Peace Process (Hansard, 25 May 1995)

§ 1. Mr. Winnick
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the latest developments in the peace process. [24620]

§ 10. Mr. Canavan
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent meetings he has had about the peace process; and if he will make a statement. [24630]

§ The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Mr. Michael Ancram)
Since I last answered questions in the House, there has been one further meeting of exploratory dialogue with the loyalist parties and there have been two with Sinn Fein. On each of those occasions, I have led the Government team. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State also had an informal meeting with Mr. Adams of Sinn Fein in Washington yesterday. On each of those occasions, we emphasised our commitment to the peace process and the key importance to that process of a substantial decommissioning of illegally held weapons together with progress on a range of other issues.

§ Mr. Winnick
I am grateful for that answer. Does the Minister agree that the White House conference on investment in Northern Ireland is a very good idea and that, indeed, the White House should be congratulated on holding that conference, which the Secretary of State and my hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Ms Mowlam) are attending? Was not the meeting yesterday between the Secretary of State and the president of Sinn Fein inevitable at some stage, now that terrorism has, 922 fortunately, ended in Northern Ireland? Will not such talks be on an on-going basis, bearing in mind the qualification made by the Minister?

§ Mr. Ancram
First, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the White House has acted very constructively in holding a conference, which follows the investment conference held by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in Belfast in December. It is being held to try to bring jobs and investment to Northern Ireland, which is indeed a very important purpose. It is quite clear also that that purpose will best be achieved by the establishment of a permanent peace. In the context of the conference in Washington, it was proper that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State met Mr. Adams to make clear the relationship between peace, economic investment and jobs and to make it clear that the only way in which peace can be founded soundly is by seeing the decommissioning of illegally held arms taking place.

§ Mr. Wilkinson
Can my hon. Friend and Her Majesty's Government do everything in their power to ensure that in their objective of appeasing or seeking the acquiescence of the minority of the minority community, they do not alienate the law-abiding majority on whose support the long-term political future of democratic institutions and stability in the Province depend?

§ Mr. Ancram
I can assure my hon. Friend that I am not in the business either of alienating or of appeasing. I am seeking to build on a situation in which there is a cessation of violence to try to ensure, through exploratory dialogue, that we can see the beginning of a genuine decommissioning of illegally held arms. There is not a Member of the House who would not agree that, at the end of day, peace must be established on the basis of illegally held arms being taken out of the Northern Ireland equation. We have made it quite clear to those to whom we are speaking in Sinn Fein and the loyalist parties that if they wish to proceed to substantive political dialogue in Northern Ireland, substantial decommissioning of arms would have to take place.

§ Rev. Martin Smyth
Is the Minister concerned with the changing stance of Dick Spring from that in December 1993 and June 1994, when he talked not only about a cessation of violence but about a handing over of weapons, along with the statement of Albert Reynolds, who is calling for the decommissioning of legally held firearms by servants of the state? Why did the Minister suggest pulling out of talks with representatives of a loyalist paramilitary faction because they were threatening to shoot drug dealers, while continuing to talk with representatives of those who had shot a drug dealer just two weeks ago?

§ Mr. Ancram
I have made it clear all along that the basis of exploratory dialogue is that it is carried out with parties that do not condone or support the use of violence. When there has been any such suggestion, I have challenged the parties about it. Indeed, earlier this week, when there were suggestions that intimidatory action might be being taken in one quarter, I made it clear that I would not speak to parties that in any way appeared to condone it. Certainly, one of the parties and, I suspect, both, have since said that they do not condone such violence. It is right that we make it clear that, in a civilised society, there is no justification for anyone taking the law into his own hands at any time.
923 On the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, it is the agreed position of both Governments that, if we are to achieve a settlement and arrive at inclusive talks—including parties such as Sinn Fein—there has to be a substantial decommissioning of weapons. The Taoiseach said in the Dail on 25 April: It is a very important principle of parity of esteem in democratic dialogue that everybody should approach discussion on the same basis, solely on that of their electoral mandate and not by reference to any implied pressure they can exert because of the existence of arms in the hands of associated organisations. In order to achieve parity of esteem and position those arms must be taken out of commission. I do not believe that the Irish Government could have made their position clearer than that.

§ Mr. Bellingham
Does my hon. Friend agree that, although there has been a welcome abatement of terrorism, it is ridiculous for the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) to talk about an end to terrorism, because the IRA clearly still has a massive arsenal and could easily redeploy it in a matter of hours? Does my hon. Friend accept that it is essential that, before the IRA is admitted to round table talks, the decommissioning process should be well under way?

§ Mr. Ancram
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reminding the House that any steps taken since the cessation of violence have been taken as a direct response to the lowering of the security risk in Northern Ireland. None of them is irreversible, and that is an important part of the response that has been made.
As for the talks, we have made it clear that to move from exploratory dialogue to substantive bilateral dialogue will require a tangible beginning to the process of decommissioning and that to move to inclusive talks around the table will require substantial decommissioning. The reason is not one of doctrine but the fact that others will not sit around the table with a party that still has associations with a fully armed and operational organisation of the sort that the IRA is.

§ Mr. Worthington
May I present the apologies of my hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Ms Mowlam), who is attending the investment conference in Washington?
Of course, we completely concur with the Government on the importance of decommissioning of arms, but what other matters have been discussed in the talks between the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the leader of Sinn Fein and in the Minister's talks with other members of Sinn Fein? Can the Minister update us on those talks? For example, have any assurances been given by Sinn Fein that it is using all its influence to eliminate punishment beatings or to take other steps to improve the quality of the peace being developed in Northern Ireland?
The Minister will have noticed the optimistic annual report of the Chief Constable of the RUC who expresses the belief that both sides of the paramilitary are set to go down a "peaceful road" but that, at the same time, the military machines are up, they are cohesive. If they decide … to go again they could do so". What promises have been given that those machines will be stood down?

§ Mr. Ancram
At the moment, we are in an exploratory dialogue, the purpose of which is to explore such questions. The two sessions that I have had with Sinn Fein have concentrated largely not only on how 924 decommissioning might take place but on the reason for it and why it is an essential part of the peace process. As the hon. Gentleman knows, those talks are not on a single-issue agenda; other topics can be, and have been, raised. I have told Sinn Fein and the loyalists that there are other topics that I believe they will wish to raise with me, and exploratory dialogue will continue in the future.
On punishment beatings, on a number of occasions I have made it clear that the Government are not prepared to accept any form of taking the law into one's own hands. We have explained to Sinn Fein that participation in normal political life implies responsibilities as well as rights, and that a party that is fully committed to constitutional means and objectives does not intimidate and threaten the population, does not encourage people to take the law into their own hands and does not condone breaking people's bones with iron bars. We shall continue to make that clear at every possible opportunity.