Discussion on a United or re-partitioned Ireland

[DannyInvincible]

As much as a I fully agree with the statement as it pertains to the north and would compliment the government on pushing for it, the idea that it came about because we were "good Europeans" during the crash and after makes my skin crawl a little.

Denis Staunton (http://www.irishtimes.com/profile/denis-staunton-7.1837495)'s insightful piece laying out how "Irish prominence in EU negotiating guidelines is due to months of graft and cunning" makes for interesting reading.

'How Ireland achieved a crucial Brexit coup': http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/how-ireland-achieved-a-crucial-brexit-coup-1.3066703


The prominence of Ireland’s issues in the EU’s guidelines, including a statement guaranteeing that Northern Ireland could automatically rejoin the EU as part of a united Ireland, is the product of an unprecedented political and diplomatic effort that began even before the UK voted to leave the EU. The State’s efforts have required strategic planning, detailed analysis, cunning and the cultivation and exploitation of personal relationships.

When David Cameron announced a UK referendum on its EU membership, the Government decided that, unlike in the 2014 vote on Scottish independence, the Republic would actively advocate for a Remain vote. Ahead of the campaign, Irish officials made assessments of the potential impact of Brexit on the economy, trade, the Border, the peace process and the movement of people between Britain and Ireland. So when Britain voted to leave, the State was better prepared than most other EU member states to make its concerns heard in Brussels and other European capitals.

Applauding a Blueshirt is difficult, but perhaps I'd been a tad unfair (http://foot.ie/threads/178393-Discussion-on-a-United-or-re-partitioned-Ireland?p=1917904&viewfull=1#post1917904) on Enda and the government earlier.

[Charlie Darwin]

You've really taken to this only quoting two paragraphs business!

[DannyInvincible]

Bertie Ahern and Leo Varadkar appear to be keen on shifting the goalposts insofar as a unity referendum under the agreed terms of the Good Friday Agreement is concerned: http://www.northernslant.com/leo-and-bertie-are-wrong-of-course-50-per-cent1-is-enough/


Ahern recently told (https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/0406/865735-brexit/) a Seanad committee on Brexit that the only time there should be a vote on unity is when ‘the nationalists and republicans and a respectable, sizeable amount of unionists and loyalists are in favour, and on the basis of consent.’ Varadkar made a similar point, claiming it was actually ‘alarming (http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sinn-feins-push-for-border-poll-alarming-says-varadkar-35585809.html)’ to hear talk of a border poll. ‘It is a return to a mind set in which a simple sectarian majority of 50 per cent plus one is enough to cause a change in the constitutional status of the North,’ he told Fine Gael members earlier this month.

The problem, of course, is that if 50 per cent, plus one, of the Northern Ireland electorate votes for reunification in a border poll, then that does indeed represent consent for change. It has to. Unless, of course, we’re now going to see the Good Friday Agreement retro-fitted with a fundamental precondition about the nature of what constitutes an acceptable majority? In which case, we also need to alert the rest of the democratic world that a numerical majority in a vote is no longer good enough to determine the result.

Bertie's recent pronouncement is particularly odd considering he played such a central role in facilitating and finalising negotiations for the agreement during the latter stages of the peace process.

The fact is that unionists have already democratically agreed upon the the future terms of the unity referendum; to renege on that and demand a change to the agreement as soon as its terms are no longer convenient for them would be unacceptably poor form.

The rest of Meagher (https://twitter.com/KevinPMeagher)'s piece is worth a read; he confidently asserts that "Irish reunification increasingly represents the rational, evidence-based way forward". As a former special adviser to the previous Labour government's secretary of state for the north, Shaun Woodward, his contributions to the debate are both welcome and interesting.

[The Fly]

I wouldn't be too surprised by that Danny, sure you even get people up here coming out with that nonsense.

The naivety displayed by some nationalists amazes me at times.

[DannyInvincible]

I wouldn't be too surprised by that Danny, sure you even get people up here coming out with that nonsense.

