Jim O'Keeffe
Question:1 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his contacts and meetings in relation to Northern Ireland over the Christmas recess.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Joint Declaration on Peace in Northern Ireland.
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:2 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach if he will give details of the date, place and agenda of any further meetings arranged between himself and UK Prime Minister, Mr. John Major.
John Bruton
Question:3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the proposed functions of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation; its composition; and its intended duration.
John Bruton
Question:4 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the way in which he proposes to include and consider Unionist viewpoints within the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation.
John Bruton
Question:5 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself with the progress made so far towards a permanent cessation of violence since the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, of 15 December 1993.
John Bruton
Question:6 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the nature of the consultation he proposes to undertake with other parties in Dáil Éireann in respect of the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation.
John Bruton
Question:7 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation is to be established only on condition that Provisional Sinn Féin gives up supporting violence and participating in it, or if it will go ahead anyway, without Sinn Féin participation, in the event of a continuance of the IRA murder campaign.
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:8 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach whether he has directly or indirectly responded to the request for clarification of the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, of 15 December 1993, which he received from Sinn Féin President, Mr. Gerry Adams.
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:9 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach whether he intends to meet or debate on TV or radio with the leaders of Sinn Féin or other such organisations; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
John Bruton
Question:10 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach his views on the possible publication of the formal draft of the Joint Declaration on Peace which he said he drew up in his office in April 1992; whether Mr. John Hume at any stage told him that this draft, or any redraft of it in his possession, had been seen or approved by Mr. Gerry Adams or by Provisional Sinn Féin as a basis on which Sinn Féin could recommend a cessation of IRA violence; and the way in which that draft approved or seen by Sinn Féin differs from the final text agreed at Downing Street.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:11 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he intends to set a deadline for consideration by Sinn Féin and the IRA of the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, of 15 December 1993; if, in view of indications of foot-dragging on the part of these organisations, he will, in co-operation with the British authorities, take steps to develop dialogue between the democratic political parties in Northern Ireland based on the principles of the declaration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:12 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he has had any contact with or communication from representatives of Sinn Féin or the IRA regarding the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, of 15 December 1993, either directly or through third parties; if the matters in the declaration on which Sinn Féin and the IRA claim to want clarification have been conveyed to him; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:13 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has for an early meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, to discuss the response to their Joint Declaration of 15 December 1993, and consider possible follow-up initiatives; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:14 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, he has for the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation; when it is intended to establish it; if he intends to consult with Opposition parties regarding its composition and terms of reference; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:15 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself with the public and political response to the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, of 15 December 1993; the steps, if any, he is taking to have the declaration promoted among the general public; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Mary Harney
Question:16 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach when he plans to have consultations with other political parties on the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation; if he envisages participation by the constitutional Unionist parties; and if the forum will proceed irrespective of the response, if any, by Sinn Féin to the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major of 15 December 1993.
Mary Harney
Question:17 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the meaning of his undertaking to provide continuing clarification in relation to the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, of 15 December 1993 which he gave in his address to the Irish Association on 10 January 1994.
Mary Harney
Question:18 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach the initiatives, if any, the Government proposes to take to give expression to his statement in his address to the Irish Association on 10 January 1994, that the task ahead is surely to practise real republicanism and reach out to the other tradition and begin in earnest the task of reconciliation.
Mary Harney
Question:19 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach the way in which he intends to fulfil his commitment in the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, of 15 December 1993 to examine any elements in the democratic life and organisation of the Irish State that can be represented to the Irish Government as not being fully consistent with a modern democratic and pluralist society and undertake to examine any possible ways of removing such obstacles.
Mary Harney
Question:20 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach his views on whether the speedy resumption of political talks involving the North's constitutional parties and the two sovereign Governments is now essential.
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:21 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach his present proposals in view of current developments in relation to the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation referred to in the Joint Declaration by himself and the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major of 15 December 1993.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 21 inclusive, together.
The Joint Declaration agreed by the British Prime Minister and myself on 15 December last provides from the viewpoints of each of the two main traditions in Ireland an honourable first step towards lasting peace with justice. The declaration has attracted an exceptionally wide consensus of support, both here and abroad. In this regard, I wish to put on the record of this House that my Department has distributed 110,000 copies of the declaration, including to all parties, public libraries, post offices, citizen's advice centres and post-primary schools. With reference to a question by Deputy Bruton, it is not the practice to publish early drafts of intergovernmental declarations or agreements.
