Michael Noonan
Question:4 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on recent developments in the Northern Ireland peace process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16352/01]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - Northern Ireland Issues.
Michael Noonan
Question:5 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the political parties in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16353/01]
Michael Noonan
Question:6 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent conversations with the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16354/01]
Michael Noonan
Question:7 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16355/01]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:8 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16857/01]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:9 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the proposed arrangements for talks in Northern Ireland, following the British general election, involving the political parties and the British and Irish Governments; the plans he has to participate directly in the talks; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16858/01]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:10 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach his views on the outcome of the UK general election in the context of implementation of the Good Friday Agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16859/01]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:11 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he has sent a message to the British Prime Minister following the UK general election; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16860/01]
Michael Noonan
Question:12 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the Northern Ireland First Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16937/01]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:13 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the contact he has had with the British Prime Minister since the election. [17104/01]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:14 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach his schedule for participation in talks on the peace process during the remainder of June 2001. [17105/01]
Michael Noonan
Question:15 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on recent developments in the Northern Ireland peace process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17496/01]
Michael Noonan
Question:16 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the British Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17498/01]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:17 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and conclusions reached at his meeting with a Sinn Féin delegation on 13 June 2001; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17893/01]
Michael Noonan
Question:18 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions in Dublin with a delegation from Sinn Féin on 13 June 2001; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17904/01]
Trevor Sargent
Question:19 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the implications for the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement of the outcome of the British general election. [17923/01]
Trevor Sargent
Question:20 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on meetings he has had with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, since the British general election. [17924/01]
Joe Higgins
Question:21 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his contacts with the political parties in Northern Ireland since the British general election. [17956/01]
Joe Higgins
Question:22 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his contacts with the British Prime Minister since the British general election. [17957/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 to 22, inclusive, together.
Following the results of the British general election, I wrote to the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, on Friday, 8 June and subsequently telephoned him to offer my congratulations on his victory. Subsequently, I met the Prime Minister on Thursday evening, 14 June, on the margins of the EU Council in Gothenburg where we reviewed in detail the current situation in Northern Ireland. Arising from this, we decided we would invite the three main pro-Agreement parties to meetings in London on 18 June. These meetings, which also included the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, and the Secretary of State, Mr. Reid, focused on finding a resolution to the outstanding issues in the implementation of the Agreement and we will follow up on these discussions in the days ahead.
Very difficult issues remain to be resolved. All sides need to stretch and to live up fully to their responsibilities. The Good Friday Agreement put in place a new partnership arrangement; now is the time for all sides to show the fullest solidarity with their partners.
My party fully supports the Taoiseach's efforts to find an amicable solution through negotiation to the four outstanding issues of major importance that divide parties in Northern Ireland. I reaffirm the call made by the Taoiseach that paramilitaries on both sides should move quickly towards decommissioning so that a political solution can be found in the next few weeks. Does the Taoiseach intend to proceed by way of bilateral discussions with the leaders of the main parties or will negotiations in the first instance be conducted at administrative level with a view to a plenary session of party leaders subsequently?
I thank Deputy Noonan for his support since he took over the leadership of his party. We are in a difficult situation. The discussions yesterday showed to the two Governments the level of difficulty following the election. There was a sense yesterday that we would have liked to have been able to start from the point reached on 8 March or even 2 May. However, it was clear that even that would be difficult. I detected that, following the election, people's positions on all sides have polarised. My assumption in the House some weeks ago that we would pick up matters after the election and proceed from there is wishful thinking. However, we must try to get back to that position as best we can.
I will meet the Secretary of State, Mr. Reid, tomorrow. After our meeting last night, the officials stayed on in London and they will return home tonight to brief me. We want to put together all the issues that were negotiated from 19 January to early May. I will discuss this with the Secretary of State, Mr. Reid, tomorrow. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, and the Secretary of State, Mr. Reid, will meet the other parties, including the DUP, over the next few days. I hope by Friday that, having met all the parties, the two Governments will have a good view of the position. We can then try to identify resolutions of some of the issues and ways to move things forward. That will not be easy.
Is it the Taoiseach's view that decommissioning is the lever which will unlock progress in respect of policing and the demilitarisation issue or does he envisage all issues moving in parallel without the decommissioning issue taking precedence over the others?
I have always said, because it is the way these negotiations have proceeded, particularly since 19 January, that while none of these issues is related, we need progress on all of them to satisfy everybody. Initially, bilateral discussions are probably the best way to do that. At this stage a multi-party process of talks would not prove successful and would not be a good idea.
The British Government is anxious to deal with the many questions it has to answer on policing. We had moved a long way – even if it was privately – on the demilitarisation list but there was, and is, no possibility of bringing that issue to a conclusion without a clear position on decommissioning.
The House will know my view on Mr. Trimble's position. He has been brave on these issues in recent years. His hands are tied in the absence of some stated progress on decommissioning. Without going into yesterday's comments blow by blow, I detect from what was said that he needs to see stronger action now than he did in the past. It is a difficult position.
The SDLP is adamant that policing has to be completed in line with Patten and with results on the inquiries into the Finucane, Nelson and Hamill cases. Sinn Féin's position is that it has moved in a substantial way on all these issues and other issues still have to be addressed. It wants progress on these before it goes anywhere.
As I said yesterday, progress on decommissioning would have to be very clear. A process with a vague timetable would not get us anywhere. I am confident that if we could get movement on policing, we could move on to deal with the demilitarisation issue which would help the decommissioning issue. However, I would be misleading the House if I reported that I noted any of those things yesterday because I did not.
Am I correct in inferring from the Taoiseach's comments that the progress made in negotiations at administrative and civil servant level on these four interconnected issues, contrary to expectations, has been somewhat reversed following the results of the election, that we now face a crisis because of the precarious political position of David Trimble and having seen how he was treated at his count, that David Trimble is serious about the action he says he will take at the end of this month and, therefore, that of the four interrelated issues, tangible movement on decommissioning is urgent not just for David Trimble but for the entire peace process?
Does the Taoiseach share my view that if councillor Martin Ferris thinks Prime Minister Blair should face down his generals to remove the apparatus of war from this country that Gerry Adams, the president of Sinn Féin, should likewise face down his generals to remove the apparatus of war from this country to enable some process of decommissioning to commence?
Including Mr. Ferris.
Deputy Quinn is correct in both questions. In answer to his first question, there is quite clearly a rolling back not just in the work at official level but also in our own work due to the election situation and the opinions people have as a result of the election. The ground has tightened up for most if not all of the parties.
The SDLP have been the most consistent always. They put an enormous effort into the policing issue. They welcomed the Patten Report with as much enthusiasm as did the Irish Government. They worked their way through the legislation, putting down hundreds of amendments which they debated and argued. They did not achieve all they wished but they certainly improved the legislation and have continued to press for more improvements. They supported the Patten Report, played their part in Patten and have given their support for its implementation. I will support their position on the Patten Report.
The inquiries are a difficult issue and the trouble is there is more than one inquiry, SDLP inquiries and those on the Unionist side. Whenever there is a perceived veto or threat that is when you get least from Sinn Féin. That dilemma exists. Whatever the rights and wrongs, Mr. Trimble feels that he had to take that action in order to safeguard his own electoral position. A party leader has to take those types of decisions. It does not help the situation and I do not see any way out of it as far as he is concerned. He has indicated his position and his party's position and he has to face a party conference this weekend.
Those who gained in the election were Sinn Féin and while we all have a role to play, they have the only role when it comes to decommissioning. If they were to help on decommissioning I could certainly mediate with the British Government in order to press for demilitarisation. It would greatly strengthen my hand also on the policing issue. The issues are not necessarily related but if nobody is prepared to move, then it is much more difficult to encourage the British Government to move on policing, on demilitarisation, and to encourage David Trimble to stay on. If nobody moves, then quite frankly, there is no point in negotiations because there will be nothing to negotiate. I appreciate the support of the House in this dilemma. I appeal to people to look at the situation. In terms of the recent election, the pro-Agreement side won, the advantages of devolution won. Northern Ireland is doing better now with less crime even though there still is some violence, the economy and the tourism industry are doing well and there is more investment. We are now facing the threat of all this being undone by Saturday week. That is the dilemma. I heard people yesterday saying that they could do nothing to help. Neither can I. I have no guns to decommission. I cannot demilitarise. I do not control the policing Bill but I know what will resolve it. If the people who have been through the elections are not prepared to do anything, then we are all wasting our time. That would be entirely unfair to the people of Northern Ireland, if not totally irresponsible. I hope people will reflect on what we are all saying. I am ready to play a part and do everything possible and I appreciate the support given by the House. Valuable time is being lost as people just sit around.
Could I ask the Taoiseach if the army council of the IRA were to issue a dump arms directive in line with historic precedent, would that be considered helpful?
There are many ways. If decommissioning of arms was to equal surrender we would not ever see it. There are many ways of dealing with this issue such as the international commission on decommissioning, the legislation that both Governments passed and other modalities that have been debated. I did not ask anyone to adopt any agenda that has anything to do with surrender and I do not think anyone else has either, but if we could find either the historic precedent or some other way – I do not want to speculate but ways have been speculated outside of the House – it would help. Then we could make more progress. My concern and worry is that if everybody says "that is not for us, we do not have to do this" then we will not go anywhere. Whatever the wrongs and rights before the election everybody said it would come down to resolving four issues. Those issues include the stability of the institutions. I know Sinn Féin feels very strongly about those and that its two Ministers, Ms Bairbre de Brún and Mr. Martin McGuinness, have not been able to do their jobs in a complete way since the end of March. That is not satisfactory. Sinn Féin also believes it has done quite an amount on the arms issue by way of inspections. There is no doubt about that having been helpful but it is not enough. The SDLP has suffered a great deal over its position on a number of fronts and its wants progress on its agenda. Its agenda has only two issues – policing and the inquiries. The UUP requires the completion of the decommissioning issue and an end to violence. It would say that because decommissioning of arms has not been completed there is still violence. People have been killed and there are robberies and other incidents. It wants to see an end to that violence from wherever it comes and Sinn Féin wants to see the full implementation of the Agreement. I want to see the full implementation of the Agreement. Both Governments want it and everybody in the House wants to see it. Some 77% of the people in the North said they wanted full implementation of the Agreement in the election campaign. The point I am making is that if we want full implementation of the Agreement we have to have real negotiations in a sincere way where everybody tries to move as far as they can on all of the issues, and particularly the issues on which they have given a commitment.
Will the Taoiseach agree there is provision in the decommissioning regulations for the paramilitary organisations to get rid of their own weaponry under the supervision of the international commission and that the question of sur render does not arise? Will he agree that stripped of the smokescreens, the word spinning and everything else, the brutal fact is that unless there is clear progress on decommissioning the peace process is in serious difficulty? The main responsibility is on the republican movement to make that move which, if not satisfactory to David Trimble at least will be a clear move towards the commitments given by the republican movement. Will the Taoiseach agree given the evidence that sectarian tension and hatred are rising again to frightful proportions in Northern Ireland as illustrated recently by what has been happening in Larne and in other places, that this is a good reason anyone who purports to be in favour of the peace process should do whatever is necessary to guarantee its success?
On the one hand the guns being silent, the international inspections and the contact with the de Chastelain Commission are all helpful but they are not enough. On the other hand, at this time of the year the violence graph goes almost straight up. That is the dilemma around the commencement of the marching season. Clearly, anything that feeds into that is unhelpful. I know that Nationalist and republican homes have been attacked this weekend and there have been issues on the other side as well. Everybody suffers once these strains are there and that has happened in each of the last six or seven years.
As always, I was at pains yesterday to stress that everybody appreciates the guns are silent. People also appreciate the inspectors' report and the contact with General de Chastelain, but that will not be enough to resolve the problem. I hope that we can still work on the position as per 6 May 2000. Following statements by the Government the previous day that I am committed to, there was agreement with the republican movement on that day to work to putting the arms beyond use in a verifiable way under General de Chastelain's commission and this should be done in a way that would give satisfaction to the public at large. They were not my words but those of the republican movement. We still have to get back to try to achieve that.
