Ba mhaith liom fáiltiú roimh an seans seo an tuarascáil seo a phlé sa Teach seo. Is mór an trua nach bhfuil níos mó díospóireachta trid an tír faoi dtaobh de.
I welcome the opportunity of discussing this major and very important report in this House. It is regrettable, for whatever reason, that there has not been more discussion and more debate throughout the country on it because it is not really a report that has to be looked at and studied by the British and by the Northern Unionists. There are many things in the report that ought to be studied carefully by Irish Nationalists because this report, in effect, is a reassessment from today's point of view of the current situation and where we go from now. That is what is important, particularly to those of us who have to live with the tragedy of Northern Ireland.
The inital cynicism which greeted the establishment of the New Ireland Forum in some quarters was quickly set aside as the work of the Forum progressed and its significance became apparent. From the very beginning, however, it was welcomed by those of us who had worked for fundamental political change in Northern Ireland and had seen our efforts negated and frustrated by a combination of British indifference, British lack of courage and, at times, by downright stupidity, by total Loyalist intransigence and by the continuing vicious circle of violence and counter-violence. We recognised it as a major Irish initiative with real potential to break the serious deadlock in Northern Ireland.
The fact is that since the setting up of Northern Ireland — and, God knows, Northern Nationalists are more aware of this than most — intransigent triumphalist "loyalism' has fed off intermittent doses of violent and verbal republicanism and all the while injustice flourished and the problem became more intractable and Northern Nationalists, the main victims of the failure to resolve the British-Irish problem, continued to suffer.
For 50 years successive British governments ignored the injustices to which Northern Nationalists were subjected, hiding behind the pretext that Northern Ireland matters could not be discussed at Westminster. During the current crisis—now 15 years old, I might add — apart from a brief period in the early seventies, Britain has failed to face up to its responsibilities and despite the desperate and deteriorating situation in the North and all the human misery and suffering that it has brought to both traditions and with its serious implications for peace and stability in the whole of Ireland, the only British approach to the problem was one of containment, of reacting to events, of increased dependence on military offensive and emergency legislation pushed to its most dangerous and its most extreme. That approach now has reached a situation where the courts of law are being used as a weapon to defeat terrorism. In the conflict-ridden society of Northern Ireland the result of that approach was entirely predictable. It has made an already grave situation considerably worse. Nationalists are now totally alienated and Unionists are more insecure and more fearful than ever before.
It was against this background and given the failure of the sovereign government responsible for Northern Ireland to reassess its basic policy that the New Ireland Forum was set up with the cooperation of the constitutional Nationalist parties of Ireland. It could not have got off the ground without the full cooperation and the goodwill and determination of all those parties and I would like to pay a tribute to all the parties in the Forum for the goodwill and determination they clearly showed. It was aimed at ending the dangerous political stalemate in Northern Ireland and beginning the dialogue necessary for political progress towards a lasting solution. It is important in studying this document that we keep in mind that that was the aim of the document. It represented the greatest challenge that has faced Irish political leaders since 1920 because that was the challenge of finding, despite their historical differences, and there were basic and deep differences which divided them, a common approach, an effective approach, a totally new approach which could lead to practical progress towards peace and reconciliation in Ireland. The Forum report and the impact which it has made is evidence that the Forum parties rose to that challenge.
The first and immediate impact was on international and indeed British opinions, and let nobody under-estimate the importance of that. Major newspapers in America, Britain and Europe called for a British response to what they considered to be a significant and generous contribution by Irish Nationalists towards a resolution of the Northern conflict. Typical of that reaction were comments like this one which I quote from a West German newspaper, Frankfurter Rundchan:
If Irish politicians are capable of far sighted planning why can the British not also be so capable. The British should be no less strenuous in their efforts to secure a peaceful future of the suffering population of Northern Ireland for whom they bear responsibility than their neighbours across the Irish Sea.
Britain's Financial Times called on Mrs. Thatcher to make an Irish settlement a priority for the next four years, and there are few of us in this House who would not say amen to that. The Financial Times continued:
No British policy will get anywhere if it is half-hearted and low on the political agenda. Mrs. Thatcher has an opportunity denied to almost all her predecessors.
That opportunity, as we know, refers to the Forum report which we are discussing here today. The fact that major opinion makers internationally were commenting in this vein was in itself a considerable breakthrough for the Forum.
The report is the result of a detailed examination of every aspect of the present conflict, economic, social, legal and political. It represents the consensus view of Irish Nationalists, a view which has been reached not only after consideration of Nationalists' viewpoints, but also after consideration and examination of the views of those diametrically opposed, the Northern Unionists. I know that elected representatives of Unionism did not come to the Forum, but those who did, nonetheless, forcefully, clearly and courageously articulated the views of those people who differ from us in aspiration. It is not surprising therefore to find that the report shows a hitherto unprecedented understanding on the part of Irish Nationalists of the Unionists' point of view and a generous acceptance of their equal and legitimate — and I stress both those words — rights. This is set out clearly in Chapter 4.15 and in the necessary elements of a framework for a solution contained in Chapter 5.2. I will quote from Chapter 5.2 two elements which are necessary for a solution.
(4) The validity of both the Nationalist and Unionist identities in Ireland and the democratic rights of every citizen on this island must be accepted; both of these identities must have equally satisfactory, secure and durable, political, administrative and symbolic expression and protection.
(5) Lasting stability can be found only in the context of new structures in which no tradition will be allowed to dominate the other, in which there will be equal rights and opportunities for all, in which there will be provision for formal and effective guarantees for the protection of individual human rights and of the communal and cultural rights of both Nationalists and Unionists.
