Ruairí Quinn
Question:1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he has had any recent telephone contact with President Bush of the United States; his plans to meet President Bush; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16577/02]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - Northern Ireland Issues.
Joe Higgins
Question:2 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the President of the United States of America; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17114/02]
Joe Higgins
Question:3 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the US Administration. [17116/02]
Trevor Sargent
Question:4 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the recent contacts he has had with US President, George Bush; his plans to meet President Bush before the end of 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18116/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:5 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. [18650/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:6 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 11 October 2002 with the then First Minister, Mr. David Trimble; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18651/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:7 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18657/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:8 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the discussions he has had with the British Prime Minister regarding the decision announced on 14 October 2002 to suspend the institutions in Northern Ireland. [18923/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:9 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will consider the reconvening of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, especially in view of the political vacuum created by the suspension of the political institutions in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18925/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:10 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he last met the President of Sinn Féin; if at this or other meetings he has raised with Sinn Féin representatives allegations that members of the republican movement have continued to be involved in paramilitary assaults and political and security espionage and that members here have continued to be involved in criminal activities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18927/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:11 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting with the President of Sinn Féin, Mr. Gerry Adams, MP, on 16 September 2002. [18930/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:12 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting with the then Deputy First Minister for Northern Ireland, Mr. Mark Durkan, MLA, on 13 September 2002. [18931/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:13 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his recent meeting with US envoy, Mr. Richard Haass, on 7 September 2002. [18932/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:14 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he last met the leader of the UUP, Mr. David Trimble, MP, MLA, to discuss the situation in Northern Ireland; when he plans the next meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18933/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:15 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he last met the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, to discuss the situation in Northern Ireland; when he plans the next meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18934/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:16 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach his assessment for the prospects of political progress in Northern Ireland, in view of his meetings with political leaders over the summer; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18935/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:17 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach his views on the implications for political developments in Northern Ireland of the motion agreed at the meeting of the Ulster Unionist Council on 21 September 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18937/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:18 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of the discussions held with the British Government and the political parties in Northern Ireland at Hillsborough in July 2002. [18938/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:19 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting with a delegation from the SDLP on 26 September 2002. [18939/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:20 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting with a delegation from Sinn Féin on 26 September 2002. [18940/02]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:21 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, on 9 October 2002. [18941/02]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:22 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his role in recent developments in the peace process. [19035/02]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:23 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the discussions he has had with the Northern Ireland First Minister, Mr. David Trimble, since the Ulster Unionist Council meeting on 21 September 2002. [19036/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:24 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meetings with the political parties in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19037/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:25 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19038/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:26 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. [19039/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:27 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions with the pro-Agreement parties at Hillsborough Castle in July 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19040/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:28 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the leader of the UUP, Mr. Trimble; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19041/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:29 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. [19042/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:30 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. [19043/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:31 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 8 October 2002 with the President of Sinn Féin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19044/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:32 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in London on 9 October 2002 with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19045/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:33 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19046/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:34 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 26 September 2002 with the Sinn Féin President, Mr. Gerry Adams; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19047/02]
Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin
Question:35 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the United States Administration. [19064/02]
Enda Kenny
Question:36 Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the United States Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19173/02]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 36, inclusive, together.
In my statement to the House last week I set out in some detail the Government's position on recent developments in Northern Ireland and how we propose to take matters forward from here. Both Governments will be keeping in close contact and continuing our contacts with the parties in the period ahead. I expect to meet the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, again at the end of the week at the European Council meeting in Brussels. It is clearly important that we should do so at this time in order that we can, together, manage the process and ensure our common determination to achieve full implementation of the Agreement is being advanced.
The British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference is meeting today under the co-chairmanship of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Dr. John Reid. The conference is the vehicle through which we can work together to address all non-devolved issues in Northern Ireland. It is the appropriate mechanism for ensuring the continued implementation of the non-institutional aspects of the Agreement. We intend to use this vehicle provided for in the Agreement to ensure all relevant issues are actively pursued by the two Governments on a regular basis. No one should be in any doubt of the relevance and importance that we attach to the work of the conference at this time and the opportunity it offers for both Governments, working together, to pursue the agenda of the Agreement.
