Trevor Sargent
Question:1 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach his views on whether it would be worthwhile to set up a civic forum with terms of reference comparable to those of the Northern body. [22085/00]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - Civic Forum.
John Bruton
Question:2 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the plans he has to set up a civic forum with similar terms of reference to the body proposed under the Good Friday Agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24219/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
I have no plans to set up a forum comparable to the civic forum in Northern Ireland. As the Deputy is aware, both the National Economic and Social Council and the National Economic and Social Forum are already in place here to advise on economic and social matters. Both of these bodies are closely linked to the social partnership process and include social partnership representation. The NESF, in particular, has a very wide and representative membership of more than 60 people representing all areas of the community and is designed to help achieve a shared understanding and to build consensus on social and economic issues.
Does the Taoiseach agree it is vital the impression that the Government in the South has one law for Unionism and another law for itself be removed, whether we are talking about the killers of Garda McCabe or policing reform? Does the Taoiseach welcome, for example, Garda Commissioner Byrne's statement that he would not have any problems with reforms which would see independent Garda investigations being carried out in this jurisdiction? Does the Taoiseach acknowledge that the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation sub-committee on obstacles to peace in the South, which is currently in abeyance, could provide a very useful vehicle through which the issue of the establishment of a civic forum in the South could be examined? The sub-committee has unfinished business and such an examination would not place a huge additional burden on the structures of the State. Will the Taoiseach acknowledge that there would be merit in trying to mirror developments in the North with similar developments here which would comply with the parity of esteem principle which the civic forum would represent?
The Deputy asked four questions, the first of which is not relevant to this issue. However, I welcome the Garda Commissioner's remarks. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has acknowledged that independent investigations would be useful and the Government is prepared to consider the matter.
A number of groups have suggested that the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation should be reconvened in some format to carry out some of the work envisaged for a civic forum. If one compares the civic forum in the North with the fora we have here, the differences are few. Our fora do not include churches in the strict sense but CORI is the representative body in this area. The issue of victims is the only issue which is not covered by our bodies. Various groups have pointed out that the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation could perhaps examine this matter. I have not entered into any discussions on the matter but I have been asked to consider it although I have not yet said "yes" or "no".
In terms of the North-South consultative forum which stems from the Good Friday Agreement, it is envisaged that consideration should be given to the establishment of an independent consultative forum which would be appointed by the two Administrations. The forum, which would be representative of civic society, would comprise social partners and people with expertise on social, cultural, economic and other issues. The Programme for Prosperity and Fairness also contains a commitment that the Government will work towards agreement with the Northern side on the establishment and effective functioning of an independent North-South consultative forum.
At the second plenary meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council which was held some weeks ago, it was unanimously agreed to initiate a study on the establishment of a consultative forum which would be appointed by the two Administrations. It was agreed that a working group of officials from both Administrations and from the North-South Ministerial Council joint secretariat would be established to examine the matter and report on it to the next meeting which is scheduled for March. The Northern Ireland Civic Forum which was established in recent weeks has stated its willingness to work with that body on this issue.
Deputy Quinn was probably the first person to put the idea into my head that it would be easier and more efficient to add on to the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body rather than set up an entirely new structure. We did that but the Unionists were the only people who failed to attend the body's recent meeting. Neither were the Unionists prepared to participate in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. We cannot be accused of not being helpful but we will do all we can to overcome the difficulties which exist.
Mr. Hayes
Does the Taoiseach agree that the achievement of the twin objectives of peace and reconciliation and the cementing of the peace which has been established since the negotiation and endorsement of the Good Friday Agreement requires more than the order of Government and politics but also requires the concentrated effort and work of civic society? Does he agree that the establishment of a civic forum in the Republic, working in conjunction with the civic forum in Northern Ireland, would greatly help strengthen the work of peace and reconciliation in society?
What is the Taoiseach's view on the establishment of a specific course on peace studies in our curriculum, which would examine the variety of traditions and cultures on the island? What is his view and what action has the Government taken on setting up the new parliamentary tier envis aged in the Agreement between the Oireachtas and the Northern Ireland Assembly?
In my reply I said I thought the idea of a civic forum is very good. We effectively have such a forum, except for the area I mentioned. In the North there is no body. We have representatives of the Oireachtas, all parties, the social pillars, business, trade unions, farming, NGOs, and a range of organisations from the fourth pillar.
