Fortnight Publications Ltd.

The Liberal InterpretationAuthor(s): David SteelSource: Fortnight, No. 251 (May, 1987), pp. 6-7Published by: Fortnight Publications Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25551176 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 04:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Fortnight Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Fortnight.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.196 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:52:35 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

COVER STORY

aaaaaaaaaaTl<!&^$Baaaaaaaaaaaaa^BaamE& ^aaaaasS^aaaaaaaa^^^^^&,

W^z^^^^Baaaaaaaaaaama^^Baal^^' ^BaaaSBaaaw^^^^aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa^Sm^waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam aaaaaaaaaaaKaa? aaaaaaaaaaaaw liiiifl ^^^^^^IrB ^^^^^^^^H

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^9^^^^^^S^^^^^^H^^^^Hb|^^^H^b^S^H^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^B ^I^^^^^^^^^^Hf BBBs Ba^B^B^B^B^B^BB^BB^BBi

^^Hfl^^l^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^HHHi^HH^^^^^^^^^HI^^^S^^^^^^^^^^^B^B ^aaaaaaaaaaaaaaam

Pressing the flesh ? David Steel and David Alton, accompanied by John Cushnahan, share a joke with a

Belfast shopper

The Liberal interpretation As the general election looms, the opposition parties have been putting together their Northern Ireland act. In a special interview, Liberal leader David Steel and joint Alliance

spokesperson David Alton told Fortnight just where the Liberal/SDP bloc stood, in the wake of rumours of dissent from SDP leader David Owen. Elsewhere we report on Labour's new policy document - and the parallel stories of a differing view from deputy spokesperson Stuart Bell.

I' 1 It was an extraordinary occasion. After a walkabout in Belfast,

meeting shoppers in much the same way as he might have

,_1 done in Bristol, Liberal leader David Steel came to the rostrum

at the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland conference and, at the

conclusion of a long speech, engaged in a tirade against the evils of

Thatcherism. On the 'Day of Defiance' Steel had upstaged Paisley -

Alliance Beats Defiance' said the APNI platform banner - and

outflanked the unionist 'equal citizenship' campaigners all in one go. No wonder John Cushnahan was beaming.

Afterwards, in an in-depth interview. Steel told Fortnight how he

hoped to square the Ulster circle. While the Anglo-Irish agreement would remain in place, devolution would be offered as part of a general decentralisation of the governance of Britain -

stressing therefore the

province's link to the rest of the UK, not stamping it with a separate mark of Cain.

In a long speech to the conference in the Europa last month, Mr

Steel said: "We in the Alliance will insist that Northern Ireland is not a

side issue in the forthcoming election campaign. For far too long British politicians have been content to stand as indifferent observers".

On the Anglo-Irish agreement, he said: "It was a mistake - and we

said so at the time - that the government did not see fit fully to consult

all traditions within the province nor to persuade the SDLP back into a

revised assembly. But the agreement does at least mark an end to the

indifference."

As to its future, he spoke of progress on the inter-parliamentary tier,

hoping Northern Ireland politicians would eventually become involved, and of a power-sharing assembly for the province. While withering in

his highly personal attack on Ian Paisley, he urged MPs - by

implication the Official Unionists - to return to the Commons and the

minority -

by implication the SDLP - to accept "justice and recon

ciliation" in a devolved context rather than adhering to Irish unity. Afterwards, Mr Steel elaborated for Fortnight. "The difference

between our approach to an assembly and the previous ones," he said,

"is that we would be operating a Northern Irish assembly in the context

of our commitment to devolution all round - or, as Mr Gladstone once

said. Home Rule all round. It remains a commitment we have made to

Scotland and Wales and we have given some thought to the timing of

this.

"I do believe that at the same time as we are legislating for a

Scottish assembly we should bring the Northern Irish assembly forward

in partnership with that, so that people no longer feel that somehow

Northern Ireland is being treated in a different way from the rest of the

UK. It would be seen to be part of a pattern of devolved government" -

a pattern which would eventually extend to the English regions.

