I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Moffatt. I call Senator Ó Murchú.
Northern Ireland: Statements (Resumed).
I have found most of what has been said interesting and revealing, especially what was said by two eminent Senators, Senator Maurice Hayes and Senator Haughey. Both have a Northern Ireland background, both are involved in business and both realise the difficulties and challenges facing anybody in Northern Ireland today. While they agreed on many aspects, there were differences of opinion between them which I have not noticed in previous debates. It suggests that the combined approach to Northern Ireland is being tested. That is not surprising because everybody forecast that if the institutions fell we would face an unravelling situation. It is what we all fear.
Before we consider where we are we should look at what we have achieved. Nobody could have forecast a decade ago that we would have made such progress. It was not easy and we all can recall how often it was necessary to step a yard forward only to step back by almost as much and then take another step forward. There were times when we felt defeatist, that we were not achieving what we wanted and when we considered that some players were active in the process while others were inactive. Nevertheless we continued to make an effort.
No words of ours could pay enough tribute to the negotiators on the Irish side for the amount of painstaking work they put in. They were often frustrated and disillusioned by the lack of progress, even up the Good Friday Agreement, when there was a danger that no party would sign it. The Agreement was signed because there had to be compromise. People had to compromise every inch of the way and it serves no purpose to say that somebody compromised more than another.
Everybody has compromised in this process. We compromised by agreeing to the deletion and replacement of Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution, Bunreacht na hÉireann. We all know how deeply held they were. They did not present a threat to any neighbour, be it Britain or anybody in the North. We saw them as a declaration, if not of fact then of intent. Each person here believed that should remain, yet we were prepared, for the greater good, to accept the deletion of the Articles and that has been done.
I accept that Unionists had their difficulty. They have lived with a tradition for many years. I do not believe they would be proud of the manner in which they implemented the power they had. We do not have to go back too many years to find a Northern Ireland more suited to a less civilised part of the world, where people were tested on their religion and even on their ownership of property. That is all in the past. While the Unionists were coming from that background, they had to accept that the Government, as one of the guarantors of the Nationalist population, would have to have a direct input. That has happened and it is now taken as natural. We should salute the Unionists for taking that step.
The republicans have also taken a step. The biggest step of all was when they stopped the war and when they said the war was over. It is over, and that is evident. I travel to the North on a regular basis and I see the changed atmosphere. I see people's suspicions being allayed. I see them working together and their ambitions coalescing as they identify joint opportunities. I also see the physical progress made in Belfast alone.
If the republicans have moved and if we want to differentiate between Nationalists and republicans, which we should not necessarily do, we could not but admire what John Hume has done in this process. He took a major risk, and when he initially did so he was castigated and scarified by some of the media in the Republic. I am tempted to name a newspaper, but since I became a Member of this House I have been careful not to say anything that would add to the problem. I always felt John Hume was so steadfast on that occasion that he continued to bring his people with him because of the admiration in which he was held.
For the short time the cross-Border bodies functioned it was evident that an effective and amicable working relationship had developed. That could only have been to the good of the whole island. This was also apparent in the ministerial councils. Even our interaction with Britain was to the mutual benefit of all concerned.
I do not believe Mr. Mandelson emerged from the final chapter of this process smelling of roses. He made a strategic error in suspending the institutions at the time he did. It may not have been a strategic error in so far as the difficulties experienced by Mr. Trimble had to be addressed. Nevertheless, we must bear in mind that every player in this process has internal pressures they must address, whether it be the SDLP, Sinn Féin, the loyalist groupings or the sovereign Governments. It was a strategic error for Mr. Mandelson not to have postponed his decision and not to have taken on board the last report from the de Chastelain commission. That commission was established for a specific purpose, to deal with decommissioning or demilitarisation. When a report was issued which gave hope, even if it was late in the day, it should have been considered. The Irish Government played a generous, decent and responsible role in regard to that statement.
We must look to the future. The first thing which must be done is to ensure all the players are playing a full role. The institutions must be reinstated at this stage. We must ensure no vacuum is left for the unravelling process I mentioned. We know that approach is supported by the people of Ireland, North and South, who want this process to work and who want to see the institutions in place. They also want decommissioning and demilitarisation in the fullest sense. This matter should be treated with urgency. Some players are allowing it to go on the back burner. I hope that St. Patrick's Day, which is a focus for the Governments, may kick-start the process again and get us back to where we were before. I wish those involved well in that, including the negotiators.
