HL Deb 26 March 1991 vol 527 cc977-85

4.31 p.m.

The Paymaster General (Lord Belstead)

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall repeat a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. The Statement is as follows:

"Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to inform the House that, following extensive discussions with the main constitutional political parties in Northern Ireland—the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, the Social Democratic and Labour Party, the Ulster Democratic Unionist Party and the Ulster Unionist Party—and with the Irish Government, a basis for formal political talks now exists. I frankly acknowledge to the House that this would not have been possible without the goodwill and determination of the Northern Ireland parties and the helpful and constructive approach taken by the Irish Government. The stated positions of all these parties are well known. Her Majesty's Government reaffirm their position that Northern Ireland's present status as a part of the United Kingdom will not change without the consent of a majority of its people.

"The endeavour on which we have all agreed to embark is an ambitious one. We are setting out to achieve a new beginning for relationships within Northern Ireland, within the island of Ireland and between the peoples of these islands. While a successful outcome cannot be guaranteed in advance, I am confident that all the potential participants are committed to a forward-looking and constructive approach. For their part, the two signatories of the Anglo-Irish Agreement—the British and Irish Governments—have made clear that they would be prepared to consider a new and more broadly based agreement or structure if such an arrangement can be arrived at through direct discussion and negotiation between all of the parties concerned.

"To allow an opportunity for such a wider political dialogue the two governments have agreed not to hold a meeting of the Anglo-Irish conference between two pre-specified dates. All of the parties concerned will make use of this interval for intensive discussions to seek the new and more broadly based agreement which I have just described.

"As the conference will not be meeting between the specified dates the secretariat at Maryfield will accordingly not be required for that period to discharge its normal role of servicing conference meetings provided for in Article 3 of the agreement.

"It is accepted that discussions must focus on three main relationships: those within Northern Ireland, including the relationship between any new institutions there and the Westminster Parliament; among the people of the island of Ireland; and between the two governments. It is common ground between all the parties that hope of achieving a new and more broadly based agreement rests on finding a way to give adequate expression to the totality of the relationships I have mentioned.

"Talks will accordingly take place in three strands corresponding respectively to the three relationships. Some arrangement will be needed for liaison between the different strands of these complex discussions. All the Northern Ireland parties will participate actively and directly in the North/South discussions. The Unionist parties have made clear that they wish their participation in those talks to be formally associated with my presence and that they will regard themselves as members of the United Kingdom team.

"It is accepted by all those involved that, so as to make full use of the interval between meetings of the conference to achieve an overall agreement satisfactory to all, it will be necessary to have launched all three sets of discussions within weeks of each other.

"A first step towards getting related discussions under way in all three strands will be the opening, as soon as possible, of substantive talks between the parties in Northern Ireland under my chairmanship. These will commence with a round of bilateral meetings before moving on, as soon as possible, into plenary sessions. It has been agreed by all the participants that before long, when, after consultation, I judge that an appropriate point has been reached, I will propose formally that the other two strands should be launched. My judgment as to timing will be governed by the fact that all involved have agreed that the three sets of discussions will be under way within weeks of each other.

"The internal talks, like the talks in the other strands, will follow a demanding and intensive schedule. In order to ensure a full airing of the issues, it will be open to each of the parties to raise any aspect of these relationships including constitutional issues, or any other matter which it considers relevant. All concerned have assured me that they will participate in good faith and will make every effort to achieve progress.

"It is accepted by all the parties that nothing will be finally agreed in any strand until everything is agreed in the talks as a whole and that confidentiality will be maintained thereunto. However, in the final analysis the outcome will need to be acceptable to the people."

My Lords, that concludes the Statement made by my right honourable friend.

4.37 p.m.

Lord-Prys-Davies

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, has been the bearer of good news, and we on these Benches warmly welcome the long-awaited Statement that the Minister has just repeated. We congratulate the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on his triumph. It is a considerable achievement. We would also place on record our appreciation of the understanding and the flexibility of the political parties in Northern Ireland and of the approach taken by the Irish Government.

After years of appalling atrocities, divisions and mistrust it is immensely encouraging that the leaders of the main political parties in Northern Ireland have been persuaded to sit around a table to have these substantial talks embracing the internal government of Northern Ireland, the relationship between the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic, and the relationship between Ireland and Britain. At times during the past 15 months we greatly feared that the initiative of the Secretary of State might be coming to nothing. There was, and there still remains, a great deal of scepticism about the initiative in some quarters, but that the initiative did not break down is due to the skill, patience, and tenacity of the Secretary of State.

There is no guarantee, of course, that the discussions will lead to a settlement. No doubt the Secretary of State will have to draw on his skills and the good will he has built up over the past 15 months in order to achieve the evasive settlement. Indeed, it is fairly clear from the tenor of the Statement that the success of the talks will in no small measure depend upon the parties having learnt to place their trust in the Secretary of State's judgment.

