| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Peter Robinson (Belfast, East): Is it possible that the Prime Minister, having set himself the goal of finding an elective system that is most broadly acceptable, has found one that is most broadly unacceptable? Is it not the case that the Prime Minister is dancing on the head of a pin when he divides the second and the third elective systems as if they were two separate systems? They are both list systems. If they were taken to be one system,it would show that there was broad acceptance for a list system in Northern Ireland--acceptance by parties that gained about 70 per cent. of the vote at the last election in Northern Ireland, and acceptance by parties across the political and community divide. Instead, he has allowed himself to be blown off course by the whingeing and the electoral panic of the Ulster Unionist party.
Will the Prime Minister also indicate to hon. Members what he means when he refers to decommissioning as having to be "addressed"? What is the relationship between the negotiating teams and the elective body? Will the elective body have a role in determining whether there is sufficient consensus on proposals brought forward by the negotiating teams?
The Prime Minister:
There are a variety of list systems, including the one that I have proposed. I refer to the hon. Gentleman's remarks about the Ulster Unionist party--not only did the Ulster Unionist party oppose it, but the Alliance party opposed it. Indeed, for almost every proposition that was put forward by one party, more than one party was prepared to oppose it. For every solution that I propose, I have no doubt that several parties will claim that it is being done solely in the interests of another party.
The reality is that I am trying to produce a compromise that not everyone may like, but that people will have to accept because the pressure of public opinion in Northern Ireland requires this process to move forward, as I believe it should.
The negotiating teams will be selected from the forum and, as I indicated a few moments ago, they will be masters of their own destiny as to how they carry out the negotiations. I will not reiterate what I said about decommissioning at the beginning of the process.In answer to the hon. Member for Upper Bann(Mr. Trimble), I made the point that progress on decommissioning is clearly vital.
Mr. Clive Soley (Hammersmith):
Apart from selecting the negotiating teams, the main purpose of the forum thereafter seems, to some extent, to reflect the activities of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation in Dublin, which has had some considerable success. Is it the intention of the Prime Minister that the forum should operate in a similar way in order to bring some reconciliation within the communities of Northern Ireland?
The Prime Minister:
Yes, the forum will be similar. We see the forum as a body that will provide an opportunity for elected representatives to promote dialogue and mutual understanding. That, in Northern
Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire):
Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in the opinion of many people, he is a prime candidate for the Nobel prize for patience? Many people in this country, who have a deep desire to see the Union preserved, are beginning to feel a trifle impatient.
The Prime Minister:
My hon. Friend is enigmatic, and I note his comments. I say to my hon. Friend and to all hon. Members: in terms of the difficulties that we face in Northern Ireland, patience may well be the mother and father of progress.
Mr. Robert McCartney (North Down):
Will the Prime Minister confirm that no party--particularly not Sinn Fein--will be allowed to retain its weaponry right to the very end of any negotiations that take place? Many people in Northern Ireland who are committed to peace are concerned that the people in question will simply negotiate and if the ultimate bargain--if bargain there be--is not to their liking, they will use the weapons that they have retained and which the proposed agreement calls upon them only to "address"?
Does the Prime Minister recall that the whole purpose of the electoral body was to act as some sort of detoxifying chamber, in which representatives of Sinn Fein could meet elected representatives of democratic parties? In fact, the whole decommissioning issue has now been knocked on the head, and it would appear--I ask the Prime Minister to confirm this--that no final agreement will be reached while Sinn Fein-IRA retain their armaments.
The Prime Minister:
Let me deal with the points that the hon. and learned Gentleman raised broadly in the order in which he raised them.
The question of decommissioning must be addressed at the beginning and progress must be made. There must be parallel decommissioning, as the Mitchell principle set out. As the talks proceed, the decommissioning must proceed in parallel with the talks. The precise manner of that is a matter to be determined at the beginning of the talks, as I previously indicated.
The second of the Mitchell principles--I believe from memory that it was the second--does refer, as the hon. and learned Gentleman rightly intimated, to the total decommissioning of weapons. That will obviously be a point that all the negotiators will wish to fix on at the beginning of the discussions.
Mr. James Couchman (Gillingham):
My right hon. Friend has produced a most imaginative proposal--a proposal that should ensure that the widest possible representation is available for the talks when they begin. Can he tell me, however, whether there is in his proposals a safeguard to ensure that such electoral eccentrics as Screaming Lord Sutch and Sir James Goldsmith do not become involved in that election for their own curious purposes?
The Prime Minister:
Democracy is a strange and curious thing, but I think the nature of Northern Ireland politics suggests that the specific candidates suggested by my hon. Friend would not be likely to obtain many votes. I think also that it is likely that the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland will be indicated on the face of the Bill that comes before the House. To the best of my knowledge, neither of the two parties headed by the two gentlemen mentioned by my hon. Friend is likely to feature in that Bill.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
Many people dislike electoral systems in which they nevertheless participate. In this country, the Liberal Democrats dislike the fact that we do not have proportional representation and the Opposition parties dislike that fact that 3 million to 4 million people are missing from the electoral register, but we still all participate. The key thing now is that all the political parties in Northern Ireland, despite what they feel about that method, should tell us now that they intend to take a full part in the election to advance the peace process.
The Prime Minister:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman and I entirely agree with every word he said.
Mr. Richard Spring (Bury St. Edmunds):
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the elected forum should reflect the widest possible range of democratically mandated opinion in Northern Ireland? Will he welcome with me, therefore, the opportunity that has been given to the smaller political parties in Northern Ireland to be represented via the top-up of 20 members?
The Prime Minister:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. In the consultations we had with the parties, there was a wide desire to find a legitimate way to ensure that the smaller parties were represented, for without them the prospect of the negotiations making progress would have been greatly lessened. That is the purpose of the top-up provision--a novel constitutional element in the United Kingdom, I know, but one that is effective and will ensure the widest possible representation in the negotiations that lie ahead.
Mr. Ken Maginnis (Fermanagh and South Tyrone):
The Prime Minister said that his Government remain to be convinced of the value of holding a referendum. Could it be that he has been encouraged in that attitude by the rapidly diminishing enthusiasm of the Irish Government for such a referendum since he proposed that we include, as a question in that referendum, part of question 10 of the Downing Street declaration--the part that alludes to a commitment to exclusively peaceful methods? Could it be that the Downing street declaration is not supported by the Irish Government as whole-heartedly as we had hoped? Could it be that they are adopting an attitude similar to that of the SDLP, whose members seem to have lost their enthusiasm for the consent of the people of Northern Ireland?
The Prime Minister:
I forget whether I said that there was "no enthusiasm" for a referendum--I had in mind the constitutional parties in Northern Ireland rather than the Irish Government. I do not know whether the Irish
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |