4.  ADDRESS BY AN TAOISEACH, MR BERTIE AHERN TD

The Chairman welcomed the Taoiseach to the 15th Plenary Conference. He said it was an historic event for the Prime Minister to address the Body - a recognition of its role and the commitment of many people to it. He said it was an important framework in which to maintain contacts, goodwill and understanding.

The Taoiseach addressed the Body as follows:

I thank the two Co-Chairmen for their welcome to the 15th Plenary Session of the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body, which held its first Session last evening. I am delighted to be here this morning and wish the conference well. The British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body, which represents Members of both Chambers of our respective Parliaments, provides a unique forum for the exchange of views across the whole range of issues of common interest and concern and has done so successfully over the years. We, in Government, have been very satisfied with that progress and the contacts and relationships which have been built as a result.

I am delighted to be with you at the 15th Plenary Session here in Ballyconnell, County Cavan, a Border region. A few Members from the constituency are here and I am proud to join them. The location of this gathering here in Cavan has a relevance for the work of the Body. Ancient legend has it that Ballyconnell takes its name from Conal Cearnach - fellow hero with Cúchulainn of the great Gaelic saga of the cattle raid of Cooley, where the Ulstermen fought the might of Queen Maeve of Connacht's army. Like all things Irish, we do not forget such things easily.

Moving quickly on, in modern times Cavan has suffered the adverse consequences of having much of its natural hinterland and economic theatre cut off by the Border. Nevertheless, despite this handicap, the people of Cavan have all the traditional Ulster virtues and entrepreneurial skills, and it is one of the most go-ahead counties in the country economically. With the opening of the magnificent Shannon-Erne waterway, formerly the Ballinamore-Ballyconnell Canal, one of the finest waterways of western Europe has been revealed to an ever-increasing number of tourists from mainland Europe and beyond. This hotel and other progressive economic developments in this region - actively supported by the Irish and British Governments, the International Fund for Ireland and the European Union's Peace Programme - also show how much we can all do with unity of purpose.

Economic progress in recent decades has been striking in all the Border counties, although much remains to be done to overcome the disadvantage of the historical situation. My Government, together with the British Government on the northern side - and with the welcome and generous support of the EU Peace and INTERREG Programmes and the International Fund for Ireland - are determined to ensure that peace and economic progress continue to benefit this region, and in so doing to reverse the negative impact of the Border and security situation on realising the region's full potential.

The British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body has made many useful and supportive contributions to the wider political debate across the range of issues of mutual interest. The authoritative and unique insight that Members have brought to issues as diverse as the Irish community in Britain, environmental issues affecting the United Kingdom and Ireland and the crucial and continually sensitive issue of animal health has led to a deeper and better understanding of these issues in both our countries.

Nor can the Body be accused of sticking to soft or neutral topics. Its consideration of issues such as policing in Northern Ireland and the current review of the potential for the de-escalation of the security measures are examples of the more difficult issues it is prepared to look at in an objective and co-operative spirit. Indeed, its programme for this Plenary Conference fully engages it in the debate around the most sensitive and crucial of issues facing these two islands at this time. I look forward to the reports of its discussion on the multi-party talks and to learning Members' views on future elected institutions and their implications for the role of the Body.

Amongst its membership are many who have striven for many years to bring about greater mutual understanding between all the peoples of these islands. I acknowledge those individuals who have, for many years, led the way in trying to find a better way to do business between these islands and within the island. There are many, too, who have given distinguished service in both the Irish and British Governments, Indeed, this Body has a remarkable record in grooming TDs for ministerial office. An obvious example is my Cabinet colleague, Deputy Dermot Ahern, a former Co-Chairman of the Body, who joined Members for dinner last evening. Many of my Oireachtas colleagues see bright futures emanating from this Body.

Perhaps the most important function of the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body is simply to encourage contact between parliamentary colleagues in these islands, which is a noble reason. These contacts often foster friendships that can prove invaluable in the sometimes difficult negotiations in which we must engage. Indeed, the contacts made here and the friendships formed over the years are very much a model of how our relationships could and should be progressed in the challenging times immediately ahead.

