Mr. Michael D'Arcy:

To frame this within the overall observations about strand two, two phrases always leap out at me in the strand’s preamble. The first is “the totality of relationships” and the second is “actions”. The preamble does not just speak about co-operation, but about action. A great deal of enthusiasm, energy and thought was put into actions in the immediate aftermath of the agreement and a great deal of time has been spent on deciding how to implement these actions. In many ways, it has been such a slow process and it seems to me that we have forgotten to decide what the next actions are. Surely now is an important time to consider this matter.

Energy is a primary issue, given that the single electricity market came out of the spirit and processes of the Good Friday Agreement as opposed to being a specific action included in it. It has taken the joint business council longer than expected because so much has been happening in the energy market with rising prices and security issues, but we have actually been filling a vacuum over the past year. No one is discussing all-island energy futures. People are discussing what they are doing themselves, comparing notes and so forth, but where are the joined-up actions? We brought key people in the sector together and quietly went through what they thought might be done here or there and what would make sense on a joined-up basis. One of the key initial insights was that it was not optimum for Northern Ireland to be wholly connected to the wider UK energy market. What is optimum for Northern Ireland is to continue to be connected to the all-island energy market and its evolution into a renewable, sustainable and more secure space. That is the fundamental point. Our request of the committee in this regard is that, once we have completed our paper – I hope that will be shortly – we can return and speak to the committee about the paper’s recommendations etc. In the first instance, we just want to start the conversation and help that with some concrete proposals and suggestions from the industry in areas that everyone is discussing separately, for example, wind, gas and hydrogen. How do we bring them together into a joined-up picture and push it out to the future? Energy is not something that you sort out today or tomorrow, as we know. It is something that you have to decide for 2040, never mind 2030, given the timescales in planning, investment and return. All of these projects involve investment. A key consideration for the Government is that most of that investment is from the private sector. As opposed to other forms of infrastructure, for example, railways, where the Government is primarily the one being looked to, most of the money for energy projects will come in the form of energy companies investing in generation and in companies adapting their internal systems to utilise renewable energy.

The challenge for the Government is in policy and governance. The latter is one of those points that gets neglected. There has been a great deal of talk in Belfast about governance and there has been some discussion about cross-Border bodies like the North-South Ministerial Council, NSMC. There are difficulties in terms of the appointment of directors and so forth, but the governance of North-South issues is broader now than just what happens within cross-Border bodies. Much of what will happen in the single electricity market is down to regulation, particularly now that the UK is out of the EU and the picture is not automatically joined up. The role of regulation in government policy, including that of the devolved Administration, will be critical in the two jurisdictions. Will the NSMC have a role in co-ordinating regulation? Will regulation be done jointly? These are important considerations for investors when looking to the future. Energy will raise these questions in a way that may be unexpected and it is important that people think about them in terms of strand two.

The Trade and Business Development Body – I always struggle with its original title – is usually called InterTradeIreland, ITI. The report by Dr. Martina Lawless that Mr. O’Brien mentioned is important because it segmented the two dimensions: the international or global dimension of trade, or what foreign directive investment, FDI, companies and so forth are doing; and what is happening domestically with SMEs and other indigenous companies. She identified the dynamism of cross-Border trade within the SME sector – SMEs simply selling to the person across the Border or companies coming together to provide a sub-supply to large FDI companies spread around the Border area – and that more attention needed to be given to it. Geography plays a role for FDI companies, but so do sectors and clusters. It is not about exactly where they are, particularly in this era of services, technology etc. It is about looking at this more through the prism of clusters. For example, where there are clusters North and South in pharma, life sciences and so forth, could they be joined up more effectively? Could other sectors be combined more effectively? Does the NSMC have any role in this? Should cross-Border bodies have more of a role? If we are going to discuss how the next 25 years of the agreement will continue the peace, stability and prosperity, then a more holistic approach needs to be taken to it. That is something that this committee might consider.