| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tony Blair (Sedgefield): For reasons that you, Madam Speaker, and the Prime Minister know, I have to leave straight after the Prime Minister has responded to me. I hope that the House will not treat that as a discourtesy.
I welcome the statement the Prime Minister has made. We know that progress has been tough over the past few months and both he and the Taoiseach and their array of advisers deserve credit for their perseverance and dedication.
Can I be sure that I have accurately understood the status of both the preparatory talks and the establishment of the international body on arms decommissioning? I understand that the preparatory talks will be bilateral or multilateral. They are designed to facilitate the all-party talks and will involve all parties, but will not in themselves be negotiations on the substantive constitutional issues. The international body similarly will advise on the issues connected with decommissioning, but will not deal with the question of whether arms are decommissioned prior to all-party talks. Therefore, both the preparatory talks and the international body are, in a sense, designed to create a mood and momentum by which the all-party talks can take place.
May I express our support for the view that, for those all-party talks to take place, there has to be full trust and confidence that each party in those talks will abide by and accept exclusively the democratic path? Trust is the key. There can be no threat, implicit or explicit, of any return to violence by any party if such talks are to be successful.
Will the Prime Minister acknowledge that this agreement, although of course it does not resolve the problem of decommissioning, produces a mechanism by
which the question can be discussed? There is a heavy obligation on all those who say that they want peace to prove it by engaging in this process and providing solutions to the outstanding problems.
Will the Prime Minister tell the House how the preparatory dialogue will operate? In particular, how will the two Governments be involved and when does he expect the first meetings to take place?
The Prime Minister mentioned the idea of an elected body playing some part in this process. Can he tell us how he would envisage the possibility of such a body becoming part of the peace process? What would be the timing of establishing such a body and, in particular, what would be its role in relation to the all-party negotiations that the two Governments hope to establish?
We essentially agree with what the Prime Minister has done today, and we welcome the framework that has been set out. It is not a solution, but it may provide a bridge to a solution. In constructing that bridge, the Irish and United Kingdom Governments should know that they will have the whole-hearted support and good wishes of all decent people in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.
For 15 months, although unacceptable violence of a sectarian nature still continues, there has been without doubt a transformation in the lives of the people of Northern Ireland. Their liberation from the bomb and the bullet has brought new hope and the chance of renewed prosperity. Peace is now too precious to squander. The duty lies on all parties to make this process work. From the outset, the Labour party has regarded this issue as transcending party politics. We have supported the Government in their search for peace because we believe it to be right. We have worked with the Government and will continue to do so.
The Prime Minister:
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his comments and his consistent support. I am also grateful to him for explaining to me his impeccable reason for needing to leave the Chamber during the course of this statement. I fully understand that that is unavoidable.
I join the right hon. Gentleman in the tribute that he paid to the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach has shown great courage and persistence, and I much admire what he has done. We have not invariably agreed on every matter, and all our discussions have not been easy, but I have found him an honest and straightforward man with whom to do business and I believe that, between us, we have made progress.
The right hon. Gentleman's characterisation of the preparatory talks and the decommissioning body was correct and I shall not reiterate the points that he put. They were certainly right. He raised a number of specific questions about the preparatory talks: how the Governments will be involved; and when they will start. We have set ourselves ambitious targets. We shall need to make a start on both tracks within a matter of days and we shall seek to do so. I hope that each Government will issue invitations to preparatory talks very soon. The starting point will obviously be existing exchanges and bilateral contacts, but we shall encourage other formats for meetings where the parties believe that they might further the objective of securing agreement.
This will be an intensive process. The two Governments have set out a way forward, but, as the right hon. Gentleman intimated, it requires the co-operation of all the parties in the tracks if we are to achieve real progress towards the targets that we have set ourselves. The right hon. Gentleman also asked about the role of an elected body and whether that could play a part in the negotiating process. Certainly it will. That is one of the propositions for serious consideration in the preparatory talks.
Both the Unionist parties represented in the House have put forward interesting and constructive proposals. They are not the same but they are both worthy of careful consideration by all the parties with an open mind, and we shall endeavour to ensure that that is precisely what they receive. The key to this, as to so much else in this process, is what will give the parties the confidence to come together for substantive political negotiations. If an elected body can play a part in that--one can certainly see circumstances in which that could be the case--it should be looked at very hard and it most certainly will be in the preparatory talks in the weeks ahead.
Mr. Tom King (Bridgwater):
Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are obvious fears about the significant risks that are being taken in the initiative that he has announced and agreed with the Taoiseach? Is he also aware that there were even more significant risks in allowing the logjam to continue and no progress to be made? In that respect, will he accept the strong support, as echoed by the Leader of the Opposition, for the view that there is no prospect of all-party talks of any value and meaning unless there is confidence between the parties? It is therefore essential that Sinn Fein-IRA and other paramilitaries recognise the challenge that they will face in a matter of weeks--I understand that the commission is to report by the middle of January--and that they give clear evidence and conviction to all those concerned that they are genuine about becoming non-violent democratic parties and are prepared to embark on the decommissioning of arms.
The Prime Minister:
I am grateful to my right hon. Friend. I share his judgment about the relative balance of risk between proceeding as we propose and not having proceeded at all. I believe that we have made the right judgment. No progress in this affair is without risk and it could never have been without risk.
I share the view that my right hon. Friend set out. The key to progress is to establish proper confidence between the parties, and all those who propose to take part in the negotiations must be set upon a secure democratic future. This is not a new condition or proposition. It was set out clearly in paragraph 10 of the joint declaration when we embarked on this whole affair and it remains as relevant and important today as it was on the day when we first agreed it.
Mr. Paddy Ashdown (Yeovil):
I am happy to welcome and support the Prime Minister's statement and the joint communique on which it was based which was issued last night. This is not a breakthrough. The bottom line problems remain to be resolved, but it returns momentum to the peace process and provides a time frame and a structure within which those problems can be resolved. That may not be very tidy, but it is sensible and good politics.
We are now less than three weeks away from the anniversary of the publication of the foundation document. The Prime Minister will no doubt agree that the only rock on which that document and the peace process can be founded is absolute unanimity of purpose and action on the part of the British and Irish Governments. Perhaps he will confirm that in the process that he sees ahead, we shall overcome the disagreements and divergences that have perhaps taken some momentum from the peace process over the past few weeks.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |