Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Apologies have been received from Senator Niall Blaney.

On behalf of the committee, I would very much like to welcome Dr. Claire Mitchell, author of The Ghost Limb: Alternative Protestants and the Spirit of 1798, to discuss women and constitutional change. I thank her very much for her attendance today. Before we begin, I need to explain, as is standard procedure, some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses with regard to references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. However, witnesses or participants who are to give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note that they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts does and may consider it appropriate to take legal advice on this matter.

Witnesses are asked to note that only evidence connected with the subject matter of the proceedings should be given and should respect directions given by the Chair. Witnesses should respect parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should neither criticise nor make charges against any persons, person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the person’s or entity’s good name.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

I call Dr. Mitchell to make her opening statement, please. She is very welcome.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Maidin mhaith, a chairde. Gabhaim buíochas leis an gcoiste as an gcuireadh. I will talk from the perspective of a northern Protestant woman, and author of a recent book, The Ghost Limb: Alternative Protestants and the Spirit of 1798. The book includes interviews with 20 northern Protestants who are reconnecting with the politics of the United Irishmen and women; their thoughts about Irishness and the future of the island.

My comments will make more sense if I briefly explain the ghost limb. I grew up in a family of religious dissenters in Belfast. My parents are Quakers. Our faith was anti-sectarian and pacifist. We were never unionists. We always supported reunification and our passports were Irish. Having this alternative, dissenting Protestant identity, I have struggled to feel fully at home in the red, white and blue areas I have always lived in. This is the ghost limb - a feeling of being out of place, like part of you is cut off. That you need to hide your politics, hide your Irishness.

About five years ago, I was given a book, Sites of the 1798 Rising in Antrim and Down. A friend and I started to take our kids on trips after school, to sites close to where we lived. We soon realised that our very unionist, loyalist presenting town was once a hub of United Irish activity. We talked about this to others, and it emerged that very few of us had been taught anything about this history. Growing up, we had limited ways to engage with our Irishness.

In learning more about 1798, I began to realise that northern Protestants like us have always existed from Mary Ann McCracken to Alice Milligan to Betty Sinclair. At each crucial juncture of Irish history, people from Protestant backgrounds, and Protestant women, have been to the fore. Anti-sectarian; believing in equality; democrats, socialists and-or civic republicans for whom Ireland was and is home, regardless of DNA.

During the Troubles, these histories fell silent. Alternative Protestants lived in a cultural underground fearing to speak and politically homeless. Until the book came out, it was quite difficult to create space culturally, politically and in the media, for alternative Protestant stories. We would often be invited, for example, to participate in a project about northern Protestants, only to end up on the cutting room floor. Often, the tape that made the cut was very male, very muscular - a very particular type of loud and conservative unionism and loyalism. This has skewed people's perceptions of the Protestant community in the North, which is very diverse, often progressive.

An adversarial news media environment exacerbates this imbalance. With children and, in my case, also a disability, it is difficult to participate in last minute, confrontational debates, especially when the consequences of speaking are so serious. All of the people in the book have been Lundied, charged with being traitors to our own community, sometimes online; other times, in the real world. Everyone here will be familiar with the chill effect for people, especially women, who speak on sensitive political issues. It is also important to say that unionist and loyalist women are subject to similar types of intimidation and harassment.

There are alternative northern Protestant women, of course, who have refused to be silent. Linda Ervine tells her story in the book, about her work creating a different narrative around Protestants and the Irish language. Reverend Karen Sethuraman speaks about coming from a working class loyalist family in east Belfast, ending up as chaplain to a series of Sinn Féin mayors. Karen has recently joined the board of Ireland's Future. Kellie Turtle, a feminist activist, talks about the cross-community nature of the women's movement in the North of Ireland, and how working with feminists on repeal the eighth, and subsequent campaigns, has deepened all-island relationships.

Half of the people in the book want Irish unity quickly. The others are waiting to see what unity might look like. A few of us have chosen to participate in public constitutional debates. Participation does not always feel safe. It is not a coincidence that the northern Protestants who speak at the very large Ireland's Future events are predominantly male. This does not reflect the level of interest in constitutional change among northern Protestant women. I have led and attended all-women panels about these subjects but they are smaller, quieter, not for broadcast.

Professor Jennifer Todd, Dr. Joanne McEvoy and Professor Fidelma Ashe have made recent submissions to this committee about how to amplify women's voices in the constitutional debate. I concur with their findings regarding small deliberative events and cafes and bringing the conversation to where people live. This could transform conversations on Irish unity.

I believe many northern Protestants, including women, will want to be part of this constitutional dialogue. Alternative Protestants may have a role to play in these conversations, as a bridge and as interlocutors. Perhaps this book could help people locate these alternative northern Protestant worlds.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Dr. Claire Mitchell. Nochtadh tuairimí an-mhaithe ansin agus caithfimid iad a phlé anois. Ar an gcéad dul síos, glaoim ar Ms Claire Hanna ón SDLP.

Ms Claire Hanna:

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach agus cuirim fáilte roimh an Dr. Claire Mitchell if we are all doing our cúpla focal. I thank Dr. Mitchell for her presentation and congratulate her on the book. It is really substantial and also a real pleasure to read. I found it a very uplifting book and it is notable that a lot of people are tapping into the new conversation about identities and the multitudes we are now allowed to have in Northern Ireland. People are also looking at the shifting constitutional conversation. Dr. Mitchell managed to do both in a really important way.

She noted in the book and in her presentation that they are not necessarily the same thing. There are people who are not identifying as Protestant, unionist and loyalist but from a Protestant background who are not yet new Irelanders or maybe will not become new Irelanders. It is an important distinction and it is also important that we do not immediately claim people who start to explore different parts of their identity and allow people space to do that.

Has Dr. Mitchell any thoughts on how best to engage people who are open to some form of a decent, pragmatic offer on constitutional change but who maybe do not want to be banked in any particular corner? Specifically, she mentioned the role of women in constitutional change. How does that differ from the mainstream discourse and our political parties? Are all those active in this space doing enough to engage and support women in this area?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

There are definitely different types of groups who are unity curious at the moment. Those from a Protestant background like mine who would say in a survey that they would vote for Irish unity tomorrow account for approximately 4% in surveys usually. That really is quite a small group. Beyond that, you are looking at unity curious, then indifferent and then it ripples out. For me, there are three tasks. One relates to people who are interested in getting a tick in the Border poll. Then there is a second job of just creating a sense of psychological safety for unionists and loyalists more generally so that the fear is taken out of reunification. That may never turn into votes but it would turn into a changed society.

