Desmond J. O'Malley
Question:1 Mr. O'Malley asked the Taoiseach whether the Department of Foreign Affairs is involved in the making of arrangements for the establishment of the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. [1431/94]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Northern Ireland Peace Process.
John Bruton
Question:2 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the criteria he will use in considering parties, organisations and bodies for observer status at the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation; whether such bodies could come from outside the island of Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1868/94]
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:3 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the expected starting date for the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1911/94]
Jim O'Keeffe
Question:4 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach the arrangements, if any, made by him with the Alliance Party in relation to its representation on the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation; whether any discussion took place on this issue prior to the original announcement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1912/94]
Mary Harney
Question:5 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting with the Leader of the Alliance Party, in relation to the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. [1972/94]
Paul Bradford
Question:6 Mr. Bradford asked the Taoiseach the nature of his recent discussion with the leader of the Alliance Party; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2031/94]
Paul Bradford
Question:7 Mr. Bradford asked the Taoiseach the nature of his recent discussion with the leader of Sinn Féin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2032/94]
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:8 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach his views on the ceasefire announced by loyalist paramilitary groups; the plans, if any, he has to ensure that the political views reflected by these loyalist groups are taken into account by the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation and in any political talks; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2265/94]
Austin Deasy
Question:9 Mr. Deasy asked the Taoiseach if he has discussed the demilitarisation of Northern Ireland with Sinn Féin leaders; and his view on the meaning of this expression. [2267/94]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 9, inclusive, together.
I am pleased to advise the Deputies that the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation will hold its first meeting on Friday, 28 October in St. Patrick's Hall, Dublin Castle, at 11 a.m.
The establishment of the forum follows a further intensive round of meetings which I held with party leaders last week, the purpose of which was to reach agreement on the terms of reference for the forum and the level of party representation at both full and alternate membership level.
As in all previous discussions on the forum my aim was that membership should, firstly, be broadly representative of all the democratic political traditions on this island and, secondly, that membership should reflect to some extent the proportionate level of electoral mandates, with favourable levels of representation accorded to all Northern parties.
I am very pleased to report that agreement has been reached with all parties concerned to proceed with this noble task of building trust and healing old animosities on this island. I am also very pleased that the forum will be assisted by the expertise of Judge Catherine McGuinness of the Circuit Court, who has accepted the invitation to serve as the forum's chairperson.
As to matters related to Northern Ireland, Government policy is carried out in an integrated manner by the Tánaiste and myself, with officials of our respective Departments working closely and effectively with each other. This approach has been carried out with regard to the establishment of the forum, and it is likely that its Secretariat will be drawn substantially from the two Departments.
Despite our best efforts, it has not been possible to secure formally nominated membership from the main Unionist parties. However, the invitation to the Unionist parties remains open and I am hopeful that in due course we may see a contribution in some form. Indeed, building on the impetus of the loyalist ceasefire and in addition to invitations to the Ulster Unionist Party, the Democratic Unionist Party and the Popular Unionist Party, I have also invited Mr. Gusty Spence, the former UVF commander, and the elected representatives of the Ulster Democratic Party and the Progressive Unionist Party to take part in whatever way they wish in the forum's work. Even without such participation, I believe the diverse political make-up of the 11 groupings in membership of the forum is testament of the Government's aim to make the forum a truly inclusive enterprise. In addition to the political groupings I have also invited Senator Gordon Wilson to contribute his unique and valued perspective to the work of the forum.
It is envisaged that the possibility of attending the forum in the capacity of observer may be open to democratically-mandated groups. To date, in the category of observer, the European Parliament nominated two MEPs. I also share the view that other parliamentary bodies, such as the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body, might also usefully hold such status, and appropriate provision for such representation is being made.
In any event, from my consultations to date, I am aware of a great level of consensus, on the part of the parties participating in the forum, that it should be both politically and socially inclusive in the performance of its work, and facilitate contributions from community groups, Churches, trade unions, business and vocational bodies in an open, flexible and responsive way.
I will call Deputies in the order in which their questions appear on the Order Paper. As Deputy O'Malley is not present I call Deputy John Bruton.
May I ask the Taoiseach if the abduction and apparent exile from his home of Paul Carroll by the IRA has any implications for the forum?
I do not see it having any implications for the forum. It is a separate issue and we should await the full reports from the Garda to ensure that we all know the true position.
Is it the case that the man is apparently being held in our jurisdiction and that the IRA, which is linked in some fashion to Sinn Féin, was involved? Does that have any implications for the terms of reference of the forum to deal with all matters by democratic and peaceful means? Does the Taoiseach consider that visits by masked men to private homes, inviting people to leave with them to go elsewhere, come within the category of democratic and peaceful methods of political action?
The Deputy is raising a very specific matter worthy of a separate question.
On a point of order, it would not be possible for me to raise it in any other way in respect of the forum, before it meets.
That may be so, Deputy, but it is a particular matter.
Perhaps it would be helpful if I were to put the question the other way around. Will the Taoiseach agree that all the parties taking part in the forum are required by its terms of reference to commit themselves exclusively to democratic and peaceful methods of political action? Is it the Taoiseach's opinion that the events surrounding the abduction and apparent exile of Paul Carroll come within the category of acceptable democratic and peaceful methods of political action?
This is clearly a different matter. The reason the forum is being set up is to let people talk among themselves about issues as they arise and, indeed, obstacles in the way of true peace and reconciliation on this island. Deputy Bruton is making statements here that run contrary to what the father of this young man said. He said that his son is not being held against his will and that he was not abducted. I said in the first instance that we should know the facts of the case——
What would the Taoiseach say——
——if the IRA was going to kill his son?
I have made clear my views and the views of the Government in this House in relation to any other approach to the solution of our problems other than peaceful and democratic means.
Deputy J. O'Keeffe rose.
Does the Taoiseach share our concern that this apparent abduction by the IRA may indicate that the paramilitaries have not ceased their activities?
The Deputy is delving into a separate matter.
I said we should all await exact information from the Garda on this matter before we jump to conclusions. Of course, I would condemn any acts, as I said in this House last week and the week before, that are not in accordance with the underpinning of peace and the development of the reconciliation process on this island.
I expressed reservations in the past about the forum, I hope my fears are unfounded. Will the Taoiseach accept that failure in regard to the forum could be counter-productive in so far as the peace process is concerned? Will he accept that the principal aim of having the forum broadly representative of all democratic traditions on the island will not be realised because the Unionists have said they will neither attend nor appear before it? As the forum will comprise mainly of Nationalist parties and the Alliance Party, and bearing in mind the change in the terms of reference, what does the Taoiseach want it to achieve?
I want it to achieve what it is being set up to achieve, namely, the underpinning of the peace process and the development of the process of reconciliation between the two communities on this island which have been divided by violence for the past 25 years. We want to start a new era on this island and between its two traditions.
I am open to being convinced on this matter. How can the forum achieve that aim when the principal tradition in Northern Ireland, namely the Unionists, will neither attend at it nor be represented on it?
We are having repetition, a luxury we cannot afford at Question Time.
I am surprised to hear Deputy O'Keeffe say he is not convinced in this regard. Apparently his party is convinced, otherwise it would not be attending the forum. None of us contemplates its failure, if we did we would not have set it up. We all want to give it our best shot and to contribute in whatever way possible to consolidate the peace process. We also want to identify the obstacles and hurdles to true reconciliation between the two traditions on the island. While it is regrettable that the two main Unionist parties will not attend — although the door is open and the invitation stands — the Alliance Party who claim to have a fairly representative view of unionism in Northern Ireland will be represented on the forum. Senator Gordon Wilson will also attend. Other small parties, some of whom are represented here and claim they, in turn, have the support of people across the community divide in Northern Ireland, will also be represented on the forum. It is not correct to say that a purely Nationalist view will be presented at the forum, but we would like a wider Unionist view. However, it will be open to other organisations and groups to make submissions to the forum and have their point of view put on the record.
