By these values we stand. Offering a better way to a better Ireland. We don’t deviate on these principles, we deliver. Always true to what we stand for, always ready to face the new issues and shape and embrace new ideas to move our society, our economy and our country forward.

For Sinn Fein, fresh new thinking is condemning dissidents as "out of touch" for doing things they used to do themselves - and still excuse when the need arises.

Sinn Fein say they don’t speak for the IRA or interpret IRA statements. But Gerry Adams said the IRA didn’t do the latest family hostage robbery, or the ones before it.

To those who think the IRA don’t pull off robberies - they do. That’s what they were doing in Adare when they killed Garda Jerry McCabe. That’s what they were doing in Newry when they killed postal worker Frank Kerr. Each time Gerry denied. Each time Gerry lied. So Gerry, how can we believe you now? Why would we believe you over the Taoiseach, who has done so much for the peace process? Why would he say what he did unless he had the clearest and most convincing Garda intelligence in front of him?

Now, Mitchel said it was a crime, because the IRA didn’t do it.

Then he said it wouldn’t have been a crime if the IRA had done it, because the IRA don’t do crime.

As for Pat Doherty, he said it was a crime, but then asked "what is a crime?"

Democratic Ireland can tell you what a crime is.

Holding families hostage is a crime.

Murdering a policeman or a postman is a crime.

Abducting a mother of ten, and disappearing her body for over thirty years is a crime. Denying her the dignity of a Christian burial is as criminal as it is cruel.

Sinn Fein appear to believe that the provisional movement and its members are above the law. The truth is so much of what they say and so many of their actions are beneath contempt.

On Monday, Martin McGuinness said that Sinn Fein and the IRA have a "special relationship". But by Tuesday Pat Doherty said there was no connection at all. So to those who think there might be a solution in Sinn Fein saying they have severed their links with the IRA, I say they have already tried to give us that lie.

The reason we are in this crisis is because the provisional movement has let down everybody who made leaps of faith in this process. So don’t anyone think that the answer now is to ask us to make leaps of fiction.

When their double-speak runs out and their lies just aren’t believed, what do they seek cover in? Their mandate.

But no nationalist voted for bank robberies.

No nationalist voted for abductions or families being threatened with death.

Yet Sinn Fein are citing the mandate they got from nationalist voters to excuse, deny, dismiss all sorts of crime. To deny that the IRA have done crimes. To deny that crime even is crime. All by quoting the votes lent to them by honest, upstanding nationalists. It angers me when Peter Robinson says that the nationalist community are voting to indulge paramilitarism and crime. It should anger and worry all nationalists when Sinn Fein’s propaganda only goes to corroborate that misrepresentation of the good values and motives of the north’s nationalists.

All the time the damage the Agreement and play right into the DUP’s destructive agenda.

Now, before the last elections, they promised to put manners on the DUP and deliver the Agreement. Then, "We’re up for the deal and the DUP are up for the deal", they told us.

But what did they deliver?

They handed the DUP sweeping new vetoes in the negotiations for the so-called "Comprehensive Agreement".

They didn’t just concede to the DUP - they colluded with them - to create a new automatic exclusion, to come in British legislation, to exclude any party like the SDLP that registers its legitimate difference with their new regime. In Annex B, Strand One, Paragraph 9, they created a mechanism for excluding others - not for doing any wrong, but for exercising a democratic right.

Two principles underpin the inclusion provisions of the Agreement - respect for democratic mandate and respect for political difference. This DUP/Sinn Fein compact would have ripped those principles out of the Agreement.

And their dodgy deal also pretended that other problems were sorted, while they were only stored up for further stand off.

But why such a bad deal for nationalists and other democrats, given Sinn Fein’s reputed negotiating skills? Why such a good deal for the DUP?

Because Sinn Fein weren’t negotiating for nationalist rights or for the national agenda.

They had no interest in inclusion. They didn’t care about any extra North South bodies. They weren’t worried that devolution of justice wasn’t tied down.

It wasn’t about standing up to the DUP for the nationalist public interest. It was about protecting the self-interest and self-image of the provisional movement:

Their ex-prisoners on DPPs;

An amnesty for their "On the Runs";

A blind eye to their criminality; and

No sight of their guns.

And what was their "deal breaker"? Release of their Garda killing bank robbers.

There’s only one thing Sinn Fein are true to - their name. Sinn Fein means "Ourselves". That’s all they care about. That’s who and what they negotiate for. "Themselves".

So much for their Ireland of equals.

Sinn Fein talk a lot about their mandate and I respect it. But all the other parties in Ireland have mandates too and there is no mandate greater than that given by the Irish people to the Good Friday Agreement.

So let’s get all the parties of all the people of Ireland together at the Forum for Peace & Reconciliation. Let’s affirm our support for the Agreement and in face of DUP corrosion. Let’s express our determination to see its institutions restored and all paramilitarism ended. Criminality is not a ‘unionist issue’. It is not a ‘British issue’. It is an issue for the people of Ireland because our Good Friday Agreement is in danger of being destroyed by it.

Let’s set out the explicit standards of Irish democracy in the twenty first century. What better way for us all to tell the IRA: ‘Don’t worry, we don’t underestimate the seriousness of the situation’.

We would also welcome the opportunity in a reconvened Forum to conclude on the outstanding business of Irish unity and consent, which could not be agreed when it met previously.

As the party that has set the compass for democratic nationalist politics on this island, the SDLP is uniquely placed to deliver a united Ireland.

We have the credibility to persuade the necessary majority in the North to vote for unity. Because our approach to unity doesn’t threaten the Agreement’s fundamentals and, therefore, there is no reason why it should threaten unionists.

We can build the required consensus among parties and the public in the South that unity would be an opportunity for us all.

We have more than just a vision of unity - we have a strategy for unity. A better way to a better Ireland.

The time has come for us to reclaim the good name of northern nationalism. To reclaim the Agreement. To restore the democratic institutions. To return to the path the Irish people chose.

To tell the DUP (and the governments) that the DUP mandate does not override everyone else’s in the North, any more than Sinn Fein’s overrides everyone else’s on the island.

That’s what I said I would do before the elections. That’s what I did at Leeds Castle and in other recent negotiations. I told Ian, I told Peter, I told Nigel that what they were looking for wasn’t on. We argued with the two governments for a better way. Our argument could not have been stronger. Our analysis could not have been stronger. Our case for the Agreement could not have been stronger. And, I admit it - at one stage - our language could not have been stronger. But our judgement could not have been better.

The SDLP needs a stronger mandate if we are to prevent the mistakes, challenge the game-playing and stop the rot that has denied people what they voted for. People need to know that the strongest vote they can cast for the Agreement is a vote for the SDLP. That the best vote to force the pace on unionists and to force peace from paramilitaries is a vote for the SDLP.

People are catching on to the elaborate con played out every time. Secret talks centring exclusively on Sinn Fein and the leading unionist party of the day. Hype about "historic breakthroughs", spin about "groundbreaking moves", hopes raised for yet another "deal to end all deals". The stilted choreography of different statements and sequencing. The deal falling apart as people come in short of what was promised or needed. Next the blame game between the supposed deal partners, rubbishing each other’s real intent. Then the pretence that the deal will just fall into place after the next election, if people vote for the same parties that served up this failure.

That’s what we were getting in Spring 2003, when the elections were supposed to be happening. That’s what we were getting in autumn 2003, when the elections did happen. We got a flavour of it in last year’s European election. And it is exactly what we are seeing played out again now. People are beginning to see that each time they backed the problem parties, the problem just got worse. They are beginning to see through this pattern of failure, realising that what gets rewarded, gets repeated.

By the time of the forthcoming elections, this current suspension will have lasted longer than the total period the institutions were allowed to operate.

The Good Friday Agreement cannot be allowed to wither on the vine any longer. The inclusive approach that gave us the Agreement in the first place is the only approach that will save the Agreement now. Progress can and must be made and the only way to do it is by recreating a process of equals.

Not punishing a party with silly sanctions that they will only find politically rewarding, but no longer rewarding them with negotiating advantage because of their relationship with paramilitaries and the elevated status of exclusive negotiations.

Other parties have been canvassing various alternatives, including the failed Prior Assembly model, a sort of joint Direct Rule, deep suspension and voluntary coalition/ exclusion. All of which deviate away from the Agreement and none of which sort out the problems which have been stopping us all.

Only the SDLP has put forward positive proposals to move politics forward by returning to the Agreement and all going as far as we possibly can.

In the midst of all the conflicting arguments, it is worth noting that no party actually believes that an inclusive executive can be formed now or soon. All parties also claim to be for the Agreement, or to accept its fundamentals. They all claim to be for the arrangements in all the strands. And all claim to be against Direct Rule.

Under our proposals, the two governments must show good authority by working together on the Agreement, through a reinvigorated British Irish Inter-governmental Conference. That means radical demilitarisation. Real equality - including for west of the Bann. Leading for sharing - in our communities and council chambers.

Our proposals are for the end of suspension and restoration of all the institutions. Parties will then have six weeks to appoint an inclusive executive. If things happen to allow the parties do so, well and good. Sadly, in reality they won’t. And when they don’t, we should not sink back into deep suspension. Nor have the Assembly just scrutinising Direct Rule.

