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

Apologies have been received from Senator Frances Black, Mr. John Finucane MP, Ms Sorcha Eastwood MP and Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh.

I welcome Mr. Tim Attwood, foundation secretary of the John and Pat Hume Foundation and Ms Eileen Weir, peace guardian. Mr. Dáire Hughes, a new Member of Parliament, is also present. He is very welcome, as is Mr. David Holloway. It is very important that they attend. We look forward to discussing things with them.

I will explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards 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. Witnesses and participants who are to give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts, however, 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 also asked to note that only evidence connected with the subject matter of proceedings should be given. They should respect directions given by the Chair on the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should neither criticise nor make charges against any person, persons 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 Mr. Attwood to make his opening statement.

Mr. Tim Attwood:

I thank the Chair for inviting the Peace Summit Partnership here today. I am joined by Ms Weir, who was here in June to speak to the committee with the Falls Women's Centre. She is one of our peace guardians. Mr. Holloway from Community Dialogue is online, as is Ms Louise Malone from YouthAction NI, which is part of the partnership. We are delighted to speak to the committee 26 years after the Good Friday Agreement.

The Peace Summit Partnership is an initiative led by the John and Pat Hume Foundation and Community Dialogue in partnership with YouthAction NI, which works with young people in the North and cross-Border; Holywell Trust, which is a reconciliation organisation in Derry; the International Conflict Research Institute, INCORE, at Ulster University, which works in conflict resolution; the Integrated Education Fund; the Northern Ireland Youth Forum, which has been here previously; and the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation, which gave evidence to the committee in the past. We were set up in response to the anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement. It was important to reflect on the achievements of that agreement 25 years on, but the partners agreed that it was more important to think about the future and the unfinished business of peace and reconciliation.

We came together as a partnership to try to engage in widespread consultation, supported by the International Fund for Ireland, to talk to people in communities, such as peace activists like Ms Weir and young people especially, about where we go over the next 26 years to finish the business of reconciliation. As part of that conversation, we have engaged with peacebuilders, local communities and young people in the North, in the Border region and across the Republic of Ireland.

At this stage, we are into the second year of that consultation. We have spoken to 900 people, of whom approximately 400 have been from youth organisations or are young people themselves. That has been achieved through a number of events organised by the partners. We had a youth peace summit in April 2024. There have been peace practitioner workshops, community dialogues and citizen juries organised by Holywell Trust. They were all about reflecting on the past 26 years and the aspirations of people who worked steadfastly, similar to Ms Weir, on the ground in peace and reconciliation for so long. They included young people and the future, which is very important. The key questions related at these events include: what remains to be done in the area of peace and reconciliation? How do we achieve this? Who is responsible for implementing it?

Society, now more than ever, needs visionary leadership for peaceful change. We assert, however, that peace is more than an absence of violence and conflict; it requires active engagement in reconciliation, addressing socioeconomic disparities and disbanding sectarian structures. After our first major consultation in May 2023, we launched a report which identified 12 calls to action based on extensive consultation, as I have outlined earlier. The report talks about the unfinished business of peace and reconciliation. Those 12 recommendations deal with the political institutions and addressing deficits in the political institutions, and ensuring positive, constructive leadership is shown both at a political and community level to tackle everyday issues, whether they relate to health, cost of living, mental health or education in the context of peace.

The recommendations also refer to formulating an inclusive peace plan. We did not have an Executive in May 2023 and, therefore, we spent some time this year trying to engage with political parties and other actors on an inclusive peace plan. Given that we now have an Executive and governments with a strong commitment to peace and reconciliation on this island, it is important we have an inclusive peace plan, which should be the foundation of the programme of government.

There were conversations with young people and members about adapting the agreement. Obviously, 26 years on, there are issues around legacy, rights, equality and policing that need to be considered. People want to see adaptations to it. For example, one such area, which is pretty current at the moment, is in tackling paramilitarism, not only in terms of local communities. Young people feel this an important issue we need to address. My colleagues will highlight some of the issues around well-being and how this issue prevents political progress, as well as the negatives impacts it has in the community.

We have highlighted the need for good relations proofing and addressing segregation. While we have done a lot of good work on equality proofing, there equally needs to be work done in terms of good relation proofing when it comes to housing selection, education, recreational facilities, etc. In the call to action, priority is given to integrated education; the need for enhanced youth participation, on which Ms Louise Malone will speak later; and the creation of a vehicle for civic engagement. We obviously had the Civic Forum, but there is still a need to engage local communities in political conversations as we move things forward. There is a real need to invest in peacebuilding. While there may be financial challenges, grassroots peacebuilding and its contribution to society is undervalued. Many people do things for little, but they keep the peace in our streets and communities. They did that for the past 50 years and continue to do it today during difficult times, as we saw in the summer. Other recommendations include having enhanced societal well-being. Young people highlighted the issue of mental health in particular and how we invest in the well-being of society. Undertaking civic education on the past and the future is the final recommendation.

The Peace Summit Partnership has continued that engagement in the past six months to lobby for this inclusive peace plan. We have met political parties in Stormont, officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and the British Government, as well as Ministers. We are also delighted to be here today to speak to this committee to advocate for an inclusive peace plan. The partnership wants to assist in the design and delivery of strategic objectives to ensure the recommendations are translated into actionable, measurable outcomes, drawing on our collective expertise in peacebuilding, community engagement and policy development.

There are many challenges. Despite progress, Northern Ireland remains deeply divided in terms of segregated housing, education and more than 80 peace walls standing as physical and psychological barriers between communities. Moreover, as I have mentioned, the lingering influence of paramilitarism and identity-based politics continues to exacerbate those tensions. As one young person said:

People in power today are too old and don’t understand the youth. They don’t understand that it’s our future, and we should be able to decide how to shape it.

This reflects a growing frustration among young people who feel alienated from decision-making processes that will determine their future. The peace process must now shift its focus from maintaining the status quo to addressing the underlying causes of division and instability. In Northern Ireland, we have the draft programme for government, which we welcome. While it highlights the need for a cross-cutting peace theme, it must serve as a roadmap to a more inclusive, integrated society. The Peace Summit Partnership is prepared to play a role in shaping that.