The next steps in the peace process must be a cessation of violence so that the declaration can evolve into a full and comprehensive democratic dialogue leading to an agreed political settlement. The declaration does not purport to provide this, but it does provide a balanced and equitable framework within which this can be achieved. A key aspect of the declaration is its recognition that an eventual political settlement will be founded upon full respect for the identities and aspirations of both traditions. Such arrangements must be the product of negotiation and agreement between the two Governments and the democratic parties. To this end, the House will be aware of my intention to establish, in consultation with other parties, a Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, if it can contribute to the consolidation of peace. Its central purpose will be to assist the process of healing the divisions among the people of Ireland. It will consult and advise on the steps required to remove the barriers of distrust which at present divide the people of Ireland and which also stand in the way of the exercise by them of self determination on a basis of equality. It will be open to the forum to make recommendations on the ways in which agreement and respect for the rights and identities of both traditions can be promoted and secured.
In consultation with other parties, I envisage that the forum will remain in existence for as long as is necessary and will be organised on similar principles to the New Ireland Forum. No timetable has yet been set with regard to its establishment, but it will be open to all political parties on this island which are exclusively committed to the democratic process. The Alliance Party has already indicated its interest in participating. Unionists in the past came and gave evidence to the New Ireland Forum.
The forum will not be in competition with the three-strand talks process. I believe that it can provide a very useful input to these negotiations. For example, the forum's agenda would include discussions on the nature and role of North-South institutions. As set out in the declaration, these would enable the people of Ireland to work together in all areas of common interest. I have no doubt that these discussions could enhance considerably the prospects for a successful outcome to the North-South dimension of a resumed talks process.
In the Joint Declaration itself, I am quite clearly reaching out to both traditions, and this has been positively responded to in an unprecedented manner. I hope to be able to follow this through in the forum. In the declaration, I have undertaken that, arising from direct political dialogue with Unionist leaders, we will examine any elements in the democratic life or organisation of the Irish State that can be represented to us as being a real and substantial threat to the Unionist way of life or ethos. That could happen, for example, in a resumed strand two of the talks process.
We are now in a period which requires a delicate and sensitive approach. There is understandable impatience, but let us not lose sight of the opportunity for peace which may yet materialise. I am reasonably encouraged by the relatively positive response to the declaration by the Combined Loyalist Military Command, as reported in this morning's papers. As I said in my recent address to the Irish Association, reasonable patience is not an unseemly price to pay if the reward we all seek is peace. When the issue of self-determination is properly examined, and I did so in great detail when addressing UCD law graduates last week, it must surely be clear that there is no moral justification, and no coherent ideological basis, for the continuation of a campaign of violence. It must be understood that the Irish Government remains committed to observing the principles of international law, as set out in the UN Charter and the CSCE, and to the Anglo-Irish Agreement.
If the principle of self-determination means anything, account must surely be taken of the reality that the overwhelming majority of people in Ireland, North and South, endorse the declaration. According to recent opinion polls, 97 per cent of the people of this State and 87 per cent of Northern Nationalists back the declaration.
Since the Joint Declaration was agreed, I have sought, through statements, speeches and interviews, to assist the process of deliberation by trying to clear up any genuine doubts or confusion that I can detect regarding aspects of the declaration. Matters on which clarification has been publicly sought relate, for example, to the meaning of self-determination, the question of consent and the so-called Unionist veto, the next stage of the peace process, and alleged contradictory statements by the two Governments relating to the declaration. I believe that my post-declaration statements to the Oireachtas, my recent Address to the Irish Association, and my speech at the Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh Memorial Dinner should help to dispel any such doubts. The explanations and elaborations that I have given, and that have been given also in recent days by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on the subject of exploratory talks and the scope of the talks process, are in no sense entering into negotiations on the declaration.
An unprecedented and unique opportunity now exists to move in a new and open direction. It is my hope that a full and positive response will be forthcoming soon, but I see no purpose in setting artificial deadlines. At the same time, a point may come after the process of explanation is effectively exhausted, and if a positive response remains outstanding and shows no sign of coming, then both Governments will have no choice but to pursue alternative avenues of political progress to try to arrive at a political settlement, involving the constitutional parties.
On the question of a meeting or public debate with Sinn Féin leaders, I have no such plans.
Regarding a possible meeting with the British Prime Minister, I have no immediate plans for such a meeting. My office and his remain in regular touch. I know that the Prime Minister and his colleagues, like this Government, are keeping developments under close review. There is, of course, an intensive and ongoing pattern of contact and consultation between the two Governments through the framework of the Anglo-Irish Conference and otherwise. I am keeping myself well informed of developments in political thinking in Northern Ireland through responsible community leaders such as churchmen, constitutional politicians and business people. These contacts, of their nature, must continue to remain confidential.
