A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.

International Portfolio Investments and The Informational Value of Trade

A large volume of literature suggests that information asymmetry resulting from the spatial separation between investors and investments have a significant impact on the composition of investors’ domestic and international portfolios. I show that institutional factors affecting trading in tangible goods help explain a substantial portion of investors’ spatial bias. More importantly, I demonstrate that an information flow medium with breadth and richness directly linked to the bilateral commitment of resources between countries, that I measure by their trading intensity in tangible goods, is consistent with the prevailing country allocation in investors’ international portfolios.

Trade Blocs and the Cold War : The CMEA and the EC challenge, 1969-1976

The coherence of the Soviet bloc was seriously tested at the turn of the 1970s, as the Soviet Union and its allies engaged in intensive negotiations over their relations with the European Communities (EC). In an effort to secure their own national economic interests many East European countries began independent manoeuvres against the wishes of their bloc leader. However, much of the intra-bloc controversy was kept out of the public eye, as the battle largely took place behind the scenes, within the organisation for economic cooperation, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA). The CMEA policy-making process vis-à-vis the EC is described in this study with reference to primary archival materials. This study investigates the negotiating positions and powers of the CMEA member states in their efforts to deal with the economic challenge created by the progress of the EC, as it advanced towards the customs union. This entails an analysis of the functioning principles and performance of the CMEA machinery. The study traces the CMEA negotiations that began in 1970 over its policy toward the EC. The policy was finally adopted in 1974, and was followed by the first official meeting between the two organisations in early 1975. The story ends in 1976, when the CMEA s efforts to enter into working relations with the EC were seemingly frustrated by the latter. The first major finding of the study is that, contrary to much of the prior research, the Soviet Union was not in a hegemonic position vis-à-vis its allies. It had to use a lot of its resources to tame the independent manoeuvring of its smaller allies. Thus, the USSR was not the kind of bloc leader that the totalitarian literature has described. Because the Soviet Union had to spend so much attention on its own bloc-politics, it was not able to concentrate on formulating a policy vis-à-vis the EC. Thus, the Soviet leadership was dependent on its allies in those instances when the socialist countries needed to act as a bloc. This consequently opened up the possibility for the USSR s allies to manoeuvre. This study also argues that when the CMEA did manage to find a united position, it was a force that the EC had to reckon with in its policy-making. This was particularly the case in the implementation of the EC Common Commercial Policy. The other main finding of the study is that, although it has been largely neglected in the previous literature on the history of West European integration, the CMEA did in fact have an effect on EC decision-making. This study shows how for political and ideological reasons the CMEA members did not acknowledge the EC s supranational authority. Therefore the EC had no choice but to refrain from implementing its Common Commercial Policy in full.

Control of Disease in Aquaculture: Proceedings of the Nineteenth U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture, Ise, Mie Prefecture, Japan, 29-30 October 1990, Satellite Symposium: 2 November

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was begun during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964, In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program include desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include increased communication and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy-coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 150 pages.)

Marine Ranching: Proceedings of the Seventeenth U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture Ise, Mie Prefecture, Japan October 16, 17, and 18, 1988, Satellite Symposium: October 20

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was begun during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program include desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include increased communication and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy-coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 186 pages.)

Genetics in Aquaculture: Proceedings of the Sixteenth U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture Charleston, South Carolina October 20 and 21, 1987

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was begun during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program include desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communication and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy-coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 88 pages.)

Marine farming and enhancement: Proceedings of the Fifteenth U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture, Kyoto, Japan October 22-23, 1986

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was begun during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program include desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communication and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy-coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 134 pages.)

New and innovative advances in biology/engineering with potential for use in aquaculture: Proceedings of the Fourteenth U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, October 16-17, 1985

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was begun during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program include desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communication and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy-coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 76 pages.)

Environmental quality and aquaculture systems: Proceedings of the Thirteenth U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture, Mie, Japan, October 24-25, 1984

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was begun during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program include desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air population, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communication and cooperation among tecbnical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a· policy-coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 56 pages.)

Reproduction, maturation, and seed production of cultured species: Proceedings of the Twelfth U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, October 25-29, 1983

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was begun during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program include desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communication and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy-coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 79 pages.)

