5.  QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

The Chairman thanked the Taoiseach for his address, particularly for sharing his expectations for a positive agreement. He invited the Members to put questions.

The Peace Process

1. Mr Kevin McNamara (Hull North): To ask the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the current political situation in Northern Ireland.

3. Mr Dennis Canavan (Falkirk West): To ask the Taoiseach if he will make a statement about the development of the peace process.

4. Mr Conor Lenihan (Dublin South-West): To ask the Taoiseach if the two Governments will consider putting in place interim institutional arrangements that reflect the three-strand process should there be no agreement by the May deadline; and if he will make a statement.

5. Mr Harry Barnes (Derbyshire North East): To ask the Taoiseach what progress is being made on revising Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish Constitution; and if he will make a statement.

8. Senator Mary Henry: To ask the Taoiseach if the Government intend initiating a debate in the Republic of Ireland in the near future on the planned North-South bodies and the Council of the Isles; and if he will make a statement.

Mr Kevin McNamara (Hull North) asked the Taoiseach to confirm the assertion of the Minister for Foreign Affairs that agreement would be contingent on a referendum being passed in both jurisdictions. He drew the Taoiseach's attention to a newspaper article about alleged security force collusion in assassinations in Northern Ireland and asked whether the Irish Government was making representations on the matter to the British Government.

The Taoiseach said that he would take Questions Nos. 1, 4, 5, and 8 together. In reply to Mr McNamara's first question the answer was "yes". There would be two referenda and they had to be passed in both jurisdictions. On the second matter, this was not a new story - it had surfaced many times. He imagined that the British Authorities would examine the matter to see if there was wrongdoing and the Irish Government would raise the matter.

Mr Dennis Canavan (Falkirk West) thanked the Taoiseach for his efforts in furthering the peace process. He encouraged the talks participants to make a special effort to reach agreement and not to give in to violence. He asked the Taoiseach to give an indication of the Irish Government's flexibility on amendments to the Irish Constitution to facilitate agreement on the basis of mutual respect.

The Taoiseach replied that the Irish Government was committed to balanced constitutional change and was happy to reflect the principle of consent in the Constitution. They would also have to make other changes and reflect the ability to have North-South bodies. They had discussed their intentions with Unionists and Loyalists and they understand and supported his Government's position. The answer was "yes".

Mr Conor Lenihan (Dublin South-West) asked the Taoiseach to expand on his reference to the indispensability of North-South structures.

The Taoiseach said that in terms of an overall settlement and in an all-island context there had to be a mechanism to deal with the issues agreed between the Governments and the parties. His Government's wish was for be powerful, executive bodies with powers to implement policies which would be real and meaningful to everyday life. The bodies should be at the heart of the important interests of Irish life. He was prepared to see bodies for agriculture, trade, tourism and cultural and educational issues: bodies which would then devolve many of their powers to a North-South arrangement, involving the Chairs from the Assembly in the North with Ministers from the South, and which would be able to have meaningful dialogue and to make decisions and not refer back on minor issues. It was not his Government's position that the bodies should merely be consultative; rather, the more powerful they were, the better.

Mr Harry Barnes (Derbyshire North East) asked with regard to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution if it would not be peculiar to have a North-South deal on common institutions yet for the South to have a constitutional claim on the North. He referred to a recent newspaper survey indicating general support from Irish people for a package including changes to Articles 2 and 3.

The Taoiseach pointed out that part of the package required the Irish Government to change Articles 2 and 3. After many months of discussions with the British Government and the parties in the North they were fairly close to a wording which would deal with the issue. He accepted that the change was necessary as part of an overall settlement. The Government of Ireland Act 1920 and the 1973 Act would also be changed. Those developments, together with the establishment of the North-South bodies, represented a balanced constitutional change.

Senator Mary Henry pointed out the existence of many North-South and East-West bodies which could be built upon. She asked that the equivalences between bodies such as the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons in Ireland the UK would be maintained. She referred to a recent Statutory Instrument in the UK which altered the status of Irish postgraduate qualifications there and used phraseology which did not indicate parity of esteem. She instanced this as a legal feature which affected people on an all-island basis and stressed the importance for all government bodies to address issues which cause division.

The Taoiseach agreed about the importance of all-Ireland professional institutions and cultural bodies. He had instructed all Departments and agencies that they should not seek reasons to change, amend, alter or distort good work which was already in place. The medical field represented a great possibility for building upon existing structures, and a good area for North-South bodies.

Mr Michael Colvin (Romsey) referred to the seven points for a settlement that the Taoiseach had outlined but noted that there was no mention of a parliamentary element. He asked if the Taoiseach agreed that for the sake of accountability a parliamentary body was required.

The Taoiseach replied that it had been mentioned in the East-West arrangements that there should be a parliamentary body-which would be the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body. He also felt that a consultative mechanism should created between the Assembly in the North and the Houses of the Oireachtas.

Senator Joe Costello, referring to the seven points, indicated that the Taoiseach had mentioned equality of treatment, not "equity" and wondered if a Charter or Bill of Rights was being contemplated.

The Taoiseach said that the discussion had returned to "equality", having been on "equity" for a while. A Bill of Rights was still under consideration and there were many issues on the equality agenda which might be more important-for example, the equality agenda and policing on the ground. There was a package of measures which would, hopefully, be in the final agreement.

Mr Robert Jackson (Wantage)welcomed the Taoiseach's point about East-West structures. He referred to the Taoiseach's points about the North-South structures within a spectrum ranging from meaningful to ad hoc and wondered where the East-West structures would be located on the spectrum.

The Taoiseach felt that East-West structures did not present any great difficulties. Many of the Government to Government issues tended to arise in the European domain and the two Governments cooperated successfully at that level on most issues - for example, on animal health.

In terms of the legislation it was a different matter. The North-South bodies were about a more orderly and systematic running of functions for the island on issues such as trade or tourism. East-West structures were different. Last December's document spelt out all the areas of cooperation and mutual interest and the details for future cooperation. He also expected far closer links on such matters in the context of a larger and more powerful Europe. The initial idea that there were few areas for cooperation on an East-West basis had been wrong. There was considerable contact between Ministers and Secretaries of State, and the agreement would make that more structured than in the past. He supported contacts both in Europe and between the two countries.

Mr Austin Currie (Dublin West) stated that the best way to achieve reconciliation between the two traditions in the North was through representatives of the traditions working together in Government to solve the problems. To do so successfully required power and responsibility.

He referred to the 13 "disappeared" in the North who were believed to have been murdered and whose relatives wished to have the bodies found so that they might accord them a Christian burial. He asked the Taoiseach to ensure that the bodies could be recovered as part of a settlement.

The Taoiseach observed that Deputy Currie had been the most persistent advocate in the Oireachtas for the case of the relatives of the "disappeared". As Taoiseach he had taken up the matter on many occasions with all the groups and would continue to do so-it was appalling that, 20 years later in many cases, the relatives had no information on the missing people and had not been able to bury them properly.

More generally, he could not understand why politicians sometimes shied away from a powerful Strand One. The British and Irish Governments wanted Strand One to be powerful and to have the devolved areas under the leadership of the people in Northern Ireland. That was the basis of Strand One. There had been numerous occasions on which an effort had been made to diminish those powers, but both the Irish and British Governments wanted to see a powerful body.