Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 4 Oct 2000

Vol. 523 No. 2

Ceisteanna–Questions. - Northern Ireland Issues.

John Bruton

Ceist:

6 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with the First Minister of Northern Ireland, Mr. Trimble; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19137/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

7 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 5 July 2000 with the Sinn Féin President, Mr. Gerry Adams; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19165/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

8 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his telephone discussion in July 2000 with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, in relation to the Drumcree march and policing legislation in Northern Ireland. [19187/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

9 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the matters he discussed at his meeting in London on 31 July 2000 with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19204/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

10 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the matters he discussed at his meeting in Dublin on 28 July 2000 with the First Minister of Northern Ireland, Mr. Trimble; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19205/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

11 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the matters he discussed at his meeting in Dublin on 27 July 2000 with the President of Sinn Féin, Mr. Adams; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19206/00]

Ceist:

12 Mr. Hayes asked the Taoiseach if he will elaborate on the points he made in his joint statement with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, to mark the second anniversary of the Omagh bombing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19284/00]

Ceist:

13 Mr. Hayes asked the Taoiseach the communications, if any, he has had with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, concerning the investigation into the murder of Mr. Pat Finucane; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19440/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

14 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in New York with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19488/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

15 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in New York with the US President, Mr. Clinton; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19489/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

16 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will provide details of the invitation he extended to President Clinton to visit Ireland later in 2000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19490/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

17 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting in Downing Street on 31 July 2000 with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair. [19823/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

18 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting on 27 July 2000 with the President of Sinn Féin, Mr. Gerry Adams. [19824/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

19 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting on 28 July 2000 with the Northern Ireland First Minister, Mr. David Trimble. [19825/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

20 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting with President Clinton; and if he received any indication from President Clinton as to whether he plans to make an official visit here prior to the end of his term of office. [19830/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

21 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the progress made to date to meet the commitment given by the Government in the Good Friday Agreement that it would continue to take further active steps to demonstrate its respect for the different traditions on the island; the further steps it intends to take in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19843/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

22 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the plans he has for a meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, to discuss the political situation in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20084/00]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin

Ceist:

23 Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 26 September 2000 with the Northern Ireland First Minister, Mr. David Trimble. [20248/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

24 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the matters discussed and conclusions reached at the North-South Ministerial Council meeting in Dublin on 26 September 2000; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20260/00]

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

25 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his discussions in Dublin on 26 September 2000 with the Northern Ireland First Minister, Mr. David Trimble. [20261/00]

John Bruton

Ceist:

26 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 26 September 2000 with the First Minister of Northern Ireland, Mr. Trimble; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20319/00]

Trevor Sargent

Ceist:

27 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meeting with the Ulster Unionist Party leader, Mr. David Trimble. [20330/00]

Trevor Sargent

Ceist:

28 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. [20331/00]

Joe Higgins

Ceist:

29 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions during the Dáil recess with Mr. David Trimble. [20401/00]

Joe Higgins

Ceist:

30 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions during the Dáil recess with Sinn Féin. [20402/00]

Joe Higgins

Ceist:

31 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions during the Dáil recess with Prime Minister Blair. [20403/00]

Ceist:

32 Mr. Hayes asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his attendance at the North-South Ministerial Council in Dublin on 26 September 2000. [20506/00]

Ceist:

33 Mr. Hayes asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement following his meeting on 26 September 2000 with Mr. David Trimble in Government Buildings. [20611/00]

Ceist:

34 Mr. Hayes asked the Taoiseach the progress made at the most recent meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20612/00]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 to 34, inclusive, together.

I have remained in close contact with the British Prime Minister and the parties in Northern Ireland over the summer months. I met Sinn Féin President, Gerry Adams, on 5 July, 27 July and again on 16 September last. The issues under discussion included the implementation of the Patten report, demilitarisation and the increased incidence of intimidation and attacks across Northern Ireland.

