Mr. John Finucane:

I may have to leave shortly after contributing, therefore, I appreciate being brought in. I thank Professors FitzGerald and Morgenroth. Like everybody else, I echo my thanks to them for attending and adding to this debate.It shows that what we need is informed debate. We have said for a long time that informed debate is an essential component of planning. People need to be very clear what it is they are discussing when they talk about the constitutional future and economics goes to the heart of that.

I have two observations to make with brief questions and I will not take up too much time. The first deals with the focus on the North as the region. Research conducted by NERI on the productivity of Ireland’s various regions shows that all regions are behind the EU average by their measure of productivity with the notable exceptions of Dublin, greater Cork and Belfast. A peer review paper by Seamus McGuinness and Adele Bergin of the ESRI, which was referenced earlier and which I believe is from last year, found that the growth rate in GDP per capitain the North, and its relative ranking over the period from the beginning of the century up to 2014, is very close to that observed in the Border, midlands and western region in the southern jurisdiction. In that area, is it not, therefore, fair to conclude that this overall context is fundamental to any discussion such as this?

The second observation I wish to make is that in the witnesses' papers they examine the fiscal impact of Irish reunification and present three possible scenarios: one, the North instantly loses subvention from Britain and it essentially self-funds; two, the Irish Government instantly assumes the fiscal deficit of the North; and, three, a gradual transfer. I do not couch this in any critical terms but I note only one paragraph is afforded to the third scenario of a gradual transfer. Would it not be more realistic to say that the third scenario was the most likely and, therefore, possibly the one most deserving of a detailed analysis and discussion? That is something I also noted in the McGuinness and Bergin paper. I thank the witnesses once again for their attendance today.