Mr. Rory Montgomery:

I will make a few quick points on the constitutional issues and then on the North-South co-operation. I do not believe it is altogether a fair summary to say the Good Friday Agreement had not answered the constitutional question but asked it. It set out some very important principles, which remain valid, the first of which is the legitimacy of whatever choice is made by the majority in Northern Ireland. Second is the recognition that it is for the people of Ireland alone to make the decision. Third is a recognition that the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the union and that Northern Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish. That was, effectively, the Irish Government and others saying that, without getting into the history of partition or the history of the island, Northern Ireland is legitimately part of the UK on the basis of the principle of consent. However, there is also a recognition that this could change in the ways we know and that both Governments would then be under a binding obligation to give effect to those decisions. Fourth is the need for rigorous impartiality in the administration of Northern Ireland, irrespective of whatever the constitutional arrangements might be. Fifth is the very important line, which I was involved in drafting, "to recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose", and that the right to hold citizenship would not be affected by future changes. Those are very important principles.

With regard to the question of a referendum, it is both "when" and "if". Ever since 1973, it has been open to the British Secretary of State to hold a referendum at any time. They did so in 1973 as a bit of a stunt, quite frankly. Now they are not obliged to hold a referendum unless they have a reason to believe a majority would favour a united Ireland. They are not obliged to, but they could do so if they wished to. The whole question of whether there is a wish would have to be worked out. I take Mr. Donoghue's point that the Irish Government and the British Government would have to take it into account, but as I said earlier, there was no look at how the different parts of the agreement were articulated constitutionally. There is not even a reference in Articles 2 and 3, for example, to a referendum in the Republic. One must assume it is implied, and I do not see how one could do it without it. It does not actually say "referendum". It is basically in Article 3 and it says, "It is the firm will ... that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island." Could "democratically expressed" be a vote in the Dáil? Who is to say?

Mr. Donoghue spoke on North-South co-operation. There have been long lists of possible areas of co-operation. If one reads the Department of Foreign Affairs documents on Irish foreign policy, Seán Lemass was beating the bushes in the mid-1960s to find things to talk about with Terence O'Neill. This carried on through the Sunningdale Agreement, the Council of Ireland and on to this. The Good Friday Agreement would not have been possible were it not for Bertie Ahern making a major concession to the unionists early in Easter week. He scaled back considerably the level of ambition and certainly the volume. He scaled back the size of it and he agreed it would have to be negotiated as a separate exercise, directly after the agreement. I was involved in setting up the North-South institutions with Mr. Tim O'Connor as I was his right-hand man at that time. Like Mr. Donoghue, I would agree it has been very disappointing how the institutions have not developed. Some of the areas chosen were, to be honest, pretty trivial. Others were more important. I am not saying they have not done good work. The North-South Ministerial Council has been, on and off, a place for political leaders and Ministers to get together. Has it achieved what it should have achieved? No, it has not.

On the other hand, North-South co-operation has continued in other ways as well. Ironically, the most important single development in North-South co-operation of the past ten or 15 years has been the creation of the all-island single electricity market. That owes nothing to the Good Friday Agreement. It was agreed as a matter of common sense and for business. Funnily enough, that is the irony of what the unionists have always said, that these things do happen if they make sense. My own view is that one must have a reason to bring people together, and that there have not been such reasons is, I know, a frustration for many of my colleagues who have worked over the years on North-South co-operation. The unionists, UUP and DUP have generally taken a pretty negative and minimalist approach to the operation of these bodies. Equally, it is fair to say not everyone in the Republic, not every Department or public and State body in the Republic, is necessarily equally as enthusiastic about it as the political leadership might be.