Ruairí Quinn
Question:1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting on 27 May 2002 with the First Minister and Deputy First Minister for Northern Ireland. [13111/02]
Ceisteanna – Questions. - Northern Ireland Issues.
Ruairí Quinn
Question:2 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the meetings he has had with representatives of political par ties from Northern Ireland since 24 April 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13112/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:3 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he last met with the British Prime Minister to discuss Northern Ireland; when he plans to next meet him; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13113/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:4 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of the British-Irish Council Summit in Jersey on 14 June 2002. [13114/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:5 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he expects to receive the report of Mr. Justice Barron on the Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk bombings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13125/02]
Trevor Sargent
Question:6 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on recent developments in the Northern Ireland peace process. [13134/02]
Trevor Sargent
Question:7 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to go to the United States; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13135/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:8 Mr. Kenny 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. [13140/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:9 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet with the Northern Ireland First Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13141/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:10 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13142/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:11 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet with the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13143/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:12 Mr. Kenny 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. [13144/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:13 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he expects the Commission of Inquiry into the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings to complete its work; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13154/02]
Joe Higgins
Question:14 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the parties in Northern Ireland. [13422/02]
Joe Higgins
Question:15 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet with the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13423/02]
Joe Higgins
Question:16 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet with the President of the United States of America; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13424/02]
Joe Higgins
Question:17 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the British Government. [13425/02]
Joe Higgins
Question:18 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the US Administration. [13426/02]
Joe Higgins
Question:19 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach the progress made to date by the Commission of Inquiry into the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13429/02]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:20 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the discussions he has had in relation to the peace process; his contacts with the British Prime Minister and with the political parties; if an early summit with the British Prime Minister is planned; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13731/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 20, inclusive, together.
The British-Irish Council established under the British-Irish Agreement held its third summit meeting in Jersey on Friday, 14 June. The meeting was chaired by Senator Pierre Horsfall, president of the States of Jersey Policy and Resources Committee. I was accompanied by the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Harney, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, and the Government Chief Whip, Deputy Hanafin. The meeting was also attended by Prime Minister Tony Blair and representatives from Scotland, Wales, the Isle of Man and Guernsey. Mr. David Trimble, First Minister, and Mark Durkan, Deputy First Minister, represented the Northern Ireland Executive.
The main focus of the meeting was a discussion on the knowledge economy, on which Jersey is the lead administration, and plans for taking forward co-operation in this area within the British-Irish Council. The meeting highlighted the range of work being done in this important area and agreed that future work in the sector will include specific projects to address the issue of the digital divide – projects such as disabled access to ICT facilities and e-government. A group of knowledge economy officials from all administrations has been established to take this forward. Members also agreed to work together on the identification and development of pilot programmes for specific issues.
Following the discussion on the knowledge economy, the council was updated by the relevant lead administrations on work being undertaken in the other council sectoral areas including drugs, on which Ireland has the lead, the environment, social inclusion, transport, health and tourism. Following the summit meeting the British-Irish Council website was launched by Senator Horsfall.
The next summit meeting of the British-Irish Council will be hosted by Scotland in November 2002 and that meeting will focus on the issue of social inclusion. The work we undertook in Jersey as well as the programme of work envisaged for the future are ample demonstrations that the council has an important role to play in developing relations between these islands and in addressing issues of common concern and interest to our peoples.
Before the council meeting, I had a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Blair. We discussed, in particular, concerns about the peace process and the continuing disturbances in north and east Belfast. The situation in Belfast was also a particular focus of my meetings with First Minister David Trimble and Deputy First Minister Mark Durkan when I met them on 27 May and at my meeting with US Ambassador Haass on 11 June. The Government continues to maintain active contact on an ongoing basis with other Northern Ireland political parties.
The British-Irish Agreement is the best hope for the future of Northern Ireland and it is important now for both Governments and the pro-Agreement parties to ensure that the Agreement is sustained. I look forward to a further meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council later this month. This will be the council's fourth plenary meeting and will allow the Government and the Executive to review progress in a number of cross-Border areas. The two Governments have also agreed to host a meeting in the near future of representatives of the pro-Agreement parties to ensure that momentum and confidence in the process is maintained and strengthened.
