Mr. Mark Bassett:

To take up the point on why the report focused on European Union institutions and not on the US Government for instance, the report was commissioned by the European Parliament. It was one in a series of reports that looked at issues such as the possibility of special designated status for Northern Ireland. Another report looked at what rights were available in EU law. This is the reason the report took the shape that it did. It was also intended to answer the question on what the status of a united Ireland would be in the European Union. During the Scottish independence referendum, the status of an independent Scotland in the European Union was an argument used by the Barroso Commission and the UK Government against a "Yes" vote. One of the purposes of this report was to give as clear an answer as possible that EU law recognises the right to self-determination. A united Ireland would be a member state of the European Union.

An analogy is drawn with German unification in 1989 and 1990 for a number of reasons. There are also very important distinctions. The report tries to show how EU law approached that question. Even back in 1957, when Germany joined the then European Economic Community, it included a declaration that German unification was a possibility. As a matter of EU law, trade between East and West Germany was a matter of German domestic law. We can see a parallel now with the common travel area and the provisions of the Ireland and Northern Ireland protocol. There was also a constitutional duty on the West German Government to work towards unity. We see this echoed in our Constitution. There was a clear constitutional path to unity in the German constitution. This is replicated in the Good Friday Agreement. It is a centrepiece of the Irish Constitution. It is a centrepiece of the Northern Ireland Act, which is part of the UK constitutional framework. It is recognised in international law in the British-Irish Agreement. It is now part of the bridge between the UK and European Union. It is in the withdrawal agreement.

There are other similarities in the citizenship provisions. Residents in East Germany could avail of West German citizenship and did so. There are some similarities with the availability of Irish citizenship for residents of Northern Ireland. The other parallel was that West Germany was a member state of the European Union in 1989 and 1990. Very early on, first the European Parliament and then the Commission took the view it was an exercise in self-determination and that a reunified Germany would be a good thing for Germany and for the European Union. Many of the institutions used the phrase with regard to German unification that it occurred "under a European roof". There was assistance from the Commission. There was political support in the Parliament and the Council, which was chaired by Charles Haughey. There was a clear endorsement of the position in international law that this was not the creation of a new state but a changing border in an existing member state. We say this is similar to what would happen in the eventuality of Irish reunification. There are important differences but they should not be insurmountable. We state West Germany and East Germany were more different at that time than North and South are now.

In terms of the self-determination provision, the votes and referendums for a united Ireland are absolutely fundamental to the Good Friday Agreement. This right of self-determination is not an ornament but an instrument. The expectation is that it will be exercised at some time. It is not rhetoric like the pursuit of happiness in the US declaration. Preparatory work does have to be put in before the votes. People voting in both jurisdictions are entitled to honest, credible and ambitious answers on issues such as healthcare, currency, employment and the administration of justice. This preparatory work should be taking place now. The Irish Government is particularly important in leading this type of work. It is also true that the Oireachtas and the institutions in the North can assist.

With regard to some of the important work that could be undertaken, we imagine that in a united Ireland there would be an immediate continuation of Northern Ireland institutions and law subject to the Constitution. The other matter would be that the Irish Constitution may have to be updated and possibly amended to take account of all of the obligations of the sovereign power which are set out in the Good Friday Agreement. A piece of work that could be done in either institution would be an audit of what aspects of Northern Ireland law may have to change and an audit of Irish law, including what provisions of the Constitution, if any, would not be consistent with the duties of equality, parity of esteem and citizenship that would come with a united Ireland.