Lizanne Dowds

Northern Ireland's Devolved Institutions: A Triumph of hope over experience

Peace processes are fragile affairs, rarely prospering over the long term without active public support. In the decade 1989–99, only 21 of 110 armed conflicts throughout the world were ended by peace agreements, and only a minority of those agreements survive. Public understanding of peace processes or transitions is critical, particularly where a peace accord relies upon formal public approval through a plebiscite or referendum. Similarly, public expectations concerning the presumed benefits of a peace process need to be satisfied. Peace accords are often accompanied – and justified – by promises of an end to violence, demonstrably better living standards, and the improved provision of public goods and services. Yet the reality for many in societies undergoing political transition, such as South Africa or Croatia, has been a peace deficit and a shortfall in the fulfillment of popular expectations. This article addresses one such society in the throes of an apparent political transition, Northern Ireland, and discusses public knowledge of, and expectations about, the devolved institutions designed by the 1998 Belfast Agreement. It is based on data from a major study of public attitudes conducted between October 1999 and January 2000, the period during which the formal transfer of devolved powers took place. The survey discloses a lack of understanding of the interlocking architecture constructed by the Agreement’s signatories, coupled to a relatively buoyant anticipation of the benefits to be derived from the restoration of devolved government to Northern Ireland. However, events during the autumn of 2002, culminating in the fourth suspension of devolution, underscored the fragility of the new regime. Its susceptibility to the mutual mistrust and suspicion that has structured the perceptions of rival political elites and their respective followers, especially of unionist voters towards the leadership of Sinn Féin and the wider republican movement, was an ever present danger, especially given the comparatively modest level of unionist support for

Consenting Adults: The Principle of Consent and Northern Ireland's Constitutional Future

‘If A Majority Of People In Northern Ireland Ever Voted To become part of a United Ireland what would you do?’ At first sight the question may seem plucked from the realms of constitutional fantasy. A united Ireland seems an unlikely prospect, at least in anything but the long term. Even proponents of unity predict a 15–20 year wait. Yet the 1998 Good Friday Agreement empowers the people of Northern Ireland to decide their own constitutional future. As a result questions on Northern Irelands future constitutional status, and public reactions to possible changes in that status, are relevant to current political debate. It is important to note that the principle of consent is not a new constitutional invention. It has had a long association with Northern Ireland. It is argued that the peace process and the 1998 Good Friday Agreement have refocused attention on the long-standing consent principle. While consent was part of the constitutional furniture it was often overlooked during the Troubles. This article re-examines consent in the light of the peace process. It draws on evidence from the 1998 and 1999/2000 Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, as well as a number of in-depth interviews with senior politicians and policy-makers involved in the peace process and the negotiations on a political settlement. First it considers the changing significance of the consent principle to Northern Irelands constitutional status, arguing that the principle has assumed a renewed immediacy. Secondly, the article reports the findings of the two most recent Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys in relation to constitutional preferences. While public attitudes towards a unitary Ireland or continued Union within the United Kingdom have been surveyed regularly, as far as the authors are aware no previous survey has asked whether people would accept or oppose constitutional change if it was supported by a majority of Northern Irelands citizens. In other words, no survey has gauged the level of public acceptance of the consent principle. The key question is: would unionists be prepared to come quietly if a majority of Northern Irelands citizens voted to accept a united Ireland?

Pensioners and the Minimum Income Guarantee: observations from recent research

This article summarizes some of the data collected via the 1999/2000 Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey. The absence of any counterpart in Northern Ireland to the British Family Resources Survey has resulted in a dearth of basic information on the financial and allied circumstances of pensioners in this part of the United Kingdom. The authors review the data obtained on levels and sources of income, health and receipt of core disability benefits and the extent of non-take-up of the Minimum Income Guarantee. The authors locate the data within the broader debate about the new directions of pension policy in the UK.

Public Attitudes to Data Sharing in Northern Ireland: Findings from the 2015 Northern Ireland Life and Times survey

A module of questions on attitudes to data sharing was included on the 2015 Northern Ireland Life and Times survey (NILT). The NILT 2015 survey included interviews with 1202 respondents sampled via a systematic random sample of addresses taken from the Postcode Address File. The research was funded by the Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Public Health Agency Research and Development Office. High proportions of respondents trust their GP surgery (91%) and NHS (86%) to keep information or data secure and use it appropriately. Slightly smaller proportions trust government departments (73%) and academic researchers (72%) and trust in charities (51%) and commercial organisations (41%) is much lower. Overall, 42% said they had ever had particular concerns about how any of those organisations used the information they kept. The majority of Northern Ireland (NI) residents support the concept of sharing of identified health data in order to improve services. Over 95% were in favour of sharing data within the health service by means of the electronic care record, and over two thirds of people were in favour of health information being shared to improve access to services provided by other government departments, with information about mental health or children seen as more sensitive. Regarding sharing data for research, eighty-five percent of people agree that “if personal data can be made anonymous and a person’s right to privacy maintained, then the data should be used where there is a benefit to society”. Nearly one third of respondents insist that “data should only be shared for research if there is explicit consent, even if this means you will have to abandon the research if there are difficulties contacting people”. It was striking that this attitude toward needing consent is associated with low trust in organisations including the NHS and government departments. However, future research is recommended to investigate the extent to which anonymization of data would address this concern. There is a high level of support for data protection measures, particularly de-identification, checks and penalties for researchers, and making sure research is of public benefit. Other measures also have high support e.g. data access in dedicated secure data centres, and making results public. The lower level of trust in commercial organisations to keep data securely and use it appropriately is reflected in less support for data sharing with commercial organisations and 50% believe the data protection safeguards implemented for academic researchers should be greater for commercial organisations. However, there was evidence that where there is great public benefit, there is more support for commercial access to data. In conclusion, public support for data sharing sits on three pillars – trust in organisations, data protection measures, and public benefit. If any of these are reduced or taken away, public support falls, and conversely if energy is put into one of these domains but not in others, then it will not be enough to secure public support. A repeat survey in three years’ time is recommended to reflect the progress that has been made.