CPL1/22604
CONFIDENTIAL
{~~75~~c} ~~21 JUN~~ 96
{102121}
From: John McKervill
Political Affairs Division
21 June 1996
cc PS/Secretary of State (B&L) - B
PS/Sir John Wheeler (DFP, B&L) - B
PS/ Michael Ancram (DENI, B&L) - B
PS/Malcolm Moss (DOE, DHSS&L) - B
PS/Baroness Denton (DED, DANI&L) - B
PS/PUS (B&L) - B
PS/Sir David Fell - B
Mr Thomas (B&L) - B
Mr Bell - B
Mr Legge - B
Mr Steele - B
Mr Watkins - B
Mr Wood (B&L) - B
Mr Beeton - B
Mr Currie - B
Mr Hill (B&L) - B
Mr Lavery - B
Mr Maccabe
Mr Perry - B
Mr Stephens - B
Ms Checksfield - B
Miss Harrison (B&L) - B
Ms Mapstone - B
Mr Whysall (B&L) - B
Mrs Collins, Cab Off (via IPL) - B
Mr O'Mahoney, TAU - B
Mr Lamont, RID - B
HMA Dublin - B
Mr Westmacott (via RID) - B
Mr Campbell-Bannerman - B
Mrs McNally (B&L) - B
FILE NOTE
TALKS: WIND UP SESSION WITH IRISH OFFICIALS - 2- JUNE
Michael Ancram had a "wind-up" session with Irish officials on 20 June beginning at 1900. He reported on the various bilaterals he had held in the course of the day with all the parties, except Labour. He knew too that the UUP had held meetings with the SDLP and with the DUP and UKUP. The Irish reported that they had held a meeting with the SDLP but had been unable to arrange a meeting with the UUP.
_Rules of Procedure_
2. O'hUiginn reported that the Irish had been unable to obtain clearance from Ministers for the proposed way of amending the Rules of Procedure and of the text discussed with British officials earlier in the day. He hoped however\, to persuade them to accept the text on the sole basis that they would be helping the UUP out of a hole. It was a sine qua non that the lines of demarcation had to be absolutely clear. The Rules of Procedure must contain only "internal operating procedures". Anything which took away from Ground Rules eg by including participation\, purpose\, philosophy\, in the Rules of Procedure could not run. Anything of a macro dimension must not be included. Consequently they sought deletion of para 21 (a) of the draft paper (they also suggested a few minor amendments which were later accepted by the British side).
3. Michael Ancram agreed that what would be "cherry picked" from the Ground Rules would be only that necessary for the conduct of the proceedings. O'hUiginn suggested that the text at present was at the outer limits of "do-able" and that any further changes sought by the UUP would not wash. Essentially\, there were three tests to be applied
> that the two Governments and SDLP were clear that the groundrules were fully operational;
> the UUP would not have to sign up to Ground Rules and;
> the role of the Chairman was given clarity.
Michael Ancram reported that the UUP and SDLP had agreed the same during their meeting earlier in the day.
4. Discussion turned then to how the new draft rules of procedure should be introduced into the negotiations. O'hUiginn said that the paper could not be introduced before clearance by his Ministers. There was also the question of whether it could be shown to UUP representatives later that evening. The Minister said that he proposed to show it to the UUP (but not for their retention) as an illustration and to test whether the concept was deliverable. He would stress its illustrative nature and that it had not been cleared with anyone. He feared that if we did not show it\, then over the weekend the proposal could be unpicked. After unconvincing objections from the Irish\, principally from David Donoghue\, that there was a danger that it could leak\, O'hUiginn eventually agreed to rely on the Minister's 'sagacity' to decide on whether or not to show the document to the UUP. It was agreed that once cleared with Irish Ministers\, the paper could be introduced by the Independent Chairman on Monday\, in his format\, as a product of bi-laterals which had taken place at the end of this week.
_Agenda_
5. After some discussion of the wording of item 8 of the draft agenda provided by Mr Leach that afternoon\, particularly the inclusion of "agreed machinery" rather than "sub-committee" - which the British side defended on the basis that we did not want - to pre-empt discussion of item 5(a) "discussion of proposals" O'hUiginn said that he had little problem with the agenda but again any agreement was ad referendum to his Ministers. Michael Ancram said that he had not discussed the revised agenda with any of the delegations. He believed\, in respect of the UUP\, that Trimble would have to be involved. He envisaged that debate next week would focus on the text which the Chairman had produced last Monday and that a further series of bi-laterals between the Chairman and the parties would then take place following which it could go back to plenary.
6. At this stage\, General de Chastelain and Martha Pope joined the meeting. Michael Ancram reported that he would show the UUP the revised Rules of Procedure to give them a flavour of the concept but would not allow them to keep the document. Both Governments proposed that the Rules should emerge as a Chairman's paper\, the product of results of bi-laterals. He suggested that at the meeting at 1000 on Monday\, the Chairman - Holkeri - might say that the two Governments had reported to him earlier in the morning on the bi-laterals and that it might be possible to adjust the text already on the table. After an adjournment\, the new Rules could be shown to the UUP and SDLP and if content\, then circulated around the delegations for further discussion\, perhaps at 1200.
7. Michael Ancram suggested that the resumed meeting might also consider the agenda although\, it was accepted by all present that the Rules of Procedure could not be finalised before agreement on the agenda. Delegations would want to see the whole package. It was further agreed that Martha Pope could fax a copy of the revised draft Rules of Procedure to Senator Mitchell with the proviso that it was a personal copy\, not yet cleared with Irish Ministers.
8. The meeting ended at 1945.
(Signed)
J McKERVILL
SH Ext 27088
CONFIDENTIAL
KM/19253
