One of the most disturbing aspects of the recent political situation and the deadlock in the implementation of the Belfast Agreement is the lack of vision and futuristic thinking displayed by key sections of the Irish Government. It goes without saying that it has failed in its obligations to implement its part of the Belfast Agreement in the few key areas which were left to it. While the issue of human rights has been addressed in Northern Ireland and, rightly or wrongly, a Commission of Human Rights has been in existence for three years working on a Human Rights Bill, despite the clear obligation in the Belfast Agreement it is only now that the Dublin Government is making moves to catch up.
The Belfast Agreement required the Irish Government to take steps of "at least the equivalent level" to that being made available in the part of the United Kingdom called Northern Ireland. Yet this is only, reluctantly and with much bad grace, happening now.
In the area of parity of esteem or, as directly quoted from the agreement, "treating with equal respect the different traditions on the island", the Irish Government has not only made no progress but has actually made this course of action more difficult. The Ulster Scots Agency, which was set up under the agreement alongside its Irish counterpart, has not been afforded equality, parity of esteem or even respect.
While our remit is to promote throughout Ireland not just the language of Ulster Scots but also the culture, we have been given a budget which is only 10 per cent of our Irish colleagues' whose remit covers only language. Is that equal respect for the traditions on the island of Ireland? The very size of our board, only half that of our Irish colleagues, does not suggest parity of esteem or equality.
A gold-plated opportunity was available from the agreement for the Irish Government to show generosity of spirit to the Ulster Scots national minority, most of whom relate culturally with the majority in Northern Ireland.
The major reason there are determined unionists in Northern Ireland is their fear of being bullied and marginalised at the hands of the Irish Government. Was the gold-plated opportunity to prove unionist fears wrong and even dumbfound a sceptical population grasped with both hands by Dublin? No it was not.
If we in Northern Ireland - and as an Ulster Unionist I am expected to spend time and effort at considerable political and other inconvenience to work the agreement - surely it is not unreasonable to expect the Government of the Irish Republic to play its part? More than 90 per cent of voters in the Republic voted that under the agreement the monocultural society in the South had to change to be inclusive and to accommodate those who do not hold the majority cultural views, religious or political. Most importantly, the anti-British, anti-unionist, anti-Ulster Scots and even anti-Protestant ethos has to be changed. While I find much support and understanding for the needs of change from ordinary citizens in the Republic, I find the brick wall is a determined section, thankfully small, in the Dublin Government who can see only a monocultural Ireland offering no respect to its national minority and triumphantly proclaiming on every occasion Irish republicanism.
Employment practices and other elements of society, which would no longer be allowed in any part of Northern Ireland, by mutual consent and agreement are widely practised in every part of the Republic. A police service which may or may not be representative of the entire community is under political control. Small ethnic groups, not just Ulster Scots, are ignored in the political process. The opportunity to show goodwill, good faith and mutual respect and understanding of inclusiveness has been squandered by the Dublin Government. In the long term, the people of the Republic may come to regret this lost opportunity.
Lord Laird of Artigarvan is chairman of the Ulster Scots Agency