Currently there is great concern about the pig sector. There is a need for an Office of Fair Trading investigation to see why the producer is getting such a raw deal. We also need a level playing field with the Republic of Ireland. They have lower costs mainly because they have to meet lower health standards.
That's why we pushed for cross-Border co-operation on food safety - and the Irish Government opposed co-operation on this. I am glad to see that [Romano] Prodi, the new president of the Commission, has called for this on a European basis. If we achieved devolution we could add to the pressure.
It is very frustrating to see Wales and Scotland go ahead - their European operations proceeding but ours not off the ground. It was so much better at the beginning of the year when we were involved in the negotiations over structural funds.
Seamus [Mallon] and myself went twice to the Commission in Brussels and I went on to Bonn to speak to the German European Minister, Gunter Verheugen, now himself a Commissioner. I can say that we effectively secured the structural funds for the new period at virtually the existing level, while in the Republic, their allocation was slashed.
But the official machine, which was happy to use us then, will scarcely talk to us now. Senior civil servants suspect that we will fail to achieve devolution and they will be able to return to their unaccountable personal rule of Northern Ireland.
I am determined to disappoint them.
During these difficulties, we have a constant stream of advice from Bob McCartney, once, too, the leader of a party, now the scriptwriter for David Vance.
The trouble with Bob's advice is that he seems to be against everything. His idea of getting to the top of the tree is to stand at the bottom and tell everyone how dangerous it is to climb. Bob's reputation puts me in mind of Dolly Parton - out of all proportion and with no visible means of support.
Then there is the DUP, who are so opposed to power-sharing and republicans.
But reflect on the fact that Peter [Robinson] has been in parliament for 20 years and Ian [Paisley] for 30. Ask yourself, in all these years - what have they achieved? Have they strengthened the Union? Have they increased the friends of unionism? Have they offered any hope for the future? Indeed, in 20 or 30 years' experience of parliament, is there any sign that they have learnt anything?
Then there are those who talk of possible alternatives. I have only heard two mentioned. One could be called the county council option. That is a return of power to a small number of larger local authorities, but what would this mean in practice? Bearing in mind the way that boundaries would be drawn, it means handing half of Northern Ireland over to nationalist and republican control. And those nationalist and republican councils would be quick to enter into cross-Border arrangements, to integrate themselves as fast as they could into the Republic. Where then would the new Border be?
The other alternative mentioned is administrative devolution on the Welsh model. I sup ported this option. In 1991 and 1992 it was the basis of the proposals we made in the Brooke and Mayhew talks. Then we tried very hard under Jim Molyneaux's leadership to get agreement: but could not.
Since then the government's ideas for Wales have changed. The government dropped the concept of proportionality that was at the heart of our proposals for a Northern Ireland Assembly. The assembly led today by Alun Michael, Wales's First Secretary, is based on simple majority rule.
Now does anyone think that we can today persuade others to accept simple majority rule?
It is more than 10 years since this party's policy moved to proportionality, a major shift that recognised the political realities. There were big arguments at the time. I was not involved but I remember a friend telling me of a confrontation with a then-senior unionist who declared, "Laddie, I would give them nothing." To which my friend replied, "They don't want any more from you - they've got it all already."
This process is actually about unionism clawing back part of what has already been taken from it. Anyone who thinks otherwise has had his head in the sand for the last 15 years.
Remember, John Taylor was quite right to remind people recently that we will not achieve progress without agreement with nationalists and that includes republicans. Remember, too, that if we continue to have difficulty in persuading unionists to go out to vote, we may be very glad of the novel provisions in the agreement to protect minorities in the Assembly.
Those who talk of so-called alternatives do not address the fact that Sinn Fein will be represented in those bodies and they will have to deal with them whether in a new council set-up or an alternative assembly. The problem we face now is inescapable while Sinn Fein maintains substantial electoral support. I wonder if the alternative strategists have a strategy for reducing Sinn Fein's electoral support, for persuading those who presently vote for them to vote for another party.
Not that we regard Sinn Fein as just another party. We will not forget the inextricable link between it and the IRA. That is why I refer so often to them both as the republican movement - it is their phrase after all.
And the republican movement has been a force for evil in this society. I do not ignore the fact that violence is at a lower level than before the ceasefires, but violence continues even from groups supposedly on ceasefire.
Since the agreement, loyalists on ceasefire have been responsible for three murders, 181 beatings, 76 shootings and have exiled nearly 400 people from their homes. In the same period, the IRA, during its ceasefire, committed five murders, 160 beatings and 62 shootings and has exiled over 400 people from their homes.
I wish they would all cease their so-called military operations.
Sinn Fein cannot distance themselves from this. It was Gerry Adams who told people who complained about sex offences to go to Sinn Fein. Prospective victims of these beatings have been ordered to report to Sinn Fein offices for their so-called punishment.
It is rank hypocrisy for Mr Adams to lecture society on rights and equality while he connives at these barbaric onslaughts. He is in no doubt as to our insistence that these abuses of human rights must stop.
Nor can they pretend that it is necessary in the absence of normal policing and is acceptable in republican-dominated estates.
There was an attack a few weeks ago in Ardowen in the Brownlow district of Craigavon. Fourteen-year-old Eamon O'Hanlon was beaten up and was later operated on in the Royal Victoria. Afterwards, Dr Liam Kennedy, who stood as a human rights candidate against Adams at the general election, conducted an opinion survey in the estate.
He visited over a hundred houses and only four refused to speak to him about these attacks. Forty-seven agreed to complete a detailed questionnaire. Overwhelmingly, they opposed paramilitary attacks. Only four supported shootings and seven other attacks.
Dr Kennedy said: "Some of the additional comments and the vehemence with which they were made left little room for doubt that punishment beatings and shootings were regarded as beyond the pale of acceptable behaviour."
I am sure we all agree with the good people of Ardowen.
One of the researchers said that he was struck by the number of times people mentioned a low level of policing on the nationalist estate and a desire for greater policing by the Royal Ulster Constabulary.
Which is a better comment on the acceptability of the RUC than anything in the Patten report.
As Margaret Thatcher told her party when the going got tough in the early Eighties, "there is no alternative."
In these situations, it is easy to talk tough. I remember the big rally at Belfast City Hall just after the Anglo-Irish Agreement, where, in his own quiet way, Jim Molyneaux undercut the bombast of some others. As he so rightly said, the true glory lies not in a grand beginning, but in carrying it on until all is completed.
We will strive to carry through to completion. We have not given in. We will not give up.
We are a confident party. We offer leadership.
We believe passionately in the Union as the best for all in Northern Ireland.
As we approach 2000 - the bicentenary of the Act of Union - on this day as on every other day, let us represent that commitment to the Union.
For the last hundred years we have been the safeguard of the Union.
Let us show the world we are ready to do as much and more throughout the next hundred years.