Reflections on the Good Friday Agreement – by Ray Bassett

Address by Dr Ray Bassett, former member of the Irish Government Delegation to the All-Party Talks in 1998.

Oulart, Co Wexford , Easter Sunday 2023

Introduction

Thank you very much and I would like at the outset to give thanks to the organizers and in particular Brian Cleary for the invitation to be here today at this historic and iconic site.

Twenty-five years ago, I was in Castle Buildings in Belfast as part of the Irish Government delegation, led by then Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, at the negotiation which led to the conclusion of the Good Friday or Belfast Agreement. It was an extraordinary privilege to be present and to participate in that event. It was without a shadow of doubt, the pinnacle of my career, a career the bulk of which I spent on issues relating to Northern Ireland.

As I listen to much of the commentary around the anniversary, I am struck by the various attempts particularly those “experts” in the media who re-interpret what was achieved on that occasion. They also seek justification for previous policy positions which in the more distant past proved to be futile, including the policy of exclusion of some political movements. The reason why the GFA negotiations were successful is because it was a radically different approach and outcome from all previous attempts.

The central thrust of the negotiations was to achieve an end to political violence in the North and this meant bringing the Republican movement and the Loyalist groups on board while keeping a broad swathe of Unionism and constitutional nationalism from walking away. Without securing Sinn Féin’s agreement and the Loyalist parties too, then the exercise would have been pointless, a position which I was glad to hear former British Prime Minister Tony Blair emphasize recently.That primary objective was achieved, and the bulk of the violence ended.

One question that has to be asked is whether the final outcome made the ultimate goal of Nationalism/Republicanism, Irish unity more likely or less likely. It cannot come as a surprise to anyone that as a former delegate to the Talks process, I firmly and sincerely believe that the Good Friday Agreement was a major milestone on the road to unity. That is an objective which I deeply share. I think we can claim that much progress towards it has been achieved in the last 25 years. We are now entering a critical phase in the years ahead.

Origin of the two States

In 1920, the British Parliament divided Ireland and created two jurisdictions. The new State in the North was very much the second choice of those in Ireland who wished to stay in the United Kingdom, their first would have been for the island as a whole to remain British. However, under their leader Edward Carson, who said he was born an Irishman and would die an Irishman, they had to accept that the status quo was simply not possible.

The new administration in Belfast inherited the bulk of the industrial production of Ireland and a population which was two thirds Protestant and staunchly British, along with a deeply alienated one third who were Catholic and Irish Nationalists. That State systematically discriminated against its minority in the economic, cultural, political and social areas. It was politically and from a security point of view, unstable from the beginning. The Free State, later the Republic of Ireland, was a much more homogenous unit. While it was politically stable after enduring a civil war, it was at that time economically backward. Again, the new State was not the preferred option of Irish Nationalists. They were forced to accept a limited form of self-rule, including accepting the British King as Head of the Irish State, something which lasted until 1949, as well as severe restrictions on the new State’s ability to conduct international relations. The British Parliament even reserved the right to legislate on internal matters in the Free State. The Privy Council in London remained the highest court in the land for both parts of Ireland. The British even placed restrictions on the armed forces of the new Free State. People forget how little real independence was offered in that Anglo-Irish Treaty. It is not unreasonable today to take great pride in the achievements of the Irish State in terms of expanding its political independence and also in its economic success, given the very poor position it found itself in in 1922.

Partition

However, the biggest injustice done to this country was to ignore the democratic mandate and to hive off the six north eastern counties into the new Northern Ireland. To add insult to injustice, it has to be conceded that the remaining twenty-six counties did very little from a practical point of view to ameliorate the condition of the minority in the North who, as a community, were placed at a serious disadvantage.

We now have the opportunity to create a new chapter and bring an end to the division of our country to the advantage of both jurisdictions.

Under the last twenty-five years of the GFA, the two parts of Ireland grew much closer as the chilling effect of violence in the North ebbed away and many more Southerners felt comfortable about visiting and doing business north of the border. Anti-discrimination measures inside the North gradually changed society there to give a better balance between the communities. Also, the Cross-border bodies, operating on a thirty-two-county basis, have ensured much greater North/South connections.

Good Friday Agreement Terms

The GFA brought about major changes to theConstitutional position of the two States on the island of Ireland. This included the mechanism whereby a United Ireland could be achieved. In the Agreement both British and Irish States settled on a formula, namely that the future sovereignty of Northern Ireland was placed directly in the hands of the people of Northern Ireland. Both the British and Irish Governments have vowed to accept the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people there. There is little or no ambiguity in the terms.

