THERE was a strong argument for remitting weapons decommissioning to "a separate but parallel stream of negotiations" before the issue was dealt with in all party talks, the Tanaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Spring, said last night.
He told the biannual plenary session of the British Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body at Adare, Co Limerick, that it was necessary to ensure the issue was dealt with "meaningfully and satisfactorily" without derailing political negotiations.
"The decommissioning issue is qualitatively different from most other prospective agenda items for the talks.
"It deals with a situation which is in breach of the law, with the complex legal considerations that entails.
"Since it requires the co-operation of the paramilitary leaders in possession of such weapons, the negotiators around the table cannot decide the issue for themselves.
"In any case, I believe most parties would not wish to become immersed in its technicalities, provided the outcomes are sat is factory to them.
"There is therefore, I believe, a strong argument in favour of remitting this issue, in the first instance, under an independent outside aegis, to a separate but parallel stream of negotiations.
"In that way it could be processed and clarified for the consideration of the political negotiators, and the outcomes submitted to them for consideration alongside the results emerging from the political negotiations across the three strands."
Mr Spring said he agreed with British MPs who said recently that the issue was too fundamental to be left vague until June 10th.
"I agree with that analysis and believe this approach should be explored with all relevant parties as of now. The baleful potential of this issue has been well demonstrated, and we must ensure that it does not eclipse the wider goal of political agreement."
He added that the two governments had made it clear they wanted the negotiations to be inclusive but also that Sinn Fein participation required an unequivocal restoration of the August 1994 ceasefire.
Within the negotiating process, we expect all participants to subscribe to the six Mitchell principles. This latter is a very challenging step for Sinn Fein, but one they should muster the courage to take."
Mr Spring referred indirectly to the recent controversy over the remark by his adviser, Mr Fergus Finlay, that talks without Sinn Fein were "not worth a penny candle".
The Tanaiste said that, rather than debating the viability of talks without Sinn Fein, he would prefer to focus on the "special value" of talks which included that party.
"If we can find agreement at that table, it will be real and lasting agreement. No one need rise from it having to look over their shoulders at those certain to reject the outcome because they were not there."
Mr Spring said there had been criticism of the notion of a special relationship between the Government and nationalists in Northern Ireland.
"This has been stigmatised as pan nationalist as though any agreement among nationalists in Ireland, whatever its content and practical effect, must by definition by reprehensible.
"I believe it is inevitable, for reasons of history, identity and aspiration, that nationalists in Northern Ireland will attach great importance to the role of the Irish Government.
"As a result of the circumstances of Northern Ireland's creation and its subsequent development, there exists a pervasive structural inequality psychological and symbolic as well as political and socio economic between the two communities there.
"That inequality has itself been one of the causes of instability. It is accepted in almost all quarters that a different political dispensation will be needed, even if the vision of what it should be differs predictably.
"The role of the Irish Government has been, and always will be, as the resolute opponent of violence and a champion of peaceful means and consent.
"If the role of the Irish Government reassures nationalists in Northern Ireland that the political processes governing them will be meaningful, and they will never again be marginalised, as they were in the past, I believe that both the British government and the unionist community should welcome that as a resource to increase the prospect of political consensus and democratic commitment, whose absence in Northern Ireland has been so costly to date.
"If we can contribute in any significant degree to setting this island on the path to agreement and peace through our involvement with the nationalist community, and in the negotiations generally, it would be strange, and indeed irresponsible, to stand aloof.
"It is the duty of the Irish Government to be both an advocate of change and a facilitator of its acceptance and achievement."
However, Mr Spring stressed that the Government's concern with the rights of Northern nationalists did not mean it was "ignorant or indifferent as regards unionist concerns".