Professor Colin Harvey:

I thank the Chairman and members for the invitation to address the committee this morning. I would like to make clear that I am speaking today in a personal capacity only. I am participating in the University and College Union, UCU, strike action in my university, so I am speaking as an Irish citizen living and working in the North. I would like to commend Emma and Jake on their courage and the stand that they have made on this issue. They speak for many people, and as so often is the case in relation to matters of human rights and equality, all of us depend on courageous civic leadership, and I would like to commend Emma and Jake on the work they have undertaken on this issue.

What we are talking about today is very simple. It is an implementation gap in relation to the Good Friday Agreement, and there are a number of implementation gaps. Let us be clear. The implementation gaps that we are talking about harm everyone in Northern Ireland. I want to concentrate today on two themes. First, I want to say something about the wider context in terms of the agreement, and second, I want to say something about the birthright guarantee under the Good Friday Agreement.

First, in terms of context, it is important to frame the conversation today in relation to a wider implementation gap that is the cause of instability in the North at the moment. Keep in mind that a number of reasonable expectations from the Good Friday Agreement have not yet as yet been delivered. There is no Bill of rights for the North, and as I note in my written opening statement, the Human Rights Commission in its advice in 2008 addressed this question in its proposals. There is no charter of rights for the island of Ireland. The Good Friday Agreement contains a right to self-determination, linked to the principle of consent, and many people on this island are increasingly worried about the lack of adequate preparation and planning when the day arrives for those referendums to take place. There is no Irish language Act in the North. People await the referendum to be held on voting rights in presidential elections which will have huge significance for Irish citizens everywhere.

In relation to Brexit, there are a multitude of issue and problems, but we have the withdrawal agreement and the protocol. Will the guarantees that are there be effectively implemented in British domestic law, policy and practice? What we are hearing this morning, and what we know is, that 21 years after the Good Friday Agreement, many of the guarantees there are still not reflected in domestic law, policy and practice in the UK. Also in relation to Brexit, a rather neglected issue is whether Northern Ireland will have a voice in the European Parliament in a post-Brexit scenario.

I list these as simply illustrative of a number of examples of ongoing problems in relation to lack of implementation, and in relation to the human rights and equality crisis in the North. As the committee is aware, there is a lot of focus at the moment on the restoration of power sharing and on the Northern Ireland Executive and the Northern Ireland Assembly and getting that up and running. I would like to underline and make something clear to the committee all this morning. Think back on all the issues that I have just listed. Many of those, if not all of them, are within the gift of both Governments to deliver, so it is vital that both the British state and Irish State work to advance these issues as a matter of urgency. Speaking personally, one of the most troubling and one of the dangerous narratives that has taken hold across these islands at the moment is that the restoration of the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly will solve all the problems of the North. That is just not true.

The second theme is the right to be identified as British or Irish, or both, as we have already heard so eloquently from Emma. We are talking about a foundational constitutional commitment flowing from the Good Friday Agreement. We know, as a matter of fact, that it is not properly implemented in British domestic law, policy and practice but it is even more disturbing than that, as we have already heard. There is no genuine grasp evident in the British system of the significance of this birthright guarantee.

In fact, I would press that a bit further with the committee today. There does not seem to be any genuine grasp of the significance of the Good Friday Agreement itself for all the people of this island, and there does not seem to be any genuine grasp of the impact of the failure to comply with the birthright guarantee on respect for human rights and human dignity of all those affected. Very troubling indeed, I think, is the British Government's rationale for the approach that it is adopting. The British Government appears not to be saying that this is an implementation failure. The British Government is saying that its interpretation is right, and I think what is worrying about the Upper Tribunal decision is that it appears to go along with that rationale. If one adopts that approach, there is not a problem to remedy. That is why I think the Irish Government has been absolutely right to point out that this is a misreading of the Good Friday Agreement - in other words, the British Government is simply wrong in its approach to the agreement. That is not the first time that has happened, and I suspect it will not be the last time. There is an implementation failure. It is an implementation failure that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency, and for reasons that we have heard.

We are facing, I think, an implementation crisis, and while much of the narrative often falls on the absence of power sharing and the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly, we should keep in mind this morning that many of these issues we are talking about, and the issue we are talking about specifically today, rests with both Governments to take forward as co-guarantors of the Good Friday Agreement. The British Government must move to resolve this implementation failure, and bring law, policy, and practice into line with the agreement. What it is raising is something that has been troubling constitutional lawyers and those with an interest in the agreement for some time, and that is the question that within the UK system, there is inadequate political and judicial acknowledgement of the constitutional significance of the Good Friday Agreement for this island and for these islands. Something constitutionally significant happened in 1998, and that needs to be more fully recognised in the British legal and political systems.

I am increasingly worried about the status accorded to the agreement in the UK system by politicians and judges, and keep in mind the context that we are thinking about today. The context is Brexit, and conversations about another agreement - a withdrawal agreement and protocol and in a number of years' time many people do not want to watch yet another agreement not properly implemented, so it is absolutely vital that this is faced by both Governments as a matter of urgency, as a matter of demonstrating respect for the Good Friday Agreement.

This is not about creating winners and losers. It is really rather simple. More than 21 years on from the Good Friday Agreement, many of us are seeking to ensure that agreement is implemented in law, policy, and practice. There are no winners and losers here. The winners will be everyone who lives in Northern Ireland. This is about the British and the Irish Governments working to create a level playing field in the North, so that the institutions and the values of the Good Friday Agreement might flourish in the future.