Lisa Chambers (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

A lot has been covered. I do not have a huge number of useful thoughts to offer on top of those given by other colleagues. I thank the witnesses for their contributions. It has been fascinating to listen to the different perspectives. It has reminded us of the journey we have been on over the last number of years, in particular. I refer to the EU's perspective, things we are doing now and what the EU offered and those concessions about which Dr. Petit spoke. At the start we were told they could not be done, but they were done. It shows we have been on a journey together. We have not covered ourselves in glory at all times. Professor Shirlow spoke about evidence-based approaches. We are all guilty at times of not focusing on the evidence, but of using ideology and emotion. That has been across the board. It is good to reflect on that as we move on to the next chapter. When it happened in 2016, we said we would spend the next decade talking about it and we are living up to that. We will still be talking about it.

Talking about the structures that were put in place, like the parliamentary assembly and how that is operating, I concur with Deputy Howlin's remarks that two meetings annually are not going to suffice as replacement. We are doing a lot of work domestically in terms of BIPA. We have a new friendship group set up between the UK and Ireland. I convened that group. We are trying to replicate some of those engagements and make up for their loss. However, it would be a welcome move from the EU perspective to look for further engagement. It was great to see the MLAs speaking yesterday at the meeting in London. That is great progress and that democratic deficit is keenly felt in Northern Ireland. I chaired the Seanad Brexit committee. We concluded our work almost a year ago but that kept coming up, not just among political representatives, but among business groups and civic society. They felt they had no meaningful voice at that table. Having to do it through the UK Parliament and on up the line that way was just convoluted and weakens their voice. Anything we can do to really address that democratic deficit in a meaningful way and give people a seat at the table is a small concession and is not going to upset how things are run. However, it makes a big difference to those voices in Northern Ireland, and that is supported across the island from all communities. It would be welcome to see that advanced.

I loved a lot of Professor Shirlow's commentary. It was eye opening for me to hear some of the positive stuff coming through that we do not hear communicated through our media, on the whole island, not just in Northern Ireland. Even in the Oireachtas we do not give enough weight to those positive news stories. I will certainly reflect on that and look in more depth at that type of information and do my best, in terms of my position, to try to get it out there. It is really positive. It changes the narrative and the tone of the discussion and conversation.

I have a quick question and it is open to anybody who wants to comment. How do the witnesses see Northern Ireland's place in the European Union evolving over the short and medium term? It has a unique position and maybe at times over the last number of years we have been a bit condescending in reiterating that this is an opportunity they are failing to grab. That must have been really annoying in some quarters. If we are honest, it has changed Northern Ireland's position within the UK, to a certain extent. The increase in North-South trade has been to the annoyance of some members of the unionist community, which they have articulated through their public representatives. I understand where they are coming from. Things have changed.

Flowing from that, Professor Shirlow spoke extensively about the Good Friday Agreement, not just in this committee but in other fora. Obviously, that was constructed post-EU membership, and was constructed in the knowledge that we were all part of the European Union. That has changed. How does he think that impacts on the operation of the Good Friday Agreement given, that the link is no longer how it was with the European Union, if I can put it that way? Do we need to update it in some way? Is it still fit for purpose? What are the professor's views on that? Obviously we have different communities saying different things, that it has been damaged by the protocol, or that it is not fit for purpose anymore. How does that evolve? Obviously, we need to protect and support the Good Friday Agreement, but we should not be afraid to update it if it needs to be updated. I know we are down to the last few moments, so I will leave it at that. I apologise in advance as I am due in the Seanad Chamber at 11.30 a.m., so when the bells go I have to run.