Do you want to go straight to a particular resource? Use the Jump Tool and follow 2 steps:
This can usually be found in the top hero section of overview, delegations visualize, session visualize, event visualize, commentary collection, commentary item, resource collection, and resource item pages.
Enter the shortcut code for the page that you wish to search for.
These documents were scanned, collated and catalogued by Ruth Murray, Annabel Harris, Isha Pareek, Eleanor Williams, Antoine Yenk, Harriet Carter, Oliver Nicholls, Kieran Wetherwick, and Cerys Griffiths.
Collection associations (2)
Already have an account? Login here
Don't have an account? Register here
Forgot your password? Click here to reset it
None
Copyright
None
Physical Copy Information
None
Digital Copy Information
None
ANNEX B
ARTICLES 2 & 3 AND CONSENT
1. There are two objectives:
(i) to secure, in the JD, a formal statement of the conditional commitment to reform Articles 2 & 3 in the event of an overall accommodation;
(ii) to secure some specifics about this reform. British proposals tabled in Dublin mention two candidates: first withdrawing the claim of right to Northern Ireland; second acknowledging the principle of freely given consent. (Our proposed amendment to paragraph 5 also introduced the notion that it would be wrong to seek a united Ireland unless [save on the basis that] a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely consented.
2. A contingent commitment to remove the "claim of right" will be difficult for the Irish side, though it would be an enormous prize, even as a contingent commitment. The Irish side (especially its Fianna Fail component) are probably hoping that, even if they are driven to reform Articles 2 and 3, they can retain the claim but gloss it by saying it will be implemented only with consent. Most of the parties in the Dail would accept or advocate replacing the claim with an aspiration. (The Irish non-paper, leaked in the Irish Press, envisages a non-amendment: ie adjusting Articles 2 and 3 to reflect fully the principle of consent as defined in the AIA. The Supreme Court has already found the AIA and Constitution compatible.)
3. The points on Articles 2 and 3 and on consent, which arise in paragraphs 5 and 7, could be brought together in this way:
"The Taoiseach confirms that, in the event of an overall accommodation being agreed, the Irish government will put forward and support proposals for a change in the Irish Constitution [withdrawing] [whereby] the claim of right to Northern Ireland [is no longer exerted]; so that it fully reflects the principle of consent by [acknowledging that it would be wrong to seek to establish a united Ireland save on the basis that a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely wished for and consent to it.] [confirming that the establishment of a united Ireland should only be sought on the basis that a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely wished for and consented to it.]"
4. The best outcome might be this:
"The Taoiseach confirms that, in the event of an overall accommodation being agreed, the Irish government will put forward and support proposals for a change in the Irish Constitution [withdrawing the claim of right to Northern Ireland; so that it] [OR (probably easier for the Irish side) replacing the claim of right to Northern Ireland by an aspiration to a united Ireland which] fully reflects the principle of consent by confirming that the establishment of a united Ireland should only be sought on the basis that a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely wished for and consented to it."
ANNEX B
ARTICLES 2 & 3 AND CONSENT
(i) to secure, in the JD, a formal statement of the conditional commitment to reform Articles 2 & 3 in the event of an overall accommodation;
(ii) to secure some specifics about this reform. British proposals tabled in Dublin mention two candidates: first withdrawing the claim of right to Northern Ireland; second acknowledging the principle of freely given consent. (Our proposed amendment to paragraph 5 also introduced the notion that it would be wrong to seek a united Ireland unless [save on the basis that] a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely consented.
A contingent commitment to remove the "claim of right" will be difficult for the Irish side, though it would be an enormous prize, even as a contingent commitment. The Irish side (especially its Fianna Fail component) are probably hoping that, even if they are driven to reform Articles 2 and 3, they can retain the claim but gloss it by saying it will be implemented only with consent. Most of the parties in the Dail would accept or advocate replacing the claim with an aspiration. (The Irish non-paper, leaked in the Irish Press, envisages a non-amendment: ie adjusting Articles 2 and 3 to reflect fully the principle of consent as defined in the AIA. The Supreme Court has already found the AIA and Constitution compatible.)
The points on Articles 2 and 3 and on consent, which arise in paragraphs 5 and 7, could be brought together in this way:
"The Taoiseach confirms that, in the event of an overall accommodation being agreed, the Irish government will put forward and support proposals for a change in the Irish Constitution [withdrawing] [whereby] the claim of right to Northern Ireland [is no longer exerted]; so that it fully reflects the principle of consent by [acknowledging that it would be wrong to seek to establish a united Ireland save on the basis that a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely wished for and consent to it.] [confirming that the establishment of a united Ireland should only be sought on the basis that a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely wished for and consented to it.]"
"The Taoiseach confirms that, in the event of an overall accommodation being agreed, the Irish government will put forward and support proposals for a change in the Irish Constitution [withdrawing the claim of right to Northern Ireland; so that it] [OR (probably easier for the Irish side) replacing the claim of right to Northern Ireland by an aspiration to a united Ireland which] fully reflects the principle of consent by confirming that the establishment of a united Ireland should only be sought on the basis that a majority of the people of Northern Ireland freely wished for and consented to it."
27 1987 - 1990
38 1993
55 1990 - 1991
64 1993 - 1997
26 1993
57 1993
59 1993
51 1993
18 1993
24 1993 - 1994
41 1993 - 1994
32 1993 - 1994
72 1993 - 1994
8 1989 - 1990
76 1993 - 1994
1 1994
60 1993
65 1993
37 1993
54 1993
32 1993
77 1993
59 1993
49 1993
61 1991 - 1992
38 1991
48 1992 - 1993
134 1993 - ?-??
59 1993 - 1993
84 1993
64 1991
42
9
31 1996 - 1996
61 196 - 1996
49 1996 - 1996
20 1996 - 1997
32 1996 - 1996
14 1996 - 1996
74 1996 - None
4 1996 - 1996
8 1996 - 1996
30 1996 - 1996
7 1996 - 1996
24 1996 - 1996
9 1996 - 1996
59 1996 - 1996
60 1996 - 1996
14 1996 - 1997
41 1996 - 1996
45 1996 - 1996
67 1996 - 1996
16 1996 - 1996
1995-12-06
A note exploring various options for concessions to ask for from the Irish Government in the text of the Joint Declaration, acknowledging the possibility and desirability of amendment of the Irish constitution. Annex A of the briefing material enclosed with a covering letter from Quentin Thomas (above).
N/A
N/A
Unless otherwise specified, this material falls under Crown Copyright and contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
The National Archives of the UK (TNA), digitzed by the Quill Project at https://quillproject.net/resource_collections/351/.