Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement díospóireacht -
Thursday, 17 Feb 2022

Engagement with Representatives from the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

Members of the Oireachtas attending this meeting remotely should do so from within the Leinster House campus. Remote participation from outside the Leinster House campus is not possible. Today we are engaging with representatives from the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation, Ms Naoimh McNamee and Ms Róisín McGlone. They are very welcome. On behalf of the committee and all its members I welcome them to today's meeting. We are glad they are able to be with us.

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 and participants who are to give evidence from a location outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note they may not benefit from the same level of immunity from legal proceedings as a witness giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts 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 the proceedings should be given. They should respect directions given by the Chairman and 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 that person's or entity's good name.

I now call Ms McNamee to give her opening statement.

Ms Naoimh McNamee

I thank the committee for having us here today.

It is a privilege to speak with members. I want to give a bit of context for the work that we do in Glencree. We are delighted and, as I said, it is a great privilege to be invited here to address the committee and to take the opportunity to discuss the work being undertaken by the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation. I am joined by my colleague, Ms Róisín McGlone, from Belfast who is the programme manager for our PEACE IV-funded programme addressing the legacy of violence through facilitated dialogue. This opening statement introduces Glencree’s work, particularly with victims and survivors in Northern Ireland and across this island.

To give a bit of context for those who are not too familiar with Glencree, we were established in 1974 in response to the conflict in Northern Ireland. The Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation works to prevent and transform political and intercommunal conflict and build peaceful and inclusive societies. As the only dedicated peace centre in the Republic of Ireland, we bring individuals and groups impacted by conflict together and help them to find pathways to reconciliation and sustained peace through facilitated dialogue, relationship-building, public discourse and shared learning.

We transform conflict by focusing on six key programme areas. Our community and political dialogue programme works with political parties and their representatives drawn from across the islands of Ireland and Britain, as well as civic society organisations and actors integral to the political debate. We do this by creating and sustaining a process where people of different traditions, political persuasions or cultural identities can come together in confidential spaces to discuss the issues that arise as disrupting factors in their relationships with each other.

Our PEACE IV-funded programme focuses on addressing the legacy of violence through facilitated dialogue by working with victims' and survivors' groups, representatives and individuals with differing interpretations of what happened in Northern Ireland’s past. We achieve this through different mechanisms of engagement and sustained contact between victims and survivors and those perceived to have inflicted harm upon them.

Our intercultural and refugee programme aims to make Ireland a more welcoming and inclusive place, with respect for all ethnic, faith and cultural backgrounds, by facilitating intercultural dialogues among refugees, migrants and members of ethnic and faith minority communities.

Our women's leadership programme is closely aligned with UN Resolution 1325 and aims to support and empower women on the island of Ireland who have experience of political conflict and its effects to expand their influence and become active leaders in the political processes that promote peacebuilding on the island of Ireland and internationally.

The peace education and young adult work that we undertake aims to promote engagement among students and young adults from across the island of Ireland through peace education, shared learning and cross-Border, cross-community relationship building. One of the programmes included in that is our partnership with Politics in Action in Northern Ireland, which works with young schoolchildren in the North and South and engages with politicians North and South. These programmes support young people in exploring their own and each others' identities and history, while at the same time allowing space for thought and action to build a shared future. The development of this work is a key priority for Glencree under our new Strategic Plan 2022-2026, as we seek to establish a centre of excellence for practical peacebuilding in Glencree, which will be focussed on training and supporting the next generation of peacebuilders on this island. This is a particular area that we are very focused on in Glencree.

The southern voice for peace programme promotes an all-island, civil society approach to lasting peace in Northern Ireland. This programme features a number of public events each year which seek to engage people from the Republic of Ireland with the issues, organisations and communities in Northern Ireland in order to make a contribution to deepening reconciliation throughout the whole island.

Internationally, Glencree has supported peace efforts in more than ten countries including Haiti, Papua New Guinea, Afghanistan, Palestine-Israel and, most recently, Cameroon. As well as sharing learnings from the Northern Irish peace process, this work also presents a very useful opportunity for Glencree to learn from the experiences of conflict transformation in other jurisdictions.

Today our focus will remain on our own shores and the work we are undertaking to address the legacy of conflict in Northern Ireland. I will talk a little bit about Ms McGlone's programme in particular. The PEACE IV-funded programme is on addressing the legacy of conflict through facilitated dialogue. Well over two decades since the signing of the Good Friday-Belfast Agreement, Northern Ireland and the Border counties remain divided along communal lines. A contributing factor to this divide is the inadequacy of the Good Friday Agreement and subsequent political efforts to address the legacy of past violence. The deficit is most acutely felt in the divisive relationship between victims' and survivors' groups and the individuals, groups and institutions perceived to have inflicted harm upon them in the past. In 2017, Glencree was awarded four years of PEACE IV funding under the building positive relations strand to target these issues through our addressing the legacy of violence through facilitated dialogue programme. The programme is due to finish at the end of August 2022 after being granted an eight-month extension due to the limitations on our work inflicted by the Covid-19 pandemic.

This programme primarily focuses on the experiences of victims and survivors groups and their communities in Northern Ireland. Through a process-based approach that creates the space for private and confidential facilitated dialogues and the promotion of sustained contact across divides, themes and issues that remain as obstacles to deeper understanding and the promotion of positive relations are examined. A crucial aspect of this programme has been that the groups, along with other relevant parties, co-develop their own process and pace of engagement prior to entering into dialogue with groups and individuals with differing interpretations of what happened in the past. The primary objectives of this programme have been: increased empathy, understanding, and acknowledgment of other stories and lived experiences; transformed social and political attitudes; decreased sectarianism; increased profile of women and women’s stories within the legacy context; and increased confidence within victims' and survivors' groups that are perceived as being hard to reach.

