Opinion

Patricia MacBride: Perhaps we need to consider a new three-stranded approach

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair (right), former US Senator George Mitchell (centre) and ex-Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (left) after signing the Good Friday Agreement
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair (right), former US Senator George Mitchell (centre) and ex-Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (left) after signing the Good Friday Agreement Former Prime Minister Tony Blair (right), former US Senator George Mitchell (centre) and ex-Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (left) after signing the Good Friday Agreement

I’M going to be interviewing Bertie Ahern tonight in Dublin at an event organised by Jim O’Callaghan TD to mark the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement.

The audience will be made up of 250 people, primarily members of Fianna Fáil, and marks one of the first events that will take place in coming weeks and months as we take stock of the political successes and setbacks since April 1998.

It will be interesting to hear Ahern reflect on the political party negotiations leading up to the agreement and recall the heavy lifting it took to get it across the line. No doubt we will also talk about the current assembly hiatus and the dreaded “B” word and how we navigate a path through that.

The current state of play between Brussels and the British government is remaining a closely-guarded secret in terms of the negotiations trying to break the deadlock over the protocol.

It is fair to say, though, that the scant details that have leaked out at the time of writing indicate a deal is more likely than not going to be forthcoming in the next number of weeks.

When that agreement is announced, we will no doubt be treated to the scrutiny of it by the DUP under their “seven tests”.

The first of those tests can be set aside quite quickly, given that the UK Supreme Court ruled yesterday on the constitutionality of the protocol in respect of the Act of Union.

With a hat-trick of legal losses on this point, unionists must now, surely, accept that the protocol is legal and also legally enforceable.

Test seven is relating to the future constitutional status of the north and I’m pretty sure the Good Friday Agreement and not the protocol deals with that issue.

That leaves customs checks, borders in the Irish sea and regulatory control to be addressed.

Oh yes, and point 4 – giving the people of the north a say in the laws which govern them. Pardon me whilst I break the fourth wall, turn to camera and say, “but… Brexit?”

It’s probably a safe bet that whatever is agreed short of scrapping the protocol entirely will be rubbished by Jim Allister and his friend from the seaside, but will it be enough to allow the DUP a route back to Stormont is the far more important question?

I personally hope the answer is yes because I think it’s the best option right now to protect the interests of the people of the north at a time where the public sector and health services are under immense pressure and where families continue to struggle with the cost-of-living crisis.

Decisions need to be made in the best interests of the electorate by the people who elected them, not by a Secretary of State who has limited grasp of the small “c” culture of this place.

But we also have to remember that it is not simply a binary choice between re-establishing the Stormont Executive and a form of direct rule, which would have to include some measure of influence from the Irish government. The third choice, and one that is provided for in the Good Friday Agreement, is constitutional change, underpinned by the principle of consent.

When referendums took place north and south in May 1998, people voted in support of the agreement because they wanted an end to violence, power-sharing, reform of the policing and justice frameworks, a more stable economy and better relationships between the people of these islands.

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair (right), former US Senator George Mitchell (centre) and ex-Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (left) after signing the Good Friday Agreement
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair (right), former US Senator George Mitchell (centre) and ex-Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (left) after signing the Good Friday Agreement Former Prime Minister Tony Blair (right), former US Senator George Mitchell (centre) and ex-Taoiseach Bertie Ahern (left) after signing the Good Friday Agreement

It should also be remembered that many people from nationalist and republican communities who voted in support of the Good Friday Agreement did so because it also contained a possibility of reunification in the future.

If the internal structures of governance collapse and direct rule is re-imposed, then this third option could become the preferred one much more quickly than heretofore not just for republicans but for others previously less convinced.

Likewise, the provision on a future referendum was seen by those voting in the Republic of Ireland as a quid pro quo for the amendments of Articles 2 and 3 of the constitution.

Political stability on the island is good for business and a clinical assessment of enduring short-term pain to ensure long-term gain is likely to influence how a lot of people will vote. People in both parts of the island will have to know exactly what they are voting for and right now, that is far from defined.

The Good Friday Agreement, like any peace deal, needs to be durable. But durable does not mean static and that’s a reality we have accepted through the St Andrews, Hillsborough Castle, Stormont House, Fresh Start and New Decade, New Approach agreements. The players and the relationships between the players have and will continue to evolve.

There is no doubt that Strands 1, 2 and 3 of the agreement have all taken a hammering at various times over the last quarter century but if the principles the majority of people on this island signed up to in May 1998 are to be honoured, then perhaps we need to consider a new three-stranded approach that focuses on building better relationships through dealing with the past, fixing the present and planning for the future.