I had a useful meeting with First Minister, David Trimble, on 28 July last. Our discussion spanned a range of issues including the planned plenary meetings in the autumn of the North-South Ministerial Council and the British-Irish Council.

On 31 July I met with the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, in Downing Street, and again on 8 September in New York. I also had a number of 'phone calls with him. We discussed a number of issues including the threat posed by dissident republican groups, loyalist violence, the Policing Bill and the overall political situation in Northern Ireland. We will continue to stay closely in touch in the period ahead. I had raised the Pat Finucane case on a number of occasions with the Prime Minister and had requested him to meet with Geraldine Finucane and the Finucane family. That meeting took place last month.

Prime Minister Blair and I issued a joint statement on the second anniversary of the Omagh bombing. We expressed our deepest sympathies to the families of the bereaved and the injured. We also emphasised our continued commitment and determination to bring to justice the perpetrators of this awful atrocity.

I met President Clinton on 8 September last in New York, accompanied by my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell. I took the opportunity to brief the President on recent events in Northern Ireland, including the implementation of the Patten report. We also discussed the possibility of a further visit to Ireland by the President later this year. I hope that the President can come before his term of office is over and I certainly made clear that he would be most welcome. Nothing definite, however, has been arranged as yet.

Last week the Tánaiste and I had the pleasure of welcoming David Trimble and Séamus Mallon and the other Ministers in the Northern Ireland Executive to Dublin Castle for the second plenary meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council. The message from the council was extremely positive and an ambitious agenda of work was decided on for the period ahead. We reviewed the 13 meetings of the council in sectoral format that have taken place and the significant progress made in establishing and developing the work of the Implementation Bod ies. This represents an unprecedented level of co-operation on this island. We look forward to making significant substantive progress in the various sectoral councils in the coming months. In addition, work is well advanced on setting up a new all-island tourism company. It is clear that all of us, North and South, stand to benefit from this kind of co-ordinated approach on such practical matters.

The council agreed procedures for recruiting the chief executives of a number of Implementation Bodies and approved the terms and conditions associated with these appointments as well as conditions of service for staff generally employed by the Implementation Bodies. The council also agreed specific proposals in regard to grading, staffing, numbers and remuneration in the Trade and Business Development Body.

The council agreed an initial opinion on the budgets for the Implementation Bodies for the period 2001 to 2003. The North-South Ministerial council envisages that the total to be spent by the six bodies next year will be IR£64 million or £48 million sterling. The proposal is that the southern contribution should be IR£49 million, or £37 million sterling, with IR£15 million, or £11 million sterling from the North. This reflects the continuing development of the work of the bodies which are now expected to employ 900 staff in total during the course of 2001. The details of the budget proposals will be considered further as part of the processes for planning public spending North and South. Final estimates for the bodies will be submitted to the NSMC in October-November, following approval by the Irish Government and the Northern Ireland Executive Committee.

The council agreed to initiate a study on an Independent North-South Consultative Forum, appointed by the two Administrations, as recommended for consideration in the Good Friday Agreement. The council agreed that a working group of officials from both Administrations and the joint secretariat would be established to take forward the study and report to the next plenary meeting.

The agenda for Government published by the Northern Ireland Executive Committee on 29 June 2000 identified actions to support North-South development, including the need to take action to remove barriers to living and working in the North or South. In this context the Government agreed to co-operate with the Northern Ireland Executive Committee in taking forward a study, through a steering group of officials, North and South, on the obstacles to mobility between the two parts of the island. This steering group will report to the council and the costs of the study will be shared equally between the two Administrations.

The council had a useful exchange of views on an Irish Government paper on enhancing competitiveness of the two economies on the island, North and South. It agreed that it would be valuable if further consideration could be given to the matter by the North-South Council in its trade and business development format at its next meeting on 27 October with a view to reporting to the plenary.

After the council meeting, I met the First Minister, Mr. David Trimble. We discussed a range of issues, including the outcome of the South Antrim by-election, the loyalist feud, the threat posed by dissident republicans and the implementation of the recommendations of the Patten report. We agreed that there were challenges to be faced but that these were by no means insurmountable. The Government will continue to work in a balanced way to foster and sustain confidence on all sides and to overcome the obstacles so that we can progress the real, practical agenda for change that is central to the Agreement.

Further to the commitment given in the Good Friday Agreement to take active steps to demonstrate its respect for the different traditions on the island, the Government has provided support, under the Irish Sailors and Soldiers Land Trust Act, 1988, for a number of projects reflective of the different traditions. In regard to strands other than the purely Nationalist strand, these included the Journey of Reconciliation and Trust Peace Park at Messines and projects promoted by the Royal Dublin Fusiliers Association, the Ulster Society and the Federation for Ulster Local Studies. In addition, last year the Government announced an eightfold increase in the funding available to the Reconciliation Fund administered by the Department of Foreign Affairs to £2 million per annum.

The Government announced last December that it had agreed to purchase the site of the Battle of the Boyne. The development of the site will serve to mark in a fitting way the significance of this important historical event for all the people of Ireland, in particular for the Unionist tradition. The interdepartmental committee with responsibility for developing the site, whose membership includes an official representative of the Orange Order, has initiated a process of extensive consultation, including with representatives of the Unionist tradition, the relevant local authorities and community groups. In addition, a programme of interim measures involving road widening and signage was put in place at the site during the summer months.

The Government, in line with our commitment in the Good Friday Agreement, will continue to take active steps to demonstrate our respect for the different traditions on the island of Ireland.

Does the Taoiseach agree there are a number of Deputies who have devoted a great part of their lives over the past ten years – in Deputy Currie's case for over 30 years – to bringing the Good Friday Agreement and its institutions into being? Does he agree that most such Members are deeply worried about the present situation and the rigidity of positions being adopted? Does the Taoiseach agree that if, for whatever reason, justified or otherwise, David Trimble is overturned as leader of the UIster Unionist Party, the Executive and the institutions associated with it could no longer function?

I accept that an enormous number of people have worked extremely hard over many years to put together what has been achieved in the past few years. I am concerned with day to day developments which centre around three or four areas, but in dealing with these the positives far outweigh the negatives. There are hundreds of people alive today in the North who would not be if the work mentioned by Deputy Bruton had not been sustained, particularly in the past few years. The Northern economy is much stronger and there has been increased investment in a wide range of areas. All this would not have occurred without the leadership of David Trimble. I was particularly taken with the remarks of Sir Reg Empey last week when he said that the more people talked the Ulster Unionist party down, the more the party would go down.

We must focus on the implementation of the Agreement and reinforcing the positive benefits that have been achieved. The Executive, the North-South Ministerial Council and the British-Irish Council are working well and doing real business. The 13 sectoral meetings have dealt with substantive issues. Individually they may not be earth-shattering issues, but collectively there has been an enormous amount of co-operation right across the implementation bodies.

People are getting a real sense of ownership of the institutions that have been established. The announcement of the membership of the civic forum will help in this regard. Deputy Quinn has been highlighting this at Question Time and it has been endeavouring to get up and running for some time. I acknowledge that it has taken a long time, but it is now up and running. Ultimately, if the system of governance works and is seen to work, we can achieve the long-term peace and stability that we all want and the quality of people's lives will have improved dramatically. As First Minister, David Trimble has a mandate from the people to implement the Agreement. The by-election was a disappointment to him, but it does not change the result of the referendum. The people of this island voted overwhelmingly for the Agreement and I know Deputy Bruton would want me to continue to work with David Trimble and all the pro-Agreement parties to ensure all aspects of the Agreement are implemented. As well as getting the structures right, we are progressing all other aspects of the Agreement, including demilitarisation, decommissioning, policing and reviewing the criminal justice system.