The learning we have accrued through this project has been and will continue to be shared on national and international platforms via journal publications, webinars, reports, roundtables and symposia, with victims' and survivors' groups, other interest groups, academics, policy-makers and practitioners, to assist in ascertaining how to productively engage with Northern Ireland’s contentious past.

On reflecting on the lifetime of the project to date, while progress has been made in some areas, what is evident is that the political processes in place to address the issues faced by victims and survivors remain inadequate in both jurisdictions. The social and political context in which the

programme has operated has been extremely challenging. As the committee will appreciate, legacy issues are very contested and the work has had to navigate major upheaval during the programme life cycle, including a sustained collapse of the Stormont Assembly, Brexit, ongoing disagreements

over the Northern Ireland Protocol, failure to implement the Stormont House Agreement, recent legacy proposals from the UK Government and, indeed, the Covid-19 pandemic. In this context, it has been vital that our programme has the flexibility to be responsive to social and political change. Victims' and survivors' groups and other programme participants can re-evaluate their strategic priorities, alter or reprioritise specific goals and seek to delay or accelerate particular facets of dialogue processes in response to changing contexts. This can present significant challenges for the type of

work the legacy of violence programme is undertaking.

Despite the PEACE IV funding drawing to a close in August, Glencree remains committed to work with victims and survivors in Northern Ireland. It is a commitment that has been embedded in Glencree’s new five-year Strategic Plan 2022-2026, which will be formally launched in the coming weeks at Dublin Castle.

We welcome questions from the committee and thank members again for the opportunity to discuss our work.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

The order of speakers' contributions for different political parties and groupings is Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Sinn Féin, SDLP, MPs and Alliance MPs, Green Party, Sinn Féin MPs, Labour Party and then Independents and Aontú. I understand Senator Blaney indicated. Is he here? He is not here. Does Deputy Tully need to get away?

Deputy Pauline Tully

I do not mind as it is a while yet.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

Can Deputy Tully make her contribution now? I understand she has commitments in the Dáil. Then we will go back to Senator Blaney as he has some other meeting as well.

Deputy Pauline Tully

Tá fáilte roimh na finnéithe chuig an gcruinniú. I am delighted to meet everyone today and listen to the presentation. Sinn Féin recognises that we are in a post-conflict society now and there is a need for reconciliation which is reflective of everyone in society. Our members have been involved and contributed with others to bring about a peace and political process in the North. We have been involved in negotiations with other governments, other parties, NGOs and civic society. We have led to the Good Friday Agreement and subsequent agreements. However, the absence of a truth and reconciliation commission leaves victims and survivors without a recognised recourse for truth and justice.

In her opening statement, Ms McNamee identified addressing the legacy of violence through facilitated dialogue, which is funded by PEACE IV. How does Glencree measure the success of that project? For example, how many participants took part? How representative were they of victims and survivors? What are the common threads coming from the different individuals or organisations that it works with? How much progress has been recently made? In that context as well, with Glencree's consultations with the people and organisations it has met with, particularly from the victims' and survivors' groups, has it come across anyone who supports the British Government's proposed amnesty legislation?

Ms Róisín McGlone

I will take that question, if Deputy Tully does not mind. I would like to start at the end because that is the easiest question. No, we have not met anybody in the victims' and survivors' groups who supports the British Government's command paper.

I stress at this stage that we will not be identifying those we work with. We do not represent victims and survivors, but we work alongside them. We are not here to represent anyone. We keep confidential the groups that we work with. However, I can absolutely guarantee that we work with every sort of group set up to work with victims and survivors in Northern Ireland. This includes those connected to people who were killed by the State and people who were members of State forces. We work with all victims but we have not met anyone who agrees with the proposal. That does not mean they all have the same reason for not agreeing with it, but none of the groups we work with agree with it. We are talking about groups representing thousands of people. We work with the main representatives of those groups and wider groups. I was going to print out the numbers because one of the things Europe is very good at is looking for figures. I was going to print them out but I did not. I can supply them to the Deputy. We have had in the region of almost a thousand contacts with people over the four years. We have had multiple contacts with people. We work with four large hard-to-reach groups as well as doing bigger events. I do not believe any of the members were able to attend the play, "Those You Pass In The Street", the Kabosh theatre company put on in Dublin in November. I know the Chair attended.

Deputy Pauline Tully

That was in Dublin Castle. I had hoped to attend but something clashed with it.

Ms Róisín McGlone

As I said to the clerk to the committee earlier, there was a production company there that will be producing a video. I will let the committee have access to that. It is about using different means. That is the public-facing way we can bring victims together. That is not the majority of our work. It is a bit like an iceberg; 10% of our work is above the surface and public-facing while 90% goes on in quiet rooms where we facilitate quiet dialogues. Does that answer some of the questions the Deputy asked?

Deputy Pauline Tully

It does, yes.

Ms Naoimh McNamee

If I may add to that, the Deputy asked how we measure success. When you have objectives around increasing empathy, understanding and shifting mindsets, which cut across the work Glencree does, it can be quite difficult to measure success. You cannot do a simple quantitative analysis. The programme is formally evaluated throughout its life cycle. One thing that is very important to the work of Glencree is the principle of co-design. While we have a planned series of engagements through the Glencree models we use in the context of facilitating dialogue and building relationships using, as Ms McGlone has mentioned, different mechanisms, such as the arts and providing opportunities for people to get together, when it comes to how people are coming along with the single-identity work and being willing to meet with those from other communities or those who have different views, there are bespoke models for measuring how things are shifting along, but it is not straightforward. We are quite lucky to work with the Special EU Programmes Body, SEUPB, a funder that understands the sensitive nature of the work. As to the crux of what Glencree does, as Ms McGlone has said, we do not represent victims and survivors, but walk along with them. We have our planned level of activity and also remain flexible with regard to what is going on in social and political contexts and what the victims themselves want to see happen. When talking about victims and survivors and what they have been through, the power has been taken away from them. When it comes to the process of reconciliation or people being able to work through the issues they have, giving them some power in that area is very important. That is an important part of what Glencree does in supporting them through that process. I hope that helps to provide a little more context.

