- Event type: CREATE_FROM
Northern Ireland Brooke/Mayhew Talks 1991-1992
WORK IN PROGRESS - IN THE FINAL STAGES OF EDITING A series of talks launched by Peter Brooke, Secretary of State for Northern in Ireland, which began in April 1991, and were carried on intermittently by Brooke and his successor, Patrick Mayhew, until November 1992.
Office of the Strand 1 Chairman (British Government Delegation)
In order to adequately reflect the role of the Chairman and his staff in re-drafting documents and controlling the flow of information during bilateral negotiations, we are representing them as a separate committee. In contrast to other Quill negotiations, in these Talks much of the actual work of negotiation and making proposals took place in bilateral meetings between the Chairman and the party delegations. The minutes of these sessions have been preserved in the same format as the minutes of the plenary sessions, and the sessions are modelled from the minutes as separate Committees (British Government/Alliance Bilaterals, etc.). The Chairman would move between these meetings, reporting on the positions of the other delegations and trying to reach accommodation. It is beyond the scope of the current project to model all the internal government meetings which took place during the Talks (although documentation for at least some of them exists in the National Archives), but we can draw on evidence within the sources we are using to show that proposals and agendas for the bilaterals were agreed within the Government team. For example, in a particular round of meetings, the Chairman will open the meeting with a near-identical agenda and summary of the current position of the other parties. To adequately model the fact that the flow of ideas between the delegations was filtered by the Chairman in this way, we have set up a committee called the 'Office of the Chairman' to show the conclusions of each bilateral discussion passing through the Chairman's Office and being redrafted before being passed on to the next delegation.
To see the full record of a committee, click on the corresponding committee on the map below.
Session 12472: 1991-05-03 12:00:00
Conclusions from bilateral meetings on 7 May and 8 May are considered and compiled by the Chairman before being presented to the other delegations.
Document View:
Conclusion of Meeting with SDLP 30 April 1991
Agenda for a Bilateral Meeting Between the Government Team and the SDLP Held in Parliament Buildings on 30 April 1991
1. Practical arrangements
(a) Delegates to park in the East car park and then use the Front Entrance; this area was to be cordoned off from the media and the general public and any demonstrators kept away.
(b) Media arrangements: Some facilities would be provided, but the media would not be allowed access to Parliament Buildings, nor would there be any opportunity for doorstepping. Exceptionally, Mr Hume would speak to the media after the bilateral meeting on 30 April to provide them with images other than those [with the protester] at the beginning of the day. A silent photo-opportunity might be offered to the media at the opening session of the plenaries.
(c) Security and access: Rooms would be kept locked, but papers would best be kept in the security furniture to be provided. Delegates could have access to the building at any time by showing their passes, although it might not be possible on Bank Holiday Monday.
(d) Statement to Press: a statement to the press following the meeting would be minimal and simply state that a bilateral had taken place. No adjectives would be used.
2. Procedural issues
(a) Meetings should take place on Mondays,Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 10.30 to 12.45 and 2.30 to 5.00 pm. But since the next week, which would be the first week of the plenaries, would contain a Bank Holiday, he proposed that there could if necessary be meetings on the Thursday instead of the Monday.
(b) Adjournments: meetings should operate relatively informally, with opportunities for breaks and caucus meetings. Adjournments might be proposed from the Chair; if others wanted to propose adjournments majority support would be required. Any delegation would have the right to leave the room unilaterally during a meeting, but the meeting would continue in their absence. To adjourn a meeting would need a majority. If a delegation wished an adjournment, it would be necessary to persuade either the Secretary of State or all the other delegations.
(c) Agenda: as Chairman, the Secretary of State would have the ability to vary the agenda order in the first strand in order to stop matters getting bogged down; this would be in the spirit of the whole process. He would consult before using the power.
(d) Minutes of the meetings: every delegation would have access to one set of minutes for each session. The security of that document would then be up to the delegation.
3. Key issues for discussion
The SDLP view: Each party should state the nature of the problem as they saw it and then list the realities which needed to be mutually accepted.
If agreement were reached on the initial stages, there would be key questions to answer. These would be:
- Who administers Northern Ireland?
- What sort of Parliament?
- Who will legislate for Northern Ireland?
- Relationships with HMG/the South/Europe.
- The fundamental question, which encompassed all the others would be "how do you run this place?"
Government view:
(i) The extent of powers (eg executive or legislative) which might be transferred;
(ii) The extent of responsibilities which might be transferred;
(iii) The means by which the powers and responsibilities would be exercised;
(iv) Safeguards;
(v) The protection of individual rights and those of both sides of the community;
(vi) Legislative arrangements;
(vii) The type of any new institutions;
(viii) Security matters (especially local representation);
(ix) Financial arrangements/resources;
(x) Relations with the Secretary of State {if there were still to be one} and with HMG;
(xi) Relations with other bodies {eg district councils and area boards); and
(xii) Relations with the EC.
4. The order in which they might be addressed
The SDLP view: If the talks began with discussions about structures they would get nowhere. It would be necessary to move forward by first establishing areas of agreement and only then by going on to devise structures which might give expression to them. Once agreement on the requirements and realities had been reached there could be a public declaration of that fact and a pause for the parties to consider proposals to meet them.
5. General approach to be adopted in initial plenary sessions
(a) Move to plenary sessions next week based on an agenda evolving out of this week's bilaterals;
(b) If there were marked differences there might need to be a further round of formal or informal bilaterals. Or the Secretary of State might conceivably suggest an agenda of his own; if this were to be the case it would simply be to maintain the momentum.
(c) The plenary sessions might begin with each party making an opening statement, either verbally or in writing, at any length which they considered appropriate.
(d) Assuming the opening statements were not completely mutually contradictory the Secretary of State would pull them all together and suggest a pattern for the plenaries thereafter.
6. Venue for North/South Strand
(a) Since there were to be three strands, the SDLP position was that there should be three locations: Belfast, Dublin and London respectively, with Strand 2 taking place in Dublin.
(b) If the Unionists ruled out Dublin, the SDLP would concede Armagh as the venue for the North/South Strand.
(c) Discussions about the location of Strand 2 should be kept confidential.
Decisions yet to be taken
- Conclusion of Meeting with SDLP 30 April 1991 (introduced on 1991-05-03 12:00:00 - CREATE_FROM - e822939) [This document]
Document Timeline
- Conclusion of Meeting with SDLP 30 April 1991 (introduced on 1991-05-03 12:00:00 - CREATE_FROM - e822939) [This document] [view current proposal at this moment]