The Taoiseach referred to my party. Deputy O'Keeffe is within his rights in putting those questions, I have put similar questions and will continue to do so.
If Deputy Bruton has problems with his backbenchers, I can do nothing about it.
During his most recent discussions with Mr. Adams, did the Taoiseach give an indication of a Government policy regarding the release of prisoners or a general amnesty for IRA prisoners?
Those matters were mentioned and, as we have been saying, will be addressed by the Government in due course.
Were commitments given or sought regarding either an amnesty or an early release programme for IRA prisoners?
Arrangements relating to prisoners are a matter for the Minister for Justice and the security forces.
The Taoiseach is aware that all Members approached this question in an attempt to reach a consensus on the way forward. In that regard I am anxious that all representatives on the forum are on an equal footing. Will the Taoiseach undertake to express to Mr. Adams the concern of Members regarding reports that an organisation with which he is associated appears to be still engaged in acts of violence, that it should stop, and that no person either here or in the North should be subject to such acts of violence?
When the Government receives the full details of the true position in this case, appropriate action will be taken.
In his reply the Taoiseach did not refer to the word "demilitarisation". Since the announcement of the ceasefire the leaders of Sinn Féin, particularly Mr. Adams and Mr. McGuinness, have frequently used that expression. Have they discussed it with the Taoiseach? I can only presume they want the removal of the British Army from Northern Ireland. Have they signified that in return for the removal of the British Army, or part of it, they would be willing to give up a proportion of their armaments?
The question of demilitarisation has been referred to by many people. It does not apply only to my vocabulary, it is used regularly in relation to Bosnia and by James Molyneaux. We want total demilitarisation in terms of Northern Ireland, far too many arms are held in both communities there. The question of arsenal has been put to members of Sinn Féin, who agree that it must be addressed. Everybody recognises that the process in which we are engaged cannot be successful until the destruction of arsenal is agreed. I have been heartened by the statement made by representatives of the Loyalist paramilitaries in New York that they are considering handing over arms in the near future, but I do not know what they mean by "the near future". The matter was also discussed at our meeting in Chequers on Monday where John Major, Sir Patrick Mayhew, the Tánaiste and I agreed that the security forces on both sides should work out the mechanics and the logistics of demilitarisation. The matter has been brought up with Sinn Féin at both meetings and it is clear that it must be tackled at some stage.
I am sure Members rejoiced at the withdrawal of the British Army from the streets of Derry for the first time in 25 years. That is a step in the right direction. We would all prefer if there was no requirement for the British Army to patrol the streets, the sooner they resume normal barracks duties the better for all. That decision is being taken on a phased basis, similar to the reopening of Border roads. The more the position improves, the sooner we will see the destruction of the arsenal involved. Demilitarisation involves the British Army and relates to arms held on all sides in Northern Ireland. We want to return to a society where the RUC can resume normal police duties and the British Army can resume barracks duties.
Has the Taoiseach discussed with the IRA——
I do not discuss anything with the IRA.
They are synonymous in my view. Has the Taoiseach discussed their interpretation of the matter?
They have said the question must be addressed before a peace process can be successful. We all recognise that if we are talking in terms of an enduring peace and reconciliation there must be a complete destruction of arsenal. We want normality restored to the two communities in Northern Ireland where the RUC, the British Army or paramilitaries from either side will require arms. That is the ideal we want to achieve.
We should be clear about the events surrounding Paul Carroll's abduction in Armagh. This young man was removed from his house by masked and armed men for purposes of interrogation, possible punishment and perhaps even worse. Would the Taoiseach accept that the mask drawn across that episode is an attempt to hide the basic fact that there remain armed people involved in this process? Second, will the Taoiseach reconfirm that the Downing Street Joint Declaration will not be negotiable at the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, that all of its participants are aware of that fact and have been so informed?
