Conor Murphy (Sinn Fein)

I thank all those who participated in the debate and I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Murnane O'Connor, to listen to the conclusion of it. In the short time I have, there were so many opinions and ideas shared that it is not possible to do justice to them all. I will deal with a few specific points and then maybe some of the themes.

Senator Blaney mentioned the A5. I was actually Minister for Infrastructure from 2007 to 2011 when that was announced by the North-South Ministerial Council. I had to remind him, and I will remind him again, that the money was taken off the table by the Government led by Enda Kenny at that stage, which was an enormous setback to the A5. It is not a matter of political disagreement that holds it up; it is a matter of courts. There is political agreement to go ahead with it. Thankfully, the money is back on the table and of course we will all pull together on that.

The Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, mentioned sectarianism in his discussion and I fully agree with his abhorrence of that and its use in the presidential campaign. Being a party that, more than most, gets those kinds of vile attacks on social media, we fully understand the damage that does, but sectarianism is the antithesis of republicanism, and certainly the antithesis of the republicanism I stand for.

Another theme that was mentioned was legacy, and I fully agree there is a need to pursue that project. There is an idea that post Civil War, the parties who formed Governments here simply drew a veil over that. Multitudes of people were disappeared in the Civil War and the War of Independence with no questions answered, no process for truth and no closure process. That clearly was a wrong approach to take so we would be fully in support of a legacy process. That is why we reached an agreement in 2014 in Stormont House, which I was part of with the other parties and both Governments, to identify a legacy process to try to deal with those issues. Unfortunately, the British Government walked away from that unilaterally and now we are back to the stage where we are trying to put that together again. I fully agree with the idea of legacy and we are fully on board with that and the contribution it can make to reconciliation. I agree with the point Senator McCormack made about reconciliation. We have worked assiduously on it. I have been involved in this process for more than 30 years.

There is one difference I would remind the Government parties of. The tone of the debate has been good and I am respectful in saying this. We took the choice to go into Stormont in 1998. It was not something we wanted to do but we did that because we agreed it was a space where we could work with unionism on matters of importance to both our communities. That choice was also available to Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael but they chose not to come North and they chose to allow us to do the heavy lifting with regard to reconciliation. Then they tell us that the two communities have not moved close enough together and we cannot progress other matters. To me, that is hypocrisy. If you want to be involved in reconciliation, then get involved with the rest of us and help us with the heavy lifting. Various Ministers, and I have met plenty of them over the years, have come North and privately said, "How do you deal with these people?" Then they tell us that a deal has not been good enough and we cannot move forward. Let us all work together on that and step up to the plate with regard to reconciliation.

There are two key points I would make regarding preparation and this is where I feel there are two areas the Government is deficient on. The Minister of State said that "the Secretary of State has stated unambiguously that there is no evidence that the necessary conditions have been met" with regard to calling a border poll. He also said there is no evidence of any conversation, which defied all logic and available evidence. The question is, does the Government agree with his position and his assertion? If the Secretary of State continues to say that in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary, is the Government prepared to go to the British Government and say it is wrong and that the evidence does support the need for a border poll? Or is the Government, as this statement seems to indicate to me, opting out of that? That is a major deficiency we need to hear from the Government about.

Second, the Government says it is not planning for unity, and I agree entirely with Senator Byrne's contribution. Senator McDowell chided us for no preparation. I must introduce him to the Sinn Féin website where you can find copious documents in relation to all-Ireland matters. The Government is staying out of that. On the one hand, it is saying there is no evidence of that, that people have not come to terms, and Senator McDowell makes the point that people need to understand the proposition. The central political entity which will be involved in shaping the new Ireland is the Irish Government, and it is not now putting on the table its ideas for that, how it would manage it and what its preparations are for changing two administrations into one administration.If the Government is waiting for the Secretary of State or the British Government, in its own interests, to decide that the time is right for a border poll, what preparation is it involved in for that?

Those are two areas of deficiency on which the Government needs to step up to the plate. We must be told what conversations it is having or will have with the British Government. It cannot simply leave it back to the judgment. This has always been the case even though that is stated in the Good Friday Agreement. The real politics of this, as everyone knows, is about a conversation between the Irish and British Governments to decide when a border poll is called. The Government cannot opt out of active preparation. It cannot tell the rest of us we need to engage more, involve ourselves in reconciliation and do more to persuade people while itself opting out of that process. The Government has the resources to do all of that. We have limited resources but we try every day to do it. The Government has the resources to say to people, "Here is our view of what unity would look like and what the steps towards it would be." That has not happened and it needs to happen. It is a major deficiency in the Government's approach to this project.