I have three or four short questions for the Minister. First, what are the two pre-specified dates which are mentioned in the Statement between which the Anglo-Irish conference will not be sitting? When are the talks likely to begin? Secondly, will there be an overall timeframe within which it is hoped the talks will be completed? Thirdly, and particularly in the light of the last sentence of the Statement, is it envisaged that the settlement, if it is achieved, will be the subject of a referendum in Northern Ireland?

I am sure that there is no need for me to say that the Opposition fully support the Secretary of State and all the parties in their endeavours to bring about an enduring settlement which will achieve peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland.

Lord Holme of Cheltenham: My Lords, we on these Benches recognise the considerable achievement of arriving at this new basis for talks. The 15 months of talks to which the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, referred had reached deadlock. The fact that the deadlock has been broken by the personal initiative of the Secretary of State is quite a remarkable and extraordinary achievement.

We now have the first talks since 1976. They are all the more hopeful now because all parties in Northern Ireland and the Irish Government are involved. We would wish to associate ourselves with the tributes paid to the Secretary of State. He has shown both patience and nerve. We and our sister alliance party had urged the initiative on him, but it should be said that the Secretary of State deserves all possible personal credit for his political helmsmanship through these very troubled waters. In the Statement which has been repeated the Secretary of State uses the words "good will and determination" and applies them to the parties in Northern Ireland. That is certainly true, but those are qualities which the Secretary of State has shown consistently over the past months.

The Northern Irish parties, together with the Irish Government, have been positive in their response. I trust that the parties are becoming aware of how much ordinary people in every part of the island yearn for a more stable relationship based on mutual respect for the traditions of the communities. If the Northern Ireland parties listen to those people rather than the opposing minorities of zealous activists, I am sure that they will be constructive in the talks ahead.

On these Benches we believe that devolution for Northern Ireland, with a substantial measure of self-government, can be achieved in the end only by the pressure of and with the consent of the people of Northern Ireland. Therefore, I should like to echo the question of the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies. If the talks are successful, how will the consent of the people be established?

Finally, British general elections have destabilised delicate situations across the Irish Sea on several occasions during our mutually troubled history. On these Benches we urge tripartisanship throughout the period of these vital talks. Each of the principal United Kingdom parties should commit itself unequivocally to that process so that we can provide a stable context for the talks over the months ahead. Those talks are certainly much too important to be allowed to become an incidental casualty of all the tensions of a British election.

Perhaps I may ask the noble Lord to give us as much detail as possible on the timetable. I feel sure that the Secretary of State is right to try to achieve the greatest possible momentum by tight timetabling, but we should be grateful if the noble Lord could share with us more details as regards the timetable.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I thank both the noble Lords, Lord Prys-Davies and Lord Holme of Cheltenham, for their reaction to my right honourable friend's Statement which I have repeated today. I agree with both noble Lords—and it was a point made early on by the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies—that no one should underestimate the scale of the task which lies before us. It will require determination and commitment of a high order by all concerned to bring the talks to a successful conclusion.

Both noble Lords asked me about the timing of the talks. We intend that talks should begin before the end of next month; in order words, before the end of April. Although I do not believe that my right honourable friend has discussed this with the co-chairman of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the Irish Foreign Minister, Mr. Collins, we propose that the interval occupied by the talks should not be less than 10 weeks. Therefore, we propose that an intergovernmental conference which is due to fall within those two periods should not, according to the Statement, take place.

Both noble Lords asked about the reference at the end of the Statement to the need to see that the outcome is acceptable to the people generally. It has been accepted during the discussions which have taken place so far that the outcome of the talks would need to be subject to a process of validation. The major question will be whether the outcome is likely to prove widely acceptable within Northern Ireland. I should not wish to go further than that today.

4.45 p.m.

Lord Colnbrook

My Lords, I join in the sincere congratulations to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State on having managed to bring the parties together in Northern Ireland to talk about the future. That is very difficult. I tried to do it 11 years ago and did not succeed because the Unionists refused to attend. This achievement is a great step forward.

I should like to pass on two observations to my right honourable friend. I hope that he will not drop his guard against the IRA. More than anything else the IRA dreads agreement among the people who live in Northern Ireland and between the North and the South. The IRA will do anything to prevent such an agreement from taking place. I hope that my right honourable friend's guard will be kept up during the course of the discussions.

Secondly. will he do everything possible not to raise too high public expectation for any immediate result? The problems with which we are all familiar have been present for too long. The trenches into which the political parties in the North have dug themselves are too deep for them to be able to climb out very quickly. I fear that if public expectation is raised that all the problems will be solved very quickly, people will be disappointed. We all hope and wish that there will be progress, but I do not believe that it will be speedy and it is dangerous for people to believe that it will be.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I take very seriously any intervention by my noble friend on this subject. I would be the first to say that I heed his warning and that given by the Front Bench opposite that we must not look at this through rose coloured glasses. There is much hard work to be done and many obstacles to be overcome in the weeks ahead.

My noble friend raised the point about keeping entirely alert as regards terrorism. I assure your Lordships that our firm policies for the defeat of terrorism will continue in parallel with our efforts to promote constructive political development. It is worth adding that most of the participants in the talks have clear views on security matters which they have put to my right honourable friend from time to time with both force and eloquence. I do not believe that they would have joined in this process if they thought it was likely to prove inimical to our efforts to defeat terrorism.

Lord Mason of Barnsley

My Lords, I place on record my congratulations to the Secretary of State on his patience, perseverance and skill in obtaining agreement from all major political parties to discuss jointly the prospects of constitutional change. That is quite an achievement especially since the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which was an agreement bitterly opposed by the Unionists, and that still remains the position. It is only an agenda but it is a useful first step, having constructed a structure for all-party dialogue which involves government in both Dublin and London.

Is the Minister aware of the position of the two blocs? I refer to a United Ireland versus a Province whose desire is to remain part of the United Kingdom. Those positions have not changed. I refer also to Dublin's constitutional claim on the Province of Northern Ireland, which still exists. It is not only a major irritant to the Unionists but will overshadow the talks on constitutional change, and the Unionists will not brook any interference by a foreign government in their affairs. Those are facts which are most worrying.

In spite of the foreseen difficulties, I sincerely hope that the Minister succeeds. It is a delicate path to tread but he knows that better than anyone. At least the Secretary of State may establish in the minds of both governments a better understanding of each political party's views. That too would be an advance since the aggravation and misunderstandings caused by the Anglo-Irish Agreement. He may also create a more peaceful political atmosphere. That too would auger well for the future.

It is too early to expect much more. For all those who wish to see an eventually peaceful Province, we wish the Minister well in his endeavours; and I earnestly believe that he deserves to succeed.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Mason of Barnsley, for intervening. He was another distinguished Secretary of State for Northern Ireland who realises only too well from personal experience how difficult these matters are.

In reply to the main thrust of what the noble Lord said, perhaps I may assure the House that there is no hidden agenda; we have an open agenda. As the Statement said, it will be open to all who wish to do so to contribute in the talks. We are working towards a transfer, if we can achieve it, of political responsibility to locally elected representatives on a widely acceptable basis but within a wider framework of stable relationships. That is the broad thrust of what we are trying to achieve.

Viscount Whitelaw

My Lords, perhaps my noble friend would give a voice from the distant past on this subject an opportunity to say to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State how much we hope that he will succeed and how much we admire his great tenacity in getting this far.

Perhaps my noble friend will appreciate and pass on to my right honourable friend my one thought regarding what the noble Lord, Lord Holme, said in regard to general elections. It is a nostalgic view from the past; it is something I deeply feel, for I know that it was the worst thing in my life that there was a general election in 1974. Neither the noble Lord, Lord Holme, nor anyone else in this House should believe that we can stop problems arising by any pact between the parties in this country. The parties in Northern Ireland will have to fight each other at a general election on exactly the same basis as before, and that will cause the trouble. That cannot be avoided; it is a bridge that must be crossed.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, the substantive point made by my noble friend Lord Whitelaw is one quite rightly in our minds as a result of it being raised by the noble Lord, Lord Holme, this afternoon in your Lordships' Chamber. It is not one I shall pursue, although I assure the House that it is also in the mind of my right honourable friend.

Before we conclude the debate on the Statement, perhaps I may thank each noble Lord who has spoken, including no fewer than three former Secretaries of State for Northern Ireland, for the generous congratulations given to my right honourable friend.

Lord Blease

My Lords, as another voice from the past with memories too, perhaps I can join my noble friend Lord Prys-Davies and other noble Lords in welcoming this Statement. It is a message of hope for all peaceable citizens in Northern Ireland. It is an opportunity that must be genuinely grasped by all. I also express my warm appreciation, with others, for the quiet patience, the courteous determination and the political skills of the Secretary of State, Peter Brooke, and his ministerial team, for the open and responsible way they have undertaken their difficult and sometimes personally dangerous parliamentary duties and efforts.

Would the Minister agree that this House should give every encouragement to the people of Northern Ireland—that is, the Churches, the business community and the trade unions—to support in every possible way the political parties enjoining in these political talks regarding the future of Northern Ireland? They must exercise a spirit of principled give and take, which is often absent in political dialogues. I dislike using the word compromise because it has a sense of giving too much away, but there are points where give and take is necessary in these circumstances.

Is it not a fact that unless the search for a reasoned and fair accommodation is firmly based on parliamentary democracy, we in Northern Ireland will all be losers? We shall continue to suffer further economic, social and political deterioration and deprivation. Having some knowledge of the talks that have been taking place over a number of years, I ask the Minister whether consideration has been given to the administrative difficulties experienced by some of the parties involved. I know that other aspects of their involvement have been taken care of. Some members of parties that are involved have papers to present and arrangements to make. Therefore, a little help in the form of an independent central secretariat for the clearance of press notices and the making of arrangements should be genuinely considered.

With those remarks, I wholeheartedly welcome and appreciate everything that has been said in this House regarding the affairs of Northern Ireland.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Blease. It is very much in the mind of my right honourable friend that a little time will be necessary for people to bring their case, position and arguments together. As a result of the talks about talks, there is good consultation between my right honourable friend and the parties. That is why we would intend, if it can be agreed, that the talks should start by the end of next month; exactly at what moment will depend on the points made by the noble Lord. I wish to make two further comments. I have been asked whether your Lordships' House should encourage the people of Northern Ireland down this particular path.

I believe that noble Lords have been answered by the exchanges we have had this afternoon. However, no one knows better than the noble Lord, Lord Blease, that success in talks of this kind, if they can improve the basis of the democratic process in Northern Ireland, will be important not only for peace and parliamentary democracy, but also for prosperity. The noble Lord worked hard in his life in the position that he held in the Northern Ireland Congress for Trade Unions for the prosperity of the people of Northern Ireland.

Lord Elton

My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State deserves every word of congratulations on his patience and wisdom. Does my noble friend agree that it will take at least as much patience and wisdom to bring the ship which he is now launching into port, in part for the reasons mentioned by my noble friend Lord Colnbrook? Does he also agree that some credit should go to those other participants who agreed to join in the consultation? It has been difficult not to lose patience with some of the refusals for dialogue we have witnessed over the years. They have been based upon or been reactions to genuine pressures and fears.

Noble Lords would do well to welcome this beginning of statesmanship among the various parties in Northern Ireland, which we welcome at least as heartily as we welcome the honourable and successful courage and perseverance of my right honourable friend.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Elton for intervening. It is right that at the end of these exchanges I should pay tribute to the sincerity, patience and determination of all those who have been interlocutors with my right honourable friend. They have all shown a readiness to address essential interests of other participants and a willingness to work constructively towards accommodating those interests. In case noble Lords with more experience of Northern Ireland than I have feel that perhaps during these exchanges I have forgotten, I repeat that we are now going to be in for a difficult and hard time in the talks.

However, there is a belief that there is sufficient common ground to make these talks worthwhile. The statement which my right honourable friend made to that effect about 10 days ago provoked a degree of scepticism. I believe that my right honourable friend was right. I believe that the discussions he has had, although they have addressed preliminary issues, have expanded the area of common ground and created a firm basis on which at least to start talking.

Lord Harmar-Nicholls

My Lords, following on the point behind the question asked by my noble friend Lord Elton, will my noble friend, in recognising the great breakthrough that has taken place, pass on to his right honourable friend the importance of recognising for some time the fragile relationship that is bound to exist between the parties to this agreement? That makes it even more essential that when any further steps are taken, however small, they are steps which have been agreed by the various parties before any notice of them appears in the press. There has been the suggestion of slight irritation caused by this announcement being made today without all the parties to it being aware of it. Will my noble friend keep in mind that if ever there was a time and a negotiation which did not require anything by way of unauthorised leaks which would prejudice coming to real agreement at the end of the day, then this is it?

Lord Belstead

My Lords, all the exchanges that my right honourable friend has had with the various parties over the past 14 months have been conducted on a basis of confidentiality. We have made a degree of progress on that basis that encourages us to believe that the latest round of talks should be handled in the same way. Therefore, I very much agree with what my noble friend Lord Harmar-Nicholls has said.

Lord Lyell

My Lords, will my noble friend pass on my congratulations, together with those of all my distinguished predecessors who have spoken this afternoon? But above all does he agree that what he has stressed in his replies to some of the questions that preceded my own intervention, is that patience is the watchword of my right honourable friend? He has had immense patience and success. I believe that the two go hand in hand. Does my noble friend consider that my right honourable friend requires all patience and flexibility in the timetable which has been proposed, particularly at this first step of the talks between the parties in Northern Ireland? We hope that when any successful conclusion is arrived at my noble friend will be able to give us some good news. Until that time we wait and hope with great optimism.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Lyell for his generous words about my right honourable friend. We must now hope that his patience and that of the other parties will be rewarded.