[ad_1]
The degree of unrest from the British government over the commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the Irish famine is revealed in previously confidential files released today in Belfast.
Senior British officials called then-State Minister Avril Doyle’s decision to go ahead with a concert in Liverpool in 1996 as “very uncomfortable”.
The confirmation that the concert was underway came after Prime Minister John Major vetoed any official British participation in a proposed ecumenical service to mark the anniversary of the famine.
Mr. Major’s decision – originally disclosed in archival documents declassified in London last year – coincided with the breaking of the IRA ceasefire in February 1996.
The most recent files show that plans were well advanced for the event, with President Mary Robinson attending, before opinion changed within the British government.
Ultimately, Major decreed that the planned ecumenical service in Liverpool involving members of the British government and the royal family “would sound like an apology for the famine” and would offend Unionist sensibilities in Northern Ireland.
‘Service of contrition’
In August 1994, Chris Maccabe, from the political affairs division of the Northern Ireland Office (NIO), raised the possibility of a British event to commemorate the famine. He informed his colleagues that the Anglican Rector of Liverpool, Canon Nicholas Frayling, was planning “a service of contrition” at the Anglican Cathedral in Liverpool next year in which “Great Britain can express its deep regret for the treatment it gave to Irish citizens 150 years ago ”.
The official continued: “To Canon’s disappointment, I was less than enthusiastic. . . pointing out that the terrible events of the 1840s must be seen in the context of the laissez-faire of the time ”. Maccabe considered that such a service could “arouse more excitement than he spent.”
His memo elicited a response from the NIO’s Tony Canavan who, writing on August 19, 1994, felt that “in taking a defensive stance on the likely criticism of the British record in Ireland during the Famine, it would be necessary to strike a balance between two extremes.” . This was the radical nationalist version of events that accused Britain of committing genocide and a more benign explanation.
However, the official warned of the danger of supporting “the revisionist vision. . . that government action to help famine victims was simply foreign to average Victorian thinking. ” Canavan fueled “the strong suspicion that London would have reacted differently to a similar agricultural catastrophe in Wiltshire.”
Debate
In October 1995, the British ambassador to Ireland, Veronica Sutherland, had joined the debate. In a dispatch to the ministers of NIO, dated October 23, 1995, the ambassador noted that the taoiseach [John Bruton] he had appointed Doyle to coordinate commemorations of the famine in the Republic.
He had attended various events, including an ecumenical service in Tuam, Co Galway. The organizers of these occasions had expressed their appreciation for the British interest in their work. Sutherland added: “None of them had suggested that the British make a formal apology for the events of 1845-49.” The only request for an apology came from Bertie Ahern, the leader of the Fianna Fáil, and was ridiculed as an attempt to arouse Republican support, the note said.
Impressed by the approach of the Irish government, the ambassador invited Doyle to dinner and the minister of state suggested an ecumenical service in Liverpool Cathedral, similar to the one held in Tuam. The ambassador felt that the idea had many attractions. He noted that Archbishop Lord Eames had delivered the speech at Tuam and stressed the need for reconciliation.
Sutherland recommended the idea of a service in Liverpool: “It would be an effective way to acknowledge the past without a fruitless exercise of apology.”
The ambassador’s suggestion garnered a positive response from Northern Ireland’s secretary, Sir Patrick Mayhew, who considered it “could do a lot of good.”
Difficulties
However, as time went on, the mood began to change and on January 16, 1996, NIO official Peter Bell informed his colleagues that he viewed the proposal with “dismay.” In a highly worded memorandum, he wrote that by organizing such a service, the British government risked “perpetuating the republican view of Irish history that the big problem is Britain’s relationship with Ireland while, in fact, they are the relationships between the two communities. ” within Northern Ireland ”.
Bell’s concerns were shared by then-British Foreign Secretary Malcolm Rifkind, who feared “to provoke recriminations against Britain by Irish nationalists.”
Further difficulties arose in February 1996 when a NIO official reported that he had found leading Protestant churchmen, Archbishop Eames and Presbyterian moderator Dr. John Ross, “half-hearted” with the idea. Eames recalled that northern Anglicans had criticized him for his involvement in the ecumenical service at Tuam and that he had found this experience a “discipline.”
This event, which coincided with the breaking of the IRA ceasefire in Canary Wharf, led the Northern Ireland secretary to withdraw his support. In a letter to Rifkind’s private secretary, Dominick Chilcott, dated February 1996, Mayhew’s private secretary stated that Lord Eames not only opposed the service, but feared that the Bishop of Liverpool would favor a very “penitent service.” “with HMG. [her majesty’s government] assuming the role of penitent. The event threatened to “do more harm than good.”
The last word was left to the prime minister. In a note sent to the Foreign Office on March 9, 1996, Major’s private secretary, Edward Oakden, expressed the prime minister’s open opposition: “Say what we say, assistance from the government (and possibly royalty) to such service it would seem an apology for the famine and reigniting the debate over whether we owe such an apology. . . Unionists are unlikely to sympathize. “
Commemorative concert
The problem reappeared when Doyle, on behalf of the Irish government, invited the British ambassador to Ireland, Sutherland, to a concert to mark the anniversary of the famine in Liverpool.
In July 1996, Sutherland informed the NIO that he had spoken to the Irish minister and “Mrs. Doyle insisted that it would be counterproductive to cancel the concert at this time. The unfavorable comment that this would attract from a wide range of people would be much more controversial than a cultural event like this. ”
The ambassador saw the force in Doyle’s arguments, but made it clear that inviting British ministers would not be appropriate “especially given the recent events in Northern Ireland.” Sutherland said she would be willing to attend herself, subject to London’s approval.
The ambassador’s letter clearly caused consternation. Sir John Chilcot, a senior NIO official, wrote on his hand: “This is very uncomfortable. Most likely, HMG will not want this to go ahead, let alone officially approve it. “
A note from Donald Lamont from the Republic of Ireland department of the British Foreign Office admitted that attending a concert would involve less “British self-flagellation” than a religious service. However, the official still argued against the ambassador accepting Doyle’s invitation.
At the event, both Sutherland and Doyle attended the Famine concert at the Liverpool Philharmonic, although the city Irish community complained about being virtually excluded from the preparations. The concert took place in September 1996, nine months before new Prime Minister Tony Blair said that those in power in London had failed the Irish people by failing to intervene during the famine.
[ad_2]