Mr. Peter Sheridan:

I will try to answer some of the questions raised. Deputy Ó Ríordáin raised the issue of sectarianism being the lifeblood of the some political parties and asked if it was a raison d'être for them continuing. I have heard that argument previously. I would tend to be more benevolent than that in that I do not think people in the political parties deliberately set out to keep that in place. It is an issue of the difficulties involved. All of us struggle with how to deal with the issue of sectarianism and segregation. There is not the willingness to deal with it in the same way but I do not believe they genuinely sit down and say they will retain those extremist parties because that suits their interests. I do not think it happens in that way; maybe it does with individuals, but I do not think it is a deliberate policy by people.

In terms of the political designation in the Assembly, in the peace-building phase I have included institution building.

This is because we still are engaged in institution building, although at some stage in the future it will be moving to having an opposition. Consequently, it is part of that growing and as Professor Hamber noted earlier in terms of the Executive, this is not settled but was to get us to a place. However, the future must be different in that regard and when the time is right, the politicians will make the call to do that.

Deputy Crowe raised the issue of a disconnect with Unionist politicians. I think there is a fall back to the past, whereby in unionism in particular, political leaders were drawn from the more elite in society and were not necessarily embedded in working class communities. This probably is true today in that in respect of the SDLP and Sinn Féin in particular, their councillors and MLAs live in working class areas. This is not the case to the same extent among Unionist parties and I think they recognise that. As for what one does about it, I was disappointed two and a half years ago, when we applied to a special EU programme, together with a broad range of other groups, having identified some of these issues about flags, parades and how one might grow the next generation of politicians, community activists and political leaders, particularly in loyalist working class areas. We proposed an academy-style approach about educating young people, particularly in working-class Protestant areas but unfortunately, for some reason or other, the project fell. It involved quite a broad range of interest groups who were part of putting together the project with me, not least the former Senator McAleese, when he was a Member of this House. I believe we will be obliged to revisit this proposal because there is an issue as to how one bridges that gap between young people, whose default position still is towards paramilitary organisations, because there is that gap where political leaders do not live or work in those areas.

Senator Cummins raised the issue of the response to paramilitarism. While there of course must be a policing response North and South, there also must be other responses. We have fallen too quickly into the language of dissidents and dissident republicans and people now are trying to style themselves as the IRA again. Journalism and so on then begins to pick up on that language, to which we go back again very quickly, whereas we must think about them differently. They are people who are anti-peace, anti-Irish and anti-democratic and I do not believe one should have a single label for a group of people because one creates an identity for them, particularly among young people, and almost gives them a body of people. We talk about dissidence as though there is a body of people around it. Everyone is aware there is nothing wrong with dissent as long as it is not violent. We also must find a way of engaging and challenging people who see physical force as a way forward when the time is right to do that, which again is a political call. However, there are things people in communities and community organisations can do, as it does not necessarily sit at Government level and we must engage them. In addition, there is a sense that one either is Sinn Féin or a dissident. There is a whole group of people in the middle who may be disaffected with the direction of travel that Sinn Féin took but who are not necessarily going down the avenue of physical force. One must be alert to that group of people and must engage with them in this regard. There is an opportunity, both for the police and for all the Departments of Government, North and South, to give consideration to those key individuals in particular who are causing the most harm in society. For example, the case of someone who has a Housing Executive house in Derry, while also having one in County Donegal that he or she rents out, is not a policing issue. It also is a matter for other Departments. Consequently, the question is what role can be played by other Departments jointly North and South, in respect of those who effectively need a spotlight put on the back of their necks and who are causing the most harm in society. However, we should be public about this and state it is being done. Moreover, if we are to take such steps with people, it should be human rights-compliant and in step with human rights standards. There are of course also must be a policing response to it.

Senator Moran raised the issues of education, funding and value for money. I will leave the question of education to the specialist beside me. As a practitioner who is in receipt of some funding, one frustration I experience, particularly in respect of the European Union, is the focus on the bureaucracy. For example, as part of a project we were running recently, I brought a group of people to visit the Executive and the Assembly. I was obliged to carry out a single tender action for procurement in respect of a number of jugs of juice for youngsters who were to visit, because the Assembly has its own catering committee. I refer to the amount of time and effort required to carry out a single tender action. Moreover, all the subsequent questions were not about the value of the project or what happened therein but were about how many cups of tea and how many bums on seats matched those cups of tea. We must find a way to deal with such bureaucracy. I also work very closely with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, which takes a completely different approach to how it monitors the money that is spent and the impact we are having. I recently met the auditors to talk about how we measure the impact, over the years to come, on the work and the money that is put in and how do we know we are being effective. This is a far more practical way of looking at it and I believe that bureaucracy has got in the way. Everyone understands the need to ensure that each receipt is covered but it is almost as though this has become the priority and not doing the business. This is one frustration I sense throughout the entire community and voluntary sector.

The Senator raised the issue of whether this keeps funding organisations, such as those represented here, in place. I look forward to the day when we do not need Co-operation Ireland, because I then will know we have got to the place where Northern Ireland is safe for everyone and one does not need organisations which carry out peace-building. I look forward to the day when that happens. As for being able to find an honest broker, it is absolutely clear that we must deal with the past. It is a weakness, in that it acts like a bungee rope in respect of almost everything we touch around the Executive and it pulls us back in. Whatever the model that must be put in place, we certainly need to deal with the legacy of the past.