Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:1 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach whether he has ever had a meeting with Unionist leader, Mr. Jim Molyneaux; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna-Questions. Oral Questions. - Northern Ireland Discussions.
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:2 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach whether a meeting will take place on the margins of the European Council meeting between the UK Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, and himself; and if so, the agenda for such a meeting.
John Bruton
Ceist:3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if there has been any change in Government policy to the effect that Government contact with Sinn Féin will be conditional on a definitive rejection of violence as a means of achieving political objectives as stated by him in reply to Parliamentary Question No. 1 by Deputy J. Bruton on 29 June 1993; and if this policy also applies to officials acting on a Minister's behalf.
Proinsias De Rossa
Ceist:4 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting in Dublin on 3 December 1993, with the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major.
Proinsias De Rossa
Ceist:5 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach if he has any plans for a bilateral meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, during the EC summit in Brussels on 10 December 1993; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Proinsias De Rossa
Ceist:6 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the progress, if any, made to date in implementing the objectives set out in the joint communique he issued with the British Prime Minister following their meeting in Brussels on 29 October 1993; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Mary Harney
Ceist:7 Miss Harney asked the Taoiseach the key principles of his self-declared peace initiative on Northern Ireland which he says he has been working on for the past 18 months.
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:8 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Taoiseach whether, in view of current developments in Northern Ireland, he will give the plans, if any, he has for a meeting with US President, Mr. Bill Clinton.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive together. As Deputies will be aware, the Anglo-Irish working meeting, held in Dublin Castle on Friday last, was the first in a series of such meetings planned for this month. The British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, was accompanied by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Douglas Hurd and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Sir Patrick Mayhew. I was accompanied by the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Spring and the Minister for Justice, Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn.
The discussions last Friday focused principally on the development of an agreed joint statement which would constitute a formula for peace. The prospects for the forthcoming European Council meeting in Brussels and for a successful conclusion to the GATT talks later this month were also discussed with the British side.
A range of important issues relating to Northern Ireland were discussed, in particular the prospects of achieving a permanent end to violence. In this regard, significant progress was made in the formulation of an agreed joint statement. Both Governments are committed to the objective of finding a formula for peace, which will command support from each of the two traditions on this island.
A number of important outstanding issues remain, but both Governments are determined to reach a satisfactory outcome. The two Governments agreed, therefore, that senior officials from both sides should speedily work together with a view to resolving these. This process of intensive consultation and discussion is already under way. John Major and I undertook to review the position at the weekend when we meet on the occasion of the European Council meeting in Brussels. In the light of this review, we will then decide how best to proceed in our work to develop a joint statement.
In reply to Deputy O'Keeffe's question as to whether I have ever met the Official Unionist Party leader, Mr. James Molyneaux, the Tánaiste and I have made clear on many occasions that we stand ready to meet the Unionist Leader or any other Unionist politician at any time and in any place. Such a meeting would afford me a further opportunity to reassure him, his party, and indeed the wider Unionist community regarding their fears and suspicions of the peace process. Our approach is guided by the principles of freely-given agreement and consent. This reflects the reality that an eventual peace formula, will need to be generally seen by each tradition as fair and equitable. We recognise therefore that, to be successful, the peace process must take account of the need to safeguard the rights and identities of the two communities in Northern Ireland. I repeat that we do not wish to predetermine, or prejudice in any way, the political future of either tradition. That is a matter for negotiation and agreement in the context of a resumed process of dialogue.
On the question of contact with Sinn Féin, there has been no change in the general policy or in the practice adopted by successive Governments in this regard. However, as during the period of the Hunger Strikes, for example, it is essential at times of high tension, or as at present when there is a serious prospect of a permanent end to violence, that the Government stay in close touch with developments in the thinking, of all sections of the community in Northern Ireland through, for example, constitutional leaders, churchmen, community leaders, business people and housewives.
Regarding the prospects for a meeting between President Clinton and myself, no definite plans currently exist. As the House will be aware, the Tánaiste met President Clinton in Washington recently. I wish to re-state here that the Government deeply appreciates the President's continuing interest in the Northern Ireland situation and his readiness to support in any appropriate way the efforts of the Irish and British Governments.
