Downing Street Declaration (Hansard, 17 March 1994)

§ 4. Mr. Riddick
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the latest situation regarding the Downing street declaration.

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The declaration by the two Heads of Government is a statement of the fundamental principles of democracy, consent and the rejection of violence. It is, accordingly, not time limited, and will stand.

§ Mr. Riddick
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that one of the clearest signals that the Irish Government could send the men of violence would be a statement that they intend to scrap articles 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution, which lay claim to Northern Ireland, if the men of violence—the IRA and Sinn Fein—do not renounce violence, as foreseen in the Downing street declaration? In any event, is not such a claim an anachronism in this day and age?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The answer to the second question is, honestly, yes, it is an anachronism. I believe that to be essentially understood. One of the most interesting features of the joint declaration is a clear statement by the Taoiseach in one of its paragraphs of his understanding of the resentment that the two articles cause to Unionists. On the other hand, he says that they represent an aspiration of many nationalists. A clear steer is given by the Taoiseach in that declaration—that if an overall package is agreed, then as part of a balanced constitutional settlement, amendments to the constitution will be put to the Irish people and will be supported by the Irish Government. I do not believe that there is anything between the two Governments on this issue, and my hon. Friend is right to raise the matter in that context.

§ Mr. Mallon.
May I also bring greetings from the Hill of St. Patrick in Armagh, where St. Patrick wisely chose to live and work? That he decided to die and be buried in Downpatrick was a matter of fine judgment on his part.
Will the Secretary of State agree with me, and remind the House and others, that the joint declaration of 15 December was signed not for Sinn Fein and the IRA, but for all the Irish people? The most recent opinion poll in Ireland shows that 92 per cent. of the Irish people overwhelmingly rejected violence and supported absolutely the principles in the joint declaration. Does the Secretary of State agree that the two Governments should now proceed to apply those principles to a set of arrangements for the whole island, which, in the words of the joint declaration, could bring agreement among all the people of the island, and do that in such a way that it is not prevented by the Unionists who have opted out or the republicans who will not opt in?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
I agree very much with the first part of the hon. Gentleman's statement—[Interruption.] Perhaps I mean the second part, after the obeisance to St. Patrick, which was entirely appropriate.
On the remainder of the statement, the joint declaration is based on the principle of consent. That is what got up the 1006 noses of the Provisionals. They recognise that they cannot obtain consent for their version of a united Ireland by democratic means. Accordingly, they resort to violence. The declaration said that nobody who resorts to violence for political ends will join the democratic process. It is because of that stance that the Provisionals are rejected all around the world, not least in the United States of America. The two Governments stand side by side on the declaration and on their determination to advance with the main constitutional parties down the talks process with the same objective there has always been.

§ Mr. Hunter
As it was the Prime Minister of the Irish Republic who said that there would be a crackdown against the IRA if it rejected the terms and the spirit of the joint declaration, will my right hon. and learned Friend "seek clarification", as the expression goes, from the Prime Minister as to what he meant by that crackdown and inquire when there will be clear evidence of that response?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
Those matters are always under discussion at the meetings that take place on a regular basis. It is important to recognise that no security measure has been held in abeyance. My hon. Friend would be rather critical had any practical measure been held in abeyance pending the response of the IRA to the joint declaration. The full range of security measures has been, and will continue to be, brought to bear on all terrorists. Those measures are reviewed the whole time, not least in conjunction with the Irish Government. I am glad to read what the Chief Constable of the RUC said yesterday about the high level of co-operation between his forces and the Garda.

§ Mr. Trimble
Does the Secretary of State agree that the declaration addressed two questions—first, the circumstances in which a united Ireland could be achieved, which is a purely hypothetical question as there is clearly no consent for such an outcome, and, secondly, how the IRA could enter democratic politics if it so wished, although it is perfectly clear that it does not so wish? Given the response to those hypothetical questions, does the right hon. and learned Gentleman further agree that the declaration is an irrelevance and cannot be used as the basis for future institutions and should not be used by him as an excuse for not implementing arrangements for stability in Northern Ireland that he knows have the most widespread acceptance?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that I have never used the joint declaration as an excuse for anything. As I have said more than once this afternoon, the declaration is a declaration of fundamental principle; it does not cease to be one on 15 March, having been one on 15 December. Nor does it preclude the taking of any security or political measures that are deemed prudent and sensible for the achievement of a less antagonistic and more tranquil and prosperous way of life in Northern Ireland—the purpose which all the constitutional parties joined up to serve and to seek. The hon. Gentleman played a notable part in that process a year ago.

§ Mr. McNamara
The Secretary of State will be aware that he has the full support of the Labour party for his interpretation of the declaration. We regard it as a set of principles that will outlast any possible lapse in talks. That must be the way forward. Does he accept that Labour 1007 believes that, if the parties cannot reach agreement, implicit in the declaration is a responsibility on both Governments to attempt to develop their own institutional framework for peace and to put it to the parties?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
I acknowledge the hon. Gentleman's comments in the first part of his question, but he will not entice me into a clarification of what has always been extremely clear in the text of the joint declaration. I shall not follow him into any discussion of what is implicit. I am perfectly prepared to recite what is explicit and what it does not contain. That is all that I want to say about that.
We must recognise, as both Governments did in the joint declaration, that there is no prospect of anything workable or durable being achieved in Northern Ireland, save that which is based on consent. That is the fundamental principle. We must continue, patiently and steadily, to probe what may be possible, what the areas of common agreement are and what, if possible, may require adjustment in people's positions. That is what we are doing and I should like to see a slightly more positive and slightly less carping attitude from the hon. Gentleman.

§ Mr. Brandreth
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that prospects for inward investment will be particularly enhanced by the success of the initiative launched at the time of the declaration? Does he have any progress to report on inward investment in Northern Ireland?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. One of the most hypocritical and disgusting features of the Provisional IRA is that it claims to speak for the people of Ireland, but does nothing but diminish their prospects for employment and prosperity. Fortunately, such are the attractions of Ireland—north and south, but I am talking about Northern Ireland—for inward investment from overseas that, in the past year, the Industrial Development Board has been able to secure £200 million worth of inward investment and about 2,000 jobs. Prospects for this year are no less bright.