I do not know why Deputy Currie continues to raise the matter of the Downing Street Joint Declaration. It was a solemn declaration agreed between two Governments and nobody except those two Governments can renegotiate it; it is not up for renegotiation now or in the future. It will form the basis of the framework document being prepared between the two Governments. If beatings or punishments are being meted out in the manner described by Deputy Currie I totally deplore them, as does the Government. I will never try to defend the indefensible.
The Taoiseach has asked why I repeatedly pose this question. The answer ought to be clear to him. I have on many occasions refrained from saying things in this House which might have harmed this process, even though I felt strongly about them. Will the Taoiseach accept that the reason I keep repeating this question is that I consider it to be fairly fundamental and I believe there are some people who do not understand that the Downing Street Joint Declaration is not negotiable, who believe that they can participate in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, and attempt to renegotiate that declaration? That is the only reason I have raised the issue.
The precise purpose of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation is to afford various people an opportunity to understand the differing points of view that exist today so that, out of its deliberations, there will emerge a better understanding, hopefully a consensus based on the ways and means of removing obstacles to reconciliation.
When the Taoiseach met Sinn Féin last week did he raise his concern about the continuing punishment beatings? If so, what response did he get? Did he get a positive response on the matter of the disposal of weapons? Are newspaper reports correct that Sinn Féin were asked for a list of prisoners they would like to see released in the Republic?
The answer to the last part of the Deputy's question is "no". In relation to punishment beatings, I said in this House yesterday and repeat that the issue of punishment beatings was raised at the first meeting and subsequently. The response was that, in so far as they were aware, there were not any current punishment beatings. However, there was an admission that there had been some initially. They acknowledged that we had made the case against them and had made it very clear that nobody would stand over that kind of practice. I have already stated the position in relation to arms and there is an acknowledgment that this must be dealt with in its totality. That is the reality.
Would the Taoiseach agree that it might be more conducive to recognising the complexities of the conflict and to achieving some consensual solution were he to refer to the differing traditions on the island rather than referring constantly to the two traditions? He will know that even Wolfe Tone in his time referred to at least three, when he mentioned Catholic, Protestant and dissenter. Would the Taoiseach agree that life has become considerably more complicated since then? Would he agree that if he were to refer to the differing traditions on the island it might have a less polarising effect?
On numerous occasions I have expressed exactly what the Deputy has suggested but people hear what they want to hear and tend to ignore what they want to ignore. I recognise fully that there are more traditions than one on this island, even more than there were in Wolfe Tone's time. There are many other different traditions on the island and any solution must be inclusive of all those differing traditions.
How does the Taoiseach envisage the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation interlinking with the talks process? When does he expect the talks process to begin? I am sure it would be his hope that it would begin as quickly as possible. Does he anticipate that the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation will run simultaneously with the talks process and have an input to it?
I cannot put a date on when the talks process will begin. All I can say is that it would be the hope and expectation of all of us that it would begin as early as possible. The framework document has yet to be agreed. Only after its publication, when all of the parties will have had an opportunity to digest its contents and make their views known, can the process begin. It may well be that there will be a round of bilateral meetings first rather than a round table conference on the views of all the parties. Those arrangements remain to be worked out with the British Government when the framework document has been agreed.
The terms of reference of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation are fairly flexible. I have no doubt that some of the issues discussed in the framework document may well be discussed at the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation if they are perceived as representing ways and means of improving the reconciliation process. The Government has not issued any diktat to the forum on its modus operandi. We are leaving that to the forum itself. That is the way most parties would want us to do it.
Does the Taoiseach anticipate that the forum will produce a report, or reports, and will there be provision for minority reports? Has that issue been examined?
