| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tony Blair (Sedgefield): May I welcome the statement, and the determination to try to put the peace process back on track? That is greatly to the credit of both the British and Irish Governments, and all the democratic parties in Northern Ireland. If, two weeks ago, optimism seemed somewhat incredible and hope completely out of place, at least today--although it is far too soon for optimism--there is some sense of renewed hope.
The statement has had to be put together quickly, and I wish to understand correctly two questions arising from it. First, how do we move forward to negotiations for a long-term settlement for Northern Ireland? Secondly, what are the essential minimum conditions before Sinn Fein will be allowed to participate?
On the first point, am I right in saying that the Prime Minister has now set 10 June as a firm date for all-party negotiations, and that multilateral consultations will begin almost immediately? If the consultations provide an agreement for a broadly acceptable elective process, do we then move straight to 10 June? If there is no agreement between the parties on a broadly acceptable elective process, will the Government bring forward their own
plans on the basis of what they think is broadly acceptable? I simply ask the obvious question--what if it is not possible to reach a broadly acceptable process by either route?
Am I right in saying that the Prime Minister said that the Government essentially will listen to what the parties say on the subject of a referendum during the process, and will not give their own views until the end of that process?
The Prime Minister
indicated assent.
Mr. Blair:
On the legislation for the elections, I should say on behalf of the Opposition that, provided, of course, it is broadly acceptable to both communities, we will obviously facilitate the legislation and co-operate in getting it through the House.
Does the Prime Minister agree that, in a sense, we now have an agreement to have discussions to agree on a way forward, with at least the principle of an elective process being agreed--that is an achievement--if not the mechanism? Does he agree that we have such an agreement--rather than an agreement on the way forward itself--which at least maintains the momentum? Does he further agree that it will require not a compromise of basic principles, but give and take on the part of all parties if the consultations are to work?
On the second point--the position of Sinn Fein in relation to the process--I think that everybody wants the process to move forward. But the flow of democracy should not be stemmed simply because the IRA has chosen to revert to violence. Everyone would prefer Sinn Fein to be in the peace process provided it is genuinely committed to peace. Does the Prime Minister agree that it cannot, and will not, be allowed to drive the process--to seek to guide by violence what it cannot achieve through persuasion?
The bombings of past weeks were atrocities utterly without regard for human life. I want to be clear that we have understood the basis on which Sinn Fein may enter at any stage of the proceedings. Is it to be allowed to participate in the multilateral discussions if it calls a ceasefire? On the all-party negotiations, is it that, before it gains admission to the full-blown negotiations, it must accept the Mitchell six principles or is it rather that at the beginning of the negotiations to which it is to be given access, it must accept the six principles and address decommissioning as set out in Mitchell? We must be clear about that. It is also clear that, if there is any reversion whatever, or any threat of reversion, to violence during the course of negotiations, it goes out altogether. The Prime Minister said that it must address Mitchell on decommissioning; perhaps he could say a word or two about that.
Is it not right once again to repeat from this House that, now that all democratic parties in Northern Ireland and in the Republic--that is the important point--have agreed that the status of Northern Ireland will not change without the consent of the people, there can be no remote, residual justification, even on its own terms, for the IRA continuing any form of violence?
I acknowledge, as the Prime Minister does, that the road to peace is going to be tough. He has taken risks so far; the Irish Government have; all parties have. We have
supported them over the peace process. We will continue to do so. It is the people who want peace--not at any price, not by giving in to violence, but they want peace so that the genuine debate about the future of Northern Ireland can be resolved by democratic means.
Over the past few weeks, lives have been lost, and I do not think that people will easily forget that--nor should they. If it should happen that a ceasefire is called again and restored immediately--as it must and should be--I hope that what the Prime Minister has outlined today, even in its most tentative stages, can offer the chance of building that peaceful future for all the people in Northern Ireland.
The Prime Minister:
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. I will try to meet the particular points that he raised.
Tenth of June is intended as a firm date for the start of negotiations. Multilateral negotiations between the parties will begin on the elective process on Monday. We will begin to discuss that on Monday. I hope that we are going to reach an agreement on a broadly acceptable elective process. If we reach agreement on that, we will bring forward that agreement for legislation.
If, as the right hon. Gentleman says, despite intensive negotiations, I am unable to reach agreement with the political parties on an elective process, I will make a judgment as to what I think is the best elective process and I will bring that proposition before the House of Commons and invite it to support that proposition. That is not comfortable. I do not wish to be in that position, but neither do I wish agreement on a mechanism to get us into all-party talks and to set up a possible future development to be held up by this dispute over the nature of elections.
I hope to reach agreement, but, if I cannot reach agreement, I shall bring forward what I think to be the best option, and I will invite the House of Commons to support me on that option, and the House will make its own judgment about whether it should. That is what I propose to do. I shall first, of course, have significant extra consultations.
The right hon. Gentleman said that the best way forward is with Sinn Fein as an inclusive part of the talks. Of course that is right but not, as he said about another aspect, at any price. The ceasefire has to be restored, and on the same terms that we had in August 1994. That is fairly clear, and it is set out clearly also in the joint communique.
Sinn Fein's entry to the all-party talks and how they will be structured was a point to which the right hon. Gentleman turned, and it is vital. Let me try to set it out.
First, for there to be any proposition enabling Sinn Fein to take part, there needs to be a ceasefire of the nature to which I just referred. After the elective process, in which there will be elections to the proposed forum, we anticipate that the party leaders of those elected would nominate from the forum members who would then act as their individual negotiating teams. The negotiating teams would meet. The first item in the negotiations would be the Mitchell principles in their wider aspect, including the points that need to be dealt with on decommissioning. That would be the lead item in the negotiations, which would begin on 10 June.
The right hon. Gentleman also raised a crucial point: what would be the position if violence were to restart after the negotiations had begun? I think that that has both a practical answer and the answer that the House would demand. The practical answer is that it would not be feasible for the other parties to negotiate with any party were violence to return: by that violence, that party would have voluntarily excluded itself from the negotiations. I believe that that would have the united support of all right hon. and hon. Members.
Therefore, the choice is with Sinn Fein. It must decide whether it remains an inclusive part of the negotiating process. I very much hope that it will put itself in a position to take part, and will keep itself in a position to take part, in the negotiations.
Let me reiterate what the right hon. Gentleman said about the status of Northern Ireland. I remind the House of the triple lock to which I have referred in the past, one part of which is that, at the conclusion of the all-party negotiations--on the presumption that there is an agreement at the end of those negotiations--that agreement, emerging from the all-party negotiations with the constitutional parties, would be put to a referendum of the people of Northern Ireland. Only thereafter would it be brought to the House.
The triple lock exists in the agreement among the parties to the negotiations--constitutional parties above all--in the agreement of the people of Northern Ireland in a referendum, and, on the back of those two agreements, in legislation brought before Parliament for its agreement. That is what we have referred to as the triple lock. It is to guarantee that the consent principle for Northern Ireland, which is widely accepted by almost every party and is self-evidently the will of the House, can be sure to have been met to the satisfaction of the people of Northern Ireland.
Mr. David Trimble (Upper Bann):
It is now a month since the last statement on Northern Ireland--a month lost because of the opposition of the Irish Government and other parties to the democratic process.
I welcome the statement's reaffirmation of the need for Sinn Fein-IRA to commit itself to exclusively peaceful means. Does the Prime Minister agree that, in practice, that will be more difficult to achieve following the bombs in London? It cannot be made easier for Sinn Fein-IRA; otherwise, it will have gained from its terrorism. Consequently, we agree that establishing and honouring such a commitment to peaceful means by Sinn Fein-IRA must be the priority--the first item to be addressed and resolved.
Does the Prime Minister realise that, until that item can be resolved, we shall find it impossible to meet Sinn Fein face to face? Does he agree that, in this context, the idea of proximity talks could be useful? Does he accept that there can be no question of Sinn Fein's progressing beyond that first item on the agenda until the other parties are satisfied about the quality of its commitment to peaceful means?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |