| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Donaldson: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Galloway: No; I have no time.
I understand why the Ulster Unionists take the position that they do--I know where they are coming from and the constituency that they represent. They are right to negotiate and haggle, to the last second, to protect the interests of their constituents, who are a vital and important part in the whole picture.
What I genuinely cannot understand is how, today, the Conservative party--a once great national party; once a party of government--could make a turn to such breathtaking irresponsibility, playing fast and loose with people's lives--which is what they are doing--by becoming the mainland political wing of Ulster Unionism. They have shown that breathtaking irresponsibility by quibbling and haggling over how many days is "days" and how many weeks is "weeks", whereas Ireland has waited not decades, but centuries to achieve the type of peace that we now have within our grasp--[Interruption.]
Unionist Members scoff, but they do not cut a very handsome figure. They should remember that the people of the United Kingdom mainland are those whose blood and treasure has to be expended to defend the Union and the Unionist population; who, for decades, have sent their soldiers on to the streets of Northern Ireland, to try to keep the peace and fight terrorism; and who have expended billions of our taxes to try to keep that peace. It is about time that Unionist Members remembered that they have to try to keep the British population on side as well, and stop being so selfish and irresponsible about it.
It is simply not true that the nationalists and the republicans have given nothing in the process. It is simply to fly in the face of reality to assert--as has been done today--that, somehow, they have come out winners in the process. The republican tradition has abandoned for all time the notion that anything other than the consent of the majority of the people of the six counties can change the constitutional course of events. That is a monumental change in republican thinking.
The Irish Republic has abandoned articles 2 and 3 of its constitution--[Interruption.] It has promised to do, and will do so, according to the terms of the agreement. Those articles were central to the very foundation of that state.
The IRA has for a very long time been on a military ceasefire. When I heard the former Home Secretary recite the dismal litany of events to which he was witness--as all of us were--and all the blood and suffering that he
saw in his time in government, I wondered how he could seem so sanguine about the possibility of returning to all that.
In the 60 seconds left to me, I say only that, if the process all comes crashing down, the echoes will be long and loud in Ireland, both north and south, and here on the British mainland. Many more people will suffer the awful misery to which the former Home Secretary referred. Avoiding that is the prize in front of us--making all that a part of the troubled history of Britain and of Ireland, and looking forward to a new future. Only a madman would wish to take risks--
Mr. Galloway:
I am sorry to say that I have no time. I have been told to sit down at 7.38 pm, although I have waited all day to make this speech.
The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Mr. Paul Murphy):
Like my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Kelvin (Mr. Galloway), I have been waiting all day--to reply to the speeches.
The debate has been one of those occasions in the House that will be memorable. We have had a relatively short debate on an exceptionally important issue. I think that all the different points of view that have been expressed add richness, if nothing else, to the House and its debating facility. I think also that no one in the Chamber--from whatever party he comes, or whatever views he may have on the Good Friday agreement--is opposed to the search for peace in Northern Ireland.
All those who have spoken in the debate want peace, although they may, of course, come from different directions on the issues. Most of them expressed a desire for a political settlement. Certainly, the bulk of those who have spoken want a political settlement that is based on the Good Friday agreement--for which the people of Northern Ireland voted overwhelmingly, by a 71 per cent. majority.
A couple of weeks ago, the Prime Minister expressed three principles to the Northern Ireland parties. First, did they agree with an Executive which was truly inclusive? Secondly, did they agree that there was a need under the Good Friday agreement to decommission? Thirdly, did they agree that there was huge significance in the role of the Independent Commission on Decommissioning, headed by General de Chastelain? The parties were asked to address those issues. That was the basis on which the two Prime Ministers went into the negotiations in Castle buildings the week before last.
We have looked today at certainty, testing, assurance and failsafe. Some of us think that we have got it right; others think that we were getting it right, but that we have not quite got it right. We will reflect on the points made during the Second Reading debate, and those to be made in Committee later this evening. Those points can be raised again--and addressed if necessary--in the other place.
The right hon. Member for Bracknell (Mr. MacKay) opened the debate, and talked about the Good Friday agreement being a huge compromise--which it is. In a sense, we have been talking today about the compromise between unionism and nationalism going forward. That makes legislation very difficult. We are not legislating for an Assembly in Cardiff or a Parliament in Edinburgh. The basis upon which the Bill is founded is the Good Friday agreement. That, in turn, is based upon an arrangement that means we can have devolution, and all the other institutions that go with it, only if we can carry through unionism and nationalism at the same time. That is extremely difficult, but it is vital in considering the Bill and anything else that appertains to the Good Friday agreement.