In dealing with this large group of questions I propose to call first, the Deputies who tabled the questions, in the order in which they appear on the Order Paper. Deputy Jim O'Keeffe.
Does the Taoiseach agree that the real clarification needed is from Sinn Féin-IRA and, in particular, whether they accept the will of the vast majority of the Irish people on both sides of the Border in support of the declaration? Can the Taoiseach give any indication as to how long they will be given to ponder this question? Second, has the Taoiseach any cogent or coherent statement from Sinn Féin-IRA as to what exactly they want clarified in the declaration? Does he agree that in public all we have had is prevarication and procrastination and that the replies of the Sinn Féin President on his radio interview last Sunday were couched in what can best be described as "Adams in Wonderland" language? Furthermore, will the Taoiseach say whether the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, mentioned in his reply, will be set up in the absence of a cessation of violence? Finally, does he accept that we now have a unique and unparalleled political alignment on this island, including all parties in the Dáil and the SDLP and the Ulster Unionist Party in Northern Ireland, in support of the peace process? Does he agree that irrespective of the Sinn Féin-IRA response to the three stranded peace talks in relation to Northern Ireland should, in any event, be resumed shortly?
I will attempt to address all those questions. If I should miss one the Deputy is free to remind me of it. In relation to a response from Sinn Féin, certainly the people of Ireland, North and South, would appreciate a positive response at the earliest possible time. We are all agreed that the objective at the end of this process — the first step in the building of a peace process — would be a positive response from them that a cessation of violence would take place. I am not privy to the internal debate there. We are all well informed from the media and otherwise that there is intense internal debate there and I do not think any of us would be surprised at that.
We are now talking about trying to find a resolution to a centuries old conflict, a matter of days or weeks will not decide that and nobody should be thinking along those lines. I have made it abundantly clear from the start that I did not expect an early response on this issue, recognising that debates and consultation processes — and all that goes with them — will take place. In that regard I would welcome an early response as, indeed, would the people. We want to find a different way forward to pursue legitimate political objectives by peaceful means rather than by violence. I have made that clear on a number of occasions.
In relation to the forum I made it clear here on 17 December 1993 that it is what it says it is — a Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. Everybody in this House wants to see peace and a cessation of violence. One of the main purposes of the forum is to try to bridge the divisions of suspicion, hatred and bitterness engendered by 25 years of violence. It will be open to all democratic parties to attend. Of course, there will be consultation with the Opposition parties at the appropriate time. It can be set up along the lines, as I indicated here previously, of the new forum report.
In relation to clarification, explanation or interpretation I have, since the first day I addressed this House and elsewhere, through a variety of speeches and statements made it clear what the declaration is all about. It is clear from paragraph 4 that the British Government has gone further than ever before. I accept that "self-determination" may have needed certain clarification and definition and I have given that in international law terms. Chapter 1 of the UN Charter clearly spells out the issue of self-determination. Article 2 states that the solution to these types of problems in any State should be pursued by peaceful means exclusively. We are all well aware of our commitment to the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which is an international agreement. I have made it clear at all times that this Government has no intention or could not contemplate turning away from our commitments under the international agreement, we are also aware of our obligations under CSCE agreements. The issue of self-determination has been clearly spelled out as well as the whole question of consent and agreement. If there are additional questions in relation to it I do not want to endanger a peace process for the sake of people not understanding exactly where this Government is coming from.
First, will the Taoiseach confirm that Sinn Féin will not be invited to take part in the peace forum unless and until there is an irrevocable cessation of violence and that a tactical ceasefire on its part would not be sufficient to justify inviting it to take part?
I have stated repeatedly in this House that the Government is interested in a permanent cessation of violence and I would like to see a declaration of that intent as early as possible.
I know that is the Taoiseach's view but I asked whether the Sinn Féin organisation would be invited to take part in the forum on the basis of a ceasefire or must there be a permanent and irrevocable cessation of violence before it will be invited? That is a slightly different question.
I do not see the slight difference in it, but I made it clear in this House that our policy is that we want to see a serious declaration with regard to a cessation of violence, and that I am not interested in a short term ceasefire for tactical reasons.
Can I take it the Taoiseach is confirming that Sinn Féin will not be invited to take part in the forum unless it announces a permanent irrevocable cessation of violence? In regard to what the Taoiseach referred to as genuine doubts raised by Sinn Féin on the meaning of the Joint Declaration, particularly the meaning of "consent" and "self-determination" and the alleged contradictory statements made afterwards, will he agree that Sinn Féin has not published any specific question on the meaning of any specific part of the declaration, that it has only indicated areas on which it would like elaboration and that in fact many believe it is not looking for clarification but a change in the declaration?
