There is a huge prize to be won by Orangemen, Garvaghy Road residents, and all in the North

This is the third time that the Parades Commission has had to rule on the Drumcree parade and it is four years since the awful…

This is the third time that the Parades Commission has had to rule on the Drumcree parade and it is four years since the awful events which followed the parade in 1996. Violence and disorder across Northern Ireland led to the review under Dr Peter North, which in turn led to the establishment of the Parades Commission in 1997.

The dispute over the Garvaghy Road parade has come to epitomise the whole public processions conflict in Northern Ireland. It embodies and magnifies all the fears and concerns, founded or unfounded, which are present wherever the issue of parades is unresolved. It has great political and symbolic significance.

This dispute has provoked massive public disorder and damage to property. It has claimed several lives. It has worsened the already dreadful inter-community relationships in Portadown, and more widely throughout Northern Ireland. And it has touched the vast majority of ordinary and unconnected people who simply want nothing to do with it, or who just get out of Northern Ireland with their families at this time each year.

In 1996 the review which led to the establishment of this commission came about because there had to be a better way of handling parades disputes. So today, four years later, I say to you that there must be, sooner rather than later, a resolution to this Drumcree problem. There is a huge prize to be won - and not just by the Portadown Orangemen and the Garvaghy Road residents but by everyone in the wider Northern Ireland community.

READ MORE

We've done a lot of background work in preparing ourselves for this decision. We visited Portadown. We studied a detailed analysis which was commissioned from Mediation Network at the end of 1999.

We sought meetings with all interested parties (and here we must say that the ongoing resolution of Grand Lodge not to permit members of the order to have any formal contact with the commission just does not help their case.)

This year's decision again builds on what we have learned, and on our previous determinations. But it also incorporates our strategic thinking on how we believe the dispute could be resolved.

But what insight have we got into the fundamentals of the dispute, because without understanding there can be no reasoned judgment of the present, or vision for the future?

Some say that this is all about competing rights, or competing interests. We think the starting point is competing identities, which have become sharper and more focused due largely to political events. The result is a greater sense of identity and more confidence in the nationalist community; and a commensurate sense of loss - loss of territory, of influence and of tradition - in the loyalist community. In the birthplace of Orangeism, Drumcree demonstrates all of these. It has become the touchstone.

FOR Portadown district, as we understand it, the threat to the Drumcree parade is a threat to everything they stand for - civil and religious liberty and the right to demonstrate faith and culture in a time-honoured way. Over the years they have been asked to give up much, but have reached their limit. They believe the residents' opposition is politically manipulated and designed to inflict defeat on their political opinions and religious beliefs as well as their rights. They do not understand how even a small parade, in silence, can be offensive to anyone but nor do they believe that they should have to `seek permission' from anyone in order to get their parade.

Furthermore, in what the Orange Order see as a winners and losers situation, they see the residents in a win-win position: no parade and they win; parade forced down, and TV pictures around the world of police in full riot gear in conflict with residents ensure a media victory for the residents' agenda.

The Orange Order refuses to talk to the residents' spokesman, albeit an elected representative. And the order believes that every attempt at even indirect dialogue has been deliberately frustrated - by the tactic of including social and economic demands, which the order clearly cannot deliver, and by delaying tactics designed to block progress.

On the Garvaghy Road, nationalists feel isolated and under siege from the effects of the Drumcree dispute and the associated parades and rallies. Insensitive sectarian behaviour by bands, hangers-on and supporters fuel their general perceptions of Orange or loyalist parades. These are seen as coat trailing, provocative and devoid of any respect for the community on whom they impinge, often at anti-social hours and over long periods.

Moreover, the Orange Order is seen to represent decades of anti-Catholic domination symbolised by the loyal orders' insistence on marching through nationalist areas. They resent the lack of respect, lack of equality and lack of parity of esteem towards them as human beings. They have genuine fears about living in Portadown, which has become virtually a no-go area for many of them. Few of them shop there. Few of them send their youngsters to college or further education there. They want their social problems addressed together with the issues of their rights.

Previous attempts to find a resolution have failed for a variety of reasons: the process has on occasions not been carefully enough designed, or has started too late in the day. On the one side, the imperative for dialogue has been to find a way of getting a march down the Garvaghy Road; on the other it appears to have been about respect, equality and righting the social ills of the past. Each sees the agenda of the other as blocking progress.