I welcome the Minister of State to the concluding stages of this important debate. Since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, so much has been written and spoken and so many hopes have been raised and dashed that people are now in a reflective mood when it comes to the process. Senator Ó Murchú referred to the patience, interest and enthusiasm which people on both sides of the Border had in the lead-up to the formation of the Assembly. Their patience has been exhausted and people are looking for new ways forward.
One of the fundamental fault lines in the Good Friday Agreement was the fudging of the decommissioning issue. There was a valid reason at the time. It was expected that relations between the two communities would improve and that a sense of trust would develop which would place decommissioning in a more favourable light at a later stage. Needless to say, that did not happen. The bitterness which has been generated over the years by atrocities committed on both sides in Northern Ireland will take a long time to heal.
Nevertheless, there is considerable hope left. The issue of decommissioning is not as important now as it was three years ago and will not be as important in three years' time as it is now. That is the way the political system is evolving. It is one of the great ironies that, in the country which speaks of decommissioning, the United States of America, men, women and children are killed in schools, offices and homes every day of the week. Decommissioning at this stage is more a symbolic gesture than anything else. If both sides and communities have the patience, it will disappear.
We must reach the stage where people, the media and unionism stop using the title "Sinn Féin-IRA". Sinn Féin is a legitimate political party which is on the road to democracy. It has already reached Damascus, so to speak, and the road from now on allows for no turning back. As time goes on and if Sinn Féin can put oceans of clear water between it and the IRA, the landscape will improve dramatically on all sides. Looking back, it will be seen that it was not the British Army which forced the IRA into a position of abandoning its campaign, rather the loyalist paramilitaries. At this stage, the IRA has nowhere to go. There is no moral support or justification for a renewal of a campaign of violence. The IRA realises that it will not only have to fight the British Army but also loyalism. That was a key issue in its deciding to abandon the campaign of violence.
That said, there is a distinct need now for Sinn Féin to pursue its own goal and political agenda and to leave what is left of a minority organisation to itself. One of the sad aspects of paramilitary organisations is that it is the minority which always has its say. Unfortunately, that is the reality of paramilitary organisations. In a democratic institution, it is the majority which has its say. As time goes by, the IRA will become increasingly ostracised as an organisation. Sinn Féin has a duty now to distance itself from that organisation and to move forward. In time it will have a justifiable claim to a position in the Northern Ireland Assembly in its own right and on its own merit. It probably has that mandate at present.
With regard to the suspension of the Assembly and Peter Mandelson's role in it, the suspension was inevitable in the face of the Unionists' position at the time. We know that, at present, a majority of Unionists in Northern Ireland probably do not want any type of power-sharing executive. David Trimble was faced with this possibility. Again, the Unionist demand for a decommissioning deadline did not help the situation. It introduced into the Good Friday Agreement an element not originally in it and the Nationalist population was not prepared at that time to dance to the music of the loyalists. Peter Mandelson faced the task of allowing David Trimble to go down the Swanee or to suspend the Northern Ireland Executive, and he took the latter decision, possibly reluctantly. Had David Trimble succumbed to adverse influences, we would have a much worse scenario than at present. When the Northern Ireland Executive was suspended, I said it would be at least two years before it would be reinstated and, as time goes by, my initial analysis appears accurate.
The Northern Ireland Executive was beginning to function, although not perhaps as we would have liked. The principle of collective Cabinet responsibility did not seem to exist during the short period of its existence. Ministers did their own thing and made their own decisions without reference to their colleagues in the Executive. That did not augur well for continued collective responsibility within the Assembly. Nevertheless, the institutions were up and running and they offered considerable hope. The cross-Border bodies have also been put on ice. They are important in the ongoing development of the political process in Northern Ireland.
It was unfortunate that politicians made extravagant claims in the lead up to the formation of the Assembly. The British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, referred to a seismic shift in the landscape. Unfortunately, that seismic shift turned out to be an earthquake which suspended the North ern Ireland Executive. Like every earthquake, it left tremors and people are now uncertain about the future. I hope those tremors disappear and the political picture becomes more focused.
There is still hope for the institutions in Northern Ireland. If the guns remain silent and Sinn Féin can distance itself from the IRA and its campaign of terror, it will emerge as a political force. It is on the road to democracy and there is no turning back. It must condemn all acts of violence, regardless of their source. It has a role in the political process on the island and it must assume its responsibilities.
