Unionists call for changes to declaration

The Ulster Unionist Party has demanded "radical change" to the Hillsborough joint declaration, insisting that it does not provide…

The Ulster Unionist Party has demanded "radical change" to the Hillsborough joint declaration, insisting that it does not provide a basis for political progress.

Ahead of another meeting between Mr David Trimble and Mr Gerry Adams today, aimed at restoring devolution, the UUP's 110-member executive yesterday unanimously adopted a resolution on the declaration.

The party leader, Mr Trimble, framed it with amendments from Mr Jeffrey Donaldson. The resolution stops short of rejecting the declaration as Mr Donaldson and his fellow rebel MPs, Mr David Burnside and the Rev Martin Smyth, had demanded. They resigned the party's Westminster whip in June because of their opposition to the declaration.

The British and Irish governments, ahead of a meeting in Rome today between the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister, were sanguine about the UUP adopting an ostensibly resolute stance on the declaration.

READ MORE

"It is not unexpected that the Ulster Unionist Party would place an each-way bet on the declaration," said an Irish source.

The resolution called for "radical change" to the declaration, stated that the UUP was not bound by it and added that it did "not provide a satisfactory basis for progress".

The fact that the motion was endorsed by the pro- and anti-Belfast Agreement wings of the party opened up an opportunity for Mr Donaldson, Mr Burnside and Mr Smyth to resume the party whip at Westminster.

Mr Trimble said the three MPs should now fully return to the party fold, adding that they had no argument for continuing to defy the party whip.

Mr Donaldson said progress had been made yesterday, and a number of his amendments had been included in the resolution. However, he said he was not yet in a position to make a definitive statement on whether he and his dissident colleagues would resume the whip but would consult them on the matter.

The resolution repeated that the IRA must carry out acts of completion before the UUP would go back into the executive with Sinn Féin.

On Mr Donaldson's amendment, it called for a timescale for these acts.

It endorsed the International Monitoring Commission, but while Mr Donaldson has argued that the IMC gives the Irish Government an unacceptable involvement in Northern Ireland affairs, there was no such reference or claim in respect of Dublin in the resolution. The resolution also opposed an effective amnesty for paramilitary "on-the-runs".

It expressed concerns about an accelerated devolution of responsibility for policing and justice to the executive and said there was no scope for any cross-Border bodies dealing with justice and policing issues.

It also expressed concerns about demilitarisation and, again on Mr Donaldson's amendment, opposed the creation of an all-Ireland charter of rights.

While the resolution strikes a firm position on the declaration, Mr Trimble stressed that its wording was "nuanced".

The governments take some consolation from this qualification, arguing that the real focus remains centred on the current behind-the-scenes negotiations, chiefly involving Dublin, London, Sinn Féin and the UUP.

British and Irish sources believe the fact that Mr Trimble and Mr Adams are again due to meet today indicates there is still a possibility of a breakthrough that could result in elections; the IRA confirming that it will cease paramilitary activity, and the UUP pledging to work the institutions of the agreement.

"If we can get acts of completion from the IRA then that will change the whole atmosphere," said an Irish source. "In the meantime it's hardly surprising that the Ulster Unionists would adopt such a position on the declaration when there is still no deal between the parties."

Sinn Féin's chief negotiator, Mr Martin McGuinness, dampened expectations of a breakthrough yesterday, again complaining of too much concentration on what the IRA might deliver to break the logjam.

"There is enormous resentment among republicans and nationalists at the behaviour of the British government, and the constant, singular and unwarranted focus by it on blaming republicans," he said.