by Duncan James
***
Prime Minister’s statement
Northern Ireland: amendments to the constitution
The Prime Minister (Mr Tony Weaver): With permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a statement about proposed constitutional changes to Northern Ireland and its structure of Government that are of the utmost importance to the future of the Province and its people, as well as having a significance far beyond the United Kingdom itself. [hon. Members: Oh!]
I have taken the opportunity this afternoon to fully brief the leaders of the opposition and the main political parties in Northern Ireland, and copies of my statement, which is also being given in another place by the Leader of that House, will, of course, be placed in the library immediately I have finished, and made widely available to hon. Members, to the media and to members of the public. Mr Speaker, I am sure you understand that my hope is that I shall be able to complete my statement this afternoon without interruption. [hon. Members: Here, here]
Mr Speaker, it will not have escaped the attention of Members of this House, or members of the public, that there have recently been considerable changes to the way in which the people of Northern Ireland have been able to conduct their lives. I dare say that, to many, life has taken on an air of normality, which, in the past, they had not dared to hope for.
I shall briefly rehearse the reasons for this, which I hope will put to rest much of the wilder speculation to which we have been treated recently in some sections of the media. The fact is, however, that there are many aspects of the changes which have occurred in the Province which I am unable to explain, any more than the media has sensibly been able to, but there are other areas where the Government has been able to help the process, and I propose to give details of those in this statement.
Let me first of all address the security situation in Northern Ireland. For reasons which I do not fully understand, and for which I have seen no satisfactory explanation put forward, it would seem that the vast majority of terrorists, from both sides of the sectarian divide, have left the Province. This appears, on the face of it at least, to be the result of a quite vicious feud that was sparked by the disappearance of the President of Sinn Fein, Mr Martin McFosters. The bloodshed that followed was without precedence, even by Northern Ireland standards, and yet it was quite specifically targeted at the leadership of the terrorist groups. Thankfully, the population of the Province was largely unaffected by this sectarian violence, which was as short-lived as it was unexpected and unexplained. I can, however, repeat the assurance which has been given many times before in recent months, and that is that the Army and the Northern Ireland Police Service have not been engaging in some form of state terrorism.
Mr Speaker, the Northern Ireland Police Service has, indeed, deployed considerable additional resources in an effort to track down the perpetrators of some of these violent crimes. An early result of this vendetta, however, was that most of the remaining members of the terrorist groups fled the Province, no doubt in fear of their lives, and no doubt also, spurred on by the list which appeared, giving the names and positions of major players in the terrorist gangs which have for so long plagued the people of Northern Ireland, and indicating those who had already either been murdered or had disappeared. Once again, the Northern Ireland Police Service continues its attempts to trace the origins of that document, although forensic tests so far have failed to produce any worthwhile leads. [Interruption]
No, I shall not give way to the hon. gentleman - there will be ample opportunity for questions when I have concluded my statement. A second and far more welcome result of this internecine warfare has been the almost total cessation of the many and profitable protection rackets and extortion scams which the terrorists were operating, and an end to punishment shootings and beatings. As hon. Members will know, the lack of terrorist leadership and the almost total cessation of sectarian violence has allowed the Police Service, aided by the Army and acting on information received, to confiscate considerable quantities of illegally held arms and ammunition, both from private houses and drinking clubs, and from arms dumps. Some of these dumps were previously unknown to the Decommissioning Body, who were also unaware of the seemingly huge arms dump that blew up near Cashel, in County Tipperary.
I mentioned earlier, Mr Speaker, that there were areas where the Government has been able to aid the process of bringing peace to the Province in ways which have not previously been possible. I can now tell the House that, with the fullest possible help and co-operation of President Minton and the American administration, and with the active participation of the Taoiseach and the Government of the Irish Republic, we have effectively closed down the operation of Northern Ireland's terrorist groups. Not only has the leadership of these organisations been either disposed of in some way or dispersed, and not only have we effectively been able to disarm them in a way which would not otherwise have been possible, we have also jointly been able to close their access to all their sources of funding. In America, for example, NORAID has been wound up and, with effect from tonight, will be declared an illegal organisation, as will any other body or individual on either side of the Atlantic found providing funds to terrorist organisations. Furthermore, action taken by the three Governments has closed all known bank accounts in Northern Ireland and elsewhere, and emptied them of their funds. [Interruption]
Well, I don’t propose to give way, but I can tell the House that freezing accounts was not considered to be a sufficient solution, and that the money has therefore been transferred to HM Treasury - several millions of pounds. I don’t propose to quote exact figures. I pay tribute here to the role played by the Bank of England and the US Federal Reserve in achieving this remarkable result. This has been a significant step forward in the action by this country and our allies in defeating the world-wide menace of terrorism, and helps to prove, I sincerely hope, that our actions are not simply directed towards Islam.
