 is a key one. It states that the British Government will uphold the democratic wish of a greater number of people of Northern Ireland, whether they prefer to support the Union or a sovereign united Ireland. This is followed by a reiteration by the British Prime Minister that the British Government has no selfish, strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland, which is one of the foundation stones of this whole declaration. The British Government also says it will encourage, facilitate and enable the reaching of agreement among the people of this island. They accept that such agreement may, as of right, take the form of agreed structures for the island as a whole, including a united Ireland achieved by peaceful means. The principle of self determination to be exercised by the people of Ireland alone is accepted on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South. Any agreement arising between the people of Ireland, whether on a united Ireland on any other basis, will be legislated for. By way of comment, I would like to say it is not new for national self-determination to be expressed by different parts of a country concurrently. That indeed is the way the states of East Germany were reunited with the Federal Republic. It would be absolutely normal procedure for any country that has been divided, whether Korea, Cyprus or China. In paragraph 4, I believe, there is full respect shown for the basic principles of republican philosophy, but in a manner that is consistent with safeguarding the democratic rights of Unionists.

Paragraph 5 is a statement by me that stability and wellbeing cannot be obtained under any political system which is refused allegiance or rejected by a significant minority. I believe there are very few in this State who at this stage want to coerce the people of Northern Ireland into a United Ireland against their wishes. We have no interest in creating by force a united but unstable Ireland. We have no ambitions to take over the territory of Northern Ireland, but ignoring its people. Unless and until we can persuade a majority of the people of Northern Ireland to join with us, there will not be a united Ireland. The Unionist population should welcome the unequivocal acceptance of the principle of consent in several places in the declaration.

Paragraphs 6 to 8 reflect my desire to respond to Unionists' fears. They include a willingness to accept and examine representations by them across the negotiating table with regard to any aspects of life in the South, which they believe to be discriminatory or which threaten their way of life. In the Declaration I also ask them to look on the people of the Republic as friends, who share their grief and shame over the suffering of the last quarter of a century, and who want to develop the best possible relationship with them, in which trust and new understanding can flourish and grow. In it I also pledge to consider how the hopes and identities of all in relation to constitutional matters can be expressed in more balanced ways, which no longer cause division. I have stated that the Irish Government will, as part of a balanced constitutional accommodation, put forward and support proposals for change in the Irish Constitution, which would fully reflect the principle of consent in Northern Ireland.

Paragraph 9 reflects a commitment by both Governments to create institutions and structures to enable the people of Ireland to work together in all areas of common interest.

Paragraphs 10 and 11 address the problem of admitting democratically mandated parties to the political process as soon as possible after a cessation of violence. They contain a commitment by me to establish in consultation with other parties a Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, after a real cessation of violence. This will probably quickly guarantee a place in the political process, without prejudice to a participation in wider talks.

I am convinced that the Declaration respects or is consistent with every basic principle and obligation enunciated by the two Governments. It honours equally the Republican position and the Unionist position, and does not seek to predetermine what position will prevail in the future. In the spirit of the Government of Ireland Act, 1920, it keeps open the option of an evolution towards a united Ireland and the encouragement of closer North-South co-operation. In the case of the Irish Government, the Declaration seeks not merely to state the underlying principles of Irish Nationalism but to reach out to Unionists and to understand and respond to their fears. If the Declaration has flaws or deficiencies or omissions from any point of view, are any of them so vital as to warrant condemning the people of Northern Ireland to the indefinite continuation of violence? I believe, and everyone else in this House I am sure believes too, that the use of political violence today has no justification in any circumstances whatever. The merit of the Joint Declaration is that it convincingly demonstrates this.

To the Unionist and Protestant people of Northern Ireland, I would say — we want to end the centuries of conflict forever. We want to take the gun out of Irish politics for good. We want to develop a new atmosphere of trust and co-operation, to establish a new era of détente, which is the only way forward. Even if we are not able at present to agree on very much, let us at least establish peace between us once and for all. I have consulted some of your leaders best placed to interpret to me your fears and your needs. I have also taken account of some of the positions put to me on behalf of Loyalist organisations, who are as much a factor in the situation as their Republican counterparts, and whom I have been determined not to make the mistake of ignoring.

The Nationalist community suffered neglect and discrimination for over 50 years. It is the duty of the Irish Government to ensure that that never happens again. Even from outside our jurisdiction, Northern Nationalists attach a special value to their membership of the Irish nation, which will never be disowned by us.

I appeal directly to the Provisional IRA to respond now to the wishes of the Irish nation clearly and emphatically expressed on repeated occasions to stop the killing. If the self-determination of the Irish people has any meaning or application, it surely applies above all else to the repeated rejection of support for violence at the polls by the large majority of both communities on this island. Once violence permanently ceases, the political leadership of Sinn Féin can join the rest of the democratic politicians on this island in working for a better and freer future for us all, for true peace with justice. Let us be prepared to bring everyone who has been excluded in from the cold. While we will never accept the terrible deeds for the last 25 years, committed on all sides, let us remember that the blame for them lies in more than one quarter, and that some of it is very deep-rooted in Irish history. For the first time ever, the right to self-determination of the people of Ireland is acknowledged, subject only to the condition of consent. The British Government have pledged to work for agreement, and will respect the democratic choice of the people of Northern Ireland as to their constitutional status, whether it be future Union or a sovereign united Ireland. There is no Unionist veto, only the requirement for the consent of a majority. The task now is to find a political settlement.

I call on everyone of goodwill both in Ireland and abroad to join now in ensuring that the beginning of peace becomes a reality, before this year is out. Let us together open a new era in our history. Just as the 1918 election 75 years ago this month involved a new beginning in the development of Irish democracy, let December 1993 be the moment we begin to resolve the conflict in Northern Ireland.

If anyone's nerve fails or falters at this point, dark clouds are looming on the horizon. The danger of renewed and more intense conflict is very real. The dogs of war are waiting to be unleashed, and the Shankill and Greysteel atrocities could be a foretaste of the future. A continuation of violence could have very grave consequences for everyone on this island. The IRA and Sinn Féin should recognise their tremendous responsibility to the Nationalist community in Northern Ireland, in particular, who have suffered so much in the past, and who could stand to suffer more than most both physically and politically, if the wrong decision is made now.

I have only one vision in relation to Northern Ireland — that is to accomplish peace with the help of all who can give it. Here I want to acknowledge the great contribution made over the last 12 months by the Tánaiste towards the same objective. It was a team effort, and our two offices have worked together extremely closely. I would like to thank all the Opposition parties, and their leaders, for the degree of patience and understanding they have shown in the national interest over the past few weeks, and for their broad support. Above all, I also want to thank the many tireless workers for peace in Northern Ireland, the community leaders, the clergymen of all denominations and others, who have done all they can to advance the process, and without whom the undertaking of this initiative would have been made quite impossible. I am taking steps today to inform foreign Governments and other interested parties of the initiative between the two Governments.

I have annexed the Joint Declaration to the next of my speech.

It now falls to others to consider their position and to respond after mature deliberation. They should be given space by everyone to do so, and helped to reach a positive decision. The Chief Rabbi wrote to me recently, expressing the hope that we might yet see in our land and between these islands the fulfilment of the vision of the prophet Isaiah "that nation shall not lift up sword against nation, they shall learn war no more".

I have done everything I can to reach this point, and to give peace the best possible chance. All I can say in conclusion is this. No one should be afraid of peace. Here is the opportunity for peace. Here let us all make our stand.

Mr. J. Bruton

I have supported the Taoiseach in his efforts to find a formula for peace, giving occasional warnings along the way about things that could go wrong. I believe a very good day's work has been done this morning. I am very hopeful, indeed confident, that it will achieve the results that are being sought.

The debate, however, is also important because a number of questions will be raised by those who speak and I hope the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, in his reply, will respond to the questions that have been raised by Members. We are all part of the process and we wish to play our part constructively — occasionally we are critical but we offer constructive criticism. In addition to commending the Ministers who have been involved in this process I commend the officials of both Governments, who have worked very hard over many long days and nights to reach today's Declaration. I compliment also the courage of John Hume, who in a sense initiated the process. I know there will be many arguments about where the process started, but very few would take from John Hume a large part of the credit for initiating the process. Equally, I would like to commend the patience and fortitude of James Molyneaux and John Alderdice, without whom it probably would not have been possible to reach today's agreement. All three men deserve the appreciation of all Members of this House because they have all played a very big part, together with, of course, the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister and the relevant Ministers in achieving what has been achieved.

The Joint Declaration is, I hope, the catalyst for all who live on this island to start talking to one another about how we can make this a truly peaceful place in which to live, an island at ease with itself and with its neighbours.

Even if the terrorist organisations do not accept this unprecedented opportunity to stop their pointless campaign, it is essential that the constitutional parties use the Declaration as a framework for dialogue and get on with the talks process. Urgent talks between constitutional politicians are needed to build a prosperous and harmonious future for all the people of this island and its neighbours. Too many people who should be talking directly to one another are not doing so and are still communicating to one another through intermediaries or through the media. It is only through face to face discussions that real progress can be made.

I congratulate the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister on agreeing this important Declaration. It reiterates, in a common Declaration, many things they said already; indeed most things that have been said here have been said by either the Taoiseach, the Prime Minister or their predecessors on many previous occasions. In some respects it is surprising the length of time it took to agree to the formula of words. But if the time that has been taken leads to a definite, final and irreversible cessation of violence, the time will have been well spent.

I highlight in particular the declaration by the British Government in the Joint Declaration:

The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish.

In view of this declaration in black and white, there can be no conceivable jusification for any organisation such as the IRA to continue to attempt to coerce by arms the British people into agreeing to something that they have already plainly agreed to in this Declaration.

I join with the Taoiseach in hoping that over time a meeting of hearts and minds will develop which will bring all the people of Ireland together. I join with him also when he "acknowledges the presence in the Constitution of the Republic of elements that are deeply resented by Northern Unionists". The Taoiseach confirms that in the event of an overall settlement he would put forward proposals for changes in the Irish Constitution that would further reflect the principle of consent in Northern Ireland. The Taoiseach says he would do that in the event of an overall settlement, having acknowledged, however, there are elements of the Constitution that are deeply resented by Northern Unionists.

The all encompassing concept of an overall settlement needs closer analysis. It may be possible to agree on answers to 90 per cent of the problem and still disagree on the remaining 10 per cent. I hope that we will not defer action on the 90 per cent that is agreed simply because we fail to agree on the remaining 10 per cent. I hope that the formula that everything has to be agreed will not be used as an excuse to defer all action on constitutional reforms which the Taoiseach acknowledges as necessary in his own Declaration.

I am also concerned at the lack of any clear timetables or specified mechanisms for the resumption of serious political talks between constitutional politicians or soon to be constitutional politicians. I hope the resumption of talks will not be deferred for very long and indeed that the great progress that was made in the talks that ended in October 1992 will not be forgotten or, worse still, rendered obsolete because of changed personnel in the parties concerned or changes in the political landscape. We cannot afford to allow the tremendous number of concessions that were made in those talks to be simply set aside or forgotten. We should ensure that that deposit in the bank is not allowed to fritter away but rather that when we come to reopen our account that interest has been added.

The talks need to be resumed quickly so that the progress that has been made is not lost. Building a settlement, be it for an overall settlement or a 90 per cent settlement, will require endless hours of talking, arguing, drafting and consulting. There is a measure of confusion in the Declaration as to where all this work is to take place. The term "dialogue", appears several times in the Declaration, but there is no specified place in which this dialogue is to occur. Will it be a resumption of the three strand process, the so-called Brooke-Mayhew process, or will it be in the new body proposed by the Taoiseach in paragraph 11 of the Declaration — a forum for peace and reconciliation to be set up unilaterally by the Irish Government?

It is very important that we do not have two competing institutions trying to solve the same problem, creating endless misunderstandings and misinterpretations between them and giving rise to conflicting timetables, which would be the least of the difficulties caused. Institutional rivalry would develop. Anybody who disbelieves that need only look at the Council of Europe and the European Community, two bodies which have an institutional rivalry between their respective sets of civil servants. I hope the Tánaiste will clarify where these talks will take place. We should aim to have just one body accepted and attended by everybody who uses peaceful methods through which all the problems can be talked out.

If the Taoiseach wants to go ahead with his proposed forum, about which I have some doubts, I would advise him to negotiate privately and in advance with all the intended participants in the forum on its terms of reference and purpose. The Taoiseach should not act unilaterally in the first instance and he should ensure that, as a declared purpose of the forum in paragraph 11 is "agreement and trust between both traditions in Ireland", both traditions are represented in the forum because otherwise it is doubtful that it can achieve its objective in a way that would be accepted by the people concerned. It is not just the words on paper that are important in getting an agreement, it is whether or not the people concerned or affected feel that they have a part in writing those words. That is perhaps more important than the words. Any forum that by intention, omission or by sheer accident excludes a relevant party will not promote the trust needed, because no matter how good the declarations emanating from that body, the excluded party will not feel that they had a part in formulating those declarations.

I said earlier that the permanency of the cessation of violence which we hope will come soon must be verifiable. It is reasonable to ask the arms which are hidden by both loyalist and provisional terror organisations be either handed up or visibly destroyed. People who retain access to caches of arms with the possibility, however slight, of taking them up again can hardly be considered to be normal participants in political dialogue. It is not unreasonable to wish to verify, to use President Gorbachev's term, the intentions of formerly violent organisations. One has only to read the message that the Provisionals sent to the British Government after the Warrington bomb to see how wide the gap can often be between words and deeds. Shortly after the Warrington bomb the Provisional IRA sent the following message to the British Government.

It is with total sadness that we have to accept responsibility for the recent action. The last thing we needed at this sensitive time was what has happened.

It is the fate of history that we find ourselves in this position, all we can think of at this time is an old Irish proverb: God's hand works in mysterious ways. Our hope is that this hand will lead to peace and friendship.

Those were the words of the Provisional IRA, yet these fine words were followed by the Shankill bomb, by further murders of British soldiers and by murders of RUC members.

A Provisional-Sinn Féin renunciation of violence requires a reversal of an Ard Fheis resolution of that party which commits all Sinn Féin candidates to support the arms struggle. I hope, as I know the Taoiseach does along with every other Member of this House, that that Ard Fheis will pass a resolution reversing that present binding resolution on all Sinn Féin public representatives within a matter of weeks.

Today's declaration between the Prime Ministers builds on the Anglo-Irish Agreement. It reiterates its principles. Indeed, the trust between two Governments and between two Prime Ministers that made this declaration possible is trust that was created by the workings of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. In a very real sense, to use the phrase of Michael Collins, the Anglo-Irish Agreement was the stepping stone upon which this declaration was built. That Anglo-Irish Agreement for the first time in the 50 year history of Northern Ireland gave the Nationalists community a guarantee, a voice, a sense of belonging in the land in which they lived, something which they have never had before. It was followed by an evolution in political thought on the part of the SDLP. They devised a new way of expressing national self determination — the idea that it is possible to express it in the North and in the South simultaneously with either part being able to adopt a different view. That was a tremendous development in thinking on the part of the SDLP and John Hume. It was accompanied by a tremendous change in Unionist thinking. It is important to recognise that in the Unionist proposals for a Bill of Rights, in their acceptance of the idea of all-Ireland institutions actually exercising significant functions, in their proposals for the working of an assembly which will effectively allow a Nationalist veto on many proposals and a 65 per cent majority for all legislation, they have radically changed their thinking just as the SDLP changed its thinking.

Having spoken to both parties I perceive that the problem has been that each is so conscious of the concessions it has made that it tends not to realise that the other side has also made concessions. There has been a dialogue of the deaf and in fact no dialogue at all because at the moment, as we know, the unionist parties are not talking to the SDLP, at least formally, or to the Irish Government. As somebody who has frequently voiced unionist concerns here, that is a major fault on their part. They should talk to the Tánaiste and to John Hume. I hope that as a result of this declaration they will start talking. I earnestly appeal to them to do so. I have spoken to them and have found them to be eminently reasonable people who want to do business with the rest of us on this island just as does the SDLP and the Alliance Party. It is a grave tragedy that they are not talking to one another. There is more talent in politics in Northern Ireland than there is in politics in many jurisdictions which are ten or 12 times as large as Northern Ireland. It is a great pity that that talent is blocked and those people cannot express their abilities in something more constructive than media interviews, talking past one another. I hope that arising from this declaration it will be possible for the dark pall of war to be removed, that shadow which prevents people from talking to one another, so that people in Northern Ireland can be human again.

There are two characteristics which could be attached to all categories of Irish people, and the more I listened to spokesmen of the unionist parties speaking, the more I realised, whatever they-say, how Irish they are in their expression and in their stubbornness. They are just as stubborn as we are, no less and no more, but they also have a similar capacity for compassion. I hope that in this Declaration we have created the catalyst that will allow compassion to subsume stubbornness so that we on this island might start living harmoniously together in conjunction with our closest neighbour and our neighbours in Europe as we should have been living for many years in the past.

Miss Harney

I, too, compliment both Governments on what is an historic achievement in drawing up this Joint Declaration. In particular I compliment the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and the many people involved in the process. Deputy Bruton referred to the constitutional political leaders in Northern Ireland and I share his views in that regard. The Unionist leaders, James Molyneaux and Martin Smyth, showed remarkable restraint in recent times when they may have felt threatened, isolated and alienated and that restraint led to the Declaration agreed by the two Governments.

