By Robin Wilson
Robin Wilson is an independent researcher and a member of the Citizens’ Assembly for Northern Ireland Advisory Group
Now that we’ve realised the first citizens’ assembly in Northern Ireland, which took place in Belfast last month, why stop at one?
The Citizens’ Assembly in the republic is itself a sequel to the Constitutional Convention, building on the success of that initiative.
Admittedly, in the republic there is a government to commission such work from members of the public, randomly selected and willing to engage in this valuable civic activity.
But the Irish experience mirrors the success of numerous ‘mini-public’ initiatives around the world in recent years. These show that ‘ordinary’ citizens are perfectly capable of engaging in democratic deliberation around challenging topics, especially when they are presented with both the evidence and the range of views.
The fact that we don’t currently have a government in Northern Ireland—and won’t any time soon—is all the more reason for handing the initiative to the citizenry.
Indeed, two areas where the political institutions in Northern Ireland have not been able to resolve the challenges could provide ideal topics for future citizens’ assemblies.
One set of challenges comprises the big social policy issues where religious and human-rights discourses collide and agreement has proved elusive: equal marriage and abortion.
The fact that we don’t currently have a government in Northern Ireland—and won’t any time soon—is all the more reason for handing the initiative to the citizenry.
Indeed, two areas where the political institutions in Northern Ireland have not been able to resolve the challenges could provide ideal topics for future citizens’ assemblies.
The other is how to stop our devolved institutions repeatedly collapsing under the weight of their own contradictions. Fundamentally, is there a way to replace the system of mutual vetoes at the heart of the Good Friday agreement with human-rights guarantees which would allow democratic majority decision and effective opposition—and alternation of parties in power after elections?
Indeed, the issues are connected: there are majorities in favour of reform on the two touchstone social issues, but also blocking minorities. On both the policy and constitutional counts, in other words, the question is: could Northern Ireland ever become ‘normal’? Last year’s failed election showed that there is no longer a demographic sectarian majority that could dominate at Stormont. Communalist representatives now constitute minority blocs on either side. So, in a new assembly, each would have to persuade the non-sectarian bloc. In other words, if it were to prevail, a party based on communalist identity would have to make an argument in terms anyone could support, regardless of background.
The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee at Westminster—a body limited by the absence of nationalist representation—reported in May that if talks to restore devolution had not been successful in six months the British and Irish governments should consult on a wide-ranging review of the Belfast agreement.
In an article in Political Quarterly around the same time, two highly respected Northern Ireland academics, Deirdre Heenan and Derek Birrell, argued that the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference established under the Belfast agreement could be reconvened to discuss how to fill the ‘political vacuum’.
In that context, why not bring in the politics-weary citizens of Northern Ireland to give their informed view on a democracy that would better meet their expectations?
Recent Comments