Dr. Neil Jarman:

Some of what I will say will chime with Professor Hamber's comments. The Agreement has undoubtedly been a relative success and a key factor in helping to provide a society in Northern Ireland that is more peaceful, safer and is beginning to become fairer. In particular, I wish to highlight the establishment of the Assembly, the Executive and the police reform programme as key indicators of progress and key successes of the work done to date. However, I emphasise that all of that is a work in progress. It cannot be seen as being done and dusted.

The Agreement was very much at an elite level, although it was supported by the wider population in a referendum. It focused very much on establishing and implementing institutional reforms, rather than having a clear mechanism for engaging on the ground. That work has been done successfully in the meantime, but the challenge of peace-building and consolidating progress on issues remains the key element. That will remain true as we move to a second phase of peace-building, where initial structures have been put in place and many problems have been dealt with, but we must think about the next phase.

I highlight five key issues that present challenges which are still to be addressed. The first is the issue of segregation and sectarianism which remains one of the key indicators in and dynamics of Northern Ireland. There are high levels of segregation in residential areas, schooling, social activities, sport and throughout the political system and structures. We must acknowledge that the problems in Northern Ireland date back much further than the conflict between 1969 and 1994, with sectarianism and segregation deeply rooted in Northern Irish society. Therefore, we can expect it to take a long time to address the issue. In the absence of a clear policy agenda and focus, there is the risk that it will be established as a norm.

The second element to be flagged is that of paramilitarism. The peace-building terms of demobilisation, demilitarisation and reintegration do not figure effectively in the Agreement, although there is a focus on the decommissioning of weapons and the release of prisoners. There was an assumption that if these issues were addressed, the organisations behind the men involved and arms used would naturally lose purpose. Unfortunately, with the exception of the IRA, the combatant organisations remain in place; although they have redefined and repositioned themselves, they remain part of Northern Irish society. Again, there is no strategy, policy or agenda on how to remove them and there is a risk that in the longer term they will be seen as a normal part of Northern Irish society which is divided and underpinned by elements of paramilitarism.

Comments on a lack of policy flag the third element - political leadership. Although much has been made about the lack of a policy on cohesion, sharing and integration because it focuses on the contentious issue of the sectarian divide, I have examined on the website a number of the policies of the offices of the First and Deputy First Ministers and all of them, including those dealing with aging, children, gender equality and race, date from before the establishment of the devolved Administration. Effectively, they are all Northern Ireland Office policies and the Administration has not developed any of them. As well as policies on cohesion, sharing and integration, a policy was promised on parades. However, it did not get very far and the disability policy has not moved beyond being a draft. The policy on sexual orientation has not appeared and, more worryingly, the anti-poverty policy dates from the time of Peter Hain, meaning it predates the economic crisis of recent years and the transformation of welfare supports, unemployment figures and so forth. That is the fourth point. If we are to move forward, the Administration must address the issue of developing effective policies. In this regard, there must be a policy to address the economy, including anti-poverty issues, employment creation, inward investment and so forth. That presents another major challenge.

The final point relates to one of the elements of the Good Friday Agreement that has not been implemented in a sustained way - the civic forum. It is an integral part of the process designed to find a way for civil society to engage in the structures of governance. Given the issues around leadership and the need to drive the process forward, there is a role for organisations of civil society to play to build better relationships with government and to see this as a way of working together in a more cohesive partnership, instead of the form which has developed in the past ten years or so, with civil society being marginalised as government sought to take responsibility for the systems of governance. If there is a way to move the system forward, it could be by drawing in civil society and wider civic organisations as part of a wider process.