Mr. Neil McCann:

While this work is not within the sphere of electoral politics at all, it is clearly within the sphere of constitutional politics and planning for the future of the island. In that sense, it certainly is in the public sphere and we very much welcome that. Part of the dialogue process that has given birth to our work involves people who are involved in electoral politics, including, for example, John Kyle.

In terms of how we see the conversation unfolding, we expect it will have a number of levels. Unionists, those who identify as PUL, or whatever people want to call themselves, have to be germane to that conversation. It must take place with them and, in time, it becomes a negotiation. That can be fostered at the community level but it is ultimately for the Government to make the proposal to members of the unionist community, including elected representatives in the Assembly and Executive and those who are not involved in electoral politics, and engage directly with them. As far as I know, there are ongoing discussions between representatives of the Department of Foreign Affairs and representatives of unionism, community groups, and former and existing paramilitaries on the unionist side. As far as I know, and this is not the place to explore it or ask any questions about it, that engagement has not arrived at the point of saying, "Let us see what business can be done between us all."

The document we call The Proposal has a lot of elements to it. If there is one particular thing for which we are asking in it, it is that somebody be sent to organise a process of engagement. It is possible to meet online or in somebody's garden and we need to just do it. We do not see any reason at all to defer an engagement that would lead in time to negotiations. Let us get on with it or we will still be talking about it in another five years.

I value greatly the Border poll provisions in the Belfast Agreement, which are largely a reproduction of the Sunningdale versions. The steps that were taken in the Anglo-Irish Agreement and then the Downing Street Declaration led to the recognition of Ireland's place in Northern Ireland's affairs, which has never been rolled back on from those times. The problem is that the provisions for the Border poll are insufficiently drafted and there is capacity for severe chaos in that regard. This is not to dismiss all that has been done, because I value it all, but I am very concerned that something may happen, or there will be a deliberate measure by the British Government, to trigger a Border poll. The legal provisions are imprecise and inadequate and the British Government, through the Secretary of State, is given power to decide the date, the electorate - he or she can decide it should include everyone aged 16 and upwards, for instance, or be limited to over-25s - and the questions to be asked. He or she can do so without consulting anybody; there is no reference to that at all. I am not the first person to raise this point. I know Colum Eastwood gave a very good account of it at the meeting the committee had with the academics from London and Trinity College.

There is a need to get discussions under way and we are advocating that for its own sake.

I do not think there is a sufficient protection of the wider Irish position within the border poll provisions. If it ends up in the courts, the committee knows about the McCourt case that gave definition to what the requirements of the Secretary of State are. That was not appealed at the Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland. It could have gone to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court in London. There is no clarity about that.

Border poll positions aside, it is time that we got everybody together to see what can be done, at the very least. One would not go into a border poll without having done that. One would not go to buy a car without having engaged with it, watched it go and discussed it. This is the future of the nation and we are significant people in the world. This needs to be managed carefully. That is why I have no apology in invoking the word "love". The only other place I know of where that was used was in Indian politics in the 1940s. Its independence resulted in great tragedy, as we know, with the partition of India and Pakistan. We can draw on the experience of the past to make these negotiations special and durable, and to avoid situations like that and the scenario where a border poll is won by a very small majority and somebody is disgruntled afterwards. That is the simplicity of our proposal. We think it is entirely coherent and capable of being adopted for an effective form of government for Ireland for the rest of our generation and long past it.