Vol. 403 No. 1
5 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he has any plans to meet the British Prime Minister or Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to discuss the current deadlock on political talks in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
6 Mr. Barry asked the Taoiseach if he has any plans to meet the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
7 Mr. Spring asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland at Ballinamore, County Leitrim, on Monday 26 November, 1990.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5, 6 and 7 together.
I met the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland during the course of our attendance at a function yesterday for the launch of the Ballinamore-Ballyconnell Canal restoration project. It would not be appropriate to go into the detail of confidential discussions of this nature but I can tell the House that the Government still support the initiative and are anxious that is should succeed.
I welcome the apparent upsurge of confidence that something will come out of the current initiative between Mr. Brooke and the Taoiseach. Yesterday Mr. Brooke indicated that there were hurdles still to be overcome. Will the Taoiseach indicate what those hurdles are and if the timetable for the participation of our Government in talks is one of them? Does the Taoiseach foresee any improvement in the situation arising from the meeting between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Mr. Brooke on Friday?
I would rather confine myself to broad principles at this stage in view of the long and protracted nature of the discussions. It would be helpful, from the point of view of the process, not to go into any particular details. However, I can say to the House that the situation is reasonably encouraging but, as the Deputy knows, it is fraught with the unexpected. At the moment I am not pessimistic, let me put it that way.
I fully understand the Taoiseach's reticence to be more specific. I am glad that at this stage the Taoiseach is sounding, and that the noises from yesterday appear optimistic in relation to the prospects of something happening, but we must express concern at the delays that have taken place. There have obviously been protracted attempts to bring about discussions. Will the Taoiseach attempt to outline in some detail what is holding up the talks? We have read about Mr. Brooke's proposals and Mr. Hume's proposals. Are we to take it that the Irish Government have not made proposals, because from today's newspapers it appears that there are no specific proposals from the Government? Will the Taoiseach clarify that the Irish Government and the British Government have actually agreed a formula which is now to be agreed by the Unionists and the SDLP?
I would not like the Deputy to think that the Irish Government have not made proposals. We have been making proposals all along the line. Progress to date has been largely as a result of our flexibility and because we have put forward formulae and compromises to get over hurdles that had existed from the beginning. We have had a very good record of success in that regard. Things that at the outset appeared to be insurmountable obstacles have now disappeared. There are a number of different possibilities for progress at the moment. I mentioned them yesterday. One is the suggestion with regard to the role of the Secretary of State, the other is John Hume's proposal that each party would come to the talks on the basis of their stated positions. That is another sensible proposal. Since everybody agrees that it is essential that there has to be three sets of talks and that there can be no prospect of success unless it is tri-dimensional, the difficulty, which is not insurmountable, is how the three sets of talks can be co-ordinated, both as to format and timescale. I am reasonably satisfied that with goodwill — and certainly there is goodwill on our side and there has been goodwill all along — we can fairly soon come to a conclusion. I do not want to be over-optimistic or to mislead the House on that score, but I believe there is a distinct possibility of success.
Is the timing and method of involvement of the Irish Government in the internal talks between the parties in Northern Ireland the only hurdle in the way of the commencement of those internal talks? Would the Taoiseach agree that the fact that the Irish Government are involved through the Anglo-Irish Conference anyway in all these matters, means that our involvement or non-involvement in the internal talks should not become an obstacle?
I assure the Deputy that it is not an obstacle. That is not an issue.
Deputy De Rossa.
We never expected to be involved in the internal talks between the parties.
Will the Taoiseach indicate his view of the proposal tabled by the Secretary of State as to the Secretary of State's involvement in deciding on the movement to a phase where the Irish Government will be involved?
That has not been tabled by the Secretary of State as such. I have already mentioned that that is a proposal, a suggestion which is there for consideration. It has not actually been tabled by the Secretary of State.
What is the Taoiseach's view on it?
Will the Taoiseach indicate if the question of the timing of the Irish Government's involvement in talks is the only obstacle or only hurdle that is there?
It is not the only obstacle.
Can the Taoiseach outline the other obstacles?
I would rather not at this stage.
Can the Taoiseach give any indication at all to the House as to what the problems are?
I have given the House enough information to understand the position. I have given what I can safely give at this stage. The Deputy should understand that the problem is that if I start taking public attitudes, or if any of the other parties take public attitudes, that affects the whole process. It is much better for me to explain to the House, as I have done, that the tri-dimensional aspects of the talks are the key and the problem that confronts us is to find an appropriate and satisfactory format for all concerned and an appropriate and satisfactory timescale for all concerned.
The point needs to be made that——
I want to bring in other Deputies and I want to dissuade Members of the notion that they may have a debate on this matter now.
I do not want a debate, but the point is that all of the other parties in this problem are quite free with their views as to what the obstacles are and have stated their views quite publicly. It is important that the House should know what the obstacles are from the point of view of the Irish Government so that we can at least address the issues as they really are rather than on the basis of rumours and assumptions.
The Deputy has raised that point in a variety of ways just now. Deputy Spring.
I am grateful to the Taoiseach for his comprehensive and forthright reply to my supplementary question. I seek some further minor clarification. As I understand it there is a meeting of the Intergovernmental Conference on Friday. Will the Taoiseach outline to us what steps he envisages after that meeting? Is there an exact timetable as of now in relation to Friday's meeting and following meetings by either the Irish Government or the Secretary of State with the other parties to be involved? Will things be happening in the next number of days?
The next immediate step is Friday's meeting. I hope that we will be able to get substantial progress there, from which everything else will follow.
I am glad to note the hopefulness if not the optimism expressed by the Taoiseach. I agree with the Taoiseach that there are some questions to which answers should not properly be given at this stage. At the end of this process——
Will the Deputy ask a question?
Would the Taoiseach agree that at the end of the road it might be more difficult to explain to most sensible people why talks have not taken place rather than why talks took place?
I would like to be able to answer that question but, as I do not understand the Deputy's implication, I am afraid I cannot.
Will the Taoiseach agree that we have now reached a stage where most sensible people do not understand why talks are not taking place, and that the element of blame at the end of the process will be attached to those who have been responsible for the talks not taking place rather than those who have helped the talks process along?
Rather than start at this early stage attributing blame in the event of a breakdown I would prefer to work for a successful outcome.