The naivety displayed by some nationalists amazes me at times.

I've also seen it written (by nationalist/republican commentators), and have often heard it repeated unfortunately, that if an initial unity referendum fails to deliver unity, there has to be another one every six/seven years until unity is achieved, supposedly under the terms of the GFA. Here (http://www.judecollins.com/2017/03/assembly-election-2017-case-british-withdrawal-donal-lavery/), for example.


Bare in mind that even if the first border poll fails, there has to be another every six years until unity is decided upon.

This is a total misunderstanding of what the GFA actually states and it is worth striking it down and correcting it when it raises its head as misleading information like this could breed misguided complacency.

The section of the GFA (http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/NIPeaceAgreement.pdf#page=4) relating to the calling of a referendum states:


“1. The Secretary of State may by order direct the holding of a poll for the purposes of section 1 on a date specified in the order.

2. Subject to paragraph 3, the Secretary of State shall exercise the power under paragraph 1 if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland.

3. The Secretary of State shall not make an order under paragraph 1 earlier than seven years after the holding of a previous poll under this Schedule.”

There is no obligation therein to keep holding a poll every seven years (or six, wherever that notion came out of) until unity is achieved. Paragraph 3 simply means that a subsequent border poll cannot be called by the secretary of state within seven years of the previous one.

[DannyInvincible]

TheJournal.ie are currently running a poll asking: "Do you think a united Ireland is likely to happen anytime soon?": http://www.thejournal.ie/united-ireland-poll-2-3367490-May2017/

The results (as of the time writing this post) show that, of just over 16,600 participants, 84 per cent believe a united Ireland will happen at some point in the future, whilst 52 per cent of those 16,600 participants see it happening within the next twenty years. Only 14 per cent think it will never happen.

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc12/poguemahone85/Capture_zpswyjs0fho.png

(I'm not sure where the missing two per cent are...)

Self-selecting polls are admittedly of limited anecdotal-type value, but can be interesting nonetheless. The article also mentions another poll (http://www.thejournal.ie/united-ireland-poll-3145062-Dec2016/) conducted by Claire Byrne Live and Amárach Research (http://www.rte.ie/tv/programmes/clairebyrnelive.html), however, in which 59 per cent of those who gave a positive or negative response (deleting the "don't knows") agreed that it is time to have a united Ireland.

http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/3145119/original/?width=614&version=3145119

A new 1,200-word evidence-based report - entitled 'Brexit and the Future of Ireland: Uniting Ireland and Its People in Peace and Prosperity' - that outlines in detail what needs to happen to achieve a peaceful reunification of Ireland will also be discussed by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement next week. More info on that here: http://www.thejournal.ie/united-ireland-2-3364240-Apr2017/

The wheels of unity really have been set in motion.

[The Fly]

I've also seen it written (by nationalist/republican commentators), and have often heard it repeated unfortunately, that if an initial unity referendum fails to deliver unity, there has to be another one every six/seven years until unity is achieved, supposedly under the terms of the GFA. Here (http://www.judecollins.com/2017/03/assembly-election-2017-case-british-withdrawal-donal-lavery/), for example.

...

There is no obligation therein to keep holding a poll every seven years (or six, wherever that notion came out of) until unity is achieved. Paragraph 3 simply means that a subsequent border poll cannot be called by the secretary of state within seven years of the previous one.

Indeed, but if any upcoming so-called border poll delivered a result that maintained the status quo I think it's reasonable to assume that another would be called in 7 to 10 years time. The proverbial genie would out of the bottle.

[DannyInvincible]

I understand these to be the final and agreed European Council guidelines for Brexit negotiations: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/04/29-euco-brexit-guidelines/

The paragraph relating to Ireland reads as follows:


11. The Union has consistently supported the goal of peace and reconciliation enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts, and continuing to support and protect the achievements, benefits and commitments of the Peace Process will remain of paramount importance. In view of the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland, flexible and imaginative solutions will be required, including with the aim of avoiding a hard border, while respecting the integrity of the Union legal order. In this context, the Union should also recognise existing bilateral agreements and arrangements between the United Kingdom and Ireland which are compatible with EU law.