I do not know on what grounds Deputy Bruton made that statement. I have carefully read every statement by every spokesperson and leader and I have tried to follow the debate. Where I have seen possible areas of confusion I have taken the opportunity in public statements to put the record straight.
Does the Taoiseach accept that I too have read every statement, including the 13 page statement by Mr. Adams and nowhere in that statement or in his letter to the Prime Minister did he indicate a single phrase, sentence or paragraph in the Joint Declaration which he did not understand?
People interpret statements and letters in different ways. I too have read the long statement and in relation to self-determination I detected certain question marks on international law. That is why I addressed it in subsequent statements. I accept that everyone will take different interpretations from public statements or letters.
The Taoiseach's statement in Barberstown was generally very helpful. It was a good statement but I do not think it was in response to any specific question from Sinn Féin because there was no specific question from Sinn Féin.
Will the Taoiseach agree that in view of the unprecedented democratic consensus achieved by the declaration, we as democrtatic politicians must move forward as quickly as possible to the phase of dialogue between the democratic parties? Will he also agree that it is not necessary to set a deadline for Sinn Féin and the IRA to come to their conclusion, but to set a deadline for ourselves upon which to embark on the democratic dialogue necessary to build on the declaration, and that it is a matter for Sinn Féin and the IRA to make up their minds when and if they choose to do so?
Work behind the scenes on defining the forum and its objectives is not being held up. In relation to democratic dialogue, the talks with the Secretary for Northern Ireland continue to try to get the three stranded talks process going. On Friday there will be another meeting of the Anglo-Irish Conference. Democratic dialogue is continuing while we hope for an early response to the Joint Declaration for Peace so that we will have a better idea as to what direction we should be going.
I fully appreciate that it is in everyone's interest that the IRA and Sinn Féin should call off their murderous campaign and that the Loyalist paramilitaries would do the same. All reasonable people looking at the developments that are at least made public by Sinn Féin and the IRA, would draw the conclusion that the direction in which they are going is either to reject the declaration or at least not accept it, between which they draw a distinction. In that event it would seem to me that——
A question, please.
Will the Taoiseach agree that there is a necessity, not only for bilateral contacts between the Northern Ireland Office and the parties in Northern Ireland, but for parties in Northern Ireland to sit around the table to negotiate an arrangement in Northern Ireland and with the Republic at an early date?
The question of parties in Northern Ireland sitting around a table is part of the three stranded process. I do not and have never subscribed to the view that an internal settlement will solve the problems in Northern Ireland. Deputy De Rossa seems to have made up his mind as to the outcome. I have not made up my mind in this regard. I am following the debate and I have an open mind. I am as hopeful as I was on the first day. I recognise that time is required and surely Deputy De Rossa will admit that this needs time. We are trying to change direction, to take the gun out of Irish politics. We should not rush, if the prize is worth going for, and I know that everyone in the House subscribes to that objective. I will not put unsatisfactory deadlines on anybody. I will pursue the process as long as it has any possible chance of success and I still give it a fair chance of success. If Deputy De Rossa thinks in a different way he is entitled to do so.
The Taoiseach is right. All of us in this House want an end to violence. If Sinn Féin or the IRA by a majority accept the declaration they will inevitably split and neither Mr. Adams nor Mr. McGuinness are prepared to take that chance. That is my assessment. I am not hoping for that or wishing it as it would be far better if we could have a total cessation of violence. In the absence of a clear position from Sinn Féin and the IRA it is important that this House and the Taoiseach give a clear signal that the political process will not be vetoed by the ongoing IRA campaign resulting in continued deaths, destruction and maiming of the people in Northern Ireland. Will the Taoiseach give this House an assurance that the Government will not allow Sinn Féin or the IRA to veto the political progress which we all want?
No party either here nor in Northern Ireland will have a veto on political progress, so far as this Government is concerned. Political progress is required by everybody and both Governments subscribe to that view. Talk about the constitutional position is one thing, talk about political progress is another. No party should have a veto on it and so far as we are concerned no party will have a veto on it. Deputy De Rossa will agree that another split in the Republican movement would not be in the interests of this country. We all saw the price paid since the last split. We too want to see a split avoided. We want to see a real cessation of violence which brings peace so that we can sit down and work out a future for everybody here, accepting differences and diversity in trying to find a framework within which we can work.
