The agreement reached at Stormont on Tuesday is far
from perfect. But it is the best that was possible at this time. It is the
culmination of over three months of intense and difficult negotiations that
arose following a series of crisis in the political process.
Last year’s Stormont House Agreement was a genuine
effort to secure a deal that would protect the most vulnerable in society, to
safeguard the rights and entitlements of citizens, to grow the economy and to
enhance the working of the institutions.
But resistance to change, which is particularly
strong within elements of unreconstructed unionism and the British security
system, and the ideological commitment of the British Tory party to austerity
saw the agreement come under immediate pressure.
The contrived political crisis by the Ulster
Unionist Party following the murders of Jock Davison and Kevin McGuigan in Belfast
led to the virtual collapse of the institutions.
Martin McGuinness and others in our negotiating
team have worked hard to find solutions to all of the core issues. Our focus
was on defending public services, while dealing with outstanding issues. These
include the Bill of Rights and Achta na Gaeilge, contentious parades and
identity. Securing the full implementation of the legacy proposals from last
year’s Stormont House Agreement was also critical.
On Tuesday, following progress in the talks, a new
agreement was achieved. Not all issues were resolved but this is an important
development which seeks to stabalise the political institutions, tackle some of
the outstanding matters, and allow for progress. Sinn Féin has successfully negotiated
a package of measures, including in excess of half a billion in new money; and
additional flexibilities to invest in public services and the economy. We have
also negotiated a fund of £585 million over four years to support the
vulnerable and working families.
A panel headed by the renowned advocate Dr. Eileen
Evason is to report on how best to use the £500 million fund to meet the needs
of the most vulnerable. These measures will mitigate some aspects of Britain’s
austerity policies but will not cover in their entirety the cuts being imposed
by the Tories on working families, claimants and the block grant. The British
approach is unfair, fundamentally undemocratic and economically
counter-productive. Sinn Féin will continue to oppose this policy.
The agreement reached also seeks to deal with the
issue of criminality and the continued existence of armed and active groups.
Of particular concern is the British government’s
refusal to honor last year’s Stormont House Agreement on full disclosure to
meet the needs of victims arising out of the conflict. Several weeks ago the British
government introduced legislation, in direct contravention of the Stormont
House Agreement, which seeks to prevent the victims of British state terrorism
from getting the truth.
Using the
pretext of ‘national security’ a British secretary of state can close down an
investigation and push aside the genuine needs of victims. These proposals are
unacceptable. As a result no agreement has been possible on dealing with the
legacy of the past.
The British objective has been to prevent full
disclosure to the families of victims of the conflict. The British government
and its security and military apparatus continue to cover up the action of
their agents, informers, army, police and political establishment by using a
‘national security’ veto. This is unacceptable.
What conceivable ‘national security’ concerns can
exist for events, many of which occurred 30 and 40 years ago? What ‘national security’ interests are
now served over 40 years later by a British government refusing to unlock the
files to the Dublin Monaghan bombings or the actions of the Force
Reconnaissance Unit or the role of Brian Nelson and others?
Will the
efforts of the hooded men to get to the truth of who in the British cabinet
sanctioned their torture come up against the excuse of national security?
Will the Ballymurphy families or those who believe
the British agent Stakeknife played a part in the murder of their loved ones,
or the hundreds of other victims and their families of British
counter-insurgency strategies find their efforts thwarted by the overriding
demands of British ‘national security’?
Will the truth about the apartheid south African
arms shipment, involving MI5, which saw the capacity of the UVF and UDA and
Ulster Resistance to kill Catholics in the late 1980s and 90s significantly
increase, be hidden from the families of the two hundred people who were killed
as a consequence?
The refusal
of Theresa Villiers to implement the agreement she made last year is about
covering up the extent to which the British state created and organised and
provided information to unionist paramilitary gangs in the killing of citizens.
It is not acceptable to those victims who survived
gun and bomb attacks or the families of those who died. Nor is it compatible
with the Stormont House Agreement.
Finally, the Irish government has not asserted its
role as co-equal guarantor of the Good Friday and other agreements. It has
played the part of junior partner and has acquiesced to British demands,
especially around the issue of legacy. Their role should have been to hold the
British government to account. They failed to do this.
We should
not be surprised by this. In economic terms, Fine Gael and the Irish Labour
Party have consistently made common cause with the British Conservative Party
in their relentless pursuit of austerity.
In the time
ahead Sinn Féin will continue to stand up for the rights of the vulnerable,
working families, our economy and our public services.
We believe
the new agreement offers the best hope for a new start – a new opportunity to
build a better future.
It is also
an opportunity for Republicans to show that the union with Britain is not in
the interests of citizens in the north. The price of the union is that a London
government, unelected by citizens here, is imposing policies that will attack
the vulnerable, the elderly and the young, while denying the Executive the
resources to invest effectively in our economy. That doesn’t make sense.
Uniting Ireland and building an all-island economy, rooted in equality makes
perfect sense.
Comments