There are four major issues, which are not related, but all will need to make substantive progress, otherwise in ten days time we will be in an intolerable position and then it will take an endless period of time to try to recover. I will not have another opportunity to take Question Time on Northern Ireland before the negotiations so I want to make clear the Government's understanding. There is no magic trick the governments can do or if there is I am not privy to it; it is not in the Irish Government's hands. If there is not a move things will go down on Saturday week. The First Minister would resign, the Deputy First Minister would have a decision to make and I think would probably resign. Then there would be a six week period of stalemate during the worst time of the year in the North following which the Secretary of State, Mr. John Reid, would have to make a decision on an autumn election. People would go into an election and have to take up positions and there would be more polarisation and intransigence. It is hard to imagine the difficulty of trying to bring it back together again. Quite frankly, I do not think it is possible. The alternative is to sit down for ten days and spend as many hours as necessary to try to resolve it. That is the dilemma and in my view there is only one sensible way to do it.
Can I take it from the Taoiseach's comments that in the very short space of time that is left, the key issue is that of decommissioning? He, along with many others in this House, has clearly said to people who profess to be republicans, that nobody has been asked to surrender arms or concede defeat, but merely to put arms beyond use. They do not even need to put all arms beyond use, but to make some tangible concrete response to the political stalemate. I think the Taoiseach shares that analysis and if it is correct, can it be construed, in his opinion, that the decision of the army council, which is an integral part of the leadership of Sinn Féin, not to make some tangible concrete progress on decommissioning is not a military strategic decision but inherently a political one, the consequences of which would be to lead to the vista that he outlined in his reply where there would be a Northern Ireland Assembly election later this year with a much more polarised community than we have at the moment? Does the Taoiseach agree with that analysis?
That is one of the issues, but there are four issues.
Movement on one will create movement on the others.
I agree with Deputy Quinn that if we do not get any progress on decommissioning, I cannot see us being able to get progress on other issues. I stress that it is not anything to do with surrender. Deputy Currie asked me if it was my view that there are many ways of doing this; there are several.
Everybody would be helpful in trying to construct a way which could not be interpreted as having anything to do with surrender, which will never happen and which would not resolve the situation anyhow. We certainly need progress on that issue. We are simply trying to implement what was agreed on 6 May last year. If we can get help in progressing that issue, the Irish Government's position is that we will do everything we can to get the policing arrangements right. We will never resolve matters in Northern Ireland unless we get a police force that is acceptable and respected in every way across all sections of the community. We know what we have to achieve in this regard and we also have to deal with the issue of demilitarisation. We cannot get progress on one issue without progress on the other. It is not realistic to expect to make progress on a number of areas and simply hope that the rest will fall into place. If people were prepared to move, it should not require a great deal of negotiation. We have already talked this issue to death and unless we can soon get some movement on it, the danger is that the whole process will be talked to death.
I have some other questions but it would probably be unhelpful to put them. I simply want to reconfirm what I said at the outset. The Taoiseach has our full support for his negotiating position and if there is anything practical we can do either publicly or privately to assist, we will do so.
(Mayo): Is it not a fact that all Sinn Féin is being asked to do is to honour a very clear and unequivocal undertaking which it gave a long time ago that there would be disarmament by a certain date? That is really all that has been asked. As Deputy Quinn has said, we are not talking of surrender, but rather a token whereby a small quantity of arms would be put beyond use. That symbolic gesture would have a dramatic effect in relation to reversing events which we hope will not happen in ten days time.
In reply to Deputy Noonan and Deputy Quinn, the current indications are that this situation will go on until the middle of next week and it would be useful if I could brief the party leaders at that stage. We need to focus on the full implementation of the Agreement. We know the areas which are holding up matters and the areas on which people can help to make progress, in the context of full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement.
The current phase of discussions on the outstanding issues has continued from 19 January to 2 May. The situation now needs to be progressed further, as everybody had agreed to do. We always had a deadline of Drumcree Sunday, to which I have referred many times in the House and nothing which has happened in the election has changed that. I am aware of the date which Mr. Trimble has mentioned and that happens to coincide with Drumcree Sunday. Some people may not like deadlines but the reality is that if we are to complete what we have been trying to do in terms of the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, we have an opportunity to do it over the next ten days.