The Joint Declaration between the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister is an historic step forward in the pursuit of peace and reconciliation between the two traditions on this island and in further improving relations between our Republic and Britain. The value of the Declaration is that it established ground rules by which the democratic wishes of the Irish people, North and South, Unionist and Nationalist, can be articulated, developed and pursued, without undermining or threatening each other. The Declaration offers a unique opportunity for the men of violence and those who support them to pursue their political goals by democratic means.

The principle of consent to any change is central to the Declaration. The rights of the two communities in Northern Ireland are acknowledged in language which is clear and unambiguous. The roles of the two Governments are clarified beyond dispute. The implications of Article 1 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which have long been the subject of ambiguity and ambivalence, have been teased out and set forth in language that no one could misinterpret.

On behalf of the Progressive Democrats, I welcome the Declaration, which I regard as balanced and fair. It clearly breaks new ground in the age-old search for peace and reconciliation on this island. It marks acceptance of the principle set out in Article 1 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement that the status of Northern Ireland can only be changed by agreement and can never be changed by violence. Paragraph 4 of the Declaration states:

The British Government agree that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish.

On the basis of those words alone, it will never be easier for the men of violence to come in from the cold and join the democratic process. The Declaration goes as far as any democratically-elected Government could go to create the circumstances in which those who resort to political terror and murder are given the democratic means to renounce the evil of violence and take up instead the challenge of democratic, peaceful politics.

It should be noted that as far as Nationalist violence is concerned, political support shown for the armalite and ballot box approach has always been less than 2 per cent in the Republic and only 10 per cent in Northern Ireland. Taking the island as a whole, Sinn Féin has never received support from more than approximately 4 per cent of the electorate. There has never been a mandate for violence, and now there is an overwhelming political demand that it must end. Any figleaf of justification for the campaign of violence, based on a perverse view of history, is completely swept away by the British Government's assurances in paragraph 4 of this declaration.

The violence of the Provisional movement now stands totally exposed as not anti-British violence, but rather as violence directed towards undermining the democratic will and aspiration of Unionists on this island, fellow Irish people. Perhaps that fact clearly explains the reported willingness of the Provisional movement to contemplate ending what they have termed the "armed struggle". Virtually every bullet and bomb has been directed at fellow Irish people and their democratic rights.

This agreement is balanced and fair and the credit for that must go to both Governments for ensuring that violence is not being rewarded, but exposed as being politically bankrupt. Over the past number of weeks I consistently expressed concern that a peace formula might be attempted to satisfy the men of violence at the expense of constitutional Unionists in particular. I am happy to acknowledge that my concerns have not come to pass and I pay tribute to both Governments for that.

However, welcome as this Declaration undoubtedly is, and generous as the language most certainly is, the realities of Northern politics still remain. Although there is an acknowledgment that pursuit of a united Ireland is the democratic right of Nationalists on this island, we must accept that for the foreseeable future the great majority of people in Northern Ireland will exercise their right to self-determination by upholding the Union with Britain. The creation of an atmosphere of trust and the pursuit of a political settlement on this island, therefore, must be grounded on the reality that it is within the United Kingdom that a radical transformation of Northern society must now be attempted to make it an inclusive and viable political community.

Unionists can take heart from many of the provisions of the Declaration. In particular, the acknowledgment that self-determination on this island must be exercised separately, North and South, and the promise of constitutional change by our Government. However, the fact remains that the challenge of transforming Northern society into a viable political community poses huge questions for that Unionist community and requires them to abandon the unyielding politics of "not an inch" which has characterised their approach for too long.

Unionists must be prepared to make huge political changes to bring about a viable political community which can earn the wholehearted allegiance of all the people of Northern Ireland. Instead of "not an inch", they must now be prepared to go the extra mile. Ulster must stop saying "no", and start saying "yes" to the demands of political viability. The initial response of Official Unionist representatives to the Declaration today is encouraging. However, they must realise too the need for major changes to accompany and flow from this Decclaration if Northern Ireland is to function as a civilised political community, enjoying the political allegiance of both communities there.

The Irish dimension therefore must be expressed by a new deal for Nationalists within Northern Ireland and by the creation of a new relationship between North and South, based on institutional links, which reflect political, economic and social realities within the island and the wider European Union.

It would be foolish to work up a political momentum based on the open and generous language of this Declaration which is not based firmly on what is politically possible. Nothing could be worse than a breakdown in the goodwill which this Declaration should bring about; a breakdown arising from the pursuit of unrealistic political aims in a manner which further divides and polarises the two communities in the North. The Progressive Democrats set out detailed and realistic proposals which we believe fall squarely within the principles laid out in today's Declaration and which are capable of establishing progress and reconciliation on this island, and particularly between the two Northern communities.

The proposal of the Taoiseach, set out in paragraph 11 of the Declaration envisaging arrangements within the Republic to enable democrats to consult together about the political future, requires careful evaluation before a final judgment can be made. I note that the forum is merely a possibility, and I welcome that fact. Recent press reports that "a Forum for Peace and Reconciliation" would, in essence, constitute a forum for working out a common Nationalist position for presentation to the Unionist community are not encouraging. However, while the Progressive Democrats will be generous in accommodating any democrat in the process of political dialogue, we believe that undertaking a monolithic Nationalist approach might not be helpful and could be contrary to the very spirit of the Declaration. Is the forum being suggested as a way of bringing Sinn Féin into talks before getting involved in wider talks with the Unionists?

Creating cross-community understanding is far more important than trying to simplify the major division in Irish politics on this island into two opposing blocks. The real barriers to be breached on his island are between Unionism and Nationalism and they will not be broken down merely by Nationalists talking to one another. The real border on this island lies between the two communities in Northern Ireland and the sooner they start talking to each other and find a political settlement under which they can work together the sooner we will have lasting peace on this island.

