John Bruton
Ceist:3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs when the Framework Document will be put to the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Northern Ireland Peace Talks.
Michael McDowell
Ceist:5 Mr. M. McDowell asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs whether recent events have shown that the Provisional movement in Northern Ireland has no intention of abandoning murder in the short term; and whether the Government intends seeking a political settlement through dialogue between constitutional politicians of potentially moderate disposition.
John Bruton
Ceist:8 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if a timetable has been set for the conclusion of discussions on the Framework Document to resume the three stranded talks in regard to Northern Ireland referred to in reply to parliamentary questions on 12 April 1994; and whether this document will be published jointly by both Governments, or by the British Government, with the agreement of the Irish Government.
Mary Harney
Ceist:9 Miss Harney asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on whether there is an onus on the Irish and British Governments to publish proposals for North/South institutions and a devolved assembly, leading to a power-sharing executive; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Michael McDowell
Ceist:10 Mr. M. McDowell asked the asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, in relation to the possible participation by Sinn Féin in political talks, his views on whether it is necessary that the IRA should give up violence permanently; his further views on whether it is necessary that the IRA should undertake any form of verifiable disarmament; his further views on whether it is possible for Sinn Féin to participate in the talks process and the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation while the IRA retains its arms and explosives; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Jim O'Keeffe
Ceist:55 Mr. J. O'Keeffe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his reaction to the statement of the Unionist leader, Mr. Jim Molyneaux, that a Government model for Northern Ireland should be agreed but not implemented before Northern parties enter into talks about their future relationship with Dublin; his views on whether it is advisable to explore these views further with Mr. Molyneaux; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 55 together.
The Irish and British Governments are currently engaged in discussions on a possible Joint Framework Document which would provide a basis for fresh political talks on the future of Northern Ireland.
We wish to launch at the earliest possible date a process of three stranded talks which would seek to achieve a lasting and comprehensive settlement on the foundations laid down in the Joint Declaration.
In the words of the declaration, our objective is "a new political framework founded on consent and encompassing arrangements within Northern Ireland, for the whole island and between these islands". We are aiming at an agreed set of arrangements across all three strands which will give practical expression to the principles outlined in the declaration.
Participation in those talks would be open to the main political parties in Northern Ireland on the basis of an exclusive commitment to peaceful and democratic politics.
The Joint Declaration provides a basis for agreement by the people of Ireland, North and South, that from now on their differences can be negotiated and resolved exclusively by peaceful political means.
There can be no vestige of justification for the taking of a single further life. The overwhelming majority of Irish people of all traditions wish to see an end to the violence which is poisoning the life-blood of this island and blighting the prospects for the present and future generations.
Sinn Féin and the Republican movement know the decided views of the Irish people in this matter. I cannot say how they will respond. Actions, rather than words, will give the true measure of their intentions. The continuing campaign of violence makes its own statement which no amount of theorizing can disguise.
A positive response to the Joint Declaration, in the only form that counts, namely a permanent end to violence, is long overdue. To defer it until after the European elections is disdainful of the lives that may be lost in the meantime. I would also have thought that the voters who are being canvassed by Sinn Féin in the European elections deserve to be told where Sinn Féin stand on this crucially relevant issue.
Mr. Molyneaux has addressed a message to the Loyalist paramilitaries to end their violence. I welcome it wholeheartedly and wish that other Unionist politicians would follow his lead.
The two Governments made it clear that no single group, least of all paramilitary groups, can have a veto on political progress. We are working on a framework to relaunch political dialogue and to guide it towards a successful outcome. We hope that those in both communities who currently support the use of violence will take the decisive step required to be represented at that table. It is clear that the prospects of success will be greatly enhanced if the two Governments can define a common approach to the key issues as a basis for discussion around the table with the other participants. We are, therefore, engaged in intensive consideration of the scope which exists for the formulation of a joint approach.
