Mr. Niall Murphy:

Thank you.

Our analysis with regard to a citizens' assembly is supported and shaped by the finest internationally acclaimed academics, and that is that the pathway to concurrent referenda is most likely to be achieved through the convention of a citizens' assembly. Such an assembly would be rigorously impartial from external political influence. It will commission its own research, reports, and economic modelling. It is a well-worn constitutional path.

Members will all be familiar with its benefits. This path has already led to successive civic movements and has been decisive in securing positive outcomes for progressive changes through referendums.

The civic assembly is a forum in which political issues would be discussed by its membership and, ultimately, voted upon. Typically, it would be made up of citizens selected at random but could also include a number of elected politicians. It should hear expert evidence and produce recommendations. In addressing the models of reunification it would serve to counter some of the mythology and fears that surround Irish reunification, namely, the block grant, issues around healthcare provision, taxation and education standards.

The civic assembly could be set up to allow a government to entrust the people with setting the direction on a controversial subject, for example. The result is then one that can be kept at arm's length or embraced depending on the political temperature of the day.

The most notable recent example is the constitutional convention of 2012 to 2014 and the Citizens' Assembly of 2016. The convention recommended the extension of the presidential voting franchise and received wide support in the Oireachtas but the matter has yet to be put to the electorate for approval. I am sure we will return to this topic in our discussion. The Citizens' Assembly sat for 18 months. Among other things, it recommended the repeal of the eighth amendment's prohibition on abortion in the State.

With regard to what a citizens' assembly on Irish reunification might look like, if a citizens' assembly were to consider proposals for Irish reunification, it should and could include political representatives and citizens from both jurisdictions on the island and possibly Britain. Non-participation by elected unionist politicians has been flagged but should not prevent it taking place. The conversations of this committee are illustrative of that fact.

Constitutional change is already upon these islands; Brexit is constitutional change. The only responsible course of action for the Irish Government is to undertake what it reasonably can to prepare for the next stage of Irish self-determination, whatever choice that may be. I assert again that it this would not be a preconditioned citizens' assembly but a genuine organ that we must listen to.

A citizens' assembly would also consider what constitutional amendments would be necessary to the Irish Constitution to ensure continued adherence to the principles of the Good Friday Agreement. It would be an opportunity to examine the competing models of reunification on the basis of reliable information and data. It should, in particular, consider the responsibilities on the Irish State to adhere to the obligations of the sovereign power in Northern Ireland.

With regard to practical arrangements, in the Republic, the citizens' assembly would be set up by a resolution of the Oireachtas and be funded by the Department of Finance. Its terms of reference would be set out in that resolution. It would have no formal role to require or even recommend constitutional or legislative change in the Republic but would command considerable political importance. The Irish Government would be required to respond to its suggestions and it is our view that this is a project that must be initiated by the Irish Government. The possibility of a joint Irish-British constitutional convention modelling reunification is unlikely.

In conclusion, the event of Brexit has changed everything forever. The constitutional security of the North, as part of the United Kingdom, has been thrust into terminal decline by Brexit. Brexit was not something that anybody in Ireland, North or South, proposed, argued for or wanted. A border poll is the constitutional pathway back to the EU for all citizens resident in this island to reset the democratic deficit that Brexit represents. The Good Friday Agreement, which was overwhelmingly mandated by the people of Ireland on both sides of the Border, provides an inbuilt democratic and legislative pathway out of this madness with a Border poll.

The debate is happening. It has been acknowledged by the former President of Ireland, Mary McAleese, among other senior members of the Judiciary. It is a conversation that is happening in staffrooms, coffee shops, school car parks when people drop their children at school and at the side of football pitches up and down the country. This debate needs to be informed by rationality and planning because it cannot be characterised by the recklessness, ill-preparedness and arrogance of the Brexit debate. The Irish Government, the European Union and the United States Administration need to begin planning for what I consider to be the inevitable. A reminder of this is to be found in the growing number of initiatives that are producing useful research output, much of which accords with our established positions and supports our efforts or assists our thinking. The preparations are now well under way and gathering pace.

We note the valuable work being undertaken by the analysing and researching Ireland North and South project, ARINS, a collaboration between the Royal Irish Academy and the Keough-Naughton Institute for Irish Studies at Notre Dame's Keough School of Global Affairs. This work includes, for example, an excellent contribution by Dr. Adele Bergin and Professor Seamus McGuinness on living standards and quality of life on the island of Ireland.

The shared island unit and the ESRI have launched a significant new research programmes which will explore areas such as health and education on the island. We also note with interest that the University College London's working group on unification referendums has essentially followed our lead in calling for extensive advance planning and preparation. The report notes that the years of acrimony over Brexit highlights the real dangers of calling for a vote without adequate advance planning.

If the Good Friday Agreement really does underpin new relationships, no one needs to be anxious about this invitation to a conversation about how we share our island in the future. A border poll is wholly consistent with the vision laid out in the Good Friday Agreement. Our island is on a path towards concurrent referendums on whether people would prefer a united Ireland, and thus EU membership, or wish to retain the union with Britain. It is the fundamental outworking of democracy. This is acknowledged within the internal constitutional legal orders of both states, underpinned by international law, and recognition is implied by the EU in its endorsement of the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts. Making use of the arrangements to test the principle of consent or the right to self-determination at the appropriate time and with proper preparation should provoke no one. Planning has commenced and the Governments must catch up.

I am more than happy to attempt to address any questions, queries or concerns that may arise.