The right hon. Gentleman referred to the slow progress on decommissioning, and he is right. We have had slow progress, although we have made progress, on various aspects of devolution, but that is not unexpected. After 30 years of conflict and distrust--and even longer periods of dislike, and even hatred, between the communities of Northern Ireland--who would have thought that this could have been done quickly?
When George Mitchell said after the agreement was signed that the troubles were beginning and that the difficulties were starting in terms of implementing the agreement, he was right. In many respects, it is right that we negotiate hard and that we discuss with great intensity the matters that are before us--whether it is the number of Ministers in the Cabinet, the North-South implementation bodies or, vitally, the question of decommissioning and its relationship with devolution.
The right hon. Member for Bracknell and others referred to a timetable, and we shall discuss that in greater detail later. However, I must stress above all that the Independent Commission on Decommissioning must be genuinely independent. We cannot compromise that. What we do in this House--legislating, as we do, for the British Parliament--is not enough on its own, because the agreement is based on an understanding between nationalism and unionism. So far--and so good--both nationalism and unionism have expressed the highest confidence in the Independent Commission on Decommissioning, and in General de Chastelain personally. I know that the right hon. Member for Bracknell shares that view. It is vital that that independence is retained.
We will see in the debates to follow that the general laid down an indicative timetable, and referred to a timetable in paragraph 21. His statement on the Friday in question mentioned "days" at the beginning of the process of decommissioning, and "weeks" in terms of actual decommissioning taking place. We will return to that matter later, and in some detail.
The right hon. Member for Bracknell referred to exclusion. The effect of excluding, expelling or suspending is all the same because, ultimately, we will end up in the same place. I repeat--we are dealing not with Cardiff or Edinburgh, but with Belfast and the agreement based on the concord between unionism and nationalism. We will end up all the time with review--inevitably, because that is what the Good Friday agreement said, and that is what the people voted for.
If the process goes wrong, if decommissioning does not occur, if devolution does not occur, or if all other aspects of the agreement are not working, the only way in which
we can resolve the matter is through review, according to the Good Friday agreement. We have a part to play, and that is why we are meeting today. Things have developed, in the sense that the purpose of the meeting of the two Prime Ministers at Castle buildings was to try to get out of the deadlock and the impasse. The sequencing of devolution and decommissioning is precise, as is the method by which we would contest those who would go back on their pledges.
The right hon. Member for Upper Bann (Mr. Trimble), in a powerful speech, referred to the commitment to inclusion, which he made eloquently. He and his party have said that they are not opposed to an inclusive Executive. He said that his party was concerned about the guarantees, the failsafe, the assurances and the certainties, but that the idea of an inclusive Executive was part of his party's policy. I agree with that entirely.
The right hon. Gentleman was concerned that, while the review could lead to the exclusion of the offending party, it could lead also to his own party coming under pressure to overlook a breach and to move forward with the Executive unchanged. No one can be certain of the outcome of any review, but I can assure the right hon. Gentleman and his party that they will come under no pressure from this Government in those circumstances.
The hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume)--who, with others, has been instrumental in bringing about this process--indicated, rightly, that people in Northern Ireland were not politicians and that they were anxious that there should be progress. I agree entirely. Outside this Chamber, and outside the Northern Ireland Assembly, there are 1.5 million people in Northern Ireland who want and deserve peace and political stability. A great burden lies on our shoulders collectively as politicians to try to ensure that that is achieved.
It is important politically to remember that, if Sinn Fein advances politically, the party which has more to lose than any other is the SDLP, in the sense that the politics of Northern Ireland will result, inevitably, in people voting for nationalist parties and people voting for Unionist parties. The hon. Gentleman's points were valid, and we will look again at them.
The right hon. Member for Huntingdon (Mr. Major) started this process and we pay tribute to him for that role, including his campaigning for the Good Friday agreement in the referendum in Northern Ireland. He helped to persuade many people to vote for it. He made a number of important points, some of which I shall try to answer.
The right hon. Gentleman asked whether we would encourage General de Chastelain to publish the full schedule and timetable for disarmament. The joint statement calls for the commission to specify two key dates--when the process should start and when actual decommissioning should begin. It must be completed by May 2000, and the commission will report in September, December and May--and more often if necessary.
General de Chastelain said in his report of 2 July thathe was prepared to define a detailed timetable for decommissioning, following discussions with representatives of the organisations. Clearly, there will be a detailed timetable. Under the Bill, if the general lays down a timetable, it must be kept to, or he will blow the whistle. I recognise that the publication of the full timetable would encourage confidence. Equally, it is a matter for the general and his colleagues to decide whether they should do that. He has
a vital, but delicate, task. He must command confidence on all sides if he is to succeed. I can ensure that the general sees the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman, and we will take it from there.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |