Priority Questions
3. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will make representations to the Kazakh Government on the imprisonment of leading human rights lawyer Vadim Kuramshin; and if he will demand the ending of state persecution of Mr. Kuramshin, who has highlighted brutal civil rights transgressions in Kazakhstan. [28359/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraGo raibh maith agat agus gabhaim buíochas leis na Teachtaí eile as sin. I ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to make the strongest possible representations to the Government of Kazakhstan with regard to bringing to a complete end the state persecution of leading Kazakh human rights lawyer Vadim Kuramshin, who was jailed for 12 years on trumped-up charges and who has suffered brutal treatment in prison since his incarceration.
The Tánaiste is concerned about the case of Vadim Kuramshin, a human rights lawyer and civil society activist in Kazakhstan, who was sentenced to 12 years in prison in December 2012 following his arrest for alleged extortion of an employee in the legal profession. Mr. Kuramshin’s trial was reported as not conforming to international standards. It will be recalled that the case was raised in this House May 2012, during a debate on Ireland's chairmanship of the OSCE. Mr. Kuramshin had become well known, in particular, for his activities to raise awareness of violations of inmates' rights in Kazakh penitentiaries, including the prison colony in which he has been incarcerated.
Reports indicated that Mr. Kuramshin went on hunger strike on 2 June last in order to protest against his treatment while detained, which he claims has included beatings and harassment by prison authorities. There are now indications however, that he has ended his hunger strike and that he is to be moved to a different facility where he will get the medical treatment he needs. This case is being monitored by our embassy in Moscow, which is accredited to Kazakhstan. In light of these new developments, the Tánaiste has instructed our ambassador to raise the matter directly with the appropriate Kazakh authorities on his next visit to Astana.
The EU has also monitored Mr. Kuramshin’s case closely and a representative from the EU delegation in Astana attended the preliminary appeal hearing in November 2013, at which the Supreme Court refused to hear his full appeal. In addition, the case was among those raised specifically with the Kazakh authorities in the course of the most recent EU-Kazakhstan human rights dialogue, which took place in Astana in November. We will continue to monitor this case closely and avail of opportunities, both nationally and within the EU, to highlight our serious concerns about Mr. Kuramshin's case and the wider human rights situation in Kazakhstan.
I urge the Government to continue to exert pressure in respect of the case of Vadim Kuramshin. He is a very heroic defender of human rights who has been hounded and persecuted by the authoritarian regime in Kazakhstan. He has courageously exposed the horrific regime of brutality which obtains in the country's prisons, in one of which he has suffered ill-treatment. This matter came to a head in 2010 when a number of prisoners mutilated themselves as a result of the horrific treatment to which they had been subjected.
I visited Kazakhstan as a Member of the European Parliament in August 2010. My first meeting was to be with Vadim Kuramshin but two days beforehand he was detained by the police, arrested and kept in preventative detention until after I left the country. This was so he could not meet me and inform me in detail about the terrible conditions which obtain in Kazakh prisons. Mr. Kuramshin is currently in prison on a trumped-up charge. It is an horrific situation and I urge the Government to ensure our ambassador presses this matter very strongly with the Kazakh authorities.
The Deputy is correct to raise concerns in respect of the wider human rights environment within Kazakhstan. He has touched on one particular issue but it is clear there are wider concerns regarding other fundamental freedoms. I refer, for example, to the right of assembly and peaceful protest, the right to choose one's own religion or to not do so and the right to follow one's conscience. It is as a result of these broader issues and the specific matter to which the Deputy refers that a structured human rights dialogue between the European Union and Kazakhstan is in place. The wider human rights issues were raised by the outgoing President of the European Commission, Mr. Barroso, on his most recent visit to Astana. I reiterate that, as a result of our concerns regarding human rights, the Tánaiste has instructed our ambassador to raise this matter directly on his next visit to Kazakhstan.
A jury threw out the trumped-up charge of extortion against Mr. Kuramshin in August 2012. In September of that year he gave a speech on human rights abuses in Kazakhstan at the OSCE conference in Warsaw, at which the Tánaiste may have been present. On returning to his country, Mr. Kuramshin was again arrested and sentenced by the court - in respect of the same charge of which the jury had previously found him not guilty - to 12 years in prison, which is where he is at present. I again urge the Government to make very strong representations on this matter, about which, unfortunately, the bureaucracy at the top of the EU is conflicted. The EU is courting President Nazarbayev and his regime because it wants to exploit the fabulous mineral resources that Kazakhstan possesses. Shamefully, the EU entertained President Nazarbayev following the arrest of Vadim Kuramshin and my return from Kazakhstan. Unfortunately, a conflict exists in this regard. The Government must fight its Kazakh counterpart in respect of this matter. I ask it to keep me, as a representative in this country of Mr. Kuramshin and others who are engaged in the struggle for human rights in Kazakhstan, informed of progress.
On the Deputy's last point, we will make sure, given his personal interest in this matter, that he is informed of representations and progress that is made. As I said in my earlier reply, I am very much aware of the significant difficulties and problems in regard to human rights in that country. I acknowledge the progress that has been made in some areas but I am also aware of the fact that we are talking about a country and an environment which, for example, ranks 154 out of 179 countries in terms of press freedom and that in December 2012 more than 40 media outlets were shut because of issues and concerns they were raising. The Deputy will be informed of efforts our ambassador makes.
On the Deputy's point regarding conflict and bureaucracy, no such conflict exists. President Barroso in his last visit to Astana raised issues in regard to human rights and the grave concerns we had. As I said in my initial response, our European Union representative was present at the preliminary trial that took place. We will continue to raise this issue bilaterally and within the European Union.
1. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade when all-party talks will recommence on the Haass proposals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28365/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraI hope that the all-party talks will resume in Stormont today. As we know, a number of deadlines in regard to a successful conclusion to the Haass talks have been missed. The end of December, St. Patrick's week, Easter and the local and European elections, which are all important dates in the political calendar, have passed and, unfortunately, no progress has been made. As I have said here previously, it is essential that the two Governments take a hands on approach to assist in resolving these contentious issues. Parades, flags and the legacy of the past are all issues that need to be dealt with comprehensively because they have the potential to create constant and consistent trouble within communities and on our streets.
I have already welcomed the resumption on 2 June of the party leaders’ talks in Belfast. The party leaders this week will hold the first of two intensive three day sessions with a view to narrowing the remaining gaps between them and for developing the practical mechanisms and related timeframe for implementation. They will hold a second three day session next week from 8 July to 10 July. The parties have also established a secretariat of Northern Ireland civil servants to support the talks. This is a welcome development.
In my ongoing meetings and contacts with the party leaders and with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, most recently on 24 June, I have stressed the importance of securing an agreement on the outstanding issues. The party leaders have individually acknowledged to me that there is broad agreement on the basic architecture for moving forward on the issues of flags, parades and dealing with the past. I firmly believe that it is in the best interests of Northern Ireland that agreement is reached as soon as possible. It is particularly important now during the marching season and before the summer recess that politics is seen to be working for the benefit of all communities in the North.
During my visit to Washington DC from 17 June to 19 June, I heard genuine concern being expressed by political, business and community leaders on the need for progress in the party leaders' talks. I conveyed this to each of the Northern Ireland party leaders on my return on 20 June.
The Government believes, as I know do all Deputies in this House, that the framework and path for peace that was agreed and democratically endorsed through the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, and in other agreements since, was the right framework and the right path towards a peaceful and reconciled society in Northern Ireland. I believe that an agreement now on these contentious issues would represent further progress along that path.
I thank the Tánaiste for his reply and I record again our appreciation of the work of Ambassador Haass and Dr. O'Sullivan up to the end of December. Will the Tánaiste agree that the Downing Street Declaration of 1993, the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 and the St. Andrews Agreement of 2010 were achieved between the two sovereign Governments and the parties working together but, very importantly, the talks were led and driven by the two sovereign Governments? We know there has been a devolution of powers but the issues under discussion that remain to be resolved predate the devolution of powers. They are also issues that will place responsibility on both Governments to enact measures to deal with the outcomes of those discussions. Will the Tánaiste agree with me and with the comments of the SDLP leader, Alasdair McDonnell, that both Governments need to be in the room to bring these talks to a successful conclusion? We need those talks to be brought to a successful conclusion for the benefit of all of this island.
Both Governments, and certainly the Irish Government, are very close to these talks and I have made it my business and the business of the Irish Government to remain in very close contact with the party leaders and with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in regard to these talks. The talks were established by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister on the decision of the Northern Ireland Executive. They were initiated within Northern Ireland by the Northern Ireland parties and formally established by the First Minister and Deputy First Minister. The modalities for the talks are, in the first instance, a matter for them to decide. I have made it clear that the Irish Government wants to be involved as closely as possible in this talks process. I have discussed that with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. What is important is that an outcome is achieved from them. I believe that is possible. I believe from what we have seen arising from the Haass discussions last year, which concluded on New Year's Eve, and from the discussions that have taken place since, that the issues which are outstanding are perfectly capable of being bridged. I hope that in these two three day sessions that are now arranged it will be possible to do that.
I note the Tánaiste's comment that the Government wants to be involved as closely as possible. We want to see a conclusion as rapidly as possible. We are into the marching season again. There are conflicting reports from different parts of the North of Ireland in regard to trouble in some places and relative calm in other areas that have seen difficulties in the past. We hope that the next month or more passes by peacefully but there are those festering sores. We need to get these issues off the table and resolved.
I appeal to the Tánaiste to ensure that he brings the influence and persuasion of his office and that of the Government to really be a participant - a participant in inverted commas, if he is not in there in the modus operandi of the talks at present - because I honestly believe, as I have said here on many occasions, that the influence and power of the two sovereign Governments are needed to bring these talks to a successful conclusion. As I said earlier, they are not about issues that have arisen since the devolution of powers. They are about issues that predate the devolution of powers and issues that will place responsibilities on both Governments to enact measures to deal with the past when a successful conclusion is achieved, and I hope that is achieved sooner rather later.
I share that hope. I hope that a successful conclusion is achieved sooner rather than later. As the Deputy will be aware, I was in Belfast for the conclusion of the Haass discussions at the new year. I remain very closely in contact with that. I have remained in contact with Richard Haass and although he is not directly involved, he has maintained an interest and was here last year to receive the Tipperary peace prize. I have been frustrated, and have expressed this, that there has been a kind of a stop-go approach to these talks since the new year. We all understood that not much was going to happen during the election period. I was glad that the talks resumed on 2 June but I must say that I was deeply frustrated that there was no meeting between 2 June and 24 June when the next meeting took place. That is one of the reasons I wrote to each of the party leaders on 20 June expressing my concern that no meeting had been arranged, conveying to them the frustrations that were being conveyed to me when I was in Washington a couple of days earlier. I am glad now that the two three day sessions have been arranged. They start this morning. They will meet today, tomorrow and Friday and will meet again next week for three days. I believe it is possible to bridge the issues that are outstanding.
There are dimensions that must be legislated for in Westminster and probably here. We have a direct and close interest in it.
2. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the issues discussed during his recent visit to the USA; and his views on whether a comprehensive immigration reform package can be delivered. [28441/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Tánaiste was recently in the US to discuss immigration reform with the US Government and members of the Congress and the Senate. The issue affects up to 60,000 Irish people, many of whom were living in the shadows and living in fear. Will the Tánaiste at some stage address the issue, outline his views on the potential success of immigration reform in the US and will he give us a sense of where things are at?
I visited Washington D.C. over the period 17-19 June for various meetings on US immigration reform, which remains a key Government priority. My programme included separate discussions with Congressman Luis Gutierrez, Congressman Paul Ryan, Senator Pat Leahy, members of the Congressional Friends of Ireland group, House judiciary committee member Congressman Mark Amodei, Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart, House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic caucus chairman Congressman Xavier Becerra and White House domestic policy council director Ms. Cecilia Munoz. I also met Irish-American community leaders, including from the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform, the Chicago Celts for Immigration Reform, Irish Apostolate USA, and the Ancient Order of Hibernians, with whom the Government has worked closely on our shared US immigration reform agenda. Each of my meetings proved very useful, offering different insights and analyses into the prospects for progress towards legislation that would provide relief for currently undocumented Irish migrants and also a facility for additional future legal migration between Ireland and the US. There was widespread consensus that an already complex political landscape had become even more complicated by the electoral defeat earlier in the month of the Republican House majority leader. The general sense I received from interlocutors was that further time would be needed to assess the full implications of this development for ongoing immigration reform efforts, particularly from the perspective of the upcoming congressional mid-term elections. I found it encouraging that proponents of immigration reform in Congress appear determined to persist with their efforts and they hope that further progress may yet prove possible this year.
As my visit took place, Mr. Kevin McCarthy was elected as the new Republican House majority leader. Through our embassy in Washington and also directly, the Government looks forward to working further with Mr. McCarthy, House Speaker John Boehner and other key congressional figures on both sides of the political aisle, and with the US Administration, with a view to advancing Ireland’s immigration reform related objectives.
Since my return from Washington, I understand that there has been a further sharpening of the political engagement in the US Congress about the situation of unaccompanied migrant children who are seeking to enter the United States via its southern border. This may now impact negatively on the prospects for wider immigration reform progress being achieved over the immediate period ahead. It would clearly be disappointing if this proves to be the case. Nevertheless, as I noted earlier, we will continue our intensive efforts to persuade Members of Congress to seize every opportunity to make immigration reform a reality.
Part of the difficulty is that the situation is changing all the time and we have a statement from the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, saying he did not believe immigration reform would happen this year. The blinds are being pulled on the window of opportunity but there is still a chink of light with regard to the possibility of this being delivered. Part of the difficulty is that, no matter what President Obama proposes, an element of the House will oppose it. I do not know if the Tánaiste agrees with my analysis. We are getting mixed messages all the time from the leaders the Tánaiste met. We met them when a number of us visited. They were positive that this would be delivered but the reality seems to be that the chance is ebbing away. Unfortunately, we are left with the situation that the Tánaiste gave a report to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade and said he was more positive than coming back than he was going out but, since that, changes took place in the House. The opportunity exists but is becoming less of an option. Part of the situation is that these people do not want to work with the Obama Government, regardless of the issue. This is part of the conundrum that people who want to deliver this must deal with.
We have two objectives in this. There are 50,000 undocumented Irish people in the United States who cannot come home for funerals and family events. We need to secure a path to legalisation for these people. Since 1965, the flow of legal emigration from Ireland to the United States has dried up and we want to find a way of doing that. The Bill passed by the US Senate would provide a path to legalisation for the undocumented Irish and provide for an E3 visa available to 10,000 Irish people per year to travel and to work legally in the United States. It would make a major change. In the House of Representatives, there is no agreement on the Bill and it is a sensitive political issue. My assessment of the situation is that the people I have spoken to accept that immigration legislation will be passed by Congress at some stage. There are some 11 million undocumented people in the United States. It is a huge issue and it plays politically. In the run-in to elections, people look over their shoulders and what they are hearing in their constituencies and districts and respond accordingly. The most recent issue to come into play is the number of unaccompanied children crossing the US-Mexican border.
It is getting more difficult to deliver. People are saying one thing to us but circumstances and politics intervene. The Minister referred to a pathway of legalisation and the E3 visa. A 12-month J programme has been negotiated Government to Government. Has the Tánaiste been in discussion with the US Government about extending the programme? The work experience has been helpful and many employers have said they would prefer to take on people on a long-term basis. What has the Tánaiste done in Government to Government negotiation, which is separate from the overall package? I do not know if there will be legal pathway for the Irish, which is a backward step. With the difficulties in the House, the opportunity is moving further away. The problem is that elements in the House do not want to work with the Obama Government and Obama seems to be the problem. The fact that he has prioritised this as an issue is seen as a red card or a stick to beat the Administration. People are sucked into their own politics and the bigger picture of immigration reform and its importance, for the Irish and everyone, is being lost.