I want to avail of this opportunity to say that the prospects for progress will not be helped by speculation based on rumour or half-truths — either in this House or elsewhere. I have pointed out to John Major that I regard it as his responsibility to keep James Molyneaux and the Unionist Party fully informed of developments, because of their continuing reluctance to meet the Irish Government. I assure the House that as soon as I am in a position to do so, I will give them the full details of what is proposed.
The Taoiseach mentioned that there were a number of important issues outstanding following last Friday's meeting. Will he accept it would be useful if the House had an outline of these outstanding issues? I want to raise two issues with the Taoiseach the first of which relates to Articles 2 and 3. Since the meeting last Friday the Taoiseach made it clear that he is prepared to put in writing his undertaking to hold a referendum on Articles 2 and 3 in the context of an overall settlement — I hope I am quoting him correctly. Will he explain the difficulty in including such an undertaking in a joint declaration, if he is prepared to give it in writing, or, if not in the joint declaration, in an annex or codicil to it? Would that approach overcome any difficulty that may arise in relation to the undertaking of the Government on that issue? The second issue I want to raise concerns the position of the Unionists. Am I to accept that the Taoiseach has openly issued invitations to the Unionist leadership? Does he not accept it is absolutely vital that he has a full understanding of the Unionist position on the issues under discussion? Could I put it to him fairly bluntly — taking the words from the Opsahl report — and ask if there is an "equality of esteem" for both the Unionist and Nationalist communities as far as this Government is concerned? If so, does the Taoiseach, in the context of his discussions with the UK Prime Minister, continue to bear in mind the need to have Unionist concerns taken on board in the context of the final declaration that will emerge from that discussion?
The Deputy has raised a number of questions. May I remind the Deputy that at all times. I have said that I take into consideration, in working on this formula for peace, the fears and suspicions of the Unionist community and the equal rights of the two traditions that have to be enshrined in any approach. It is no good recognising one to the exclusion of the other. Nobody would make any progress in approaching the Northern problem in that regard. If there is a problem in relation to the position I have stated here and outside on a number of occasions that, in the event of an overall balanced settlement, the Government will be prepared to put the appropriate question in a referendum to the people — I do not think there is — I do not have any difficulty in saying it will be put in writing. Regarding the details of the outstanding issues the best I can do is read to the House the response of John Major which sums up both our views in relation to it. I quote from his comments last Friday at the press conference when he said:
Neither of us believes that airing those views publicly in advance of that agreement is going to make that agreement any easier to reach.
As I said in my reply the two Governments are committed to finding an agreement to the matters outstanding between us. Senior officials from both sides are already engaged in discussions in London today and they will continue until they reach the end of the line as far as they are concerned. In the light of the progress made by them I expect to have another meeting with the British Prime Minister, John Major, in Brussels at the weekend on the occasion of the summit. I think I have dealt with all the questions raised by Deputy O'Keeffe but if I have omitted one please tell me.
I welcome the fact the Taoiseach has stressed that the peace formula as well as the talks process must be such as to command the support of the two traditions. That is important. I wish to question the Taoiseach on an aspect of the communique issued following the meeting in Brussels in which both he and the British Prime Minister urged the Northern parties to intensify their efforts to find a new basis for inter-party talks between the constitutional parties. What progress has been made since 29 October in getting talks going between the constitutional parties in parallel with his efforts?
We are available at all times to join the talks process. The work in the background towards the resumption of the talks is being carried out by Sir Patrick Mayhew and Minister Michael Ancram and their report to the Anglo-Irish Conference on the last occasion it met was that not sufficient work had been done in the background to be able to invite all the parties to come back to the table. It is a matter for them to report back to us as soon as they feel they have enough work done so that the talks process can resume. We are ready to resume them at any time.
