Lord Eames: even politicians did not realise full complexity of Brexit

Recently I took up a kind invitation from Lord Eames, former archbishop of Armagh, to visit him at the House of Lords.

On the wintry evening when he greeted me at the Peers’ Entrance to the Palace of Westminster, he was obviously very much at home in the splendid surroundings.

He had agreed to speak to me on the record for the News Letter on a range of current issues and at his suggestion our initial conversation at the House of Lords was followed up by further discussions at his home outside Hillsborough.

He was quite taken aback when I mentioned to him that he had been a peer for 22 years now, and he went on to tell me that he attends the House of Lords for several days every week.

He described the routine as “quite strenuous” for peers from Northern Ireland and Scotland in particular, as it means considerable travel and staying away from home as well as coping with many official papers.

However, he also said that Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales were under-represented in the House of Lords which, he said, is dominated by peers from “the home counties”.

At the moment he is particularly focused on the work of the committee on Middle East issues and he told me that in his view the recent decision by US President Donald Trump to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel had “totally upset” what he described as the “delicate balance” between Israeli and Palestinian interests.

He added that because the UK and the US have traditionally mirrored each other’s stances in relation to the Middle East, for example in relation to the two-state solution, the UK is now going to suffer in the eyes of Palestinians if it does not clearly disassociate itself from the US move.

Lord Eames described the Brexit issue as “all embracing” at Westminster. He said that Brexit was now being seen as having complex ramifications that people had not foreseen.

He said: “I blame the politicians for not explaining the intricacies, but at the same time I doubt that politicians themselves realised how complicated it would be. There has been consternation in Whitehall at the extent of the work.”

Nonetheless, he paid tribute to Prime Minister Theresa May who, he said, faced an “almost impossible task”.

He said: “Theresa May is a most likeable person, a person of faith, a product of rectory life, but I worry about the strain on her of current events. What I know of her I admire. At times she is unfairly criticised for how she is dealing with the Brexit issue, but I think she is stronger than people realise.”

Regarding the border issue, Lord Eames said he had been “amazed” at how many English peers had approached him saying they had not realised how complicated it would be.

He said it had been “most damaging” that the recent agreement allowing Brexit negotiations to proceed to phase two was being interpreted as “an intention rather than a solid agreement”.

He added that even among Tories he found a lack of confidence in the UK’s negotiators and went on to speculate that it was possible that “current Brexit preoccupations will affect moves to restore Stormont”, adding: “We cannot allow this vacuum to last. The DUP and Sinn Fein have a responsibility.”

On two of the main obstacles, Lord Eames said he understood the RHI inquiry to be “a work in progress, although aspects are already emerging to indicate that mistakes were made”, and on an Irish language act he said that the real issue is that of its terms and how it would be interpreted.

However, he warned: “If we want to be a totally integrated society at peace with itself, expressions of cultural differences are going to be important.”

Regarding the 2009 report of the Consultative Group on the Past, which he co-chaired with Denis Bradley, Lord Eames said that naming a victims’ recognition payment figure – £12,000 – had been “a mistake”.

While not denying the recognition principle involved, he reiterated what he had told me several years ago for The Church of Ireland Gazette, of which I was then editor, that he is “unhappy with the statutory definition of a victim”.

The 2006 Victims and Survivors Order does not distinguish between people who were acting lawfully and those who were acting unlawfully, thereby allowing a moral equivalence to be perceived.

However, he observed: “Time may be the real healer.”

Regarding the issue of forgiveness, Lord Eames stressed that it is a personal matter and that no one should demand or expect it of others.

He said that the churches had encouraged an attitude of pressuring people to express forgiveness, adding in relation to victims and perpetrators: “It is reasonable to expect people to require sorrow.”

In his recent book, ‘Unfinished Search’, Lord Eames writes that “the loyal orders have the power and influence to make a really significant contribution to a reconciled and shared community”.

When I asked him if he felt that Orangeism in particular would rise to that challenge, he said there is “such diversity of attitudes” within the Orange Order.

He pointed to a divide between Orangeism in Belfast and in the rest of Northern Ireland, referring to “urban apartheid versus a rural neighbourliness”.

He recalled how a senior Orangeman in the west of the Province had once said to him: “Don’t judge us here by Belfast.”

Lord Eames said he had been invited by former prime minister John Major and former taoiseach Albert Reynolds, to advise on the 1993 Downing Street Declaration text.

He said he had been “absolutely horrified” by the first draft and told them that without the principle of consent within Northern Ireland to any change in the Province’s constitutional position they “could not sell it to unionists”. He added: “I expressed my feelings strongly on the consent issue.”

He said that John Major had done more for Northern Ireland than any other prime minister and was not given the credit he deserved. He added that Major and Reynolds had known each other from their earlier political careers, commenting: “History brought the two very good friends together.”

Regarding emerging splits between conservatives and liberals within the Anglican Communion in particular, Lord Eames said: “Divisions are now more severe than when I was dealing with them. Traditional views on issues such as homosexuality are ingrained in culture. Liberal thinking on one side is faced by a growing intensity of conservative thought, even within which there are divisions.”