In regard to constitutional change, I welcome the Government's commitment to alter Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution to accommodate a new settlement based on the principle of consent regarding any change in the status of Northern Ireland. The claim made in 1937 that this Parliament and our Government could, as a matter of right, exercise jurisdiction over Northern Ireland in accordance with the terms of that Constitution was always dubious in value but now it is a major obstacle to political reconciliation between Unionist and Nationalist.

An aspiration to unity based on the principle of consent was, as long ago as 1967, seen by the Members of all parties in this House to be a far more sensible statement of the Nationalist position. In the 25 years that have intervened nothing has happened to undermine that judgment; in fact, everything points towards change.

In the last analysis this Declaration offers those who have masterminded the campaign of political terrorism a way out of the evil in which they have immersed themselves and the rest of us. Within days of this Declaration, however, they have engaged in violence both in Ireland and Britain and have killed innocent members of both Northern communities, presumably to try to boost their political position. Whether such people can ever be convinced by persuasion of the evil nature of their anti-democratic campaign is now being put to the test. With them and them alone lies the choice for democratic politics.

I presume the Government, because of the contacts it has had, is optimistic that this will provide a forum for the men of violence to change and become involved in the democratic process but when we talk of a cessation of violence it is important that this implies a renunciation of violence. In no sense can we allow those who say that violence has ceased to come to the table for talks and leave their weaponry outside and allow them the opportunity to go back to the gun and the bomb if they do not get their way at the talks table. It is extremely important that cessation implies renunciation.

Regardless of the choice that the men of violence make I am dedicating myself and my party to the pursuit of reconciliation on this island based on open, generous and inclusive political principles. This Declaration is good in so far as it goes but its publication only marks the starting point of building reconciliation on this island. What is now needed is a level of political commitment from all sides which we have never witnessed in the past.

The momentum for a political settlement exists in the hearts and minds of ordinary people right around this country and, indeed, in Britain. It is for their elected representatives to transform emotion for peace into a durable and honourable political settlement of the age old issues that have damned our affairs and torn apart our lives and prospects for generations.

We always thought that there were many watersheds in the context of the violence in Northern Ireland — Enniskillen was one and Warrington was another — and were very optimistic that these would mark the end but, unfortunately, this was not the case. We were also optimistic when the Sunningdale Agreement and the Anglo-Irish Agreement were signed. I agree with Deputy Bruton that the Anglo-Irish Agreement is the foundation stone on which this Declaration is built but none of these has led to peace. This is the best opportunity that the extremists and those who have engaged in violence will ever have to come in from the cold. Ordinary people are sickened and fed up — they want no more.

I want to use language that is reasonable, fair and not in any sense emotive as I do not want to make it any more difficult for them than it will be because what all of us want to see is peace followed by a political settlement which is long lasting, fair and reasonable. I urge them on everybody's behalf to seize this opportunity and join with the rest of us in trying to find a political solution to the age old difficulties which have confronted our people and led to 3,500 deaths during the past 25 years. Enough is enough; now is the time to say yes.

Proinsias De Rossa

I wish to share my time with Deputies Sargent and Fox.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am sure that is satisfactory.

Proinsias De Rossa

The Declaration produced today following the meeting of the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister is a document of potentially major significance which offers the best prospect for peace and political progress we have seen during the past tragic 25 years. I welcome it with a sense of relief that a balance has been achieved. My one fear during the past few months was that it would be difficult to achieve the necessary balance and that it would escape the clutches of those involved in the negotiations.

It is a substantial document not just in terms of its length but also in regard to the ideas it puts forward and the issues it seeks to tackle. It clearly merits careful consideration by all sides and the interests of peace will not be served by a rush to judgment on the detailed proposals it makes. The Declaration is the fruit of a long process of dialogue and consultation between the two Governments and it has to be said the final text is a tribute to the drafting skills of some of the best brains in both the British and Irish public services.

Perhaps one of its most significant features is that it marks an end to the false belief that there can be any simple solution to the problem of Northern Ireland or that peace can be achieved through victory by one side or another. Today's Declaration is a serious attempt, in my view as Leader of Democratic Left, to recognise the complexities and the conflicting interests at the heart of the problem of Northern Ireland. Inevitably, it will be seen as offering something for everyone and perhaps that is no bad thing. On the other hand, nobody has got everything they were looking for but we have always said that a solution to the problem is dependent on a willingness to compromise on dearly held aspirations.

The fifteenth of December may turn out to be one of the most significant dates in the history of Ireland. Politicians in this House and in Northern Ireland and, indeed, the citizens of this State and Northern Ireland have a responsibility to ensure that it does not turn out, as so many times before, to be just another false dawn. What is new is that that responsibility now also lies with the paramilitaries and the IRA in particular because it is not the Members of the Dáil or of the British Houses of Parliament who have been waging a bitter war against the people of Northern Ireland for the past two decades.

The Declaration represents the collective position of the democratically elected Governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland and reflects the wish of the overwhelming majority of people for a total cessation of all violence. It is now up to the paramilitaries to respond to the democratic wishes of both Governments and peoples by ending without further delay their campaigns of murder and destruction or face the consequences.

The principal source of paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland has been the Provisional IRA and while the Loyalists have shown an equal viciousness they claim that their evil activities have been a reaction to the ongoing Provisionals campaign. It is now up to the Provisionals to respond. The British Government in this Declaration has gone as far as it is politically possible to go to meet Republican demands in regard to self-determination and have gone a distance that would have been considered inconceivable even a few years ago. If the Provisionals spurn this opportunity, responsibility for the continuing violence will more clearly than ever before be seen to rest totally with them and the Irish and British Governments and the Irish and British people will never forgive them for it.