The Taoiseach said he expressed the view to the Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, that rumours and half-truths do not help the situation. In those circumstances, does he accept that it would be helpful to tell us the outstanding issues between himself and Mr. Major with regard to the peace process? Given that demagogues such as Mr. Paisley can thrive only in situations of fear and insecurity, would it not help to ease the fears and insecurities if, first, we knew precisely what was being discussed and negotiated and, second, if the people of Northern Ireland knew precisely our Government's intention with regard to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution?
I have already answered the latter part of the Deputy's question when I quoted what both Prime Ministers agreed. I stated in the House that neither of us believe that it is going to be helpful to the resolution of the outstanding matters to have them debated in public. That is our position and we are sticking to it.
I cannot help if people misrepresent what I say. I try to express myself as clearly and simply as I can when speaking on the issues which are supposed to be causing fear to some of the Unionist people. I have taken the opportunity on every occasion that people visited from both communities to explain that there is full respect for both traditions and there has to be full respect for the equal rights of both communities in any approach to the problem. There is no need for fears and that is our approach to the preparation of the joint statement on the formula for peace.
The Taoiseach referred to the fact that a number of important outstanding issues remain to be resolved. Is one of those issues the refusal of the British Government to acknowledge the legitimacy and value of the aspiration to Irish unity?
I have no intention of going into detail on any matter outstanding. However, I wish to tell the Deputy that the type of language she is using and the issue she is raising is taken from the leaked document that appeared in the Irish Press but that document refers not to the peace process but to the talks process. A document, something along those lines, when it has been finalised by the Government, will be sent to the British Government, but that is a matter for the other process.
Perhaps one further round of questions from the Deputies concerned of a brief and relevant nature would be appropriate. Let us not forget that at this time on Tuesdays a half an hour only is provided for Taoiseach's questions.
The Taoiseach has put on the record of this House his willingness to put in writing his undertaking in relation to Articles 2 and 3. Will he please explain in simple English why such an undertaking cannot be included in the joint declaration?
I did not say it would not be included; I said that if there were difficulties over the understanding of the Government's position, we would be quite happy to put it in writing in any form in which it is requested if that can alleviate any of the problems. I do not see any difficulty and I recall Mr. James Molyneaux, accepting the position as I explained it on the David Frost interview. Indeed, I saw the co-chairman of the British-Irish Parliamentary Body, the former Government Chief Whip and Mr. Michael Mates discuss on BBC's "Newsnight" a few days ago another misunderstanding that was supposed to be there but Mr. Mates accepted the Government's position. Some of the difficulties that are being represented simply do not exist in my view.
All parties in this House would be willing to be of assistance to the Taoiseach in seeking to ensure that direct face-to-face discussions take place between the Government and the Unionist community. Does he accept it is extremely important for the avoidance of misunderstanding that such face-to-face discussions take place?
I go to great lengths every time I speak on this subject to try to explain every possible angle and to try to remove fears and suspicions in people's minds, regardless of the community they come from. I am trying to signal clearly that both Prime Ministers and their Governments are engaged in a process of trying to put together a joint statement that we hope will commend support from both communities and from the paramilitaries on both sides. We are trying to signal a new direction, a new beginning different from the past 25 years of armed conflict which has not brought results to anybody. There will be no military victory on either side. We want to signal clearly that the new starting point will be the cessation of violence, the objective, of course, being peace which should be the starting point of a new beginning in all our approaches to finding a solution to the problems in Northern Ireland. We are trying to show the futility of violence in the 25 wasted years with its waste of effort, energies and lives which has been to the detriment of both communities so that everybody will see that a new beginning is necessary and that they should follow the new road ahead.
The Taoiseach stated in his reply that he does not believe it would be helpful to outline the outstanding issues in the House. Does he accept that, in the light of the uncertainty and insecurity arising from people's fears that the issues being discussed and negotiated may have an adverse impact on either or both communities, it is important to make clear what the issues are so that the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic are treated as adults capable of making judgments and distinctions between what is good or bad for the North or the South?
Does the Taoiseach continue to stand by the six democratic principles enunciated by the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, in particular, the one that the people living in Ireland, North and South, without coercion and violence should be free to determine their future — which implies there could be a different future for Northern Ireland and for the Republic?
