Mr. Niall Murphy:

I thank Senator Black for those questions and observations. It is a privilege to have Senator Black as our chairperson. I am cognisant of how busy she is and of how attentive she is to her role in the Seanad.

Taking matters one by one, the shared island unit is something that we welcome. It is convincing, we collaborate with its work and we are obliged to be one of the official consultees, specifically when the shared island dialogues are convened. We have been asked to contribute and we have contributed speakers to each shared island dialogue which has occurred. We have undertaken consultation with and offered advice and opinion to the civil servants within the shared island unit. However, more needs to be done by the Irish Government. The unit is welcome and it seems to be well resourced, albeit some of the finance has been recycled from previous commitments. Insofar as its work is important, we do not consider that it is consistent with where the conversation is in real terms. Real evidence-led research to inform more concrete planning needs to be undertaken but it is welcome as a first step and we wholly embrace the opportunity to work with it.

This committee has an important role in setting the agenda and in holding the different mechanisms of the Good Friday Agreement to account. In my day job, I work as a solicitor in Belfast and I have enjoyed the opportunity to engage with the various academic research models that have been ongoing. I most thoroughly enjoy the opportunity to work with Professor Colin Harvey at Queen's University Belfast and have observed the rulings in the High Court in Belfast regarding Raymond McCord's application for judicial review.

I understand and appreciate the law relating to schedule 1 of the Good Friday Agreement. It is important to understand and communicate that whereas the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland may call a border poll at any time, he or she must call a border poll if it appears likely that a majority would: "express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland." I would respectfully submit that the threshold of evidence for that has already been reached in terms of electoral results. The Northern jurisdiction returns 18 MPs to Westminster and the majority of those represent a united Ireland constituency. When it comes to city and county councils in the North, there are four councils which would broadly have a united Ireland perspective and four which would broadly have a United Kingdom perspective. Belfast City Council, the largest council in the North, would genuinely have a neutral constitutional preference but one which we would consider leans more towards reunification. Electoral results would inform us that the evidence threshold has been met for the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to discharge his obligation under schedule 1 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

On what this committee could do, whereas we consider that the evidence threshold has been met, we want to know what evidence the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is judging. It would appear that he is not using what should be the most fundamental parameter in a democracy, namely, electoral results. Therefore, what is he using? There are difficulties with polls. When a poll is broadly in line with one's thinking, it is to be welcomed. When it is not, then one contests its reliability. We respectfully consider that this committee could usefully correspond with the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to ask him what evidence he is using to discharge his obligations under schedule 1 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

The evidence sessions that this committee has been engaged in have been very productive and insightful and I trust they have been beneficial to its members. It might be time that this committee considered producing its own report on the prospect of constitutional change on our island during this decade. There has been great benefit from the five evidence sessions that have been convened so the committee may consider appointing a rapporteur to pull together its published opinion on the topic. I would urge the committee to write to the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, to publish his response, if and when received, and to comment on and debate how it considers the efficacy and the constitutional politeness of his response. The committee should consider if the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is taking the issue seriously or if lip service is being paid to what is a fundamental part of our Good Friday Agreement. Those are two action points which could be sensibly addressed by the committee.

I mention the Senator's final point. She correctly observed that our Warm House For All event was transformative insofar as it provided a neutral, honest and genuine space for voices that perhaps do not often find expression in political unionism to be heard. As I said in my opening remarks, we are so proud that Trevor Lunn, MLA, and the Reverend Karen Sutherman found it within themselves to consider that our organisation was one they felt they could contribute to and one in which their voices would be honestly cherished, which they are. We want to continue that work, take it forward and maintain the level of outreach which we have undertaken in good faith to date. The most organic, natural and responsible place for those conversations to take place is in an all-island citizens' assembly with the space and the subject matter being completely neutralised. In that way, we can get the gloves on, get down and dirty, get the facts, commission, assess and review the evidence and make recommendations.

I hope I have answered the Senator's question.