Mr. Francie Molloy:

It is an important report and important academic research. I imagine the present is a great time to research and come up with a vision people have for the future. That is what we are missing - how we create opportunities for a new Ireland. I was interested in what the witness said about people not really being that interested in constitutional changes but more in social changes. Do the witnesses take from that there is an acceptance constitutional change will happen and we need to start building the infrastructure and social mechanism to deal with the issues that will come about with that constitutional change? I know from my interaction in the past with unionists, for instance, where I live - it is an area that was termed "the murder triangle" during the Troubles - it was difficult enough to engage sometimes but I had conversations with neighbours because you live beside them and talk to them. Often, people asked me if I ever talked to Protestants. I said that if I did not talking to Protestants, I would talk to nobody because my neighbours are Protestants. That was the conversation. I thought in some of the conversations that they wanted to engage in discussion but found it difficult because politics is seen as a dirty sort of word and dangerous. There is an opportunity to create that discussion. I like the idea of cafes to open up small discussions. A constitutional convention is a big convention and if the decisions that come out of it are advisory, that is good enough, but very seldom are they changed. It is important that to be part of that overall constitutional convention, there are small consultations to engage at local level and bring people along.

I thought that the research showed that people are not really interested in whether there is a change in the national anthem or the flag but more in issues around social changes. It would be good if we could get that conversation opened up. When the witness spoke, I thought of the opportunity we would have if the Assembly was back up and running again. There is a chamber there, which was the old Senate chamber. That could be used as a discussion chamber for an ongoing Assembly. One problem with political structures is that everything is based on motions and political input and there is no opportunity for discussion with ordinary people on the ground. It is about creating an opportunity to have a discussion with people, where they can come and have their say in a venue created for that purpose.

Concerning the future, coming back to the previous question about how the witnesses see this developing, what structure do we need to engage further and develop this? I recall an issue around remembrance Sunday, which we are coming up to again. I got advice from a unionist to invite people into my council chamber when I was chair of the council because whenever you invite people into your venue, you make the rules. When you go to somebody else's venue, they make the rules. How do we get opportunities to engage with people? We brought in unionists from within the British Legion. They asked what they could bring with them. I said, "Whatever way you normally go to these events; I do not know." They asked if they could bring flags and banners and I said, "Yes". They also asked who would take the photographs, which would become an important issue. I said that we would take the photographs, give them to them and they could use them in whatever way they wanted. It was interesting - in the final analysis of the whole thing - that when we were taking the photographs, even though I was the mayor, I could not get anybody to sit on either side of me because nobody wanted to be too associated with a Sinn Féin mayor in that situation. Two elderly women came forward and said I did not seem to be that harmful. I found that with that open discussion people were having, people could start to engage better. How do we engage these cafes on a wider scale, cross-Border, internally and cross-community, in local areas, halls and businesses, whatever the case may be?