I certainly hope there will be a different future for the two communities in Northern Ireland and that the starting point for the formulation of a new future will be a cessation of violence and an acceptance of the peace process. We can then go on to the talks process. I have sought at all times to keep this House fully informed and since this Dáil session began, I think there was only one week when I did not answer questions or make statements on Northern Ireland. I have given extensive interviews in the print media and on radio and television and I had a significant response, particularly from Northern Ireland.
Only yesterday a Unionist MP was saying quite clarly that he was quite happy to leave it to the two Prime Ministers to work it out so long as they bore in mind the equal rights and concerns of both communities. I share that view and he can be assured of that. It is the responsibility and duty of the British Prime Minister to inform the Unionist politicians, who have access to him at all times to ensure there is no misunderstanding and that their fears and suspicions are totally groundless. The Deputy may recall that when the Anglo-Irish Agreement was prepared it was not thrown from one side of the House to the other. A sensible person would not suggest that that is a better way of doing business between two Governments than the way we are doing it.
Would the Taoiseach accept that the formula required by the republican movement would not be acceptable to the majority community in Northern Ireland and that rather than delivering peace, moving along two separate processes could result in further violence from a different quarter?
I hope not. It is not the intention of the Governments to lead the communities in that direction. The vast majority of the people in the North would not even contemplate that. My best information is that there is a strong move for peace and there is an opportunity for peace. It is the responsibility of both Governments to grasp that opportunity and make sure that a different direction for the two communities is pointed out. We must first try to get a cessation of violence and then go on to the talks process where all constitutional parties and those who renounce violence will have an opportunity to have their views expressed on the best future for Northern Ireland. I am sure all parties accept that one cannot get stability or move forward in a political system which does not give equal recognition and equal rights to two communities who have been divided for too long by armed conflict.
The Taoiseach misconstrued my question with regard to the Spring principles which state that people living in Ireland, north and south, without coercion and without violence should be free to determine their own futures. I suggest that that implies that the future for Northern Ireland may be different from the future of the Republic of Ireland. Does the Taoiseach stand by that principle?
Of course. We will pursue our best efforts to get a cessation of violence and after that we will pursue the talks process, on the basis that nothing will change in relation to the status of Northern Ireland without the consent of the majority. That has always been my position and it does not change.
Will the Taoiseach tell the House what is the barrier to the resumption of talks between the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland and does he agree that they should talk to one another now?
Of course they should talk to one another, but they all have given reasons as to why they are not doing so. Mr. Ian Paisley has given his reason and everybody should know it by now. As he says, he is always making himself abundantly clear. Mr. James Molyneaux has given his reasons for not resuming the talks. Mr. John Alderdice is ready to sit down and talk, as are the SDLP and the Irish Government. The question must be addressed to the Unionists and the Democratic Unionists. It is not for me to answer for them.
Will the Taoiseach say if his adviser on Northern Ireland is continuing to have talks with representatives of the republican movement in Northern Ireland?
Is it the British Government's intention?
Is the Taoiseach's adviser continuing to have talks with the representatives of the republican movement in Northern Ireland?
It is for the British Government to decide. They have already said that their communication lines will stay open. I got an assurance from the British Prime Minister, Mr. John Major, that it will not interfere with our talks process with them.
I asked about the Taoiseach's adviser, not about the British Government.
I have already said that I have not met Sinn Féin or the IRA——
I am asking the Taoiseach's adviser.
—— and perhaps the Deputy should read the Evening Press of yesterday for corroborative evidence.
The Taoiseach sounds like John Major.
My adviser will continue with the general policy of previous Governments in relation to gathering information for me about the shifting opinions in the various Northern Ireland communities. The Irish people would want me to use that information to make the right decision in going forward to try to find peace.
Is there an agreement to have a further meeting with the UK Prime Minister before Christmas, after the meeting in Brussels next weekend?
I expect to have a meeting before Christmas in order to review progress that our officials have made during the summit in Brussels.