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 (1)
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
NORTHERN IRELAND OFFICE
WHITEHALL
LONDON SW1A 2AZ
SECRETARY OF STATE
FOR
NORTHERN IRELAND
Roderic Lyne Esq
Private Secretary to Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
10 December 1993
Dear Rod,
**JOINT DECLARATION INITIATIVE: BRUSSELS NEGOTIATIONS**
Thank you for your earlier note of this afternoon negotiations. I attach, in response, a briefing note in similar style. It is the product of discussions here with Quintin Thomas, and brief discussion with my Secretary of State and Michael Ancram.
Our analysis here is that the Irish are either deliberately playing hard in the end game to see what they can get out of us, or (less likely) have already heard that JD will not do the trick with the Provisionals and would not therefore mind a break with the British. Either way, since the Irish seem prepared to open up a few issues which we thought to be closed, you might want to counter with some suggestions which will be equally unpalatable to the Irish. Examples include insisting on references to "separate consent" in paragraph 4 and a commitment now to a referendum to withdraw the Irish claim of right (some sources are suggesting that the Irish might have been prepared to concede this).
The key issues are obviously paragraph 4 and the Convention/Forum. Both go to the heart of how unionists will react to the declaration. Ministers on Thursday judged that the reference to "a sovereign united Ireland" in paragraph 4 and any reference to the Convention/Forum would stoke unionist fears. Our view is that this remains a valid judgement. But Mr Molyneaux subsequently said that a reference to the Forum would be acceptable if the original Irish paragraphs 10 and 11 were proving difficult to remove. So we reluctantly conclude we can accept a reference to the Forum providing it is clearly limited to an advisory role.
On paragraph 4, we should continue to insist on removal of the words "as of right" and sovereign united Ireland". The latter in particular was of concern to Mr Molyneaux. We have suggested possible fallbacks. Copies go to John Sawers and Melanie Leach.
Yours,
Jonathan
NORTHERN IRELAND OFFICE WHITEHALL LONDON SW1A 2AZ
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR NORTHERN IRELAND
Roderic Lyne Esq Private Secretary to Prime Minister 10 Downing Street
10 December 1993
Dear Rod,
JOINT DECLARATION INITIATIVE: BRUSSELS NEGOTIATIONS
Thank you for your earlier note of this afternoon negotiations. I attach, in response, a briefing note in similar style. It is the product of discussions here with Quintin Thomas, and brief discussion with my Secretary of State and Michael Ancram.
Our analysis here is that the Irish are either deliberately playing hard in the end game to see what they can get out of us, or (less likely) have already heard that JD will not do the trick with the Provisionals and would not therefore mind a break with the British. Either way, since the Irish seem prepared to open up a few issues which we thought to be closed, you might want to counter with some suggestions which will be equally unpalatable to the Irish. Examples include insisting on references to "separate consent" in paragraph 4 and a commitment now to a referendum to withdraw the Irish claim of right (some sources are suggesting that the Irish might have been prepared to concede this).
The key issues are obviously paragraph 4 and the Convention/Forum. Both go to the heart of how unionists will react to the declaration. Ministers on Thursday judged that the reference to "a sovereign united Ireland" in paragraph 4 and any reference to the Convention/Forum would stoke unionist fears. Our view is that this remains a valid judgement. But Mr Molyneaux subsequently said that a reference to the Forum would be acceptable if the original Irish paragraphs 10 and 11 were proving difficult to remove. So we reluctantly conclude we can accept a reference to the Forum providing it is clearly limited to an advisory role.
On paragraph 4, we should continue to insist on removal of the words "as of right" and sovereign united Ireland". The latter in particular was of concern to Mr Molyneaux. We have suggested possible fallbacks. Copies go to John Sawers and Melanie Leach.
Yours,
Jonathan
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
1993-12-10
Encloses a more detailed brief. Stephens offers two possible explanations for the Irish Government "playing hard" at the very end of the Joint Declaration process. The first is that they simply want to see what they can get last minute, the second is that they believe it won't work and so are happy to try their luck. He goes on to state that the British side should stick firm to its key arguments around paragraph 4 and the consent principle.
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.
NoneThe National Archives of the UK (TNA), digitzed by the Quill Project at https://quillproject.net/resource_collections/351/.