As we are all well aware, East-West co-operation is not a new concept. We have long recognised that a unique relationship exists between Ireland and the United Kingdom, stemming not only from our geographical closeness, but also from intertwined histories. For social and economic reasons, there has been a close intermingling of the people and cultural influences and over the years there have been a number of valuable initiatives, including this Body, aimed at furthering and developing this unique relationship.

My predecessor and John Major agreed on a multi-faceted programme on East-West co-operation in 1995 which followed on from an earlier agreement that year in Mallorca on the desirability of strengthening the bilateral relationships between the two countries. Last May a further list of areas of mutually beneficial co-operation was agreed in the margins of the European Council by my immediate predecessor. In addition, a steering group was established, which is co-chaired by my Department and the Cabinet Office, to monitor and drive East-West co-operation.

We have made significant progress. Last December I published a joint report with Prime Minister Blair which outlined the types of co-operation which had taken place on a wide range of fronts. The report details links in almost every area of public policy, including areas such as transport links, the application of information technology in schools, youth exchanges, food safety, the fight against crime and drugs, health and the environment to name but a few. All are areas of great relevance to our people and it was a very comprehensive document.

We have also witnessed considerable progress in the Strand Three discussions which are taking place in the peace talks which embrace East-West relations and co-operation. Throughout these discussions, the Irish Government has always recognised that a successful settlement must incorporate the development of a wider East-West dimension. There is no doubt that Strand Three institutions will play an important part of an overall agreement. The intergovernmental council proposed as part of an overall settlement will deal with the totality of relationships between the two countries and will include representatives of the British and Irish Governments, the Northern Ireland Administration and the devolved institutions in Scotland and Wales. Although there is already a great deal of useful co-operation between the British and Irish Governments on many issues, there is no doubt that the current move towards devolution within Britain will open up exciting new possibilities which a new council could develop. We believe this council would provide a valuable mechanism for consultation and co-operation on a wide range of East-West matters and we look forward to its establishment as part of a settlement.

I want to turn now to the settlement as a whole. As the Government sees it, the shape of a settlement is clear. In essence, a mutually acceptable and workable settlement should involve the following: first, balanced constitutional changes in both Ireland and the UK to reflect the principle of consent; second, Northern Ireland institutions, including an assembly exercising devolved executive and legislative responsibility on a basis where each community there will share power and responsibility; third, a North-South ministerial council and North-South implementing bodies; fourth, an East-West intergovernmental council for purposes of co-operation involving the two Governments and devolved institutions in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; fifth, standing intergovernmental machinery between the two Governments for interaction and co-operation on matters involving Northern Ireland that will remain under London control; sixth, equality of treatment provisions; and seventh, measures to establish an acceptable peaceful society dealing with issues like prisoners, security in all its aspects, policing and decommissioning.

The word "compromise" is the key in this context. There are elements in the package, as I have outlined it, which will cause difficulties for Nationalists. In particular, it is no secret that Nationalists - to a greater or lesser extent - have difficulties with the prospect of constitutional change and the establishment of an assembly. I believe, however, that the majority at least of Nationalists are prepared to contemplate such measures as part of a balanced accommodation. I believe that Unionists recognise this. What Nationalists need to know in return is the response of Unionists to this unique opportunity. In particular, we need to know the attitude of Unionists to substantive and workable North-South structures, including implementing bodies with meaningful powers, which we regard as indispensable to an agreement.

As far back as 1991, the then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Peter Brooke, who is here today, established that it was common ground among the major parties concerned, including both the DUP and the UUP, that hope of achieving a new and more broadly-based agreement rested on finding a way to give adequate expression to the totality of relationships, namely those within Northern Ireland, among the people of the island of Ireland and between the two Governments. This three stranded approach underpins the Joint Declaration of 15 December 1993 and the Joint Framework Document of 22 February 1995 and forms the basis of the current multi-party negotiations. The key to success, as Peter Brooke indicated, is that all three relationships must be adequately addressed.