The second issue is not the subject of the question. My Department and the embassy are working on it with the US Administration and I am hopeful we will have a satisfactory conclusion. With regard to the main issue of immigration reform, across the political spectrum in the US it is accepted that there must be legislation on immigration. We cannot have a situation where 11 million undocumented people are in the United States, many of whom work in various areas of the economy.
There is also a economic driver in respect of this issue in some areas of the American economy, such as agriculture, for example. Farm work is heavily dependent on immigrant labour. Obviously, there are issues in respect of security and so on and everybody accepts that this is going to have to be done. However, there is a question of political will and that is a matter for the United States Legislature. We will continue to remain in close contact with key figures in that Legislature. It is far more a case now of when, rather than if, there will be immigration legislation in the United States.
4. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will provide an update on immigration reform law following his recent visit to Washington D.C.; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28366/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraI welcome the Tánaiste's personal interest in and continued commitment to this important issue, along with that of his officials. We have discussed the serious difficulties facing approximately 50,000 Irish people, commonly referred to as the undocumented, on numerous occasions in the House. These people need to have their status regularised as quickly as possible. Their current status makes it remarkably difficult for them and in many instances, as the Tánaiste remarked earlier, it causes hardship and heartbreak for their families at home. Following his recent visit, is the Tánaiste any more optimistic now than he was the last time we discussed this issue in the House one month ago?
I have a formal reply to Deputy Smith's question which is identical to the replied to Question No. 1. If it is okay I will take that as read and simply answer the question. The direct answer to the question is that I am more hopeful than I was a month ago. When the Republican majority leader lost in the primary election, there was a good deal of speculation that it was directly related to the immigration issue. I feared that this would play negatively in the politics in the US Congress. In fact, when I visited Congress I was very encouraged by the clear statements from both sides of the political divide to the effect that they want to do this and that there is a necessity to legislate to deal with immigration. The question is when that will be done. One of the problems in the politics of Capitol Hill is that there is never a good time to do it. There is always another issue, such as a row over the budget, which is what happened last year. The issue most directly impacting on it now is the fact that large numbers of children are being moved across the Mexican border. They are unaccompanied and there are allegations of some rather unpleasant people being involved in the movement of these children. This is playing as a big issue in public discussion and the media in the United States and, therefore, it is difficult for legislators to address the necessary legislation in that environment. That is the immediate issue.
I believe there is a desire, a wish and a will to undertake immigration legislation and to get the issue dealt with for political, economic and security reasons as well as for various other reasons. The issue is when this is going to be done. We have continued to keep the pressure on and keep dialogue and discussion open with people on both sides of the political divide and that work will continue. I am more optimistic than I was a month ago.
I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. The fact that business and church leaders and other people of influence within society who may not have been strong advocates for immigration reform legislation previously are taking a leading role at the moment is heartening. Perhaps we should take the opportunity to compliment the many representative organisations and advocacy groups which we have had the opportunity to meet on the great work they are doing and have done for many decades on behalf of the undocumented Irish and Irish people.
At the weekend Nancy Pelosi gave a very depressing comment on immigration. She was referring in particular to the difficulties on the United States-Mexico border. She said that she held out little hope of Congress passing comprehensive legislation and that the Democrats had been very patient with Mr. Boehner and the efforts he had been making as well as the changed political situation there. This, as well as the impending mid-term congressional elections, are playing into making the situation more difficult. President Obama stated on Monday that he would take some executive action in respect of dealing with immigration. Could that be seen as a threat to Congress? Does the Tánaiste believe it will give congressional leaders added impetus to bring the legislation to a successful conclusion?