There's nothing further relating to Ireland in the document, as far as I can make out, so where exactly is the guarantee, which I assume has to be written somewhere, that the north will be able to maintain its EU status via Irish unity?

Although Gerry Adams welcomed the confirmation that the north would resume full status with the EU following a successful unity referendum, he seemed to think the Irish government could have harnessed greater support from Europe and might have secured stronger guarantees if it had done so: http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/44399


Today’s extraordinary meeting of the European Council was very important for Ireland, north and south. There was a high level of media spin that the Irish government would deliver in the national interest. It is disappointing and deeply concerning that even at the first hurdle that the Irish government has once again fallen short. The European Council guidelines should have gone considerably further. There is support for Ireland in Europe and the Taoiseach has failed to harness it.

...

The best way to secure Ireland’s future is through designated special status for the North within the EU. This can still be achieved, if this objective becomes a priority for An Taoiseach. The government needs to discuss with our EU partners; how all of Ireland can remain members of the Single Market and the Common Travel area, how EU funding streams can continue to be accessed, how the rights of Irish citizens in the north will be delivered, how trading arrangements, north and south and between Ireland and Britain are protected. And critically how the Good Friday Agreement is preserved in all its parts, because that is how we will continue to advance the peace process.

Meanwhile, Dr. Janice Morphett, a planning expert with University College London, has shed some light on a potential means to soften any potential hard border in Ireland: http://www.centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk/blog/brexit-and-island-ireland


There is one approach that could give some certainty to the relationships across the border on the island of Ireland that could be implemented now and could bridge Brexit into whatever follows. This is using an EU Regulation that supports the creation of agreements of European Groupings for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC).

The EGTC allows public bodies in different member states to come together under a new entity with a full legal personality and is designed to ‘facilitate and promote territorial cooperation (cross-border, transnational and interregional). This can include the provision of investment, public services and other cross border agreements and running public transport services, hospitals, managing development projects, exchanging good practices. The EGTC can be established by two or more member states. The Regulation also allows the inclusion of third party states that are not part of the EU. The EGTC can include public bodies and local and regional authorities and it must have an assembly comprising of representatives of the area and a director. The EGTC’s activities are defined through its establishment and it must set a budget and a work programme. EGTCs can be in receipt of EU funding but may also include other funding streams in their programmes.

[DannyInvincible]

There's nothing further relating to Ireland in the document, as far as I can make out, so where exactly is the guarantee, which I assume has to be written somewhere, that the north will be able to maintain its EU status via Irish unity?

Just saw this, which answers my question above: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/brexit-summit-eu-accepts-united-ireland-declaration-1.3066569


The declaration on Ireland, which echoes the experience of East Germany after German unification in 1990, will be recorded as a “statement for the minutes”, the equivalent of council conclusions at a formal summit.

[The Fly]

Bertie Ahern and Leo Varadkar appear to be keen on shifting the goalposts insofar as a unity referendum under the agreed terms of the Good Friday Agreement is concerned: http://www.northernslant.com/leo-and-bertie-are-wrong-of-course-50-per-cent1-is-enough/



Bertie's recent pronouncement is particularly odd considering he played such a central role in facilitating and finalising negotiations for the agreement during the latter stages of the peace process.


I just wanted to expand on my earlier reply as I didn't have the time to before.

Aside from the probable politics at play in the contributions from Bertie and Leo, their comments are also indicative of a general naivety that one encounters amongst a fair number of nationalists. In effect what they are asking for is for unionists to no longer be unionist; this can be achieved because they aren't really British at all and simply labour under some sort of false consciousness.

What they don't get is that Ulster unionism, in essence, is a form of British nationalism and that the vast majority of unionists will never vote for reunification even if it was proven that they'd be better off in such a scenario. The union, or, more to the point, identity, is about more than just economics.

[Charlie Darwin]

I just wanted to expand on earlier reply as I didn't have the time to before.

