Mary Harney
Ceist:11 Miss Harney asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the Ulster Unionist Party document on the political future of Northern Ireland, published on 5 March 1997. [6666/97]
Other Questions. - UUP Document.
I welcome the Ulster Unionist Party paper, Pathways to Peace Within the Union, published on 4 March, as I do all contributions to political debate in and about Northern Ireland. The paper does not purport to be a comprehensive statement of UUP policy, nor does it pretend to offer a final resolution to the current problems. Rather, it claims to present "an interim set of common sense proposals" which it sees as "complementary to the Talks."
That said, most, if not all, the issues raised have been identified as matters to be dealt with in the comprehensive, three-stranded, multi-party negotiations and I am firmly of the view, given the need for a balanced accommodation between differing interests and objectives, that progress on matters of concern to any individual party is most likely to be achieved within the existing framework of those negotiations. Nevertheless, while many of the UUP proposals are in the first instance primarily for the Northern Ireland parties themselves to consider, I would be happy to discuss any or all of these proposals with the UUP to see whether they could help achieve the progress in the negotiations required to bring about a comprehensive agreement. I would be particularly interested in an exchange of views on what the paper refers to as "how matters of mutual interest and benefit can be discussed or pursued with appropriate representatives...of the Republic of Ireland" and "how we can address the void of misunderstanding that presently exists between politicians in Northern Ireland and those in the Republic of Ireland". Curiously, the paper seems to envisage discussion on North-South co-operation with the British Government but not with the Irish Government.
One particular point of concern about the paper is the assertion in the opening section that the UUP "will not allow themselves to be drawn into a position which provides for the arrival at the table of Sinn Féin". At face value, this would appear to deny the possibility of inclusive negotiations, even after an unequivocal restoration of the IRA ceasefire and Sinn Féin's compliance with the requirements for entry to the negotiations set out in the Ground Rules and enshrined in British law. I consider it inconceivable that any party refusing to participate in the multi-party negotiations alongside all parties which have met the legal requirements for participation would have the remotest possibility of persuading the Governments and the other political parties to join them in working to their alternative agenda.
Does the Minister agree that the publication of this paper on the day before the cessation of the nine months of talks was not very helpful in the sense that it was known that the talks were coming to an end and would not resume for several months? On what date does the Minister anticipate these talks will resume and does he believe they are likely to be more successful than they were?
On the timing of the publication of the paper, it may well be that the UUP was working on this paper for some time. Deputy O'Malley will be familiar with a similar paper published in 1992. Whenever views are put forward in a policy document or in statement form we must take them on board for critical assessment. Very little of what is contained in the paper is new. The prospect of the UUP discussing North-South trade with the British Government but not with the Irish Government, which has a major role in this area, is baffling. The date fixed for the reopening of the negotiations is 3 June.
On the question of whether the resumed talks offer a prospect for progress, the talks are slow, difficult and tortuous at times. As someone who likes to get things done and enjoys working 24 hours a day if things need to be done, I find the talks an extremely frustrating experience. However, if we are to make progress in finding a resolution to the difficulties in Northern Ireland this can only be done by an inclusive three-stranded talks process. To put this in context, we are trying to find a resolution to a conflict which has bedevilled this island and which politicians in recent years and in the distant past have failed to resolve. The Deputy has much experience in this area and he knows it will take a long time to resolve this conflict. However, we must provide whatever time is required.
The sincerity of the Ulster Unionist Party can be judged by the publication of this document on the eve of the adjournment of the talks. There was a similar incident in 1992 when the Ulster Unionist Party submitted a document at the end of those talks. The contents of this document and the sincerity of the Ulster Unionist Party give rise to questions.
Will the Tánaiste agree that these talks went nowhere and that we need all inclusive talks which include Sinn Féin after the declaration of a permanent and unequivocal cessation of violence? These all-inclusive talks should move forward on the basis of the three-stranded formula devised in 1991. The intransigence of the Unionist parties is as much a barrier to progress as the continuing violence, murder, beatings and expulsion of people from the North by the IRA and the loyalist groupings.
The Deputy managed to fire four salvos against the Unionist parties. Ironically, just as we question their sincerity in the talks process they question ours. This is apparent. I do not agree that the talks went nowhere. The talks are certainly going somewhere but they will take a long time. Part of the difficulty is the accumulation of distrust and fear. The Unionist community has fears about the ambitions and policies of Nationalist parties on this island. It will take a long time to establish bona fides across the table about the political motivation of what we want to achieve. The three-stranded process is the only show in town in terms of the talks. The conditions and terms for participants are well laid out and these have the overwhelming support of the Members of this House. It must be dawning on Sinn Féin and the IRA that the continuation of violence and the threat of violence are the biggest inhibiting factors to making progress on this island.
We use the phrase "three-stranded process" all the time and it is no harm to remind ourselves that this means internal, North-South and east-west. The publication by the Ulster Unionist Party of a document which refers to the possibility of discussions on North-South trade with the British Government——
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
The Deputy must proceed by way of questions.
——but not with the Irish Government raises questions about its sincerity.
The reality of economic events on this island is that, irrespective of what politicians North or South think, the business community is getting on with it. The business community is aware that enormous market opportunities were not availed of. This applies to the southern producers in terms of the opportunities in Northern Ireland and to the Northern producers in terms of the much larger market on their doorstep.