Regrettably, the situation at interface areas in north and east Belfast over the past number of months has led to violence and increased tension between communities. This violence is also occurring in some of the most deprived areas in Northern Ireland. The situation demands real political and community leadership. It is vital that there is effective policing to ensure that the PSNI attracts the support and confidence of all sections of the community as it seeks to discharge its duties. I am concerned that, if allowed to continue, the violence and disturbances will inevitably increase divisions between communities even further and frustrate and debilitate the wider effort to bring stability and normality to Northern Ireland.
In the course of my meeting with Prime Minister Blair, I again raised with him the importance of the British authorities providing material relevant to the Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk bombings inquiry requested by Mr. Justice Barron. I understand that Mr. Justice Barron intends to submit his report on the bombings in the autumn.
On Tuesday, 11 June, I met with former Canadian Supreme Court Judge, Mr. Peter Cory. Judge Cory has been appointed by the two Governments to examine the cases of the murders of Pat Finucane, Robert Hamill, Rosemary Nelson, Chief Superintendent Harry Breen, Superintendent Bob Buchanan, Lord Justice and Lady Gibson and Billy Wright. I thanked Judge Cory for agreeing to take on this important work which he is anxious to begin and intends to carry out as quickly as possible.
I expect to meet with Prime Minister Blair again during the EU Council in Seville on 20-21 June. I have no immediate plans to visit the United States.
I thank the Taoiseach for his comprehensive reply to the 20 questions grouped together. Will the Taoiseach summarise what his new Government intends to do to maintain the momentum within the peace process and the British-Irish Agreement? In particular, what steps has he taken, together with the British Government, the Prime Minister and the Northern Ireland Executive, to deal with the continuing sectarian divide that has spilled over into communal violence in Belfast? Will the Taoiseach outline what proposals he has, as one of the major co-signatories of the British-Irish Agreement, to restore a sense of commitment to the benefits which were supposed to flow from that agreement?
We have, through the North-South Ministerial Councils and in direct meetings with the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, looked at the main sectoral parts of the Agreement to see what progress has been made and what progress is necessary. There is ongoing progress in most of these areas, which are working well, but in others there is not as much progress as we would like and we will try to come to an agreement over the next 12 months or sooner on the action we need to take and the targets that need to be met in those particular areas. We have gone through the Agreement and I am glad to report to the House that progress is ongoing in most areas. The work within the Executive, with which we are not directly involved, is progressing and initiatives like the regeneration programme, which were launched some weeks ago, are designed to help target the areas of most disadvantage. Work in the North-South bodies, which slowed down for a while during the election here, has resumed and a range of meetings will be held before the summer break.
On the difficulties at the interface areas, our people in the Secretariat have remained involved and closely in touch with the parties. I have personally had a number of meetings and the Minister for Foreign Affairs or officials have remained closely involved with the parties I have not met. Arguments can be made about who is to blame for what happened in various areas and the actions of the Police Service of Northern Ireland in different circumstances, and we can go through them one by one if necessary, but there is active engagement in communities across the divide to try to de-escalate some of these tensions.
The new term being used in relation to some of the protests in Northern Ireland is "recreational rioting". I do not like the term because "recreational rioting" can easily move on to other rioting but for what it is worth, a distinction is being drawn between recreational rioting and more serious rioting. My own view is that it all has to be taken together and an effort made to encourage real liaison between the communities in whatever way possible. We have seen what happened in Ardoyne and in some areas where that has been facilitated by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, and good progress has been made in that area. Last week the Minister, Martin McGuinness, offered the view that his colleagues would engage directly with loyalist leaders in other areas and the Loyalist Commission has issued its petition. If direct dialogue could be built up in these areas, there would be far less hassle this summer. Our part in that is to directly assist the sides in getting into that type of dialogue and we can play a useful role in encouraging them to do that.
The other specific point I would like to mention concerns the Police Service of Northern Ireland which has done a very good job in some areas but has been highly criticised in others. We have been endeavouring, through Ambassador Haass, the Secretary of State, Dr. John Reid, and directly through Prime Minister Blair and others, to indicate in a fair way how the concerns expressed to us can be addressed on the ground and the new Chief Constable, Mr. Orde, can help in that regard.