Though the powers of the various devolved assemblies would not

necessarily be the same, and the Alliance would want to be persuaded that a Northern Ireland assembly was working before devolving exten

sive responsibilities, nevertheless, said Mr Steel: "I would imagine if a

power-sharing assembly were a success there's no reason why it

couldn't in time ask for the same powers that had been granted to a

Scottish assembly." So was the plan to persuade the unionists to accept the accord on the

basis of this UK-wide devolution? While not over-selling the Alliance's

powers of persuasion, the Liberal Leader said, nonetheless: "We would

seek to persuade them that they were not going to be treated as some

sort of pariahs and that we wanted their co-operation and help." When it was put to him that the unionists remained unprepared to

talk about devolution in advance of at least the suspension of the

agreement, he said that Official Unionist leader Jim Molyneaux - and

indeed SDLP leader John Hume - hadn't "put up a block or veto on it"

in discussions with him in the previous fortnight. The unionists, he said, knew the Alliance was sympathetic to their

complaint about the way the agreement had been arrived at without their

involvement. And, noting what he described as the divisions in the

Official Unionists, he said: "I don't know what will happen after the

election in terms of their own party leadership...I wouldn't dare to

interfere in their internal affairs - I'm just told by everybody that there

might be changes". In the leadership? "Well, changes in the dispos ition."

But no deal would be countenanced in a hung parliament. In his

speech Mr Steel said: "I give you a pledge today that in any parliament where there is an uncertain majority we will not allow the crucial issues

of Northern Ireland to be reduced to the level of flea-market bargaining between the parties."

And his statement was, significantly, echoed by SDP observer Tom

McNally, who said: "I think it would be absolutely right for all West

minster politicians, in advance of the general election, to make it quite clear - as David Steel has done - that there can be no grubby Dutch

auction, whatever the outcome of that general election, about the future

of the Anglo-Irish agreement or the political structure of Northern

Ireland."

6 May Fortnight

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.196 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:52:35 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Concern about the Alliance's stance had been raised when SDP leader

David Owen was quoted as saying that account had to be taken of "the

realities on the ground" in Northern Ireland and of the "substantial"

majority against the agreement. And Mr Robert McClennan, the SDP's

spokesperson on Northern Ireland before Liberal MP David Alton

became the joint voice of Alliance opinion, had been noted for his

unionist sympathies. Mr Steel made light of the alleged divergence with his Alliance

partner. But others were not so sure. A Liberal party manager told

Fortnight that Dr Owen would have considered a deal with the unionists

"a live possibility". Part of the reason why such close links were being

forged with the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, he claimed, was to

foreclose that option. An occasional policy advisor to David Alton took a similar view,

suggesting that that it had been with this in mind that the the Liverpool MP had been taking such a public line. Dr Owen was very ambitious,

he said. Or. as a very senior figure in the Alliance Party of Northern

Ireland put it. echoing these views, for David Owen it was "not a matter

of philosophy but of political arithmetic".

However, it is clear that if there has been a problem it has been a

problem with the SDP leader, not the SDP. And it is difficult to see

what room for manoeuvre Dr Owen - who was repeatedly unavailable

for comment - could retain. APNI leader John Cushnahan, in his con

ference address, was careful to stress "the growing bond of co-operation between our respective parties and the strengthening of ties between us"

and spoke of discussions of how those relationships could be further

strengthened "in a more formal way, in the post-election situation".

The current position is that the APNI and the Liberal-SDP Alliance

will go into the coming poll on a 'common platform' - not yet a joint

manifesto. But the situation is changing rapidly: only time for

consultation made the APNI demur about unity on the hustings this

time around and the Liberals make no secret of their impatience. "We were very disappointed that it was unachievable at this

election." said Mr Alton. "We'd have liked them to have moved faster."

said Mr Steel more philosphically. Indeed the aim by the European elections of 1989 is to have a complete triangular relationship, includ

ing the Progressive Democrats as well - new PD TD Geraldine Kennedy was a conference guest.

On the detail of policy, Mr Alton said that if he were Alliance

Secretary of State he would want to see three-judge courts in Diplock cases - even mixed courts in the long run - as well as the descheduling of several offences and a cut-off point for remands. A Bill of Rights based on the European Convention would be introduced -

preferably for

the whole of the UK but for Northern Ireland alone if need be.

And he went on: "One of the things we're really concerned about is

the failure to make progress on equality of opportunity and the latest

reports demonstrate that there's even more disparity in employment and

continued discrimination in the north - and that's got to be rectified. I

think the prerequisite for making political progress is to end alienation,

which is what the agreement is supposed to be about."

There is no doubt that these positions, on issues which have been

key sources of argument inside the Anglo-Irish Conference, would be

much more welcome to the Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin

than those of the current Westminster administration.