The peace process is at a critical juncture. At the end of the mandate of the Northern Ireland Executive, it will be 30 years since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. All of us must act decisively to consolidate the gains of peace. The 12 calls of action that have come from our consultation offer a clear pathway forward, but their successful implementation will require not only the active collaboration of the Northern Ireland Executive, but equally that of the Irish and British Governments and civic society actors in order to move forward. We will remain committed to working with the Northern Ireland Executive and governments to ensure meaningful and measurable progress in a journey towards a shared sustainable and prosperous peace. We will continue to highlight the positive and potential of peace and reconciliation as a policy approach and not just as a tick-box exercise.

We can do much more to support peace and prosperity. Obviously, peace does not stop at the Border, nor do the dividends of peace. We welcome the report by IBEC last year on peace and prosperity which highlighted the potential and transformation of the economy because of peace. Northern Ireland, however, has not fully drawn down on these rewards due to instability. Through the reconciliation fund and the shared island fund, the Irish Government, together with the International Fund for Ireland, have played a critical role and actively support many organisation across the island, including cross-Border initiatives, in peace and reconciliation. There is a need to embed principles of peace across policymaking. It should not be left to the Executive Office in the North or the reconciliation fund in the South to hold this mantle. Peace Summit Partners provides the framework to be active and deliberate about peace. That is why we are calling for an inclusive peace plan, which needs a forward-looking, cross-departmental approach with deliverables and transparency. There should be a deep discussion on the cost of division at a time of sparse public monies in Northern Ireland. How can cross-departmental and cross-jurisdictional working advance peace and reconciliation?

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

I thank Mr. Attwood. Before I invite Ms Weir to speak, I welcome Mr. David Halloway, who is online. I apologise as I did not see him earlier. He is the director of Community Dialogue. Ms Louise Malone, senior lead at Youth Action NI, is also online. I am more than happy for them to make contributions at any stage. If they wish to make a statement, they can do so after Ms Weir. They are more than welcome to the committee meeting. The committee is delighted they are here. I invite Ms Weir to make her opening statement.

Ms Eileen Weir:

I thank the committee for the invite. It was a long travel down this morning without coffee on the train, to put something light on it. As for my role, I am a grassroots peacebuilder in the area of good relations for the past 50 years. It has been an uphill struggle, particularly when community organisations at grassroots level - not just the women's movement but right across the sector, such as our youth movement and others - that have maintained and worked with the Good Friday Agreement are finding it difficult because of the lack of investment in those organisations to keep the doors open.

We have not seen any peace dividend in the areas I work in, which are in north Belfast, which was the worst hit with all the conflict. The fact that more peace walls are being put up after the Good Friday Agreement tells us what we are working with at grassroots level. We cannot encourage our young people to come into these roles because who would want to do so with a year's funding put on the table for us to be able to keep peace at grassroots level?

I am looking at this from a different aspect. We would not have a tourism trade if it were not for the community workers working on the ground, at grassroots level, who have maintained the peace since the Good Friday Agreement and maintained it prior to the agreement. Businesses would not be coming to this island if there were trouble in the North. The people who have kept that trouble at bay have been the community workers, who are the last to be thought of when it comes to this round of funding, even this year. We have just been told recently that there is another 10% cut and we have to try to find 20% of the money we have applied for to keep the doors open. Community organisations were getting dumped on long before Covid, and we have been struggling. I am only speaking for community workers. Those are the people with whom and for whom I have a voice. We are not getting what we voted for in the Good Friday Agreement. I have been involved with a lot of implementation bodies and I have seen no implementation in the past 30 years or even somebody set up to look at implementation.

We need our Civic Forum back but we also need that forum to be representative of civic society in the North. When the Good Friday Agreement was made, it was made maybe on the basis of orange and green. We are no longer an orange-green society, so our civic society needs to form part of a civic forum. The committee hears from voluntary and community organisations. I am on the Belfast Women's Assembly, which was established by community workers and university lecturers setting up committees, non-funded, on a voluntary basis, to try to move things forward. Most of us have given 50 years. Our young ones are not going to give that same time because they will leave this island and go somewhere else if there is no investment put in. I do not want to talk about funding; I want investment. We were promised investment through the Good Friday Agreement. We were promised a peace dividend through the agreement. We are not seeing it and we have not got it.

The debate at the minute about paramilitarism is a bit of a joke. Twenty-six years on from the Good Friday Agreement, we are still talking about paramilitarism. We have gangsters and gangs who carry the names of paramilitary organisations. The paramilitaries have actually said, "They do not belong to us." Why is the justice system not taking that on board?

We are tackling everything. I do not sit in an office every day. Most community workers, including me, are out at night at interfaces talking to the people who are still being traumatised by not getting their cases heard in court to get the truth of what happened to their loved ones during the Troubles.

There is still an awful lot that needs to be done. I would like to see the Irish and British Governments honour their pledge that they would be the ones that would oversee the Good Friday Agreement and set something up. They have put all the things down that Mr. Attwood has spoken about, and every other committee that has come down here and everybody who has spoken to the committee are all saying the same. I know they are all saying the same; I watch it online. We are not getting anything done.

The biggest thing for me is a bill of rights. It is a disgrace that we do not have a bill of rights for Northern Ireland. The last time I was here, I had bullet-pointed the things. The British Government does not seem to be interested in it, and the Irish Government does not seem to be that interested in it either. It is a disgrace that people in Northern Ireland are still shouting out for a bill of rights that we should have had many, many years ago. Until we have that, we can forget about talking about the constitutional question because if we do not have what we voted for, why would we change anything?

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

I thank Ms Weir. That is a stark and a realistic picture. It is quite shocking that after so many years, that is how she and her organisation feel about these issues.

If Mr. Holloway or Ms Malone would like to make a comment, they are more than welcome. If they do not, do not worry; we will go to our committee members.

Mr. David Holloway:

I will make a brief statement on behalf of Community Dialogue, as part of the Peace Summit Partnership. First, however, I want to strongly echo and reinforce everything Ms Weir said, in particular in reference to the question: where is our bill of rights? It is about implementation, implementation, implementation. In paragraph 2 of the agreement's declaration of support, on page 1, it states: "We ... dedicate ourselves to the achievement of reconciliation, tolerance, and mutual trust, and to the protection and vindication of the human rights of all". Community Dialogue has been engaging civic society in dialogue on the unfinished business of the agreement with a particular focus on that paragraph, whose intention, sadly, remains woefully unfulfilled. From January 2022 to the present, we have delivered 31 or 32 engagements with approximately 300 marginalised people, reflective of the diversity of our society: people from areas of deprivation, urban and rural; women's groups; the LGBTQ+ community; loyalists and republicans; people with mental health issues; community workers; peacebuilding practitioners; and ethnic, faith and other minorities. We have about a dozen recurring themes across all those dialogues. I will briefly highlight six of them.

First, we need an updated, more inclusive peace plan responding to an evolving peacebuilding context and to emerging social cohesion challenges, in particular the emerging challenge of growing diversity. As our consultation progresses, this issue is becoming more and more prominent and we are finding that especially for young adults we engage with and the ethnic minority communities we engage with.

Second, systems and structures are uniformly viewed as failing to respond meaningfully to rising levels of general intolerance and increasing polarisation across our society, perceived to be a direct result of social media misinformation and the rising tide of objective truth denial.

Third, respondents generally believe that our government is failing to address shared social needs for the common good, in particular issues relating to poverty such as social housing, integrated living, childcare, the cost of living and healthcare, and, in particular, within healthcare, mental healthcare.

Fourth, our respondents remain unhappy that 26 years on, the agreement has yet to be fully implemented.

They focus in particular on the continuing unaddressed and unresolved needs of victims and survivors of our conflict and on the continuing blight of paramilitarism on our communities and, more recently, the belief that paramilitaries are inciting anti-immigrant sentiment.

Fifth, an integrated system of education as our society's norm continues to be a priority with our respondents, who view it as playing a vital role in evolving a united and cohesive society in the future.

Sixth, there is a general sense of powerless frustration with our continuing societal focus on voting, not in response to shared social issues and needs but, rather, to keeping the other side out. This is believed to diminish our democracy and to ensure that shared social issues remain unresolved and that sectarian politics continue under the mantle of our agreement's power-sharing arrangements.

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

That is very powerful evidence, as was Ms Weir's. If Ms Malone would like to say something she is more than welcome or she can comment later, if she wishes. There is no pressure.

Ms Louise Malone:

I will speak now. I thank the committee for having me. I work for Youth Action Northern Ireland. We are delighted to be part of the Peace Summit Partnership. It is vitally important that a youth voice is represented and that we continue to strive for the wants and needs of young people. I will be as brief as I can and take the committee through some of the difficulties facing young people at the moment. Our organisation works right across Northern Ireland and we have strong links in the Border counties due to our peace funding. We have many partners in a cross-Border context.

The consultations we have held and continue to have, involve young people in Northern Ireland and the Border counties. One of the key things that came out of the consultations with young people was the 12 calls to action. In two weeks' time, the week of Hallowe'en, we are having a festival of peace. This will bring together more than 100 young people to look at those calls to action and to youth-proof them, for want of a better term. We want to ensure that they feel relevant to young people and that young people understand their role in helping to deliver the calls to action and strengthen the voice of the partnership.

A big thing that came out of our consultations was that young people feel the weight of the past on them and that they are the future and the fixers of all the issues that we have had to deal with in our conflict in the North. Although they are keen to get involved in politics and have their voice, they feel that weight and pressure. They also feel that peace building is bigger than Northern Ireland. Young people are very aware of all the global issues - as we all are - but they are constantly influenced through social media, news outlets and conversations with friends. There is a feeling of helplessness about what is happening across the world. They are committed to making a change in that and being more active in what they can do here.

Throughout our consultations with young people, one of the key issues was that young people have a strong sense of the importance of relationships, tolerance and working with people from other backgrounds. Young people are way past issues of green and orange in Northern Ireland and are looking very much, as Mr. Holloway said, at inclusion and diversity. They are very concerned about young people who do not identify as one side or the other. Lots of young people are moving from that but when they return home or to their communities, they feel that they need to pick a side when things are not going well in society.

Young people really want to contribute to political life but feel they are totally held back by these restrictions. They believe they lack a voice and have a distrust of the political system to meet their needs. They believe the agreement needs to reflect their needs in a changed and ever-changing society. They think that some new strands need to be included in it because it is outdated, old and has not considered lots of different things, such as new communities moving to Northern Ireland and living with the legacy and impact of the conflict.

Young people talk about trauma and the mental health issues their community, families and friends are feeling and that the weight of these relates back to the conflict and its legacy. Paramilitarism is still a massive problem for young people in our society. We know that at times it can be glamourised and there can be manipulation and intimidation to get involved. The legacy of the past is not just about the impact on ordinary life but also on the larger question of truth and justice. Young people value new communities and diversity but they worry about racism as a new form of sectarianism in our society and that some political views are quite narrow and do not consider this. Continued segregation of young people, whether through education or lack of opportunities in their local communities, continues to impact on young people's lives. Poverty, homelessness and socioeconomic and mental health issues are also massive issues for young people.

We know all the issues young people are facing and at the heart of it all is peace-building and living with the legacy of the conflict. If young people want to be educated or seek employment or new opportunities, they still have to proof themselves by questioning whether they are safe to go to a particular area or if a job is suitable for them. The things people had to consider a number of decades ago are still relevant to young people.

On a positive note, all the consultations we have had, and will continue to have, with young people are led by them and focused on them. We do not just organise these events hoping that young people will engage in them. They still have a voice in how we conduct our consultations. They are part of the process of reporting and analysing the findings. It is important that they are with us from the very start of the journey. Those are some of the key highlights we have collated as part of the Peace Summit Partnership.

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

I will now go to the members. The order is Sinn Féin, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Independents, Alliance, SDLP and so on. If it is in order, I will ask Sinn Féin to nominate their speakers, because that is how we do it here.

Mr. Dáire Hughes:

I thank Mr. Atwood, Ms Weir, Mr. Holloway and Ms Malone for attending today's meeting and for contributing to the presentation. I commend the work of each of their organisations in pursuit of reconciliation and for contributing to the committee and this process. I pay particular tribute to the John and Pat Hume Foundation. Those who built the peace on this island are perpetually worthy of our highest gratitude. We must recognise the courage of the men and women who took bold initiatives in difficult times to deliver the peace. The work of the foundation and the legacy it maintains is extremely commendable. It did its work in a political context in which it met considerable opposition. This makes the courage of those initiatives all the greater. Challenges still remain and I agree entirely with Ms Weir on a number of points. Funding for community development in the North is difficult. All too often, the Dublin and London Governments have been found wanting in their roles as co-guarantors of the agreement. We need a bill of rights and, what is more, in the absence of such a bill we are threatened by a significant cohort of British political opinion which is hostile to international human rights protections, in particular the European Court of Human Rights, so serious challenges remain.

In the context of all that, however, due to the work of those people, I and my generation have very limited experience of conflict and thankfully the generations that follow us have none at all. As all the witnesses have pointed out, post-conflict dynamics exist and have to be considered as such. Reconciliation is obviously an obligation for each and every one of us. It needs to be interwoven into everything we do, irrespective of the constitutional dynamic, while still allowing people to pursue legitimate aspirations in a growing debate about our future.

I would like to hear the thoughts, opinions, advice or directions of the witnesses in respect of the various civic initiatives that are openly considering and engaging with people on our future and what can be done in that context.

I am thinking of things like the shared island unit, the citizens' assembly, the women's assembly Ms Weir mentioned, the SDLP's commission on the future of Ireland, Sinn Féin's commission on the future of Ireland and what those groups can do to enhance reconciliation in their pursuit of what are legitimate aspirations. We know the best way to do that is in an open, engaging and citizen-led environment. If the witnesses have thoughts on that, they would be most welcome.

Mr. Tim Attwood:

I will take that first. Obviously there has been a moment of significant political change with Brexit. From the Peace Summit Partnership's point of view these conversations are right, but the need is for inclusivity and debate and discussion based on mutual respect because we all share this island. There is change afoot and it is about how we do that in a way that engages people in an inclusive way. I am thankful for the comments about the John and Pat Hume Foundation. We have done work on building common ground and a shared home place. We try to use language that encourages people to have a conversation about relationships in the North, on the island and between the islands in a positive way. I think we are all conscious of the change that would bring.

It is important we engage in that in a comprehensive way. Everybody has their various roles. The Peace Summit Partnership is focused on practical issues of reconciliation. Maybe it was not there originally and in some of the earlier iterations, but we welcome peace and reconciliation being in the programme for government in the North. We have talked about it as a foundation stone. There is a graphic in some of the consultation which refers to peace and reconciliation as the foundation stone. It is important there is leadership shown. We will be making a submission on 4 November in Stormont. It will be a comprehensive report on how we can go further. We talked about cross-cutting. This is cross-cutting and cross-jurisdictional. How do we all work together to ensure we achieve the stuff my colleagues have mentioned? Too often it is left to the Executive Office, the reconciliation fund, the shared island fund or the International Fund for Ireland. This is a collective responsibility. For example, shared space is not just a responsibility of the Executive, but of the Department for Infrastructure. It is about investment and tackling social need, as Ms Weir spoke about. Areas like the Falls and Shankill, the peace lines and many other parts I have been have had some of the greatest problems with sectarian divisions and need investment. The Department for the Economy has a responsibility in relation to peace and reconciliation. It needs that cross-cutting, shared responsibility.

It is the same for the island. The work of the shared island fund and the reconciliation fund in the last while has been really important, especially in an environment where funding has been a challenge for many community organisations. Reconciliation has stepped in when there have been difficulties to support vital organisations. Ms Weir may have stepped down. She has not retired from her current position but she knows every January there is a 90-day notice for people involved in community work and peace work. If we did not have those independent peacemakers, where would the North have been over the last 50 years, and where would it be today at times of conflict and difficulty? There is a shared responsibility on all of us to have a collective response that is based on mutual respect and understanding.

Ms Eileen Weir:

There is a lot happening and I can only speak for the women's movement at this stage. I am aware this is not about women's issues, but we are better at doing it than most.

Mr. Dáire Hughes:

I am not going to dispute that for a second.

Ms Eileen Weir:

I know. Due to my work over the years, I have built really good relationships with people in the South. I had a project in Tallaght 21 to 23 years ago and the relationships we built there within Tallaght are as lasting today as they were 21 years ago. We are still in touch with each other. We still know each other’s birthdays and we do things together. When the Good Friday Agreement came out at first there was an emphasis on cross-Border work, but what happened then was if you were not on the Border you did not get the funding. The areas I work in are urban. I do not have the same things in common with somebody from a rural community because rural communities have their own difficulties and a lot of those are not my difficulties. That is not to say I do not care about them because I do, but putting a group from the Shankill and Falls into a rural group from the South does not work. There needs to be more thinking about how we build those relationships North-South.

We also have to build those relationships within Northern Ireland itself. I think John Hume said one time that unless you unite the people you are not going to unite the country. We need to use what we have and do forward thinking and forward planning. All my jobs have been in peace building and good relations. I have done a job for 16 years on year-to-year funding. If I had been told 16 years ago I would have 16 years’ funding, think of what I could have done. It would have been tenfold or maybe more. There is the time you get your funding, the time to recruit for the programmes, the time you run down your funding and the time you are on your notice again. Out of that year’s funding, rightly or wrongly, only six months’ of work on peace building and good relations is being got out of me. There needs to be forward thinking.

I am on the All-Island Women's Forum, the National Women’s Council of Ireland and the Belfast Women’s Assembly. I am coming down to the assembly meeting next week. There is another one in November and another one in February. I am involved in all those because we need to build up those relationships up and not only with each other. There is no point in me telling the women I work with that we need to sit down together and talk together but I will not be party to it. Leadership has to be shown and there is great leadership across all the community organisations. In the women’s movement itself, every time we talk about the constitutional question, which we have done – we have done conferences on the Windsor framework, the protocol and Brexit – everything comes back to a bill of rights and what is not implemented in the Good Friday Agreement. People tell me that until we have our victims and survivors dealt with, a bill of rights and a civic forum that is representative of everybody in our society we cannot be serious about talking about the constitutional question. It is there, it is in the Good Friday Agreement, but it will be one of the last things that will be done within that agreement. I voted for the Good Friday Agreement with my hand on my heart while not agreeing with everything in it. The 20% I did not agree with has all happened. The 80% I voted for, I have got nothing out of.

