These are extracts from the speech by Dr Esmond Birnie last night:
The decommissioning issue is now the only issue which really matters. It eclipses and predominates over every other issue and if it is not resolved it will destroy the present agreement and make it almost impossible to negotiate an alternative.
It cannot be denied that there is an element of confusion about the meaning and interpretation of the decommissioning issue within the Belfast Agreement. All of the pro-agreement parties have signed up to decommissioning, but some of us want it sooner rather than later. Sinn Fein may be right to say that the agreement doesn't insist upon decommissioning prior to the formation of the executive, but the Ulster Unionist Party is equally right to insist that it cannot proceed until it has a guarantee that decommissioning is going to begin and be completed by May 2000.
Our problem is that we find it hard to believe that the IRA is genuine about real peace. . . So let me tell them what an Ulster Unionist means by peace: peace means an end to orchestrated violence and politically motivated intimidation. Peace means an end to arms buying, training and recruitment. Peace means a willingness to provide palpable evidence that the "war is over". Peace means an end to the semantically tortuous "ifs", "ands", "maybes" and ambiguities of IRA army council statements.
The plain truth of the matter is that a few words from the IRA could transform the political situation overnight. We are not demanding surrender, but we are demanding an end to the fear, the veiled threats, the stockpiles and the uncertainty.
We want prior decommissioning as a sign that the IRA is serious about the process, but Sinn Fein insist that prior decommissioning isn't included in the agreement. Both parties would regard a retreat from these fixed positions as a "concession too far", and at the moment neither Trimble nor Adams could sell such a retreat to their respective parties.
Listen to what Martin McGuinness said on September 28th: ". . . What I do say is that if the executive is set up then all the parties have a collective responsibility to get rid of the guns and Sinn Fein would play a positive role in that respect. David Trimble might find that if he moves things forward that would have more influence with the IRA than anything I or Gerry Adams could say to them."
I must preface this next part of my speech by saying that I am merely stating my own opinion. I am not flying any kites for the party and I am not testing the waters for a change on policy. I am merely exploring political possibilities. That is the job of a professional politician. So let me set up a hypothetical proposition:
I want to know what would happen if we took Martin McGuinness at his word and agreed to form an executive without prior decommissioning; indeed, without the guarantee of decommissioning at all. That is not my idea of "leaping together". In fact, it would represent a suicide leap into the quagmire. My party almost certainly wouldn't buy the strategy and even if they did our fate would be tied to the actions of the IRA. That does not make sense.
But what would happen if Sinn Fein tied their fate to the actions of the IRA? In other words, if the executive was created before prior decommissioning and the IRA didn't deliver the decommissioning goods, would the Sinn Fein ministers resign from office until such time as the goods were delivered? Given the nature of the relationship which has always existed between Sinn Fein and the IRA, it seems only fair that it be Sinn Fein, rather than the rest of us, who tie their fate to the actions of the IRA.
Now that is what I call "leaping together". The Ulster Unionist Party's leap is to agree to an executive before decommissioning and without a guarantee that there would be decommissioning; and Sinn Fein's leap is to risk loss of office and the continuation of the executive if the IRA do nothing.
And let me add a reassurance to my Ulster Unionist colleagues. I am not going soft on our "no guns, no government" policy. What I am saying is that if there are no guns there will be no Sinn Fein in government, but there will still be a government and the Ulster Unionist Party will still be in it. Are Sinn Fein brave enough for "leaping together" in this fashion?
The full text can be read on the website www.ireland.com