Proinsias De Rossa
Question:5 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his contacts or discussions with the participants in the Northern Ireland talks during the sessions held in Dublin Castle. [4690/98]
Ceisteanna—Questions. - Northern Ireland Peace Process.
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:6 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will give his assessment of the prospects for progress in the Northern Ireland talks in view of developments during the sessions held in Dublin Castle; his views as to whether the talks should be held abroad; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4691/98]
Proinsias De Rossa
Question:7 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the telephone contacts he has had with Prime Minister Blair and President Clinton regarding current difficulties in the Northern Ireland peace process. [4692/98]
John Bruton
Question:8 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with the organisation, Families Against Intimidation and Terror. [4693/98]
John Bruton
Question:9 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach his views on the status of Sinn Féin's participation at the all-party talks on Northern Ireland. [4694/98]
John Bruton
Question:10 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach his views on the proceedings of the all-party talks when they took place in Dublin from 16 to 18 February 1998. [4695/98]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:11 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the progress, if any, made in the multi-party talks held in Dublin Castle; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4713/98]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:12 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the talks in Dublin Castle from 16 to 18 February 1998 and, in particular, on the position of the Irish Government with regard to the issue of Sinn Féin's exclusion. [4780/98]
Joe Higgins
Question:13 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will give details of the most recent discussions he has had with the British Prime Minister on the peace process. [4805/98]
Ivor Callely
Question:14 Mr. Callely asked the Taoiseach his views on whether the IRA is ultimately responsible for its own actions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5068/98]
Ivor Callely
Question:82 Mr. Callely asked the Taoiseach the likely contact that he will have with Sinn Féin in the weeks and months ahead; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5188/98]
Ivor Callely
Question:83 Mr. Callely asked the Taoiseach the importance he places on the need for all-party inclusive talks in the peace process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5189/98]
Ivor Callely
Question:84 Mr. Callely asked the Taoiseach his views on whether the IRA is ultimately responsible for its own actions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5190/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 14, inclusive, and 82 to 84, inclusive, together.
As the House will be aware, the Governments issued their determination on Sinn Féin's participation in the talks last Friday. They made clear that great care was taken by the Governments in arriving at their conclusions. Against the background of the three day session of the talks in Dublin Castle last week, which allowed all parties, including Sinn Féin, the opportunity to state their views in full, the Governments wished to ensure that the fullest possible consideration was given to those views and to all the issues and factors involved. Following on this, the two Governments had been obliged, as stated in their joint press statement, to conclude that the representations under rule 29 were upheld and that Sinn Féin should not be allowed to participate in the talks. At the same time, the Governments stated that:
Subject crucially to events on the ground and to convincing demonstration in word and deed that a complete, unqualified and unequivocal IRA ceasefire is being fully and continuously observed, it is the expectation of both Governments that Sinn Féin will be able to return to the talks on 9 March. We will maintain contacts with Sinn Féin in the meantime.
The Governments acknowledged in their determination "the positive contribution that has been made to the peace process by the IRA cease-fire of August 1994 and its restoration of July 1997". They also acknowledged "the very significant and genuine efforts which have been made, and are being made, by Sinn Féin in working for peace". They made clear that they believe "Sinn Féin will continue, together with the other parties, to have an important role to play in the bringing about of a comprehensive, inclusive settlement, and that the maintenance of the IRA cessation will also be critical in that regard".
I have had copies of the conclusions of the Governments on the position of Sinn Féin in the talks laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas for further reference, together with their joint press statement. Having regard to the nature of the procedures under which the Governments have made their determination on the case of Sinn Féin, I do not propose to comment further on it in any detail.
Both Governments remain fully committed to the principle of inclusivity subject to the requirements of the Mitchell principles and we look forward to the return of Sinn Féin to the negotiations on 9 March on the basis set out in the joint determination. As the House will be aware, the UDP returned to the talks this week. There are, of course, other parties who remain outside the process of their own choosing. They know that the door remains open for them.
