mary robinson

mike65 wrote: »

She quit the job halfway through her second term, for a better paid/more prestigious job with the UN, that's how good Robinson was.

dvpower wrote: »

Did she do it for the money and the prestige?

Yamanoto wrote: »

Disingenuous wording at work there methinks.

Mrs. Robinson: I should like to second this motion and to welcome the opportunity which it gives us in this House to discuss the position, not only in the North of this country but in these islands. If we try to discuss or assess what is called the problem of Northern Ireland out of that context, [781] we are not going to come up with a balanced, realistic conclusion.

Before going on to carry out that assessment I should like to remind ourselves—if we need reminding—that we are talking about the lives, jobs, relationships and even the dignity as human persons of the people living in this whole geographical territory, more critically those in the North, but also those in this part of the country and in the neighbouring island.

...I would prefer to see a very detailed assessment of the consequences of each type of withdrawal. Taking them separately, regarding the consequences of military withdrawal, I think that it could be very beneficial if a phasing down of military presence in Northern Ireland could be achieved in a constructive way, because it would reduce very substantially the level of violence...

We must do this in a framework where nobody has to give up their political aspirations provided they do not try to impose those aspirations by violent means on others.

I feel that this is a very delicate balance which must be achieved. I do not believe that it is beyond our imaginations or our energies. We will be condemned by future generations unless we get down to it much more seriously and with much more desire for concrete and positive results...

...We cannot go on talking about aspirations and unity unless we are a great deal clearer about what we mean by unity. I, for one, do not see or desire unity as a takeover by the South or as an assertion of territorial domination or even jurisdiction. Not only do I have to state that firmly but I believe I must try to persuade my fellow politicians—the Members of this House—and members of the Government who are in a position to take steps on it, to state in a much more concrete way than has been done that the concept of Ireland is not a concept of domination from the South as the single way in which there can be the fulfilment of any aspiration or national aim for unity.

It is very important, as I said at the beginning, that the political package which emerges is sufficiently flexible to allow both majority and minority to participate in power. I believe that this is negotiable, that it is possible, with the economic and political pressures that can come to bear on those in Northern Ireland, to insist on power sharing between majority and minority and to insist that this can be done in a context which does not require denial or undermining of the aspirations of those who participate.

Also, a much more conscious effort must be made to reinforce the idea that any nationalist aspirations that are held by the minority in Northern Ireland are of the more flexible kind which I hope are emerging here—not a concept of Southern domination or of a takeover, but an aspiration for co-existence between Irish men and women on this island in viable units which offer the basic protections of peace and security, of respect for the dignity of human persons and of absence of discrimination and terrorism.