Aside from the probable politics at play in the contributions from Bertie and Leo, their comments are also indicative of a general naivety that one encounters amongst a fair number of nationalists. In effect what they are asking for is for unionists to no longer be unionist; this can be achieved because they aren't really British at all and simply labour under some sort of false consciousness.

What they don't get is that Ulster unionism, in essence, is a form of British nationalism and that the vast majority of unionists will never vote for reunification even if it was proven that they'd be better off in such a scenario. The union, or, more to the point, identity, is about more than just economics.
Either that or they're fully aware of what UU is and they are perfectly happy to put any issue of a UI on the long finger because they have no intention of dealing with it honestly.

[The Fly]

Either that or they're fully aware of what UU is and they are perfectly happy to put any issue of a UI on the long finger because they have no intention of dealing with it honestly.

Yeah, there's also that.

[DannyInvincible]

Something further from Slugger in relation to the nonsense spouted by Bertie: https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/05/01/if-you-want-trouble-again-in-the-north-play-that-game-its-a-dangerous-game/

I thought the following comment (https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/05/01/if-you-want-trouble-again-in-the-north-play-that-game-its-a-dangerous-game/#comment-3285546842) succinctly demonstrated the illogic of Bertie's position, which contradicts the terms set out in the GFA besides:


It is not possible to decide the constitutional issue on a cross-community basis. This should be more than obvious as there is clearly there is no cross-community consent for keeping Northern Ireland in the UK.

Aside from this it is clearly nonsense to say that a united Ireland could only happen if a majority of Unionists support it, given that this is a contradiction. 100% of all Unionists at any given time will by definition will be opposed to a united Ireland, even if the Unionist electorate shrunk down to one person.

[backstothewall]

Anything but 50%+1 is impossible to justify in practice. In the event that 52% vote for ending partition it simply must happen. If 52% doesn't justify unity how can 48% possibly justify the union?

Bertie and Leo can say what they like.

[DannyInvincible]

Michel Barnier, the EU's chief negotiator for Brexit, announced in his address to the Dáil today that there would be at least a customs border on the island post-Brexit.


Brexit changes the external borders of the EU. I will work with you to avoid a hard border.

The UK’s departure from the EU will have consequences. We have a duty to speak the truth.

Customs controls are part of EU border management. They protect the single market. They protect our food safety and our standards.

Text of the full speech here: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-1276_en.htm

And video here:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPS4yiTkKJE

[DannyInvincible]

"French farmers call for ‘hard’ border between Republic and Northern Ireland": http://www.independent.ie/business/farming/eu/french-farmers-call-for-hard-border-between-republic-and-northern-ireland-35721095.html


[The leader of an influential regional French farmers association Christophe Hillairet] said that he was afraid that the UK would sign agreements to import food from the Commonwealth and that he was particularly concerned by how these imports might find their way into the Republic and the wider EU.

Quoted in Agra Europe today, Monsieur Hillairet is said that “Ireland is a big problem but for the French farmer we will need to have a hard border between the north and the Republic as otherwise we will have a lot of products that will cross from north to south. That would be very dangerous for our producers.”

[DannyInvincible]

Here's a subtitled Russian news report on the potential impact of Brexit upon the Irish border:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-tJMFDeTA8

The Russian reporter visits Derry city, the Donegal border and Belfast, with most of the focus being on Derry, but it's interesting to hear a take on local matters from beyond Europe.

[DannyInvincible]

This report on a similar theme is actually pretty amusing:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK2Wis7cfXg

It provides a brief outline of Irish-British history, but it's certainly nothing like what the BBC (or even RTÉ) would produce anyway! ;)

[CraftyToePoke]

That last one is f*ckin quality :)

''history in Ireland as in Russia is a living matter and the blood rivers the British shed in Ireland are not forgotten''

Indeed comrade, indeed.

[Gather round]

Zdravstvitye Tovarishch, afternoon all.

Just switched on Twitter and did a double-take as a smiling McGuinness endorsed the SF candidate in Derry. Party Marty's son Fiachra, looks very like his father

[DannyInvincible]

That last one is f*ckin quality :)

''history in Ireland as in Russia is a living matter and the blood rivers the British shed in Ireland are not forgotten''

Indeed comrade, indeed.

They devoted great prominence to the existence of the short-lived Limerick soviet of 1919. I can't for the life of me think why...

We also, "like [the Russians], remember everything", ha. Is this another subtle dig at forgetful Britain's expense? Of course, it was GK Chesterton who once remarked that "the tragedy of the English conquest of Ireland in the 17th century is that the Irish can never forget it and the English can never remember it".

[DannyInvincible]

Zdravstvitye Tovarishch, afternoon all.

Just switched on Twitter and did a double-take as a smiling McGuinness endorsed the SF candidate in Derry. Party Marty's son Fiachra, looks very like his father

Afternoon!

He does indeed:

https://yt3.ggpht.com/-k5Lz1Q1AUJI/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAAA/Ph7KjER9ajM/s900-c-k-no-mo-rj-c0xffffff/photo.jpg

[osarusan]

We can't be uniting with any part of anything where people dress like that.

[DannyInvincible]

'More than 50 per cent of people in the North want a border poll at some point over the next five years': https://www.thesun.ie/news/1017253/northern-ireland-politics-border-poll/


A poll reveals 51 per cent back a vote over the North’s place in the UK at some point in the next five years. The Irish Sun survey [conducted by LucidTalk], in conjunction with Belfast radio station U105, also shows 52.8 per cent endorse bringing in an Irish Language Act.

...

Examining the support for a referendum on Northern Ireland’s constitutional future reveals that among Catholics, 75.8 per cent back a border poll while 16 per cent are against such a move. Among Protestants, 26.3 per cent are for it while 68.3 per cent are against.

In terms of an Irish Language Act, 30.5 per cent of Protestants back the idea while 52 per cent are against it. Among Catholics, a resounding 90 per cent want an Irish Language Act and four per cent oppose.

Meanwhile, accounting for all communities, 39.4 per cent of people oppose a referendum on unity whilst only 22.78 per cent oppose an Irish language act.

[DannyInvincible]

In a rather unexpected development, Colum Eastwood - usually one to cool or defer talk of a unity referendum - has been making explicit noises about such a referendum potentially being held after Brexit takes effect: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sdlp-calls-for-border-poll-on-united-ireland-after-brexit-negotiations-1.3101566

He stated the following at the SDLP's election manifesto launch when asked about his position on a referendum: https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/05/30/colum-eastwood-argues-for-a-border-poll-after-brexit-process/


I want a border poll, we’ve just made it a lot more winnable, because of the work that Mark and our MPs did in Westminster with David Davis. The work that we did in negotiations when we were talking about lots of different things, we were talking to the British Secretary of State with making sure that we get re-entry into the European Union…

We think there is a route for actually winning a border poll… I think that will need to happen after Brexit.

According to David McCann of Slugger O'Toole:


Eastwood did stress that it was important to work on engaging with Unionists and building a reconciled Ireland, rather than focusing on just getting better election results. He argued for a Unity Poll to be seen as a key part of rejoining the EU, rather than a narrowly focused issue.

There is no express mention of a referendum in the SDLP's actual manifesto (http://www.sdlp.ie/site/assets/files/43536/manifesto_2017_low_res.pdf), nor has Eastwood specified a time-frame, other than saying he thinks it will need to happen after Brexit, but it's an interesting development nonetheless to have the SDLP now pushing for a referendum too. Let's hope it's not just an electioneering tactic.

[DannyInvincible]

Brian Walker on Slugger O'Toole asks some questions to ponder over the next few years and emphasises the need for James Brokenshire to outline how exactly he'll judge "when it appears likely to him" that a majority of the northern electorate would vote for a united Ireland: https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/05/30/straight-after-next-weeks-election-it-will-be-incumbent-on-the-british-government-to-spell-terms-and-conditions-for-holding-a-unity-referendum-and-dublin-will-not-be-left-out/


Here is a run of questions for consideration.

