A chara,

The proposed review is very welcome. I would have dearly liked to have the time
to prepare a more detailed submission, but unfortunately work pressures have
militated against it!
I write from the perspective of a social psychologist who has carried out research
on Irish diasporic identity, particularly in England. A list of my relevant
publications can be found here. From the level of expertise I have built up in
studying Irish identity abroad, I would offer the following observations:
-

The acknowledgement in the consultation paper that the Irish Diaspora is

not a homogenous group is welcome, but this is not always apparent in
government and public discourse within Ireland. A greater level of
engagement with the full implications of what the term diaspora actually
means would be welcome. It is simply not the case, as regularly suggested
within Ireland, that there are 70 million people worldwide who call Ireland
home the picture is far more nuanced than that.
Identifying with Irishness is not the same thing as identifying with
Ireland. This is a more important distinction than might be apparent. The
idea that the Irish State has a monopoly on the ownership of authentic
Irishness ignores the forms of diasporic hybridised Irishness that have
developed in different parts of the world. Therefore, any attempt at
engaging the diaspora that involves selling peoples Irish identity back to
them, such as was the case with the Certificates of Irish Heritage, are
misguided.
A distinction should potentially be drawn between those Irish abroad who
lead transnational lives, and those who lead diasporic lives. The former
may be said to have one foot still in Ireland, so to speak maintaining
contact through regular visits, online media, social media, financial ties
etc. This characterises the lives of many recent migrants while such lives
may have been characterised in the past as being caught between two
countries, they are now rapidly becoming the norm. Diasporic lives on the
other hand refer more to a sense of Irishness, which may or may not be a
primary identification, rather than necessarily with day-to-day links with
contemporary Ireland: this characterises the identities of many of those of
Irish descent (who may also be of English, Jamaican, Indian, Italian,
Chinese, Argentinian descent etc.). While it is right that Ireland as a
nation-state should seek to foster a relationship with both these groups, a
one-size-fits-all approach would not be appropriate.
Engaging with the more hybridised forms of Irishness found in the
diaspora should be thought of as a form of cultural exchange, rather than
exporting Irishness to the diaspora.
There is a tendency within Ireland to exaggerate the size of the diaspora
based on rather dubious statistics. For example, the oft-cited figure of the
70 million strong Irish diaspora does not have any basis in anything but
the loosest statistical reality. This may seem harmless, but I would argue
that it gets in the way of genuine diasporic engagement. For example,
debates about votes for citizens abroad are regularly hijacked by spurious
fears of swamping, if all 70 million would want the vote. Ideally, the
use of the 70 million figure would be phased out of government discourse.
While there is no harm in exploring the economic potential of engaging the
diaspora, suggestions that this is the primary, or indeed only motivation
for diaspora engagement are apt to cause resentment witness the

widespread agreement with Gabriel Byrnes shakedown comments in

reference to the Gathering. Language such as tapping or harnessing the
Diaspora should be avoided, as it suggests that those within the Diaspora
exist solely as an economic resource without any agency of their own.
There is a perception that diaspora engagement so far has only existed at
the elite level e.g. the Global Irish Economic Forum. It was suggested at
the recent Irish in Britain conference at the London Irish Centre that an
equivalent Global Irish Community Forum should be held for those working
with Irish communities worldwide. This strikes me as an excellent idea,
and would arguably provide a more accurate reflection of the multifaceted
ways in which those abroad engage with Ireland and Irishness.
Finally, and most importantly, Irish citizenship does not end the moment
one leaves Ireland. On a worldwide scale, Ireland neither ranks first nor
last in diaspora engagement terms its dedication to the welfare of its
needier citizens abroad through the Emigrant Support Programme is
commendable, while on the other hand, there is a highly-developed
concept of diaspora as sales force (dubious though that characterisation
may be). A facet that Ireland has so far failed to develop is a concept of
diaspora citizenship, particularly in relation to the stake Irish citizens
abroad continue to have in the governance of the country. Towards this
end, putting into practice the recommendations of the Constitutional
Convention regarding voting rights in Presidential elections, and extending
this to establish some form of representation in the Oireachtais, is
essential, and long overdue.

I am willing for all, or part of this submission to be released or published.

Is mise,
Marc Scully.