It is my pleasure to return to the Seanad, especially for such an historic debate to make my contribution and to say how much I appreciate the accommodation afforded to me by the Seanad. Today's timetable got a little offside and I am glad the House has been able to accommodate me.
Twenty five years is the span of a generation and yet the last 25 years on this island have seen all too many lives cut short and all too many hopes diminished. Lives have been lived in the shadow of actual violence or its ever present threat. That is why every Irish person, at home and abroad, rejoices at the ending of the 25 year old IRA campaign.
This is truly the first day of a new era. We all hope to see the swift follow-on of an end to paramilitary violence on all sides and consolidation of this process by a gradual and general process of demilitarisation, and the elimination of remaining areas of discrimination and disadvantage. There is a heavy onus on all, on both Governments and all constitutional parties, to contribute actively to the consolidation of peace by a generous and flexible approach.
As the Government stated yesterday, there is now an historic opportunity to take the gun out of Irish politics forever and to achieve a new and far-reaching political accommodation in Ireland in a transformed atmosphere. The aim of both Governments is an agreed Ireland where the principle of self-determination is balanced by the requirement of consent.
Today there is a clearer realisation than ever before of the futility of attempting to resolve the differences between two communities by force or of coercing one community into the mould set by another, whether in Northern Ireland or in Ireland as a whole.
At last we have a real opportunity to break free from the stagnation and demoralisation caused by the prolonged violence over the past 25 years. We are prepared to recognise in practical ways without delay the electoral mandate of Sinn Féin, on the basis that the complete cessation of IRA military violence will immediately become and remain a reality, and that the commitment to the success of the democratic peace process proves definitive. As the commitment to cease military operations is unconditional, so is acceptance into democratic political life, and we fully recognise that political and other progress will depend on confidence building measures on all sides.
The Government, since the Downing Street Declaration, has made it clear at all times that we were not interested in half measures, such as temporary or conditional cease-fires, that what we wanted was a complete cessation and an end to the IRA campaign.
Yesterday's IRA statement is quite clear and unambiguous and can have only one possible meaning, that its campaign has ended for good. This is expressed in two ways in the statement. First, it expresses in a positive way its "definitive" commitment to the success of the democratic peace process. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, "definitive" means finally fixing or settling something, conclusive. In other words, by using the word "definitive" the IRA has made a firm, final and conclusive commitment to the democratic peace process. Furthermore, it announced a complete cessation of military operations. That means there can be no going back. As Mr. John Hume quoted yesterday, the dictionary definition of "complete" is something that has finished and has ended. "Complete" and "definitive" taken together mean permanent.
As I went into Setanta House last night the girl at reception had a small dictionary. I asked her to open the dictionary and to read out the definition of "complete". As she reached it so too did the cameras of BBC and ITV. She read out the clear definition on camera. I do not know whether that was shown on television. I am glad Mr. John Hume and I were thinking the same thing last night.
I regret that there has been some temporary controversy over the absence of the word "permanent". That matter should now be regarded as settled and resolved. The British Government has made it clear that it is not insisting on the use of the word "permanent" as such. The Secretary of State, Sir Patrick Mayhew, said on BBC 1 news at 9.15 p.m. last night — and I quote: "It is very simple for the IRA to say, yes, Mr. Reynolds is very right, he understands what we mean to say. But if they say that then that would be good enough for us." This morning on Radio 4, he put the same point slightly differently. I quote from a press agency report. He said: "It would be quite enough for Mr. Adams to say that the Irish Prime Minister, Mr. Reynolds — who has said he believes the cease-fire to be permanent — understands what we intended. He has got it right and we have got it wrong." I now draw attention to the article in The Irish Times this morning by Mr. Adams in which he says: “Albert Reynolds, Dick Spring, John Hume and others have responded positively and correctly to the IRA announcement. So have President Clinton and others in the US.” That disposes of the matter in the manner requested by the Secretary of State. There should be no further difficulty or debate.