I agree with the Taoiseach we should not set up any barriers but will he accept that if we do not move forward we will effectively impose a veto on Sinn Féin and the IRA? We will undermine democratic constitutional politics if we just sit around and wait for their response before we move on.
I assure the Deputy that the Government is not sitting around and is not imposing a veto on Sinn Féin or anybody else. I have outlined the ongoing work in relation to the forum for peace and reconciliation and the work to try to get the three stranded talks process underway again. The forum for peace and reconciliation is not in opposition to the three stranded talks process which will be put back on the rails as soon as possible. Work with the Anglo-Irish Conference continues and we have a meeting this week.
Will the Taoiseach clarify his response to Deputy Bruton earlier? Will participation in the forum be confined only to those parties who have permanently renounced violence?
I have made that clear on a number of occasions in this House.
The Taoiseach should say "yes" or "no".
I do not question the Taoiseach's intentions; I have great admiration for what he is trying to do but, like the rest of the nation, he must be aware that when the leader of Sinn Féin-IRA spoke on radio on Sunday he did not once refer to Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland, he referred continually to the Six Counties and the Twenty-six Counties. Does that not tell the Taoiseach something? I should also say that a number of members of the Taoiseach's party still have that habit. Second, in dealing with the problem, instead of the constitutional parties on the island of Ireland sitting around the table would it not be more positive to have the constitutional parties in Westminster and Dáil Éireann sitting around the table to sort this matter out? While the Alliance Party in Northern Ireland and Sinn Féin who do not have representatives in Westminster or in this Parliament would be excluded everyone else would be included. It is time the leaders of the people who elect public representatives to both Parliaments sat around the table to sort this matter out once and for all.
What has been happening for quite some time in the debate is that the people are being sidetracked instead of concentrating on the actual wording and content of the Peace Declaration. If the debate was confined to this we might know what people are saying. It is a matter for people themselves to decide what language they should use in a particular interview; I decide what language I should use.
Sometimes not so well.
I would not deny them that opportunity. On the question of who should sit around the table, the British Government has made it clear in the Peace Declaration that it is a matter for the people of Ireland to sit down and work out their future and whatever agreement they come to, even if this involves a sovereign united Ireland, it will legislate for this. Therefore, the British Government is saying for the first time to the Irish people that they should sit down and work out their future and whatever agreement they come to, even if this involves a sovereign united Ireland which some people may not like, it will underwrite and underpin it. It is saying that the people of Ireland as a whole have a right to do this.
Will the forum go ahead without Sinn Féin if it decides not to give up violence; in other words, will the other parties, plus the Alliance Party, go ahead anyway? That is Question No. 7 on the Order Paper and I do not think the Taoiseach answered it. Second, is the Taoiseach aware that there is puzzlement in Northern Ireland among the political parties and elsewhere, about the failure of the Government to submit any concrete ideas as to how it sees Strands II and III developing? In particular, people in Northern Ireland are not clear on the Government's view of North-South co-operation. They are unclear as to whether what is envisaged by the Government is that the South will have a say in the way the North is run or that the Dáil and Civil Service will surrender powers to all-Ireland institutions. It is not clear which approach has been adopted as the Government has not submitted any concrete ideas. Will it do this in the near future? Finally, did the Taoiseach take the advice of the Attorney General, in the light of Article 2 of the Constitution, in regard to the constitutionality of the Downing Street Declaration, in particular paragraph 2?
A number of questions arise from the questions Deputy Bruton asked. As I said in my long, detailed initial response today, the Government has not taken a decision as to the timing of the establishment of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. I also said that all parties would be consulted at the appropriate time. On the question of what position we will adopt in the forthcoming talks, the Deputy can be assured that we will submit our proposals to it. Consultations have been taking place — these matters are also discussed at the anglo-Irish Conference — and while it is true detailed submission in writing has not been made our views are well known and crystal clear; we see the process evolving. On the question of North-South economic co-operation, I initiated a study and have been promoting it within Government. Time and again our Ministers meet Ministers in Northern Ireland. I have said — and this has been shown in studies — that both North and South would benefit from the peace dividend but more so in the North in that its home market may expand by 100 per cent while our economy may expand by 50 per cent in terms of investment, tourism and trade. There would be huge savings in overheads and in due course we could do a far better job on behalf of certain sectors in Northern Ireland at the European table in Brussels or elsewhere. Our interests coincide in many areas; for instance, in agriculture where the British Government would have different priorities in negotiations. Therefore, there are ample opportunities for economic co-operation. As I said, I initiated studies in this regard. Each time the Tánaiste goes to the Anglo-Irish Conference he brings different Minister with him for discussions on North-South economic co-operation. There is also the human and economic costs. We could put the money we spend on security to much better use; I am sure the British Government feels the same way. Therefore, there is a huge peace dividend for all of us and I am glad that we will have the co-operation of the House in pursuing it. I think we all know where we stand.
Deputy McDowell has been offering for some time.
The Taoiseach did not answer my question.
Will the Taoiseach indicate whether he agrees with Dr. John Alderdice, the Leader of the Alliance Party, who has most happily agreed to take part in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, that there would be a good deal of merit in proceeding with the Forum with or without the participation of Sinn Féin to demonstrate that it is not solely a means to advance the Sinn Féin viewpoint in Irish politics? Does the Taoiseach agree that one of the problems, in terms of clarification, is the continuing failure of the leadership of the Sinn Féin-IRA movement to state clearly whether it accepts the proposition, which the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste have repeatedly said is the cornerstone, that the constitutional status of Northern Ireland can only change with the consent of a majority of the people there? Finally will the Taoiseach indicate whether, if that acceptance of that majoritarian principal is not forthcoming, he will enthusiastically pursue all aspects of the democratic peace process, including the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation regardless of whether Sinn Féin withholds its participation in the process?
As I said, the Government has not yet made a decision as to the timing of the establishment of the Forum. It is true that Dr. John Alderdice expressed a clear view in that regard when he came to see me and I told him that the Government would take this into consideration.
In regard to the cornerstone of this whole process, as Deputy McDowell puts it, everybody should study the joint statement of John Hume and Gerry Adams made in April last in which they said that not alone would a solution have to be sought by agreement between the people but it would have to command the support and allegiance of both communities in the North. That lines up with the contents of the joint declaration. There are valid comparisons that can be made. It is not for me to say what the problems are within the internal debate in the Republican movement; that is a matter for themselves. However, wherever I believed there was any possible confusion I have clarified it on behlf of the Government.
As I recall it the Taoiseach said, and I will defer to the Taoiseach's memory if I am wrong, that any solution would have to earn respect. That suggests that it could come into being without having that respect, a position which, I submit, is a million miles away from acceptance of Article 1 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. The Taoiseach should be aware of the difference.
I made it quite clear at all times in this House that there was no question of any going back on the Anglo-Irish Agreement in the matter of the consensus enshrined in it. I spelled that out here today, too, not alone in relation to our obligations under the Anglo-Irish Agreement but under international law, under the United Nations Charter and under the CSE agreement. It is very clear.
In Question No. 5 I asked the Taoiseach whether there had been any contact between himself and his Government or officials of the Government with Sinn Féin or the IRA with regard to what clarifications are being sought by Sinn Féin or the IRA. Has any such contact been made either by the Government or by Sinn Féin? What I want to know is whether Sinn Féin has conveyed to the Government, formally or otherwise, what precise clarifications they require? Arising from that and in view of the fact that before the Joint Declaration was prepared, Mr. John Hume presented to the Taoiseach and to the Tánaiste a copy of the Hume-Adams agreement — an agreement which very few in this House have seen but which we are led to believe is the basis of the clarifications that Mr. Adams is seeking — would the Government be prepared to publish what they know of that agreement which was, apparently, agreed also by the IRA? If that information were made available, everybody both inside and outside this House could see what precisely is the basis of the difference Mr. Adams claims exists between that agreement and the Joint Declaration?
I have said on a number of occasions that the publication of the Hume-Adams agreement is a matter for the two gentlemen concerned. They can publish it if they wish and we would have no objection if they choose to do so. I hope I am getting the tone of Deputy De Rossa's question right in regard to what may be the difference or otherwise between the Hume-Adams agreement and the Joint Declaration.
To come back to what Deputy McDowell said a moment ago, in the statement I referred to it is made quite clear that the exercise of self-determination by the Irish people is a matter for agreement among all the parties, all the traditions and all the cultures on this island. That should be borne in mind. It was the substance of another part of the statement we spoke about a moment ago. In regard to contacts since December, as I said in my reply, there is regular contact between Downing Street and Dublin. They are aware of our views and we are aware of theirs. I have said from the start that there would be no renegotiation of the text of this agreement. In the context of other people who have come to see me, and have come to see me since Christmas, those contacts are continuing. I do have a letter from Gerry Adams. As to whether one talks about that in the context of clarification, I do not see it in that context, nor do I see it in the context of renegotiation. However, I will be forthcoming in any responses I have to make that I believe will further the peace process.
In regard to the forum, I am still unclear on one point. The Taoiseach said that the timing has not been decided, and I accept that, but has it been decided to go ahead with the forum irrespective of whether there is a cessation of violence? That is a fundamental principle. I would like to know whether the answer is yes or no or whether it is undecided. Does the Taoiseach agree that with the major focus on Sinn Féin there is a danger that the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland, particularly the Social Democratic Labour Party, the Ulster Unionist Party and the Alliance Party, which between them represent around 85 per cent of the people of Northern Ireland, might feel they were being sidelined? Does the Taoiseach accept that it is important that he and his Government maintain contact with those three parties? In the light of an earlier comment by the Taoiseach that he was not interested in an internal settlement, does the Taoiseach agree that irrespective of what might happen in the short term — and I hope there will be a cessation of violence on the part of Sinn Féin and the IRA — he will be moving towards a resumption of the three stranded talks, a much wider process involving Unionists, Nationalists in Northern Ireland, North, South and, of course, the two islands, as soon as possible, allowing a reasonable time for a response from Sinn Féin and the IRA?
The Irish Government is ready to participate fully in the talks process as soon as it is under way. We are not holding this up. The Government has not yet decided on the timing of the setting up of the forum. I have also said on a number of occasions that the forum is open to all democratic parties and to Sinn Féin if there is a clear, unequivocal renunciation of violence.
Will it be set up otherwise?
The Government has not decided yet on the timing of the setting up of the forum.
In relation to those who would seek to impose a strict time limit on this process, would the Taoiseach agree that if the peace process eventually fails it is almost inevitable there will be a descent to new depths of barbarism on both sides in the North? In that situation I assume all of us in this House would like to be able to put our hands on our hearts and say that all the time peace was on offer we gave it a chance and did everything possible to ensure that such atrocities did not occur. Would the Taoiseach agree that we cannot justify holding the expressed will of the great majority of Irish people North and South to ransom? That means that when we in this House and the other sovereign Government in Great Britain decide that sufficient time has elapsed and that the political process cannot be held up we will proceed through the established machinery of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, to do what is necessary.
Finally, would the Taoiseach agree that the only clarification that is immediately urgent is clarification on the part of the so-called provisional Republican movement as to what separates them now, and what is the difference between the Hume-Adams agreement and what is on offer in the Downing Street declaration that justifies the loss of a single life in Northern Ireland or, in their own terms, justifies the remaining in prison for a single day longer than necessary of those involved in the troubles in Northern Ireland or those who will get involved if this process is not successful? That crucial question must be asked time and time again. How does it justify a continuation of the murdering?
That is the type of clarification we would like to see, but in studying statements published by various spokespeople for the Republican movement I have to ask if they have read the declaration in full. I have read statements that it is a matter for the British Government to say where they stand on a future agreement for Ireland and to state clearly their position in regard to self-determination. There are so many such statements published that one must ask if the declaration has been studied in detail. While I accept that Deputy Currie stated in relation to all out efforts to ensure that this process is brought to a successful conclusion, at the end of the day we must be able to stand back and put our hands on our hearts and say that we did everything within our responsibility to ensure that every possible opportunity was taken to establish the peace process. For the sake of short term gain we should not seek to put the long term future of the communities in Northern Ireland at risk. We have had 25 years of that and it has driven the communities in Northern Ireland apart. We want to bring them together again and it is the duty of all of us to do whatever is necessary in terms of a peace process to achieve that. Consequently, I will go the whole distance in an effort to achieve it.
In relation to timing, I made it clear in my response today that there may come a time — hopefully there will not — when the two Governments will have to sit down again and decide in what direction to proceed. I want to make it clear that efforts are continuing with the political leaders of the democratic parties involved in the three stranded talks process to try to get them back around the table and we want to see that happen as soon as possible. It is important that everybody studies in detail the contents of the declaration because, whether or not it fails on this occasion, it is my honest belief that matters can never go back to where they were. This historic declaration has advanced the position and it is from there we will proceed even if it fails. I hope it does not fail and I can say honestly with my hand on my heart that I have no evidence as yet which convinces me that it will fail.
I am calling Deputy Harney after whom I will facilitate Deputies John Bruton, Doyle, Boylan and De Rossa. We have six minutes remaining for questions to the Taoiseach and I would ask Members to recognise that.
As a result of the correspondence the Taoiseach received from Mr. Adams, to which he referred earlier, has he any reason to believe that Sinn Féin are prepared to accept that there can be no change in the status of Northern Ireland without the consent of the majority of the people there? When will the Taoiseach have discussions with the other leaders in this House in relation to the establishment of the forum?