Should the GFA be renegotiated to require the decision on a Northern referendum to be taken jointly by the two governments?

Should the perceived gap of an arbitrary seven years between two referendums in the North (border polls), survive?

Under the present law, how does the secretary of state judge “what seems likely to him” that a majority of the electorate would vote for a UI?


On a run of opinion polls and Life and Times surveys ? Some unionists are saying “ bring it on.” How long a run of polls and surveys? What questions?
Specially commissioned polls with the questions approved by the Electoral Commission?
A combined nationalist share of the vote in one, two or more regional elections of any kind?
A majority of members voting for it in the Assembly or any other regional election?
A simple, or cross community majority vote in the Assembly?
Without an Assembly, a people’s petition requiring Downing St’s criteria of 10,000 petitions to require a government response? Then 250,000 say to trigger a referendum?
A mix of polls, surveys and elections over an electoral cycle of five years?
The two referendums north and south are supposed to be concurrent. Does the Republic have an effective veto on UI if the North votes yes and they vote No? How might this be managed? If so what is the holding pattern for another go? The North must delay for seven years as the law stands.

The decision is for both parts of Ireland alone. But must the British government be neutral?

[DannyInvincible]

An in-depth presentation produced by the BBC looking at life along the Irish border: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/The_hardest_border

[BonnieShels]

I read through that yesterday evening. shame they confused the Irish Setter on the BÉ logo with a Greyhound. tut tut tut.

[DannyInvincible]

'UK tried to block Kenny move on unity clause': https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2017/0612/881978-brexit-unity-clause/


The so-called unity clause was to be inserted into the minutes of an extraordinary summit meeting in Brussels on 29 April. However, two days beforehand, Irish officials were subject to what one source described as a sustained diplomatic offensive by Britain to try to block the declaration. At one point officials from the British Department for Exiting the EU tried to set up a phone call between Mrs May and Mr Kenny on the issue. However, the officials were told that the phone call would not happen, and that Mr Kenny was sticking to his guns.

RTÉ News also understands there were phone calls to Dublin from the Northern Ireland Office, and calls from Downing Street to European Council officials in Brussels to try to get the declaration delayed until an EU summit at the end of June. Throughout, British officials made it clear that it could damage Mrs May in the middle of an election campaign.

It's good to know they were told where to go. :)

[BonnieShels]

I really enjoyed that read yesterday. It's like we always seemed to have the upperhand with the Tories re the north when Kenny was in power. Coveney is likely to be next MinFA. We'll see.

Last time we sent a Cork man to do our bidding; we all know what happened*.













*Obviously ignoring Peter Barry and Micheal Martin

[DannyInvincible]

Simon Coveney says the Irish government will insist on post-Brexit "special status" for the north of Ireland: http://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/government-will-insist-on-special-status-for-northern-ireland-coveney-says-35855713.html


You have heard talk about the need to ensure that we do not have the re-emergence of a hard border. And some people seem to be talking in the context of using technology to make sure that that isn’t the case. For me that misses the point totally.

This is not about finding a way of avoiding queues on roads, through better use of cameras and people being able to apply online for permits to transit between two jurisdictions. What we are insisting on achieving, is a special status for Northern Ireland that allows the interaction on this island as is currently the case to be maintained as close to the current norm as possible.

It’s not so much about a soft or hard border, it’s about an invisible border effectively that you don’t notice as you cross it, in terms of either physical barriers or indeed other barriers.

This seems to represent a welcome change in language and attitude from the government. Coveney's predecessor Charlie Flanagan was always reluctant to use the term "special status", but Coveney is now unequivocal in declaring what the Irish government desires.

