First, I would like to express my appreciation to the Government side for dropping the amendment which read:
To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following: Seanad Éireann condemns the IRA for their attempts to disrupt the Dublin to Belfast railway line, which attempts pose a threat to the lives of passengers, of staff of the railway companies and of the public at large, to the right of free movement of individuals and to the jobs of members of the staff of the railway companies.
That is absolutely unexceptional. Everybody could agree with that. There is no disagreement whatever about the content. However, as the proposer of the original motion I approached the Government Whip this afternoon and explained to him that I was rather anxious that we should maintain exactly words.
I think it is appropriate that I should start by explaining to the House why I made this request which was so graciously acceded to by the Government side. This wording, which was written by a group of us on the peace train when it was stopped as a result of a bomb hoax, was deliberately written with the intention that it should be passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas in precisely this wording and that it should then be sent to all the county councils, both North and South of the Border, so that the 32 Counties would have an opportunity democratically to vote upon this and to express their wish. It is our feeling that if this was done, if both Houses of the Oireachtas and each county council on a 32 county basis, voted this measure through and passed it in democratic session, it could then be transmitted to the provisional IRA or Provisional Sinn Féin as a plea to them to obey the clear and determined voice of the Irish people. For that reason, I appreciate the fact that the Government did yield on this matter and agreed to drop the amendment. As I said, there was no conflict whatever between us with regard to the sentiments; it was just the feeling that our case would be much strengthened if the original wording was maintained.
I would like to mention the peace train, because it was really in support of the peace train initiative that this wording was forged. The peace train ran in both directions. A train was seen off by the Lord Mayor of Belfast and arrived in Dublin on the morning of Saturday, 28 October 1989, and we were seen off at Amiens Street station by the Deputy Lord Mayor representing the Lord Mayor, Seán Haughey, and the trade union brass band. It was a marvellously inspiring occasion and a mass of ordinary Dublin people and travellers joined with public figures and went up to Belfast. On the return journey a bomb hoax was telephoned to the railway authorities and we were all asked to leave the train. Like a lot of sheep, we started doing just that and I spotted a distinguished former Member of the other House, Jack McQuillan, one of the founders of Clann na Poblachta, sitting in his seat. I thought perhaps he had been taken ill and I said to him, "Jack, you are going to miss the bus; are you ill?" He said: "I certainly am not ill, and I certainly am going to miss the bus. I came up here on a peace train and I am going down on a peace train if it takes me a forthnight". I said: "Well, I think you are right. Do you mind if I join you?" Then Monica Barnes came bumbling down the corridor and said: "David you are going to miss the bus". I said — if you will excuse the expression, I do not know if it is parliamentary —"You are damn right Monica; I am going to miss the bus. Why don't you miss it too?" It kind of snowballed from there. Nearly 100 of us, not only public representatives but ordinary people, showed their solidarity by staying on the peace train. It really was a very remarkable, although slightly uncomfortable, event.
A number of things struck me about that. When we were lodged in the station first, the British Army gave us some of their food, and we established some kind of human contact with them which was rather interesting. It was a gesture of charity and kindness on their part but more importantly, when we were stranded later in the night, both sides of the community and representatives of the Protestant Unionist community came and delivered food and hot coffee to the railway station. I took great heart from the fact that both sides were able to unite in appreciation of what we were doing. The reason is that it was a simple idea. It lacked all kinds of sophisticated political folderols; it was a simple idea that ordinary people could very clearly associate with. We heard, most interestingly, in what I thought was a very perceptive, direct and pointed speech from Senator McGowan about how this attempt to disrupt communications affects the lives of ordinary people.
I have to raise another point and I do so because I want to scotch it. We noticed on the way up through Dundalk that there were a group of protestors in the station. They had placards and were talking about another form of disruption which I also regret, and that is the cratering of Border roads. I raise this because it is important that we deal with this issue. People like myself on the Peace Train committee and in New Consensus are asked sometimes to be even-handed so that on any occasion when we condemn the IRA it is assumed that we have got automatically in a Pavlovian response to launch a blast at the British Army or the RUC or something else. I take these things into account as much as I possibly can. May I also point out to the House that Senator Brendan Ryan in supporting our request that this motion be taken, raised that point and indicated that if he spoke — and, perhaps, he will speak later this evening — he would attempt this balancing act.
I received communications from the people involved in the South-Tyrone-North-Monaghan Community Association about what they called a peace bus. They explained the disruption to the communities involved and I have a good feeling of sympathy for them. It is very unpleasant to have this division between communities, farmlands and so on. I was unable to go that afternoon because I was involved in charity work to which I had previously committed myself. I wrote back to the chairman who had written to me and explained this. However, I said I would like to be kept in touch and to be reassured that I was not unwittingly involving myself in political affiliations which I would find distasteful. I await a reply to that letter.
However, I explored the matter further. I explored it when, with other members of New Consensus, I went to the North of Ireland and met senior officers of the RUC and I asked them for statistics. I explained I had been approached and that I was concerned because I understood the human disruption involved. I received from them some very clear facts and figures which I would like to place on the record. There are approximately 300 milies of Border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland with a total of 291 recognised Border crossings which are called BCPs. Of the 291 BCPs, 16 crossing points are land routes approved by customs commissioners for the importation and exportation of goods of every description, including vehicles.
