Mr. Paul Mac Flynn:

To be clear from the start, maybe we should talk about our project as more of a framework. We are not talking about piecing together the Northern Ireland economy and the Republic of Ireland economy and asking what would happen if we did this to it what would happen. In the infancy of the NERI, we looked at doing a macroeconomic model for Northern Ireland and data gaps put that one into the ditch. That is why I applaud the audacity of the ESRI and its partner, NIESR in the UK. I imagine that model will end up looking like a regionalised version of the UK NIESR model and it will be informative, but as for looking for policy direction on where we want both economies to go, the type of macroeconomic model they are building is useful and it is good for evaluating and looking at what particular policies would impact on the economy. We are looking at saying this is the model of an economy we would want for both. Dr. McDonnell and I had a paper out last year called Resilient Economy. It is maybe the taster for what the framework will ultimately end up being. For us that is the more worthwhile piece. Wherever somebody sits on the constitutional issue, we could take the framework and say that somebody living in the North wants that region to succeed economically no matter what its constitutional arrangement. Obviously, it will be different under a united Ireland than it would be as it currently is, but it is about saying even when talking about the all-island economy we are pushing both economies in the same direction. There are two very different positions and we do not want either one to stay where they are. We want to converge on something we believe would be better.

On the fiscal commission and its report, it was a very good piece of work and has led to much more government honesty about finances in Northern Ireland. My colleague, Dr. Lisa Wilson, who sat on the commission, said trying to get data from Whitehall was like getting blood from a stone. I have spoken to colleagues in Scotland as well. It is much further down the road when it comes to fiscal devolution. It has taken certain welfare payments, but has also looked at VAT, which is much more complicated area. On welfare in particular, Scotland has taken over responsibility for certain welfare payments. Its administration had a huge amount of trouble getting information from the Department for Work and Pensions. It does not take a lot to think that possibly within certain institutions there is a lack of enthusiasm for much of the devolution being proposed and even for some that has already taken place. While I see the fiscal commission's report as a very good one and commend it highly to anyone to read, it should be the starting position and we should be having a much bigger conversation about what that would look like. To a certain extent, Scotland was made an example of in terms of some of the decisions it took on devolution. That is very irresponsible but we should be looking at safety measure built in to any devolution to protect the already depressed level of public spending that has been there in Northern Ireland.