The crucial thrust of British-Irish inter-governmental arrangements over the past number of years has been the commitment of both to working together to create partnership institutions in Northern Ireland, in Ireland as a whole, and between Ireland and Britain, which could end violence and create a new, imaginative political dispensation. The common factor between Sunningdale, the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the Downing Street Declaration, the Joint Declaration and the Belfast Agreement was the need for the two governments to work in unison on a common strategy and on agreed policies.
That unity of purpose survived the vagaries of Thatcherism, the prevarication that resulted from John Major's dependency on unionist support in parliament and the turbulence of the then putative peace process. It ensured that the vision of Good Friday could become the reality of the future.
The key question now is: will it survive the first Labour government in 18 years and its apparent willingness to break the inter-governmental bond on key issues, and instead, proceed unilaterally with decisions which not only run explicitly counter to the Belfast Agreement and the Patten Report, but are at odds with the expressed position of the Irish Government and that of the majority of people in Northern Ireland? Let us be clear:
Suspension of the institutions in January was a unilateral decision designed to sustain the Ulster Unionist Party.
The decision to weaken and dilute the Patten recommendations is another overt attempt to save unionism from itself, at the expense of the need to create a policing service that can command the support and involvement of all sections of the community.
The order passed on Tuesday to give the power of decision about flags to the Secretary of State is an obvious breach of the Belfast Agreement in yet another attempt to influence the outcome of the Ulster Unionist Council's decision next Saturday.
This drip-feed of concessions, for overt party political reasons, has changed the perception of the British government's role as protector and guarantor of the Agreement it helped to create. The Secretary of State has allowed himself to become a political crutch for Ulster Unionism.
In doing so, the crucial intergovernmental bond has been broken three times in six months. In the process, political unionism has, ironically, been weakened, while the British government has forfeited the impartial leadership which one is entitled to expect from a sovereign government.
In essence, the central problem is that the negotiating process often used by the two governments over the past two years has fostered the "shopping-list syndrome". During that time, the UUP and Sinn Fein have beaten a path to Downing Street and Government Buildings. Each time more demands were made - and more met. Private undertakings and understandings replaced the politics of negotiation.
This was most glaringly obvious at the negotiations three weeks ago at Hillsborough when, as soon as the outcome on decommissioning was clear, the Patten Report and the flags issue were tossed on the table as two more preconditions. Like Oliver Twist, the Ulster Unionists could not recognise a good deal when they saw it and had the bowl out demanding more, and more, and even more. Unlike Dickens's Mr Bumble, however, the Secretary of State has tried to fill the bowl - at too high a price.
It is now surely legitimate to ask London and Dublin to end the practice of government by concession, of side-letters, private understandings and post-dated commitments. It is damaging trust, it has fostered suspicion. If it is not halted now it will destroy the political basis upon which the Belfast Agreement is predicated.
On the issue of the order dealing with flags, the Belfast Agreement had specifically decided on "the need in particular in creating new institutions to ensure that such symbols and emblems are used in a manner which promotes mutual respect rather than division. Arrangements will be made to monitor this issue and consider what action might be required." This was our responsibility - the parties in Northern Ireland - and it should have remained our responsibility. But as soon as the Ulster Unionist Party rattled its cage the Secretary of State removed our responsibility for reaching agreement and made it his own preserve. In one day he unilaterally assumed to himself the power of decision in these key areas at the behest of unionism.
As for the Patten Report, the Prime Minister is on public record saying it would be fully implemented. The Secretary of State is on record as saying the same. So also are the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Yet as soon as the unionist demands had been made the legislation was changed by the British government to remove the name-change and place the power of decision with the Secretary of State.
One of the most important recommendations of Patten now resides not in legislation but with a government which has put Patten and the prospects of a new policing dispensation at risk, to satisfy the recurring unionist demand for concessions. There has been pain for everyone on Patten. The SDLP and broad nationalism accepted it. So too did many within unionism and, indeed, encouraging numbers within the police. We went further: the SDLP did not shirk its responsibilities. We made it clear that in the context of the full and faithful implementation of it we would play our role in bringing about a new policing dispensation by participating fully in the new policing institutions and encouraging others, particularly young nationalists, to do likewise.
Patten is itself a compromise. It is policing not in the image of unionism or nationalism. It is fair. Those with a sense of fairness must ensure its full implementation.
The Policing Bill was published on Tuesday. Not only have recommendations on the name, symbols and the flag been undermined, the problems go further than that. Other details weaken and possibly obstruct key Patten recommendations, such as on the Policing Board and Police Ombudsman.
Further developments are awaited: the publication of the implementation plan for Patten and the appointment of an effective and credible Oversight Commissioner with full powers to supervise the implementation of all aspects of the Patten report. These matters must be properly dealt with. The defects of the Bill must be remedied.
Patten represents an enormous prize for all in Northern Ireland. For the first time, we were offered a detailed blueprint for the creation of a police service in which everybody could participate. That prize can still be claimed. Equally it could be lost.
We can not and will not allow the political process and policing project to be hijacked by those who should know better.
Seamus Mallon MP is the SDLP deputy leader