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the British Cabinet Minister with responsibility for the North, shall call a border poll if it appears likely to him or her “that a majority of those voting would express a wish that NI should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland”. The word Shall was deliberately used in the text to indicate that this is not a simple discretionary power to be exercised, either to hold a referendum or reject one, on a personal whim, but that any decision has to be based only on the evidence available. This has been re-enforced in pronouncements by the courts in the United Kingdom.

I am aware of the arguments that the current British Government would not adhere to the Good Friday Agreement in relation to a unity referendum, but with the Johnson and Truss administrations now history, I have no doubt, but any future Government will seek to restore the UK’s status as a respected member of the international community. This will include abiding by international treaties, including the Good Friday Agreement.

Border Poll

With voting and attitudinal changes occurring inside the North, it is time the Irish Government, in particular as a co-signatory of the GFA, began to press for a timetable for a border poll. We should not be in any way shy about doing this and although some groups will say that a demand for a poll will be destabilizing, I believe that ignoring the terms of the Agreement is both unconstitutional in the Republic and is also I believe destabilizing. Showing that the goalposts will change when it does not suit certain parties is a recipe for division and justifiable accusations of bias.

The GFA is now part of the Irish Constitution. We need to respect our Constitution and there is a duty on the Irish administration to see its terms upheld. In the discussions at the GFA, we agreed that any new border poll should not take place earlier than seven years after a previous one. This was a compromise over previous suggestions of five or ten years.

While the premise for that article in the Agreement was that it might take several referenda to achieve a unity result, my fond hope is that the first border poll will be successful and that it will be the last one.

Southern Opposition to a border poll.

As the question of a border poll has arisen, there has been a determined resistance by elements of the establishment in the Republic. This is strange since nobody outside this circle seriously suggests that there would not be an overwhelming majority in the Republic for unity in a future referendum. Support for unification is particularly strong in provincial Ireland outside the main metropolitan Dublin area.

Our three traditional parties, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour were all founded by men, who were steeped in revolutionary Republicanism and who vehemently rejected splitting Ireland into two States. Therefore, as the dream of their founders now appears as a realistic possibility, the party leaders of these political organisations should rejoice and feel a sense of achievement. But in reality, some, though not all, radiate a fear of its accomplishment. As with many issues in life, the fundamental motivation is self-interest, masked by claims of acting for the national good. The old parties fear that with nearly 30% of any new State coming from Northern Ireland (or nearly 2 million people) and with none of the three parties with a presence there or any real support, their position as the potential leaders of future Irish Governments will be very seriously eroded, if not disappeared altogether.

It is of course true that there are many difficulties ithe way. Any new all island State should not be merely an extension of the present Republic to cover the whole Island. Change is always challenging, and a new State would disrupt comfortable lives and sinecure positions.

However, this issue will not go away and we have a destructive tendency in this State to try to ignore clearly signaled forthcoming developments, which may have a profound impact on us, right up to the last moment. This is particularly true of developments which our leaders may be uncomfortable with. I think it is fair to say that there are now changes taking place in both parts of this island which may fundamentally alter the political landscape of this State and our Northern neighbour, and it is time we began planning and thinking in that new context.

Principle of Consent

A particularly pernicious argument put forward by some politicians uncomfortable with change is that unity should only occur if a large section of the Unionist community supports it. This is an impossible. hurdle because simply put, if Unionists supported Irish unity under any guise, they would not be Unionists. Any Dublin politician who thinks that being kind to Unionists will make them forsake their fundamental political belief, seriously underestimates Unionism.

This issue was put to bed in the referenda which followed the Good Friday Agreement where large majorities, North and South, agreed on a fundamental and democratic route towards unity.

These objections against accepting the principle of consent are echoing the arguments of apartheid South Africa and the idea that one vote was not equal to another. It is a profoundly anti-democratic argument and strikes at the whole basis of self-determination.

The Irish Government argued for years with Republicans to get them to accept the principle of democratic consent. This was achieved after a long struggle. For us to turn around and renege on that principle would be morally wrong and discredit all those who risked their lives for peace. In any event, unless you go the whole hog and create separate electoral rolls for Catholics and Protestants, it would be well-nigh impossible to tell where a secret ballot came from. It is also breath taking in arrogance that some Southern politicians can casually state that Unionists are incapable of accepting the outcome of a democratic referendum. I have heard no Unionist politician state that they would not accept the result, even if like Arlene Foster, they would opt to move to GB rather than stay in any new State.

