Full implementation key to NI success

In four of the eight polls undertaken in support of the peace process (December 1997, February 1999, October 99 and May 2000), …

In four of the eight polls undertaken in support of the peace process (December 1997, February 1999, October 99 and May 2000), the people of Northern Ireland were asked what their priorities were for success.

Some of these issues remain at the top of each community's "to do" lists while others are now far less important than they once were.

Why? Perhaps the people's priorities deserve closer inspection in the hope that their agenda can now be met and their peace process moved forward.

The first poll to ask people what they thought was most essential or important for a successful peace process was held four months before the Belfast Agreement was struck in December 1997.

READ MORE

Significantly, problems of community peace-building, such as segregation in housing and education, were ranked higher in the people's priorities than, for example, reformed and shared government.

These social problems were only dealt with in aspirational terms in the Belfast Agreement and still remain substantially unaddressed, as has been the case throughout the period of the Troubles.

Hopefully the Northern Ireland Assembly, Civic Forum and Human Rights Commission will give more attention to these omissions than the Northern Ireland Office has done over the past 30 years.

If this is not done then the culture of violence that now permeates many sections of society will probably continue to undermine efforts to find a political solution.

In a more positive vein, it is interesting to note how problems cease to become problems as they are properly dealt with.

For example, for Protestants the Irish constitutional issue was second only to problems of paramilitary violence in the poll undertaken before the Belfast Agreement, but dropped in post-agreement polls to ninth on their list by October 1999.

Similarly, a Bill of Rights that guarantees equality for all was the No 1 priority for Catholics in the first poll, but when the Equality Commission was established under the terms of the Belfast Agreement it fell from second in their list of February 1999 to 10th in October 1999.

Resistance to North-South bodies has also diminished among the Protestant population as the relatively benign nature of these new institutions has become apparent.

In February 1999 a majority of Protestants considered nearly all these new institutions of government to be "Very Important" or "Important", ranging from a high of 84 per cent for co-operation on transport to a low of 54 per cent for implementation of aquaculture and marine matters. The only exception was the implementation body for language (Irish and Ulster-Scots) at 36 per cent "Very Important" or "Important".

Implementation seems to be the key to success. Success breeds success, and things never seem to be quite as bad as many thought, once they are done.

Political gridlock appears to present the agreement with one of its greatest dangers as it opens up more opportunities for its enemies to bring their forces to bear. The agreement has, at various times, been compared to a train leaving a station that everyone should be on or to the Titanic about to founder, but perhaps a more apt vehicle of analogy would be a bike.

Political momentum needs to be maintained if the people of Northern Ireland and two governments are to avoid falling off.

The clear No 1 priority for the whole community of Northern Ireland is security. Disbanding paramilitary groups, the Mitchell principles of non-violence, decommissioning, the observation of human rights and police reform remain the top issues through all the polls.

Each community sees these in slightly different terms, and that is a real difficulty. But the people of Northern Ireland voted for the Belfast Agreement in the hope and aspiration that it would deliver peace.

When it has not, there is disenchantment, and the agreement is under its greatest threat. There can be little doubt that the loyalist feud, punishment shootings and murders attributed to republican groups contributed significantly to the failure of the Ulster Unionist Party to win the Antrim South by-election last year.

However, if the people can be persuaded that police reform could, eventually, lead to the end of paramilitarism, then it would be more acceptable across the whole community. The full engagement of all sections of Northern Ireland society in an acceptable police service is arguably as important as the decommissioning of weapons that can easily be replaced.

However, the debate on this issue is being driven by the politics of the forthcoming elections and what was agreed at Hillsborough Castle last May. The results of the poll taken after that deal clearly illustrate where the electorate stands on these key issues.

Democratic Unionists, Ulster Unionists, Progressive Unionists, Alliance supporters and SDLP voters all give the highest priority to commitments to non-violence and paramilitary decommissioning, listing them in the top five of their priorities out of a list of 22 items taken from the Belfast Agreement.

The Sinn Fein electorate has a somewhat different agenda, listing reform of the RUC; the early release of prisoners; Northern Ireland demilitarisation and the reform of the criminal justice system as its top four.

The only item that everyone puts in their top five is support for victims of the Troubles.

The principle of consent makes it into the top five for all the unionist party supporters (DUP, UUP and PUP). Alliance and SDLP voters both have the new Northern Ireland Assembly and the Northern Ireland Executive high on their list, but the reform of the RUC is now just out of the SDLP top five at No 6, with Northern Ireland demilitarisation at No 7.

The leaderships of the proagreement parties and the two governments have some difficult decisions to make but, with regard to the future of the peace process, the implementation of the Belfast Agreement and public opinion in general, one clear message seems to come through. All of the agreement needs to be implemented more completely and less slowly than is presently the case, and implementation must deliver peace.

If peace and stability can be delivered, then the pro-agreement parties and two governments might find they have far more licence with regard to the full implementation of the Belfast Agreement than they may presently believe to be the case.

When it comes to making peace there is no need to be faint-hearted.