There is an air of uncertainty surrounding all the institutions in Northern Ireland. With patience, goodwill on all sides and a little imagination among our politicians both here and in the United Kingdom, we can progress and the Executive will succeed.
As a representative for the Border constituency of Cavan-Monaghan, I know the people of the Border region want to see the current impasse in the peace process resolved and the institutions set up under the Good Friday Agreement restored.
The people of Cavan and Monaghan have enjoyed the tangible benefits of peace. They have seen long dormant links with communities on the opposite side of the Border revived. The tourist trade has enjoyed a boost and the local economy has benefited from the upsurge in cross-Border trading which has fostered many valuable commercial links. This has taken place in an atmosphere of mutual understanding and respect for the different traditions, which has always been a feature of the way of life in the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan. The people of Cavan and Monaghan feel that too much has been accomplished to let the peace process falter now. They want all those involved to renew their efforts in the negotiating process to find a solution to the current difficulties.
I commend the tireless commitment of the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, to the peace process. They and the major political players in the North, Britain and the United States who have devoted themselves to advancing the process have secured a prominent niche in Irish history for their efforts. However, it would be sad to see history record these efforts as ultimately inconclusive.
If further leaps of faith and imaginative approaches are required, let all those involved find the courage and ingenuity to implement them. The people of Ireland, North and South, have experienced too much of the prosperous climate which the cessation of violence has brought to have it overshadowed once again by the threat of renewed hostilities and the human consequences that would come in their wake.
As we speak, strategies to deal with the key issues are being evolved and considered. I have faith in the Government that it will play its full part in successfully implementing these strategies in tandem with all the political interests involved. I hope we are able to herald a successful outcome to those efforts in the near future and I look forward to seeing our country develop to its full potential in an atmosphere of genuine peace and harmony. I hope peace will continue in Northern Ireland and that the Assembly will be restored as soon as possible.
We are back further than where we started. We have given away Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution, none of the institutions referred to in the Good Friday Agreement is operating and once again there is direct rule from Westminster. Any Unionist would be happy at present. Sometimes we delude ourselves into imagining that we can beat the English. The British seem too powerful, but there is always hope. Nothing changes the British mindset unless it hits their pockets. That is the reality we speak about in private but we cannot speak about it openly.
Everyone is aware of the point at which British attitudes changed and at which they embarked on this process. It was not when people were killing each other in the Six Counties – that did not matter to them – and it was not when innocent people were killed in the United Kingdom or anywhere else, it was when the banking institutions in London were threatened. It was at that stage that an attitudinal change took place. Anyone who believes that the British were sincere when they signed the Good Friday Agreement need only consider their record on all other agreements we made with them in the past. If the conditions suited them, they adhered to them, if not, they simply scrapped the agreement.
I do not blame Peter Mandelson for trying to save Mr. Trimble's neck, he is only a functionary. However, the British Parliament took a unilateral decision to break an international agreement which it had solemnly signed with a neighbouring, friendly sovereign state. I would not be upset if the Agreement had been in place for many years, but it had only been in operation for a short period when the British Parliament took its decision. It behoves our Parliament and our Government to highlight that fact.
The Agreement is not worth the paper on which it is written unless events are proceeding in the manner the British want them to proceed. Is that not the truth of the matter? The British have engaged in some machiavellian machinations in this regard. They foresaw a scenario where the IRA would decommission its arms, where Sinn Féin would be brought on board for a short time and things would, thereafter, return to the way they had been. Under that scenario the 78 British Army installations in the Six Counties, the 159 RUC installations, some of which might be scaled down, would remain in place and the 27,500 members of the armed forces – the British Army, the RUC and the Royal Irish Regiment – would also remain for as long as their presence was required. In addition, 280,000 legally held arms would remain in Unionist possession and Croppy would lie down again.
The British method will not work on this occasion because the people of the entire island have spoken. This Agreement might fall but it will not go away. In my opinion the Americans will bring pressure to bear on the British to enforce the Agreement, and I hope they do so. The American plan for world globalisation does not include trouble spots where NATO or the American Army cannot become involved. If these entities cannot become involved, they cannot use up arms and this will result in job losses in Milwaukee or Wisconsin. The Americans, therefore, would like to see the difficulties in this trouble spot resolved, particularly as they could make some money out of it.
