Thursday, January 04, 2007
“no point proceeding unless there is clarity”
Prime Minister Tony Blair, just off the plane, has issued a statement. Full text here Updated below the fold Updated again
The full statement
I have spoken intensively to the leaders of both the DUP and Sinn Fein over the past days. Ian Paisley and Gerry Adams have made their positions clear to me, on the two crucial issues of power-sharing and support for policing, justice and the rule of law.
So let me set out my clear understanding of these positions.
I need both leaders to agree to this understanding.
Both parties have already publicly agreed to power-sharing on the basis and timeframe set out at St Andrews.
On policing, justice and the rule of law Sinn Fein will propose to their Party’s Ard Fheis that Sinn Fein commit now and fully to support the PSNI and the criminal justice system and actively encourage everyone to co-operate fully with the police services in tackling crime in all areas as well as actively supporting all the criminal justice institutions. These proposals, if committed to, and acted upon amount to the support by Sinn Fein for the rule of law, police and courts that is necessary.
For their part, the DUP require that the Sinn Fein commitments to support for the police, the courts and the rule of law are translated into action so that there is real and tangible evidence of such support. It is delivery on those commitments that creates the conditions for devolution of policing and justice to take place. When there is delivery, there will be devolution.
On the above basis the Government is in a position to facilitate the timeframe set out in para 7 of the St Andrew’s Agreement, namely on or before May 2008, provided of course that the Sinn Fein commitments are translated into action within that timeframe; and the DUP undertake it will do nothing to delay or obstruct devolution of policing and justice when those conditions are met.[added emphasis]
My view therefore is that if there is delivery by Sinn Fein of support for the police, courts and rule of law within the St Andrew’s timeframe, then there should be devolution of policing and justice within that timeframe.
It is only on this basis and with this clarity that we can proceed to an election. I am confident that both parties want to see progress and will honour their commitments.
But there is no point in proceeding unless there is such clarity.
Update As Ian points out in the comments, Sinn Féin’s Gerry Adams has stated - statement here [Added link]
The West Belfast MP said: “The core of a motion I would put to a Sinn Fein ard fheis is accurately summarised in the British prime minister’s statement today.”
And in case you missed them, a reminder of previous posts on the differences between target dates and deadlines and conditions and commitments
More It’s worth remembering what Ian Paisley has already said “the sooner we have delivery, the better for us all.”
And What he has said today
In his statement tonight, Mr Paisley said he had made it clear to Mr Blair that upfront delivery was expected from Sinn Fein.
“Sinn Fein must deliver on policing in a real and meaningful way,” the North Antrim MP stressed.
“There can be no movement unless we have clarity on the need for everyone to support the rule of law.
“The Prime Minister is well aware that we are willing to make progress on a level playing field when there is full support for and co-operation with the police.”
He reiterated: “We have remained steadfast on the need to achieve full delivery and if confidence is to be built then it is up to Sinn Fein to match their words with deeds.”
Pete Baker @ 01:43 PM
That appears to be very clear.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 01:54 PMThe question remains: “WHO Decides that what Sinn Fein and the Nationalist people in their support is enough?
Will the call be made by the British Government or the DUP?
How can Sinn Fein be held responsible if the people who actually know the events of future criminal events fail to respond to the request to trust the police?
There will as has been demonstrated over the last few days be people who will never contact the PSNI - what will happen if people do not respond as the DUP would want and run of the doors pointing fingers at neighbours and shouting accusations?
It still seems there is a lack of clarity in what is expected and from who, and also what the reprecussions will be if the Republican people do not deliver as requested by Sinn Fein within the time frame.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 01:55 PMThe question remains: “WHO Decides that what Sinn Fein and the Nationalist people in their support is enough?
The IMC?
Just a thought..
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 01:56 PM“I need both leaders to agree to this understanding… there is no point in proceeding unless there is such clarity.”
From the BBC:
Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams said Mr Blair had reflected in his statement the basic elements of the motion he would put to his party on policing.
The West Belfast MP said: “The core of a motion I would put to a Sinn Fein ard fheis is accurately summarised in the British prime minister’s statement today.”
SO, Gerry Adams has AGREED TO THE UNDERSTANDING and PROVIDED THE CLARITY required by Blair in his statement.
All that remains is for Paisley, as the other leader, to do likewise, and it’s Game On!?
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:01 PMAnd to follow on from my previous, if Paisley DOESN’T respond likewise, it’s pretty clear-cut which side the blame will fall on.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:05 PMWhich is precisely where we were, is it not Ian? In which case, why is the British PM coming home early?
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:08 PMOn the other hand, if Paisley does provide the necessary clarity, then can we ditch the notion of the St Andrew’s Agreement (St Andrews was at best a staging post), for say, the Post-Miami Jet-Lag Agreement?
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:12 PMI’d suggest that the question remains as to whether that target date is enough for SF given a promise of good behaviour from the DUP..
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:12 PMThe West Belfast MP said: “The core of a motion I would put to a Sinn Fein ard fheis is accurately summarised in the British prime minister’s statement today.”
Do we know the full wording of the motion?
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:12 PM“Which is precisely where we were, is it not Ian? In which case, why is the British PM coming home early?”
I guess to make a bigger impact on the national news. Perhaps Paisley might be more forthcoming with the required clarity if the national media are making a story of it. Maybe Blair still wants to look relevant - answers the question “Why’s he still hanging on?”