A year ago the decision on Drumcree referred to the Prime Minister's involvement in 11th hour discussions. It is now clear that Portadown district - and they confirmed this last week - took from its meeting the understanding that while the July 4th decision would go against them, there would be a parade before too long if they kept the protest to a minimum. This they did.

But the reality was then, and continues to be, that only the Parades Commission can make the legal decisions on parades, and only by applying the law and the statutory criteria. I should add that, in 1999, the Parades Commission was not party to any understanding with Portadown district.

So where does the Commission stand in all this? It has consistently taken the view that the freedom to parade is an important one which should be constrained only for compelling reasons.

It is disturbing generally that the organisers of parades and those who oppose them often fail to acknowledge, let alone address, the genuine concerns of the other side. That can best be demonstrated by showing respect. The simplest, and most direct, way of showing respect is a willingness at least to speak to those who are most affected. And we continue to give due weight to evidence of real attempts, by either side, to address the legitimate concerns of others and a readiness to do something about them when it is within their power to do so.

We don't have much evidence of any such efforts by Portadown district. Their approach has too often been categorised by protest and implicit threats of violence. They cannot escape all the responsibility for creating the circumstances in which rioting, assaults and other unlawful acts took place in 1996 and 1998. Support parades and rallies in Portadown and elsewhere have continued to provide a constant stimulus for tension and a worsening of relationships in the area. Among the results have been a climate of fear and intimidation in the nationalist areas of Portadown, together with real stress.

The Parades Commission has tried, time and time again, to alert the Orange Order that this strategy was unacceptable, even counter-productive. It has acted against the possibility of securing a local agreement over the Drumcree parade.

We recognise that there have been moves, unfortunately unsuccessful, by some in the order to permit some dialogue with the Parades Commission. Our very first action when we were appointed in February was to write to Grand Lodge and we are still waiting for a reply or acknowledgement. Dialogue with us would help so long as it was not a short-term tactic for a quick result only. It could not, however, be a substitute for real engagement between Portadown district and the Garvaghy Road residents.

The decision we issue cannot - in the light of all of this - come as a surprise.

I should say immediately that the Parades Commission is concerned not just to make decisions week in and week out in the summer months on these issues, but on the important decisions, such as this, where there is a total inability on both sides to move forward, to try to identify the basis for a fair and equitable resolution of the problem in the medium term. Drumcree is crying out for such an approach.

So, we would like to suggest a road map for the future - not just another set of tired ideas dusted off, but a real attempt to suggest a course of action which could have very important results. And we hope that all involved will think very carefully before responding - indeed their response will be seen around the world as an indicator of their desire to move forward.

First, we wish to encourage strongly all involved to see the opportunities in Brian Currin's mediation initiatives. This will require genuine, sustained commitment to make progress, by everyone. Our proposals are, we hope, complementary.

So, starting with Portadown district, we see it as necessary for them:

first to comply with the terms of our determination;

to introduce an immediate moratorium on Drumcree-related protest parades and demonstrations;

to avoid any actions that could reasonably be perceived as an incitement to break the law or intentionally designed to raise intercommunal tension;

and to engage with representatives of the Garvaghy Road residents, both in the Currin initiative and in any civic forum which may be established.

In these circumstances, we believe that a limited parade could take place along the Garvaghy Road, in a peaceful and lawful atmosphere, ideally within the next three to eight months.

Let me repeat that: in these circumstances, we believe that a limited parade could take place along the Garvaghy Road, in a peaceful and lawful atmosphere, ideally within the next three to eight months.

The commission would look to the nationalist residents to demonstrate that they were genuine in seeking a long-term resolution of the intercommunal tensions in Portadown by facilitating the proposed parade.

As to the future, we cannot envisage circumstances in which any subsequent parade could pass along the Garvaghy Road other than by local agreement, perhaps following discussions in a civic forum.

These are very serious proposals. They are designed:

to provide real encouragement to all those directly and indirectly involved on both sides, and in the wider communities who are working to achieve a fair and equitable resolution to the Drumcree dispute;

to end the feeling of tension under which the nationalist residents of the Garvaghy Road have been living;

to recognise the right of the Orange Order to celebrate their culture;

and to create circumstances in which the Currin and other initiatives to improve relationships could flourish.

Let me stress, people will now want to see how Portadown district, the Garvaghy Road residents and political and civic leaders will react to this. To them we say: please consider what we are proposing and weigh your response very carefully. Our proposals are designed to facilitate a sustained and determined effort to build good community relations in Portadown. Everyone has much to gain from that. And we ask all concerned to look to the opportunities for the future, rather than resting on the enmities of the past.