Mr Speaker, I come now to the political future of Northern Ireland, and the constitutional changes that I mentioned a moment ago. Let me start by saying that the discussions which have led to the proposals being formulated, which I am about to outline to the House, have taken place in an atmosphere of total co-operation between the three Governments, and that we are all in complete agreement about the proposed future of the Province. Details are therefore being laid before those Governments today, in a coordinated public briefing operation of which my statement is a part.
Let me remind the House, although it is probably not in the least necessary for me to do so, that for decades, if not centuries, the two opposing parties in Northern Ireland have had aspirations which have proved impossible to reconcile. On the one hand, the Unionists have demanded that they should remain part of the United Kingdom, while on the other, the Nationalists have demanded quite the opposite for a united Ireland. As President Minton quite rightly pointed out in a speech to Congress last year, the common factor, which has prevented reconciliation between the two ideals, has been the United Kingdom itself. In recent discussions with me and with the Taoiseach, Mr Michael O’Leary, President Minton has proposed that this barrier to future progress should be removed. In the situation that the cessation of terrorism has created, positive initiatives on the political front are now possible.
Mr Speaker, we have jointly taken a bold step forward, and are prepared to work together to cement the peace which is now being enjoyed in Ireland into a lasting and stable political future during which the vibrant economies of all sides can flourish side by side. The President has proposed, and this Government and the Government of the Irish Republic have agreed in principal and subject to certain safeguards that I shall outline, that sovereignty of both the Republic and the Province of Northern Ireland should pass to the United States of America. [Interruption]
Mr Speaker (Sir William Wakeham): Order, order. I must ask hon. and right hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House to regain their seats and allow the Prime Minister to complete this impor
tant statement without interruption. Order! Members have already been told that there will be ample opportunity for debate later.
Mr Tony Weaver: Mr Speaker, I can quite understand my hon. Friends wishing to put their points now, but this is an issue which will be debated to the fullest possible extent in the weeks and months ahead, and time has been allocated this afternoon for questions after my statement. I would only say by way of a diversion now, and for the benefit of those members who have not yet had an opportunity to study the text of my statement, that those of my hon. and learned Friends who have been able to do so, and with whom I have had the briefest of discussions before coming to this Chamber, have given a generous and welcome degree of support to the measures which I have outlined to them. For this I am most grateful, and it gives me hope that other hon. Members will share their support when they, too, are fully aware of what is proposed. [Interruption] I’m sorry, but I shall not give way to my hon. Friend. My statement is nearly finished, and time presses on.
Mr Speaker, the proposal to transfer sovereignty of both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to the jurisdiction of the United States, will of course, create a united Ireland. This will no doubt be welcomed by those Nationalists in the Province, who have long aspired to such an outcome, but may, at first sight, be thought to be abhorrent to the Unionists. However, the proposal will contain sufficient safeguards to fully protect the interests of both sides. For instance, there will be a provision for continuing representation in this House, and for the maintenance of British citizenship where this is wanted.
