Michael McDowell (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The elephant in the room that has not been discussed yet as far as I can see is denominational education. I am taking the point from all the Foróige people and everything else that youth work is hugely important because it allows people to break out of the channels into which denominational education puts them. However, it is both North and South, by the way. This is not a Northern Ireland issue alone. Can it be right that if a priority is learning to live with people with different identities that people go to a different school? I pose this question to anyone who is willing to answer.

Looking back over the education they have received so far, especially between the Christian faiths, is there anything now at this stage that really would make a difference if the witnesses' school was simply a Christian school or a non-denominational school? Is there anything they have learned that is of particular value because they were at a Protestant, Catholic or non-denominational school? In other words, is it important that we continue with denominational education? If we are going to have denominational schools, we are going to have denominational sport to an extent. Then we scratch our heads and ask how come all the Catholics are playing Gaelic games and all the Protestants are playing soccer and some of the wealthier people are playing rugby. We have to ask ourselves whether denominational education serves any useful purpose either North or South. This is a big problem for us in the South as well because the churches still have control over a lot of education.

I want echo what Senator Currie said that we cannot have a certain situation. I was part of the Good Friday negotiations and the St. Andrews negotiations where the DUP and Sinn Féin eventually came together and we had the Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness partnership arising out of it. However, one of the things that is in the Good Friday Agreement and that is still in the St. Andrews Agreement is, as Senator Currie said, this notion that a person can opt out. A person can say, "I am sorry, I am not concerned with hospitals or schools; I am more concerned with abortion", so we have no Parliament or no Assembly. He or she can say the Irish language is too important for him or her to put back for a while so we are not having a discussion about finance, health, education or the other things. Maybe the time has come when we talk about constitutional change to change that bit of the Constitution where people cannot just opt out of politics and use a veto on each other. I would be interested to hear the witnesses' views on that.

Lastly, I will mention the European Union. On both sides of the Border, a majority favoured staying in the EU. It strikes me that everything good that has happened on this side of the Border has happened largely because of the EU. I really think that Northern Ireland's interests are to be back in the EU, however that happens, be it in an Irish confederation sharing our membership of the EU or whatever it is. Do the witnesses agree with that proposition? Northern Ireland should get back into the EU because it seems to me it has done us huge favours. When we were out of it, we were floundering. Our population was going down. Now things are good, or rather better. We should be talking about trying to get Northern Ireland back into the EU. Do the witnesses agree with that?