There is peace and there is peace. People are saying we live in a peaceful society. Peace does not necessarily always have to mean violence. Where is the cost of living hitting? It is hitting the ordinary, working-class, grassroots people on the ground. There needs to be more forward thinking. There are funding streams out at the minute where people are told they have got their funding and they should continue working, but we do not know how much they are going to get. We are in October and that funding should have come out in April. It is not the fault of those down here, but if members want the Good Friday Agreement to work and to make those changes within it, there is a need to put the resources into the people who can deliver that on the ground.

When we look at the Good Friday Agreement, it has been changed. I did not vote for any of the changes that were done in the Stormont House Agreement. I did not get a chance to say why I wanted or did not want those changes. It can be changed when it suits political parties but the changes do not always suit civic society. Civic society needs to have a stronger voice. The way of getting that stronger voice is having the civic forum up and running again, which is in the Good Friday Agreement.

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

We are over time but we can come back in later. I understand Deputy Feighan and Senator Currie are sharing time.

Frank Feighan (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Yes, I am sharing time with Senator Currie. The witnesses are very welcome again. There are some great names in the Peace Summit Partnership such as the John and Pat Hume Foundation, Community Dialogue, YouthAction NI, Holywell Trust, Ulster University, Integrated Education Fund, NI Youth Forum and the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation. This committee and its members have worked with most of these organisations over recent years. I thank the witnesses for the great work they have done and the great partnerships they have created.

I will comment on one or two areas. I always tell people I come from middle Ireland in the west of Ireland. I represent a Border county. We need to do an awful lot more to bring in middle Ireland. People turn off. They think that everything is fine with the Good Friday Agreement. We are in a much better place - let us be honest - but there are a lot of issues that need to be addressed such as the bill of rights and the integrated education system. There is a lot to be done there. I feel we sometimes need to extend that conversation. It is not very easy because most of the people who have an interest in the Good Friday Agreement have certain ideals about Northern Ireland, a united Ireland or whatever. We need to open up that conversation but it is not easy. People think the North is in a much better place, which it is, but there are still things bubbling under the surface. The reconciliation and shared island funds have played a critical and active role in supporting that. I very much welcome that and a lot more can be done. I have noticed that some groups, maybe from a loyalist or unionist perspective, are outside the influence and we need to bring them closer in. They are not as quickly engaged with the shared island fund. We have broken down a lot of barriers in the last number of years. I see it all around the country. There is a lot of funding out there and there are some towns and villages that are absolutely brilliant at applying for funding and some that are not. I wonder if that is an issue. Is it hard to get some areas to engage, for want of a word, with the shared island fund?

Finally, I am a very big supporter of integrated education. I do not know whether the level of integration is at 9% or 11% but-----

Ms Eileen Weir:

It is 7%.

Frank Feighan (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is at 7% after 20-something years of talking about it. I am disappointed it is not higher. I can understand the reasons but we need to do a lot more. I always remember my good friend, the late Baroness May Blood, who did so much to highlight and promote it. I thank the witnesses for coming in today. I wish them every success.

Mr. Tim Attwood:

If I take the first point regarding middle Ireland, my parents were born and bred in Cork city. I still call it home in some respects. There are not many Attwoods there anymore unfortunately. The conversation needs to be a national conversation about any change on this island. In the so-called rebel county, I am not sure how engaged they are. The family members who were there were not that engaged during the Troubles. It is important that we engage the whole island in this conversation, whatever the change may be. That sort of inclusive, generous discussion on the island is really important. It is not just middle Ireland; it is the whole of the island.

Frank Feighan (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I use middle Ireland as a term that-----

Emer Currie (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Are you ready for me?

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

Yes, go ahead.

Emer Currie (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Cathaoirleach and Deputy Feighan. It is great to hear Ms Weir's wisdom as usual and to see both witnesses in Leinster House. What I am about to say is related to Deputy Feighan's comments. We find that attention seems to always focus on the political issues in the North rather than a consistent focus being on social integration, reconciliation and the disconnect North and South. The shared island unit does very good work in that space but a recurring issue has been the prioritisation of reconciliation. Reconciliation means different things to different people. We could do with a conversation around what reconciliation means and identifying ways to bring people together. A very practical and obvious example is the lack of student mobility North and South at third level. The Taoiseach, Deputy Simon Harris, did some work on this in his previous role. There have been moves to address the criteria and to break down the barriers but the numbers of students going North and South is something that has disimproved in the last 25 years rather than improved. There are plenty of other ways in which we can bring about practical opportunities for movement and practical ways to address reconciliation. Multiannual funding is definitely one of those areas on which we need progress. We have our workers on the ground who, as Ms Weir has correctly pointed out, are doing the peacekeeping job 24-7, 365 days a year. That should be recognised through multiannual funding. My real question is around opportunities. Do we focus on partnership in identifying opportunities for things like housing issues that we are facing both North and South? Could have an apprentice scheme for construction that would help North and South and bring opportunities to communities that face cycles of poverty? Is that the space in which the witnesses think we should be? As far as I am concerned, it is about that change, slow as it is. It is about offering people something new, something different and something better.

Ms Eileen Weir:

We need our trade apprenticeships back up and running again because you cannot get an electrician or a joiner. All these trades have gone. All the industries we had prior to the Good Friday Agreement - the shipyards, the ropeworks, the Sirocco Works - have disappeared. We have lost all those trades. My nieces and nephews, who are educated, are crying out for jobs. Some of them are not academics but they are great with their hands. There is no opportunity for them to become anything other than unemployed or working stacking shelves in a supermarket. There is a lot of talent out there in our supermarkets. There is a lot of talent out there in jobs that are ancillary jobs that people could be doing while doing an apprenticeship and bettering their outcome in life. Ms Malone will say more on this but the statistics in particular for our young people are scary. It is not just in employment.