I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. Has he been made aware of the reports and comments by various politicians, including the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Dr. John Reid, that following the completion of the Good Friday Agreement and its ratification over the past number of years there is a sense that some sections of the loyalist community believe they are continuing to lose out and that their support for the Agreement has been diminished and is continuing to fall? Does the Taoiseach share that analysis, which is in part an explanation for the reaction of some sections of the loyalist community in the inter-communal areas of Belfast to which he refers? Does he agree with the analysis that in some way the Unionist-loyalist community feels under threat as a result of the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement? What steps, if any, does he see the Government taking to reassure that section of the island's population that its place is secure and that the parity of esteem, to which the Agreement refers, will extend to all sections of the people?
We are constantly being told that support for the Agreement is being eroded, but I believe, from all the many meetings I have had in recent weeks, that underlying support for it and what we have been trying to achieve through it remains fundamentally sound. Difficulties have been highlighted and there may be a sense among considerable sections of the Unionist and loyalist community that they are losing out. However, reports of discussions with them indicate that they accept that an enormous amount is being achieved and, while there is some violence, it is sporadic and a level of reconstruction, regeneration and improvement with a positive approach is also present. The job of both Governments is to continue to give confidence and support in practical ways. I accept that there are some elements within the Unionist-loyalist community which have the view that things are not as good for them. I equally accept that the people of the Short Strand, who have seen their community dwindle considerably because of the difficulties over years, also feel that they are under huge threat. Such feelings are not mutually exclusive.
The key issue is that we must maintain momentum in the process and do all we can by working closely with the pro-Agreement parties and other parties where possible to ensure that the implementation is fair and to the letter of the Agreement. There should be no advantage for one side over the other; it should be done fairly. Parity of esteem, equality and equity are all fundamental parts of the Agreement, just like demilitarisation and other issues, and should benefit the entire community. We are trying to ensure that every segment of the Agreement is fairly implemented and, in the next few weeks, we hope to have a summit of pro-Agreement parties to gauge where they are disappointed, where they want more progress and to see what can be done. We want a clear understanding of where the Agreement is four years on and how much can be done before the elections next May in Northern Ireland.
In the context of the leader of the Labour Party raising the issue of parity of esteem, does the Taoiseach accept that the Government has a role in maintaining that parity in the eyes of all concerned? Does he accept that it is less than wise, as reported in the newspapers, for discussions to take place about possible links between the SDLP and Fianna Fáil and that talking up such reports does not serve well the sensitivities of the situation? As leader of Fianna Fáil, will he respond?
Is the Government able to stand its own ground on intelligence, particularly in relation to the situation in Colombia? There were a number of British statements indicating that there was more to the Colombian mission than meets the eye. Is he able to work from Irish intelligence on this matter or is he depending on a pool of intelligence which may be British dominated? Is there Irish intelligence on this matter and, if so, is the Taoiseach able to tell us anything about it?
In relation to parity of esteem, did the Taoi seach receive an invitation to the Jubilee celebrations for Queen Elizabeth II hosted recently by the British Ambassador? If not, was he represented at the celebrations or did he make a formal communication with the British Ambassador on the matter?
Has the Taoiseach received an invitation to attend, or has the Government been asked to send observers, to any of the Northern marching events in the summer by way of ensuring flashpoints do not recur?
With regard to the first matter raised by the Deputy, which is a party political one, I am not here to answer on that, but I read the reports with interest. The reporters probably had more information than I had as president of my party. That is all I can say on that matter. There have been no meetings. Perhaps it was the Greens who talked to them.
Maybe there is more than one Fianna Fáil Party.
It was not the Fianna Fáil Party.
On the question of building confidence and parity of esteem, I will repeat what I said to Deputy Quinn. We can help in a number of ways. We can demonstrate in a competent manner that where there are issues creating difficulties on either side of the divide, we can usefully assist. My view is that this should be done in an even-handed and fair way, always communicating to both sides where we stand on what we can achieve and, where necessary, stating our concerns directly to the British Government or to the parties involved. It is my honest view that the Executive is working well and hard to help each other. I do not think there is tension or unfairness. People are anxious to help and, hopefully, at the meeting we will have with the pro-Agreement parties we will be able to achieve that.
In relation to the Jubilee celebrations, I think all Ministers were asked. I did not attend, but some of my colleagues did.
On the matter of intelligence in Colombia, I have heard many reports from people about their views on the position in Colombia, but we have no intelligence on the ground there. I am dependent on reports – conflicting ones – from others.