There are nine concessionary routes through 19 BCPs, that is, routes that pass from the Republic of Ireland into Northern Ireland and back into the Republic of Ireland and on which customs commissioners have waived customs regulations. A total of 92 BCPs are the subject of road closure orders issued for security reasons by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland under the provisions of section 19 of the Emergency Provisions Act (Northern Ireland), 1978. In addition, there are 18 permanent vehicle check points (PVCPs) on cross-Border routes.
The figures that accompanied the letter I received from a chief superintendent of this district tell a very significant story indeed. They demonstrate clearly that since the Border roads were closed in 1981 there has been a dramatic, sustained, continuing drop in bomb attacks, shooting incidents and murders, both of policemen and civilians. That is an unarguable answer to people who accuse those of us interested in the North-South rail link of being insensitive and uncaring with regard to the rights of the people whose lives are disrupted, admittedly, by the cratering of the roads. I have figures both in graph form and statistical form.
In the Lisnaskea sub-division, in 1980 there were six deaths. In 1981 there were three and after the introduction of the policy of closing the roads it dropped to none. It went up once or twice subsequently but there were several consecutive years in which there were no murders.
In regard to shootings, in 1980 there were 17; in 1981 there were 21, but immediately following the closure of the roads it was down to nine. It now hovers somewhere between three and seven.
With regard to bomb incidents, in 1980 there were 12 and in 1981 there were also 12. In 1982, there were three. In other words, those serious incidents have been reduced to a quarter or a half of what they were.
I understand the inconvenience and disruption to people in the communities along the Border but I have to balance that against death. If it is a choice between death, on the one hand, and inconvenience, on the other, I am sorry, but some people will have to be inconvenienced. That, I hope, puts to rest the peace bus campaign which was so actively promoted by Provisional Sinn Féin.
Having made that little digression which is rather important, I want to address again the subject of the North-South rail link. Several people have indicated they consider it a very strange method of operation by the IRA. It is difficult to understand their motivation. I do not believe there is a great deal of value in simply blackguarding the IRA and describing them as monsters, terrorists, perverts and so on because it is important that we get them to listen to us. Like any other human being, if you use bad names and derogatory language about them they will just erect a shutter. They will not listen; it is a natural human instinct.
However, it is worth while asking them simply questions. The simple question I would ask the IRA is how they can square their stated objective of unifying the country with the disruption of the principal rail link between the two parts of the island. I would be interested to hear their answer. I would also like to know what is the military objective. In a war situation like, for example, World War II there was, of course, bombing of railway lines for a very good reason; it was interrupting the transfer of military supplies. There is no such reason for these attacks on the railway line.
I would like to refer the House also to another matter which is regrettable. It was mentioned in Dáil Éireann by Deputy McCartan. He placed a rather interesting piece of evidence on the record of that House. Talking of the Dublin-Belfast link he said that this issue first came to his attention most directly when a number of train drivers, some constituents and some acquaintances, told him that they could not stand the strain any longer. They explained that they had, in the face of unbelievable pressures, written to Mr. Gerry Adams, so-called Member of Parliament for the people of West Belfast and President of Sinn Féin, requesting a meeting. Those train drivers, as workers, wanted to bring to his attention what his associates were inflicting on those who drove the trains on that line. They never received a response from Mr. Adams, a Member of Parliament for the people as he describes himself. He refused to meet them. He refused to meet his constituents, whose lives and livelihood were threatened. I do not wish to engage in personal attacks upon people but that stands, without further gloss from me, as a comment upon the nature of Mr. Adams' commitment to democracy.
It is also important to remember that the Irish Congress of Trade Unions yesterday again passed overwhelmingly a simpler resolution to this. In speaking on it on the radio this morning the General Secretary mentioned that he had been approached by a train driver who had driven four times over an unexploded bomb on the railway line. It is extremely difficult to ask people to continue driving trains in this appalling situation because you never actually know when you are going to be blown into smithereens. There is a danger, not only to employment but also to lives, firstly, to the lives of railway employees and, secondly, to the lives of the innocent travelling public.
I want to put two or three other things on the record. There is a political dimension to this from which the Southern Government cannot escape, and that is, the necessity of investment in this rail link. I was sad and puzzled to hear some weeks ago the Minister for Tourism and Transport, Deputy Séamus Brennan, whom I respect, saying that where it became necessary to choose between investing funds in the development of the North-South rail link on the one hand, and the suburban network in Dublin on the other, he would go for the suburban Dublin network in terms of seeking funding. Although I am a Dubliner and I tend to think in Dublin terms, I question whether his priority is right. It is not just an economic situation; it is an economic plus a social situation, and one with a very definite political touch to it.
Like most Members of the House, I get some very odd literature through the box in the morning and yesterday I got something from the Societé Internationale des chemins de fer, a French rail way magazine. The entire issue was devoted to the heavy investment currently being embarked upon by both sections of Germany to increase the transport link between the two countries. In this House, and the other House, we often hear of parallels being drawn between the developing situation in the East and what we could do here. That is one very clear development.
I very much welcome this motion and, once again, I would like to place on the record my thanks to the Government for allowing us to pass the motion in its original form.