Certainly, where I live, the task is doing anything we can to create that safety in order to avoid violence. For me, it is not just about the poll itself.

Regarding how to engage people, Ireland's Future has been fabulous with the big events, the road show and establishing itself as a very credible actor, also in respect of the research behind the scenes even on things like pensions. If you read the Ireland's Future documents, they are really detailed. The lack of an offer is a big barrier for the unity-curious at the moment. I appreciate the difficulty in defining an offer in a rapidly evolving political context but if somebody asked me to go out and persuade persuadables, I do not feel I have the tools to do that at the moment.

In terms of getting women to participate in the event, looking at the work of Professor Jennifer Todd, Dr. Joanne McEvoy and Professor Fidelma Ashe is the way to go because they are not talking about the big scary meetings where your face might be in the newspaper and you are wondering whether your kids are safe and all of that. They are talking about going to where people are and creating safe spaces with neutral facilitators. Very quickly then, they are finding that people are coming around to Sláintecare, childcare and women's issues. It is so important to get that kind of contribution because if we do it all in forums that are official and large, then we are going to hear advocacy for a certain type of unity and not the one which women might necessarily ask for.

Ms Claire Hanna:

I thank Dr. Mitchell. That concept of psychological safety is really important. As she says, it is about that extension of consent. It is not, in this context, always going to be absolute delight about it but it is creating things people are comfortable with. She will know I am involved with SDLP's new Ireland commission and exactly that sort of small-group, face-to-face, multiple levels of dialogue is the phase we are in at the moment. It is sitting down with people in small groups and asking what their fears, hopes and rights are, and not exposing people. Not everybody is ready for a large group approach to it. I will hand over to other colleagues.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Hanna. That is a very important issue. It is Sinn Féin's slot now for whoever it wishes to nominate.

Pauline Tully (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh Dr. Mitchell. I thank her for coming in today. I have listened to her in the audiovisual room before this as well. What she has done is really enlightening. Anything we can do to broaden the conversation around constitutional change and the future of this country is really important. It is really important to include as many different voices and perspectives as possible. She has opened the door to doing that as have some initiatives to which she has referred. It can be hard to reach certain elements of the community, especially women. She has said there is a fear in the community from those who are perhaps a little bit louder about expressing their true opinions. It is about trying to find how best to overcome that because I am sure it is still very difficult for many to speak out. Does Dr. Mitchell feel it is becoming any way easier, as a result of her book and other initiatives, for people to come forward and express their opinions? She identified that people have a fear around Irish unity. Is that fear just based on something like people saying that as their nationality is British, they want to maintain the Union although they have not actually looked at the issues that affect us all? There is a lot more that unites the people on the ground than divides us. There are things like healthcare, childcare, the cost of living and housing and so on and all the ordinary issues that affect us all the same. We need to get the conversations around those issues. What exactly is the fear that people have about discussing the future of Ireland? Is it just the fear of being ostracised in their community for even discussing it or is there a fear about some other elements?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Míle buíochas le Deputy Tully for her question. There are a lot of elements to that. It is a really important question. What is the fear? For the people who are already quite persuaded about the merits of reunification, the fear is that their safety would be threatened. For everybody who participates in Ireland's Future - the Protestants - there is that conversation around the kitchen table about whether they are prepared to relocate, if people are going to find where their children go to school and is it safe. When I express that fear it is from members of my own community. Beyond those fears of the already convinced, there are wider fears in the Protestant community. A friend expressed it to me like he felt the guy ropes had been kicked away. Everything that he had loved about British culture was crumbling and he could see that after Brexit. He could see Britain was changing but he could not define the hope and the offer or the vision that would replace it yet. In the absence of an offer - I do not mean that has to be pinned down now - but in the absence of hope and vision that is perhaps occurring at the moment because of concrete unity planning or specifics, what then fills the vacuum is the hurt of the past and post-conflict issues. We talk about flags because we should be talking about healthcare, and I really think that is what people want to be talking about. Then the hurts of the past then come in and there is time to dwell on them in the absence of something to be very excited about instead.

The fear in private conversations is vastly diminished. I am the political nerd in the family and an election or two ago, I had people call me up who were extremely afraid that a Sinn Féin member would be the First Minister because this is how a lot of election campaigns have been run. These same people have rung, after recent elections, saying "Mary Lou seems great". Somebody who is known to me even used a couple of words of Irish for the first time and said they felt so much less afraid. That context is really changing and those fears are diminishing but that is happening in private. People are not ready to bring that kind of conversation into the light.

Has my book eased people's fears? It has certainly eased my fear. I have spent my entire adult life quite afraid to speak. I wanted to call the book "Do not fear to speak" almost as an encouragement to my own self. In finding 20 people to walk beside all of us who have felt alone and that we were the only radical in the village, we realised this is actually just a history that has not been erased in a Machiavellian way. We have almost erased it within our selves because of our own fears. It was finding that community to walk beside. The book has impacted a lot of Protestants and provided that self-recognition that they are not alone. Their question to me then after reading the book is what they do now? They are asking what they join and I do not have a really good answer for them on that yet. I tell them to do something local in their community, to do something positive and to do things that make them feel uncomfortable. That is as far as I have got but I look forward to the day when I can suggest a really viable, exciting positive reunification movement that they could look at.

Pauline Tully (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there something more than that, which the Government, political parties or even this committee could be doing to encourage conversations and to try to allay the fears? As Dr. Mitchell says, it could be with some people that they have lost their identity or they feel they are losing it because of Brexit, so there might be something we could do to assure them they have not and that their identity within the new Ireland would be secure and respected. I presume there is more that could be done by politicians as well.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

It is hard to reassure people that their sense of identity will not be affected because what is a unionist after reunification? It is honest to take that on board. Certainly, a bill of rights that would include things that Protestants might be interested in could be looked at.