Conflicting reports?
I met the President of Colombia quite recently. The views were not only British. I have heard many views on this matter, but I have no particular view on it. I am more concerned about what is happening now and what will happen into the future. I cannot influence or change what happened in the past. While there are concerns and will continue to be concerns, the position as of now and going forward is what really concerns the people in Northern Ireland who have raised this matter with me time and time again.
In regard to building confidence, on some aspects of the Good Friday Agreement we have not achieved as much progress as we would have wished. Those are the areas on which we hope to get agreement. We hope to get a road map agreed at the next meeting. I have had a number of discussions with Mr. Trimble and Mr. Durkan, both separately and together, in the past few weeks and there is a determination that we agree these issues and then move forward. I have discussed that with most of the other pro-Agreement parties. I have discussed it with Sinn Féin and colleagues have discussed it with other parties and I think we can get an agreement to try to make progress at that meeting.
I thank the Taoiseach for his replies. The Taoiseach will recall that the Good Friday Agreement envisaged the completion of the decommissioning of illegal arms within two years of the referendum being held. Can he give the House any estimate of when the process will be completed? In view of the appalling lack of co-operation by the British Government with Mr. Justice Barron's commission of inquiry, does the Taoiseach share the concern of the families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings? Does he feel that the British foot-dragging adds credence to the belief concerning involvement of British agencies in these tragedies?
The Taoiseach is aware of the massive support in the country for the recent postcard campaign to pressurise the British Government to shut down Sellafield. Has he used any of the opportunities at his disposal to speak to the British Prime Minister about this?
Has the Taoiseach spoken to the British Prime Minister about the Stevens report into alleged collusion between security forces and loyalist paramilitaries, part of which report was leaked to a British newspaper?
Decommissioning and the work of the International Commission on Decommissioning is ongoing. There have been substantive and extensive acts of decommissioning as reported by General de Chastelain and they are ongoing. There is no completion date as such but the extension made by the British Government and supported by me is the summer of next year. The process will be incremental and hopefully ongoing. There is no question of a deadline, which is never helpful, but what was set down is being delivered on and there is confidence in the process.
In relation to Mr. Justice Barron, I passed on a memo last week from him to Prime Minister Blair and his officials reiterating what is required. He received an amount of information previously but has not got all the information he requires or answers to some of the issues he raised. Whether that information is available or will be handed over is uncertain. We have had a commitment from the Prime Minister and from the Secretary of State, Mr. Reid, that they would provide everything they had through their own intelligence agencies. Mr. Justice Barron is still unsatisfied and that is the position.
We continually raise the matter of Sellafield and ministerial colleagues are dealing with it. We look forward to the report on the Stevens inquiry. I do not want to comment on leaks of the report as, frankly, I do not know about it. We look forward to the report of Judge Cory, a competent, international and renowned judge, who has given his time to examine the papers in this area and to speak to the families and groups involved. He will spend much of the summer in Northern Ireland working on this which will be helpful. From my meeting with him last Tuesday I do not think he will spend an undue length of time on the work. He is determined to put in enormous effort to bring it to completion as quickly as possible. We have called many times for a public inquiry into these issues and we still hold that view. We will go through the process and wait for the report of the Stevens inquiry and the work of Judge Cory. If, at the end of that, there is still evidence of collusion in some of these cases we look forward to having a full public inquiry on these issues.
Will the Taoiseach get serious with the British Prime Minister and Government, two and a half years after the independent commission was set up to inquire into the Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk bombings, about the continuing deficit of critical information, which they are clearly refusing to hand over? It beggars belief that the Taoiseach can say he still does not know whether information exists or is available. What does he talk about to the British Prime Minister when he raises this issue? Instead of passing over polite memos, will the Taoiseach take the gloves off and demand that the information is provided forthwith? It is months since a fresh request was sent by the commission for specific information but that information has not been received.
Does the Taoiseach realise he is dealing with a Prime Minister who seems to be more concerned about where he came in the pecking order around the late Queen Mother's coffin than about matters of substantial social policy and justice? This is an issue of fundamental justice for the bereaved families and the victims. Since the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, apparently puts so much store by his public standing in the media, will the Taoiseach use the media to shame him into giving this information? This is the prime minister who has scurried around the world to be President Bush's outrider in a so-called war on terror yet, with regard to the single worst act of terror on this island—
In fairness to other Members, I ask Deputy Higgins to confine him self to asking brief questions and not making statements.