That is a generous acceptance by Nationalist Ireland of the full and equal rights of Unionists to their rights and traditions. Whether we agree with them, like them or would prefer that they were not there is beside the point. That is the reality.
Furthermore, the spelling out for the first time by Irish Nationalists of the real meaning of Irish unity and of the need for agreement and spelling out what they mean by agreement, is even more important. I will quote again from Chapter 5.2:
Agreement means that the political arrangements for a new and sovereign Ireland must be freely negotiated and agreed by the people of the North and the people of the South.
That must clear away the myth that Irish unity means oppression of Protestants and a denial of their rights within a green Gaelic Catholic 32-County State. If there is anything that has been more aggravating to those of us in Northern Ireland who are proud to call ourselves Irish Nationalists, and who are proud to say that we would like to see this country united, and that it is the only way in the end which will bring lasting peace and stability to this island, it is the failure in the past of Nationalists — and I include all Nationalists, not just Southern Nationalists — to spell out what precisely they mean by Irish unity. That failure was counterproductive in that it allowed Irish unity to be interpreted by others, people perhaps who are not wholly, to put it mildly, sympathetic with the idea of Irish unity.
In the past Nationalist parties always agreed on the aim of Irish unity. The only debate seems to be as to who was the firmer in their support of Irish unity. I have heard little debate of how Irish unity is actually to be brought about, and it was because of this misconception and this failure to spell out Irish unity that we had to listen to British politicians, and indeed Unionist politicians, telling us that Irish unity was a taboo word, something you should not mention, something to be said in hushed tones. I am glad that once and for all the Forum document has swept all that out of the way and we can now talk about an Irish unity in agreement with our fellow Protestants in the North which will be generous to their traditions and which cannot be forced and must be brought about by agreement, and their agreement is essential. From now one, it is up to us to persuade them and to win that agreement.
The report correctly points out that whilst Northern Nationalists were the main victims of the failure of the 1920 settlement, it has also failed the Unionists in whose interests it was intended to work. It is undoubtedly true that the power and the privilege that they enjoyed under the Stormont régime was bought at a very high price indeed. They also suffer from the instability and the insecurity in Northern Ireland and their lives are blighted by fear. A series of articles currently in The Irish Times must bring that home starkly to all of us — how tragic their situation is and the situation particularly in which the Border Protestants find themselves. That is a situation that the Forum report and the work of the Forum was aimed at bringing to an end.
In its historical analysis the report points out, as I have already said, that Northern Nationalists have been the principal victims of the failure to resolve the conflict. That of course is quite true. They have been excluded from participation — perhaps I should say "we have been excluded from participation"— treated as second class citizens and denied legitimate expression of our identity. They have suffered from Unionist misrule, from British neglect, suffered at the hands of those who would pose as their liberators whilst in reality creating conditions which contribute to worsening their situation. They have suffered violence from all sources, British, Loyalists and so-called Republicans. They have been exploited by violent and verbal republicanism and harassed and intimidated in the name of law and order. Quite frankly, they have come to the end of their tether. They are not interested in ideological cant and political posturing.
What the Nationalists want in Northern Ireland is positive action by the British and Irish Governments which will lead to a real change in their situation, and that is what the Forum report calls for. This report can and must play an important role in bringing about that change. The change can be brought about when the British and Irish Governments together, as the report suggests, face the realities set out in Chapter 5.1. Whereas I accept what Senator Honan said about various options in the report, I do not think that the options in themselves are that vitally important, and it is quite natural that some people will have a preference for one rather than another.
To me all the options may meet the realities and the unchangeable parts of that report are those realities. You can say what you like about your opinion of certain ways of doing things, but what you cannot do is change the realities. Therefore, the important part of the report is the part that spells out those realities in Chapter 5.1. With those realities are proposed elements for a solution in the part which follows in Chapter 5.2. Those elements must be the basis for any future negotiations to resolve this problem. Irish Nationalists, in this document, have faced up to all the realities, including those that are uncomfortable from a traditional, Nationalist viewpoint. It would be, to say the very least, counter-productive if the British Government failed to do likewise.
In relation to the requirement which states the need to accept the validity of both identities and to provide for "equally satisfactory, secure and durable, political, administrative and symbolic expression and protection" for both traditions, it is clear that fundamental and radical changes in British policy will be needed if that requirement is to be met. Let us remember that the basis of British policy has in all respects been heavily weighted in favour of the Unionist tradition. Nationalist equality cannot be achieved by tinkering about with present structures. The recurrent message in the report is that Britain must face up to her responsibilities, that Britain must act and must act urgently.
In a speech the Tánaiste made at the weekend he has given us some indication that he feels hopeful. I hope for all our sakes that that is correct because it is five months now since the publication of the report. During those months a series of events has deepened further the alienation of Nationalists and has totally eroded their confidence in the judicial system and the security forces. I have referred to this before in the House and I have stated my concern about it. Since the publication of the report, events like the remarks of Justice Gibson in another acquittal of an RUC man in Belfast court, further evidence of irregularities in police files which dealt with those shoot to kill incidences that I mentioned here before, the police conduct culminating in the killing of Seán Downes in West Belfast in August, all of those things have led to a total collapse of confidence in the judicial system and in the security forces from the point of view of Nationalists. In any society, that spells danger for the community as a whole. In these circumstances, whereas other people may have expressed impatience with the British I would as a Northern Nationalist who lives in Northern Ireland say that any further delay is dangerous and irresponsible, I do not choose those words lightly.
Finally, it would be a tragedy if, as a result of any further British delay, the realism and the determination shown by the authors of this report and the unity of purpose from which it derives its main strength, its importance and its impact, should be lost. It would not be the first time that British tactics had divided and conquered us.