Mr David Andrews's handling of Northern Ireland matters during his first months as Minister for Foreign Affairs is a source of concern. Only weeks ago he had to apologise to the unionist parties at the Stormont talks for creating an impression that Articles 2 and 3 would not be open for negotiation during the course of multi-party talks. Yesterday he was submerged in a storm of anger from the Ulster Unionist and Alliance parties because of weekend comments concerning North/South arrangements. Mr Andrews has accepted that his observations were misjudged and inappropriate and he has stated that he had not intended to propose the creation of a third source of power within the three-strand framework. Offence was created by the Minister's weekend suggestion that the North/South strand should have "powers not unlike a government". Retracting those comments yesterday, Mr Andrews insisted he was not apologising. Nevertheless his retraction is an admission of a serious gaffe at a time of extreme sensitivity in the talks process.
Given the pressure that the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party has been operating under in recent weeks it was perhaps no surprise that Mr David Trimble should seek the ultimate sanction in calling for the sacking of Mr Andrews as Minister for Foreign Affairs. He accused the Minister of "coming out with a republican wish list" and said that it was not the action of a serious politician. Unionists wanted to know who was actually talking for the Irish Government, he said. Mr Trimble's response and that of Lord Alderdice were somewhat overblown given Mr Andrews's obvious discomfiture and the subsequent withdrawal of his remarks.
A far more measured response was forthcoming from the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Dr Mowlam, when she suggested at a meeting of the British/Irish Parliamentary Body in London that the choice of words had been unintended. Reflecting the upset sometimes caused in this State by the thoughtless observations of British ministers, she ruefully said "we all use words at times that get us into difficulties". But the talks process itself is far more important than any passing dispute over words or symbols. Dr Mowlam hoped that yesterday's "furore" would give way to progress by the end of the week, when the parties concentrated on the real and substantive issues before them. In spite of yesterday's difficulties, she found reasons for hope and confidence in recent political developments. She believed "a turning point has been reached in the history of our two nations" and she looked forward to positive discussions and negotiations. The British government would, she said, be pushing forward with all the power and confidence that it had.
Coming at this particular time in the Stormont talks process, such support and reassurance will be of considerable importance to the Government and particularly to its beleaguered Minister for Foreign Affairs. But that is what new Anglo/Irish structures are supposed to be about: a framework within which difficulties and disagreements are addressed and resolved. In the scale of Northern Ireland's problems, Mr Andrews's faux pas was a worrying slip, but hardly a sacking offence. Let us hope that he learns from it.