I am doing that. The Taoiseach must get real. We must get real answers about what he intends to do to ensure the commission has the information well in advance of the end of September, when it is due to report, so it can get to the truth about this terrible atrocity.
Mr. Justice Barron has received an enormous amount of material from a range of sources, including the British Administration. It is important, in order to have as full and accurate a report as possible, that everyone with relevant information co-operates fully. As I pointed out to the last Dáil, Mr. Justice Barron has received some of the information he sought but not everything. It will be a matter for him to assess and comment in his report on the co-operation he has received from the various authorities with which he has been in contact. My role has been to endeavour, as best I can, to get that information.
I do not know if the security information, which would be in the security sections of the British Government, is available. I do not have access to that information. All I can do is make the case that we require it. Whether it is available to be handed over or is handed over, we will read in due course in Mr. Justice Barron's report, which will come before a committee of the House for public scrutiny. In the meantime, we will put our full efforts into seeking the information Mr. Justice Barron still requires. However, it is not a question of the information being in this Prime Minister's or the previous Prime Minister's office. That is not the type of information about which we are talking.
I thank the Taoiseach for his earlier reply. Does he accept that the priority now for the First Minister and all Ministers in the Executive is to get on with the job they were elected to do in their respective Departments? Does he accept that Sinn Féin is fulfilling its mandate and responsibilities in the Executive and that there is no basis for the ongoing threat of the First Minister to bring down the Executive, which he repeated in the past week?
I acknowledge the Taoiseach's reference to the situation in the Short Strand. Is he fully conversant with the conditions of daily life for that small community of some 3,000 souls who continue to suffer daily attempts by loyalist paramilitaries to carry out worse ravages of sectarian attack? What steps has the Taoiseach taken to have this matter raised with the British Prime Minister? Has the Taoiseach – he alluded to this matter in his earlier responses – raised the ongoing, very questionable activity of the RUC-PSNI, which has in some instances participated directly in some of these attacks upon defenceless communities already under attack from loyalist quarters?
The Taoiseach said he did not like the term "recreational rioting", but while joining him in this, I would go further. We should not at any time give currency to the notion of recreational rioting. It is an absurdity and is absolutely offensive. I ask the Taoiseach, therefore, to join me in roundly rejecting all acts of sectarianism, as I did in my address last Sunday at Bodenstown, and to record appropriately whatever source such attacks might emanate from.
I have no difficulty joining anybody in wholeheartedly acknowledging and condemning all acts of violence, whatever source they emanate from, including any attempt to murder a recruit to the Police Service of Northern Ireland or intimidate Nationalists from joining the force. Whatever the level of violence, I roundly condemn it, and I hope everybody else in this House takes the same view.
I am very well versed on the plight of the people of Short Strand and have enormous sympathy for the community there, which has dwindled from 10,000 people down to 3,000. They have suffered an enormous amount of hardship and intimidation on an ongoing basis. I have made the views of the Government known on the activities of the loyalists and the way the situation was policed by the Police Service of Northern Ireland. The Government believes the handling of the situation left a lot to be desired, and we hope our representations will lead to some improvement. We made those representations directly to Secretary of State John Reid and to Ambassador Haass. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen has expressed our views in other meetings also, and I expressed them to Prime Minister Blair last Friday.
In the interests of balance and fairness, I also congratulate the Police Service of Northern Ireland on the way it handled difficulties on the same weekend in other areas of Belfast, including Donegall Square, with great professionalism. The same police service operated under different commanders in those instances, and I have heard people who criticised the events in Short Strand also praised police activities elsewhere. This must be made clear for the purposes of even-handed debate.
I have asked that we seek to achieve consistency in policing because that is how confidence can be developed in the Police Service of Northern Ireland. Hopefully we can move on to a situation where everybody can be supportive of the Police Service of Northern Ireland, that all communities can join it and that we achieve a truly community-wide policing system like that of any other democracy. I am sure Deputy O'Caoláin does not agree with me totally on that but will come around to agreeing with me because it is the best way of dealing with these issues in the future.
What was the Deputy's other question?
I asked the Taoiseach specifically about the role of the First Minister and Ministers in the Executive. Does he agree they should be getting on with the work they have been elected to carry out, and does he accept that Sinn Féin is fulfilling its mandate and responsibilities in the Executive, that the ongoing threats of—
The Deputy has made his point.
I thank Deputy Ó Caoláin for reminding me of the question as I had forgotten it. As I said to Deputy Quinn, the Executive is working well and I do not see any reasons for a motion of exclusion. I gave my views on the matter last week and, thankfully, the meetings at the weekend went well. We should view all elements of the Good Friday Agreement and the normal day to day issues in the North in a positive manner. I remind those listening to this debate that things are calm among the vast majority of the citizens of the North. Investment, which has increased substantially, will be further considered at a conference in the United States in a few months. All members of the Executive are working on a regeneration programme, involving the investment of large amounts of capital in deprived areas, such as west and east Belfast, which need restoration, reinvigoration, investment and employment. I could mention many such good programmes and other positive aspects of the peace process.
In response to Deputy Ó Caoláin, if I were to make a criticism it would be that positive developments in the North are not publicised. Last Friday, for example, some of the best employment figures in the history of the North were announced, but it was difficult to find a politician of any persuasion to talk about them as they preferred to reflect on certain negative matters. I would like to hear those inside and outside the Executive talking positively as many good things are happening in areas such as health, education, enterprise, energy and transport. If we are to be balanced in our comments on the North, we should mention such matters. As I said to Deputy Quinn earlier, all political parties in the North should talk up the enormously improved situation there if we want to develop confidence in the Good Friday Agreement.
I will allow two final questions from Deputies McGinley and Quinn.
May I ask a brief supplementary question?
Deputy Ó Caoláin is allowed to ask one question and he has asked it. In fairness, I have to allow the Deputies who are allowed five and six questions to speak at this point.
Perhaps the Ceann Comhairle will fit me in before time runs out.
During his discussions with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, and the First Minister, Mr. Trimble, did the Taoiseach raise the current and future roles of the British-Irish Parliamentary Body? I am sure the Taoiseach will agree that the body has contributed significantly to understanding and co-operation between the two peoples and the Parliaments. Members of the Government, including the Taoiseach who is a former joint chairman of the body, have served with great distinction on it. Does the Taoiseach envisage an enhancement of the body's powers? During his discussions with the First Minister, did the Taoiseach ask if Unionist politicians will take their places on the body? The effectiveness of the body would greatly increase if Unionists were present.
Was the issue of increased sectarianism among young people raised at the recent meeting of the British-Irish Council in Jersey? Most of the young people to whom I refer do not remember the violence during the armed conflict in the North. Have concerns been expressed in relation to the perception that the first generation for many years not to have suffered the direct consequences of violence appears to be more sectarian than older generations?
In reply to Deputy McGinley's queries about the important matter of the future of the British-Irish Parliamentary Body, it was discussed at the recent meeting of the British-Irish Council. We were unable to come to an agreement at the previous council meeting. Deputy McGinley alluded to the fact that it was agreed some time ago that changes would be made to allow members from other Administrations to sit on the body, but Unionists did not take up that option. What was agreed last Friday was that over the next few months an effort will be made to make whatever institutional changes are necessary to bring everyone on side. Given the brief flavour of the discussions and the comments I had afterwards with some of the leaders I think that will be possible. It may be the end of the year – perhaps following the November meeting – before the matter is formally concluded. I asked recently that this should happen more quickly so that the committees here can be set up and it was agreed the issue would be looked at. There is now movement on the issue which, I hope, will be resolved later this year.
I did not have discussions on the issue raised by Deputy Quinn. Obviously the sectarianism which exists at the interface and in communities is a matter of major concern. It is a concern that there are still efforts on both sides to drive communities out of areas. The major emphasis is to continue to support cross-community programmes, promote the efforts being made in regard to education and build up confidence in these communi ties. However, as the Deputy pointed out, there are still major difficulties. Even though progress is being made and community leaders and political parties are working very hard to try to gain control there are still difficulties. There is not as much progress as one would like and we must continue to work on these problems. It is true of any city that where there is deprivation and social difficulties it is easier for such problems to exist. Rejuvenation and regeneration programmes would help to put an end to these activities. It is worrying that people are still being intimidated and forced out of communities.