Proceedings of the Eleventh U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture, Salmon Enhancement, Tokyo, Japan, October 19-20, 1982

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was started by a proposal made during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program are desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communications and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy coordinative body; administrative staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 108 pages.)

Proceedings of the Ninth and Tenth U.S.-Japan Meetings on Aquaculture

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was started by a proposal made during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program are desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communications and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy coordinative body; administration staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations. (PDF file contains 98 pages.)

Proceedings of the Seventh U.S.-Japan Meeting on Aquaculture, Marine Finfish Culture, Tokyo, Japan, October 3-4, 1978

The United States and Japanese counterpart panels on aquaculture were formed in 1969 under the United States-Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The panels currently include specialists drawn from the federal departments most concerned with aquaculture. Charged with exploring and developing bilateral cooperation, the panels have focused their efforts on exchanging information related to aquaculture which could be of benefit to both countries. The UJNR was started by a proposal made during the Third Cabinet-Level Meeting of the Joint United States-Japan Committee on Trade and Economic Affairs in January 1964. In addition to aquaculture, current subjects in the program are desalination of seawater, toxic microorganisms, air pollution, energy, forage crops, national park management, mycoplasmosis, wind and seismic effects, protein resources, forestry, and several joint panels and committees in marine resources research, development, and utilization. Accomplishments include: Increased communications and cooperation among technical specialists; exchanges of information, data, and research findings; annual meetings of the panels, a policy coordinative body;' administration staff meetings; exchanges of equipment, materials, and samples; several major technical conferences; and beneficial effects on international relations.(PDF file contains 37 pages.)

Market survey of the periwinkle Tympanotonus fuscatus in Rivers State: Sizes, prices, trade routes and exploitation levels

Tympanotonus fuscatus was collected from 23 markets through Rivers State (Nigeria), a few in neighbouring states, and from an unexploited population at Buguma. The size distribution of shells was determined,and information on prices and trade routes was also obtained. The mean shell length of specimens from the unexploited Buguma population was 46.4 mm, compared to 30.4 mm for the Buguma market samples. Mean sizes in other markets showed a geographic pattern: the smallest were from the Adoni-Ogoni-Opobo sector (28.1-30.9); the largest were from the Nembe-Brass sector (37.7-44.2) and Bendel State (35.7-45.6); The results suggest the population structure of Tympanotonus in much of Rivers State has been strongly impacted by overharvesting. They show that local market as well as some in Cross River State, are increasingly being supplied by road with specimens from the Benin River area of Bendel State. Differences between shell types; and relations between shell size, selling price and market distance from source, are also discussed

Anglo-Irish relations in the framework of the EEC and Northern Ireland, 1969-1975

This thesis will analyse Anglo-Irish relations between 1969 and 1975, when two topics dominated the relationship: Northern Ireland and the entry of Britain and Ireland into the European Economic Community (hereafter EEC). In 1969 entry to the EEC was still only a possibility and awaited political developments, while the Northern Ireland problem had yet to escalate. 1975 on the other hand confirmed that Ireland would remain in the EEC even if Britain left while Direct Rule for Northern Ireland was confirmed as the British policy for the foreseeable future. These dates are significant because they encompass firstly pre and post entry to the EEC and how this transformed Anglo-Irish relations. Secondly they contain the commencement and then deterioration of the Northern Ireland problem and the attempts to resolve it that finally led to direct rule by Westminster. The study will examine the fluctuating nature of the relationship between Britain and Ireland. Special regard will be devoted to the demands of internal British politics and how such demands affected the relationship. Overall, the study will demonstrate how the bilateral relationship evolved under the pressure of events in Northern Ireland and adapted to the multilateral context of the EEC. It will compare the dynamics of the states’ interactions in two extremely different areas. The thesis will demonstrate how entry to the EEC transformed the unequal Anglo-Irish economic relationship and created one of partners within the EEC. It will also analyse how the developing Northern Ireland problem caused changes to British policy. In particular, it will examine how the British Government came to recognise the beneficial role that the Republic of Ireland might play in resolving the Troubles in Northern Ireland.