Like so many others, I was very disappointed that the multi-party talks session held in Dublin Castle last week, which it had been intended would focus on Strands 2 and 3, was dominated by the issue of Sinn Féin's participation in the negotiations.
That said, we have to move on. I continue to believe that there is a reasonable prospect of common ground being found to reach agreement in the weeks ahead. In this regard, I am encouraged by Senator Mitchell's remarks last week that we are now at a point where there is a reasonable basis for believing that the talks participants can reach an agreement. It is the clear will of the people that we have peace and that these talks succeed. We must — all of us, working together — do our utmost in the period ahead to make this happen. For our part, the two Governments are determined to do everything we can, working with the parties, to produce a settlement in the next six weeks.
I take this opportunity to refer to the series of bomb attacks and attempted attacks which have been carried out in recent days, including those in Moira, Portadown, Belfast and Dromad. I know the House will wish to join me in condemning those responsible and in expressing sympathy to those injured or otherwise affected. These shameful acts bear out Senator Mitchell's prediction last week that the closer we get to the end game, the greater the incidence of violence designed to undermine the negotiations. The best answer we can give to these extremists, apart from bringing them to justice, is to defy them, to bring the negotiations to a successful conclusion and to expose the extremists for what they are.
A number of talks participants, as well as Senator Mitchell, have spoken about the possible relocation of the negotiations away from the distractions of the media. This, it has been argued, would facilitate a clearer, more intensive focus on the issues. This is not an unreasonable suggestion and is worthy of serious consideration.
I had a range of discussions and contacts with the participants to the talks and the British Prime Minister in the past week. I do not propose to comment further on these contacts other than to say that I am constantly working, in whatever way I can, to promote and facilitate dialogue and agreement in the talks process.
I met last week the group known as FAIT — Families Against Intimidation and Terror. The group wished to highlight once again the importance of ending punishment attacks. As the House will be aware, I have consistently called for the ending of such attacks and I do so again on this occasion.
Is the Taoiseach aware of reported comments by Mr. Martin McGuinness in the Europa Hotel last night which implied that Sinn Féin was seeking to create new conditions for its return to the negotiating table? Will he make it clear at his meeting with Gerry Adams this evening that the basis and the parameters of the negotiations are already established and there is no question of the Mitchell principles being set aside or watered down, that everyone at the negotiating table must be there on an equal footing with regard to their exclusive commitment to the democratic process?
I am not aware of the remarks last night but I have heard some remarks in recent days. Everybody must be at the talks table on the same basis. It would be entirely unhelpful for any party, group or individual to set down preconditions because the basis of the agreement and the parameters of the negotiations have been well established and it is only within those parameters we can operate. The Mitchell principles, assigned by those who are participants, the basic structure of which we have been negotiating in one form or another, for the better part of two years, cannot be rewritten or altered by any party or group and must remain intact.
Has the Taoiseach any up to date information from the relevant security sources on responsibility for the Portadown bomb? Has he information which would exclude the possibility that IRA logistics, local personnel or IRA material might have been used in this operation?
I have no hard information at this stage. I have not had a detailed security assessment but I have had some preliminary assessments on which it would not be useful to speculate because it would add nothing to the debate.
Will the Taoiseach raise with Mr. Adams the fact that Sinn Féin declared itself unable to speak for the IRA a week ago when facing expulsion from the talks with regard to the two murders which led to its exclusion, and his most recent statement to the effect that the IRA was not involved in the more recent bombings? Does this indicate that the steps taken by both Governments in relation to the suspension of Sinn Féin was the correct one?
I hope the decision made by the Governments last week was the correct one. It was based on the security information available to us. In any decisions we make in this area we have to be extremely cautious to base them on the best assessments. We will continue to do that regardless of how unpalatable it might be for some people. I have stated on a number of occasions that the assessment of the Irish Government is that Sinn Féin and the IRA are opposite sides of the one coin. I had no reason to change that view.
Why did the council representing the Government in the public interest not seek costs in the High Court action taken by Sinn Féin, on foot of the decision of the British and Irish Government to have it expelled from the talks, given that there was manifestly no way in which an Irish court would have jurisdiction over the decisions that were inherently of a political nature in Dublin Castle?