Their focus is entirely different.
Their focus is not entirely different. Many of the reports carried out by the NESF, for example, examine specific measures and programmes to achieve equality and social inclusion and it considers expert reports put forward by all the relevant Departments and agencies. The civic forum in the North examines equality, opportunity, openness—
These words have a different meanings in practice in the South and in the North.
They do not have a different meaning. In my efforts to encourage people in the North in terms of their civic forum, the meanings are precisely the same. That is why the forum in the North has representatives of business, agriculture, fishing, trade unions, voluntary, community and church groups and representatives of the arts, the same areas as here. We are trying to get away from having different meanings and move towards having the same understanding.
Some of our third level institutions, not to mind Glencree, have looked at this and have already done useful work over the years in very difficult times which everybody commends. While they should continue this work, the Deputy is suggesting there should be peace chairs in the third level institutions.
Mr. Hayes
At all tiers of education.
Perhaps. Certainly it should form part of the civics course in schools. George Mitchell suggested a chair of peace studies, and I am supportive of that. Some graduates under the George Mitchell scholarships are involved in peace and reconciliation work and perhaps that will be extended. There is no chair of peace studies in the third level institutions.
Regarding the parliamentary tier, I answered that question last week. We moved to set up the British Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body to include the Council of the Isles with our colleagues from the other devolved Administrations in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It has to be more formalised. Since answering Deputy Quinn's question last week I have asked the co-chairs if they will finalise the formal arrangements before their next meeting.
A number of matters arise from the Taoiseach's replies. I welcome Commissioner Byrne's support for an independent complaints procedure based on the Patten report, and his endorsement of the Labour Party's policy published last Thursday. Is it the intention of the Government to bring forward legislation in the near future to establish such an independent body in view of the dissatisfaction which members of the public have with the current system?
On foot of the points made by Deputies Sargent and Hayes, does the Taoiseach agree it would be worth while to formally ask the chairperson of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation if in her view there is merit in that body completing the reports, which were at a penultimate stage, in relation to barriers to reconciliation, even though there is no formal Unionist representation on that body? In the light of the current situation it would be useful and I ask the Taoiseach to communicate formally with the chairperson to ask her opinion as to whether there is a willingness to complete that task and publish the report.
Hopefully, the co-chairs of the British Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body will agree to the fusion of their body with the Council of the Isles and not have a parallel organisation. There is neither the time nor the resources in absolute terms to have two parallel bodies. Of the two, would the Taoiseach consider that the Council of the Isles, involving parliamentarians from Edinburgh, Cardiff, the Isle of Man, Stormont, Westminster and Leinster House is of infinitely greater value than a body confined to Westminster and Leinster House?
I welcomed the comments of Commissioner Byrne, which were helpful. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has said the Government will examine it to see how that can be done. A reference has been made to the fact that it should be examined in the context of the Garda Síochána legislation, but no decision has been made on that yet.
A number of times over the past 18 months I referred to the chairperson of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation on this matter and will do so again. I would like to see the work completed and I have continued to carry it forward in our subheads on that basis. The difficulties on the last occasion related not necessarily to parties but to other pressures and issues. I will raise the matter again.
I wish to reiterate that at its September meeting the British Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body invited the other parliamentary bodies and devolved Assemblies to become members, although not full members. They had observer status and were allowed to be involved in the debate and make presentations. When I attended they were involved in the question and answer session, but they were not present in a formal sense. The Unionists did not attend, something I hope we can overcome, but other than that it worked very well. The members were anxious to participate and were interested.
I agree that they should become formal members and that another secretariat and structure ought not to be envisaged. From talking to the two co-chairs in preparation from that meeting their view was that this was a wise way of proceeding and that if the parliamentarians from Westminster and the Oireachtas agreed they would not have a difficulty with it. My understanding is that the meeting that weekend went very well. I have asked them to put the formal mechanisms in place.
I welcome the fact that the Taoiseach has said he is considering the request to reconvene – as I understand from his reply – the sub-committee of the forum for peace and reconciliation dealing with obstacles to peace in the South. Does he agree it would be of considerable interest to Unionists if that body were reconvened to finish its work and to consider the establishment, if appropriate, of a civic forum in the South? Will he acknowledge that many Unionists did partake in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation at the time and their presence and contribution should be acknowledged? It included people such as Gordon Wilson and many individual Unionists. There could be a misunderstanding if their contribution was not acknowledged here today. Given that there are such differences between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael in relation to the civic forum idea in the South, does the Taoiseach agree it should be left for consideration in the interim to the forum sub-committee to deal with the issues, and the various interpretations of those issues, so that its recommendations can, at least, form the basis of a civic response to the issue rather than it being decided by parliamentarians?
I do not think there is any great difference, but I want to make two replies. Many groups from Northern Ireland attended those Friday meetings and made many useful contributions to the deliberations of the forum. Of course I recognise that. When I say Unionists, I am talking about the leadership and their representatives. I should say, not in any sense of argument but to give a factual response, the Unionists political leadership did not wish to take part in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. It has not yet indicated its desire to take its place on the British-Irish Parliamentary Body or on the reform basis, as Deputy Quinn put it today. Without going into the details – I ask the Deputy not to ask me to go into them – I would have moved much further at the last session of the Ministerial Council, where I outlined what I was prepared to do, except for one group.
Does the Taoiseach agree that sectarianism is alive and well on this island and that we need to confront it at the earliest possible age? In particular, as Deputy Hayes suggested, we need to confront young people at primary and second level with the existence of another tradition on this island. People of a Nationalist tradition, to which the overwhelming majority of people on this side of the Border belong, should be confronted at an early age with the existence of another tradition. These different preconceptions about sovereignty and different views of history would help people understand there are two legitimate points of view. Does the Taoiseach agree that is necessary? Does he further agree that the good work done, particularly by a former Minister for Education, Padraig Faulkner, in reforming the history curriculum is unfortunately being set at naught by the fact that so few students are studying history. Many young people can go through the education system with very little understanding of the fact that there are two points of view about history on this island. If we are to have genuine reconciliation of hearts and minds we must understand the other tradition. Despite all the structures being created for politicians to meet other politicians, we are not changing attitudes sufficiently at grassroots level and that has to start at the earliest possible age.
The point about the education system is way outside the questions I am answering. On the broad question of reconciliation, this is a good place for politicians to start. The problem for many years was that there was no contact whatsoever. We went through two periods of almost 30 years with just the Lemass-O'Neill talks. There was practically no communication or intervention. Of all the business, farming and other bodies, trade unions probably have the best record on the island of working together down through the decades. The Congress of Trade Unions is an all-Ireland body. Even many of the sport and cultural bodies were divided but there are many all-Ireland bodies. That can be built up at every level. If it can be done in the education—
What about the question I asked?
To be honest, I do not think it has much relevance to where we are at this stage. If the question relates to whether the curriculum review body should look within the education system, that is a matter for the curriculum review body. Given that all young people are taught civics in school, the issue of reconciliation should be included. If I can give a purely personal view on history, I would not necessarily agree with Deputy Bruton' view. The difficulty is not that they believe there is an "us" or "them", they do not have any view on history. They do not consider that history is a great issue and it is not being taken up as a subject in school like years ago when people had a strong view one way or the other. History is not a major subject for students in either primary or second level schools. If they had more knowledge of a balanced history, rather than little or no history, we would be better off.
I agree.
When one has a view, at least it is something.
It is a question of more reconciliation, starting younger and trying to get people to communicate and link together, the twinning of towns and children visiting other communities. I hate the term "the other side" but, unfortunately, that is what it means. I am in favour of people intertwining their activities and I spend quite some time, as do other politicians here, with many of the encounter groups, the across the frontier groups, the across the Border groups and the integrated education groups. I had a long discussion with Mo Mowlam recently about integrated education reviews on these issues and other bodies. All of this is useful.
Does the Taoiseach agree that unless young people are given an understanding of the traditions and belief structures of the other community, they will not have an intellectual structure into which to fit the good experiences they may have on trips they make north of the Border? Therefore, it is very important to introduce, at primary and second level, a module of peace studies in an Irish context, dealing with peace between Unionism and Nationalism, understanding by Nationalists of Unionism and understanding by Unionists of Nationalism. Does the Taoiseach agree that is of primordial importance so far as advancing this issue is concerned at grassroots level and it is not something to be put in second place to contacts between politicians? Politicians can go only as far as their constituents will allow them. If the next generation of constituents of politicians on both sides of the Border are not being educated to have respect for the other tradition, we are building on sand. I ask the Taoiseach to reconsider his less than vigorous acceptance of the proposition I make to him, that we need to do something about this urgently at primary and second level.