I met Nancy Pelosi when I was in Washington. I understand her views because clearly what is happening on the Mexican border is playing very negatively in the immigration debate. The possibility of the US President taking executive action is something I discussed with his domestic policy adviser, Cecilia Muñoz, who leads on the issue of immigration. The position is that there are 11 million undocumented people. I am told there are deportations at the rate of approximately 1,200 per day at the moment. This is also a major issue in many communities and neighbourhoods with large immigrant populations. Clearly there is pressure on the US President and the White House to take executive action to address the issue. As I understand it, the President has said that if Congress does not legislate, he will have to consider taking some executive action. The nature of that action is obviously something to which we are not a party.
My understanding is that the immigrant-rich cities are very much in favour of the legislation, whereas the parts of the United States that have had little immigration over the years are where the greatest opposition is articulated. It is very important for the families and individuals who contact us from the United States and their representative organisations that we continue to give them a positive and hopeful message, but at the same time that we do not raise expectations to a level that will not be realised. I hope that legislation can be enacted and brought to a successful conclusion.
I record my appreciation and that of my party for the Tánaiste's ongoing effort in this particular respect. During every Question Time since I became party spokesperson on foreign affairs and trade I have raised this issue with a priority question. I recognise that the Tánaiste and his officials have continued to work with all shades of political opinion in the United States and in all sectors of the economy. Will the Tánaiste ensure this important work continues and that we give out a factual message to the families at home, who have not seen loved ones for many years and who face the heartbreak and hardship to which I referred?
I thank Deputy Smith for his support and encouragement on this issue. I join him in expressing thanks to the various organisations with which we work in helping Irish immigrants in the United States. They do great work and this work is co-ordinated closely with our embassy in Washington.
It is a difficult political issue. Immigration is a difficult political issue anywhere but it is a difficult political issue in the United States in particular. It seems to me that it is not sustainable not to have legislation to deal with the range of issues that touch on immigration, not least the fact that there is now such a large population, fully 11 million people, in the United States who are undocumented and who are, in practice, integrated into the United States community. These are people who have been there for 20 or 30 years and have children who are American citizens but yet are themselves liable to be deported.
Many are employed in the economy, in particular in sectors which are dependent on immigrant labour. It is not sustainable that this will not be addressed at some point by way of legislation, which everyone accepts. The question is when it is going to be done. That comes down to politics, which we all understand. We all understand that when there is a difficult political issue, people start to play to their own audience, base and supporters. The Deputy is right that there are some constituencies and districts in which immigration plays differently, but that is changing too. I have heard in the discussions I have had of areas where immigration used not to be an issue or, if it was, the issue was about not doing something. That is changing because of the composition of the population. I agree with the Deputy also that it is important not to raise expectations beyond what can be achieved. This has gone on for a very long time. There is a growing understanding in the political system, however, that this is an issue that must be addressed. The question is when. I would prefer to see it addressed quickly in the interests of the undocumented Irish who are there and also to get the E3 visa put in place. We are very much in the hands of the legislators on Capitol Hill who are in turn in the hands of their voters. There is another mid-term election in November.
5. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade in view of the fact that the Government is a joint and co-equal guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement, the way his Department plans to support the re-established leaders' talks in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28442/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraMy question is similar to the one which was put by Deputy Smith. I table the question ahead of the party leaders' talks in the North this week. Unfortunately, we have seen a real deterioration in the peace process in the North. We have had the Haass talks and resolutions which the British Government and sections of unionism never fully endorsed. Many believe that let the Unionists clearly off the hook. To move away from the script, I ask the Tánaiste in relation to the talks themselves what role the Irish Government will play. Will the Government be pressing the British Government to engage more with the peace process?
The Government, as guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement, will continue its close and ongoing involvement in the talks in line with our support for effective devolved power-sharing government in Northern Ireland and for fair and comprehensive mechanisms to deal with parades, flags and identity issues and the legacy of the past. The modalities of this next phase of the talks are a matter for the parties and are under development currently. In that context, the specific role of the two Governments has yet to be established. However, close and ongoing governmental involvement is likely to remain necessary.
