Mr. Niall Murphy:

I might address Deputy Brendan Smith's remarks on a civic forum, a thread that was picked up by Senator Currie. I was struck by the Deputy's description of the political architecture of the Good Friday Agreement. It is right to say that this is an important feature of the Good Friday Agreement that has not been given expression, and we are all the lesser for it. In short, we are in favour of the inception of a tangible and meaningful civic forum, but it should be as well as rather than instead of the citizens' assembly, which we have advocated for. They would address two discrete and different sets of relationship, but they could complement each another.

Regarding the political architecture, a quote came to mind about international law, namely, pacta sunt servanda, or agreements must be kept. That is a fundamental principle in international diplomatic relations and law. It is a regrettable fact that several aspects of political agreements over the years have been left unexecuted, as it were, for example, an Acht na Gaeilge. We are 500 days on from New Decade, New Approach, 15 years on from the St. Andrews Agreement and 23 years on from the Good Friday Agreement, all of which made explicit and express affirmations in respect of Irish language legislation. In terms of citizenship and the architecture of the state, it has been argued in court twice that the Good Friday Agreement is not binding on the courts or the British Government. We have also seen that expression used in judicial review proceedings taken by a parent who had chosen an Irish route of education for his or her child and applied to Coláiste Feirste. The Northern Ireland Department of Education attempted to persuade the court that the Good Friday Agreement was advisory rather than binding. Obviously, and rightly, the court dismissed that argument. We have had agreements on how to resolve the legacy of our past, for example, the Stormont House Agreement, but we still do not have an historical inquiries unit, HIU. The matter was addressed more generally in the UK Supreme Court yesterday. Perhaps most egregiously, we have had a Secretary of State express his intention to break international law in terms of Brexit, which is an issue that continues to vex the G7. The political architecture is important, but it is also important to consider it in a wider context, the overriding fundamental principle being that agreements are all well and good, but they are no good if they are not abided by.

Deputy Brendan Smith was right to bring to our attention the utility and good auspices of a civic forum, and I would welcome the inception of such a forum, but it should be as well as rather than instead of our call, which is to promote an all-island dialogue on the exclusive issue of the potential constitutional change on our island.