Mr. Mickey Brady

I thank the witnesses for their presentation. It was very informative and interesting. We recognise that there are many challenges in bringing people together. Obviously, there has to be co-ordination and contact. Will the witnesses explain the best way to ensure that everybody who needs to be around the table is around the table and included? That is my first question.

My second question is on an issue that has been the topic of much conversation recently, the advent of an all-island citizens' assembly. That could be a way of gathering representative views from across society. What are the witnesses' views on that? After such an assembly was convened, any recommendations, opinions and so on could be brought back to the Oireachtas for discussion. They are my two questions for the moment.

Ms Róisín McGlone

One of the things Ms McNamee said that is particularly important is that we do not dictate to victims. What we do is to encourage them to have the people around the table who can help and work with them. There has been enormous success in terms of walking with people on a journey. Sometimes, people view victims as people who are out there and different from the rest of us but they are exactly the same as us. They have fears, concerns and anxieties just as we do. The beauty of a project like ours is that there is no rush. We can take things at people's own pace.

With regard to the public-facing aspect of our project, if you go back seven years to when funding for Glencree was first thought about and when the SEUPB entered into negotiations, it was probably felt at that stage that we would be an awful lot further on by now. In those seven years, there has been the assembly at Stormont. All our groups are from the North, although one of the groups we work with works with some victims in the South. However, we thought we would be an awful lot further on. That is what we were alluding to in the end part of the statement, which was about the political, social and cultural background to this work. It has been very difficult and painstaking but we now have the people around the table who need to be around the table. Ms McNamee would know more about the all-Ireland situation than I would. Perhaps she would like to follow on in that regard.

Ms Naoimh McNamee

I will add to that, if I may. Making sure the right people are around the table and that all voices are represented is really important to the work of Glencree. With Ms McGlone's programme and across the work of Glencree, we find people who are at different places in their journey. There is no standard approach for everyone. We meet people where they are. There may be individuals or groups who require a bit more one-to-one work. We have to work harder at developing trust with some. We do whatever it takes to keep those conversations going and build that trust to make sure that people feel comfortable and safe engaging with the dialogue. That is of paramount importance to us. I do not mean to oversimplify it but the work across Glencree boils down to two things: building improbable relationships across divides and facilitating difficult dialogue. In order to do that, we have to create a very safe space. With regard to the trust we have with the participants and those we work with, our reputation is one of our greatest assets in Glencree. We now have almost 50 years of experience and that is something that stands to us. Because of the quiet and confidential nature of the work and people's faith that it will not be breached, we can go into places and engage with people who are very hard to reach or who are reluctant to come to the table. As I have said, we do not make exceptions. We ensure that everyone who needs to be at the table is at it. We do whatever we need to do to work towards that in the context of our work.

On Mr. Brady's question regarding an all-island assembly, from Glencree's perspective, we are absolutely in favour of conversation and engaging with one another. Citizens' assemblies have had great success in hearing people's voices. When they are run well and respectfully and when voices are heard with regard to what needs to be said, they can work extremely well. In principle, Glencree is absolutely in favour of open, honest, public and transparent dialogue, but we would have a particular interest in how that dialogue is facilitated and mediated. With regard our principles around creating a safe space, trust and respectful dialogue, it must be ensured that it does not descend into a positional politics back and forth and that there is an open and honest exchange. As I have said, however, there is great benefit to it so we in Glencree are in favour of talking.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

Does Ms McGlone wish to comment?

Ms Róisín McGlone

I refer back to the debacle that was the Civic Forum for Northern Ireland. I was a member of that forum. For me, it comes down to the success or failure of these types of large projects. Bringing in representatives of civic society comes down to how it is serviced, mediated and facilitated. I will not make any comment on the civic forum, but it was a very large experiment in bringing civic society together and people have their views one way or the other. I agree with Ms McNamee. My expertise lies in how one creates the safe space and how one facilitates that dialogue without alienating people but making people feel comfortable. That is what Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation is about as well. I believe that part is critical. If one is asking from the committee's perspective, that is the critical part of it.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

There are two minutes left in this slot. Do you wish to make a final comment, Mr. Brady?

Mr. Mickey Brady

I thank the witnesses. Obviously, part of the difficulty is the confidentiality and the issues in getting groups around the table who probably, in many cases, fundamentally disagree about many things. The centre has been successful, as far as I am aware, in getting disparate groups together and going through stuff.

The other question I have relates to something that is very topical at present, that is, the constitutional issue. The committee is involved in the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. Ms McNamee mentioned some of the inadequacies of the Good Friday Agreement, but part of the difficulty is that the agreement has many parts that simply have not been implemented. One of those is the referendum and the border poll. Does she have any views on that or is that outside her remit?

Ms Naoimh McNamee

The centre does not take a position on the constitutional question. It is not our place to pass comment on that. I should clarify that when we mention inadequacies in the Good Friday Agreement, the agreement is a massive achievement and I would never wish to take away from that. When I mention inadequacies, I am purely talking about the victims' and survivors' sector and how the provisions were or were not there in that regard.

In terms of the constitutional question, what we find very unhelpful in our broader work is front-loading the destination. The idea that this is a fait accompli or that we will get to that point at some stage anyway is very unhelpful for the conversation. As far as we are concerned, our interest is in finding ways to live peacefully together, whatever form that takes in terms of the political change that we might see over the next ten to 20 years on this island. As I said, we do not take a position on the constitutional question.

Senator Niall Blaney

I welcome our guests and thank them for the presentation. I was between meetings so I heard some of it, but not all. However, I read it beforehand. I tried to get in from my office and I did not manage that so I came back down again.

I am very much aware of the work the centre has done over the years before and after the Good Friday Agreement. I spent a weekend in Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation quite a number of years ago in the 2000s and I am aware of the vital work it does. For the purposes of the committee and the witnesses' presence here, would it be possible for them to give a view as to their input into the lead-up to the Good Friday Agreement? How vital was the work the organisation did in shaping the ground, let us say, in the lead-up to the Good Friday Agreement and after the agreement?

Following on from that, there is a narrative that with any future border poll some will call for it sooner and others will call for it later. I understand the witnesses cannot take a side, and I am not asking them to do so, but there is a narrative that a citizens' assembly would have to be held in the lead-up to that to deal with issues. Do they have an opinion in that regard? From my perspective, the difficulties and the divergences of opinion are so great that it will take something much greater than a citizens' assembly to get everybody to the one space. We have a great deal of work to do. In my view, a citizens' assembly could not take on the disparity and the amount of work involved, considering the amount of work that was done behind the scenes before the Good Friday Agreement to get the agreement across the lines. There was a massive amount of work, in addition to the back-channelling. Could our guests give us a flavour of some of that? Not to do down a citizens' assembly, but could they give us a taste of what is involved? How many more organisations like the centre are out there behind the scenes doing this back-channel work, if I can call it that? What is their general view?

Ms Naoimh McNamee

I thank the Senator for his questions, which are quite interesting. I am a little biased in saying that Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation's role was very integral or important. The centre is the only peace centre in the Republic of Ireland. There is the Corrymeela Community in the North as well. The difference with Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation is that we have no religious affiliations. It is a secular organisation. The centre has been going for 50 years and our work has evolved throughout that time to support the peace process on this island and to engage for the people in the North and the people across the island who are doing this. There is a very strong public service ethic in the centre. We are resourced for the State and for communities in the North. We work with politicians in London and with individuals in the UK as well.

I will come to the issue of a citizens' assembly or a public forum, but it is essential that there are places or environments where people can come away from the public eye, the media and the pressure of party lines and engage with each other as human beings, addressing the issues that come up for people. We need to be creative about this. We are in a very precarious time after Brexit. Much great work has been done by people in Northern Ireland and people on this side of the Border on the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, but we are still not there yet. We have made mistakes. There is much that still needs to happen. Brexit, as the committee can appreciate, has put much pressure on relationships that were hard won and which we worked hard to help create. That is something that has kept us very busy in Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation over the last almost six years.

For that private, confidential work, those safe spaces where things are very contentious, to be able to work through those issues in a safe space, to be able to disagree in private, come back together and work on that relationship, but have that commitment to work together regardless of the divides, organisations such as ours can offer a support to help people do that. That is something. We still engage regularly with the actors from the peace process who helped negotiate the Good Friday Agreement. One comment in particular that stood out for me came from a senior unionist politician. He said his biggest regret was that the importance of establishing and maintaining those relationships across divides was lost in the years since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. That is the strong focus for us in Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation.

Regarding a citizens' assembly, as Ms McGlone said, and we feel strongly about this, we support the idea in principle, but it depends on how it is done. It depends on the mediation and facilitation facility that is set up around it, the nature of the space and how it is done whereby people are encouraged to engage in a professional, courteous and meaningful way, and with a sense of creativity. The issue of the constitutional question and discussions about it is not something we can avoid, nor should we. We all need to take seriously our responsibility for contributing to the ideas on how we want to live together in the future. We have experienced a great deal of change on these two islands over thousands of years. We must not sleepwalk into the future on this, but engage well with each other on how that happens.

I have some concerns about how that is done.

On the idea of a Border poll, what scares me significantly is the idea that 51% or 52% might be in favour but what about the rest, in terms of a principle of consent? There are clear legal provisions in the Good Friday Agreement. All sides signed up to that. However, we have seen the contentious nature of the Brexit vote. We have seen what that has done to communities and to relationships in the UK and with us. For me, an awful lot more work needs to be done. It is painstaking at times. It requires a lot of patience. It can be frustrating. That informal diplomacy, back-channel discussion, and getting people ready to come to the table to engage in that debate is crucial. That is what Glencree does. That is where we come in and, as always, we stand ready to help in whatever way we can. We also work closely with individuals and smaller organisations that are working towards the same goals of peace and reconciliation.

As Glencree is the only peace centre in the Republic of Ireland and with the unique experience we have, we believe we have a strong responsibility to contribute in any way we can. The Senator is right in terms of the role Glencree played in getting younger politician, civil servants, community actors, combatants, former combatants, victims, and survivors together leading up to the Good Friday Agreement and how that important that was. When a relationship or conversation broke down, Glencree was able to go places where other State actors may not have. We take that responsibility and role very seriously. That has continued throughout the implementation phase, through the different negotiations, and through Brexit. From the time the vote was announced to this very day, our teams have expanded working in that area. We are working very closely with London in a time when relationships, east and west, are probably at their most fragile in well over 50 years. We have put a lot of stock in the work we do. It has to be quiet. It has to be done under the radar. Not many people know about it at times, but it is essential and something that we are committed to continuing as we navigate through these difficult and turbulent times we are facing politically.