I do not accept that. Deputy Bruton is answering my question by trying to put it another way, as if I am disagreeing. That is entirely unhelpful. I am not answering a question here about the curriculum report on what should be taught in primary schools. If that kind of co-operation and reconciliation is not built into the education system, the matter should be examined by those who design curriculum reforms and we should not give an off the top of the head reply to an off the top of the head comment. I am in favour of anything that will help to bring about reconciliation. Many organisations are working extremely hard on this but the Glencree group has done an enormous amount of work over many years. It has done a great deal of research on the projects which have been in place since the 1970s. Work was also carried out by the Irish Congress of Trades Unions in the mid-1970s when people worked, trained and were educated together. Many resources are being put into these projects but we should ask the curriculum formation groups North and South to look at the education aspects.
Mr. Hayes
Will the Taoiseach accept that there should be political responsibility for this issue. Politicians believe that not enough people from the North of Ireland visit the South of Ireland and vice versa and that something must be done about this. Will he accept that it should be the responsibility of the Government to put in place structured funding for outside peace organisations engaged in this work? Will he accept there is a responsibility on the Government to change the curriculum so that peace studies can be part of the national curriculum and that people understand the importance of reconciliation, not just an agreement between politicians but something which is practical and beneficial for our entire society? The Governments must take a lead in this area. Will the Taoiseach confirm to the House that the amount of Government funding over the past ten years in the area of peace and reconciliation is minuscule by comparison to the amount of money spent by the British Government per head of population?
Many organisations and groups continue to receive funding. Perhaps it is not sufficient, but over the past 30 years this State has been very helpful to many groups and to young people who have come to this city since the troubles began in 1969. I am not saying this is sufficient, but we have been helpful.
People have strong views on many issues, including integrated education, which is not a simple issue. Together with the Catholic church, I was involved recently in extensive discussions on the anti-discrimination and equality legislation with other minority churches, including the Methodist church, Presbyterian church and the Church of Ireland. The involvement of these churches with their communities is very important to them, and rightly so. This is very important in Northern Ireland if we are to make progress in reconciliation. This must be done in an inclusive manner, otherwise we will not achieve what is required. While violence was taking place, we were not prepared to engage in these issues. However, there is more openness now. The Government is prepared to support organisations involved in this work. It is not true that they have not been assisted in the past and we will continue to help them in the future.
May I have a written reply to Question No. 15 which we will not reach today?
While joining other Deputies in welcoming the comments of the Garda Commissioner in relation to investigations, does the Taoiseach see a role for the civic fora in encouraging exchanges of police management and policemen, not just between the Garda Síochána and the Police Service of Northern Ireland when it is in place, but between police forces within these islands? There are many common problems, including xenophobia, racism and drugs problems in inner cities about which we could learn from each other, both on a management and patrolling level. Would the Taoiseach consider such exchanges between police forces within these islands useful, given that we already send gardaí to Amsterdam where they play a very useful role?
Yes, that is already happening. Members of the Garda Síochána at different levels take part in training courses in the United Kingdom. Members of the RUC come to Templemore. RUC officers who did a good job in Kosovo were trained in Templemore. Given the experience of the RUC in relation to aspects of crime, including smuggling and gangsterism in Border areas, there is close co-operation between Sir Ronnie Flanagan and Commissioner Pat Byrne in this regard. Members of the Garda have studied inner city crime in college in the United States for many years.
Does the Taoiseach envisage a superintendent from the London Metropolitan Police being seconded to Dublin and vice versa? Does he envisage the same thing happening North and South on this island at patrolling level in terms of exchanging expertise and learning from each other?
I envisage that the new police structures in Northern Ireland will allow for this. Commissioner Byrne and other senior members of the Garda have said they would not have any difficulty having closer co-operation with the police service of Northern Ireland. That would be a good thing. When all the differences are removed, crimes relating to drugs and other criminal activities will not be resolved unless the police forces work closely together.
On a point of order, Deputy Mitchell suggested that Question No. 15 may be replied to by way of written reply. My Question No. 16 relates to the same issue and I would like my question to remain on the Order Paper so that I can have an opportunity to ask supplementary questions.
I did not realise that, therefore, my question may also remain on the Order Paper.
The fact that Deputy Mitchell may receive a written reply will not affect Deputy Quinn's reply.