When you talk to people, it might not be things that have been thought about yet. It might be things like religious freedom, which seems so inbuilt and obvious, but articulating that might be incredibly helpful. I do not think people will be able to put trust in a wider hypothetical process they hear about in the media; I think it will be the groundwork of face-to-face conversations. I think that includes time and resources, especially if you do not want to hear from only the most committed hard core, and I assure members that they will be mostly men because they will have the time to do this.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are only two minutes left in this slot, so maybe we will go on to the next round-----

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. That is fine.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----unless Mr. Brady or Mr. Hazzard wants to come in for the two minutes.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are two minutes left in the slot. I am happy to give them to Sinn Féin, and then I will call Deputy Brendan Smith. Whoever wants to use the two minutes, please do.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Mr. Brady have any questions? I have a number of questions that-----

Mr. Mickey Brady:

I am fine for the moment. I thank Deputy Conway-Walsh.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Grand. We will move on to Deputy Smith.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh Dr. Mitchell. Tá brón orm nach raibh raibh mé anseo ag tús na díospóireachta mar bhí mé ag plé ceisteanna sa Dáil. Dr. Mitchell is very welcome. I apologise that I missed the earlier part of her contribution as I had questions in the Dáil Chamber. I have not had the opportunity to read her book but I find her contribution this morning very interesting. For all of us who desire constitutional change but are conscious of this, there is a lot of work to be done between now and then. That is an onus on all of us, regardless of which political tradition we come from.

Has Dr. Mitchell had any engagement with the shared island unit of the Department of the Taoiseach? As she is aware, the unit has engaged in a lot of dialogue across different sectors. I think the last figures the committee saw showed something like 3,000 people participating in those dialogues, from youth to groups representing specific sectors, both North and South. That is very important. Where there is qualitative research going on and where there are guest speakers leading debates and ensuring there is a good cross-section of input, that is very important.

I am very glad Dr. Mitchell mentioned Linda Ervine and that she participated in the compilation of her book. I have known Linda for many years and have been in the Skainos Centre on quite a number of occasions. I have supported in my own small way the work she and her colleagues are carrying out there. It is phenomenal. When you go there and listen to the people delivering some of the classes and the people studying there, they are very conscious of who the custodians of the Irish language have been going back many decades. That message that is contained in Dr. Mitchell's contribution this morning has to be amplified much more. The Irish language is not the preserve of any one political community; it is the preserve of all the Irish people. As regards those people who were custodians of the language in the past and who were great Irish linguists, we should always recognise their work. It is to be hoped that we will get more of that community to be active in speaking, fostering and promoting the Irish language. Linda Ervine and her colleagues have developed a number of naíonraí in east Belfast. I think some of them are held in Presbyterian halls or churches. It has not been easy for Linda or her colleagues - anything but - but she has persevered and she and her colleagues have done and are doing a great job in promoting the Irish language and developing learning through Irish. We cannot commend her work enough.

I always think it is important we support cultural and sporting activity so much. I laud the people who established East Belfast Gaels and the GAA ground there. There are people of different backgrounds participating in GAA sports there, be it Gaelic football, hurling, camogie or ladies' football. It is great to see that. They have encountered difficulties as well, and there has been vandalism at the grounds they use. That is a pity. The message has gone out that in many instances in the past the GAA did not get adequate recognition for the great work it has always done in our communities North and South. Gaelic games are not the preserve of the Catholic people. Some of the best players in Gaelic history have been from the Protestant tradition. That is not amplified enough either. The more people from east Belfast who can participate in Gaelic sports, the better. It is important that people partake in all sports. It is very heartening to talk to some of the people involved in East Belfast Gaels and recognise that they are competing in competitions now in County Down, I think. It is great to see that at all levels.

Dr. Mitchell mentioned the atmosphere in the news media environment and confrontational debates. Confrontational debates do not achieve anything, no matter what walk of life we are in. Is Dr. Mitchell coming across any debates that are civilised or conversations that, regardless of one's viewpoint, one can be comfortable participating in or attending? Confrontational debates are no good for society in any respect.

I commend Dr. Mitchell on her work and look forward to having an opportunity to read her book. The other women she mentioned have all contributed handsomely, and some of them are still doing so, to the important debate and discussions that we need and that are far from one-sided but are all-embracing, positive, upbeat and non-confrontational.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will say a few words, if I may. This is a very important debate, with Dr. Mitchell challenging the issues today. Something that seems to be missing, not from what she is saying, is maybe an understanding generally in Ireland of who the United Irishmen were, which she referred to, and what they were about. One of the key things that is often not mentioned - this is not accusatory; I am just relating what I think - is that they came from the theory of the French Revolution and that rights were for all people, Catholics and Protestants. They were not oppressive in respect of any religion or any people.

As regards the debate we need here, Dr. Mitchell talks about a united Ireland and I talk about one too, but it is more a united people. In other words, it is about getting a new consensual relationship. The words "united Ireland" can mean many things to many people. Most people have not thought it through. I do not say that rudely or ignorantly, but there has to be a model, and in that model there has to be respect for all communities and traditions. I very much acknowledge and respect Dr. Mitchell's tradition. I refer to the Protestant tradition in terms of the Celtic revival and people like Standish O'Grady, who was defined by Lady Gregory, I think, as a Fenian unionist, if there was ever such a thing. He led the revival in Celtic literature. Douglas Hyde, our first President, was Protestant. We have had huge influences in the southern political environment. Leading the charge on the Enlightenment were clearly people from different religions but particularly from the Presbyterian and Church of Ireland traditions. I have read a fair bit about this time and I spend a lot of my time reading and trying to understand exactly what Dr. Mitchell says in her narrative, that is, that her home area was basically a united Irish area. What that meant at the time was that they felt oppressed in their religion, they were oppressed in their politics and they could not participate fully in society, which is the same way that Catholics would have felt. We have to see people in their history. We need to elaborate more on what the future will be, and that must embrace unionism and the Protestant identity. They must be absolutely convinced of that. Most people here in the South whom I know are of the nationalist tradition, like me.

In order to embrace other identities on this island the future for all of us has to be a new form of relationship. The term "united Ireland" can mean many things. Whatever the future is, it must be embraced fully and freely by unionists. Is that not the reality?