The Nationalists in the Six Counties and, despite daily propaganda, most people in the Republic are becoming aware of the British gameplan. It is such a pity that events have overtaken us because, despite Unionist misgivings – I can empathise with these because I have relations on both sides of the political divide in the North – the institutions were beginning to work. People on all sides were afforded a glimpse of a better future where peace would reign and people of different political and religious persuasions, perhaps for the first time, would be able to communicate and co-operate for the betterment of all. I accept that these people are in the minority because there remains a huge bloc of Unionists who cannot stomach sharing power with a Catholic or a Nationalist.
If the British Government had not once more bowed to Unionist pressure and the institutions had been permitted to work, we would have had a better Ireland. There will not be much change until and unless the Unionists receive a message from Britain that by working the Agreement they face a better economic future. That is the key. They also need to hear that the British Government will not shelve everything every few months in order to protect another Unionist leader. Can we expect that much of the British? I do not know. I know one thing, however, the days of Croppy lying down are gone forever. The mistake was to let him see that he was as good as, if not better than, his master, that he could master a political brief, become a Government Minister and work with people of a different persuasion.
There can be no going back. As Martin Luther King said, "I have been to the mountain top". Not only have the fools left us our Fenian dead, they let us see the mountain top. There is no going back, we can only move forward. People on both sides of the political divide and on both sides of the Border – that artificial divide which separates us – have begun to see that the only way forward is by working together and ensuring the operation of the Agreement.
Somehow or other, the Government must stand up to the British. I know this will be difficult. Our economy represents only 1% of the entire economy of Europe. We are only a small nation but we have always been able to stand on our own two feet and not be afraid. We should show the same resilience we showed in the past when de Valera ceased to pay annuities to Britain. We can stand up to a large nation and show our resolve. People will respect rather than hate us for doing so.
I hope the Americans continue to support us, even if their reasons for doing so are not altruistic. That does not matter. The only objective we have is to make the 32 counties of Ireland a better place for ourselves and our children. We cannot do so as long as a militarised area remains in the Six Counties. The existence of private armies on the Unionist and Nationalist sides cannot be tolerated forever.
Decommissioning is an important issue but I would prefer to consider the concept of demilitarisation. Northern Ireland is not a normal place in which to live. There is no point blaming one side or the other. We must look to a future where we can work together, and the Agreement provided for such a future. If we were able to convince the British to allow us to run our own affairs once more, the people in the Six Counties would be able to run theirs.
I welcome the opportunity to comment on the position in Northern Ireland. We have held debates similar to this on a number of occasions in recent years and each time we have reflected on the positive aspects of events in Northern Ireland. We are more than conscious of the delicacy of the situation in the North but, following the suspension of the institutions and the Assembly a number of weeks ago, I have never seen such a level of despondency among the people in Northern Ireland.
I live in County Monaghan and I do not believe anyone could underestimate the level of despondency among people living along the Border. When I spoke to a number of them about the current situation, they all expressed their disappointment. I was in contact with a number of second level students, all of whom were 17 or 18 years of age, in Northern Ireland from both sides of the religious divide and it was extremely sad to witness their disillusionment, their total lack of interest in the lack of progress and their lack of faith in politicians and those in a position to keep matters moving forward. It is sad to compare these emotions with those of two years ago when there was such hope, enthusiasm and eagerness to look forward to an improved life which their parents did not enjoy. People in Border counties hope that the suspension will only last for a short period of time and that matters will improve.
I also listened to older people who were deeply involved in politics in Northern Ireland over the past 30 years. These people are fed up with what has happened. In their own quiet way they worked towards improving the lot of people, particularly Nationalists, in areas such as Fermanagh. The suspension is a great disappointment to these people who have worked so diligently over the past number of years to try to make things happen in Northern Ireland.
The problems can be resolved but problems such as those in Northern Ireland are not solved overnight. However, we cannot go back to where we were before the Good Friday Agreement. For the first time, pro-Agreement parties inextricably linked to paramilitary organisations are talking to those on the opposite side of the political divide and these parties are the first to admit that there is no going back. Like everyone else, they are unsure how we move forward but they know it is the only way to go.
I hope the current problem is only a temporary hitch. The situation at present gives anti-Agreement forces further opportunities to undermine the process and allows extremists on both sides to continue to threaten murder and mayhem. We cannot allow these people to succeed but they will do so in the absence of an alternative. We must do everything in our power to prevent such an outcome.