Instead, we keep the Assembly, with all its legislative, budgetary and other powers under the Agreement. We protect the executive power model of the Agreement and prevent Direct Rule, by having the two governments nominate ten people from all walks of life - not civil servants - to administer the departments and look after the business of the Executive, fully accountable to the fully functioning Assembly.

With restoration of the Assembly, North South bodies would come off ‘care and maintenance’. The civic administrators would be recognised as Ministers of the Assembly and so the North South Ministerial Council would get going again - and it needs to. Similarly, for the British Irish Council.

The civic administration panel would not only be nominated by the two governments, after consultation, but would have to be approved by the Assembly in a cross-community vote. So our proposals are not for a "super-quango", mandarin rule or unaccountable government. 108 elected MLAs would be doing the job they are meant to do. And the North South arrangements can do the job they need to do.

The Assembly then faces a choice. Vote them in, and get as much of the Agreement up and running as we can. Or vote them out, and accept deep suspension. That puts it up to the parties - and exposes them. In public, they have to show whether they are on for the peace and progress that the people of Ireland voted for. Or whether what they really want is stalemate, suspension and runaway Direct Rule. The reality is those who argue against our proposals argue for suspension and British Direct Rule.

There is some arrogance in the assertion that people from civic and community life outside of elected politics would not be up to the job of delivering effective governance. When we look to the social partners we can see many people who have stronger pedigrees and greater expertise in front-line community development, reconciliation, regeneration, enterprise and job creation, and delivering public services than some of the MLAs some parties might nominate to serve in an Executive. The real fear of some politicians in other parties is not that such people mightn’t be any good accounting to the Assembly, but that they might be too good. Remember, civilian appointments to the Policing Board and DPPs have proven very effective.

We want to talk to the other parties so we can debate our proposals against any alternative they might offer.

If there is any good intent on the part of the DUP as far as the fundamentals of the Agreement are concerned, talks on our proposals will test that. Or if, as many of us believe there is not, those talks will call their bluff.

Of course, we know others will put propositions to us.

As in our recent meeting with Tony Blair, voluntary coalition or exclusion will be among them. As with Tony Blair, we will be saying no to such a departure from the Agreement. Our proposals are the best way for parties to prevent us all from remaining excluded from democratic opportunity because of paramilitarism. It’s not just that - as with silly sanctions - Sinn Fein would hope exclusion would prove politically rewarding to them. We would also ask, voluntary coalition with whom and on what terms? With the DUP, on the basis of their failed "Comprehensive Agreement"? No way.

The kinds of decision being taken by Direct Rule now are more fundamental and long-term than anything we had got to when we had our own institutions. Other parties might be complacent about that, even happy to duck some issues and to see our communities’ interests and public services compromised.

But not the SDLP. Think about it:

One adult in four in this society lacks basic literacy and numeracy skills. Direct Rule responds by squeezing the education boards’ funding.

One child in three here lives below the poverty line, but instead of attacking child, Direct Rule attacks children’s funding.

Now, one in two might say they don’t see much wrong with Direct Rule,

But each and every one of us will be hit - and hit hard - when Direct Rule imposes water charges in spite of clear public opposition.

Too many people are accepting water charges as inevitable in the hope that they will be reversed later. Too many others are assuming they won’t be affected if they are imposed. Perhaps too much campaigning emphasis is being placed on how we respond to charges when they come in.

Rather than trying to pretend that it’s enough to say we will repeal Direct Rule’s damage on water when devolution eventually returns, is it not better to create options and truer choices for ourselves?

It isn’t just opposition to the excesses of Direct Rule that should argue for the restoration of the institutions. It’s our own stronger agenda.

We want a real strategy to combat poverty.

Proper investment in our infrastructure throughout the whole region and not just in Greater Belfast. Whether it is in roads and railways, schools or hospitals - including addressing the "Gap in the Map" for acute services in Tyrone and Mid Ulster.

The reconstitution of the Strategic Investment Board on the social partnership model we envisaged.

Policies to reinvigorate our public services, so that they can match the best that others will have in the future. Not just meeting the needs of all of us who need those services, but also motivating those who deliver them.

A framework to stop undervaluing and overtaxing our business sector. We have to find ways of supporting our small and medium enterprises facing added cost burdens such as insurance, energy, transport and waste management. New jobs are not just create by new government policies or new public expenditure, but by new businesses making new products, providing new services, finding new markets in the world and creating new multipliers at home.

Support for the community and voluntary sector, which delivers so much but faces the fall-off of European funding, now without the fallback of any of the Executive Programme Funds.

It’s not just because the SDLP created the Executive Programme Funds that we resent their abolition by Direct Rule. All five funds showed support for projects and new service models that supported particular needs of children. Not just the Children’s Fund, although it was particularly important and even unique among them. It wasn’t only through these funds that we pursued our commitment to children. We led on the creation of a Children’s Commissioner and insisted on world leading powers for that office. We initiated the Children’s Strategy.

We did it because we believe passionately in the unfulfilled promise of the 1916 Proclamation, to cherish "all the children of the nation equally".

We challenge all the parties on this island to step up to ensuring that this is a guaranteed reality by 2016. And the sooner the better.

By making it our shared priority to eradicate child poverty.

By ensuring that no child of Ireland is ever left behind or branded a failure.

Where the "children of Ireland" doesn’t just mean children of Irish parents.

Where we measure our shared patriotism in the schools we build, the healthcare we provide and the hopes we raise.

Where no child with a disability’s parents have to negotiate with or between different services, as though their child is the first with such special needs.

Where society, all its systems and every service says and means "every child is our child."

Where all children live free, not just from the deprivation of poverty, but the depravity of prejudice.

Where they will grow up with proper respect for all the differences on their island.

Where they don’t just get their history from a gable wall, but have a positive regard for all the different hurts that people have suffered at different hands.

It is not just for victims of the troubles that we need to deal with the issues of truth, recognition and remembrance, but for our children and generations after them. But we do owe more to victims than they have been given them to date.

Victims and survivors are fed up with politicians patting them on the shoulder, but then simply shrugging their shoulders when it comes to what we do about delivering on the Agreement’s promise to them. No victim denies that this society needs to look to the future. But we must deny no victim the right to tell their story, the truth of their hurt.

It was at our insistence that the idea of a victims and survivors forum was in the Joint Declaration. This is something the two governments should honour, without any further delay, so that victims can shape and define the truth recovery process in ways that reflect their needs. It wasn’t addressed in the "Comprehensive Agreement" in December, but it needs to be delivered now. If the governments really are serious about doing things differently from now on, why not make that the first item of business at the British Irish Inter-Governmental Conference? Why not at last put all victims’ rights to truth and closure ahead of the victim-makers’ desire to avoid embarrassment and discomfort?

I do not accept the argument that some have even made this week - just as we have heard before in relation to Bloody Sunday - that only when we agree something to be done for all victims, should anything be done for any victim. If we can lift a cruel cross for someone, should we not do so?

That’s why Tony Blair is to be commended for sincerely, completely and publicly exonerating the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven.

On Wednesday evening, I could see from the glint in Sarah Conlon’s eye, hear from the lift in her voice, feel from the strength of her hope that a big, dark stone has been rolled away from Guiseppe Conlon’s memory.

I am honoured to welcome Gerry Conlon here today. Gerry impressed and inspired today, not just by articulating his own anguish, but his feeling for others too.

We made a promise and we’re proud to have kept it. We have so many other promises to keep. And we are proud that people look to us for help and for hope.

That’s why we have to keep getting stronger to carry these hopes. Stronger to go the distance for a society of equality, tolerance and prosperity. Stronger to keep building for the new Ireland.

As we look to the elections, we owe it, not just to ourselves, but to those who look to us for help, to keep getting stronger.

We know we have to do more to get the people who stayed at home last time out to vote this time. To convince them that when they stay away from the polls, politics stays stuck. To show them that the SDLP is not just worthy of their support, but hungry for their votes as well.

We need to persuade people that the strongest vote they can cast is a vote for a stronger SDLP.

That if they’ve had enough of the corrosion of the Agreement and the corruption of politics, then the best thing they can do is to use the power of their vote to make the SDLP stronger.

Because we are stronger and we offer more.

Stronger on the right issues. Stronger for the right reasons.

Stronger against the Eleven Plus, stronger for students and for our senior citizens. Stronger on the environment, for farmers and for the rural community. Stronger for job creation, healthcare and public service provision.

Stronger for victims. Stronger for the Agreement. Stronger on Irish unity. Stronger because we are straighter. Stronger because our hands are cleaner.

Better for progress and stability. Willing to go further for peace and democracy.

So go to the people and ask them to support our efforts to build - not just a party - but a nation.

Tell them that the SDLP counts patriotism - not in stolen bank notes - but in the acts of decency carried out by people across this island every day of their lives.

Get out on every doorstep and every street and tell the people that the time has come to reclaim the good name of northern nationalism.

That the day has arrived when we must make good the promise to cherish all the children of the nation equally.

That ours is a better way to a better Ireland.

Get out there and fight like we have never fought before for the values we hold dear.

Stand stronger than you have ever stood before for the vision we hold out for Ireland and all our people.

You know I made a promise to Sarah Conlon in her daughter’s kitchen eighteen months ago. And we kept it.

She made me make another promise in the same kitchen on Wednesday evening. She told me:

"You’ve got to keep going for everybody else. We need the SDLP to keep on for everything that needs to be done in this country."

I made that promise. And we are going to keep it.

SDLP are keeping on.

SDLP - Lead on.