Progress on issues of policing, human rights and equality will continue unimpeded. We must also ensure the work of the all-island implementation bodies continues uninterrupted and the conference is considering how this can be done. These bodies have operated successfully over three years in sectors economically vital on both sides of the Border and must be allowed continue their work.
I welcome the support of President Bush and the US Administration at this time. As I said last week, the President's statement of support underlines his continuing interest in the process. President Bush has been a consistent and committed supporter of the process and we value greatly the assistance of his Administration. I have not been in contact with the President recently and have no immediate plans to meet him.
With regard to the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, Deputies will be aware that, while it continues formally to remain in existence, it has not, in fact, met since 1999. However, in view of the expressions of interest by parties in this House and Northern Ireland, I have asked that the possibility of reconvening briefly might now be explored.
While I know the Taoiseach has been extraordinarily busy, I draw his attention to the first question asked, namely, if he has had any recent telephone contact with President Bush of the United States; his plans to meet President Bush, and if he will make a statement on the matter. We are being threatened with the possibility of war. Will the Taoiseach comment on the fact that the United States, a member of the Security Council, has circulated a draft resolution? Has the Government been consulted on the content of that draft resolution and does it meet some of the concerns expressed by the Government on previous occasions to allow diplomacy one last chance, as President Bush said this morning?
Would the Taoiseach like to complete his formal reply before taking the supplementary questions?
I answered a number of questions on this issue last week. To update what I said then, the country is a strong advocate of the system of collective international security based on the United Nations Charter. Under the terms of that Charter the UN Security Council has the prime responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and all member states of the United Nations are bound by the UN Security Council decisions. Our colleagues in the Security Council and the Minister for Foreign Affairs are in contact several times a day. We are doing all we can to work in the growing international consensus that the Iraqi regime poses a potential threat to regional security. We will continue to work in every way we can to reach agreement on the return of the inspectors under the conditions laid down and the rapid commencement of their work on the ground. Progress has been reported in discussions between the inspection teams and the Iraqi authorities over the past 24 hours. We are ready to study these proposals on an ongoing basis until we achieve success. I replied that I had not met President Bush but I add, as I did last week, that I have had two meetings in recent months with Ambassador Haass.
I have two questions, one on Northern Ireland and one on Iraq. Thirty-six questions have been answered in one comprehensive reply. On the question of Iraq, has the Taoiseach's office or the Department of Foreign Affairs been consulted on the draft text circulated initially by the United States for the other four permanent members of the Security Council? Following the meeting of the other ten members of the Security Council, has the Irish Government been consulted on the text? Can we have an outline of the content? What is the Government's attitude bearing in mind that recent opinion polls here have been resolutely in favour of the pursuit of diplomacy to the nth degree before engaging in war?
Concerning Question No. 10 on the Order Paper, about Northern Ireland, following the suspension of the Stormont administration because of allegations of espionage by Sinn Féin and the IRA can the Taoiseach confirm that the British Government showed him transcripts of conversations which took place between senior Irish and British Ministers about bi-lateral discussions, which were in the possession of Sinn Féin and-or the IRA? Will he confirm or deny that such information was shown to him by the British authorities? Will he make known to this House, the view that it is in all of our interests, that now, four and a half years after the Good Friday Agreement was signed and two and a half years after complete decommissioning was called for, it might be constructive and desirable if there was an all-party resolution passed by all of the parties in this House, that all paramilitary activities cease and all paramilitary organisations be stood down by their parent political organisations?
In reply to the first question, I have not been personally involved in this morning's draft resolution but work has been ongoing since the middle of last week, first with the permanent members of the Security Council and then with the wider group. We have been fully consulted and the Minister for Foreign Affairs has been involved in the process. We recognise its usefulness and we have been supporting the proposition of a new resolution clarifying the conditions under which the arms inspectors will operate. Discussions have taken place in the past few days with the permanent members and we await the results of those talks. We support a clear, full and unambiguous resolution so we do not have an ongoing exchange over what it does or does not mean. Our input was to make sure it was clear, not alone to the Security Council but—
Will there be one resolution or two?
In the format envisaged, it will probably work out at two. We were anxious that it be clear, not only to the Security Council but to the public at large, what the difficulties would be if the first resolution was not resolved.
Will there be two resolutions?
