Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I too welcome the opportunity to say a few words on the 44th meeting of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly. I am well acquainted with this group and had the privilege from 1995-1997 of being the Irish co-chairman of what was then known as the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body. My colleague on the British side at the time was the then Conservative MP, Peter Temple Morris. Now, having done a little political side turn, he is a life peer representing the Labour Party.

What the people who set up this body in the late 1980s or early 1990s - the likes of Jim Tunney, Peter Barry, Michael Mates and Peter Brooks - put in place has turned out to be a most effective element of parliamentary business. We often hear the phrase "talk is cheap" and we often hear politics and political assemblies being deemed to be nothing more than talking shops. However, this was a talking shop which worked and produced results. The great benefit of the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body, as it was, and now the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, was that it brought people together who previously would not even meet with each other or engage in any degree of political dialogue and through ongoing meetings, sub-committee and plenary meetings over the course of ten to 15 years, people who were foes became friends.

People sometimes criticise politicians for the social occasions which often flow from formal politics, but I recall many social occasions at which members from either end of the political spectrum were comfortable wining, dining and singing along with people from the other end. Complex problems such as the Northern Ireland problem can only be resolved by dialogue and friendship and the British-Irish Interparliamentary Body, now Assembly, played a strong role in that regard. I was delighted to be associated with it for the few years I was. The work, however, must continue, because the building of peace is slow and its bedding down is even slower. We cannot rest on our laurels and the ongoing dialogue between east-west and North-South must continue.

I know there was a busy schedule of work before the assembly this week and I am aware it concentrated on many issues, including the commemorations project being led by former Senator and Deputy, Maurice Manning. This project must be handled very carefully because different days and dates mean different things for many people. Respect and consideration must be at the core of all of the commemorations, whether the Battle of the Somme, the Ulster Covenant, the First World War or the 1916 Rising. All of these issues must be handled with great care. Seven or eight years ago, I requested we begin planning for the commemoration of the 1916 Rising and I tried to take into account all sides of the equation. I am happy that is happening now and that the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Deputy Deenihan, is showing leadership on that.

I call on the Minister and on my party and everybody else to begin to plan now for the commemoration of what was probably the greatest tragedy on this island, the Irish Civil War. It has been the source of bitterness, division and strange politics on this island since the early 1920s. As a country, a nation and a Parliament, we are great at lecturing others on peacemaking and on how to move on. However, we have a big job of politics, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil Party members in particular, in reflecting upon the Civil War. We cannot replay it because what is written is written and what is done is done. We must consider how we grow, develop and move on. It is great that when the 1916 centenary will be commemorated, we will have an island at peace with itself and with its neighbours. I hope that by 1921 and 1922, when we are commemorating and reflecting on the centenary of the Irish Civil War, we will have arrived at a stage of grown-up politics and that political parties will recognise the reality that the divisions which divided brother from brother, neighbour from neighbour and family from family are well over and that we must now look at the new allegiances and political alignments that must flow from that. This will be a big project for us and we can learn from the work done by groups such as the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly in tackling and considering the past in a reflective and sensitive manner, while deciding that the future cannot be a prisoner of the past. I look forward to engaging on that in some small way and to seeing the two Civil War parties decide to let bygones be bygones.

I congratulate the current co-chairmen of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly on the work they did during the week. I watched some of the proceedings on the monitors and believe there was a great level of engagement. In its previous incarnation, the body consisted of 25 Members from the House of Commons and House of Lords and 25 Members from Leinster House and that may have been a sharper and more precise grouping. However, the addition of the Scottish, Welsh, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey groups adds to the flavour and helps colour the jigsaw. All of these people coming together to talk - maybe talk shop - produces results and helps trade, tourism and relationships. Just 25 or 30 years ago, the majority of people in the Republic had never travelled to Northern Ireland. I recall asking people at Fine Gael meetings over the years how many had travelled abroad. Almost 100% would have visited Britain, 20% to 30% had been to the United States but only 5% or 10% had been to Northern Ireland. That mental barrier has broken down but that does not mean we can end the dialogue or discontinue the economic, social and political projects.

I congratulate all who were involved in the plenary. It was great that the Seanad Chamber was used as a venue for meetings, although I hope it is not a sign that it will become an antique house for extraneous bodies. There are interesting similarities between BIPA and the Seanad. While BIPA does not have the power to make big decisions or overturn governments' proposals or legislation, it can exert an influence through dialogue and constructive engagement. The Seanad must approach its work in the same way. The two bodies can learn from each other.

I understand the assembly will hold its next plenary in Scotland but its sub-committees meet frequently and its members are very active even if their work is not well publicised. They do valuable work which has made a genuine difference. Long may that continue.