Real dialogue in London
``A welcome opportunity for real dialogue,'' was how Caoimhghín O
Caoláin described his participation in the British-Irish
Inter-Parliamentary Body Plenary Meeting in London this week. The
Cavan-Monaghan TD is the first ever Sinn Féin representative on
the body.
The visit saw a number of firsts for O Caoláin, including a tour
of the House of Commons and House of Lords. More significantly it
was the first occasion on which a SF elected representative had
an opportunity for public debate with British Secretary of State
Mo Mowlam.
On Monday afternoon Mo Mowlam addressed the meeting on the
current negotiations. In a question to her Caoimhghín O Caoláin
asked ``if she acknowledged the need to make progress in the
negotiations at Stormont and on substantive measures of equality
and confidence-building, notably in the area of demilitarisation
and prisoners''. Unhappy with the Mowlam's reply which was in very
general terms, the Deputy asked what steps ``specifically do you
envisage your government taking to secure a focused and fully
engaged talks process?'' He also asked if she agreed that movement
on the prisoners issue was essential.
Among others to raise the issue of prisoners were Norman Godman
(Labour MP), Senators Joe Costelloe and Edward Haughey, and
Charles Flanagan. In response Mowlam said that she wished that
all prison-related issues could be addressed before Christmas and
that two-thirds of all lifers would be out on parole over the
Christmas period.
The second plenary session was held on Tuesday and dealt with a
motion commending both governments on their ``determination in
pursuit of a lasting settlement in Northern Ireland''. O Caoláin
moved an amendment which sought to ensure that the motion both
reflected the three-stranded approach of the talks process and
removed the offending prescriptive reference to a ``lasting
settlement in Northern Ireland''. He stated that a simple
commendation was not enough:
``This body's role should be to spur on both governments and all
parties to greater efforts and to seek to remove all obstacles
and ensure real and substantive negotiations. We need to inject a
sense of urgency into the situation. Not all parties at the talks
table are engaging. Equal resolve needs to be shown by the
British government in implementing measures of equality, justice
and confidence-building, a responsibility also of the Dublin
government, and in urging on unionists the necessity to embrace
change.
``The British government itself must also embrace change. Its task
is to transform its relationship with the Irish people. The
constitutional legislation which has underpinned the failed
entity of the Six Counties - the Government of Ireland Act and
the Northern Ireland Constitution Act must be repealed. We need a
new political and constitutional dispensation.
``The scope of a settlement must be wider than the Six Counties.
It must encompass the whole of the island of Ireland. It must
create a new relationship between Ireland and Britain.''
O Caoláin chose not to press his amendment when responding to
members' contributions at the close of the two-hour debate,
avoiding a division in the Body at the first meeting of its new
term. He stated that while he would at all times confront members
with the politics of conflict resolution and the issues at the
heart of the conflict, it was not his intent to foment division
in the body and he would accordingly withdraw his amendment and
abstain on the tabled motion. One other Irish delegate, Conor
Lenihan, took the same position.
It is expected that the next plenary meeting of the British-Irish
Inter-Parliamentary Body will be held next March in
Ballyconnell, County Cavan.