Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Hugh Dykes (Harrow, East): Not only is the report a tribute to the people who created and wrote it, but it is the culmination of the long-standing forbearance, patience and courage of both my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, who have liaised with the senior Irish Ministers involved.

As a member of the British-Irish Parliamentary Association, I thank my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister for his earlier forthright mention of the fact that any delicate election process or system that is to be constructed, in whatever way it may emerge--in itself a difficult matter--would not be a return to the old Stormont paralysis or the Ulster assembly system, which was, I vividly and painfully remember, sabotaged by Protestant militants two decades ago.

The Prime Minister: It is certainly not a return to the past; I see it as a step to the future. I think that that is how it has been viewed by all those who have examined the proposition over recent months and put their name to it.

Mr. Thomas McAvoy (Glasgow, Rutherglen): I wish to associate myself with the gratitude expressed to Senator Mitchell and his team for their work, and with the tributes to the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition for their responsible attitude to that issue.

The Prime Minister must know, however, that, when one adopts an idea that has emanated from one side or the other in Northern Ireland, suspicion is immediately aroused on the other side, as has happened in connection with more than one issue in Northern Ireland of late. Bearing that in mind, to keep the SDLP and the other parties on board, will he listen carefully to their representations about the nature and modality of the proposed assembly, and about the possibility of a time scale for its existence?

The Prime Minister: The answer to the hon. Gentleman's question is yes. I think I may say that, in the past three or four years, I have gone to enormous pains, as have my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State and my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, to try to ensure that we can remove misunderstandings, and that we can take on board the views and sensitivities of all the parties. I have made that point clear repeatedly.

24 Jan 1996 : Column 366

I am as well aware as any hon. Member that we need to carry people with us--all the people with us, if we can--if we are to achieve a satisfactory outcome to the negotiations that we are embarked on. That has been our position in the past, and it remains our position today.

Mr. Graham Riddick (Colne Valley): Although the Mitchell commission says that decommissioning would take place "during the process" of all-party negotiations, it does not say how those negotiations and decommissioning would interact. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that we will never allow a position in which Sinn Fein-IRA are allowed to take part in negotiations if there is even the vaguest implicit threat that violence may be resumed if they do not get what they want?

The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend makes a valuable point. Perhaps I may refer him especially to paragraph 34 of the Mitchell report, which says:


That is precisely the way I see it.

Obviously, at the beginning of such talks, I would suspect that the parties themselves will wish to erect a series of staging posts, but it is not for me at this stage to set out precisely what they would do or how they would agree it. I believe that they would wish to discuss that matter at the beginning of their talks. I think Senator Mitchell envisages that that is what they would do, and so do I.

Miss Kate Hoey (Vauxhall): I welcome the Prime Minister's statement and the statement by the Leader of the Opposition. I say to the Prime Minister that I personally do not believe that either the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition would be prepared to play politics with the lives of the people of Northern Ireland.

I repudiate the insinuations made by my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara), and I wish to dissociate myself from those remarks.

Can the Prime Minister tell me any possible reason why, if the proposals for an elected body were taken up--as they might be--any democratic party that believes in democracy would refuse to get involved in an election for that body with a very narrow mandate?

The Prime Minister: I am grateful to the hon. Lady for what she said, which I deeply appreciate.

As to the second part of her question, I can give the hon. Lady no good reason why any democratic party would refuse to take part in an election for the narrow purposes set out in my statement today. I cannot conceive that there is a credible reason for refusing to take part in that, and I very much hope that no one will.

Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield): I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his outstanding commitment to a lasting peace in Northern Ireland. It was his initiative, he has driven it, and it should not be overlooked. As a Conservative and committed Unionist, I also congratulate

24 Jan 1996 : Column 367

the official Unionist party, its leader and his predecessor on their enlightened and constructive attitude to the peace process.

Paragraph 19 of the report says:


Because confidence is so important, can my right hon. Friend tell the House this afternoon that it is his belief that Sinn Fein-IRA are prepared to accept those fundamentals, which they have never done in their history?

The Prime Minister: We wait to hear from them. The statement that they have produced so far has not covered that point. Clearly, we wish to hear from them and from the loyalist paramilitaries--from both sides--precisely whether they accept those principles and that commitment. We hope that they will accept them, and that they will state that unequivocally. I look forward to hearing them say so. They now have the opportunity to argue the case and to say directly, on television and on radio, that they accept those principles. I hope that they will use the opportunities that are open to them.

Mr. Dennis Canavan (Falkirk, West): Does the Prime Minister accept that the Mitchell report does not recommend immediate elections, but recommends a compromise between those who demand decommissioning before all-party talks and those who maintain that decommissioning can take place only at the conclusion of all-party talks? Will the Prime Minister accept a staged process of decommissioning in parallel with immediate all-party talks, with elections to be held on a new constitutional settlement after the all-party talks agree to such a settlement?

The Prime Minister: We must get all the parties to the table in order to have all-party talks. To do that, we need the confidence of the people and all the parties of Northern Ireland. That is the ingredient that is missing from the hon. Gentleman's proposition. That is why we are seeking an electoral position that will enable all parties to have that confidence and to have a direct mandate to enter into talks. The election is the mechanism that will allow that to occur. On that basis, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will understand why we have proposed it, and what it will achieve.

Mr. Richard Spring (Bury St. Edmunds): My right hon. Friend has spoken about the need to boost confidence in order to develop the political processes in Northern Ireland. Does he agree that a significant step toward improved confidence in Northern Ireland would be the immediate cessation of killings and punishment beatings?

The Prime Minister: Yes, I certainly agree with that. My hon. Friend has some direct experience of Northern Ireland, and I am grateful for his support. He is entirely correct. If that were to happen, it would certainly increase the feeling of confidence across the communities in Northern Ireland, and, as such, would be a very welcome development.

Mr. Tony Benn (Chesterfield): Is the Prime Minister aware that many people who hoped that the ceasefire

24 Jan 1996 : Column 368

would lead to early all-party talks have been strengthened in that view by the peace process in South Africa, the agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, and the Dayton accord--not one of which required the decommissioning of weapons? In the latter case, President Clinton said that the arms embargo could be lifted a few weeks after the Dayton accord was agreed.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the process began when my hon. Friend the Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume), Mr. Adams and Albert Reynolds advanced a proposition to end the fighting based on the idea that the people on the island of Ireland--north and south and in the two communities--should be able to determine their own future? If there is a newly elected body and a referendum in the north that underlines the division of Ireland, it is no more likely that peace will be secured now--whatever the parties' intentions--than in the past hundreds of years.


Next Section

IndexHome Page