Ian Gow was a British Conservative politician, closely aligned with Margaret Thatcher. Gow was outspoken on the Troubles in Northern Ireland, where he had completed military service during the 1950s. He considered Republican paramilitaries nothing more than criminals and opposed any concessions or negotiations with Nationalists. When Thatcher signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement in 1985, Gow resigned from the ministry in protest. He explained his resignation in the House of Commons on November 26th:

“My first encounter with Northern Ireland took place nearly 30 years ago. As a young subaltern I was stationed at Omagh in county Tyrone. It has been my good fortune to return to Ulster on many occasions since then, first as a soldier and then as a Member of this place. I have been proud to count unionist Members of this House as my friends.

It is nearly seven years since I spoke in a debate on Northern Ireland, from the opposition front bench, with Airey Neave at my side. I speak today to show that it is not necessary to have a big mouth or a loud voice to care deeply about Ulster. I speak too as one who condemns violence in all its forms. I speak as a Unionist who repudiates today and who will repudiate tomorrow, every kind – I repeat, every kind – of unlawful or unconstitutional action…

Following the signing of the agreement at Hillsborough on November 15th, the Prime Minister said that she was a Unionist and a Loyalist. I shall never question her sincerity, but I have to say that those words were received with incredulity by Unionists in Northern Ireland. The Anglo-Irish agreement has been signed without understanding of the views of the overwhelming majority of the people of Northern Ireland. It has been signed against a background that gives wholly disproportionate consideration to the views of the minority. Under the agreement, the Irish Government will put forward views and proposals on political, security and legal matters, including the administration of justice. The Government who will put forward their views and proposals relating to Northern Ireland are the same Government from whose territory murderous assaults have been made on the innocent in the Province, and to whose territory the guilty have returned and found too often a safe haven.

Article Two of the constitution of the Irish Republic lays claim to the territory of the whole of the island of Ireland. One might have thought at least that if the Republic’s Government were to be allowed – and in the most solemn terms of an international treaty – to put forward proposals relating to political, security and legal matters, they would have agreed to remove Article Two from their constitution. The British Government claims that it is a major step forward for the Government of the Republic to have given formal acceptance of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom. If that is so, why was Article Two not removed?

We are told that the agreement will mean more effective co-operation on security matters between the Republic and the United Kingdom. Is it really suggested that without the agreement such co-operation would have been less effective? All civilised Governments, with or without a formal agreement, should commit themselves unreservedly to the elimination of terrorism. If the Government of the Republic have been unable hitherto to be as effective in combating terrorism as we were entitled to expect, why are we so confident that they will be able to deliver now? …

Our fellow countrymen from Northern Ireland will perceive — and will not be wrong in perceiving — that the agreement would never have been signed unless there had been a prolonged campaign of violence. The agreement will be perceived as having been won as a result of violence. The Irish National Liberation Army and the Irish Republican Army will believe that their violence is succeeding. The Royal Ulster Constabulary and the Ulster Defence Regiment will perceive that they have been betrayed…

No Member of the House should criticise the agreement without putting forward an alternative policy. I remember the words of our manifesto at the 1979 general election. They were words in which I had a hand. The manifesto said: In the absence of devolved government we will seek to establish one or more elected regional councils with a wide range of powers over local services. Alas, following the assassination of Airey Neave, that policy was never implemented. It may be that he was assassinated because that was his policy. Successive Secretaries of State have abandoned that policy. Six years on, although there is still an absence of devolved government, there is still no one or more elected regional councils…

We should implement the policy laid down in the 1979 manifesto. We should assert that those in Northern Ireland who aspire to a united Ireland will be respected. We should assert that Ulster Unionists are ready to acknowledge the place in Ulster of the Roman Catholic, whether Unionist or Republican, as in any other part of the kingdom, and that all men and women should be entitled to express their views, opinions and identities under a rule of law which would safeguard their rights. We should assert that the policy of the Government is to maintain and to strengthen the Union.”