The decision was made to withdraw the case. It was considered reasonable to sign it off on that basis.
Who considered it was reasonable, the relatively well paid lawyers or the taxpayer?
The Government was only a notice party in the case. Substantial legal fees were not incurred. When the decision to withdraw the case was taken before lunchtime last Friday costs were concluded on that basis.
Anybody who takes the State to court can have a free run as regards costs.
No. However, the Deputy will accept that, in the circumstances, the Government was anxious to move ahead and dispose of the case. We were formally committed to putting forward our determination at 2.30 p.m.
Does the Taoiseach recognise that the undemocratic exclusion of Sinn Féin from the multi-party talks has caused a widespread and justified anger, not only among the significant section of the electorate which has given this party its mandate which I represent in this House, but on a much broader scale among people throughout the country? While noting the Taoiseach's acknowledgement of Sinn Féin's significant role in the creation and pursuit of a lasting peace within the peace process in his initial response to the questions tabled, does he accept that there is an absolute determination on the part of the Sinn Féin leadership to pursue the peace process along the difficult course to its successful conclusion? Does he also accept that the responsibility for overcoming this crisis rests not only with Sinn Féin but with all parties and with both Governments?
The Governments want to achieve inclusive talks. I acknowledge the Deputy's statement that Sinn Féin wants to develop the peace process and wishes to see it move forward. While the Deputy may have a democratic mandate, we also have a democratic mandate to ensure that the Mitchell principles are adhered to. Last week the Governments considered that the Deputy's party was in breach of that mandate. That is why the determination was issued.
(Dublin West): I deplore the fact that this crucial subject has been narrowed to five minutes because of childish squabbling over the wounded vanities of party leaders. I hope there will be no repetition of it during the by-election campaigns.
Does the Taoiseach agree that extreme sectarian elements within the IRA, the UDA and the UFF who do not agree with the peace process will do anything to bring it down? Does he agree that the policy of exclusion of the UDP and Sinn Féin pursued by the Governments plays into the hands of these elements and that when all parties are back in the talks they only have to carry out another atrocity to tear the process asunder again? Is it not the case that the Governments' interpretation of the situation regarding opposition to violence is leading the process into a culde-sac?
Does the Taoiseach agree that pronouncements of a commitment to the democratic process and a renunciation of violence by leaders of parties such as Sinn Féin and the UDP should be sufficient for the talks to continue uninterrupted? Will the Taoiseach agree that in view of the lack of progress it is crucial that a people's peace process, involving the ordinary people, communities and cross community groups, be brought into the frame?
The Mitchell principles were laid down and participants to the talks signed up to them. They were clearly enunciated and all the parties in the talks understood what they meant. There is a difficulty that at times people outside the talks who want to wreck them can have an advantage. We saw that last week and we saw it in Lancaster House a few weeks ago when what should have been two important weeks spent dealing with different strands of the talks were taken up entirely by serious issues involving serious breaches, in which people were killed. We are trying to make the talks as inclusive as possible. We are trying to give a role to everyone involved. I appreciate, as I am sure do all Members and party leaders in the House, that people are trying extremely hard to convince some people in their communities who do not want to listen. We have to make every facility available to do that. That is why I argued in recent cases that the exclusion of people from the process should be for as short a time as possible, while at the same time making it clear that the integrity of the process could only be maintained as long as we saw a dramatic improvement in the period people were out of the talks. As I stated here last week, the process is based on democracy and non-violence. There is no other way to do this. Wherever we can assist people who are trying to make the process work we will do so. Where there are acts of violence we cannot do that. I hope that over the next few weeks we can continue to work on the basis of the three strands, on the basis of the work that has been done on the equality agenda, on the demilitarisation issues, on the prisoners issues and on trying to get an understanding between loyalists and Unionists and Nationalists and republicans so that we can bring forward this process. What we deeply require now is that Nationalists and republicans and loyalists and Unionists give us an opportunity and do not turn back to a small group of people who seem to be far happier shooting, bombing and maiming people than trying to allow people constructively to enter dialogue. That is what I want to put my energy into.