The establishment of a North-South body and implementing bodies is without prejudice one way or the other to eventual decisions on the constitutional future. I make no secret that, in the long-term, I want to see a united Ireland brought about by agreement and peace. I share Wolfe Tone's vision of abolishing the memory of all past dissensions and of substituting the common name of Irishman in the place of the denominations of Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter. I believe that this is an honourable and attainable vision, springing from an honourable tradition. It can be achieved only by open, democratic persuasion and after a long process of building trust and confidence. Forty years ago, de Valera stated that a forced unity would ruin national life for generations. That remains our outlook today.

I said it before, but it is worth repeating, that the Irish Government does not view these negotiations as a win/lose contest. What we want to achieve as a result of these negotiations is a win/win situation for Nationalism and Unionism alike. What we want is a level playing field where Nationalism can co-exist in healthy competition with Unionism; where Nationalists can feel that they, too, are first class citizens, that it is just as respectable to be a Nationalist as a Unionist and where Nationalists can feel that their rights and aspirations have equal validity and enjoy equal respect and recognition to those of Unionists. We are talking about rectifying an imbalance and not about creating a new imbalance.

Meaningful North-South arrangements are essential to the success of this project in terms of giving institutional expression to northern Nationalists' sense of identity and to the North-South strand of relationships. They are of great practical significance as well and, as we conceive them, pose no threat but rather bring the prospect of great mutual benefit. As a Nationalist, and as someone deeply interested in the prosperity and well-being of this island, I believe that the North-South body should evolve over time. I also believe that the underlying economic realities mean that it will do so. However, there would be no question of this happening without agreement, North and South. The watch-word of the whole process of negotiations in which we are engaged is agreement and any development of the settlement which we hope to see emerging from it will be on the same basis - by agreement.

The settlement which emerges from these negotiations will not mean the end of either Unionism or Nationalism. What will have changed, if we get it right, is that neither Nationalists nor Unionists will feel they are playing with loaded dice and that the future is hopelessly prejudiced against them. They will have the absolute certainty that the future is in their hands and theirs alone. Beyond that, nothing is inevitable and there are no predetermined outcomes.

We have all come a long way since the current negotiations began on 10 June 1996 and there is widespread agreement that we have a real chance of securing a historic accommodation between Nationalism and Unionism. However, we have an extra mile to go. As I indicated, Nationalists are, I believe, ready to go that extra mile. We take heart from President Clinton's wise remark on St. Patrick's Day that concessions that today might seem hard to accept will seem so much less important in the light of an accord that brings hope and peace and an end to violence. However, we cannot make the journey alone. Unionists must join with us in making the hard decisions. As President Clinton said: "No one will be the loser if agreement is reached."

As George Mitchell rightly said last week, the time for decision is now. The Government fully supports the 9 April deadline for agreement, which accords with our own May deadline for a referendum. The talks have been going on since the summer of 1996 and it is hard to believe that anything has been left unsaid - in fact things have been said too many times. It is also a fact of life that things rarely get done without a deadline being set. Above all, we simply do not have the luxury of more time. Time is the enemy in a situation where the opponents of peace are actively seeking to make agreement impossible through the stepping up of violence, and where they will exploit any delay to cast doubt on the credibility of the political process to the benefit of their own nihilistic agendas.

The people of Ireland, North and South, are facing a choice. We can maintain the integrity of the quarrel - some people may find a comfort in this - but most of us take no comfort in bitterness, hatred and violence. We - Nationalist and Unionist together - can negotiate a new deal for a new generation. We can put in place a new harmonious dispensation that will reflect the equal realities of divergent allegiances and identities that will bridge and accommodate all our aspirations for the future as we speedily move to the twenty-first century. There is, in reality, no viable alternative if we want to see peace, reconciliation and stability. We must, and I am confident we will, seize this opportunity. Thank you.