That was the position as of last night. I reiterate that we agree totally with Kofi Annan that we should have as much support as possible for this from the wider public who, as Deputy Quinn pointed out, are concerned, as are those in other countries. The best way of avoiding problems is to make the resolution absolutely clear.
In relation to Deputy Quinn's second question, I was not shown any documents but I was briefed that documents and transcripts existed and I have no reason to believe that is not the case. They were, as he has outlined, sensitive documents.
Were they of the scale I referred to? Was the Taoiseach involved in any of them?
The documents were of the scale the Deputy referred to, including transcripts of calls between myself and Prime Minister Blair.
Will the Taoiseach make a comment on the—
Thank you, Deputy. I call Deputy Joe Higgins.
Has the Taoiseach discussed with Ambassador Haass the national security strategy of the United States of America published on 17 September 2002 and has he discussed the implications of that document which are sinister, dangerous and arrogant in the sense of the United States now arrogating to itself the right to strike anywhere in the world to protect US interests?
Will the Taoiseach instruct the representatives of the Government on the Security Council and the Government itself to, for the first time, take an independent stand in relation to the threat of war against Iraq which is opposed by a huge majority in this country and by tens of millions of Americans? Does he agree that this would be a predatory war for control and oil, not democracy, since the US supports horrific dictatorships in the region such as Saudi Arabia?
The Deputy should ask a question.
Does the Taoiseach agree that the threats to attack Iraq and claim world domination is grist to the mill of those dark forces which slaughtered thousands of people on 11 September 2001 and the innocent people in Bali? Will he, for a change, stop the Government's subservience to the administrations in the United States and stand independently in front of the world, saying it opposes a war against Iraq and will not provide the facilities at Shannon airport for that? Will he declare that there should be a standing down of the criminal wastage of armaments internationally and that those resources should be turned to resolving the problems of humanity because that is how we will end conflict?
Does the Taoiseach agree that the invasion by dozens, if not hundreds, of police of the Sinn Féin parliamentary offices in Belfast was an unjustified, dangerous and anti-democratic strategy by the British Government? Despite the serious reservations some of us might have in regard to Sinn Féin's policy and strategy this invasion creates a dangerous precedent for democratic rights and the right of those elected by the people. Why did the Government not condemn it outright as opposed to making rather muffled noises?
I disagree with Deputy Higgins in regard to his question on the United States. The administration in Iraq has the power to remove the present tensions and end the suffering of its own people along with the concerns of everybody else. All it must do is meet in full and without delay its obligations under the Security Council resolutions. That would avoid any threat or escalation.
The Government welcomes the fact that President Bush went to the United Nations where he laid out the concerns of his country regarding the threat posed by Iraq's failure to comply with their obligations under the Security Council resolutions. We argued that was the best way to do it and we support what President Bush did. The Government welcomed Iraq's agreement to accept the return of weapons inspectors unconditionally and we look forward to seeing how that operates. We urge the Iraqi authorities to back words with action and to co-operate fully with the inspectors and hold nothing back. They should allow full, free and unfettered access to all places and to all relevant documentation and personnel. That is what has been set out and if that happens the concerns of Deputy Higgins will be avoided. Ireland will continue to support the Security Council and if Iraq does not comply we will support whatever action the Security Council requires. However, we hope it will not come to that. I have replied already to Deputy Quinn in regard to what is happening with the resolution.
The Government strongly condemned the way the Sinn Féin offices in Stormont were targeted, not the fact they were raided or examined, but the number of people involved. We were glad to see the change of attitude, which would not have happened in the past, when Chief Constable Orde made an apology for the way the raid was carried out. The Deputy will acknowledge that there are prosecutions pending in the case. We do not object that investigations were going on but at the number and force of those involved and we made that clear on the Friday afternoon about three weeks ago.
Is it correct that the Taoiseach personally offered President Bush facilities at Shannon Airport for bombing raids on Afghanistan and perhaps now on Iraq? This is an amazing contrast to the basic denial of civil liberties at Shannon Airport when my colleagues Deputies Boyle and Gogarty and Patricia McKenna, MEP, were denied access to the terminal. This seems at odds with the Taoiseach's generosity towards President Bush. In the context of the probable war with Iraq, can the statement by the Irish ambassador to the United Nations be made clearer by the Taoiseach because it was not clear on 17 October?
Does the Government support the approach of the United States to the United Nations whereby it only wants one resolution in which action will be contemplated and allowed if arms inspectors are unable to carry out their work, or does it support the approach of the French who want two distinct resolutions, one relating to the inspectors and the other allowing military action if and when it is seen fit to take it? Which of the two approaches does Ireland support?
We are aware that a majority of the people have a huge concern about and do not agree with the policy of the United States on Iraq. Has the Government expressed any concern that the United States is targeting other countries in what it likes to call its axis of evil, such as North Korea? The reason it is referred to is because it possesses nuclear bombs. Does the Taoiseach support this widening of the scope of the wish of the United States to attack other countries?
On Northern Ireland, does the Taoiseach agree that the old terms of reference of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation are outdated? If we are to make progress on Northern Ireland in terms of the involvement of all stakeholders, including the parties in the House, will new terms be drawn up in consultation with all concerned? Will they concentrate and focus on the issues which are stumbling blocks, such as the disbanding of paramilitaries, for example, the IRA? Will the Taoiseach focus on this and give the parties a chance to bring whatever progress they can to the talks? Does he agree that, as long as there is no involvement by the Unionist side or an equivalent forum for it, this gives licence to the republican side to sit on its hands, or, in the case of the IRA, its arms, and not move? Will the Taoiseach make the point forcefully to the British Government that we need disbandment of paramilitaries and that this needs to be done on as cross-community a basis as possible? Could the consensus between North and South on issues such as Sellafield be used as a building block towards community relations on common issues on which we can certainly fight without rekindling the old tribal divisions?
The Deputy asked a number of questions, the first of which concerned overflight and landing facilities being granted in the event of an attack on Iraq. To date no requests for overflight or landing clearance have been received in the context of the current situation in Iraq. Any such requests would be considered in the light of the position of the UN Security Council—
Refuelling is against the law.
—and in the context of ongoing efforts to reach a peaceful resolution of the issues. The Government gave permission previously under the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order which allows the Minister for Foreign Affairs to grant permission to foreign military aircraft to fly over or land in the State. In the case of routine landings of military aircraft, confirmation is required that the aircraft does not carry arms, ammunition or explosives and form part of a military exercise and operation. As the Deputy knows, we have used this order a number of times.
In the case of the resolutions, I said we will support the position of the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, and have done so throughout the debate. It is more likely that there will be two resolutions, but that is to be concluded today or maybe overnight and we will stick firmly with the position. As I have already said, the purpose will be to clarify and make sure that whatever happens on the inspections is absolutely clear and whatever action may be necessary is also clear if the resolution is ignored, which I hope will not be the case.
The Deputies asked a number of questions on Northern Ireland. The institutions have broken down because once again trust has broken down between the parties. There would have been a suspension of the institutions even if the British Government had not acted because the Ulster Unionist Party was clearly going to pull out. In an honest and fair way, we now must try to build it up as quickly as possible working with all the parties because there is no use being involved in the blame game. We must move on and find the terms that will allow the parties to get back in partnership, working together in mutual trust and confidence. It is never easy to do, but I detect from all sides a willingness to try.
Our preferred option is to have that set up sooner rather than later. It would be bad if that were to drift out until the assembly elections next year, which we feel should take place at the beginning of May. Our considered view, which we share with the British Government, is that all paramilitary groups should be out of the equation. That would certainly help to build trust and confidence. That requires all sides, not just republicans, but loyalists as well. Most of the violence in recent times has been from loyalists, not from republicans, but there is still the issue of trust and until all sides move away from that it will be very hard to get stable institutions, which is what we want to achieve.
The meeting of the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference today is to establish how to get a process that will start to deal with the issue of building trust and confidence and determine the outstanding issues all the parties and governments have that need to be addressed. This will allow us to get an agreement on all the outstanding issues. It will not work if we just try to satisfy just one party or any one government's agenda. The only way to do this is to look at the totality of the issues that are outstanding, which may be creating conflict, disharmony or breaking trust and try to deal with them all to see if we can get sufficient agreement – if not total agreement – from all the sides to address that with each other. As always, our position will be to act as an honest broker to try to get an agreement that allows us to go on and implement the one thing that is not suspended or in any difficulty and that is the Good Friday Agreement. That is what we will endeavour to do both at today's meeting, which is commencing now, and subsequently.
The Taoiseach did not answer the question about the forum.
At this stage I am more anxious to organise a session of the forum and if it requires any changed terms, we can look at that. Even in its old format it would be very useful to allow people to engage and give their views on the issue. I would like it to meet before Christmas.
Does the Taoiseach have any reason to believe that information from his own office and from other Government offices, including transcripts and communications, is not being filtered away to sources that should not have it? Has he carried out any analysis of the security of his own offices and Departments? The Attorney General has made a very cogent case at The Hague in recent days about what the Government described as the cataclysmic consequences of an explosion or terrorist attacks on the MOX plant in Sellafield. On 3 November 2001, British Nuclear Fuels Limited invited the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland, the RPII, to carry out a safety inspection of enhanced security measures at Sellafield following the 11 September attacks on New York and Washington. Why has the Taoiseach not taken this up directly with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, given that this would be the quickest way to get the two vital pieces of information that are missing? What enhanced security measures have been put in place at Sellafield? What evaluation has taken place of the possibility of a terrorist attack and the radioactive fallout that would result from such an attack? This vital information is missing and can best be obtained by the Taoiseach sitting down with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, rather than during an important though third hand PR exercise in The Hague. This is a matter of the gravest consequence for our country. Britain does not believe Iraq about its weaponry; why should we believe BNFL, a firm with a dubious history of deliberate falsification of data?
Is the Taoiseach prepared to see to it that the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland goes to Sellafield to carry out a security evaluation? Is he prepared to raise directly with the British Prime Minister the evaluation of the consequences of, God forbid, a terrorist attack on the MOX plant in Sellafield? Why has the Taoiseach not raised this matter with the British Prime Minister directly in the last 12 months?
The reply to the first question is "Yes". Since the events of recent weeks there has been a full review of confidential and security papers in a number of Departments, including mine, to make sure such papers are not being leaked. There has been a general tidying of arrangements.
Regarding Sellafield, the Deputy will know that while debating other issues in several meetings in the last few years we have always raised the Sellafield issue. There has been much dialogue and exchange on Sellafield and that continues. Regarding security, the British Government informed us that it undertook a major review after 11 September. I am not privy to the precise security issues it dealt with but it gave us assurances that it had stepped up security.
The case in question is important and an enormous amount of legal work has been put into it. It will go on for some considerable time; this session will go on for most of the week and we will see where that brings us. Sellafield will remain a key issue on the Irish agenda with the British Government and for the other organisations which are pursuing it.
Regarding our own agencies, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government has been involved in this but I do not have details about that in this reply. I suggest the Deputy tables a question for the Minister regarding our nuclear agencies and their correspondence with BNFL. I do not have that information.
At a meeting in July between the British Nuclear Installation Inspectorate and the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland information which was sought was not made available, specifically regarding the enhanced security measures. Obviously we do not need to know all the details. What evaluation was carried out regarding a possible terrorist attack on Sellafield? I understand the RPII is to meet again on 8 November with the inspectorate. Will the Taoiseach undertake to contact the British Prime Minister before then to encourage him to provide that information so that our independent nuclear safety analysts with the RPII can be happy that BNFL has brought in enhanced security measures? We should also be able to analyse what evaluation, if any, has been carried out regarding the consequences of a terrorist attack on the MOX plant.
If that has not already been done by the Department concerned I have no difficulty doing it. I will raise the case which is ongoing with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, when I meet him on Thursday night or Friday.
Does the Taoiseach accept that the current crisis in the peace process does not have its origins in the raid on the Sinn Féin offices in Stormont – in which nothing incriminating was found – but rather in the Ulster Unionist Council meeting on 21 September when that party adopted what is, to all intents and purposes, an anti-Good Friday Agreement programme? Does he recognise that the purpose of that programme is to roll back the progress we have all made in the intervening period since the Agreement was endorsed by the people as a whole? Does he accept that the participation of Sinn Féin in the peace process, the Executive and the all-Ireland bodies is based on its electoral mandate alone and nothing less? Will he tell the House what programme his Government together with the British Government will lay out in order to implement the Agreement now that the institutions have been suspended?