Substantial progress has been made over the summer months. I do not deny that there continues to be pressure – that was particularly so over the summer. The violence in loyalist areas is disturbing, as is the threat posed by dissidents. We will do everything we can to progress the real agenda for change that is necessary. I take Deputy Bruton's point. Regardless of whatever differences, interpretations or analysis people give, it is far more important to resolve them. An amount of issues have been resolved and people have strong views on the difficult matters that are left. I understand that, but we should try to square the circle and sign off on these matters.

Does the Taoiseach agree that he and other Nationalist leaders have done enough to win over the support of Unionist doubters for the Agreement? Specifically, what is his view of the comments made by SDLP Councillor Declan O'Loan to the effect that the reason for the potential collapse of the Agreement is the widespread disillusionment among Unionists with it and that this disillusionment puts particular responsibility on the Nationalist community and its political representatives? Does he agree that the major problem is the name of the police service and that Nationalists, including the Taoiseach, others in this House, ourselves and the Nationalist parties in Northern Ireland, need, as Declan O'Loan put it, to attend to why this is a genuine and significant issue for Unionist people and to deal as best we can with that?

I think everybody here is doing their utmost to be accommodating and I think that is acknowledged by the leadership of the Unionist Party throughout. In regard to any issue they raise with the Irish Government, we genuinely – and it is appreciated – try to help in the resolution of it. In relation to the representative of the SDLP—

Declan O'Loan who is a member of the Ballymena Urban Authority representing the Social Democratic and Labour Party and a Nationalist has said he believes Nationalist leaders should be doing more to win over Unionist support for the Agreement at this critical time given that if David Trimble falls, the Agreement falls.

I agree because it is what I am doing, needless to say. Also, I think I would be misleading the House if I did not say that the leadership of the SDLP, both the party political leadership and the leadership in the Assembly, would state very strongly what their views are on the outstanding issues. They have stated their position very clearly on a range of issues that are still outstanding, so I have to take that as being the position of the SDLP.

Notwithstanding that, it is in the interest of everybody on this island that the leadership of the Executive through David Trimble and Séamus Mallon and the pro-Agreement parties continue to be able to move their work programme on through the Executive, the Assembly, the North-South structures and the British-Irish Council. Anything that would upset that would be bad news. I do not subscribe to the view that the dissidents, as David Trimble calls them, within his party are in any way right in portraying the failures of the Agreement. Of course, they see that any concessions that are made are not beneficial to their side, and I can understand that. I spent hours and days on end listening to that point of view put forward by both Unionists and loyalists, but particularly Unionists, so I understand their point of view. However, Sir Reg Empey's remarks on the other side also have to be reflected on. We do not face the death, the mayhem of the past. The economic issues, social development and investment are doing better. I understand the effect of the loyalist violence, particularly during the summer. That has been signalled by group after group and deputation after deputation as a fact that there is still violence. Of course, to an extent, the continuing threat by the Real IRA is continually menacing from that organisation.

Mr. Hayes

Will the Taoiseach comment on his remarks last week when he said that Sinn Féin would have to resolve its relationship with the IRA before his party would enter Government with it? Will he define what he means by the word "resolve"? Does he mean prior decommissioning? Is he looking for the IRA to be disbanded or is he looking for a declaration that the war is over?

I think we have got the third statement on several occasions but, ultimately, whenever it is possible, and the sooner the better as far as I am concerned, I would agree with the view put forward by Martin McGuinness, the Minister for Education in the Northern Ireland Executive representing Sinn Féin and a former chief negotiator for Sinn Féin in all these matters, that he would hope the IRA would disband, fold up and be gone.

I wonder, prior to that happy event, if the Taoiseach would use his undoubted influence with both Sinn Féin and the IRA to recognise the difficulties in which the Unionist community finds itself, that is, the lack of substantial progress on the overall issue of decommissioning and the sense that many people in the Unionist community have in regard to the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement for which they voted, perhaps reluctantly, on assurances from the British Prime Minister and others that a substantial change would take place but who feel that that substantial change has not taken place.

Does the Taoiseach not agree that a significant compromise has been made in relation to the issue of decommissioning? Against that background of compromise on one side, does the Taoiseach think that he and the British Prime Minister can use their undoubted influence to persuade some flexibility in the interpretation of the Agreement and its related components to ensure that the Agreement with all of its insti tutions continues to survive because nobody is talking down the strength of the position of the Unionist Party other than themselves in terms of the way in which they voted and behaved?

The Agreement does not belong to Sinn Féin, the republican movement or the Unionist Party, it belongs to all of the people of this island. The Taoiseach indicated earlier the amount of taxpayers' money that is being committed on behalf of the people of the South of Ireland to that process. What specific steps does the Taoiseach intend to take to restore sufficient trust in the process to enable the Agreement to continue against the background of the forthcoming British general election?

In terms of the arms and decommissioning end of it, the Agreement that was satisfactorily worked out to allow the Executive to be reinstated back in May and June makes provision for arms dumps inspections which would reinforce confidence in the process and I hope the next round of that will happen as soon as possible.

Has the Taoiseach conveyed that view to the IRA?

Not to the IRA.

To its representatives.

To Sinn Féin. The Deputy mentioned my undoubted influence on the IRA. I am not too sure I can ever claim to have exerted any influence on that particular organisation but I hope I did on Sinn Féin. I have emphasised very strongly that Maarti Ahtisaari and Cyril Ramaphosa are heading up that inspection and moving on on the check back of the June inspections and even further inspections is something I would welcome. I think that would certainly be helpful.

My officials are again today at one of the numerous meetings in London or here trying to resolve the other outstanding issues. There are not many issues now but they are very important to both communities and not easily resolved. They are not holding anything up but they feed into a lack of confidence. On the issue of dissidents, we are continuing to put enormous resources into trying our utmost to control and to eliminate that threat but, as with all of these things, that is not easy. The Garda does all it possibly can as do the other police services.

I cannot do much about the other issue which is feeding into this. Loyalist violence is extremely destructive and we do not understand too well how that feeds into the process in the North. I suppose it has been best put to me by many of the delegations. If somewhere between 200 and 300 houses in a relatively small area of this city or any other part of the Republic had to be vacated during the summer, we would know how we would feel about it. I pay tribute to the resilience of the people of the Shankill and offer my sym pathy to them in regard to the terrible violence they have endured.

I think it is fair to say that the political leaders of loyalism have used their political skills very effectively over the last number of years, and that has been appreciated by everybody here, to achieve a political and a peaceful co-existence with their neighbours. The present dispute is doing damage to their cause and to the cause of all who want lasting peace. I hope that the efforts that are being made to find a solution are successful and I urge all those involved to redouble their efforts. There is not much we can do on that other than to lend our support to those efforts being made.

Deputy Ó Caoláin.

I have tabled a number of questions.

I want to give every Deputy who has tabled a question the opportunity to ask one supplementary and then I will return to the Deputy.

I also tabled a question to the Taoiseach. Recognising that policing is a core issue that must be resolved, does the Taoiseach share my concern at the statement by David Trimble reported yesterday in which he calls for a rowing back of the British Government policing legislation due before the House of Lords later this month? Does the Taoiseach agree that the Patten report and its recommendations are a compromise based on a broad view of the policing issue and is not a programme of concessions to Nationalists? Does he also agree that the current British legislation on policing does not implement the Patten report in full and that we need to see the full implementation in legislation and a new, non-sectarian police service in situ in the North of Ireland? Does the Taoiseach further agree that this issue is bigger than the political fortunes of any one political leader?

I have stated my views on the Patten report many times in interviews and inside and outside this House. I have always said that the full implementation of the approach set out in the Patten report proposals offers the best opportunity for the new beginning for policing in Northern Ireland which everyone wants. That is our shared concern and we have a shared objective to achieve a police service capable of attracting and sustaining support from the community as a whole. Only then will it be successful.

We all recognise how vitally important it is to achieve this objective and how important it is to the Agreement as a whole. Issues remain to be resolved and people know what those issues are. It is unfortunate but not surprising that some of those issues have gone on for so long, but they still have to be resolved. Any of the issues, whether previous issues or issues which delayed matters, always have to be resolved. I have not ever seen a major issue go away – someone, some day has to resolve it. The issues of the Patten report, its implementation and the drafting of legislation are to be resolved. I do not believe anyone will move completely in one way or the other. That means we have to try to find an honourable agreement. Mr. David Trimble sometimes says things which are not palatable to some people and other people say things which are certainly not palatable to him. Those of us in the middle trying to find resolutions have to continue to do so. I assure the House that we will continue to ensure that the new dispensation and beginning are achieved because that is the only way we will successfully resolve this issue.

We all wish to see tensions eased on the basis of parity of esteem. Following reports of a security crackdown on paramilitary dissidents, will the Taoiseach take into account concerns which have been strongly expressed to me that the level of British military activity in south Armagh in particular is increasing tensions? This is particularly the case where cattle movements, BSE and TB issues are interlinked with British military personnel entering farmland and fences being damaged and not repaired. Will the Taoiseach take this into account in discussions with the northern leaders such as the First Minister, Mr. David Trimble, or with the British Prime Minister to ensure that whatever is done to alleviate tension is done within the bounds of necessary security and that nothing is done to heighten tension which would be counter-productive in terms of security by driving people who are unhappy with the status quo into the arms of those who wish to wreck the process? Have any measures been taken to make that point to the British authorities?

The points made by the Deputy have been made to me several times. The Deputy will forgive me if I say it sounds like the agenda of the South Armagh Farmers Association which has a legitimate case which it put to me many times. I have represented those issues and we have pushed and moved towards trying to get as much normalisation and demilitarisation as possible in south Armagh. There has been some movement of some of the permanent structures in that area.

On the other hand, residents would say there is more security in parts of the area in peace time than was the case in troubled times. There is also the concern that some of the difficulties with dissidents still emanate from that location. All of these issues have to be taken into account in trying to deal with the situation. I take the point and have made the point many times that heavy security in that area has not resolved the problem. However, in fairness to the British Prime Minister, it is very difficult for him to totally ignore the intelligence concerning this area but I have pursued the issue long and hard with him.

(Dublin West): In the event of a general election in this State producing a situation in which Fianna Fáil and Sinn Féin could form a Government, and in the event that Sinn Féin states a willingness to form such a Government, is the Taoiseach saying that, in those circumstances, he would not form such a Government unless the IRA had already been disbanded?

I have made my position very clear and I tried to say it in a way which Sinn Féin and everyone else would understand. There is a Constitution in this country which states there can only be one police force—

And one army.

—one defence service – there cannot be two. It is as simple as that. My party faced that situation a long time ago. It is unambiguous and there cannot be any ambiguity in it. There lies the position. It is better to state it clearly now so that everyone understands it. I am sure everyone understands it – all political parties. I would be surprised if the Deputy had any difficulty understanding what the Constitution states.

Does the Taoiseach agree that the Minister Mr. Martin McGuinness is correct in saying that the outstanding issues of policing and decommissioning are bigger than the political fate of any one individual? However, does he also agree that the reality is that if that one individual – David Trimble – is overthrown there is no Executive and that, under the Agreement, Mr. Martin McGuinness ceases to be Minister for Education and Mr. Séamus Mallon ceases to be Deputy First Minister? That is the way the Agreement has been framed. Unless there is sufficient support for the Executive within unionism and nationalism there is no Executive.

