Dr. Adele Bergin:

So far we have discussed some of the similarities and differences, say, in terms of education. If we were talking about constitutional change there is a whole spectrum of outcomes that one would want to consider, which start with maintaining existing services in health and education. One may want to merge elements of both systems. One might need to align with the best system if research decides, North or South, whichever system is best or one might want to do everything new. So much of the discussion tends to focus on the presumption that we will keep education, health, etc. more or less the same, and make some changes here and there but there is a whole spectrum of opportunities. When we think about it, we are trying to think about the principles that we would want to apply in any kind of planning process. That is the range of outcomes for each area so it gets more and more complex as we go along.

Members have asked about the benefits or costs. One needs to know what one is going to say for all of these things. Various numbers have been thrown around. We can increase or decrease all of them. Until we knows what it is we are planning for, it can be quite challenging to state a benefit, cost or place some of those numbers around that.

As I have mentioned before, and it is worth mentioning again, the timeframe and transition period is absolutely crucial because big reforms might cost a lot of money and take time to implement. If one is ambitious in those reforms, say, for example, in the North and investment happens then over time the Northern economy will grow quite strongly and all the rest, therefore, reducing the need for subvention in the future. We have got to take all those dynamics into account and the timeframe will matter quite a lot in terms of estimates and a range of figures.