Political representatives in Northern Ireland, representing the Unionist community, have a right to be consulted on the structures of a new State but no veto on it happening.

Brexit Lessons

There are a number of lessons to be learnt from the major Constitutional change, namely Brexit, which occurred in our British neighbour. The first and foremost is that people voting on a border poll need to know what they are voting for in some detail. In this respect a great deal of preparatory work needs to be done.

Another valuable lesson we should learn is that British/Irish relations work best when we refrain from megaphone attacks on each other. Trying to change democratic mandates in a neighbouring country almost always backfires. We need to maintain good relations with the British in the interests of Irish unity.

Second Irish Republic

I would hope it is not just an extension of the present Irish State to cover the 32 counties. The possibility of unification offers us all a chance to reboot the State and to reflect the full range of interests of the Irish people. I would hope that the new State of 7 million souls would be less a patsy for the European Union and be more self-confident and independent than the present Republic.

There will be a sizeable population of former Unionists still living in the northern part of the new State. While there will probably be a reduction in their numbers post-unification, they will still constitute over 10% of the total population and their interest and identity need to be accommodated. They are unlikely to be enthusiastic EU Federalists, and any Irish Government of a 32-county State would have to factor that into their policies. Many would want some continued association with Britain. Under the Good Friday Agreement, those in Northern Ireland and their descendants can continue to claim British nationality and passports, even if the Constitutional position changes to a united Ireland. They will want the new State to be part of the Commonwealth and to be a friend to the UK and the Anglophone world. The Nationalist part of the population will need to be generous, without sacrificing the need for all citizens to be treated equally.

Economic Issues

Those opposed to reunification often fall back on economics once their anti-democratic approach is shown to be bogus. From its initial position as the engine of Ireland’s economy at the time of partition, the North has fallen back and is now less economically productive than the Republic. It needs a very large transfer of resources from the British Treasury to maintain services and welfare levels, many of which are below those in the Republic. A new unified State would have to treat all its citizens equally so that the issue of budgetary policy is one which must be addressed.

The present level of the subvention of Northern Ireland by the British Treasury is difficult to calculate. Itdepends very much on what is included and what is excluded in those calculations, including what is the region’s contribution to Whitehall’s expenditure in areas such as defence, space exploration, national debt servicing, pensions for public servants, police, army, international aid, etc. However, no matter what way you calculate it, it is without doubt a large sum and must be factored into any talk of Irish unity.

I believe that the budget issue would be temporary as the current situation reflects the economic policies pursued by London-centric UK Governments in the past, which in areas like corporate taxation, development of natural resources such as forestry, etc. did not reflect the priorities or interests of regions such as Northern Ireland. I would be confident that with the correct range of policies the North would soon be of net benefit to the Irish economy. I would also envisage that the UK Government, possibly Brussels, and maybe even the US, would assist in the short term to overcome this fiscal difficulty. In any event, I would hope that the leveling-up process would be relatively short.

Wrap Up

I believe that we should look forward with enthusiasm and an open mind to the reunification of our country. Of course, there are many obstacles but there are enough brains and innovation in both States to overcome these difficulties. I am fed up with politicians and some elements of the media preaching very negative sentiments and openly attacking some of the fundamental cornerstones of the Good Friday Agreement while piously proclaiming their adherence to it.

As Parnell, one of my personal heroes, put it succinctly, “No man has the right to fix a boundary to the march of a nation” and the small-minded nature of some political figures in Dublin are seeking through self interest to do just that.

Let us greatly welcome the prospect of Irish unity and embrace it with enthusiasm and generosity.

Tributes

Given the time we are in, I would like to make a few small tributes. Firstly, and foremost to my former boss and friend who led the official side of the Irish delegation to the GFA, Dermot Gallagher, whose intelligence and his innate ability to get the best out of a disparate group of officials was pivotal to the success of the GFA.

I want to say that on the Irish side Bertie Ahern and Albert Reynolds defied the local naysayers and provided terrific leadership. Tony Blair was the man with the executive power in the North and he has not received the recognition he deserves. Blair, regardless of other issues and topics, was the man who decided in the end that the British State was going to fully and unconditionally back the peace process. No other British leader ever treated Ireland with so much respect and commitment. Blair was by far and away the most important figure from outside this island at the GFA and his efforts were vital in ensuring its success.

Thank you very much.