Dr. Ian Cooper:

Those are excellent questions. Senator Richmond's question came up at the PPA meeting in the context of some kind of formal representation for Northern Ireland. It did not come up at the first meeting because the rules or procedures had not been established. Once that was done, at the second meeting it was agreed that Members of the devolved assemblies, members of the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee, representatives from local and regional government in the EU and civil society actors could be invited to attend. There was a discussion about whether the Committee of the Regions could include some kind of representation for Northern Ireland. Barry Andrews was at the meeting of the PPA. He did not bring the matter up, but this is an idea he has floated, namely, that Northern Ireland should have some kind of representation in the European Parliament. It was not put in those terms, but many people brought up the problem of a democratic deficit. This is a problem that is unique to Northern Ireland because the latter is going to be a rule taker for the foreseeable future without having any formal role in EU decision-making. The consent vote that will be forthcoming in 2024 hardly compensates for that fact.

There are ideas floating around. The advantage of the PPA is that it has a certain amount of flexibility in the context of the fact that it can set its own rules and decide who to invite as guests. However, the fundamental problem is that there are 35 Members of the UK Parliament and only one of them is from Northern Ireland. In that context, you simply cannot have cross-community or cross-party representation. It was interesting that at the same meeting, Ireland, in the context of its MEPs, was very much over-represented. Four of the 35 MEPs present were Irish. They all spoke, and that had a tendency to tilt the conversation back constantly to questions about Northern Ireland. Two members of the Northern Ireland Assembly were also in attendance. One spoke quite robustly in a way that was critical of the UK's approach to Brexit. A couple of members asked if the PPA could not get on to its main task, namely, holding the partnership council to account. They were of the view that the PPA should discuss the broader EU-UK issues rather than always coming back to Northern Ireland. If there were another forum where the representatives from Northern Ireland could have a voice, it could help to resolve that problem.

The point Deputy Richmond made about junior Ministers is also well taken. Liz Truss, the UK Foreign Secretary at the time, was not at the meeting that happened in May. That was taken as an insult by many of the European members. She may have had a perfectly good excuse for not being present. Maroš Šefovi had just come from meeting with Ms Truss, but she did not actually show up to the meeting of the PPA. In the room, that was thought of as a kind of snub. That was less the case this time around because the tone was different. I do not know if the fact that James Cleverly was not there makes a difference. If you have experience with other forums like COSAC or the various inter-parliamentary meetings that happen within the context of the EU, the parliamentarians expect there to be a representative of the executive - whether it is someone from the Commission or someone from a national government representing the Council - who is there in the room answering questions. These groups have scrutiny and accountability functions; they are not just talking shops.