Mr. Manus Cooney:

A number of questions have been asked, all of which were highly astute. Senators raised everything from practical issues and political and tactical matters to the underlying problems we face to health concerns, the needs of the people who are undocumented in the United States and perhaps some of the inconsistencies with respect to how the governments are approaching these issues. In thinking through how this issue plays out in Congress it is important to recognise that in the United States House of Representatives, there has been a good bit of district drawing that makes a primary challenge far more of a threat to an incumbent than a general election. Most Members of the House look at what happens and how their votes will affect their perceived loyalty to the base more than they focus on achieving consensus and finding a middle ground.

It is also important to bear in mind that more than one third of Members of the House have been in office for fewer than six years. Many of them were not around in 2013 and they certainly were not around in 1986, 1996, 2000 and 2007. For this reason, a great deal of continuing education needs to take place. At its heart, there is also a need to recognise that the Irish-American community of today is very different from the Irish-American community of 50 years ago. Members of Congress who are Irish-American and may have a cultural affinity and take pride in their ethnic heritage and in being Irish-American may act on Ireland's behalf or in promoting and supporting legislation and policies that, in addition to helping and advancing American interests, also help the Irish people. They will do that primarily for American interests, not because there is a strong Irish-American constituency in their district. A good example is the Speaker, Paul Ryan, who is from Wisconsin. He made his Irish heritage an issue when he was on the vice presidential ticket with Mitt Romney. He is proud of this heritage but he does not advance Irish issues because he believes it is something for which his constituents will turn out and vote for him.It is important to recognise that for many leaders in Congress, the past is just the past. Therefore, we need to be in a position in which the Irish Government has pressed and continues to press the case on broader issues, including economic issues.

On the question of what more can be done and what elements may be missing, there is a unique, incredible bilateral economic relationship between the United States of America and Ireland. Members of Congress, the finance committees and ways-and-means committees are very well aware of it. They are grappling with the tax issues and the trade issues that go along with that. I would imagine that the members of the judiciary committees and those responsible for immigration reform are not as clued in or keyed in. I have struggled in Washington to get those American companies with a significant presence in Ireland to engage on this issue. They have not because those offices, folks or companies have their own portfolio of issues that are important. It might be worth considering whether we can bring those interests into the discussion via the American Chamber of Commerce Ireland and other bodies to try to figure out how we can get them to voice their support for solving the problem of the Irish undocumented and creating an E3 visa. That is not to say that this can put us over the top but it would not only reinforce the importance of our bilateral relationship but also get those in Congress with more of a business inclination driving their policy decisions to think more seriously about what it is we are trying to achieve here.

If companies working in Europe seeking access to the European market believe Ireland is important to their future, then the Irish Government and people need to communicate to them that solving this problem is important to them. I do not know the extent to which that communication is taking place. It may need to be elevated. Ambassador Anderson does a fantastic job and she has a terrific staff but her embassy's size, muscle and bandwidth pale in comparison to those of just one technology company in Washington. Can those resources be brought to bear? I do not know. In fairness to the companies, they have an immigration agenda also. There is an emphasis on having STEM immigrants, high-tech workers, the educated, the best and the brightest come to the United States to stay. That is good policy. Can they elevate the Irish issue as part of their agenda? I do not believe they talk about it at all. That is something to consider.

I reiterate that Mr. Ciaran Staunton and the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform have been phenomenal. They have delivered "Chuck" Schumer and they have delivered many folks. The continuing efforts of Mr. Staunton, given what he has been through personally, have been amazing. I am proud to have met him, to know him and to work with him wherever possible. I failed to mention him by name but wanted to do so and acknowledge the Senator's point.

We have seen many Irish in Washington and many representatives of the Government. The levels of awareness and knowledge of this issue are high but its ranking varies from Member to Member. There is a challenge and we are seeing that the goodwill exists. We have convinced folks that if something is going to happen, we will be part of it. CIR is happening for reasons unrelated to the Irish. It is happening because of the bigger issues at play, the challenge the United States faces in trying to resolve the differences between immigrants who assimilate and those who simply integrate. That is a challenge that many politicians are grappling with. How it affects the future of their parties, their states and the country is a matter we cannot overcome or solve. If CIR does not happen or if there is another path taken, the extent to which we have broadened the coalition or network of folks in the United States who are already interested in this and add new voices to the debate is such that we should actively pursue this. I refer to doing what we can do more of. It is fair to say the resources that have been applied to this are limited. Any way that the Seanad can bring more to the table and become more engaged can only help.

With regard to Brexit and its implications, Brexit, if anything, makes the achievement of CIR more difficult because Americans see that their concerns are not limited just to them. They see the actions that have been taken by Great Britain and they ask why they should not stand up also if Great Britain can do it?

With regard to a Trump Administration, let me make a personal observation. I do not know anything more than any Senators but I have read Mr. Trump's book, which he talks a good bit about. The concern that many conservatives have in the United States is everything for this individual is a deal. Every position he takes is the beginning of a negotiation; it is for leverage. If he needs to move on A, B or C in order to go to a deal, he will do it if he gets something in return for it. That is how he has conducted himself to date, it appears.

My analysis of the debates in which he made deportation an issue, hammered away at it and, seemingly without much thought, pivoted on it tells me that is where he is coming from. That is what hurts him with many conservatives. I refer to movement conservatives, religious conservatives and constitutional conservatives. It is a question of whether he will remain true to those values he espouses today or move them aside or quickly drop them like a bad habit in order to achieve some sort of political deal or outcome. That is a concern and something that might work to the advantage of those seeking CIR. We do not know but it is an observation I believe is worth making.