Let me tell the House that a joint, international, Constitutional Committee has been meeting at a secret location for some months now to draw up detailed proposals which will enshrine and safeguard the interests of all parties to this agreement. In mapping the way forward, they have drawn heavily on the precedence set when Hawaii joined the United States of America in 1959 as its 50th State. The Constitutional Committee has now drafted a State constitution for the united Ireland, and this will be put to this House in a few days time when a White Paper is published containing the full set of proposals which surround this venture. These proposals will similarly be put to the Senate and to the Dail. Any amendments agreed in any one of these places will be put to the other two, and when agreed by all parties, enshrined in a revised Constitution. It is not only the elected representatives who will be consulted, however, and I shall be bringing forward a Bill very soon which will make provision for referenda to be held both in the Province and on the mainland. As to the representation of the people, hon. Members will know that the United States Congress, through which all legislative powers are granted, consists of two houses, the Senate and the House of Representatives. Each State sends two members to the Senate, while the numbers of representatives in the House are elected on the basis of their population. It is envisaged that Ireland will have two Senators and four members of the House of Representatives, two of whom will be empowered to sit in this Chamber and take part in debates on any issue that relates to or might impact upon the State of Ireland. This facility will, it is proposed, remain in force for ten years after sovereignty passes across.
Finally, Mr Speaker, the House will wish to know that initial consultations with the European Union, the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation have brought forward a welcome, positive response. The fact is that the people of Northern Ireland have become wearied by long periods of conflict, by a peace process that failed to bring peace, and by various attempts at self-rule that have failed to find a satisfactory political solution to the conflicting views found within the Province. I sincerely believe that the proposals soon to be put before this House will bring a lasting solution under the good offices of the United States, which has itself had a long and happy association with Ireland, north and south, from where some 50 million of the American population can trace their ancestry. I also believe that the ‘do nothing’ option no longer exists.
Mr William Holden (Hampstead): I thank the Rt. hon. Gentleman for his statement, and for his usual courtesy in making it available beforehand to members of this House. I thank him also for the detailed personal briefing he was able to give some of us on the Opposition benches before coming to the Chamber. Both these moves have been invaluable in helping us to understand the proposal that he has outlined this afternoon, and which, as he said, will have far reaching consequences for this country and others if adopted. The Government will know that, traditionally, there has been a high level of support for all policies relating to Northern Ireland on all sides of this House, and having now had a chance to hear what the Prime Minister has had to say, I believe that this support can be expected to continue. [hon. Members: Here, here]
It is quite plain that there is an enormous amount of work to be done before the proposed transfer of sovereignty can be effected, and in the coming weeks and months it is evident that Parliament and its various committees and institutions will be heavily involved in ensuring that the best interests of the people of this country are safeguarded. Our overall interests must be to ensure that terrorism never again returns to the Province, and that the peace and normality which is currently being enjoyed by the people of Northern Ireland is maintained and enhanced.
There are obviously also complex international negotiations to be completed, and I wonder if the Prime Minister is able to say anything more about them at this stage? For example, the Republic of Ireland is already a full and independent member of the European Union. Will the transfer of sovereignty of both the Republic and Northern Ireland to the United States bring automatic membership of the EU to the Province, or will the Republic be required to leave the Union?
Mr Weaver: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his unqualified support. There are indeed many issues that require considerable further study and debate, and a considerable amount of diplomatic activity will inevitably be required. As to the specific point which has been raised, current thinking is that the new State of Ireland would become an automatic member of the EU, and that, for a specified period of time, probably ten years, both the US dollar and the Euro would be regarded as legal tender, with the Pound Sterling being phased out of circulation as the Dollar is phased in.
Mrs Shirley Donovan (Antrim North): I, too, thank my right hon. Friend for his openness and frankness in coming to the House today. I share the views expressed by the hon. Member for Hampstead (Mr Holden) in that I believe the proposals put forward will go a long way towards stabilising the situation in the troubled Province of Northern Ireland and provide solid foundations for the future. I salute the initiative taken by the President of the United States in suggesting such a long term solution to an apparently un-solvable problem, and I share his view that the people of America will be able to warmly welcome the kith and kin who live in what will become the 51st State. I look forward with great enthusiasm to taking part in the debates that will inevitably follow, and in being a part of the difficult and complex pattern of decision-making that must be completed before a transition can take place
I speak, as the House will know, for that part of the Ulster population that has been so staunchly in favour of remaining part of the United Kingdom. From what little I have heard and read today, however, I take great strength from the fact that those of us who wish it may maintain our British nationality for the foreseeable future. I am also pleased to note that, through virtually automatic membership of the EU, we shall have the right of free movement to and from its member nations, including Great Britain. It seems to me, Mr Speaker, that the measures outlined this afternoon will give the people of Northern Ireland, from whatever part of the community, the best of all worlds. The Prime Minister mentioned, almost in passing, that he believed that future economic benefits would also flow from the transfer of sovereignty. Has my right hon. Friend any further information he can give the House on that important aspect of these proposals?
