Emer Currie (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I want to thank Claire Hanna for suggesting this engagement. It is a very good morning's meeting. The witnesses may feel that we are not asking in-depth questions and that maybe we are not interrogating it fully but honestly it is very good to hear the witnesses talk about how things work operationally, and for us to hear this and piece it all together. It is hugely beneficial.

I very much value the opening statements and the witnesses' reflections on where we are in a post-conflict society. Ms Mercer talked about how we can move from equality to integration and how some of the scaffolding is self-fulfilling division. That was very insightful. Ultimately, power-sharing is problem-sharing and we are trying to make that work is best as possible.

On the citizens' assembly, I presume this is in strand 1, or do the witnesses think beyond strand 1?

Yes, there is a review mechanism included. How far do the witnesses think it is possible to go in tweaking the Good Friday Agreement without it beginning to unravel or people losing confidence in it? Is that another reason to bring people back into it or is that why politicians might be nervous of something like this? Do the witnesses get push back about this? Have they had any support from the political parties regarding a citizens' assembly? Funnily enough, something that came up at our meeting last week with the up-and-coming politicians is that they feel that political decisions which affect the Good Friday Agreement are made behind closed doors and not in the open, when the Good Friday Agreement is the people's agreement. I am not giving my opinion. I am asking for more information on the matter.

It was stated that the institutional framework reinforces constitutional politics. Does that benefit the two main parties and extremes? Given Mr. McCallister's healthy statistics on how people support power-sharing and Stormont, why does he think that people vote for parties which threaten their collapse or parties involved in the collapse? With regard to 2016 and the efficiency of the Bills up until that point, nobody has mentioned Brexit. How much has that played into this? How much of this is trying to fix local problems based on bigger issues?

As regards the well-being piece, is that similar to what we are doing at present whereby we are changing our measures of success with regard to well-being? New Zealand is doing it as well, and Scotland has done it. I am not as familiar with what is happening in Wales and England.

Can we afford not to address community designation in search of more stability and to bring more young people with us? One thing I came across last week was how effective the councils are at working together. Do the witnesses see a difference between how the councils work together versus Stormont? Perhaps the witnesses can give us their views on the petition of concern, the problems involved and the perceived solutions? That would be useful as well. I did not mean to ask so many questions, but there is great stuff here and I appreciate the witnesses' time.