Vermont lawmakers debate creating Vermont Irish Trade Commission to deepen ties with Ireland

Representative Connor Casey, sponsor of legislation to create a Vermont Irish Trade Commission, told the House Committee on Commerce & Economic Development on May 22 that the commission’s purpose is “to foster support, expand economic, educational, cultural ties between the state of Vermont and the island of Ireland.”

Supporters said the commission would pursue trade and economic development, cultural and educational exchanges, government policy collaboration, tourism and diaspora engagement. Representative Molly Burke of Brattleboro and Representative Kate Paton of South Burlington joined Casey for the presentation and described successful exchanges and delegations that have visited Vermont from Irish officials.

The proposal draws on an Irish government model that has been adopted in almost 30 U.S. states, Casey said, and he argued Vermont could benefit from Ireland’s role as an English-speaking gateway to the European Union after Brexit. “Ireland is now the only English speaking country fully inside the European Union,” Casey said, adding that connections could help Vermont firms “match Vermont companies with Irish partners, investors, and EU networks.”

Committee members pressed for clarity about how the commission would differ from an in‑development sister‑state program and who in Vermont has been contacted by Irish officials. Casey said the outreach has included visits from the chair of Seanad Éireann and other Irish officials, and that the draft commission would be housed in the state Treasurer’s Office. He said the Treasurer requested a seat on the commission.

Some legislators expressed concern about creating a standalone statutory commission before finishing work on a broader sister‑state framework the committee is preparing. A number of members said they preferred to wait for the sister‑state report — due in December and expected to be available in January — before enacting new statutory institutions at the state level.

As a compromise, committee members discussed including the commission in S.122 with a delayed effective date so the sister‑state report could be considered. Committee staff indicated they would set the commission’s effective date for July 1, 2026, if the committee approved the bill. Supporters said a statutory commission carries more gravitas and enables appointments by the governor and legislative leaders; others said similar work could be done by nonprofits or by executive‑branch activity without statute.

No independent appropriation was required to create the commission in the draft before the committee, but sponsors said the commission would be able to solicit private funds to support travel and programming and that other states use that approach. Committee members also discussed whether to add explicit goals in statutory language; supporters said they were open to adding goals drawn from the presentation.

The committee ultimately voted to report S.122 (draft 1.5) favorably out of committee; that bill included the trade‑commission language alongside other provisions. During the discussion, members directed staff to set the commission’s effective date in the bill so the sister‑state review could run its course before the commission would take effect.

The committee’s debate highlighted three themes: supporters emphasized historical and cultural ties and potential economic opportunities with Ireland; some members sought guardrails and clearer statutory goals; and others preferred to await the sister‑state committee’s recommendations before enacting new statute. The draft language and an effective‑date compromise will move to the full Legislature for further consideration.