On the issue of his contacts with the United States Administration, has the Taoiseach discussed Iraq and Afghanistan directly with the President of the United States, Mr. Bush? Can he indicate to the House the origins of the request to this State to allow US military aircraft to use Shannon Airport as a base and train in Irish airspace? Will he confirm that he discussed the use of Shannon Airport with the President of the United States?
Ambassador Haass is a regular visitor and in regular contact with us on Northern Ireland related issues. He dealt with the issue of Afghanistan in the past and is now dealing with Iraq. He is a good source of knowledge on these matters on which I have had a number of opportunities to be given an insight into the thinking of the State Department and the Presidency.
We have not received any requests relating to action against Iraq. We met requests regarding the campaign in Afghanistan under the Air Navigation Act-—
Will the Taoiseach share that insight into Iraq with the House?
Please allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.
I shared it earlier and also last week. Through Ambassador Haass we have communicated our concern that this issue should be processed through the Security Council, which seemed unlikely some months ago. Many other countries made similar arguments to ours and it has now happened. I hope that will continue to be the case. I discussed the matter with Kofi Annan last month in Johannesburg. The Minister for Foreign Affairs also discussed it at the meetings of the United Nations last month.
Deputy Ó Caoláin asked a series of questions on Northern Ireland on which I do not wish to say any more than what I have said. I note the Deputy said no incriminating evidence was found. I have already replied to Deputy Quinn's question in response to which I outlined the information I was given. I have nothing more to add. I accept that the reason the Executive was suspended on 14 October was because the UUP was about to pull out. Once its conference stated in September that a deadline had been fixed for mid-January, it immediately created tensions. That is from where it emanated. It was on that basis that I indicated in my statement on that day that the outcome of the UUC meeting was unfortunate. We have now reached this point.
The Deputy would accept and appreciate that based on this fact there is a lack of trust and confidence. He will have seen the figures the other day from the poll of the Unionist community which show that its present level of confidence in the partnership arrangements is 0.6% in terms of support. Even allowing for the usual percentage level of error, that is a fairly damning figure. We, therefore, have a problem with which we must deal to the best of our ability.
On the position of the Governments going forward, we must make sure we continue to implement the Agreement in all its aspects on which we will not start to be selective, whether in regard to the equality or civil rights agendas. We must find a mechanism to deal with the implementation bodies, a matter that is on the agenda today, but it is our intention to remain engaged in all the issues and keep the agenda moving. I am anxious that we do not let any of it slip; I want to keep it going on all fronts with the involvement of the relevant Ministers here and those who have taken over the responsibilities of the Executive. In that regard, we have already looked at our programme up to Christmas in order to keep things moving.
On the other side, we must work with the British Government and all the parties involved to try to get the institutions back up and running, which is a separate exercise. We need to divide them, otherwise we will fall behind on work on implementing the Good Friday Agreement. As a separate exercise, we will do all we can in using the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference which was clearly devised for this purpose, it was devised to deal with non-devolved issues.
Several hundred people are working for the implementation bodies which have clear agendas, strategies and work programmes. It is our view – I stated this clearly to the British Government when I met Prime Minister Blair a fortnight ago tomorrow and will do so again this weekend – that we must move forward and continue to work those agendas to the full, but we have to clear the mechanism to do so. I hope that will be done this afternoon.
A number of Deputies are offering. If it is agreeable, we will take questions from each and a final reply from the Taoiseach.
I will try to be as brief as possible. Will the Taoiseach confirm that he has been informed to his satisfaction that the material seized by the British authorities in their raids on the Sinn Féin offices and related IRA and Sinn Féin offices in Northern Ireland was incriminating to the effect that it contained details of confidential conversations of a political nature between him and other senior political figures in the Irish Government and British Government Ministers and perhaps others? Does he believe that that kind of political activity undertaken by a party which purports to be democratic undermines the basis of trust on which the Good Friday Agreement was constructed?
On the same topic, were any of those arrested near Dublin recently in relation to alleged IRA membership in possession of intelligence of the kind referred to by Deputy Quinn? Were any of them agents for candidates to this House, some of whom were elected? Will the Taoiseach give an undertaking to the House that no member of the IRA is employed within the precincts of this House?