We have to think this through. As I have said to some of our unionist colleagues in Westminster, we need to hear more voices like Dr. Mitchell's and also voices from unionist political parties on what they see as the future, with all of us working together. I say that because many people do not think that through. People think a united Ireland will mean domination of the Six Counties, Northern Ireland or whatever one wants to call the place by the people in the South. The issue is much deeper than that. We have to go back to the tradition of liberty, equality and fraternity. We cannot stress enough that we need to get to that place. If not, we will have hundreds more years of dissension, trouble and violence, which nobody wants. I do not know if Dr. Mitchell would like to comment on that.

There is a broader picture and we need to reach into it to inform people. The leaders of the United Irishmen were primarily a middle class initially. They then joined with the Defenders to form a more revolutionary tradition. Their principles were equality and respect. Dr. Mitchell mentioned a bill of rights. That is where we have to go. We have to ensure the rights of everybody based on individuals and not religion. Whoever they are, people must have the same rights. We must not oppress any minority, whether Catholic, Protestant or whatever else. I do not know whether Dr. Mitchell has a view on that. I feel quite strongly about these issues.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Gabhaim buíochas, a Chathaoirligh, as ucht na ceisteanna. I thank the Cathaoirleach for acknowledging the huge role that Protestants played in the formation of the Irish Republic. After partition these histories were diluted, erased and taken away from us. It seems ridiculous that we are only discovering or rediscovering the contributions that were made. We became very disconnected from these histories and figures.

The Cathaoirleach is absolutely right that 1798 - not the pikes as I was raised a pacifist but the Enlightenment concepts-----

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Freedom.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

-----that emerged in the 1790s - can provide such a fantastic template for the constitutional questions we are facing currently. At the time it was Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter. I would suggest that list could keep going by adding "other", "migrant" and "heathen". That is a very inclusive way to frame who belongs to the nation.

I did not used to feel I could ever play a role in meeting or building in Ireland because I was as Scottish as I was Irish according to the DNA test but I think the challenge is to really create a meaningful kind of form of nation-building in which all can play their part. The United Irishmen movement was hugely inspiring in that. The problem with the Protestants is that they were a bit too radical as leaders but we can expect that.

I thank the Cathaoirleach for his questions. Linda Ervine's work is an example that is similar to 1798 in that the Irish language, like 1798, is a template for Protestant engagement with Irishness that was inspiring and a connective tissue with the land and the island we live on but which had been forgotten, erased, made illegal and dumped from schools, etc. I worked very closely with Linda. I still only have bunrang Gaeilge and I am terrible at the language aspect but I am on the committee for the new school for Naíscoil na Seolta and the new bunscoil that will open in September. Linda's example is a wonderful one to pull out. She has been at this work for over ten years at this stage. She has gone from having protests outside to having senior unionist figures taking ownership of the question, "Sure, was it not Presbyterians who helped save the language?" It was the same with the naíscoil. We faced protests at the beginning but really it was for people. Linda's model was to meet people for a cup of tea, bring them in and have small discussions. We have gone on from that. We met first in a non-denominational church and then a Presbyterian church and we now have our own premises. We are over subscribed for the preschool this year. It is a very positive model to look at the way Linda has done things. She has always had her door open. She has not been tied to any kind of political party or vision. What she is offering is that, in the way that the ideas of 1798 are healing, the Irish language of itself is healing for northern Protestants because all of a sudden these words that had been a mystery to us are connecting us to the soil, the bend in the field and the river that flows past us. With all of that, Protestants feel more rooted to the island and not one tradition. The GAA is also a very important example. We all have a psychological hump to get over as Protestants when participating in these Gaelic and true Gael activities. I think that view that we do not really belong here is slowly beginning to change.

The talk radio media environment is pretty terrible for women. I know many wonderful, articulate women friends who do not take those calls because there are school runs to be done and conflict to be thought of at the last minute and it is too difficult to participate in. I assure the Cathaoirleach that there are small, local conversations taking place on a regular basis. That is where real change is happening.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Stephen Farry.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Good morning, Stephen.

Dr. Stephen Farry:

It is good to see Claire again. This is all fascinating. Speaking from the Alliance Party's perspective, I wish to clarify that we do not take a position on the constitutional question but we are open-minded. We very much are aware of the open and fluid debate. We certainly very much welcome Dr. Mitchell's comments and perspective on this debate and what she has brought to it personally.

I want to explore more deeply issues around identity in Ireland. In Dr. Mitchell's answer to the Chair she touched upon the impact on the history of the island over the past 100 years in terms of polarisation of identity. To get a sense of the scale of diversity we have had, people often talk about surnames that are associated with Gaelic Ireland versus those associated with plantation families but all of a sudden those names jump across into what we would have assumed to be people from different backgrounds. For example, there are people from all the different political persuasions in Northern Ireland with the name McGuinness. Gerry Adams has what is essentially a Scottish name. All of that points to a much deeper complexity in our history. I am sure Dr. Mitchell very closely identifies with that. I have the impression that through history there have been a lot more mixed marriages or mixed relationships but, rather than living mixed, multiple, plural lives, people have been forced by various factors in our society to almost choose a side. Sometimes a husband or, more easily, a wife has been forced to assume the identity of his or her spouse.

Usually a wife has been forced to assume the identity of her husband. Does Dr. Mitchell have a sense of the scale of how those sorts of historical trends have occurred? Coming to where we are today, how can we push back against the narrative that someone's religious, national or political identity all have to reconcile? I mean in the sense that if you are a Catholic, you are Irish and a nationalist and if you are a Protestant, you are a unionist and British. How can we better recognise there is a lot more crossover in that particular respect?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Dr. Farry is right about our surnames and the tangled web of our family histories. When I recently did some genealogical research, the biggest unionist supporter in our family had Irish-language speaking relatives from the Shankill Road and many Catholic relatives as well. I refer to that sense of mixed relationships, which was more difficult in the days of Ne Temere. We are not living in that world any more.

Whenever we chose to send our kids to primary school, from a Protestant background, we sent them to a Catholic primary school because there were no integrated options nearby. We thought we would integrate ourselves and be great peacemakers. I was embarrassed I ever thought that because what we found when we arrived was that we already lived in a place where people had mixed, weaved and tangled around one another. The school was incredibly mixed, not just in terms of Catholics and Protestants but in terms of mixed marriages and newcomer kids from all types of countries. My kids are living in an entirely different world than myself. Generation X and the end of millennials had conflict embedded in their childhood and then an adult life lived in peace. My children do not recognise the kinds of things and concepts I talk about and the world I still half-live in.