The Provisionals cannot be allowed to preach peace and practice murder. The repeated acts of violence at a time when they were claiming to be seeking peace, such as the murder of two village policemen in Tyrone at the weekend and the placing of a 1,000 lb. bomb in the densely populated markets area last night, raise very serious questions about the bona fides of the IRA leadership. It is now make your mind up time for Gerry Adams and his colleagues. Put bluntly, it is time for the leadership of the Republican movement to put up or shut up. Adams and the rest of the leadership of the Republican movement must now grasp the olive branch they have been offered or face the political and security consequences. The political consequences of rejection should be total ostracisation of Sinn Féin by the democratic political parties.

Political progress required compromise also from the Unionists. Like many other people, when I first saw the Declaration I was anxious to find out the reaction of the Unionist community and their democratic representatives. The response of the Democratic Unionist Party with its talk of "sell-out" and "betrayal" was as inevitable as it was predictable. It was always likely that, irrespective of what agreement was hammered out between the two Governments, Dr. Paisley would see in it not the potential to achieve peace but the opportunity to make political mischief.

The attitude of the Ulster Unionist Party has been much more complex and considerably more thoughtful. They have earned great credit for their restrained attitude: it cannot have been entirely easy to take this position when they knew that Dr. Paisley would be beating the Loyalist drum at their door, seeking to whip up fears among the Unionists and take whatever political advantage could be extracted.

It would be wrong to imply the Ulster Unionist Party spokesman had endorsed the Declaration — clearly they have not — but neither have they rejected it. Those I have heard have taken a balanced view on the document, listing those things which they regard as positive — the fact that there is no reference to "joint authority", specific guarantees that there will be no change in the status of Northern Ireland without the express wish of a great number of people living there — but have expressed disappointment at other aspects, especially the failue of the Irish side to deliver more specific guarantees in regard to amendment of Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution.

In fairness to the Taoiseach, it must be acknowledged that in section 7 of the Declaration which states: "in the event of an overall settlement the Irish Government will, as part of a balanced constitutional accommodation, put forward and support proposals for change in the Irish Constitution which would fully reflect the principle of consent in Northern Ireland", he has gone further than he or any of his predecessors have been prepared to go in the past.

However, it is clear from the response of the Unionists that the speed and the extent to which the Taoiseach is willing to act on this promise will have a major impact on whether or not the necessary political follow-through to the Declaration will take place. In this regard I hope that Deputy Reynolds heard the lunch-time remark of the secretary of the Ulster Unionist Party, Mr. Chris McGimpsey, that had the Taoiseach been prepared to make a similar commitment at the time of the talks last summer, the whole process might have been successfully completed by now.

Promises of political generosity are fine as far as they go, but the people of Northern Ireland have a right to know exactly what form any proposed amendment to the Constitution would take. The Taoiseach has refused to talk in anything other than generalities on that issue. It is now time for him also to put on the table in relation to Articles 2 and 3, a detailed statement as to what form the amendments specified in Article 7 of the Declaration will take. This could provide an impetus towards rapid progress. Failure to deal with this issue may seriously hinder the prospects for progress.

Now that this phase of talks between the two Governments, culminating in the publication of this Declaration, has concluded, an urgent priority must be the reopening of serious dialogue between the democratic parties within Northern Ireland. We have always stressed that a solution cannot be imposed by the two Governments over the heads of the people of Northern Ireland. The matter is urgent as no time must be given to the paramilitaries to enable them to regain the initiative. In their Declaration, Dublin and London have set out a framework which it is hoped, will lead to the creation of a new future for Northern Ireland which will recognise the diversity of political aspirations and cultural identities there and which will be capable of winning broad support. The democratic parties in Northern Ireland must now be deeply involved in working out the nuts and bolts of any new arrangement. Without their early involvement, the whole project runs the risk of running aground.

There are many aspects of today's Declaration that require much more consideration and explanation. It will clearly not be possible to deal with them today. However, I would ask the Tánaiste when replying to this short debate to spell out in much more detail exactly what is involved in the proposal in section 11 for a "Forum for Peace and Reconciliation to make recommendations on ways in which agreement and trust between both traditions in Ireland can be promoted and established". Can the Taoiseach indicate when such a forum will get under way? Will it be before talks resume on Northern Ireland or will it be after or during those talks? Will its deliberations be confined to questions relating to the Republic? What would its agenda be, and what its membership?

What is the intended role for this forum and how will it be constituted? Is the Government talking about a coming together of democratic parties in the Republic to discuss ways of addressing what is referred to elsewhere in the Declaration as elements in the democratic life and organisation of the Irish State that are considered by the Unionist community to be a real and substantial threat to their way of life and ethos? If so, what way, would the role of such a forum differ from the role this Dáil would play through a Dáil committee?

If, on the other hand, what is envisaged is a forum made up of the political parties in the Dáil and the Nationalist parties in Northern Ireland, then I can see little value to it. Indeed it could constitute an impediment to progress. The real need is not for talks between the different Nationalist parties, but for dialogue between Nationalists and Unionists. It may be that the purpose of this forum is to provide a platform for Sinn Féin, a carrot to encourage the cessation of violence by the IRA — if this is the purpose of the exercise then we should be told.

Irrespective of any reservations or questions I have, I recognise the importance of this Declaration and believe that it should be made available on the widest possible basis to the people of Northern Ireland and of the Republic. People should be able to read it for themselves and make their own judgments on it. It should be possible for people who have queries about it to have them answered in a straightforward way. The Declaration should be made available in libraries, in schools, in Government offices and other suitable locations. The Government took the trouble to have a document on the Maastricht Treaty distributed to every home in the country. This Declaration is potentially as important. On that occasion freefone services were established to answer questions from the public. I urge both Governments to do the same in regard to this Declaration.

For far too long the people of Northern Ireland have been allowed to endure political stagnation and an unspeakable campaign of terror. Thousands of lives have been taken away, tens of thousands of people have been maimed and hundreds of millions of pounds worth of property destroyed and thousands of jobs lost. At many times in the past 20 years it appeared that the people of Northern Ireland had been robbed of everything, including the right to hope. Nobody would be so incautious as to claim that today's Declaration is a complete formula for peace and political progress, but it does offer a potential for peace and political progress. It offers a chance to hope again. Anyone, politician or paramilitary, who undermines that hope deserves nothing but the contempt of the people of this country and of Northern Ireland.

Mr. Sargent

On behalf of the Green Party, Comhaontas Glas, I want to record our gratitude to the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste, Prime Minister John Major their Governments and officials for bringing peace that much closer, I pray, with this Joint Declaration. On behalf of the Greens, a party born of the peace movement, I appeal to those who believe in or who practice paramilitarism to enter into the dialogue towards a settlement. As a member of the Church of Ireland, elected by all creeds to this House, I have nothing to fear living and working for all my constituents in Dublin North. I appeal to Protestants in Northern Ireland to be courageous in coming to speak with others who share different political views.

All sections of society have much to learn about respecting the rights of minorities, their concerns and legitimate aspirations whether these concerns be cultural, linguistic, religious or political. In seeking a consensus for peace and justice for all, the Greens will not be found wanting. The Green parties of the republic, Northern Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales have since 1983 had common policies on the Northern crisis. The Greens will continue to support all peaceful means to end violence through trust and co-operation.

Mr. J. Fox

I will be brief as I have not prepared an eloquent speech like the Leaders of other parties. I would not put myself in the category of a party leader but nevertheless I have a voice. There is an adage, "if evil is to succeed it is sufficient for good men to do nothing". For a long time we, as a nation, have being doing less than we might, but there has been a change today. I compliment the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister for going the extra mile to lay the ground rules and set the pace for peace in this country and on this island.

For 25 years the paramilitaries on boths sides in Northern Ireland have dictated the pace and have brought their communities down a certain road which has led to death and the destruction of families and property. They now recognise that that road has been a cul de sac. The way forward is for the constitutional and democratically elected politicians to take their various communities down the road of peace which has been officially opened today. I appeal in particular to Unionist politicians in Northern Ireland, those who have been so vocal and vociferous in condemning any involvement by the Irish Government to seek a solution to this dreadful problem. The troubles have been going on for too long. Too many people have died. Irish men have killed too many Irish men and, unfortunately, many of those who came to our shores suffered the same plight.

I pray for the success of the peace process. The Irish people through their democratically elected Parliament and the British people through theirs have spoken to all concerned. They have spoken to the men of violence, to the constitutionally elected politicians and have sent out the message that we want peace. We are at a crossroads. Let us take the right road. The people abroad, particularly in the United States, who have lent some succour to the organisations of violence on one side or another should take note of the democratically expressed wishes of the people of these islands. There is only one way forward.

As a member of the minority in this country, as an independent politician who has been elected by people of various political and religious beliefs, I send a message to all the people of Ireland, particularly the Unionists, that we do not want to take anybody over. We want to live in peace. That can only be achieved by people living with one another in their communities. We have given them the opportunity and I would ask them through their elected representatives to take it.

Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Spring)

I would like to thank Deputies Bruton, Harney, De Rossa, Sargent and Fox for their contributions to this debate. The tenor of the debate, ably led by the Taoiseach and responded to by the other speakers, will be noted in Northern Ireland and in the UK. The conciliatory tone of the debate should be well received and it reflects the spirit and generosity prevalent in Irish politics in relation to dealing with the problem of Northern Ireland.

In 1865, at the height of the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln said:

With malice towards none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in: to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan; to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves.

The Declaration agreed today by the British and Irish Governments can be the first step towards binding up the nation's wounds and the first step towards a just and lasting peace. Since I began by quoting President Abraham Lincoln, it is perhaps fitting that I should continue by referring to a statement issued within the last hour by President Clinton in which he said:

In this season of hope, the call for peace on earth has a special resonance in Northern Ireland. No side which claims a legitimate stake in the future of Northern Ireland can justify continued violence on any grounds. I call on those who would still seek to embrace or justify violence to heed the words of Paul and cast off the works of darkness and put on the armour of light.

What has happened today has a simple yet profound significance. The British Government has declared, in a way that puts it beyond all doubt, that they are not the enemy of Irish national aspirations. The Irish Government has declared that we are not the enemy of Unionist rights and aspirations.

The problem is not a problem between Britain and Ireland. The problem concerns relationships on this island. Those relationships have been founded for too many years on hatred and mistrust, on fear and terror. In making the declaration that was made today, the British Government affirmed that it is for us on this island, and us alone, to determine our own future on a basis of new relationships built to consent and trust.

No British Government has ever made such a declaration, in such a formal way, so succinctly and expressly as that. I found myself in an unusual position today in Downing Street, as the only politician present who had also been in Hillsborough in 1985 when the Anglo-Irish Agreement was signed: That agreement, too, held out the opportunity of self-determination based on consent, to the people of this island. But even that was not as clearly expressed in words that are immediately understandable to everybody.

I do not believe there can be any room for misunderstanding what has been said today. I want to make it clear, for my own part, and I think on the part of everyone in this House, that we do not want a future on this island based on mistrust or on fear. We do not want the false unity that comes from coercion.

In making this Declaration, we have adopted the role of persuaders. When I say we, I mean we the Irish Government and we the people of the Republic of Ireland. Irish unity will only be achieved, in the words of the Declaration, "only by those who favour this outcome persuading those who do not, peacefully and without coercion or violence". In short, the search for Irish unity must become for all of us a search for unity of hearts and minds, for unity of purpose, and not merely a search for unity of territory.