It is also about in education because the education system is letting so many of our young people down. There is a lot that we can share on this island, including education and trades. We did a civic initiative not so long ago. The two highest things that came out were housing and education. That ran for over a year across the island. It did not matter whether someone was in the North or the South. Those were the two issues that came out of that civic initiative.

Mr. Tim Attwood:

It is an important question. The John and Pat Hume Foundation has had a relationship with the Royal Irish Academy because John Hume would have been very strong on a balanced regional economy. We would have events in the north west on the Magee campus of Ulster University in Derry and Letterkenny Institute of Technology on investment in the greater north west. When we talk about the north west, we mean from Galway to Sligo to Letterkenny to Derry to Coleraine. How do we ensure there is investment in infrastructure? The fact the shared island unit put the money up for the medical school shows us the value of a shared island. We are trying to embellish that relationship between Ulster University and Letterkenny Institute of Technology. There are so many opportunities. A report showed how few students from the South attend tertiary education in the North. How do we create opportunities to share that? It is a really important question and we need to see collective action - cross-jurisdictional action. It does not challenge anybody's identity. It makes sense. I am conscious that Mr. Holloway and Ms Malone may have some comments to make.

Ms Louise Malone:

We had a group of young people were involved in the shared island youth forum. I know that report was launched recently. It looked at things like sustainability, opportunities for young people, diversity and well-being. Whenever we talk to young people and consulting on peace building or reconciliation, those themes emerge all the time: lack of housing in an area where they feel is affordable or safe for them to live in and lack of opportunities through education or employability. Although our numbers for integrated education are pretty low, it is education beyond the school. It is education in our communities and with our youth organisations or youth clubs. Lots of young people with whom we come into contact say they do not address the issues. Integrated education is important but we also need to look at the issues of why you are in an integrated education system and why you have chosen that path. I work in Youth Action NI and am based in our Newry office, which is right on the Border. We support lots of young people in employability and looking beyond Northern Ireland and across the Border to see what opportunities exist. If we are talking about apprenticeships, lots of young people need placements and an employer to take them on to fulfil the criteria to be an apprentice. We are very strong in encouraging young women to go in non-traditional jobs, be they in STEM or trades, and to see these jobs as opportunities in which they can engage, develop their skills and qualify. We are involved in lots of cross-Border projects. Echoing Ms Weir's thoughts on funding, the young people never want it to end. They do not want this to be over. We have produced the report. We know the actions. Let us keep working together. They never want that sort of process to end. They still want to maintain those relationships. It is heartwarming to hear about Ms Weir's relationships with people she met 20 years ago. We would love that for some of the young people with whom we are engaging, that the funding is there to sustain those relationships and those young people can become real champions and leaders and bring other young people along in different youth forums.

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

Does Mr. Holloway want to say anything?

Mr. David Holloway:

I would like to highlight one of the other recurring themes in our dialogue engagements that I did not introduce in the initial presentation summary, namely, the vital role of participative democracy in making any meaningful progress North or South. It concerns the widespread sense of voicelessness and powerless frustration that afflicts our citizens in Northern Ireland living within a political system that, irrespective of their political views, most people regard as broken and ineffective. There is one simple process that can significantly mitigate that and that is the process of participative democracy. Across the island and the islands off the shore of Europe, we need more investment in ongoing systematic structured civic society engagements - like the one referenced by Ms Weir that led to housing being prioritised in a Civic Forum engagement that will take place at the start of November with 100 participants in the La Mon Hotel, and I will be one of the facilitation team at that event - where ordinary citizens are given the opportunity to deliberate with support with diverse and impartial advice on an issue that is felt to be important to them and reach a consensus-based solution to that issue, which, if we have the systems and structures in place, is referred to government to enact, government empowered by the people to enact change rather than people handing over their power to political representatives to do stuff on their behalf.

Ms Claire Hanna:

I thank the foundation and our witnesses. I remind everyone of the distance we have to go on lots of different issues. Reconciliation as a way of living is coming through all the contributions. The witnesses' call to action talks about tackling paramilitarism, which is quite timely. It is something the assembly discussed this week on the back of an SDLP motion about reviewing the various schemes and being real about what is and is not working, including engagement with paramilitaries, which, maddeningly, is still going on. What did the people with whom the witnesses engaged, particularly women and young people, tell the witnesses about that and what they do and do not want government to do?

The witnesses spoke about some of the participative structures for peace building and peace maintenance. Given that it is not just an internal issue within Northern Ireland, what more can the governments in Dublin and London do to facilitate cohesion and progress on all the things the witnesses discussed? How can we do more and do better in terms of segregation in everyday life and the separate lives that many people are still living in different communities and all the costs associated with that?

We are moving in a different direction constitutionally. Again, it links into the issue of paramilitarism, when we talk about the future, we do have get it right how we talk about the past.

I wanted to ask about the narrating about the Troubles and the witnesses' thoughts on how we can more ethically remember and try to ensure the lessons of the past are learned in order that we do not leave ourselves some time-bombs about people's views on the efficacy of violence and any work in that space. I will leave it up to the witnesses who is best placed to answer that.

Mr. Tim Attwood:

I will comment on the first and last points. Ms Weir will have comments about paramilitaries. Obviously, there has been an ongoing debate in the media in the North yesterday and there was a debate in the Assembly yesterday. It is a very live issue for a long time and, 26 years after the Good Friday Agreement, it is important it is addressed as soon as possible. It came up last year in the broader consultation across the board on the peace summit 2023, particularly in April when we had the youth peace summit and young people were saying that paramilitaries are still a problem for young people. As one young person said, they want to see the end of paramilitary violence as it is a big issue in today’s society. Young people recognise it because they see it in some of their areas. One talked about the shooting of Lyra McKee and the impact that had on young people because she was so young. It is something they have highlighted that they want to have addressed.