The issues which we are addressing are, of course, profound and complex and require the most careful consideration. While useful progress has been made in the discussions to date, significant work remains to be done on a number of matters which will be essential components of any future agreement.
The Secretary of State and I reviewed the progress which has been made when we met last week. We agreed to return to this matter at the next meeting of the Anglo-Irish Conference, which will take place shortly. The Taoiseach and Prime Minister Major also took stock at their meeting in Downing Street last week.
The two Governments hope to bring these discussions to a conclusion at the earliest possible date, and ideally within the next few weeks.
When a Framework Document has been agreed, we will need to give joint consideration at that point to the use we might make of it in our contacts with the other potential participants and to how the results of our work might be made public in an appropriate way in due course.
The definitive abandonment of the use, or support, of violence for political ends would open the way to participation in political talks and to a role in the shaping of an agreed future for the Irish people. It is also a precondition for participation in the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation. The manner in which a permanent end to violence could be established and verified, and the other practical consequences of a permanent cessation of violence, would be matters for decision at a later stage in the light of the circumstances.
I do not believe that discussions aimed at the achievement of agreement on internal structures in Northern Ireland in advance of discussion of the wider relationships involved would have any greater prospect of success now than they had during the numerous failed attempts to do so in the past. No progress can be made on the basis of a selective approach which focuses on one of the three key relationships to the detriment of the other two.
I am ready, as always, to discuss with Mr. Molyneaux and other Unionist leaders any aspect of the search for political progress. They are fully aware of the value which I attach to direct personal dialogue and I hope that they will take up the long-standing invitation which I have extended to them in this respect.
What will the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs do with the Framework Document when it has been prepared? To whom will it be presented? Will it be published and in what forum will it be discussed?
In the first instance we have to reach agreement on the Framework Document. Deputy Bruton will appreciate the complex nature of the matters that have to be addressed. It will obviously have to be presented to the Government for its approval and it will then be a matter for agreement between both Governments as to how we will make progress from there.
Is the Tánaiste saying that the document is being prepared and discussed without any prior agreement as to what will be done when it has been completed?
The Deputy is well aware that we are working with the British Government to see if we can present a shared and common understanding of the key issues that need to be addressed. If that is achieved and if there have been bilateral discussions over many months with the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland we will see if we can resume the three stranded talks, which is the best way to make progress, at which we would discuss the overall approach for the arrangements in Northern Ireland, new North-South structures and new east-west arrangements and a balanced constitutional accommodation.
The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs agreed to take Questions Nos. 3, 5 and 10 among others together. I ask the Tánaiste for fair and honest answers to the questions set out in Question No. 10. Is it necessary for the participation of Sinn Féin in political talks that the IRA should permanently give up violence? Will he state his views on whether it is necessary that the IRA should undertake any form of verifiable disarmament or whether it is possible for Sinn Féin to participate in the talks and in the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation while the IRA retains its arms and explosives? I must have a fair, unequivocal and decent minded answer to these questions.
I will do my best and I hope I meet the standards set by Deputy Michael McDowell for a fair, decent-minded unequivocal answer. The key to Sinn Féin-IRA being part of the political discussions is a permanent cessation of violence. It has to be permanent and there can be no equivocation about that. There will have to be verification of the handing over of arms. As I said publicly on many occasions, there is little point in attempting to bring people into political dialogue if they are doing so on the basis of giving it a try and if it does not work returning to the bomb and the bullet. It has to be permanent and there must be evidence of it. The details of verification are obviously a logistics matter that will have to be worked out and agreed by both Governments. I assure the Deputy that neither Government will attempt to bring them into discussions and dialogue until they are satisfied that the violence has ended permanently.
I appreciate that the Tánaiste is trying to meet me some way along the road but he is not meeting me half way. I ask again whether it is possible for Sinn Féin to participate in talks and in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation while the IRA retains arms and explosives and whether it is necessary as a precondition for demonstrating a complete commitment to the end of violence that some verifiable process — I am not asking for a formal disarmament ceremony — is in place? I ask the Tánaiste to say clearly that a precondition is an absolute and unequivocal statement by the IRA that the violence is over and that their arms and explosives are being dumped or destroyed, with a verifiable mechanism to ensure that has been done.