This is becoming the mainstream and with each generational change, this is just the way the North is. I regularly feel constrained and frustrated with everything being reduced to the camps Dr. Farry referred to and the assumption all of these things come in packages of identity, namely, Catholic, nationalist, republican, Irish; and Protestant unionist, loyalist, British. The solution I have taken for myself is to pick one from each column, so I will be a Protestant and a republican and I will see what happens to combine those words.

This is not a change that is going to make a difference on an individual level and I agree with the Alliance Party's proposals for reform of the Assembly institutions. It is not sustainable, 26 years after the peace agreement, to work in terms of assumed ethnic blocs when even the people in those blocs are straining to fit the criteria. I have expressed my own desire for reunification but I do not for a moment think that comes without significant reform of the Northern Ireland institutions first. I am very aware that unionism is becoming a minority and there are still needs for minority protections and various parties have interests in keeping those in place but surely we must be able to find a way to loosen the vice grip of those categories because society has moved on. People have moved on and those institutional set-ups are holding us back.

Dr. Stephen Farry:

If I may follow-up on Dr. Mitchell's final points as they are very welcome. I would invite Dr. Mitchell to go a little bit further in that respect. Dr. Mitchell talked about the role of designations in the Assembly. Dr. Mitchell might reflect a bit further in terms of other areas of public policy be it, for example, in terms of equality monitoring. People are asked whether they are part of a Protestant or Catholic community. Is that a proxy for their politics? I appreciate there is a broad-based rationale for doing that but how irritating does Dr. Mitchell find that type of system? Is it the same with the census? At times, other people do not give an answer and there is this assumption to ask what primary school they went to in order to work it out by proxy. Does Dr. Mitchell feel we need to have a more subtle way of assessing people's identity in terms of how monitor equality in our society?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

It is difficult because there are patches of real inequality in our society such as in policing. It is extremely important to take account of how many Catholics are in the PSNI because that really matters. I laughed, however, when my kids did a cross-community scheme at school recently. They are in a Catholic primary school. They had to do a scheme with a school based in a loyalist housing estate. They had to write down their hobbies and they were led to write down either wearing green for St. Patrick's Day or going to the parades on 12 July. I asked them why they did not write down Xbox and football because that is all they do. He turned up and said they talked about the thing they had to talk about for 30 seconds and then they talked about Xbox and football. In one sense I was really glad they were not avoiding the issue in those schemes because I take my kids to St. Patrick's Day events and to the 12 July events because I am interested in all cultures and want to be friends with all of my neighbours but it has very much outgrown the kids' lives. I do not know what that would look like - Catholic, Protestant or other, depending on the context. I tick all kinds of boxes. I do not think it is actually meaningful to our lives now.

Dr. Stephen Farry:

Absolutely. Dr. Mitchell's comment reminded me of the scene in "Derry Girls" when they were doing a cross-community engagement scheme on the blackboard. Obviously it is a parody of something which is in the past but it touches on that. It is a particular scene which strikes a lot of people.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

We did keep our toaster in the cupboard.

Dr. Stephen Farry:

There we go. That is it sorted.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Mr. Chris Hazzard MP has one question.

Mr. Chris Hazzard:

I thank the Chair and welcome Dr. Mitchell. Today has been fascinating. I apologise but I am travelling and so am stuck in the car. Coincidentally, I am heading to the 1798 centre in Enniscorthy as part of our European election campaign but I wanted to touch upon some of the things Dr. Mitchell has alluded to.

One was newcomer Irish and foreign nationals who are now making Ireland and the island of Ireland their home. For those of us who advocate for constitutional change and building a new Irish Republic across the island, what lessons can we learn from the last five or six years where this process of change and identity-shaping within the wider Protestant and Dissenter community has taken place as we start to embrace newcomer Irish and those people who are making this island their home in order that we can begin that conversation as quickly and probably as successfully as possible?

Second, like most people on this call, we all have family friends and people we live with who stem from the community we have been speaking about today. When it comes to people reassessing their identity and reassessing the journey where they are at, what is the most difficult part about unshackling themselves from the position of supporting maintenance of the Union? For a long time it was said the maintenance of the Union of Great Britain and the North of Ireland was about material well-being. Perhaps Brexit has shaken that, as perhaps has the loosening of the Catholic Church's grip on the southern State. Are there other items Dr. Mitchell feels are still the most difficult or intractable when it comes to walking this journey? How do we begin that process? I thank Dr. Mitchell again for her contribution today. It has been first class and I am not surprised, as I read Dr. Mitchell's book, which I commend to anybody who is interested in this subject.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Míle buíochas. I love the question about newcomers and new nationals to the island because in 1798, my people were the newcomers. They were not invested in a certain type of Irish state. They were here and they wanted to do their business and have a good life for their families. They were quite unshackled and free in their envisaging of how a new Ireland, or whatever it would be called at this time, would look like and that is very exciting. Thinking about nation-building in that inclusive way is going to be crucial to this reunification project because it is not just about including Protestants, but everybody. That will settle a lot of nerves.

The rise of a kind of more far-right politics on the island is quite unsettling actually from a Northern Protestant republican point of view because from a point in time when I was taking pelters from my own community, I have now started to get them from a kind of true-Gael perspective. It is important for the Oireachtas and whoever else is working on this, therefore, to look at this issue and to make sure that Protestants do not become a whipping boy in that wider context. We do not want anybody to be excluded. Working on telling the stories of who we want to be as Ireland that are inclusive is a really necessary job of work.

What is the most difficult part of unshackling? First, I do not think that most unionists or loyalists feel it as a shackle but Mr. Hazzard is right to identify the dissonance with belonging to the UK at the moment. We have a lot of good, loyalist friends and they do not trust Westminster as far as they could throw it. They feel excluded, abandoned and that their sense of loyalty is to their own community. There is some interesting learning for Irish nationalists and republicans there, not in changing those people's loyalty to the idea of the union, but with the queen dying, the decline of the welfare state, the rise of English nationalism and the crumbling of our state in the North, there is a loosening of a lot of the bonds. There is an area there where conversations might be possible.

I am sorry to say there is also a distrust of political parties, that is, all political parties. Even many unionists and loyalists distrust their own political parties that are designed to represent them. That is why this process around constitutional dialogue needs to be people-led. While political parties absolutely have a role to play in getting the structures in place to give people like me the offer, the pitch and the things that are going to viably change their lives, if the process is solely party-led, it will end up in more disillusionment. The good part is that a lot of us are standing here willing, ready and eager to step in to the fray. We will not just persuade for any old Ireland; that is not in our DNA. I refer to a good unity and wider than that and, as I said, declare a North that is psychologically safe, where people, even if they did not want unity, can feel relaxed and valued and that prevents violence. This is just the problem of our times, that is, an alienated and disenfranchised feeling, which is behind the rise of the far-right, North, South, and across the water. People will need to feel like citizens again and feel they can voice their concerns at some level and that they will actually be listened to. That would be a game-changer.

Mr. Chris Hazzard:

Iontach maith. Gabhaim buíochas le Claire Mitchell agus ádh mór.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think Dr. Mitchell for being here. I was really keen to have her here since I first saw the launch of her book. I have her book here and it is fantastic. It makes a really positive contribution to the whole discussion and the discussions that we are having on this committee, which obviously surround women and the Constitution and the role that women can play in it and what we need to do. I wish to quote a small extract from her book, on page 33:

The united Irish analysis in the 1790s and mine now is that politics on this island offers the best chance of realising these values...Irish reunification, in some shape or form, has always made sense to me. Bigger fish, small pond, republican not monarchy, leaving a state which is constitutionally routed in empire and feudalism for a State that at least attempted to be a peoples' Republic.

[...]

It does not stop me dreaming of a second Republic with a new Constitution remade by all on the island today.

On this committee, we meet a lot of people who wish to share that. What does Dr. Mitchell want good unity to look like for progressive Protestants? When she talks about structures in place, what do they look like for her? I completely agree in terms of conversations at grassroots level from a community perspective and building capacity in individuals and communities. What are the kinds of structures? What do we need to do? What does good unity look like?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta. That is an excellent question. Does the Deputy wish me to answer the question in terms of State structures or structures as part of a unity dialogue?

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I refer to structures to facilitate the dialogue so that we are not reinventing the wheel and that each conversation is adding to the other conversations in it. Sometimes in community development we get stuck at a level. What framework do we need?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

I thought Ireland's Future's recent document, Ireland 2030, was excellent in articulating the process of citizens' assemblies and how we saw that unfold with a very specific timeline. This committee has heard from the very best such as Professor Fidelma Ashe, Professor Jennifer Todd and Dr. Joanne McEvoy, who have all been very clear that those small groups get round quickly, in a matter of hours, from suspicion and defensiveness to quality discussions, usually about healthcare and care.

The danger is that a lot of groups are talked out in the North. The North is researched to death. The Shankill Women's Centre must have no paint left on the door from the number of knocks that it gets.

On the Deputy's question about how to build that in, make it meaningful, record and document it, with the citizens' assembly process, there needs to be some kind of central hub or place to store that information so that work is not replicated time and time again. Losing the knowledge of consulting people and for it to disappear into the ether is a counterproductive thing to do because that will create the perception, and maybe the valid perception, that there is not really much point in engaging because what is going to happen is going to happen anyway. I refer to having a place to record, catalogue, disseminate and tell stories in the media and in the wider world, whether that is through radio, television, media and the creatives, etc.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it a digital portal that could be used for feeding into the citizens' assembly whereby we would have everything captured together? I am speaking about bridging the gap between the influence and the policies, and the voices of women and others being heard, and bringing this to a point where they can see real change and their values being reflected in what is designed in policy.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

When I think of the experimental forums happening at present there are a number by academics, there is Sinn Féin's process, the SDLP's process and some civil society initiatives also. Does anybody know what the finding is other than what has been reported to the committee? I am not sure where that knowledge is kept. It seems like a rather scattergun approach at present. Of course we have to dip our toes into the conversation to see whether it is possible and whether people will engage. Information gathering is something that might be quite important.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is the framework I am trying to get at. I do not know whether it would be under the shared island unit, the Irish Government or who it would be. I am just trying to get in my head exactly what it would look like and where it would stand. It is almost like uploading the various pieces of academic information to a central portal. This discussion that we have to capture is not being done internationally. We have a responsibility as a committee. This is probably what we are trying to do in terms of the reports on the economy, health, women in the Constitution, climate change and all of these things. I see the need for a bigger framework whereby we have the citizens' assembly, all of this information being centralised, and all of the voices of the women and hard-to-reach people who have come forward. Their voices really matter in this and we have to be able to make them count.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

We presume that when it comes to a more set piece citizens' assembly, which the State is more familiar with, it would be on the back of three or four years of having done micro-assemblies around the island. I suggest the issues would be drawn from the micro-assemblies. Nobody will log into this portal; ordinary people are not very interested. If there is a genealogy of these ideas, and they occur as the main set pieces of the main citizens' assembly event, that would be significant. We would be speaking about very different issues than if a random committee sat down with a list of ten things that might come up. Those issues may not come up.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

It might be a lot easier and better.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Dr. Mitchell for her contribution to the discussion conversation about the issue and, as she rightly mentioned, Ireland's Future. There is a richness in it and I do not want to lose any of it. Whether we agree with it or disagree with some of it, we should have it all together. We should not reinvent the wheel. We should progress the conversations at the same pace as people are progressing themselves in the conversations they are having. I thank Dr. Mitchell for being here and for her contribution. I ask her to stay in touch with the committee so we can have further conversations with her as our work evolves.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of our deficits here is that it is very rare that we get people such as Dr. Mitchell coming here. By this I mean people with a Protestant background who are articulating issues and their views on the future. Perhaps Dr. Mitchell could help us with other groups we could invite. We do not have much time left with the election coming up but it is very important. The big negative is there is no engagement from political unionism with the committee and this is what we need. We will not have a future unless we go forward together. This is my view. We can hang out all the colours we like, and all of the policies we think might work, but it is a difficulty if we cannot get them to engage because things will not change unless we do. We cannot force it on them either. We have to get consent.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

When I speak to unionists and loyalists about the blocking points for getting into this debate, very open-minded unionists and loyalists will point to the housing crisis and ask why they would go from one state with structural problems into another. As some of the problems in the Republic begin to be repaired, and the citizens' assembly or whatever work begins to produce something of more substance to speak about, unionists would not have to come down here to speak about flags and emblems, although some may do so. We can all see that something is in the ether and changing. There might not be Irish unity but things can happen in a heartbeat and unexpectedly. I believe there are unionists who will want to have some role in shaping this, even if it is in a quieter way, but it is hard at present for them to know what to speak about. Why come here to speak about how much you love being British? Certainly a Bill of Rights and such things come under the agenda. Healthcare might arise in a meaningful way with regard to learning from both models. That would be relevant. I do not know whether we would need representatives of political unionism to do this. It could be people from various backgrounds.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If they do not engage, their communities will not follow them. They lead them in as much as they get their votes from their communities. I hear what Dr. Mitchell is saying and today's debate has been very useful.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Go raibh maith agat, Deputy Wynne. This work does need an awful lot of sensitivity. In my book, it was a very brave thing for everybody who participated to tell their stories. I was acutely aware of that. I did it in a way that they had a final say over their own words. They could present themselves the way they wanted. They could take out any locations, family names or anything they felt would open them up to any danger. It is really important to appreciate that. Also, as I have been exploring the political world and bringing these stories into politics I realised that not only sensitivity is needed but a kind of autonomy as well.

I did my PhD in UCD and later worked at the Institute of British-Irish Studies. I worked on evangelicalism at the time. I believe there is something inherited from a religious past in the mindset of autonomy and independent thinking and Protestants are a bit stubborn, or "tran", which means "stubborn" in Ulster Scots. They like to find things out for themselves. If a process is to manage to include Protestants, it will need to throw the doors open and have that questioning and exploration as central in order for it to be valid rather than top-down with a policy already made in a backroom and asking what they think about it. That is quite important to say.

I have been politically homeless in the North of Ireland. My solution was just to be other, to be neither and to opt out of everything. That is a very powerful identity for some people who take a lot of identity and value from not being part of two of the main traditions. I just thought I was part of all of the traditions and wanted a way to express that.

With regard to women and participation, the online stuff is a given and you need to have a thick skin. There are other ways to participate. I would use today as an example of women's participation. I have children and had to get childcare for today. I have a disability also - myalgic encephalomyelitis, ME - so I had to stay down last night but expenses were available for participation in the committee meeting, which is absolutely fine. I am very privileged to be here. I am pointing that out because I am here. I am incredibly committed to this work and this process but a process that looks like this will only get the incredibly committed and I do not think too many of them will end up being women.

In terms of the privacy of these conversations, being unrecorded and Protestants fearing to speak, I feel that this is changing every year. Senator Black will maybe find this in Ireland's Future as well. Maybe at the beginning there was a much smaller pool of Protestant participants that could be drawn on. I have been amazed to see how each subsequent event has opened up with more and more options. That is quite exciting and I think that has some kind of exponential growth where the more of us that are smoked out and stand up, the more people this encourages to feel safe doing it in that space.

There is a lack of trust in political parties across the western world. I think we have so much in common. The media portrays Northerners as crazy cousins, very angry and very loud unionists and loyalists. The unionist and loyalist women I know are not like that. There is a sadness there because we have so much in common in terms of our values, hopes and fears and I hope that will come out in the debates ahead.

Frances Black (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have to start by thanking Dr. Mitchell for being here, for staying overnight, for getting childminders and all of that, for her very thoughtful engagement with the ongoing constitutional conversation and for sharing her experiences and knowledge with the committee. I absolutely acknowledge the wonderful book Dr. Mitchell has written and I think everybody should read it, in particular, everybody in the Oireachtas, because the way it is written is phenomenal. It saddens me sometimes to think it was so brave of all those women to come forward in the book and that it has come to that - that they have to be brave to do it and that it is even in that place. I thank Dr. Mitchell for all of that.

Deputy Conway-Walsh has asked a lot of the questions I wanted to touch on. The one question I wanted to ask concerns an engagement with a group which came down from Belfast and it was called uncomfortable conversations. They were amazing. It was mind-blowing. We should take something like that and expand it. I do not know whether the Chair, Deputy O'Dowd, was present but it was really powerful. It was an informal Good Friday meeting and it was so powerful. People from the Shankill Road and across the community from north Belfast and west Belfast were present. For me, it was a real eye-opener.

The questions asked of us, particularly by the unionist community, were: "What will we get out of it? You are talking about united Ireland so what will it look like for us?" I think that is the question. I am back and forth to the North. My family are up in Rathlin Island and I am up there all of the time. I was there for Easter. There is that question of what would it look like. What would health and housing look like? They are always the questions that come up.

The focus is on the words "new Ireland" , and I think those words were used. Language is very important, but what would Dr. Mitchell's priorities be in a new, united Ireland. If the aim is to achieve real change, what would she like to see?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Gabhaim buíochas le Senator Black for her questions. I thank her for commending the bravery of the people in the book. They really took a risk. We find that in participating in that project, we have, to some degree, liberated ourselves from that fear through finding a community to walk beside, with each other but also with all the people, including the Senator, who have stepped in to support us in the new relationships we have formed. Those conversations, friendships and relationships are what a new Ireland will be built on.

I loved the uncomfortable conversations reference. I think sometimes people in the North are seen as the crazy angry cousins but the North actually has so much to offer. We are very good at uncomfortable conversations. We are resilient and have a lot of humour and grit. We know how to talk very sensitively with people who have experienced the deepest of traumas and loss. That is something the North could perhaps bring to the South. Partition has distanced us and it would be lovely to have more of those conversations with one another. The Taoiseach made the comment the other day about familiarity with Berlin and Paris versus Belfast and Derry. That probably is somewhat of a reality. I would love to see how surprised people are when they find how normal and okay these conversations will feel with unionists and loyalists, not just radical Protestants like me.

What would I like to see in the new Ireland? Deputy Conway-Walsh read out a little bit about a second republic, which I have been told not to say because it is little bit too radical and potentially a thing of fear. This is a wonderful Republic. The history of the Easter Rising and how Irish independence was won matters a lot to me. I think the sense, and this is reflected in the language of a new Ireland, is that it would be something new and it would be rebuilt, not just tagged on.

I do not know if it is okay to speak about structures. Stephen Farry asked a question about how we can get away from these two binary camps that trap us in identities and political groupings that people have long since outgrown. I would hate to see those structures replicated in a new Ireland. It is incredibly important that unionists feel safe and comfortable but I think we could do that in a rights-based context in negotiation with the British state, for example, through the retention of British citizenship, without embedding groups that must always have a veto. It is not that I think unionists will need protection. I think they will very quickly find political and ideological friends who would argue for the same kinds of outcomes in the context of a reunified Ireland. I would love for the structures not to be too tied down or sectarian in their construction because that is exactly what we are trying to get away from in the North. It secured the peace but it is not securing us good politics or a good democracy.

Health and the word “care” are incredibly important when I think of a new Ireland. I met my best friend from UCD last night and we were comparing our experiences of trying to get a GP appointment and what it was like to go to a dentist. Our experiences are very similar. The NHS has crumbled to a point where, while it is excellent in certain circumstances, in other circumstances, we would probably be better off in the kind of healthcare system in place in the South. Huge promises about Sláintecare should not be made, for example, that it will be wonderful and immediate. Unionists and Northerners are canny. We know that resources are limited for all the things we want and certainly the word "care" in "social care" will not be possible. Just having real talk about those kinds of issues would make a big difference in trust, so reduce the bling and promises of sunlit uplands and be honest about what might be possible.

I absolutely believe that Northerners would have much more of a say in our own lives. I have never voted in the context of a reunified Ireland. I have never voted for a government that has governed me and I am almost 50 years old. We are governed by Westminster. There is nothing we can do to change the budgets or substantially reallocate things to have the kind of society that we want. I have come to believe that the Assembly is quite toothless, to the point that it often makes the situation worse because everybody, on both sides, is so keen to get the camps and votes that they are scared to make difficult decisions.

Finally, an Ireland that can talk truthfully about what is happening to the environment would be incredibly important. We have passed the 1.5°C warming threshold and are probably heading for 2°C warming. I looked at a map the other day but I would need to check again if it we are heading for 3°C warming. This will happen and it will not take us very long to get there. Ireland was not one island; it was hundreds of islands. That reality has not been factored into these conversations about a new Ireland. I do not think the UK has factored them in. I think Scotland is beginning to grapple with these realities.

What does sovereignty really look like? It is not a nation once again. For me, it will be boat building, food security and, living in the North, Lough Neagh and having drinking water for my family. Those are the issues that are easy to pretend are future issues for our children to sort out. However, I think we can see in our lives, with the floods, crop failures around the world, increasing prices and so on, that those issues are coming at us much more quickly than we intend. I would love to see a new Ireland that was thought of as an ecological unit and in which we had honest conversations about how we can survive that together.

Frances Black (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Dr. Mitchell ever think of going into politics?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

I think I would be terrible because I am very sleepy most of the time.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Mr. Brady wish to comment?

Mr. Mickey Brady:

I thank Dr. Mitchell for her presentation. Mixtures were mentioned earlier and I am an eclectic mix myself. I have Presbyterian and Church of Ireland grandparents on the paternal and maternal sides.

I wonder about the issue of welfare. My background is in welfare rights which I used to deal with on a daily basis. I deal with people from the Protestant unionist community. One of the striking things is that our communities have so much more in common than they realise. Dr. Ciara Fitzpatrick and a professor from Cork gave a presentation to the committee a number of months ago. Their argument was that in a new Ireland following reunification or whatever, we could start from scratch and have a welfare system that would be the envy of Europe. That is something in which the people I deal with on a daily basis are much more interested. People talk about the cost-of-living crisis. There has always been cost-of-living crisis. It is has just got a lot worse with heating costs, food costs and all of that.

I will address the issue of prioritising in terms of both communities.

Approximately 12 years ago, in Rev. Mervyn Gibson's church, I gave a presentation on the welfare cuts . People from the community - not politicians but people from the loyalist communities - were very interested in what was being said about the cuts and how they would affect them. It struck me that they would affect their community as much as the community I represent. Yet a couple of weeks later the flag protest happened and everything went down the tubes. It is really a matter of prioritising in terms of how our communities are affected. Would Dr. Mitchell agree with that?

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

I agree entirely that these are the issues that unite us - class politics. I certainly have close relationships with progressive loyalists and these issues are of the upmost concern to them. As Mr. Brady said, sectarianism bubbles just under the surface and we can go from these amazing conversations about progressive welfare systems to the flags protest in a number of weeks. Progressive loyalism needs to be included and cherished in this debate because I have always found those people to be the key to envisaging what a class politics - an anti-sectarian class politics - could look like in a new Ireland. I am not saying they would not continue their loyalties to their community, that they would not want to march and that their loyalty to the monarchy and whatever would not continue, but welfare, education, children with special educational needs, mental health, addiction and suicide are the real issues. Those are the issues I believe will come out in the citizens' assemblies. It is just a case of getting sectarianism out of the way and creating a stable-enough conflict. It might be just about not sweating the small stuff. For example, Deputy Costello suggested 12 July as a national holiday. This is a very easy thing to do. Let us take that off the table as a sectarian issue. Everybody loves a bank holiday. These are all the things that can be easily given but I am not saying they should not be debated carefully. Even though I take my kids to the parades on the 12th and try to blend with it, I still feel quite intimidated by the whole thing. These are not easy issues, so I do not mean to be facetious in that term, but sectarianism and the communal blocks in the struggle are there under the surface and can rise to the top when things are so terrible that class unity is necessary, like the 1930s workers strikes and during civil rights protests. They can also rise to the surface when the States are functioning and people have enough to feed their kids and to feel cared for, in as much as is realistic, by the modern state.

So, yes, we have much in common in that. It is very difficult to hold on to that class unity with so much sectarianism swirling around. It is important to neutralise that.

Mr. Mickey Brady:

Gabhaim buíochas. I thank Dr. Mitchell for her most informative presentation today.

Dr. Claire Mitchell:

Míle buíochas.

Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That ends our meeting today. Everybody has contributed. I think it was very enlightening and rewarding. I hope Dr. Mitchell found our contributions to her thinking helpful and I look forward to meeting her again. The committee thanks her for coming.