On the issue of women, and Ms Weir can speak better than me on this, the Chair’s mandate may be ending shortly but a month ago in Derry, Foyle Women’s Aid launched “'When you know what they are capable of’: Paramilitary-related Gendered Coercive Control”, a report which it commissioned by Professor Aisling Swaine, professor of politics, from UCD. It did not get as much publicity as it should. It is a devastating report about the realities of women living under the threat of abuse and intimidation from paramilitaries from across the board. It is a really hard-hitting report and deeply researched. Professor Swaine is now doing comparative work in other parts of the world to compare what is going on here. It is very important. It is right up to date and it is detailed. It is not just somebody’s view. These are the words of very courageous people who have come forward to participate to highlight in some detail what Ms Weir will know happens on the ground. They will speak at a Hume foundation event during Human Rights Week on 3 December in Belfast. It highlights how, today, so many women are under coercive control from paramilitaries from all sides across the North. It is pretty shocking. The testimonials from the individuals, which can be found on the Foyle Women’s Aid website, show the reality of the control that paramilitaries still have today.

On the last point about narration, many young people say they just do not get taught about the past. It is so important it is done. The high water mark for the narration about the past was the decade of centenaries. The Irish Government played a very significant role and so did local authorities in the North in presenting a range of narratives at events. I was on Belfast City Council at the time and we had civic events for the Somme and the Easter Rising. We funded a whole range of events within loyalist, republican and nationalist communities. It was very inclusive. A whole range of narratives were given an opportunity to be displayed. That was all based on the community relations council’s policy principle of ethical remembering and I think we have stepped back from that. I think we have to get back to a situation where there are principles of ethical remembering. Everybody has a right to tell their narrative but it means all narratives need to be told. There should also be some locations where collective narratives are told. In Belfast City Council there is a small exhibition where you get a taste, not detail, of the different narratives in Belfast and the new minority narratives. It is very important to go back to first principles and the principles the Irish Government supported and that local government supported during that decade of centenaries, which gave a template for the way forward to do that in an ethical and inclusive way.

Ms Eileen Weir:

They are saying now what I have been saying for ten years. Anyone who knows me knows I have said everything came through a hard time. Ms Hanna knows I gave evidence to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and what is being discussed now is what I said way back then. A lot of loyalist prisoners who came out of prison who are doing fantastic work in the communities. They may be very few and far between but they are there and still doing fantastic work. There are also those, however, who still want to carry that badge of honour. Paramilitary organisations need to disown those people. I always hear about drug dealing but it is not always drug dealing. There is also coercive control, money lending and trafficking going on with these organised crimes. It is not just about drugs. All I hear about is drugs but that is not the case; it is everything. I know of a young man owed drug money. He was either going to get a bullet in the head or his sister was trafficked until his debt was paid, and that is what actually happened. These are horror stories. Derry has done that research, and the Women’s Resource and Development Agency, WRDA, and the Women’s Support Network has also done all that research in the Belfast area, and we are getting the same thing across the province.

We can keep continuing one wee project on, say, the Shankill and another wee project on the Falls, but what I would like to see and the work I have been doing for many years is saying that if anyone wants to have a loyalist event, say, then they must pair up with someone who wants to do a republican event and let us share the information with each other. I firmly believe that our Good Friday Agreement should go into our schools because our young people are being told lies that the Good Friday Agreement was brought in for the nationalist community and the Protestant community got nothing. I am talking about bringing that into schools, both North and South and not just the North, and educating people on why we have a Good Friday Agreement, how we got there and the trouble we had getting there, instead of people listening and being recruited to sell drugs which leads to other stuff which leads to other stuff. I believe it is peace money and you have to have a partner in peace money before you can get funding, and it has to be working together and sharing together and not putting one group in their wee silo and another in theirs. We need this reconciliation. It is peace building. We have done 26 years of peace building. Communities, no matter what community it is, should be ready to make that step. If they are not, what have they been doing for the last 26 years? We need to do it holistically and under the community development umbrella right across the whole sector, whether it is men, women or young people. We need to look at the whole thing holistically and doing it down the road.

I was with a lot of the loyalist prisoners when they were released under the Good Friday Agreement. I could name the ones who went down the community development route but, unfortunately, others did not and they went down the gangster route. It went on so long that it is hard now. I am glad to see this is hitting the air because I have been living with that daily. Those people are torturing their own communities. Paramilitary organisations were set up, believe it or not, to protect their community, but now they are putting their communities at a level of fear.

I am not saying it is everybody but lot of people I work with say their fear of their own community is greater than the fear of the other community now. We have changed and that is a question I ask: what is the difference now 30 years later? The difference is they fear their own community more than they fear the other.

Mr. David Holloway:

I recorded approximately four questions and I will not attempt to respond to each of them one by one but I will have a crack at an overarching response that applies to each individually. Where the systems and structures of government are unable to respond meaningfully and effectively to these issues of paramilitarism and segregation in everyday life, the need for ethical shared remembering and multiple other issues where they are unable to respond effectively or there is an absence of political will to respond effectively, my proposal is to trust the people and pass down to the people the power to make decisions through the process of participative democracy.

Since beginning a career, both voluntary and professional, as a dialogue facilitator in the late 1980s through to today, I have found this to be almost uniformly true without fail. When people are brought into a room who are divided and polarised, who feel voiceless and a lack of confidence to speak and who are highly opinionated on different sides of divisive issues, if you get the process right, create a safe space and give them the opportunity to open up and share honestly based on their feelings, needs and experiences, you will achieve consensus on the issue you are addressing, irrespective of what that issue is.

If we take perhaps an example from the Republic of Ireland, the most public and perhaps painful issue it has addressed as a state was the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution which related to abortion rights and the bodily autonomy of female Irish citizens. That was an issue on which citizens could not engage meaningfully among themselves without painful dispute. Families cannot discuss it and politicians cannot express an opinion on it because it will impact them at the next elections.

A citizens' assembly of approximately 100 diverse citizens, with all views and none, managed to successfully reach consensus and offer proposals to the Irish Government, which itself was able to stand back from the issue and therefore not receive flak for its response. It had committed to respond to whatever the proposals were and it brought the issue to the Irish people. Irrespective of one's view on how that referendum went, the Irish people and Irish citizens were empowered to vote and reach a decision. They reached a decision that has changed to a significant extent the nature of Irish society and the experience of women in particular living in that society.

Personally, I would say on balance it was a good outcome but whether you agree or not with the result, I make the point that we need to empower and trust the people. The people can propose the effective resolution of the ongoing blight of the issue of paramilitarism across our communities; they can do it. Our citizens have the capacity to propose the resolution to segregation in everyday life. We need to empower the people to do so and commit to follow up on the responses they provide.

