Allister responds to Blair/Ahern
07 April 2006
The Blair/Ahern statement of 6 April is overwhelmingly negative from the Unionist perspective:
1. It contains no conditions pertaining to criminality but, rather, concludes that the IRA’s July 05 statement is enough and that now “all parties should engage in political dialogue”, such engagement being the primary route to building trust, rather than a sustained ‘clean bill of health’ from the IMC or abandonment of criminality being necessary.
2. The option of an effective shadow Assembly has been removed since Sinn Fein is delivered an absolute veto by the indication that only opinions with the requisite cross-community support would even be considered. By simply staying out they can neuter the Assembly.
3. It is no longer the fundamental principles of the GFA which are non-negotiable, but the Agreement itself. No meaningful flexibility is given in its implementation.
4. Where there is flexibility, however, is in expanding the GFA. This surely departs from the essence of the Agreement itself by anticipating that the two governments can unilaterally change its scope and operation in terms of both its “structures and functions”. The fact that detailed work on this is beginning now poses a particular challenge to unionism. Should we engage at all in a process while at the same time London and Dublin are developing an alternative programme of expansion of joint stewardship? Leverage in thwarting that dangerous process could come from making its abandonment a condition of our further involvement in the Assembly process. Otherwise, are we not in danger of allowing the gallows of joint authority to be constructed for use if we don’t jump high enough on their devolution demands?