I wish to express appreciation for the support given by the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minster, Tony Blair. They have faced difficulties, particularly on the day on which the Northern Ireland Executive was suspended. However, they have worked all along to try to move matters forward. I also acknowledge the support given by President Clinton. US support may have ulterior motives but that does not matter. The support has been there and President Clinton has been steadfast in his support over the past number of years.
There will be a presidential election in the US this year and we do not know the policies of the potential candidates towards Northern Ireland. We have been lucky to have the support of President Clinton and it would be a shame to lose that support over the coming months. We should avail of every opportunity to use his expertise and persuasive abilities to move matters forward.
There is no doubt that the suspension of the Executive created a division between the two Governments and between the Taoiseach and the Prime Minister. It also led to much mistrust among people in Northern Ireland. However, for the few weeks in which the institutions were operating, there was no doubt that they were beginning to make a difference and that they were effective and working well. Day-to-day politics involves dealing with mundane issues such as opening or closing hospital wards, and it was refreshing to see such events in Northern Ireland. The longer the suspension lasts the more difficult it will be to bring the institutions back on track.
Instead of discussing the political situation in Northern Ireland, this debate should have been about how we in the South could help the situation in Harland and Wolff where 1,700 workers are on protective notice. Whether people agreed with the Good Friday Agreement or not, the majority of people, North and South, voted for it and want it to succeed. These people could see that it presented the best opportunity for them, for their families and for the future prosperity and economic development of Northern Ireland. That prosperity and economic development would have knock-on effects for Border counties.
No one knows the answer to the current problem. There is a political vacuum in Northern Ireland which allows extremists on both sides to determine their own ways and means of dealing with the situation. We have to move forward. We are approaching the second anniversary of the signing of the Good Friday Agreement and I hope that we will get the process back on track. That is the only way forward and there is no going back. I hope that the people of the 32 counties can look forward to a better place for all. The only way this will be achieved is through social and economic equality on both sides of the Border and I look forward to such a society in the near future.
The suspension of the Executive was a serious development from the point of view of greater political achievements in Northern Ireland. People, North and South, were set back by the fact that we had reached stalemate. The purpose of this debate is to reassure people and political colleagues in Northern Ireland of our firm belief in and support for the progress made in the past few years, particularly since the setting up of the Northern Ireland Executive. It is important to state that we are determined that, through interrelationships and debate, public representatives in Northern Ireland will make the necessary progress to re-establish the Executive and put an end to distrust in the future.
A recent television programme debated the memorial erected in Derry by the IRSP. The programme included representatives of the IRA, the UDA, families of murdered RUC officers, a clergyman whose father had been shot and a woman whose daughter was killed by a plastic bullet. The programme demonstrated the effort that will be required to build relationships. One can genuinely understand feelings that are still so deeply ingrained even though political progress has been made. The personal loss over the years has been phenomenal. Thousands have been killed and one can see the difficulties involved in moving forward.
The political progress which has been made, the establishment of the Executive, the cross-Border bodies and the genuine commitment of politicians North and South, is still in evidence. It is vital that more progress is made to assure both communities in the North that they are following the right path for their own prosperity.
This morning the protective notice given to the workers in Harland and Wolff was mentioned on the Order of Business. We are concerned about that because, while there may be political difficulties, this is one country. Job losses in the North are of concern to us even while our economy is growing. It is sad to see a mainstay industry such as ship building being wound down. The views expressed this morning were sincerely meant, without wanting to interfere. People should be encouraged to engage in political dialogue. Those from different backgrounds must meet more often to find a way round the difficulties of decommissioning. The progress which has been made enables the people involved to take that step.
It is important that we share our prosperity. We have much to offer the people of the North of Ireland. They also have a great deal to offer to us. It is easy to talk like this in times of economic prosperity but there is a great future ahead for all of us and the step is worth taking. It is important for us, however, to recognise the division that still pertains and the need for the building of trust among the people of the North after so many decades of strife.
I wish the political representatives in the North every success in building for future. Greater trust will secure a way round the present difficulties and will allow the political process to succeed.
When is it proposed to sit again?
At 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday 21 March.
Acting Chairman
I apologise to the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, Deputy de Valera. Unfortunately, the two Members who had the motions down for the Adjournment are not here. I have no alternative but to adjourn the House.
The Seanad adjourned at 2.35 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 21 March 2000.