Will the Taoiseach agree a great part of the problem has been that the leadership in the republican and loyalists communities has failed completely to prepare supporters for the reality of compromise and for the reality that there must be a radical revision of their respective aspirations if there is to be any compromise? Will he also agree failure to do basic grass roots political preparation is probably the cause indirectly of the recrudescence of violence that has occurred? That is a political failure the Taoiseach should address specifically to Mr. Adams when he meets him this evening. Will the Taoiseach agree the continuance of punishment beatings represents the most barbaric attempt to maintain Nazi type control over particular areas by loyalists and republican terrorists and people are living in literal fear for their lives in those areas, fear of being brought before kangaroo courts and fear of being tortured and all that is happening on this island? Will he also agree the Government is right in its strong maintenance of the Mitchell principles to protect the democracy of this State against pollution by such methods?
I agree with Deputy Bruton. Like other leaders in this House, I met representatives of the group against intimidation and terror who outlined the cases that have happened. I am also aware that at least some parties in the North are trying to move people away from what is known as punishment type beatings to look at other ways of building up proper and legal community policing. I support those efforts and condemn the barbaric acts which still continue and the treatment meted out to people who are guilty of small offences——
——if they are guilty of anything.
——and should be dealt with by the authorities. They should not have to face kangaroo courts with no opportunity to make their case.
As I will be saying today and at all meetings, this House supported and argued for the Mitchell principles and there is a clear understanding of what they mean. I do not see how we can have Mitchell principles with a revolving door, so to speak, or argue that one crime does not matter but another is serious. I understand those who say it would be handy if that was possible but how could it be operated? Would one argue that the victim is only half-dead, or distinguish between a failed and a successful attempt to blow someone up? I could not make determinations on that basis. It must operate on the basis of non-violence and democracy and I cannot think of any other way of doing it.
Does the Taoiseach agree, contrary to the view of Deputy Higgins, it is essential that the Mitchell principles are applied in the same way to all organisations, particularly those which have an acknowledged association with paramilitary groups? Does he also agree that to do otherwise would strengthen the dissident elements on the loyalist and republican side of the appalling circumstances in Northern Ireland? We acknowledge that there is a struggle for supremacy in the republican movement between those who want to be engaged in this democratic negotiation process and those who feel the only way to achieve their objectives is a scorched earth policy. However, is there not a limit to the latitude which a democratic Government — either the Irish or British Government — can give in dealing with them if they are not in a position to state clearly that they have no hand, act or part in an organisation which is engaged in killing or bombing?
The Government wishes to ensure that we have inclusive discussions, that those who are included have signed up the Mitchell principles, and that we can move forward on that basis. We will endeavour to do everything we can in that regard. At the same time I acknowledge the goodwill for the talks process among the political groupings. I am realistic enough to understand — as I am sure is everyone in this House — it is not easy to convince people to move away from practices of the past and we want to be as supportive as possible of people who are trying to do so in order to build the peace process and to convince people that the correct way to argue one's case is not through the barrel of a gun or with semtex but through dialogue and negotiation. All my work is an attempt to do that in a way where we can be seen not to be walking away from people who are trying to work for peace, regardless of what side they come from.
This week marks the end of three months of difficulties. Since the beginning of December there have been a number of murders, bombs, threats and intimidation of one kind or another. We must continue to face up to that and not be intimidated. No one should lose heart and as far as I am concerned we should try even harder. The two Governments, the political parties and those who believe in democracy must see that the only alternative to a peace process, regardless of the details of a final outcome and how long it takes to negotiate a settlement, is to go back to what we have had for 30 years. We should not allow ourselves to be derailed, undermined or intimidated by the handful of people or, perhaps, a few hundred if it is stretched to the outer limit, who hold a view which opposes that of the other 5 million people on this island.
