HC Deb 14 March 1991 vol 187 cc1081-4
3. Mr. John D. Taylor

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his most recent discussions with the Government of the Republic of Ireland about a replacement of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr. Peter Brooke)

After discussions, not only with the Irish Government but with the leaders of the main constitutional parties in Northern Ireland, I have drawn up a text which I believe provides a sound basis for formal political talks on all the key relationships. This text which, in my view, respects the essential principles of all concerned, is now being sent to all the potential participants, with the request that they should respond to me, I hope positively, before Easter. I shall make the text public in due course.

Fourteen months of painstaking collective effort about important but essentially preliminary points lie behind us. Against that background, I do not believe that we can sensibly engage in further textual barter. The moment for decision has come. We have a real chance to move forward together to substantive talks. These would offer the prospect of a significant transfer of power to local politicians in Northern Ireland and a new beginning for relationships between both parts of Ireland, and among the peoples of these islands.

Mr. Taylor

That was a substantial reply, which we in the Ulster Unionist party welcome. The party has always been keen on talks within Northern Ireland and eventual talks with Dublin.

Is the Secretary of State aware that his reply is timely, bearing in mind, as he emphasised, that he has been on the job for 14 months and that many people in Northern Ireland were beginning to lose interest in the process? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House why the document that he agreed with the Ulster Unionist parties on 24 December—Christmas eve—was subsequently rejected by the Dublin Government about seven weeks later? Is that because the Dublin Government, as reported in the press, now refuse to talk to Ulster Unionists as part of the United Kingdom delegation? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that people in Northern Ireland see the Dublin Government using the Anglo-Irish Agreement as a vehicle through which to obstruct political progress in Northern Ireland and talks between Unionists and the Dublin Government?

Mr. Brooke

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his welcome for what I said. No one could be more conscious than I that we have been 14 months engaged in the process, as I have lived through every moment of them. As to the text that I have discussed, not only with the Unionists but with the other potential participants in the talks, at all stages there has been discussion about whether we could find a draft that would be acceptable to everybody. Now that we have reached the stage where I am putting forward a text which I hope respects the interests of all concerned, if we can proceed during the immediate future with good will towards all other participants, we are more likely to get to a successful conclusion.

Mr. Peter Robinson

Does the Secretary of State recognise that in many quarters of the press there will be confusion about his statement today, for over past weeks and months many had expected the Secretary of State eventually to mourn the passing of his initiative but instead find him with the air of an expectant father? He believes that he has a text which will get support from the parties in Northern Ireland and the Dublin Government. Can he tell us whether he has come to that conclusion because of his talks with party leaders and with the Dublin Government? Has the gap that existed after 24 December been narrowed as a result of his meeting with the Government of the Irish Republic? May I assure the Secretary of State on behalf of my party that when the text is made available to us it will be examined carefully but in a positive light?

Mr. Brooke

Throughout the process I have always been disturbed by the association of my name with the initiative, on the general basis of the case of the Liberal peer, the publication of whose memoirs at the turn of the century was held up for three weeks because the printers had run out of capital "I"s. As to the substance of the hon. Gentleman's question, throughout the exercise there has been a continuing convergence towards narrowing the gap. I pay tribute to all concerned for their contributions to the process.

Mr. Duffy

Will the Secretary of State not be discouraged by the reluctance of certain parties in Northern Ireland to sit down and talk, which may owe less to a lack of political will than to private hopes about the outcome of the general election? Will he draw comfort from the fact that certain items on the political agenda, which were not there when he arrived, owe much to his political courage and imagination?

Mr. Brooke

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his closing sentence. I have riot been discouraged as we have gone through the process, because there has been a desire for convergence on everybody's part and everyone has played a constructive role. As to the result of the general election, that is a subject about which I have no doubts.

Mr. Kilfedder

I, too, congratulate the Secretary of State on his untiring endeavours to promote talks. I look forward to seeing the document which will be published in due course. I hope that it will ensure that there will be talks. Will the Secretary of State ensure that the Foreign Office makes all proper arrangements for the visit of the President of the Irish Republic when she comes to the United Kingdom in June, albeit on a private visit, so that we can show that the people of the whole United Kingdom wish nothing but the best of friendly relations with the Irish Republic?

Mr. Brooke

There is a slight element of a concealed agenda in the hon. Gentleman's question, but I have no doubt that everyone will welcome the President of the Irish Republic as and when she comes.

Mr. Winnick

Is it not the case that substantial political progress depends in essence on two matters—first, that the minority community in Northern Ireland should have an input and that both communities should be treated on an equal basis and, secondly, as has fortunately been the case in the past few years, that there should be growing co-operation between the Irish Republic and this country? One hopes that that co-operation, which to a certain extent is shown by the Anglo-Irish Agreement, will remain in force and will be part of the policy of the present Government as well as of future Governments.

Mr. Brooke

Underlying the talks of the past 14 months has been the proposition that I put on 9 January last year, that any arrangements likely to succeed would need to enjoy widespread acceptance. That has informed all our discussions. As the hon. Gentleman will know, the Irish Government have been involved in those talks continuously over the past 14 months and have made their own input to them.

Mr. Ian Bruce

Does my right hon. Friend agree that to ensure that the majority community is positive, flexible and responsible, he ought to make it clear now that there will be no unreasonable veto of the minorities or of the Irish Republic, so that a deal can be made that will be acceptable both to the minority community and to Her Majesty's Government?

Mr. Brooke

One of the considerations that has informed all our conversations has been the awareness of all taking part that everyone has the freedom to withdraw from them, if they wish to do so. In that sense, although I personally would not use the word, everyone has a veto, but I sincerely hope that it will not be used.

Mr. McNamara

We admire the Secretary of State's tenacity over the past 14 months and, as he knows, we have wished him well in his discussions. We share to a degree the regret that he must feel that it has been necessary for him to issue today what amounts to an ultimatum. That is a matter of regret for us. Is it the Secretary of State's opinion, on the basis of his discussions, that it is possible for all the parties involved to sit down and work things out according to a suitable timetable? Does he agree that if the parties concerned do not accept his position, we shall be back at square one? Does he further agree that the three relationships will have to be re-examined, whatever might replace his present round of talks—though I hope that they will not be replaced? Does the Secretary of State acknowledge that the next fortnight will be an important time for reflection for the people who are party to the discussions, because the only persons who will delight in the talks not progressing further after the next fortnight will be the men of violence from both communities?

Mr. Brooke

It was not in my mind to present what the hon. Gentleman described as an ultimatum, but, after 14 months of constructive negotiation with all the parties, I am concerned to take personal responsibility, on behalf of the Government, for a text that will be acceptable to all. In that sense, and by definition, I run the risk that everyone will accuse me of misreading the tea leaves in making that proposition. Nevertheless, I believe that that is a sensible way to draw matters to a conclusion. As to returning to square one and dealing with three relationships, that seems to be a form of multidimensional chess, but I will endeavour to unravel the hon. Gentleman's proposition. I wholly agree with his remarks about terrorists.