Is it a fair construction of the Taoiseach's answer that the only resolution Ireland is likely to support at the Security Council is one that is a clarification of the terms of operation of the inspectors and that Ireland is against any resolution that would include an automatic right to strike? How many of the ten non-permanent members of the Security Council share his view on the appropriateness of the Security Council retaining for itself the right to evaluate the inspectors' report?
With respect to Deputy Quinn who raised a supplementary question, will the Taoiseach confirm that the transcript was one of telephone conversations and will he outline the origins and destinations of the phone conversations if that was the case? Will he also confirm where these transcripts were found?
Various claims have been made by the US administration regarding Iraq's capabilities in relation to nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. Has the Taoiseach sought or received verification of these claims from the US administration?
There are several questions one would like to respond to at this point, but very briefly in relation to the Taoiseach—
The Deputy probably knows more of the answers.
Will the Deputy send us the transcripts?
Deputy Quinn is not in the Taoiseach's chair, nor is he likely to be. Will the Taoiseach tell the House what the Government's policy would be in the event of a US attack on Iraq? Would it continue to allow our country to be used as a base for a foreign power that would be involved in a war in which we have no part? If so, how does that square with the Government's continual assurance that Irish neutrality is safe?
I am glad the Taoiseach has confirmed enhanced security arrangements in his Department and that there will be no need to break into offices around here. Has the Taoiseach considered reconstituting the Forum on Peace and Reconciliation to allow the pro-Good Friday Agreement parties to continuously put forward ideas on how the institutions could be revived and the peace process pushed forward again? The forum was never actually stood down, as the Taoiseach knows.
In relation to the US and the UN, we want to see matters dealt with as quickly as possible, but in all these discussions we have totally supported Kofi Annan's position, that the UN Security Council should be used as a vehicle for deciding and winning support for the resolution, and that the resolution should work through the chief UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, and the man in charge of nuclear inspections, Mohamed El Baradei. They have set out their views on how the inspections should take place and the room that is needed to manoeuvre to carry out the inspections.
On the basis of the work of the UN weapons inspectors going ahead, there should be no military strike. Kofi Annan has always said that if the resolution is clear and unambiguous but is not adhered to, there would be a right to strike. He has made that clear—
What if it was adhered to?
If it was adhered to there should be no military strike. That has been his position and we have supported it for weeks on end. Whether we end up with one resolution or two, this principle still stands. Kofi Annan has worked very hard to achieve that position and it is the one we will continue to support.
Does the Taoiseach support two resolutions?
The position might be clearer if there were two resolutions, but many people believe there should be one resolution. Kofi Annan's view is that this is perhaps possible but that the details would have to be carefully worked out and the arrangements laid out by Hans Blix would have to be very clear. I am not saying it would be impossible to address the issues in one resolution, and many countries argue that there should be one. I could see a final solution whereby one resolution would be set out in two parts that are very clear, but it would have to be based on the report of Hans Blix in the end. I cannot see how anyone can call this other than he. If he sets the arrangements he is the one person who can arbitrate whether the job has been satisfactorily done in accordance with his resolution. I do not see how anybody on the outside can determine whether the resolution has been fulfilled, and that is the difficulty in this.
So it will not be Jack Straw?
Deputy Higgins, I have tried to facilitate everybody who wished to ask a supplementary question and that cannot continue unless the Taoiseach is allowed to reply to all of them.
In relation to the matters on Northern Ireland, as I have said in reply to Deputy Quinn's question and a number of related questions, I did not see any information or any data on these matters. If I did not believe the people who told me, I would not have been able to work the process as I have done. My information in regard to the raid on one of the houses – as it is the subject of court hearings I do not wish to comment at length – is that included were sensitive papers and documents, including transcripts. In relation to the arrests in Bray and elsewhere, those matters are also sub judice and I will not comment on them.
That concludes questions to the Taoiseach.
It is important that the Taoiseach outline from where the phone conversation transcripts came? From where were they tapped? Was it from his offices in Dublin or did they come from Northern Ireland? That is vitally important so that we know the situation.
Question No. 78 please.
It is outrageous that we do not know whether the conversations were tapped in this building—
The Chair has no control over the answers to questions.
It is outrageous.