Mr Weaver: I am most grateful for the hon. Lady’s enthusiastic support for the prop
osals that I have outlined this afternoon. As I am sure she has understood, however, they are only outline proposals, and a considerable amount of work and effort remains to be done before the dream of a peaceful and settled Northern Ireland becomes a permanent reality. In respect to her particular point about future economic development, it is, of course, far too soon to be able to speak in specific terms, especially in an area where contracts must necessarily be negotiated.
However, I would make two points, Mr Speaker. First of all, I believe that any part of the United States is almost certain to benefit from the overall prosperity of that great trading nation, and that, in the particular case of Northern Ireland, there will be an inevitable increase in tourism, with the impact that has on jobs and income, flowing almost from the start. Secondly, I know that the President has in mind encouraging - I put it no stronger than that - the letting of new contracts with Bombardier Aerospace for quantities of their ‘Starstreak’ ground-to-air missile for the US Army. As hon. Members may recall, this is a multi-warhead missile, produced exclusively by Shorts of Belfast. Furthermore, I understand that there are also likely to be new orders placed for Bombardier’s Regional Jets, for use by US Coastguards, and that in turn will also bring additional work and job security to Shorts. I have no doubt that more trade development will follow.
Mr Jonathon Bradshaw (South-West Cornwall): I congratulate the Prime Minister on this bold and imaginative move, but dare to suggest that it is the American people, rather than the people of Northern Ireland or the UK who will be the net beneficiaries. Would the right hon. Gentlemen agree with me that, in gaining what some would see as its fatherland as well as a 51st State on the very edge of Europe - indeed, an integral part of the European Union, - the United States benefits from a huge trading opportunity and vastly increases its sphere of influence over world affairs? Would he not also agree that this move is likely to be hugely popular with the 50 million Irish-Americans in the States, to the extent that the Republicans will probably enjoy the votes of that section of the community for many years to come?
The Prime Minister: What the hon. Member says is probably true in detail, although I do not believe that the United States has more to gain than the people of the United Kingdom as a whole. For one thing, the people of Northern Ireland will have in place a third party as their sovereign power which should be acceptable to both parts of the community, whereas at present the UK is unacceptable to one part, while union with the south would be unacceptable to the other. This solution will, I anticipate, prove to be acceptable to both sides across the whole of Ireland, north and south. Economic benefits are bound to flow, not least because of the special relationship which already exists, and without which this proposal would never have been possible.
It should be born in mind, Mr Speaker, that the United States has always played a pivotal role in the peace process, acting as an honest broker across the sectarian divide, so it is no stranger to the recent history of the Province. Finally, this country will save many millions of pounds of public expenditure every year, not just because many of the present costs will transfer to the United States, but because we shall no longer need, for example, to maintain an Army there. We shall, of course, also lose tax revenue, but I estimate the net benefit to the Exchequer to be in the order of some £100 million each year.
Mr Patrick McNeil (East Belfast): Will the Prime Minister please tell the House what will happen to the British Army based in the Province, and to the Northern Ireland Police Service? I notice he is already counting the savings to be made, so may I assume that, at last, the people of Northern Ireland are to be rid of them?
The Prime Minister: The proposals that will be put before this House include provision for the Northern Ireland Police Service to be disbanded upon the transfer of sovereignty, and for it to immediately reform as a US Federal Police Force. As the hon. Member may recall, all American Federal policemen are fully armed. [laughter] The British Army will similarly be withdrawn to barracks on the mainland, and will be replaced by an equal number of US Marines and Coastguards. It is also proposed that the Irish Republican armed forces and the Guardai would likewise transfer to US Command. The hon. Member for East Belfast and his cohorts cannot, I am pleased to say, look forward to a period without law enforcement. [laughter]
Mr Bernard Mercer (Edgbaston): On a more serious note, would the Prime Minister agree that the defeat of terrorism in Northern Ireland, by whatever means that has been achieved, has a significance for world peace and stability far beyond the narrow borders of that Province? Is it not a fact that the United States and its coalition partners have become obsessed in the past with the thought that terrorism only exists in the Muslim world, and that this has actually done more harm than good to recent efforts to achieve a peace settlement in the Middle East? Can the Prime Minister say whether the United States has any plans to help Spain tackle the problems of ETA and the Basque Separatists?