When the Government has more work done on the establishment of the forum we will consult with Opposition Leaders at an appropriate time.
The letter I received from Mr. Adams is a very formal one and the comments to which Deputy Harney referred are not contained in it, nor would I expect them to be. A better description of the letter would be that it is asking me rather than telling me, but as I have said on numerous occasions, there can be no doubt in the minds of anybody in the Republican movement as to where this Government stands in respect of our obligations under the Anglo-Irish Agreement, international law, the United Nations and the CSE and we made that clear from the outset. People could not say they were under any illusions as to the position of the Government before we started to process the Joint Declaration.
Will the Taoiseach accept that what puzzles people in Northern Ireland is the fact that the Government has failed to put forward any institutional proposals for North-South co-operation in Strand 2 of the talks process? I am not talking about a willingness to co-operate on an ad hoc basis but rather a suggestion for the establishment of institutional links, particularly in view of the fact that when the Unionists came to Dublin they proposed the establishment of more bodies such as the Foyle Fisheries Commission on a cross-Border basis but received no response from the Irish Government. Is the Government willing to put forward proposals for the establishment of institutions in respect of North-South co-operation and, if so, when?
In regard to the Hume-Adams document, will the Taoiseach agree that if the exercise of self-determination is a matter for agreement between the two traditions on this island, one or other tradition has a right to disagree? Finally, has the Attorney General advised on the constitutionality of the declaration?
I am not aware of any problems in regard to the constitutionality of the declaration. In fact, the British Government had to take legal advice in respect of its constitutionality there.
In regard to institutional linkage between North and South, I do not know whom Deputy Bruton communicates with in Northern Ireland, but I find it difficult to accept that they do not have a good idea of what we mean by institutional links between North and South. That matter was referred to in the previous talks and the Deputy can be assured that we will be putting forward proposals in that regard. This is a matter for the talks process and not one for megaphone diplomacy, publication or otherwise. Such matters have to be negotiated around the table when the opportunity arises.
In relation to other aspects of Deputy Bruton's question, there is nothing left to be said except that I will keep in touch with the British Government and at the Anglo-Irish Conference on Friday we will continue to monitor and assess the development of the process. We will not be found wanting in trying to see it through to a suitable and successful conclusion.
Has the Taoiseach or the Government considered that paragraph 2 of the peace declaration could be in conflict with Article 2 of our Constitution? Given the overwhelming support for the peace declaration, what would be the status of the declaration if any such problems arose?
I will have that matter examined and communicate with the Deputy. I have not got the two documents in front of me now.
In regard to the aspect of Deputy Bruton's question to which I did not respond, namely, the exercise of the right to self-determination, for the first time in this declaration the British Government has upheld the legitimate rights of the Nationalist community in Northern Ireland and one of the bases of the conflict has been that the Nationalists felt their rights were not being recognised. They are recognised now. Both sides have an opportunity of having their rights recognised on an equal basis rather than domination by one over the other. Both communities will have equal rights in relation to expressing their views.
Will the Taoiseach tell the House whether the resumed three stranded talks — when they get under way — will be on the basis of the Downing Street Declaration and whether that will be the basis for making progress? Will he agree that an early meeting between him and Mr. Major would be a clear signal to all concerned that they are united behind the declaration and that there are no contradictions between the Taoiseach's position and that of Mr. Major's in regard to it? Finally, will the Taoiseach agree with Séamus Mallon, the deputy leader of the SDLP, that there is not a whisper of a difference between the Hume-Adams document endorsed by the IRA and the declaration as it relates to self-determination?
In relation to the first question posed by the Deputy, the answer is no. The three stranded talks process is separate. They may be referred to, but we made it clear from the outset that talks on the Joint Declaration are not a substitute for or in opposition to the three stranded talks; they are complementary to that process. It is our belief that if we could establish a peaceful environment in the North, the three-stranded talks process would have a much better chance of success.
Regarding a meeting between the British Prime Minister and me, as I said in my reply the two offices are in close contact and if we consider a meeting is necessary the House can take it we will hold one. However, we might be confusing the issue even more as someone might interpret from that that there might be some question of renegotiation or making textual changes to the declaration. Let us get that firmly settled and let us get a response one way or the other.
In relation to the comments made by others on the declaration, certainly people will choose different language in regard to it but if anyone goes outside the parameters of it I will be the first to check them. I spelt out clearly the Government's view in relation to the issue of self-determination and I do not believe anybody has argued with that so far.
The time for questions to the Taoiseach is exhausted and we must now move to deal with priority questions to the Minister for Education.