Mr. Chris Hazzard:

I thank the witnesses for their interesting and thought-provoking contributions today. I have a couple of comments to lead into a question. First, I could not agree more with Mr. Holloway on the need to broaden and deepen the conversation on some of these issues - not just the issues about how we move forward on emerging needs and redeveloping a peace plan but also the shared common good on health and education. When we talk about integrated education, it always strikes me that we focus on the North and we nearly forget the fact that, equally, 94% of primary schools in the South are faith-based.

The South of Ireland is as slow as any European nation in divesting from faith-based education. There is an onus on all of us in society to think nationally and deeper on society. We also need to think more deeply about issues such as violence against women and girls and a broad range of issues. Participatory models from Reykjavík to Porto Alegre are in place right across the world and they lead to fantastic results in society. We need to look at them. Do we need to think with a national lens when it comes to some these issues to take it out of the narrow orange and green lanes that some of these issues can slide into in the North?

Second, we can be hard on ourselves when it comes to discussing some of the peace issues. I was taken by Mr. Holloway's point on the need for a renewed peace plan. In recent years, we have had the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement. There has been a lot of reflecting on where we have been and where we need to get to. Something struck me this week when I took my daughter to football training. Our local soccer club when I was playing as a much younger man, was made up of 100% Catholic team members. This week, there were people from right across the community and ethnic backgrounds and it was much more open. It is the same for my local Gaelic club. We have people from ethnic backgrounds playing. We now have a partnership with the local rugby team. Beyond some of the vested interests and institutions, when looking on the ground at society, there has been a move away from some of the polarisation. That is not to suggest there is not work needed and there are of course a broad ranger of factors involved but we can be hard on ourselves. To focus on the point of a renewed peace plan, what does that look like for the next 25 years? Perhaps there is an international example; I am not sure but it is something worth looking at. I thank everyone again as today was very thought-provoking and useful.

Mr. Cathal Mallaghan:

I want to very briefly raise something Ms Weir talked about earlier in respect of the difference between peacebuilding in urban and rural communities. It is a very different problem and I am glad she raised it because a very subtle sectarianism exists within rural communities and it is different. What she said about ensuring we have the different aspects of development work happening is important.

We just finished a huge peace project in Pomeroy - Connecting Pomeroy - a flagship project under the peace programme. The difference that has made in a community where we thought we were only doing this for the younger generation is huge. We are already starting to see seeds of hope for everyone who lives there. There is a very important further divide there in the urban and rural set-up.

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

I have listened to everything that has been said. There is clear conflict surrounding the resolution of the problems. They are not being resolved. The witnesses are on the ground, they see it, they know it and they speak about it here and they know what they are talking about.

I hear what is being said and our job as a committee if we can, as I know time is short for the Government, is to collectively write to make the point about funding, which is key from has been said. Surely the shared island unit funding and other funding should be available but that is clearly not given in the way it is wanted. I do not criticise anybody but it would be good if that could be summarised for us.

Mr. Holloway outlined a number of very important points. Perhaps the witnesses could summarise the actions we could take to follow up with Ministers and political parties. I do not know whether this would be helpful but they could get an outcome from what they have said today. We are more than happy to do that and nobody will disagree with that.

The witnesses probably feel they are a voice in the wilderness because, clearly, the political system does not reflect their views. Politics only works when it reflects the people. If does not, there is an unhappy society with serious onward problems that will never be resolved. I ask the witnesses to contact the secretariat with three or four key points they would like us to work on. The committee will meet next week. In the meantime if the witnesses could get correspondence to us with their proposals, we can circulate them to members. This is to be practical about getting a resolution or just to put pressure on people. The starkness of life the witnesses have outlined is not unique to the North. It is especially acute in some communities. These issues are also in my community.

Ms Eileen Weir:

There are a couple of points I would make. I do not want to hear the word "funding".

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

I understand that. You want funding.

Ms Eileen Weir:

I want investment in these communities. People come from all over the world to this island because of the work being done. There is investment in tourism and in businesses. We want the same privilege for community so there is investment in it. The Department of Foreign Affairs, with the reconciliation fund, has done more than most in trying to secure this. The Department has been in there and been realistic about what we are asking for and what can be done. However, it also has purse strings. I am speaking about long-term investment, similar to what was done in Limerick when there was ten years of guaranteed funding to turn Limerick around. I would love ten years of guaranteed funding to turn Belfast and Northern Ireland around. It will take ten years. It was done in Limerick and it is working there. We can see the improvement that is happening. It was to tackle the drug gangs and everything else.

One of my main priorities after investment is the bill of rights. The Irish Government needs to get serious about the bill of rights. It is down to the Irish and British Governments to make sure it happens.

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

As it happens, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is visiting next Thursday and will meet the committee. We will be very happy to make this point.

Mr. Tim Attwood:

My colleagues in the Peace Summit Partnership will come back with proposals. I want to address Mr. Hazzard's comment on being positive. The John and Pat Hume Foundation is going to have an event as part of a peace summit to recognise the quiet peacemakers and the everyday people who have done all of the heavy lifting in the past and today. Ms Weir has been around for decades-----

Ms Eileen Weir:

Be careful.

Mr. Tim Attwood:

-----and so has Mr. Holloway. Ms Malone is a wee bit younger. There are so many people who, in a very quiet and unassuming way with no publicity, have kept the peace in our streets and in our community and society. This happens today. Peace activists, community workers and youth workers, at times when other people do not go into those situations, work with young people. They take them away from potential riot situations and they encourage them. It is important to recognise this, which is about investment. We have to recognise those who serve us really well. They are not all well known. They are not political figures or well-known civic society people. They are very ordinary. They would probably be embarrassed and some would decline recognition saying it was not for them. They have invested their time and energy to give us the peace we have today. It is the collective duty of the governments and the Northern Ireland Executive to invest in the future so we do not go back to those days. We will come back to the committee with precise things. The programme for government will have specific actions for the Executive but there is also an all-Ireland context to this. We really appreciate the opportunity to be here and the questions from all the members.

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

I thank the witnesses. We will now adjourn meeting sine die as our meeting next week has not yet been confirmed.