I am not sure if the Deputy is listening to my response.
I think I am.
I am not sure he is as I am answering the question as directly as it can be answered. The Joint Declaration makes it very clear on behalf of both Governments that democratically mandated parties which establish a commitment to use exclusively peaceful methods and which have shown they abide by the democratic process are free to participate fully in democratic politics. There will obviously have to be a precise means of establishing the commitment to use exclusively peaceful methods and that obviously has to be decided and agreed by both Governments. There can be no participation by Sinn Féin-IRA in political discussions with either Government until they have made a very firm commitment that the violence has ended.
I do not hear clarity.
Deputy McDowell, allow me to interrupt.
I am entitled to question the Minister.
When the Chair has risen, the Deputy should be seated. We are dealing with priority questions for which 20 minutes only are available to us and I cannot dwell unduly long on any one question. It would be to the disadvantage of other Deputies. I am asking for brevity. I allowed the Deputy two questions and I want to call Deputy Bruton and other Members.
I do not think I am taxing anyone's patience by asking for a simple unequivocal answer. Is it possible for Sinn Féin to participate in talks with the constitutional parties and in the proposed Forum for Peace and Reconciliation without clear, unequivocal and demonstrated disarmament by the IRA? That deserves a simple answer.
It is not possible.
We have got it out of him.
I note the Minister did not answer Deputy McDowell's questions.
He has answered twice.
The Minister says that the new political framework must be based on consent. Has he decided how to discern that consent? How will he discover whether the people of Northern Ireland consent to the framework to be implemented? How can he say a political settlement is based on a forswearing of violence if the verification of such forswearing is simply a logistics matter? Does he believe that paramilitary displays of the type we saw in Dublin city and Finglas are consistent with a forswearing of violence by the IRA?
To establish the consent principle in Northern Ireland means getting the consent of the greater majority of the people in Northern Ireland to any proposed settlement. That can be done by way of referendum. Discussions would take place with the political parties who represent the public and a referendum could take place to establish the consent principle. There are two aspects to the establishment of the ending of violence. One would be a political statement. I assume this would be followed by a verification process which would be the responsibility of both Governments. I would view that as logical. I would find any paramilitary displays, like that which took place in Dublin, objectionable. If the law is broken responsibility lies with the Garda Síochána and the DPP to prosecute people.
Half the time available to us for dealing with priority questions has expired.
By dealing with half the questions.
Regarding the political process that follows the publication of the Framework Document, with whom and what discussions will take place on the content of that document before we proceed to a referendum, the established end point of those discussions? Will there be a time limit on that process? Will that process of discussion involve consultation with Opposition parties and, if so, in what framework will that be? Will the referendum take place in both parts of the island or just in one part?
If the document is agreed by both Governments, the obvious way to make progress would be to have discussions with the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland. Deputy Bruton is aware that both the Taoiseach and I have said we will have consultations with the Leaders of the Opposition in relation to this matter. The House has been helpful in this regard for a long time. All parties have adopted a helpful attitude in relation to the conflict in Northern Ireland. In my view it would be desirable to have a referendum in both parts of the island. That would give it greater veracity. I have no difficulty in relation to consultation and coming before the House at any time.
What time limit is involved?
I do not know if it is wise to set time limits. Time is of the essence to end the conflict and the killings in Northern Ireland, but one must retain a degree of flexibility.
If time is of the essence how can the setting of time limits be avoided?
As time is of the essence, one can give the matter the urgency it requires. Both Governments are available if the participants are available to join in discussions to resume the three stranded talks process and make progress as quickly as possible.
We now come to Question No. 4.
Is this courtship of the Provisionals going to continue forever? Is the Minister's patience with the Provisionals not running out?
The Deputy should not cut across the Chair in this fashion.