Ceasefire (Hansard, 19 January 1995)

§ 2. Mr. Winnick
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the latest position on the ceasefire by paramilitary organisations in Northern Ireland.

§ The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Sir Patrick Mayhew)
Four and a half months have elapsed since the IRA's ceasefire and three since that of the Loyalists. Everyone welcomes that. We must now secure that violence in Northern Ireland is over for good, and that means that the so-called punishment beatings must stop too.

§ Mr. Winnick
I certainly agree with what the Secretary of State has just said. Does not the ending of a number of Army patrols in Northern Ireland demonstrate that, without terrorism, there would be no need for the Army to patrol in Northern Ireland at all?
Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that it is important, both for the ceasefire and in the overall national interest, that the Government do not abandon the creation of meaningful cross-border bodies? Is he also aware that there is a grave suspicion that the Government will act as they did last night, and abandon what is essential for peace in Northern Ireland and for good relations with the Republic to buy the votes of the Unionist Members of Parliament, who will then support the Government—as they did last night—so that the Government can survive in difficult circumstances?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
It is a pity that the hon. Gentleman spoilt a good opening with a cynical conclusion. Of course he is right to say that we all look forward to the day when there is no need for the Royal Ulster Constabulary to be helped by the Army: the RUC, the Army and the people of Northern Ireland all look forward to it. But no change will be made except on the professional advice of my security advisers. That has been the case hitherto, and it will continue to be the case.
In our quest for a shared understanding between the two Governments—which we nowadays describe as a joint framework document—we are trying to find a means by which proposals can be made that will help the political parties to sit round the table together.

§ Mr. Peter Robinson
Does the Secretary of State concur with the view expressed by the assistant chief constable that the IRA should be kept intact? Did he tell students recently that the Sinn Fein leader should be propped up?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The RUC has a great record, which is a source of pride to everyone in Northern Ireland and in the entire United Kingdom. I think it very desirable, for example, for the RUC to recognise the need to examine the transition to peacetime policing—if I may put it like that—and, similarly, for the police authority to consult, as it is now doing.
As for the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I note that there is now a ceasefire and that exploratory dialogue is taking place. That strikes me as a change for the better, and I do not wish to disturb the trend.

§ Mr. Trimble
Does the Secretary of State share our concern about the repeated threats from Sinn Fein/IRA. to resume—most recently, earlier this week by Mitchell McLaughlin—and the rumours that the IRA is trying to 833 acquire additional weaponry, especially rocket launchers, and that the Deny brigade is re-equipping? Does he agree that it is now essential that those who said that this was going to be a permanent peace—I am thinking of the Dublin Government, the SDLP and especially the leader of the SDLP—should bring pressure to bear on Sinn Fein/IRA to prove that they are committed permanently to peace?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
Any sign that a political party—Sinn Fein and the IRA in particular—is associated with a policy involving the use of violence for political purposes is extremely reprehensible, disgraceful and unwelcome. I do not comment on rumours, but I note that it is widely believed that the IRA continues in existence. Equally, I note that, with the disgraceful exception of the murder of Mr. Kerr in Newry, in November, there have been no deaths and no terrorist injuries since the end of August. That is something of which I am extremely glad, as is everyone in Northern Ireland. I want every possible influence to be brought to bear on all who have previously been associated with paramilitary organisations to persuade them to desist and to put violence wholly behind them for good.

§ Mr. Hume
Does the Secretary of State agree that we now have the best opportunity for lasting peace and stability that we have ever had? Will he confirm that, at the end of the day, the only way to achieve that lasting stability is by an agreement among our divided people which threatens no section of that people? Will he also confirm that private agreements or promises for the internal politics of this House would in that situation be utterly irresponsible? Can he assure the House that there are no such private agreements or private promises?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to say that there is now a good opportunity—probably the best, certainly for 25 years—to secure a lasting peace. That does not, of course, rest with the Government alone. We wish to do all that we can to help the peace become secure. That is something that has to be done by proper, not improper, means. Equally, consent is the basis for stability in future and there is no point in the Government taking a course that is not likely to be sustained by consent.

§ Mr. Hunter
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the purpose of the framework document, which he mentioned earlier, is to promote round-table talks, and not to deter them, that it will essentially be a consultation and discussion document, and that it will impose nothing, as the agreed way forward is by consent, not by coercion? Will he confirm that any agreement that may emerge from discussion on the joint document will be subject to a referendum of the people of Northern Ireland?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
My hon. Friend is absolutely right and I want this to be much more widely understood than it seems to be at the moment. Party leaders asked us—the two Governments— to set out proposals that would seem to be acceptable to them as offering the best prospect of getting wide acceptance across the whole community for a political accommodation which the parties have been seeking for several years. That is what we are trying to do. There is no question of trying to impose it. We shall offer it and if it is rejected, it is rejected; if it is accepted, it is accepted. We want to use 834 it to help them get back around the table again. As the Prime Minister said, the outcome of the talks process, if it is resumed, will be put to the people in a referendum.

§ Ms Mowlam
Does the Secretary of State agree that directness and openness are crucial for all parties as the peace process unfolds? If so, will he give a straight answer to the part of the question from the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume) that he avoided and to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick), which he described as "cynical"? When things were ruled in and out of the framework document last night to the benefit of some people in the negotiations and for the electoral expediency of the Government, was it or was it not a secret deal that will create problems in the peace process?

§ Sir Patrick Mayhew
The peace process is something to which everybody in the House is committed. There is no framework document. We hope that there will be a framework document, but a lot of work needs to be done before there is. The basis for any future arrangements in Northern Ireland must be one of consent widely shared across the whole community. That is what informs the Government's approach to these matters and will continue to do so.