| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Glentoran: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness the Lord President for repeating the Statement of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. I am also grateful to her and her team for allowing me early sight of the contents of the Statement.
I share the Government's disappointment, but I must say that I am not surprised because it seems to me, even at this stage, that the IRA has moved very little, if any, further forward since the Trimble/Blair/Ahern debacle at Hillsborough some time ago. I wonder whether the Government think that they have. Does the noble Baroness agree that the prime obstacle to an agreement and to an enduring political settlement remains the refusal of republicans to show openly that they have completed their transition from terrorism and physical force into a political movement that campaigns to achieve its objectives exclusively through democratic and peaceful means?
Surely, the significant issues today revolve around matters not mentioned in the Statement, for example, the treatment of "on the runs" and Her Majesty's Government's interpretation of republican statements published yesterday in the governmental proposals. In particular, I am referring to policing and disarming. I wonder why Her Majesty's Government believe that the IRA really is prepared to disarm, when it knows that this is pointless without tangible photographic proof. The IRA is not prepared to allow this proof to be made public. Is this one more round of the blame game, I wonder? I sincerely hope not.
Will the noble Baroness the Lord Privy Seal confirm that photographic evidence of decommissioning is seen by both governments as essential to the solution? Will she say what discussions, if any, have taken place with the IRA in this regard?
I hope that the noble Baroness has seen that the Irish Deputy Prime Minister, Mary Harney, said that it would be wrong of anyone to assume that this was just about
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1021
photographs, and that that was the only outstanding issue. I wonder what are the other issues on which there was no agreement.
Both yesterday's draft IRA statement and the actual statement published today talk rather vaguely about the IRA instructing its members not to engage in any activity that might endanger a new agreement. Is it Her Majesty's Government's clear and unequivocal understanding that that means all the activities set out in paragraph 13 of last year's declaration, including beatings, shootings, intimidation, racketeering and organised crime? Is it also the Secretary of State's clear and unequivocal understanding that, when the IRA talks about moving into a new mode, that means the effective standing down of the organisation and that it will no longer engage in recruitment, training or targeting?
This morning's IRA statement, which I hope the noble Baroness has had an opportunity to see, says that photographs "were never possible". Can the noble Baroness explain on what basis the documents published yesterday included reference to photographs as part of the process?
Yesterday, the Prime Minister said that, once the necessary legislation was passed, Sinn Fein would recommend support for the police and take its seats on the Policing Board. Republican statements say nothing of the sort. They merely commit Sinn Fein to holding a meeting to consider its position. How firm are the promises that have been given to Her Majesty's Government that the republican movement really will accept the police and the rule of law in Northern Ireland?
Finally, will the noble Baroness confirm that, until and unless weapons have been put beyond use and all forms of paramilitary activity have ceased, we will not, in this House, be asked to legislate on either the "on the runs" or "security normalisation"?
Lord Smith of Clifton: My Lords, we welcome the progress that has been achieved. I pay tribute to the patience and perseverance of both the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach. It has been a very long marathon for them. It is unfortunate that they have not quite got there, but we wish them Godspeed. Mr Ahern and Mr Blair deserve our thanks for what has been achieved so far.
That said, this is yet another phase in the politics of exasperation—so near but yet so far. It is possible that agreement will not be concluded in the immediate future. Even if it is, it may not be sustainable in the long term. We hope that that is not the case but, given the history of Northern Ireland, we must be prepared for the worst while hoping for the best.
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, that there is an absence of any reference to "on the runs". That will have to be articulated in the near future.
More specifically, I have a question for the noble Baroness the Lord President of the Council. The Committee of the Centre is now to be placed on a statutory basis, which we welcome. Was it the intention
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1022
that the committee would be able to scrutinise all actions of the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister or merely the functions falling under its current remit?
I should like some clarification about paragraph 14 of annexe B. Is it the Government's intention that candidates should declare their community designation before election to the Assembly? We would have great concerns at any move further to entrench sectarianism in that way.
We also welcome the proposals on the secretariat of the British-Irish Council and the east/west parliamentary framework. We hope that that will help to further good relations between all the parliaments in these islands. As a member of the British-Irish Inter-parliamentary Body, I know the potential that is there; we hope that it would also mean that Unionists would feel able to participate in the work of that body. I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, would agree with me on that.
Overall, so far so good. We have an exasperating few weeks ahead, but we hope that a lasting conclusion can be reached.
Lord Glentoran: My Lords, I apologise to the noble Baroness the Lord President for my misnomers.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran—we are all having fun and games with titles and designations today.
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Smith of Clifton, for his opening remarks, particularly his tribute to the patience and perseverance of the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach. It has been a long marathon. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, that yesterday was disappointing, but it is important that we concentrate on how far we have come. Reading through the documents and thinking about where we were such a short time ago, we must recognise that both sides have come a long way and that their leaderships have made a great effort to reach the remarkable degree of agreement that is evident in the documents published yesterday.
There are honest differences of opinion, and we have to continue to try to resolve them. It is not about apportioning blame but continuing with the process. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, with the Foreign Minister from Ireland, will hold a meeting with the parties next Wednesday. The intergovernmental conference will take place next Thursday, and there will be a further opportunity for the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach to meet towards the end of next week.
The issue is transparency; as I said in the Statement, it is about trust and confidence. That is the context in which we are looking at this one final issue. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, will forgive me if I do not go into detail on the content of the negotiations that have got us
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1023
to this point. We have got to a very important point; we feel strongly that the two Governments proposed a sensible compromise yesterday on transparency and on photographs. We will continue discussions with the parties to try to resolve that.
On the specific question of the conditional aspects of the Joint Declaration, the noble Lords, Lord Glentoran and Lord Smith of Clifton, raised the issues of on the runs and security normalisation. Those matters are in the context of acts of completion. That is what was agreed; that remains the position. So there will be no movement on those conditional aspects of the Joint Declaration until we see acts of completion. I am happy to repeat that.
The noble Lord, Lord Smith of Clifton, asked me some specific questions. I have the answer to them in my hand, but I cannot read the official's handwriting, so I hope that the noble Lord will forgive me if I write to him on those points.
A Noble Lord: In your own handwriting?
Baroness Amos: Absolutely, my Lords. I think that my noble friend will try to help me out.
Regarding the further question of decommissioning, perhaps I may ask the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, to look again at Annex C(5), which was the proposed statement from the IRA, where it states that it will:
"in this new context, conclude the process to completely and verifiably put all its arms beyond use. Accordingly the IRA leadership has agreed with the IICD to complete this process in a way which further enhances public confidence and to conclude this by the end of December".
That is an incredibly important statement. Indeed, if the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, looks at the statement that it was proposed that the IICD should make, the transparency issues and the issue of verification are very important within that, too.
I am hanging on, just in case I receive some clarification on that particular point.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |