Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 28 September 2021

Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement

Engagement with Ad-Hoc Group for North-South and East-West Cooperation

Ms Claire Hanna:

I thank the Vice Chairman and thank the witnesses for dealing with all the questions so far. It has been very interesting. They talk in their paper about the political conditions and the social conditions for full North-South and east-west engagement. Necessarily, the North-South bodies are more numerous as there are more obvious practical and logistical areas of co-operation, but particularly in the context of the sense of loss that some are feeling, that can sometimes be misinterpreted or even distorted as being an imbalance. The witnesses said they have further meetings with colleagues today. Are there any additional structures, or perhaps a refreshing or re-presentation of east-west structures, to address that perception that North-South is more adequately provided for? Although it might go beyond their remit, are there additional mechanisms that the witnesses think would be helpful for addressing that perceived democratic deficit in terms of opportunities for people politically in the North and the South, but particularly in the North, where there are no MEPs, in order to feed into decision-making at an EU level?

I was struck by Dr. Ní Lochlainn's point about the already complex architecture of governance arrangements that have sprung up from the protocol and the difficulty for organisations in navigating them. I am glad I am not the only one who is becoming a bit bothered by all of the structures that are there, without potentially creating more. Of course, there are more needs.

My last question is about engagement with the Executive, with the UK Government and with the European Commission. The witnesses referenced at section 3.4 of their position paper a lack of detail, particularly in terms of how the UK will discharge its responsibilities. Perhaps I am picking it up incorrectly but is there a bit of a difference in interpretation? The witnesses might expand on the point that is made in section 3.4. I suppose I will begin with Dr. Soares but any of the witnesses can pick up on those points.