Ms Róisín McGlone

I cannot speak to Glencree's role before or after the Good Friday Agreement because I was not there. I was in Belfast starting on interfaces. What I will say is that there were various developments which came out of that. Take the example of Brexit, which Ms McNamee finished on, and how it was managed or not managed, depending on one's perspective. What was different about coming up to the Good Friday agreement was many things. It was a multilayered and very complex set of issues. Our civic society was very engaged. It was a very dangerous time for us but it was a very exciting time. That was because civic society were engaged in the discussions. They were engaged in everything from the referendum to the setting up of the Parades Commission and the Human Rights Commission. Any attempt to look at a change, be that constitutional change or whatever, has to engage on a number of different levels. When I remember those times, it was as though we were all involved. Everybody was involved in one aspect or another. Some of us were involved on the ground, keeping the peace, so that the politicians could get on with it. Some people were involved in Human Rights Commission. It was about making sure it was done the right way. It was about advising Government.

There were a lot of really good and vibrant organisations. This example always sticks in my mind. I remember during the lead up to the referendum, one of the organisations got see-through stickers and put them on the green part of every traffic light in Belfast so that when it turned green, it said "Yes". Using innovative ways of bringing people on board is critically important. I am passionate about this aspect of it because I have lived through it and know the consequences of it. There have to be the spaces and politicians.

There also needs to be partnerships. Let us remember, we had people from South Africa helping us. I went to the John F. Kennedy School of Government with political parties. Stanford University was involved. Academic people were helping as well. A whole range of people need to be brought together. For me, Glencree is the perfect beautiful setting to do some of that background work with the people who need to help us through. The Senator is right: it cannot be done with one group or one assembly. There are many interwoven issues.

Coming back to the question on a truth and reconciliation commission, which I did not answer. We did not have that commission but there was lots of storytelling and things were happening in the Northern Ireland. I hope that answers the Senator's question on that.

Senator Niall Blaney

I thank the Ms McNamee and Ms McGlone for their answers. They are right in that conversations have to take place and I will be calling for them to happen. We also have to be careful about our conversations. What the witnesses have highlighted is that not all these conversations can take place in one room. It has to be a much bigger picture than a citizens' assembly. It is good to have this aired today. It is good to have a picture of the work that was involved in the run-up to the Good Friday Agreement. One of my biggest fears is having a Border poll that fails. Where that would leave us as a nation? Where would that leave us as Catholic and Protestants on this island? How far would that set relations back? That is a space we do not want to get into. Moreover, I know Covid has impacted on the work of Ms McNamee and Ms McGlone as much as anybody on the island. I look forward to engaging with them in their work in the years ahead. I look forward to an invitation to Glencree and sharing conversations and, step by step, moving the conversations forward in a way that is inclusive. It is about bringing everybody onboard in a manner that has diversity of view and respect of opinion across the board.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

Does Ms McNamee wish to make a concluding comment in regard to Senator Blaney's contribution?

Ms Naoimh McNamee

I thank the Senator for his comments. Glencree always stands ready. The Senator and the members of the committee are welcome. If we can assist them with certain conversations, they are welcome to engage with our events. It is very important to have that level of engagement and we appreciate it.

Senator John McGahon

I apologise that I am the sole Fine Gael representative here. My colleague, Senator Currie, is in Fermanagh, and Deputies O'Dowd and Carroll MacNeill have sent their apologies. I have a meeting in Leinster House at 3 p.m. so I have to leave at 2.55 p.m.. As a result, I will not be present for the second round of Fine Gael questions. I have four or five questions. Do I have 15 minutes, Chair?

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

Yes.

Senator John McGahon

With that in mind, I will ask one question instead of a couple at once. Once it is answered, I will move on. Ms McNamee stated that Northern Ireland and the Border counties remain more divided along communal lines. Coming from a Border area, I could not agree more. Why does she believe Northern Ireland is perhaps more divided today than it was 20 years ago? What are her views on that?

Ms Róisín McGlone

I will take that question because, while I live in Belfast, I frequent those areas. There is a whole complexity of reasons why sectarianism has reared its head. We can be very disparaging of ourselves. We are really nice to outsiders; we just do not like each other from growing up in the North and in Belfast. There is a certain amount of truth in that. I know this is going to sound very counter intuitive but the reason any sectarianism is not necessarily a bad thing. I know that is counter-intuitive.

People were saying it behind closed doors and now maybe they were saying it out in the open. I would much prefer to facilitate a session where people are putting those things, and how they think, out on the table. Until that is gotten rid of and until it has gotten out, there is a lot of resistance and a lot of difficulty. If we take that as a microcosm of a society, then maybe we needed to have the conversations. We went through a number of cycles, the first of which not to talk about the war. There were so many different manifestations of that. It was everything from people not saying what they did, who they were with, or going into other areas. It was a case of, "Let us not talk about the war". Then we had a period where there was very much an upheaval in people talking about stuff, and then we have come around again. It comes back to the fact that we do not have a shared understanding of what caused the conflict. We do not have a shared understanding of what caused the war, so people are vying for position with regard to who caused it.

The members' response to my next point might be, "Oh well, you would say that anyway". The rise in social media has had an enormous impact. Where people had been talking behind closed doors and perhaps in community groups, now they are saying it with access to tens of thousands or millions of people. I do not have the answer to what the Senator has said but I would caution by saying that it is not necessarily a bad thing. People are braver now to say things that they really feel, whereas previously it might have eaten them up inside. A society that is eating itself up inside is not a good society. It manifests in lots of different ways. Psychologists say that the body holds the score. I believe this also in a bigger arena whereby society holds the score. We have been through a lot of pain and a lot of trauma. As a society we live with that pain and trauma. Some of the ways of getting through that is to talk about it. It does not answer the Senator's question.

Senator John McGahon

That is excellent and it really does. I get what Ms McGlone is saying in that it is easier for opposing views to be shared and discussed rather than bottled up and kept in their own communities. That makes absolute sense to me.