As I have said previously, the Government will continue to be constructive and supportive of the talks and is committed to advancing any outcomes that emerge. We demonstrate that support directly with the parties and through our ongoing engagement with the British Government and US Administration. In my ongoing meetings and contacts with party leaders and with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, I have stressed the importance of securing an agreement on the outstanding issues. As I said in reply to a previous question today, I am firmly of the view that it is in the best interests of Northern Ireland that agreement is reached as soon as possible. It is particularly important now during the marching season and before the summer recess that politics is seen to be working for the benefit of all communities in the North.
We accept the importance of the fact that discussions are going on prior to the contentious parades and marches which are coming down the track. It is important that the first official meeting is taking place between Sinn Féin and David Cameron at Downing Street this morning, four years after he took office. There is a different approach by the Irish Government, the Tánaiste and his officials from that of the British Government. I do not know how often the Tánaiste engages, but I presume he meets all the parties. The same does not seem to happen with the British Government. It does not seem to be as engaged as the Irish Government in the process. We have seen in the Haass talks that the British Government did not adopt a position, offer support or encourage parties to adopt a position.
The difference in approaches has been a negative. Many of the Unionist parties involved were opposed to the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement but they have agreed now to work with it. It is important, therefore, that the British Government plays with the Irish Government a more significant role in the process. How does the Tánaiste consider that the Irish and British Governments can encourage the process and talks? How can more involvement from both Governments be encouraged?
It is important to state that the Irish Government has continued to be very closely involved. I have regularly met all the party leaders in Northern Ireland and maintained regular, ongoing contact with them by telephone and through officials. In many cases, it is contact which has never been brought to public attention. I have maintained a very regular dialogue with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. The two Governments are the co-guarantors of the Agreement and we work closely together. Both Governments share the view that the talks should succeed and both are encouraging that. I have had these discussions with the Secretary of State, Ms Theresa Villiers, on a number of occasions. My most recent discussion with her took place on 24 June 2014.
We will stay in close contact with the talks which are taking place. I hope they succeed. What is important is to get an outcome from the two three-day sessions taking place this week and next week, respectively. I am very familiar with the issues and where the gaps and differences are in respect of particular issues. Those gaps are perfectly capable of being bridged and I hope they will be.
I reiterate that the Irish Government has been inclusive in the process. It has tried to involve all parties and none and to encourage and promote the idea of dialogue. The British Government seems to have adopted a different position. The night that Deputy Gerry Adams was arrested, they were having a drinks party with the DUP. The British Government may be meeting unionism on a regular basis, but it is not meeting the wider parties which is a weakness in its approach. It is positive, however, that the meeting with Sinn Féin is taking place for the first time today. The worry is that the British Government is more concerned about the next election and coming closer to unionism in that regard rather than about building on the peace process itself.
Does the Tánaiste believe this is a genuine process or are we just going through the motions? There is a view that the talks up to now have merely involved parties laying out their stalls without any genuine attempt to resolve the issues which are still outstanding from Haass. There were talks after Haass, but it appeared to be a matter of going through the motions. Does the Tánaiste believe this is a real opportunity which sets the mood music in relation to the contentious marches and what is facing us down the road?
I welcome the fact that Prime Minister David Cameron is meeting the Sinn Féin leadership today. The Taoiseach and I met the Sinn Féin leadership last week and have continued to maintain close contact with all the parties. I do not accept that this is an issue which should be driven by anyone for party political reasons. There are agreements in place, including the Good Friday Agreement and the agreements which succeeded it, that were voted on by the people of this country. There are international agreements - in effect, treaties - between the State and the United Kingdom on Northern Ireland. What is required to be done is to give effect to the agreements, implement them and see that they work in the interests of the people of Northern Ireland and both these islands. This is not an issue with which anyone on this or the neighbouring island should play party politics. These are agreements between Governments.
A settlement was achieved and there is work to be done to implement it. Part of that is the talks that are now to take place among party leaders within Northern Ireland, supported by the two Governments. Another part of it is the North-South dimension. There will be a meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council in Dublin on Friday. We have practical issues which we must discuss. The issue should not be reduced to one of what is to the party advantage of any political party. It should be worked on the basis of what is in the best interests of the peace process itself and the people of these two islands.