That is a matter for the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation itself. We would hope that there could be a consensus report produced at the end of the day but it is a matter for the forum to decide its modus operandi.
May I take it that it is the Government's intention in regard to the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation that all parties participating will be treated, in terms of the various Protocols at the forum, in proportion to their electoral strength, with due regard to the agreed weighting in favour of Northern parties, so that no artificial advantage is taken by Government parties over non-Government parties?
We do not intend to take advantage of any other party participating in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. It will be a forum available to everybody to express openly their particular views and we are not building in any advantage of the type Deputy Bruton suggested.
I have a particular reason for asking this question. I am somewhat reassured by what the Taoiseach has said but I will have to wait and see.
If the Deputy wants to put his reasons to me in the House I may be able to deal with them.
I am concerned at some of the arrangements about which I have heard today in regard to the logistics of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation which appear to be giving an artificial advantage to the Government parties over non-Government parties in the manner in which various matters concerning the opening of the forum are being put together. I would be deeply concerned about that. These are proposals which have been put to me by a representative of the Taoiseach. The manner in which they are being put forward seems to suggest that the Government wants to have it both ways, that they want to be there as Government representatives, take advantage from that, and then also take an advantage from being separate parties. They cannot have it both ways.
Perhaps that is something that can be resolved.
I hope so.
I do not know what the Deputy is implying. I will speak to my officials afterwards. Quite clearly it did not come from me if I do not know what the Deputy is talking about.
I am very reassured to hear that. Given the time available, this was the only opportunity I had to raise it directly with the Taoiseach. I hope it will work out all right.
With regard to the earlier questions about continued paramilitary violence, if it is shown that this type of activity continues, or indeed if the current case under investigation is shown conclusively to be an activity of the IRA, will the Taoiseach say whether he will make it clear to the political representatives of these paramilitary organisations that political sanctions may have to be applied at some point if this type of violence does not cease, bearing in mind the overriding desire of the people of Northern Ireland to be free of all types of violence?
The House will appreciate that over eight weeks have elapsed since the announcement of the IRA ceasefire and a couple of weeks since the announcement of the cessation of violence on the part of the loyalists, during which period, thankfully, there has been very little violence. That is the way we hope it will continue. I have said all along that it is a long road, that undoubtedly there will be difficulties encountered along the way. Undoubtedly there will be some people, however small in number, who might want to derail the peace process. It behoves all of us to ensure that that does not happen.
The vast majority of people want to see us push on with the peace process, and the more it can be strengthened on the ground the better and stronger will be the momentum to ensure that it is consolidated and endures. This is precisely the point I made to the British Prime Minister on Monday. It is very important to see a continuance of issues like the removal of the British Army from the streets of Derry, the gradual return of the RUC to normal civilian police duties and all the other issues that can be tackled to rebuild confidence. There will undoubtedly be the occasional problem put in our way but we cannot let them derail the peace process.
My question relates to activity authorised by the command structure of the IRA as distinct from maverick activity by people who simply want to disrupt the peace process. While it is important to bear in mind the sensitivities and the necessity to bring a political organisation like Sinn Féin into the process, it must be made aware that if there are authorised activities that involve violence against people in Northern Ireland, or elsewhere, sanctions must be applied to them at some point.
We are having quite a deviation from Question Time by way of statements.
That is a hypothetical question and I do not propose to deal with it at this stage.
Has the Taoiseach read the Irish News? Would he agree that the circumstances referred to are in no way hypothetical? Would he further agree that by raising this matter in this House and ensuring it is aired publicly, the Opposition is serving the public good and making it less easy for people to carry out this sort of activity in future?
The Deputy can be assured that the Government will not in any way accommodate this type of activity and will take any appropriate action in relation to it. As to activities that are mandated or authorised by the IRA, I do not know how Deputy De Rossa can make that judgment. We have said clearly that we condemn beatings or acts of punishment. We would not attempt to defend such actions and we will continue on that route.