Ms McGlone said that what is missing in Northern Ireland at the moment is a shared understanding and context of what caused the conflict. Does Ms McGlone believe we will ever get to the stage where there will be that shared understanding?

Ms Róisín McGlone

I have been lucky enough to study peace processes throughout the world. I have also been out to South Africa and Macedonia. There is no perfect peace process. There is no perfect society out there that has come through conflict. I am very proud of where I come from so I would say that we have done good. As Ms McNamee has said, yes there were difficulties with the Good Friday Agreement and particularly around the issues of victims and survivors who should have been central to the agreement and they were not. It is just as simple as that, in my humble opinion. They should have been central but they were not but look at what else we did. I do not believe we are ever going get a shared understanding, but I do believe that we can share with each other our understandings and get a better idea of where other people are coming from, as opposed to taking up positions because taking up positions gets us nowhere.

Senator John McGahon

Naturally enough there has been huge upheaval in Northern Ireland over the past years with Brexit, the protocol and so on. How has the Glencree centre been able to manage that upheaval? What has the centre had to implement to try to be more flexible and manoeuvre in an ever-shifting landscape since 2016?

Ms Naoimh McNamee

The Senator referred to Brexit. In his previous question the Senator asked about Northern Ireland society being divided and a Border division again. Obviously, Ms McGlone comes from that area. Brexit has forced the issue of identity to the fore again. Identity is a very complex issue and a very strong part of the conflict in the North. It was very eloquently dealt with in the Good Friday Agreement in that people could be British or Irish or both. With Brexit it has forced this back into a black and white realm where people must choose. All of the conversations about the protocol or about Article 16 have had a big impact on how relations have broken down and people have gone back into their camps, and in our experience this has been around the issue of identity and being forced to choose. I just wanted to make that point.

On the Senator's question about a shared understanding, I would agree absolutely with Ms McGlone that it is probably not going to happen, and it is not necessarily likely. I would also say, however, that it does not need to happen if there is a shared commitment and understanding of where we want to get to, as in a peaceful future and living well together and - going back to the Senator's previous comment - not front loading the destination of what that is going to look like, and having that commitment to actually engage with one another. There is no issue with people having their different narratives once they are prepared to listen and engage with one another.

With all of the work and momentum, and the sense of pushing a boulder up the hill with the peace process and its implementation, Brexit has been one of the most disturbing factors in that whole process since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. Again, it is the issue of identity and people going back into their camps. We have experienced this as people being less likely to engage and they may have stepped back a little bit. Much more work is needed to be done on a more one-to-one basis. A lot more patience is required in certain areas. It is two steps forward and one step back, at times. It is about tenacity, determination and patience for moving forward with that. Glencree supporting people with that is of paramount importance to us.

I shall now turn to the issue of social media and those relationships, the different things that happen from a political perspective such as announcements from the EU or commentary from British or Irish politicians, and the impact it has on people's willingness to come to the table. Things may be taken out of context or may have been said in the heat of the moment. The impact this has behind the scenes on people's willingness to talk or engage cannot be overestimated. This is something we deal with on a regular basis. Because of the nature of the centre with regard to confidentiality and subtlety, we are able to go in and repair those relationships where possible. It is a long process and there have been many setbacks over the years since the Brexit vote. It is difficult but it is about the strong commitment to keep moving forward and a commitment to the peace process.

Senator John McGahon

I find it very interesting that both Ms McGlone and Ms McNamee have mentioned the impact of social media. I guess that social media was not a huge thing a couple of years ago and is more recent. I have had this conversation with people I know in Sinn Féin and people in Sinn Féin I am friendly with. I asked what their views on this would be if I was a unionist in Northern Ireland and I was looking at some of the anti-unionist rhetoric that I see coming from republicans. Do the witnesses believe that this would isolate them or would make them pull back their horns a little bit so that they do not want to get involved with any further engagement?

Ms Róisín McGlone

I am not going to talk specifically about one community or the other, but I will say two things about working with the groups I work with. The one thing they are all united on is that they did not want to happen what happened to them. We need to be very cognisant of the fact that people are suffering. The second point is that yes, very often I would be in groups where one of the things we try to record is the context of meetings over the period of years. Very often it is local context that comes up in the groups, not national or international. It will be about "Look what happened on the UTV news or the BBC Northern Ireland news", or "Did you see such and such did that on Twitter or Facebook?" or whatever. Referring back to what was said before, that is what we work on and that is what we have the conversations about, because it is out there and it is out in the open. Very often, the context within the groups I work with is very impactful impacted by local politics.

Senator John McGahon

On the funding of Glencree, reference was made to fact the PEACE IV funding is due to come to a close in August of this year. What alternative funding streams are lined up?

Ms Naoimh McNamee

The Glencree programmes are largely supported by the Department of Foreign Affairs through the reconciliation fund, and some of our legacy work continues under our community political dialogue. We will be seeking new sources of funding to continue on the work that Ms McGlone has undertaken. The work on this particular programme is very specialist and very sensitive work.

Given the different layers of the work we do in the victims and survivors sector, it is important for us to continue that, so we will seek other sources of funding for that. We are also examining the PEACE PLUS funding, which will be announced further down the line.

We recently diversified our funding over the past three years and have funding from various philanthropic organisations and other kinds of funding bodies. As Ms McGlone said, we have had four years for this programme, and having multi-annual funding is really important for that. It is not as though we can just say we have a year, there is an annual fund and we will do X number of events. Rather, we have to engage, meet people where they are and go at their pace. There are times we push for a particular reason but it needs that time. The multi-annual funding, therefore, with two-, three- or four-year programmes for this type of work, is really important for that continuity. There a few different options and we will continue with the work.