I have spent many weeks, in common with several of my colleagues, seeking out opportunities to speak, frankly and openly, with people who disagree with the aspiration for unity. That process, which has been conducted in an atmosphere of confidentiality in order to protect them, has led me inexorably to the conclusion that nothing could be more worthwhile than the effort to build new relationships and to build confidence.

Again and again, I have sought to assure the people to whom I have spoken that they have nothing to fear from the attitude which the Irish Government is bringing to these negotiations. Again and again, they have told me that fear is inbuilt in the community of Northern Ireland, that the divisions between the two traditions in that community have sometimes made hatred palpable. Again and again, they have told me that the single request I have made to them — that they should learn to trust the good faith of the Irish Government in regard to their tradition — is the hardest thing I could ask.

I hope that as they read and study this Declaration, they will come to realise that in all the meetings they had with me, they were told nothing less than the truth. I hope it will now be possible to begin the long, slow, and painstaking process of ending this conflict between traditions on our island.

The first prerequisite is the removal of violence. When I spoke in this House on 27 October on this subject, I pointed out that many of the activists of the Provisional IRA have been involved in violence and terror for all of their adult lives. Many of them now have teenage children. They have a choice — they can condemn their children, and their children's children, to lives of violence and terror. Or they can stop. If they were to stop now, it would provide hope that politics can replace terror as a means of achieving political objectives. It would free their children from the shadow of the gunman, and empower them for the first time in their lives to contribute to the well-being of their own communities. Now they have that chance. The peace process in which they have claimed an involvement, and which has been pursued so diligently and courageously by John Hume, Séamus Mallon and others has given them that choice. It has shown the way to an end to killing and to the beginning, at last, of the road to addressing the relationships on this island in the way that they need to be addressed.

In the speech I referred to a moment ago, I set out six democratic principles which must underpin the search for peace and progress. Those principles were widely welcomed in this House and elsewhere. They are all contained, implicitly and explicitly, in the Declaration we are now considering. They add up to one simple proposition — the need to balance the right of the Irish people to self-determination with the right of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland to give or to withhold their consent to constitutional change.

As the Declaration makes clear, we will, in the appropriate circumstances, ask the people of Ireland to enshrine the paramount importance of consent in our Constitution. And in doing so, we will accept fundamentally the obligation to persuade. We cannot enshrine consent in the Constitution without at the same time implicitly rejecting and repudiating coercion, force, or terror.

Now is a time for everybody in this House to reach out. We must reach out to those who are prisoners of their own terrorist tactics, just as we must reach out to those who have been bereaved by those tactics. We must set out to work with people of goodwill to build a process of peace and reconciliation. In this regard, I hope it will be possible, on due consideration, for those in Opposition in this House who have expressed reservations about such a coming together, now that they have read the Declaration, to reconsider their positions.

I welcome the support for this Declaration and the contributions made in this House today and for the support from outside the House and I hope that many more declarations of support will be made for the position taken by the British and Irish Governments today.

A number of points were raised by Deputies Bruton, De Rossa and Harney and I will deal with those now. I understand we will have a fuller debate on all these issues next Friday when this House will have an opportunity to give its full support for this Declaration. This would give a very strong signal to the people of this island in relation to this process. That is a matter that will be discussed between the Whips. I certainly will urge that we will have an opportunity of going into the detail of the matter, as requested by Deputy De Rossa.

On the question of Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution, the Taoiseach and myself as well as other spokespersons on behalf of the Government, have been very explicit in recent months in our acceptance of the necessity for constitutional change. It is not our intention to use the formula as quoted by Deputy Bruton to hold up progress or to act as an inhibition. Deputy Bruton was concerned that there is no timetable. We hope the timetable is implicit in this Declaration and that we can bring a new dynamic into the peace process based on the efforts of both Governments. As we said in London today, we are very anxious to resume the three-strand process of dialogue. The Government solemnly believes that a cessation of violence would transform politics on this island.

Questions were raised on how to determine a permanent cessation of violence. We are talking about the handing up of arms and are insisting that it would not be simply a temporary cessation of violence to see what the political process offers. There can be no equivocation in relation to the determination of both Governments in that regard.

Concern was raised by Deputies Harney and De Rossa about the question of establishing a forum for peace and reconciliation. Many Members of this House were in the past involved in the New Ireland Forum, a very worthwhile process engaged in by the parties on this island. We favour as much dialogue and consultation as possible and I would like to think that there will be widespread consultation with all the parties in this House and all the democratic parties on this island before we engage in any forum or new form of talks. The Opposition parties have a major role to play in building on the dynamic which this peace formula will establish.

Criticism has been proffered in relation to the 1937 Constitution. We should not for a moment feel that the conditions of 1937 are similar to those of 1993. There has been an amazing change in the politics of this island. The debate taking place here this afternoon could not have taken place in the politics of the 20s and 30s, and I hope that will be understood in Northern Ireland. The atmosphere of politics has changed, as is strongly reflected in the debate this afternoon.

The future of Ireland is in the hands of the people of Ireland. The people of the United Kingdom, our nearest neighbour in geographic terms and one of our most important partners in economic terms, want nothing from us except that we will be willing to work together. The people of Ireland demand that all of us in this House, as equals, should be prepared to take whatever risk is necessary to keep the process, now begun, alive and strong. I was very honoured to lead the Labour Party in these negotiations. From my earliest discussions with the Taoiseach before the Government was formed, he was very forthright in his determination to do whatever possible to establish peace of this island. He has always put all the cards on the table in relation to Northern Ireland. I was very honoured to work with him during the last number of months and I appreciate the leadership and negotiating skills shown by him over many months.

We must make no mistake about the opportunity that exists. This Declaration is the first step in a process of peace. The second step will be a cessation of violence, which we all hope will happen, but the process of building a peace that can be sustained will be long and painstaking. Today this Government has made a good start and we are grateful for the support of the Opposition parties in this matter. Let up hope that our generosity will be reciprocated in Northern Ireland and that we can all work towards a peaceful existence on this island.