Towards 2016 - A United Ireland

national | miscellaneous | news report Saturday August 17, 2002 17:01 by McMean

----------------------------------------------------------------- The following is the full text of the Gasyard Wall Feile's annual lecture delivered by Mitchel McLaughlin MLA at Pilots Row Centre in Derry last night. -----------------------------------------------------------------

TOWARDS 2016 - A UNITED IRELAND

I would like to thank the organising committee of the Gasyard
Feile for giving me the opportunity to address this audience. I
would like to dedicate this lecture to the memory of my great
friend Barney McFadden, lifelong republican and Gael who
contributed so much to the struggle for Irish Freedom, Justice
and Peace. Wolfe Tone could well have been talking about Barney
when he said, "A generous mind is not deterred from a glorious
pursuit because it is attended with danger."

We are at an unparalleled time of enormous challenge and
opportunity in our history. The title of tonight's lecture -
Towards 2016 - suggests the culmination of a journey. That is an
apt description of the path of struggle for self-determination
travelled by the people of Ireland and the growing belief that
the end of that journey is now within our grasp. There have been
many facets and phases in our struggle involving people from
disparate backgrounds and taking many different forms. Irish
Republicanism can be traced back to Wolfe Tone and the United
Irishmen. The basic tenets of republicanism and
anti-sectarianism, as espoused by Tone and his comrades over 200
years ago are as appropriate today as when they were enunciated
by the United Irishmen - to unite Catholic, Protestant and
Dissenter. Therefore, Republicans have a long history of
struggle for equality and are experienced, creative, imaginative
and ready for the challenge of change.

Following the 1916 Rising we had the all-Ireland election in
which over 80% of the people of Ireland voted for Sinn Fein or
other nationalist candidates - less than 20% of the electorate
voted in favour of the Union. Britain refused to accept the
mandate for Irish self-determination and the War of Independence
ensued. This resulted in partial independence with the country
being partitioned as a result of collusion between the British
and Irish Unionist elite, enforced by the explicit threat of all
out war by the British government. For the first 50 years after
partition, nationalists were dominated, oppressed and
discriminated against by a unionism that was confident that it
would hold all power, unchallenged, in this state for as long as
it desired. The one party Stormont government had the uncritical
support of successive British governments. Dublin had abandoned
the north to its own devices, aside from the periodic rhetorical
reference to the fourth green field, when speaking at the graves
of patriots such as Wolfe Tone or at Easter Commemorations or at
election time.

This all changed in the mid-sixties with the emergence of a
campaign to end discrimination in employment, housing and voting
and so the Civil Rights Movement was founded. A new generation,
better educated than their parents and less willing to accept the
scraps from the unionist master's table demanded real jobs,
proper homes and an end to discrimination - Equality. It was a
form of struggle that most nationalists could identify with and
participate in.

Rather than recognising these demands as legitimate and
reasonable, the unionist establishment saw them as a threat to
its position of privilege and dominance. It met with brute
force, peaceful demonstrations, demanding such basic human rights
as an end to discrimination in employment, housing, right of
assembly etc. We witnessed the scenes transmitted throughout the
world of the RUC attack on a peaceful Civil Rights March in Duke
Street in 1968. Unprovoked attacks by unionists wielding nail
studded cudgels and other weapons assisted by the RUC on the
Peoples Democracy march at Burntollett. That same New Years
night in 1969 saw the invasion of St. Columbs Wells by marauding
RUC and B Specials, followed immediately by the setting up of the
first 'Free Derry'. Later the same year the vicious beating of
Sammy Devenny by the RUC led to his subsequent death from his
injuries in July.

The pressure cooker tension continued to build throughout 1969 in
the nationalist community eventually erupting when the annual
Apprentice Boys March was forced through the City centre while
the nationalist people of Derry were forcibly curtailed in what
is now generally described as 'The Bogside'. Nothing was ever to
be the same again. Three days of rioting followed in which the
nationalist people of Derry defeated the RUC and demonstrated
that never again would they be treated as second-class citizens.
The rioting had spread to other nationalist areas of the
6-counties in an effort to lift the modern day 'Siege of Derry'.
This was achieved at an awful price particularly for the
nationalist people of Belfast with many people being killed and
whole streets being razed to the ground.

33 years ago British troops were deployed on the streets of Derry
and Belfast by the British government 'in support of the civil
powers', i.e. the Unionist regime and the RUC. Many within the
nationalist community welcomed the respite believing that the
troops would only be here for a short period but this was to be
proved a quite naive belief. It wasn't long before the
realisation sunk in that the British troops were here for no
other reason than to protect Britain's selfish economic,
political and strategic interests. Instead of addressing the
modest demands of the Civil Rights Movement, the British
government began to shore up the unionist establishment. Instead
of confronting the malaise and demanding an end to
discrimination, provision of decent housing and equality the
British Government indulged in appeasing unionism by taking the
approach of - how much reform will unionism accept?
Unfortunately successive British governments right up to the
present one continues with this approach.

In 1969 nationalists in the North were not content to accept the
second-class citizen conditions endured by their parents and
grandparents. This demand for Equality guaranteed that it was
only a matter of time before the British Army came into
confrontation with nationalists. And even those nationalist
politicians who, today, publicly claim that there was no need for
the violence, privately find it hard to sustain the argument that
we would have brought the unionists or the British government to
the negotiating table without the terrible experience of the last
30 years. Over that tragic period many things that would be
unthinkable in a normal society took place. But the North of
Ireland was not a normal society. It was not a democracy where
divergent political opinions and aspirations were allowed to
flourish and engineer change through the ballot box. No, only
those political opinions and aspirations compatible with the
status quo were acceptable and encouraged.

British, Irish and Unionist politicians continued to ignore the
warning signals and persisted with the old failed policies of
appeasement and containment. A war that could have been avoided
became unavoidable, even inevitable and so the IRA was reborn. I
don't have to recount all the events of the last thirty years
here, as it is now part of history that hopefully will not be
visited upon future generations.

PARTITIONIST POLITICS SERVED NO-ONE

The ironic aspect of all of this was that the system and
political conditions against which nationalists rebelled and
which unionism was determined to retain, served no section of
society in the North. It failed nationalists in that it treated
them as second-class citizens and sought to perpetuate a
sectarian state that was unsustainable in an evolving world. But
it also failed unionism because it reserved all power and
administration in unionist hands and left unionists ill prepared
for inevitable change. The disarray that is evident in unionism
today is because of the history of privilege and dominance and
the belief that it would never end which in consequence meant
that Unionists perceived no need to develop good Democratic
practice nor negotiating skills. Unionist politics were the
politics of the 'big house', ascendancy politics.

The unionist political establishment - the Landed Gentry -
exercised complete control over its working class by continuously
playing the constitutional card at election time. The
Brookeboroughs', the O'Neill's and Chichester-Clarkes' would come
down out of their Ivory Towers just before elections and tell the
Unionist electorate that unless they came out in force and voted
for the Union that nationalists would vote them into a united
Ireland where they would lose their jobs and state benefits.

Some of the most ill served by the apartheid style government
administered here since the inception of the state were the
unionist working class. They were deceived by self-serving upper
class politicians who played on superstition and fear to
indoctrinate them into believing that so long as they continued
to vote for the unionist party they would always have work in the
shipyards, foundries and other sections of commerce that was
almost entirely controlled by the unionist business class.
Because in those days, young working class unionists were almost
assured of immediate employment on leaving school it was mostly
those from the financially better off that sought to further
their education. The segregation in housing ensured that few in
the unionist working class ever got to realise that in reality,
their living conditions were no better than nationalists, in fact
in some instances it was inferior. By the time that it was
realised that the traditional industrial base was in terminal
decline an entire generation of unionists was left with no job
prospects and no education.

In contrast, nationalists having few decent job prospects tended
to take the boat to England or further afield, but nevertheless
encouraged their children to avail more of secondary and third
level education opportunities. As a community we have benefited
as we developed a confidence and a determination. We demanded
equality in all aspects and let it be known that we would accept
nothing less. Unfortunately the British government in its 'how
much change will unionism accept' approach continued to defend
the indefensible. This approach served only to prolong the
period of conflict. Our entire society paid the price of
Britain's refusal to recognise the democratic wishes of the Irish
people and its 'blind eye' attitude to the misrule of unionism.
But in the face of British oppression and unionist arrogance,
nationalists developed a more robust attitude towards democratic
politics than unionists who lectured regularly about the
'political process' and the 'table of democracy'.

PEACE PROCESS

Republicans and nationalists convinced that only an inclusive
approach could succeed in a conflict resolution process,
continued in our efforts to establish common ground on which we
could approach the British government. Sinn Fein, with others in
the SDLP, Irish government and the American Administration
eventually succeeded in creating the conditions for all-Party
negotiations that in turn resulted in the Good Friday Agreement.
I believe that the Agreement now gives us the opportunity to
redress the mistakes of the past together and build a new
democracy based on the needs and requirements of all the people
of Ireland.

The GFA can be used as the foundation on which to construct the
New Ireland of equals that we wish to see. It is recognised -
yes - even by many unionists that the outworking of the GFA will
lead to the reunification of Ireland. Unionists may differ over
when it will happen but there are very few who would put their
hand on their hearts today and say with conviction that it will
never happen. That being the case it is incumbent on all of us
to prepare for the eventuality of Irish reunion. This
particularly applies to the two governments.

The message should be - prepare for re-unification. The majority
of people in four of the 6-counties already vote for those who
would claim to be pro-united Ireland candidates as do the
majority of people in Belfast. And the numbers voting for
pro-united Ireland parties in the other two counties is growing
by the day. It is therefore, incumbent on the two governments to
have in place plans and mechanisms to ensure the smooth transfer
of sovereignty when the time arrives. I am not pointing out
these facts in order to frighten or further destabilise those in
the unionist community that has genuine fears. I say it because
I believe that many unionists also recognise the change that is
taking place but are bereft of the courageous and visionary
leadership required to guide them into the new dispensation that
is evolving. Their fears must be addressed in a comprehensive
manner that will extract the types of assurances and guarantees
from the process that will satisfy any misgivings. And let me
remind you that unionist fears must be addressed and catered for
by republicans as well as unionists. We have a responsibility
to, at every opportunity, reassure unionists, that they will not
be denied one right in a new Ireland that a nationalist or
republican will have.

The type of leadership presently being given to the unionist
electorate by David Trimble is one of self-fulfilling negativity.
Unionism in the Good Friday Referendum very narrowly approved of
the Agreement. Now what any other political leader would have
done would be to enthusiastically sell the benefits of that
Agreement to his/her constituency in order to consolidate and
build on support for it. But not David Trimble. Ever since
signing the Agreement he has been a reluctant advocate. He never
fully accepted the agreement and has spent all of his energies
attempting to undermine or renegotiate its terms and conditions.
By pandering to the demands of the anti-Agreement members of his
own party and trying to out-Paisley the DUP for electoral
purposes, he has left the pro-Agreement Unionists virtually
leaderless.

Despite the lack of leadership being given to the pro-Agreement
Unionists I do not subscribe to the notion that the DUP will
eclipse the UUP at the Assembly elections. I am certain,
however, that notwithstanding the contest between Sinn Fein and
the SDLP, or its outcome, that such is the support for change
within our shared constituency that the two governments will be
forced to accept that the momentum towards constitutional change
is now unstoppable.

But the indicators of change are not just the growth of Sinn Fein
and the political strength that we continue to develop. There
are other indicators also, I believe that there are a growing
number of unionists that are politically astute enough to
recognise the change that is happening and the direction that
that change will inevitably take us. They may not be ready to
publicly express such acceptance nor pro-actively hasten its
arrival but nonetheless will be willing to make their place in
the New Ireland. I believe that a number of recent studies are
helping to inform and influence the thinking of people across the
political spectrum.

The latest survey - the Life and Times Study - carried out by the
University of Ulster and published early July reveals that for
the first time ever, less than fifty per cent of the population
of the North are in favour of maintaining the link with Britain.
This has been an accepted trend for a number of years as shown by
opinion polls from sources that could not be accused of a
pro-United Ireland bias. For instance, a similar Life and Times
survey carried out for the Belfast Telegraph in February 2000
showed a 13% drop in support for the Union since 1986.

This study came just as David Trimble renewed his call for a
'Border Poll' to take place on the same day as the Assembly
elections.

The First Minister claimed that such a referendum would 'clear
the air' and remove the notion of a United Ireland from the
political debate here for decades. This latest survey, however,
may well give Mr Trimble _ and all unionists _ serious food for
thought. I hope that it gives them encouragement to participate
in the debate that has to take place.

But republicans and nationalists should not jump up on the tables
and start singing 'We're on the one road' just yet. Surveys _
although accepted by most people, as a barometer of political
thought and opinion _ do not mean that a United Ireland is
imminent. I do believe, however, that we are in the last lap of
the journey. The change in attitudes and demographics indicated
in these surveys do have serious implications for the
administrations in the North, in Britain and in Dublin.

As I indicated earlier, it is the responsibility of the
administrations to have contingency plans to assure an orderly
transferral of sovereignty when conditions dictate such a change.
So those who today are planning for the future must take into
consideration the plain and inescapable truth that, within the
lifetime of most in this audience, a majority of voters within
the Six Counties will vote for a United Ireland.

We are being presented with a set of figures _ part of the Life
and Times survey _ carried out by reputable academics and
learning institutions that indicates a growing trend showing that
we are on the road to radical constitutional reform. I am
confident that that reform will result in the creation of a
unitary state in Ireland, free from London rule, and with a set
of mechanisms in place that provide maximum confidence in the
people of Ireland that all of their rights and cultures will be
upheld and respected.

The next event that will give a scientific indicator will be the
publishing of the census figures presently being compiled. The
Census figures will be a crucially important factor in indicating
how far demographic change has occurred. That is why I am a
little suspicious that they have not yet been announced. They
were supposed to have been published in the spring of this year
then they were postponed until the autumn and now possibly next
year. I have heard whispers that it might even be held back
until after the May Assembly elections.

It goes without saying that being Catholic or Protestant provides
no conclusive evidence of political allegiance. In the political
reality of this state, it does provide an important gauge of
voting trends. Even if the Census data is held back until next
year, the pattern remains the same and the conclusion to be drawn
equally unavoidable. A huge political change is on the cards and
again, I would like to know what the two governments are doing to
deal with this changing situation. Sinn Fein has asked the
Irish government to publish a White Paper on plans for Irish
unity and I would call on the British government to make similar
preparations.

Sinn Fein has a vision of the Ireland that we would like to see
and just like other parties we will put that vision before the
People of Ireland for endorsement. But the People of Ireland
will decide in free and democratic elections what party or
parties will govern a sovereign, independent Ireland.

A new Constitution will be required that will recognise the
diversity of cultures, religions and ethnicities that will make
up the new Ireland. It will also require a Bill of Rights to
underscore the equality under the law of every individual
citizen.

David Trimble may well get his wish for a referendum on the same
day as Assembly elections but even if he doesn't it will only be
a matter of time before one must be held. There are mechanisms
in the Good Friday Agreement that lay out how and when a Border
Referendum may be called. And a simple majority within the
electorate is all that is needed. Of course some Unionists - and
even certain prominent individuals within the SDLP - already want
to change the rules.

Some of them want to see the simple majority idea scrapped and
have the Border issue decided by a more complicated system. Some
say yes, fine, a United Ireland, but only when a majority of
Unionists vote for it, or a loaded majority requiring 75% of the
total 6 County population.

But that is not what they signed up for when they accepted the
Good Friday Agreement. They demanded that we accept the
principle of consent that meant for as long as a simple majority
i.e. 50% plus one wished to remain in the United Kingdom then
that's how it would remain. Isn't it ironic therefore, that that
principle of consent that they all - including the SDLP and the
Irish government - thought would be too bitter a pill for
republicans to swallow is now the very mechanism that they now
wish to change.

The Good Friday Agreement makes provision for a Secretary of
State to call a Border Referendum whenever it appears that such a
poll may result in constitutional change. Another referendum
may not be called for at least seven years thereafter. The
steady trend of changes in voting patterns should contribute to
when the Secretary of State becomes of the opinion that a change
would be forthcoming. Next May's Assembly elections could well
be crucial in informing that decision.

The two governments and the other political parties cannot just
bury their heads in the sand and remain in a state of denial
about the change that is taking place and the inevitable outcome
of that change.

The task for us as Irish republicans is to make the transition as
smooth and inclusive as possible. We need to present our
analysis and temper our language so that although we spell our
intentions out quite clearly, it does not come across to
unionists and others as being belligerent or threatening. We
will endeavour at every opportunity that presents itself to reach
out to unionists in efforts to convince them of the desirability
of working along with us to build a New Ireland where, together,
we can be masters of our own destiny.

An Ireland where together, we can achieve true self-determination
as equals in our own land. An Ireland where political and
cultural difference is respected and encouraged as assets rather
than the source of division. An Ireland where we can be at peace
and build normal relationships with our neighbours both on this
island and in Britain.

Again, making due allowance for the overtly paternal language of
that period, we can find great wisdom and guidance in the
writings of Wolfe Tone, "The memory of religious dissensions will
be lost, when no sect shall have an exclusive right to govern
their fellow citizens. Each sect will maintain its own clergy,
and no citizen will be disenfranchised for worshipping God
according to his conscience. To say all in one word, Ireland
shall be independent. We shall be a nation, not a province;
citizens, not slaves. Every man shall rank in the State
according to his merit and his talents."

In developing this great debate about future constitutional
change, Sinn Fein will continue to highlight the ludicrous waste
in maintaining two political systems, two economies, two
transport systems, two health, education, agriculture, fisheries,
tourism systems etc on an island of just over 5.5 million people
- a population smaller than some European Capital cities.

We will point to the benefits of one judicial system, one
policing service and one army in one democracy that have no
sectional or party political allegiances.

Sinn Fein believes that we are in the last lap in our journey
towards a United Ireland of equals- the final phase of struggle.
And we believe that many of the 'unionist' tradition recognise
this course of events too. The signposts are already there,
pointing towards 2016 and the realisation of the vision of a free
and sovereign United Ireland.