Lord Caine:

I will address the question from Senator Chambers. My earlier answer probably demonstrated that I am concerned about political stability in Northern Ireland. I agree with much of what Baroness Ritchie said. The issues around the protocol have been a major contributory factor in recent weeks and months but there are long-standing grievances within loyalism, some of which go back to the immediate aftermath of the Agreement in 1998. Although I do not agree with it, there is a perception that many loyalists have that the Agreement has worked for nationalists and republicans but has somewhat left them behind.

I remember drafting a speech in 2014 in the immediate aftermath of the flag process, during which the disorder was on a far worse scale than we saw some months ago. The speech was my attempt to do a version of the scene from the Monty Python film where the characters ask what the Romans have ever done for them. I asked what the Belfast Agreement has delivered for loyalism. Actually, if we look at the list, it is a long one. I remember at a select committee Tony Blair was asked what the Good Friday Agreement delivered for unionism. The first answer was the union. There are long-standing grievances within loyalism. They relate not only to the protocol but other issues that we need to try to address.

I believe Deputy Richmond and Baroness Ritchie have demonstrated above all that the Agreement is three-stranded. All parts of that agreement are essential and interlocking. One of the problems I found in engaging with Brussels is that those involved tend to see the Agreement almost exclusively through the prism of strand two and they downplay the east-west dimension. If there is anything that colleagues could do to try to gently address that, it would be most helpful. It is three-stranded and all three strands are vital and interlocking. All have to work.

I wish to address one point on the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference. The history relates to the immediate aftermath of the St. Andrew's Agreement, for which Lord Hain was responsible, to his credit, and the re-establishment of devolved government. A decision was taken at the time by the then British Government that the BIIGC should not meet regularly because of unionist sensitivities. After 2010 we continued that. To be honest, we did not come under much pressure from Dublin or any other quarter for the conference to meet regularly until after devolution fell in 2017. Then, the BIIGC met more regularly.

I agree with Deputy Richmond. As I said in an earlier answer, we need a strong institutional mechanism for the bilateral relationship between the UK and Ireland, whether that means more regular meetings of the BIIGC or a new institutional arrangement. My view is not set in stone on which of these it should be, but we definitely need institutional arrangements for the bilateral relationship.