I must remind the House we have exceeded the time allowed for Taoiseach's Question Time but I will allow some brief supplementary questions.
Will the Taoiseach, on foot of his last reply, confirm that the two Governments are committed to the production of a proposed settlement by the end of the talks timetable, that is, 1 May, and that it will ultimately be put to the people on this island, North and South, for democratic resolution by way of plebiscite or referendum?
That is still my aim. I believe it is the right course of action. The two Governments must continue to drive this forward. I hope we will carry everyone with us, but if we do not we must keep going anyway.
This House speaks with one voice on punishment beatings.
Saying what?
The Taoiseach spoke in his earlier reply to me of adherence to the Mitchell principles. I reiterate here, most clearly, that Sinn Féin has at no time dishonoured its affirmation of the Mitchell principles. The Taoiseach stated that point very clearly last week when he accepted there was no evidence against this party. This is a time that demands courage and fortitude. Deputy Bruton spoke of those who live in literal fear of their lives——
The Deputy must ask his question.
Many people are in that position at the moment. What steps does the Government propose to take to restore confidence in this process, particularly among those in the Nationalist community for whom that confidence is clearly no longer present? They despair of the Government's position as representing the Nationalist view on this island. I have witnessed and have had to contend with that reality since the expulsion of my party last Friday. What steps does the Taoiseach and his Government propose to take to restore that position?
The Governments have already made that position quite clear. They have stated they will continue to work with those people in the talks who abide by the Mitchell principles of democracy and non violence to bring forward a peace settlement, which will address all aspects of the difficulties we have had on these islands over the years.
I reiterate to the Deputy that the Mitchell principles are vital to the progress we can make on this issue. I am glad to hear him reiterate that his party has signed up to the Mitchell principles. I ask him and his colleagues to do all they can to encourage those from Nationalist communities to have faith in the process, in non violence and in democracy so that we can all move together. If we can do that, we will see that the work done and decisions taken by successive Irish Governments for the Nationalist communities in recent years to build confidence, argue their case and move forward issues of policing and prisoners were right. I know the Deputy and his colleagues can have a substantial input into convincing people those are the right things to do.
(Dublin West): I do not believe that one life should have been lost or that one limb should have been harmed in the 30 years of strife in the North. However, will the Taoiseach not agree that the Governments' policy of exclusion is giving inordinate powers to a few rejectionist paramilitary elements to tear the process apart and stir up sectarianism? This tiny rejectionist element must no longer get a majority in its organisation but simply has to carry out a freelance sectarian atrocity. It has pulled the political people out of the talks and created further havoc. Can the Taoiseach not see the point I am trying to make in that regard?
The problem is that it was not a freelance operation which resulted in Sinn Féin being excluded.
Deputy Higgins should not be so naive.
The decisions last week were based on what I believe was a good assessment of the situation, without going into it here. The Governments acted on clear facts. The fact that parties are excluded from the talks for a short period is a sign of what we are trying to achieve in regard to inclusion. The fact that I offered to meet one party before and am meeting another today is a sign we are trying to make that work.
Will the Taoiseach agree the IRA has a record of operating on a disciplined basis and that operations in which it is involved have been authorised at the highest level within the IRA? Has he noted that Deputy Ó Caoláin has not questioned his statement that the IRA and Sinn Féin are two sides of the same coin? What procedure is the Taoiseach putting in place to examine any evidence which may come to hand on actual responsibility for and involvement in the Portadown bomb?
On a point of information——
I call on the Taoiseach to reply.
——this is the Taoiseach's Question Time and not Sinn Féin's question time. If that opportunity was offered I would answer all the questions——
I have called on the Taoiseach.
The Deputy has not answered any up to now.
Deputy Currie has not made a very positive contribution.
I have called on the Taoiseach.
I have no time for hypocrisy.
All the security analysis is carefully analysed and acted on whenever we have an opportunity to so do. As I stated in regard to recent events involving the IRA, the Government made its assessment based on the best security information we could obtain. I am satisfied that was as correct as it could be in these circumstances.
We must move to questions nominated for priority.