Government officials were in Stormont this morning for a meeting with senior Northern Ireland Office officials, and took the opportunity to fully clarify the position in all its aspects. I am glad to note that according to the UTV News at Six p.m. this evening, the British Government is now happier about the terms of the IRA announcement. We should all be able to move forward, both Governments and the political parties, on the basis of a common and shared understanding of the situation and of the IRA's intentions as set out in its statement yesterday.
One of the purposes of the Downing Street Declaration, in the paragraphs in my name, was to remove the fears of Unionists of coercion or of forcible political and cultural assimilation. In the declaration I asked the people of Northern Ireland to look on the Republic as friends who share their grief and shame over all the suffering of the past quarter of a century, and who want to develop the best possible relationship with them, a relationship in which trust and new understanding can flourish and grow. The atmosphere of peace presents a new and unique opportunity for Unionists and Nationalists to build up this new relationship of trust and reconciliation in a vastly improved atmosphere, assuming loyalist paramilitaries respond favourably to the current position. This opens up a range of possibilities in human and economic terms.
Last December, in this House, I described in some detail the principles which guided Mr. John Major and myself to the Downing Street Declaration. I said it was a charter for peace in Ireland and that it set out to demonstrate to every shade of opinion in Northern Ireland that their political aims and ideals can be far more effectively pursued by purely democratic methods.
In the whole exercise leading up to the Joint Declaration it was a slow and patient task trying to reconcile important principles such as the right to national self-determination with the obligation the Government had set itself and affirmed in an international agreement to seek consent. There had to be movement away from simple majoritarianism as a political solution to the problem either in the island as a whole or within Northern Ireland. We also had to convince Republicans that violence served to distract from the problems at issue rather than resolve them and that there was an effective role for their position in constructive politics. The whole outreach exercise was fraught with risk, risk for me personally and risk for the Government. Yet without the effort of understanding and without constructive engagement, the stand-off and the violence might have continued almost indefinitely.
The continuing development of the peace process and, ultimately of a negotiated political settlement will be rooted in the balanced set of precepts and guarantees set out in the Joint Declaration. The Joint Declaration came about as the initiative of the Irish Government and set out on the one hand to address Nationalist grievances. Mr. John Hume was of inestimable value at this stage in conveying the real concerns of Nationalists and how they thought those concerns must be addressed in the context of the achievement of a normal society in Northern Ireland. In balance with this was a concern to address the fears of Unionists and loyalists that their identity, beliefs and values were not under threat. The Declaration aims to eliminate the siege mentality from both communities and with it any possible purported justification for recourse to arms.
The British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, deserves our deep and lasting gratitude for his courage in agreeing to proceed with the initiative of the Declaration. Over the next few days and weeks as the substance of peace becomes fact, I firmly believe that the reality of an end to the IRA campaign will be equally clear on both sides of the Irish Sea. Peace represents a major political achievement for all involved — it is a victory without victims. There are no losers from this process, only winners.
In reaching agreement on the Joint Declaration, we also continued our parallel search for political progress. The peace process and the talks process have been complementary, and all Northern political parties, including Sinn Féin, have a part to play in shaping the final outcome of the talks. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Spring, and his team of officials are owed heartfelt thanks for their work on both processes.
In securing peace it was important to eliminate distractions and show good faith. The perception or excuse of censorship was to some extent a distraction as well as meriting reform on the basis of freedom of expression. Accordingly, section 31 of the Broadcasting Act was lifted in January to focus attention on the context of the Declaration rather than extraneous issues. Similarly, we agreed with the decision of President Clinton to grant a short term visa to Gerry Adams last winter to allow him to meet directly in the US with influential Irish-American opinion which has been a crucial influence in advancing the peace process. I thank President Clinton for his constant support for the Irish peace process and the Joint Declaration, and likewise all our friends in America.
I take this opportunity to express the Government's deep appreciation of the continuing efforts of the US Ambassador to Ireland, Mrs. Jean Kennedy-Smith, who over the past few days has made a real effort, working long hours, to ensure yesterday's announcement was possible.
Throughout, the approach of the Government has been one of constructive engagement rather than sterile confrontation. The initial reaction of Northern Republicans to the Declaration was one of disappointment. However, the Government was not prepared simply to set out the Declaration on a take it or leave it basis. While the Declaration was not and is not renegotiable, we accepted that there could be a valid distinction between clarification and negotiation. We dealt with every difficult point or objection raised to the best of our ability. We responded to loyalist requests for clarification with the same thoroughness, honesty and detail. There were, needless to say, no backdoor political pacts or agreements, just as today there are no secret deals or hidden agendas.
The process of securing peace was at all times a delicate and difficult procedure. At times almost alone, apart from my Government colleagues, I kept faith in the possibility of peace. I knew if I wavered publicly that would universally be regarded as the end of the peace process. During this time their were suggestions of appeasement and naivety. Much has been made in other contexts of my ignoring advice. If I had taken much of the advice offered by pundits and some in Opposition parties, the delicate flower of peace would have withered on the vine.
I am particularly grateful for the steady support and understanding throughout of our partners in Government, and especially the Tánaiste, for an initiative that had begun before they joined the Government, as well as for the active part he and his officials played in developing it further. Both of us have at all times been determined to be satisfied with nothing less than a permanent peace. I was also grateful for the support given to the Declaration by all parties and by independent Members of the Oireachtas.
Because I was clear in my mind about the many benefits of peace, it became necessary to be clear about the steps necessary to achieve it and not to be deflected by short term considerations or point scoring. In the critical period ahead, where it is essential to consolidate peace quickly and to make it irreversible, I intend to apply the same activist and resolute approach. All of us, if we want peace, must be prepared to welcome into the democratic process those who are no longer associated with a campaign of violence. There is a new beginning. To that end, I propose shortly to initiate bilateral discussions with all interested parties on the establishment of the forum which I envisage will meet before the end of October.
Meanwhile, we will continue to work to bring to a conclusion the framework document on talks under discussion with the British Government. There will then be an opportunity for negotiations to take place involving all the parties in Northern Ireland in an open and constructive way. As someone who has had a lot of social and business contacts with the Unionist community, I believe I will have done the Unionist people some service if I have succeeded in helping to bring to an end the IRA campaign of violence which they see as primarily directed against them.
I would also like to pay tribute to the generally steadfast position adopted by the Unionist leader, Mr. Molyneaux, and his colleagues in resolutely dampening down attempts to arouse hysteria in the Unionist community both in December and now. The next task facing us is true reconciliation between the Unionists and Nationalists and the development of a pragmatic partnership based on mutual support and need. I repeat, we have no interest in pressurising or cajoling Unionists unwillingly into a united Ireland. Any such arrangement will eventually come about on the basis of broad agreement or not at all.
Nationalists are entitled to look for equality and parity of esteem in Northern Ireland and for recognition of their Irish identity. For continuing progress it is essential that Unionist leaders, too, are forward looking, prepared to educate their community on the need for compromise, just as John Hume and I have spent much time trying to persuade northern republicans to engage exclusively in the democratic process.
As President Clinton said yesterday, we are at the beginning of a new era which holds the promise of peace for all the people of Northern Ireland. I know that President Clinton, who has played a very important role in his support for peace, is envisaging economic assistance for reconstruction and investment in Northern Ireland and on both sides of the Border. The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Spring, flew to America this afternoon to meet President Clinton and to move this package along. The President is anxious to be seen to underpin the decision taken yesterday and to help Irish people to consolidate the peace process. President Jacques Delors of the European Union is also ready and willing to help on behalf of the Community. The peace dividend is in economic as well as human terms and the human dynamism unleashed will be complemented by economic dynamism.
Let us all make the most of a new opportunity, the opportunity of a lifetime. We owe it to the memory of the 3,000 dead — one of whom was Marie, the daughter of Senator Gordon Wilson — to make this new era work. I am very glad for his sake that the IRA campaign has come to an end and would like to thank him for his tremendous efforts for peace and indeed all those who have worked hard for peace over the past 25 years. I pledge my continuing commitment to a lasting, just peace and to the achievement of a comprehensive negotiated political settlement which will nurture and sustain peace and progress.
When I addressed the Seanad last December, I quoted Shakespeare in support of my concept of peace. I think he bears quoting again.
A peace is of the nature of a conquest;
For then both parties nobly are subdued,
And neither party loser.