Martin Ferris (Kerry North-West Limerick, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

To follow on from what Mr. Brady said, the bill of rights is an issue that is continually raised by Deputy Gerry Adams during questions to the Taoiseach and on Leaders' Questions. We have reiterated that it is central to the Good Friday Agreement and one of the outstanding aspects of the Agreement that remains to be implemented. People, irrespective of where they live, need access to human rights and they need a bill of rights. That is all the more important in a post-conflict situation. It cannot be stressed enough how important it is to developing a peace process and creating public confidence in that process. A bill of rights is central to those efforts.

It is clear from the witnesses' presentations that the public has bought into the concept of a bill of rights, is aware of it and supportive of it. The breakdown in progress has arisen because we do not have political unanimity on the matter and there is no effort it to push it forward by the two Governments. Indeed, there is a division between the Governments as to what types of human rights and what type of bill of rights should be implemented, particularly since the change of Government in London. David Cameron's position on breaking the link between European human rights and a distinctive body of British human rights has created a lot of alarm, certainly within Nationalist communities and in this jurisdiction. It comes back to several issues, one of which is the Good Friday Agreement and the international obligations associated with the implementation of that Agreement. This committee is an implementation body but we cannot get one section of the community in the Six Counties to sit here with us to discuss issues. That in itself creates difficulties.

Reference was made to civic society and how it can contribute to peace-building. I am very supportive of the delegates' views in this regard. They observed that it takes a political process to lift and move things forward, and the lack of that political support is inhibiting what they are seeking to do. The question, then, is how we move beyond where we are at now and create the political support that is required. The witnesses noted that it might require outside intervention in order to guide people in that direction and so forth. We need a situation where the process is driven publicly and the political people, or people of influence within society, are forced to push it forward. There is an obligation in this regard on the leadership within communities and within civic society, as well as on political and religious leaders. In that context, will the delegates indicate what support they have had from the religious institutions for pushing this forward? Has the contribution from those bodies, if any, been positive or negative? In the case of influential people within civic society, are there sectarian divisions evident in terms of the support or otherwise for making progress? Finally, is there a legal avenue under the international obligations within the Good Friday Agreement whereby a political party could take a leading role in having a bill of rights implemented?