Or maybe he had a fall-out with the BeeGee.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:17 PMThe devil is in the detail, and the smell of panic from SF is quite enjoyable. Theres no getting away from it, a lot of this is due to panic inside SF.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:20 PMI can’t see how this statement particularly requires anything new to be said be said by anybody. Existing statements could be said to cover what is called for.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:28 PM“I’d suggest that the question remains as to whether that target date is enough for SF given a promise of good behaviour from the DUP..”
Pete,
I know you like to get into semantics about ‘target dates’ vs ‘deadlines’ but what’s the difference really? What political deadline has ever been immovable if one side shirks from it? A deadline is basically a target date that all parties agree on.
The last few months of negotiations since St Andrews has been about getting the DUP to agree to the May 2008 target date, thereby making it to all intents and purposes a deadline (as much as any date ever is a deadline) and then getting SF to ratify the policing move at their AF.
Paisley’s New Year speech came closer to agreeing the May 2008 target date (more so than media reports of the speech gave it credit in my opinion - no-one seems to have reported the following quote ** except the DUP website and Slugger via me pasting it), hopefully he just needs this final nudge to make a more explicit commitment and the deal is done.
** The DUP proposal [in the ‘changed context’ of cross-community vote for electing Justice Minister(s)], while acknowledging that the Assembly needs some time to bed-in, PUT NO RESTRICTIONS ON WHEN THE POWERS COULD BE DEVOLVED [my emphasis]. This is achievable with delivery [by SF].
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:32 PMIan
Your questions are answered, as best as I can, in the linked posts above.
In short, a deadline is enforceable.
A target date is dependent on conditions on the ground, “real and tangible evidence” - as referred to by Blair, “When there is delivery, there will be devolution.”
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:37 PMAs I understand Pete’s defintion: IRA decommissioning by May 2000 was a target date; Good Friday 1998 was a (functioning) deadline.
However, given how the DUP rode over 24th November, there has been some considerable blurring of that distinction in recent times.
Note: I just misread progress76 for what it actually said: process76. Clearly, this is not the end.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:39 PMBlair is the one who is in a panic.
NI peace process and devolved govt is the only thing left for Blair to stop his entire legacy being one of sand through his fingers.
The goal for Blair is to achieve some kind of definitve result before he leaves office, no matter if it falls apart after Blair is gone.
Panic is a good thing in this senario because it shows the finishing line is in view.
Never before have the DUP and Sinn Fein, as leading parties, been so close to reaching a settlement, no wonder both sides are showing signs of being spooked.
In the words of the Irish lady from the Tax advert:
“Go on, go on, go on, go on” make the deal.Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:41 PMI think that Sinn Fein should go ahead,have the Ard Fheis and put it up to Ian. Sinn Fein should stop worrying that Ian P will scupper things at the last moment. All we had today was a quid pro quo reassurance from Blair so that when Adams gets the go ahead Paisley will be in a bad position if he backs down at the last moment.Lets say Ian does back down. All Adams has to do is call another Ard Fheis and rescind any support for the police or put that on hold. Or even better ,flood the PSNI with so many Republicans that the DUP might be driven to conjure up another precondition
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:53 PMThe fact that Gerry Adams could respond immediately and with the necessary clarity to Blair’s speech, whereas Paisley has yet to do so, suggests it is Paisley who is feeling the heat most now. Discuss.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:55 PMSinn Fein must absolutely prefer this speculation and discussion to the magnifying glass placed on their so-called internal democracy and the ongoing dissent/attrition! Well played, SF!
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:58 PMIan,
it is clear that in such matters Adams deals directly with Blair and Powell. I would assume he replied so readily because he and Blair have been in constant contact and are already in agreement. Blair has returned to deal with the DUP.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 02:59 PMIt’s worth remembering what Ian Paisley has already said “the sooner we have delivery, the better for us all.”
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 03:15 PMLook, there is going to be considerable panic on both sides. 30 years of mistrust does not disappear overnight so it demands calm heads all round. I await the DUP statement and pray it will be measured and conciliatory.Goodness gracious the Dup have got so much recently with St Andrews and more preconditions etc.. it is time for a conciliatory approach and less of the gaming techniques!
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 03:19 PMYes. Pat McLarnon’s reading of this latest development seems the simplest and most credible given the information we have to hand. Blair has come back to whip Paisley back into line as he believed he had done at ST Andrew’s where Paisley looked a most chastened man.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 03:19 PMWhat would constitute a “positive statement” from Paisley;
I am confused as to exactly what SF want the DUP to say?Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 03:25 PMMr Blair came home a day early from holiday in Florida to try to revive hopes of devolution returning to Northern Ireland by the end of March.
So reported the BBC - it’s the 4th of January and the British PM, the second most powerful man in the world (or the dogsbody for the most powerful?) - was still on holiday.
What planet does he live on?
As for the policing question, this should be thrown into sharp relief tomorrow when an Irish speaker comes before the court in Laganside to answer charges of ‘drunk and disorderly behaviour’ arising out of an incident in which she merely spoke Irish to a PSNI officer.
The PSNI like to don the GAA togs - but when it comes to An Ghaeilge, they’ve got a bit of a blind spot.
Posted by on Jan 04, 2007 @ 03:25 PM