Senator John McGahon

Ms McNamee stated her organisation carries out very specialised work and that such work has to be done by well-trained professionals. I do not know whether I should call them employees or volunteers, but how many people work in the centre and what type of training do they need to deal with the important issues it is working on?

Ms Naoimh McNamee

We currently have 14 members of staff. Four of us work full time and the rest are part time. We also have some external contractors, that is, specialist facilitators and mediators, with whom we work. There is a very strong board, all of whom are volunteers, and there are standing committees on governance, audit, risk and so on. Ours is a wide network and community and many people have committed to Glencree over the years, although it is a relatively small-staffed team.

On training, our programme managers are experts in their field and have a wide variety of experience. The woman sitting beside me has done decades of work on interfaces in the North and has been a member of the Northern Ireland Policing Board. When we recruit for a programme, we look for that unique experience and that aspect that people can bring in. We seek mediation and facilitation skills and training, as well as emotional intelligence, which cannot always be taught, and that empathy and ability to connect with people. We are not an advocacy organisation. As a result, we need to be able to set aside any personal beliefs and focus on the process. Engaging with people in that way is very important and that is not always easy for people to do. There is an ongoing training plan in Glencree for staff where we may have identified particular areas, but the people who come to work with Glencree are experts in their field and are chosen for the variety of skills they have in a given area. In light of the responsibility we have for people and what they are going through, which tends to be in the context of a high-stakes relationship, it is important people have the capacity and the ability to do that.

Nevertheless, some of our work is very difficult and raw, particularly some of the work Ms McGlone does, and as a human being you absorb that. That kind of care and reflective practice, therefore, is something we work on providing for our staff in Glencree too. It is very specialist work. The training on the ground, with the ability to observe the work, is very important. As we move into the next five years of Glencree's life, a very strong focus for us will be on the establishment of a formal centre of excellence in Glencree. We have held peace education programmes over the years but we are deeply committed to helping to upskill and support the next generation of peacebuilders because an area of concern relates to who is coming next to continue this work.

There are many older voices who did incredible work and have great experience we can all learn from, having been engaged in the peace process, but what are we doing to support the next generation of leaders, peacebuilders, senior civil servants, political representatives, community leaders and women to have a seat at the decision-making table? We need to support young people to find courage for their voice and we need to provide opportunities to engage.

Furthermore, we must reflect the diversity of society and recognise we are no longer just an orange and green society. We have to examine how Ireland has changed. Within our new strategy, formalising our peace education offering and the niche 50-year experience we have is something we are deeply passionate about as we proceed in the next five years.

Senator John McGahon

I thank both our guests for their presentations. They are both very impressive people and I can see how on top of their brief they are, given the excellent work they do. I apologise that I will not be present for the second round of questions.

Deputy Pauline Tully

I think it was inappropriate of Senator McGahon to suggest that only one party or one section of the community posts inappropriate comments on social media. Unfortunately, members and supporters of all political parties do it, including his own. It should not happen and I do not condone it in any form, but he should not have mentioned just one party.

Senator John McGahon

That is a fair point. I should have added that the issue is equally prevalent on the unionist side. I accept the point.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

I thank Deputy Tully. Offensive comments by groups or individuals are not acceptable in any form. Unfortunately, there is too much of this type of behaviour in life today. It causes much grief for individuals and families and it is a difficulty for society at present, with individuals and groups posting comments, unfounded in many instances, about people. It is not to be tolerated, in political life or any other area.

Did Mr. Brady wish to comment?

Mr. Mickey Brady

As somebody who lived through the conflict in the Six Counties from day one, I did not watch it from afar on television. I represent a Border county and I can see the very positive aspects of the Good Friday Agreement in my constituency. I would not necessarily accept that society, in my constituency at least, is more divided. In my view, people are coming together more and more, particularly in the case of young people.

I have been a member of this committee since 2015, as has the Acting Chairman. When we talk about the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, the referendum and the Border poll constitute an intricate part of that agreement. It seems that some members of the committee are more interested in revising parts of the agreement than actually implementing it. Ms McNamee mentioned the issue of the 50% plus-one threshold and asked what will happen to the minority if the result is as narrow as that, but that is democracy. If we members of this committee were elected by 50% of votes plus one, we would all be reasonably happy just to have been elected.

Brexit has been mentioned a great deal. In my experience, having talked to people in Britain, and in England in particular, there was a mismanagement and they did not really know what they were voting for. In the lead-up to a Border poll, there would have to be a serious and prolonged discussion of what it would entail in order that anybody who was voting would be aware of what he or she was voting for. In the Brexit referendum, the people in the Six Counties voted to remain in Europe by 56% to 44%. Again, that was democracy but it was ignored. We need to focus on implementing the Good Friday Agreement rather than try to cherry-pick bits and pieces from it.

Ms Naoimh McNamee

I appreciate Mr. Brady's experience within his community. We too very much see a great coming together of younger people, who are looking for a more hopeful future, and that is something we want to support. I fully accept his point about how the 50% plus-one threshold is a matter of democracy, but our concern relates to the impact of that on the peace process and good relations, not to whether the vote goes one way or the other. I agree work would need to be done on that, with information on any campaign or any view of how the future might look. For us, it is about the importance of bringing people along as much as possible and the volume of work that would be involved in that. We believe in making that investment in people, hearing their views and helping everyone who is to be included in a state or country to feel a part of that and to feel as though they have a place there, whatever that might look like.

That is where we are coming from with those comments.

The Good Friday Agreement is a fabulous achievement and we would not for a second take away from that. We are clearly very much in support of it but it is a matter of implementation. Today we are focusing on the lack of provision for victims and survivors. It is not perfect; no peace process is. There are gaps and things that have not been implemented. That is what we are talking about. That is not to take away at all from the overall achievement of the Good Friday Agreement. There are always rays of hope within communities, large and small, in the North. That is particularly true of the young people in how they are coming together and working so hard. Some of the organisations and individuals we work with in the North are working so hard to keep relationships strong, keep a sense of hope and try to work together through this. That is what we want to support in Glencree.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Brendan Smith)

I thank Ms McNamee. Anyone listening to her or Ms McGlone would be very clear that they are very complimentary of the achievement of the Good Friday Agreement. Ms McNamee said it was a fabulous and massive achievement. All of us around this table would agree with that and we compliment those who made it possible. It is up to all of us to ensure it is implemented in full. I have often said we have not maximised the potential of the agreement. There is so much more to be done by all of us on this island and by the Irish and British Governments. That will be the case for some time into the future as well.

The witnesses spoke about the importance of conversations, and Senator Blaney reflected those thoughts as well. We are short quite a number of members today as some of our colleagues are attending an all-island, cross-Border event in Enniskillen. It is a shared island event and that is especially focused on women's issues, as far as I know. One of my colleagues, Senator McGreehan, said she could not make it here today because she was attending that important event in Enniskillen. I mentioned the shared island. The shared island initiative is facilitating conversations at sectoral level, be those related to tourism or different aspects of our everyday living. It is important we have those conversations at different levels, whether in the community and voluntary sector, tourism and hospitality, agriculture or different sports. There are many important issues we can address on an all-Ireland basis. Those conversations at sectoral level are very important and they will get to the nub of problems much more quickly and with a greater significance than a citizens' assembly that deals with every subject matter. Conversations at micro level as well as the macro level are important.

The witnesses mentioned the PEACE education programme. Some of their programmes have been funded by PEACE IV. In response to questions I put in the Dáil recently, the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform stated it is hoped the new PEACE PLUS programme will be formally signed off on by Europe in the not-too-distant future. It is the desire of the Irish Government and the Northern Ireland Executive to have that programme in place as soon as possible. I hope the Glencree project can benefit from the PEACE PLUS programme, and I am sure I speak for the committee when I say we will support Glencree in its request to the PEACE PLUS programme. We value the work the witnesses do and they have been before this committee on a number of occasions.

If we do not succeed with education and ensuring people achieve better attainment in education, some of the issues that have bedevilled society will continue. The Integrated Education Fund was before the committee recently. There are particular difficulties in a lack of attainment at second level, in further education and at third level as well. We need improvement through the different strata in education.

One programme I always thought very beneficial and useful was the Wider Horizons programme. I do not know if the witnesses are familiar with it. Our colleague here in the Oireachtas, Senator Wilson, was Youthreach co-ordinator in County Cavan at the time and he had a number of youth training programmes going between groups in this State and groups in Northern Ireland. Deputy Tully would know this from her vocational education committee in County Cavan. The Youthreach centres collaborated with similar groups in Northern Ireland. Youth groups from Northern Ireland came to their counterparts south of the Border and engaged in some of the work, training and learning they were doing. Similarly, the groups from here travelled north. Part of that programme involved travel abroad to the United States, Australia or wherever there were Irish communities. Ms McGlone mentioned some of the schools and universities with a particular focus on politics as it applies to our island. They were involved in vocational programmes there. I followed up because I attended many of the events over the years in my constituency. To my knowledge, many of the contacts made by those young people at that time have continued 20 years on. That is very important.

The people who took part in those programmes were predominantly those in second chance education. Youthreach is often populated by young people who left formal education but now want to go back and follow a particular course. In many instances today it is great to see those people going back to second chance education. They then go off to the further education sector and many of them end up with primary degrees and higher qualifications as well. The Wider Horizons programme does not exist nowadays. It has been gone for a number of years but that type of programme could be beneficial in targeting a particular age group. We should build on the success of those programmes.

In her opening remarks, Ms McNamee mentioned people who are hard to reach. That is a very good phrase because it is often the people who do not engage with different groups who are left out and isolated. Maybe they think there is nobody to listen to them, help them or understand them. We all know that from our own communities. Thankfully, in Ireland today we have great senior citizens' groups and very active communities where social activities were arranged pre-Covid. Now they are, we hope, resuming for the future as well. These groups meet socially once a week or whatever. Oftentimes there is a still a cohort that will not attend those groups. Some of these people are isolated and live very lonely lives. It is about how to reach them.

In every walk of life and each sector of society there will be that small cohort that will not be reached. I do not know how to devise a mechanism to get to those people who are hard to reach. There needs to be a particular focus in all our work on reaching those people. I commend the witnesses on highlighting that within the victims' and survivors' groups. I asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if his Department was satisfied that there was engagement with the families of victims at official level. In some instances people have not sought help or maybe they have not been reached out to. It would be shocking and very disappointing if there are people who have not been given support or maybe have not sought support and who do not benefit from whatever support schemes are in place. They do not want to think of the work of WAVE Trauma Centre or other advocacy and support groups.

I have attended different Glencree events over the years, as have other colleagues on this committee, and I found them very beneficial because of the Chatham House rules. People could speak their mind at these events and 99% of the time - if not more - they would not be quoted. It is a very good concept. I was at one of the first engagements the centre held about Brexit and it was very informative. It was a time when people from different traditions were very concerned about what might emerge. The Glencree Centre's work in that regard, about which all of our colleagues have spoken today, is very important because there are so many issues still to be dealt with.

We all know the legacy issues. We need never remove the emphasis from supporting those people and trying to resolve those issues. As we all know, that is not simple.

At the beginning I read out the names of quite a number of our colleagues who could not be here but who would like to be with us today. I thank the witnesses for their excellent contributions. I have no doubt that we will have further engagement with them as a committee.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.50 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Thursday, 24 February 2022.