Mr Speaker: Order. I am sorry to stop the hon. Gentleman, but his questions do not relate directly to the statement.
The Prime Minister: With respect, Mr Speaker, I believe the hon. Member for Edgbaston (Mr Mercer) does make a valid point, in that the defeat of terrorism has been perceived by many, especially in the Middle East, as a war against the Muslim community. Of course, this is not the case, and we and our allies have made it quite clear on more occasions than I care to remember that terrorism and those who support terrorism will be pursued wherever they are and whoever they are. Actions which we have been able to take in Northern Ireland to bring peace to the Province after decades of unrest there and on the mainland will, I hope, do much to reinforce that point, and to reassure those involved in the Middle East peace process that Islam is not the only target.
Mr Iain McFadean (Glasgow Central): Would the Prime Minister agree that, when the constitutional position of Ireland has been changed as outlined in his statement, the point made earlier by my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Cornwall (Mr Bradshaw) becomes very relevant, in that with the huge Irish-American vote almost guaranteed, the President, Mr Minton will be able to take a much tougher stance with Israel, as his Jewish lobby will no longer hold such power over him or be able to exert such a great influence over what he does?
Mr Speaker: Order. I really must insist that hon. Members do not widen this debate beyond the subject of the Prime Minister’s statement.
Mr Ronald Briggs (Liverpool, Walton): The Prime Minister has displayed an endearing belief that Irish terrorism really is a thing of the past. How can he be so sure? What about the most recent attack in London, which destroyed one of the Capital’s best known landmarks?
The Prime Minister: I firmly believe that terrorism in Northern Ireland is at an end, Mr Speaker. We have seen no evidence of it for some considerable time now, and all our information is that the terrorist organisations are now without arms, without a leadership, without the large reserves of cash they once enjoyed which would enable them to re-arm, and indeed, in many cases they are also without members who are any more prepared to continue their sectarian violence. As I have said, there have been no explosions or bombings or shootings in public, and no punishment shootings or knee-cappings or beatings in private. Earlier victims of protection rackets are now free from the demands once made upon them, and the public at large is now coming to realise that it can lead a near normal life that has been unknown to them for many years. As to the bombs that destroyed Nelson's Column, my information is that this was a small IRA cell which has been based in North-West London for some time, but which has eluded the best efforts of Scotland Yard’s Anti-terrorist Squad. I am pleased to be able to announce to the House, however, that, following a series of Police raids in North London early this morning, six men and two women are now being held at Paddington Green Police Station, and are being questioned about the bombing.
Mr Ronnie Hancock (Blyth Valley): Mr Speaker, that is indeed welcome news, and it is to be hoped that the perpetrators of that rather stupid and pet
ulant bombing of one of London's most popular tourist attractions can at last be brought to justice. It was obvious to many of us that it was a last desperate act by a dying organisation, and we are fortunate that it did not result in any deaths or serious injuries to any members of the public. May I ask the Prime Minister if any decision has yet been taken about replacing the monument?
The Prime Minister: No decision has yet been taken, Mr Speaker, although I am hoping that we shall soon be able to announce that this famous column will be replaced, using money taken from the accounts of the IRA and other terrorist organisations. (hon. Members: Here, here) At the moment, however, we await detailed proposals, and, I have to tell the House, a legal opinion about the rights and wrongs of using confiscated funds. As I am sure my hon. Friend the member for Blyth Valley is aware, it has also been suggested that, as a gesture to our European friends and allies, and in particular the French, we should no longer perpetuate the memory of Admiral Lord Nelson.
Mr Edward Little (Dover Harbour): Many members on both sides of this House could suggest a more fitting gesture to offer to the French.
Mr Speaker: Order, order.
***