In the Fortnight interview, buoyed up by Greenwich. David Steel

said the election was "shaping up" as a battle between the Alliance and

the Tories: "Our objective is to win - we make no bones about that."

However it now appears, as the Alliance surge subsides - that it will be

at least the election after next before its Northern Ireland agenda may see the light of day.

L1 I abour has had its own internal

policy problems, arising from a

._I Times report of a speech towards

the end of March by junior spokesperson Stuart Bell - itself a sequel to an earlier div

ision over the party's policy document finally released last month.

Mr Bell was reported to have held out "an

early review" of the Anglo-Irish agreement,

allegedly to entice unionists to support Labour in the event of a hung parliament.

Although Labour leader Neil Kinnock put the

affair down to "mischief" and "misrepre sentation" by the media, Des McCartan. the

London correspondent of the Belfast Tele

graph, says that Bell twice declined to deny what he had been quoted as saying. And the

shadow deputy told The World at One that he

had made no apology for what he described as

his "policy statement".

But the Labour leadership was quick to

stamp on any suggestion of a policy shift to

accommodate the unionists. Senior spokes

person Peter Archer went on Good Morning Ulster to rule out any deals and Kinnock's

press secretary, Patricia Hewitt, was emphat ic. She told Fortnight: "There is no question

of doing a deal with the unionists or going back on the agreement. The policy is absol

utely clear and we are not going back on it."

Mr Archer is now. in hindsight, quite relaxed about it. "I still haven't actually sorted out what Stuart said he was going to

say in his handout, as against what he did

say, as against what he said afterwards he had

said, and what everybody thought he had

meant. It's all a bit of a jumble," he said.

He suggested Mr Bell had, "without

actually thinking about it", put out the state

ment "on the spur of the moment", and too

much significance should not be read into it:

"If there were a plot going on about Labour's

policy on Northern Ireland and I wasn't a

party to it I would have something fairly

strong to say to everybody," said Mr Archer.

"But no, there isn't one."

It was Mr Bell who was strongly suspected

(Fortnight 250) to have been responsible for

the leak of a draft of the new document.

which had included the key insertion of sig nificant' into the party's 'unity with consent'

formula. As a result the amendment, although

supported by Mr Archer, was dropped. The paper at the centre of the row

comprises, in its final form, only eight

double-spaced A4 pages. The 1985 party conference had been told that a 'green paper'

would be presented to it the following year but the person responsible for Northern

Ireland in the party's Walworth Road

Labour

plains headquarters left and was not replaced for

several months. The pressure to produce

something in advance of the election ruled

out substantial policy revision.

"Even then some of us hoped," Mr Archer

said, "

that we could at least talk about some

of the problems which have been raised about

what the existing policy meant.

"But when we tried to do even that some

people were saying: 'There you are, you're

changing policy,' and the moment that was

suggested you couldn't change a bloody word.

We were stuck with the existing policy - all

we did was to update it politically in relation

to the Anglo-Irish agreement and econom

ically and in terms of civil rights by virtually

adding all the things we'd decided since."

The document - New Rights, New

Prosperity and New Hope for Northern Ireland -

reads very much that way, with a rather

general introduction leading on to a shopping list of demands.

While it does stress its adherence to the

consent formula in the Hillsborough agree ment, it adds: "But...no group or party should

or will be allowed to exercise a veto on

political development or on policies designed to win consent." Such policies would include

"a major programme to harmonise the

economic and welfare systems throughout Ireland" and "discussions aimed at eliminating conflict and encouraging mutual trust".

On the economy. Labour commits itself

to reflation, investment in housing and

infrastructure, and revival of the manu

facturing sector, as well as greater north-south

co-operation. On equal opportunities, the report talks of

stronger powers for the anti-discrimination

agencies, positive action programmes and con

tract compliance. Women's rights -

including to abortion - would be "a matter of priority".

All children would have access to

comprehensive, integrated education.

Finally on civil liberties more narrowly, Labour pledges:

repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act

and, "eventually", the Emergency Provision

Act, the latter being amended in the

meantime:

legislation to preclude convictions on

uncorroborated supergrass evidence:

the introduction of three judges into Diplock courts, while "working towards" restoration

of jury trial: an end to strip-searching and a ban on

plastic bullets: and a review of rules governing use of lethal

force by police and army, and of long delays before inquests into disputed security force

killings.

Fortnight May 7

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.196 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 04:52:35 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions