Ms Dolores Kelly:

I want to put on record our party's thanks and appreciation to the Tánaiste for his recent remarks in support of the party's call for the implementation of the Haass-O'Sullivan talks and his commitment to opening Government records relating to any mechanism that might be established in dealing comprehensively and ethically with the past. It is important to note that at the outset. The committee may know that in respect of the Haass talks, there was an overwhelming amount of response right across civic society from individuals, trade unions and other community and voluntary organisations. This is an example of where civic society has sought to engage. There will be a call for a compromise rally in Belfast city centre this Sunday. This rally wants to see the parties engaging and dealing with those contentious issues of parading, flags and the past that have not yet been dealt with.

Another aspect of the civic forum is that there would be an all-Ireland consultative forum to partner with a similar body in the South. That remains an unfulfilled promise and commitment of the Good Friday Agreement. As members will know, equality and human rights were at the core and, indeed, a compromise of that agreement which is an international treaty between two sovereign governments and the British and Irish Governments are co-guarantors of that agreement. We believe that more needs to be done and more pressure applied to the Executive and in particular to the Unionist parties in the Northern Ireland Executive.
The victims' groups in particular have been very powerful over the past number of months. Despite their differences of opinions and their different experiences of the conflict they have spoken with one voice in their demand for a mechanism to deal with the past in order to address issues of concern with regard to justice and for finding out what happened by means of truth recovery. Their voices have been very powerful and the victims have stayed on the same page, so to speak, in their call and their commitment to the process overseen by Richard Haass and Megan O'Sullivan.
Those are examples of how civic society can put pressure on the political parties. It was anticipated that dealing with the past would be the most potentially contentious issue where there would not be agreement at the Haass talks, yet it is the issue on which there is most agreement about the mechanisms. That is a very fine example of how civic society can play a role in setting the agenda for political parties.
The North is still very much in recession with high levels of unemployment. We have a housing crisis and a health crisis. Civic society is at a loss. As John Dallat, MLA, commented, some opt to be increasingly disengaged from the political process. It would appear that our society is being held back by the interests of select interest groups. In our view the civic forum could provide an opportunity to allow the voices to be heard of those who believe themselves to be marginalised.
I did not attend the initial civic forum and we acknowledge that there were flaws in its mechanisms and how it was to be established. The people who responded to our letters asking for their views on whether the civic forum should be reconvened, said as much. However, they agreed with the principle that there was a role and a place for such an institution. The fact that the review of the civic forum has not been published is a very poor decision which suggests to me that the review recommends that the civic forum should be re-established because what has one to fear from publishing the report. This week in the Northern Ireland Assembly the First Minister made light of the civic forum when he said it was not an issue which was raised with him on the street. This attitude does an injustice to those people who want to see a greater participative democracy.
I will give an example of how accountable participative democracy can work, an issue which is also pertinent to the South. I refer to Mapping the Rollback? - Human Rights Provisions of the Belfast Good Friday Agreement 15 Years On, recently published by the Committee for the Administration of Justice. I suggest this committee might wish to hear from that committee about its work. It refers to accountable participative shapes of governance as envisaged by the Good Friday Agreement being very possible. Good participation leads to good outcomes. We have seen it in mental health where the participation of service-users and carers in a Belfast mental health rights group led to the implementation of the card-before-you-leave appointment card system across accident and emergency departments in Northern Ireland. As a result of this initiative, 160 people every month who are in mental health distress now get follow-up appointment and support which they would otherwise not have. That is an example of how participative democracy can make a real difference to the lives of people. I will conclude by quoting from Inez McCormack who when speaking to an American audience about the MacBride principles, said:

We can all deliver the rhetoric which offends nobody but the dispossessed. For those who have can always argue that tomorrow is the right time for change. For the have-nots, today is not soon enough and we can only hope for their generosity of spirit in forgetting their yesterdays.