We are not talking about the fate of one individual out of some sort of sympathetic concern for that person. We are talking about whether, through David Trimble, unionism is willing to support the continuance of the Agreement. We in this House as Nationalists have a great historic responsibility at this stage in history to ensure we are not looking back two months from now and saying, "If only we had said this", "If only such a concession might have been made the Executive might still be in being", or "It isn't in being and it's all the Unionists fault" but still there were these things we might have been able to do to save the situation.

Does the Taoiseach agree it would be no consolation for us, for this House or for the next generation of Irish people if, three months from now, we are able to blame the Unionists yet again but we have no Executive or cross-Border bodies and ten, 15 or 20 years' work is gone down the drain? Would he therefore agree it is very important that all Nationalists – whether from Fine Gael, Sinn Féin, Fianna Fáil or the SDLP – bend every political sinew and every element of their imagination to ensure the Unionist community recognises that this Agreement is also for them, that it is worthwhile, that it is delivering for everyone who lives in Ireland, whether Unionist or Nationalist? Would he agree that David Trimble should be given by Séamus Mallon, Gerry Adams, Bertie Ahern, Ruairí Quinn and by everybody else, the political help that he needs if he is to survive, that this is a moment of decision for us as Nationalists in this House and that we do not want to look back on this as yet another well intended effort into which huge amounts of time was put but which was lost because of an issue of nomenclature, or timing or some comparatively unimportant issue in the overall scheme of things?

I do not want to go into the issue of whether this is bigger than one person. The Good Friday Agreement is supported by the people and by the pro-Agreement parties. For that reason it must be implemented. Whether it is First Minister, Deputy First Minister, or whatever, we do not want to row back and undo things. As I have already said, and as Deputy Bruton has said now, compromises must be made. It is normally impossible in any walk of life to get away from the emotion people feel about some aspects of this. If one person is totally on one side of an argument and another person is totally on the other side, it is rare – we see it every day in this House – that there will be a straight victory unless there is a straight vote. Normally in debate, for example, on Committee Stage, people listen to the other point of view, bring in amendments and re-examine matters on Report Stage. It is that kind of detail in which we are involved. I have made it clear on the biggest issue, the Patten report, that there must be a balance in going forward, that there must be an acceptable police service in the North that will serve everybody fairly, so that the problems and difficulties of the past can be left behind. That is what we must achieve. The titles – the Executive, First Minister, Deputy First Minister – are important titles. The Assembly, the institutions we have set up, the whole administrative system about which I have given details today, are co-operating and working to make life better for everyone. They are dealing with bread and butter issues which are important. That is all going well. What we are saying in this House is that we must try to find agreement in the last few areas. It must be remembered that about three months into the negotiations on the Good Friday Agreement there were 181 items to be considered and I recall people asking me if I seriously thought we would ever get agreement on all of them. I said we would try. Now there are four or five items on the list. It does not, therefore, seem unreasonable – and I support what Deputy Bruton said – to ask people to stretch themselves that little bit and try to find a resolution that will allow all of the positive things to continue. I do not want a situation where Unionists feel depressed, where Sinn Féin or the SDLP, or the DUP for that matter, feel depressed. I want them all to feel that they can share in a project that is worthwhile, meaningful and positive for the area in which they live, and for us to have a good relationship with them as we agreed in voting for the Good Friday Agreement. It should not be beyond the bounds of the English language, or of the Irish language for that matter, to work out such compromises.

Deputies Currie, Hayes, Higgins (Dublin West) and Quinn rose.

There are just two minutes remaining and a number of Deputies wish to intervene. I will call Deputies Quinn, Hayes, Currie and Higgins in succession and the Taoiseach will reply.

I have been trying to get in.

Yes, but people who had questions tabled must get priority.

I said before that this just forces me to put down questions every time Northern Ireland is discussed.

That is what the Deputy should do. The Chair is not preventing the Deputy from putting down questions.

Mr. Hayes

I will give way.

I will call Deputies in the following order: Deputies Quinn, Currie and Higgins. Deputies should be brief. The Taoiseach will make one reply.

I have nothing further to add to the dialogue that has just taken place other than to say that I support the thrust of it from both sides. What progress, if any, has been made in the establishment of the interim parliamentary tier between the Assemblies of Scotland, Northern Wales, Westminster and Leinster House?

I thank Deputy Hayes for giving way. Would the Taoiseach agree that there are two circumstances in which the Northern Ireland Executive could come to an end? One is in the immediate sense of Trimble being removed. The other is if, further down the road, we have a police service in Northern Ireland which young Nationalists and republicans do not join. I base this on precedent, on history. The Executive will inevitably fail if that happens. Therefore, to use Deputy Bruton's words, every sinew should be exerted to get agreement on that issue.

In view of his statement about the conditions and circumstances in which Sinn Féin would be involved in Government, with which I entirely agree, does the Taoiseach think it would be useful to have a joint declaration between the four leaders of the parties that might be involved in the formation of the next Government on the circumstances and conditions under which they would have any dealings with Sinn Féin, emphasising the democratic process and the fact that there is only one Army in this State?

(Dublin West): Is the Taoiseach aware that the experience of working-class communities in Northern Ireland is one of continued sectarian division, including sectarian attacks, and continuing polarisation which can lead eventually even to cantonisation on a sectarian basis, and, within the Protestant community, the added difficulty of intracommunity tensions inflicted by a small group of people on a majority of innocent Protestant people? Would the Taoiseach agree that unfortunately the Good Friday structures have not changed for the better in a major way the quality of life of the majority of working-class people? Would he agree that if political leaders continue to posture on a sectarian basis, playing to sectarian galleries, they will continue to be agents of division, when what is needed is a mass movement at the base to unite communities and begin to fundamentally change the lives of people for the better?

On the establishment of the interim parliamentary tier, the next meeting will take place in Galway. The two Parliaments have made the changes necessary to bring in our colleagues from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We will probably be in a position to establish it at the next meeting which is to take place shortly and at which we will probably have everybody except, unfortunately, our colleagues from the North. I hope they will join when those changes they have always argued for have been made. I would like the position to be otherwise, but we will keep pursuing that.

On the issue of young Nationalists, the Deputy has a point. However, I have been told by the SDLP and Sinn Féin that if a resolution is found to areas of difference, they will recommend that young Nationalists and republicans should join the police force. That will not be the position of either party if those resolutions are not arrived at. Regardless of what we say here, we would be wrong to think that the feeling in Nationalist and republican communities is other than extremely strong. That is part of the difficulty.

Regarding sectarian attacks, notwithstanding what I have already said about the Shankill, this summer was a marked improvement on previous ones. There were very few areas where the parades gave rise to other issues, but there are still problems. Looking at the figures, attacks are predominantly against Nationalists. In fairness to Nationalists in the North, when the problems were in the loyalist areas the Nationalists did things which they have not done in 30 years to try to assist and alleviate the movement of people and traffic. Therefore, this year in the areas which have always been afflicted the Nationalist people who have always suffered certainly tried their utmost, particularly in the second half of August and in September, to allay those fears, but of course the level of attacks in the Shankill area by loyalists has been enormous. What has happened in that area is horrendous. It may be better that I do not go into any more detail on that – I think people are aware of it – but it really has been horrendous.

On the level of freedom of movement of people, maybe we should not forget the excellent festivals which took place in the North this summer which enjoyed massive attendances from all over this island with little or no trouble. There probably would have been more trouble if they had taken place in parts of this city. Therefore, we should look at all those issues in a positive way. Our difficulties still come down to finding a resolution to Patten and to the difficulties of both the Shankill Road situation and the militant elements of the Real IRA and some other fringe groups.

What about the joint declaration I suggested?

The position is clear in the Constitution.

Barr
Roinn