[DannyInvincible]

Economist David McWilliams writes another piece that comprehensively dismantles unionism's economic case for continued partition, in the Belfast Telegraph, of all places!: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/news-analysis/demographics-are-shifting-towards-a-united-ireland-we-must-have-a-plan-35865222.html


Immigration is a good indicator of economic success. People move to places where they feel their kids will have a better life. Today in the Republic one in six people are foreign-born. In Northern Ireland it is one in a hundred.

If immigration tells you about foreign people’s choices, direct foreign investment tells you about the choices made by foreign capital. Since the Good Friday Agreement, American corporations alone have invested close to $400 bn (£312bn) in the Republic. This is equivalent to 56 years of the British Government’s annual subvention to keep Northern Ireland afloat!

The dependent nature of the NI economy has become endemic, with handouts from Whitehall replacing the urge to pay for itself. This is evidenced again by the DUP’s approach to propping up May’s government which has nothing to do with making Northern Ireland self-sufficient — in fact, it is nothing more that a subsidy junky’s shopping basket. This will make Northern Ireland’s economy more, not less, fragile.

[DannyInvincible]

I happened to come across the following video on YouTube of David McWilliams - as a guest on RTÉ's Prime Time back in 2014 - affirming the potential economic viability of Scottish independence:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLmveSJwQyM

The presenter David McCullagh made a point that also has relevance to the question of the potential economic viability of Irish re-unification. He posed the following to McWilliams:


"[The Scots] pay £53 billion a year in taxes, including oil taxes, and get £65 billion back, so you're starting with a £12 billion deficit..."

Of course, the north of Ireland receives a block grant or subvention of nearly the same amount as Scotland's annual budget deficit every year from Westminster - £10 billion reportedly - and re-unification sceptics or opponents often ask how the south would be able to afford that in the event of re-unification. McWilliams responded to McCullagh as follows in respect of Scotland:


"If you reduce economics to the budget deficit, you're actually putting the cart before the horse. The question is: 'How do you get there and can the Scottish economy be dynamic enough to generate revenue over the course of, let's say, ten years and to reduce its expenditure to narrow that budget deficit?' In actual fact, the budget deficit doesn't matter a lot as long as they can finance themselves and I have no doubt they can."

McWilliams went on in the clip to explain in greater detail why he believed Scotland could finance themselves, but his answer could equally be applied to a re-unified Irish economy.

Also, I think it's worth noting that the subvention received from the UK by the north of Ireland is actually a cost of partition. That doesn't mean that sum will translate into a cost of re-unification for the south in a post-unity scenario. To the contrary, a single, harmonious island economy, rather than two smaller competing economies on the one island, will be well capable of covering and surpassing the present cost of partition (http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/mairtin-o-muilleoir-partition-economy-3092098-Nov2016/). Evidently, it's partition that Ireland really can't afford afford; not re-unification.

Anyway, what I find so intriguing or novel about David McWilliams' very welcome contributions to the Irish re-unification debate is that he primarily comes at it from a rationalist perspective, rather than a romantic, sentimental or cultural one, considering he isn't from what many might regard as a traditionally nationalist or republican background. His grandparents were Scottish Protestants and his wife is an east Belfast Anglican.

[Gather round]

Anyway, what I find so intriguing or novel about David McWilliams' rationalist perspective...his wife is an east Belfast Anglican

Let's hope her irrationalist perspective doesn't influence his articles then...

[DannyInvincible]

Kevin Meagher (https://twitter.com/KevinPMeagher) spoke with George Galloway yesterday on the prospect of Irish unity in light of recent events:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ON-x2OfBSU

Meagher feels the DUP's deal with the Tories will make unity more likely. Paraphrasing, he outlines that the money from the DUP-Tory deal is going to be spent on things like underwriting the north's move next year to cut its corporation tax-rate to 12.5 per cent from 18 per cent to try and compete with the south, which obviously has had a much lower corporation tax-rate historically. The idea behind this move, he says, is that American and European investors will think there's not much difference between investing in the north and the south and so will be attracted to the north, but Meagher asserts that "there's not a single economist" of whom he knows that actually thinks the cut in the corporation tax-rate will make "a blind bit of difference" due to additional factors like Brexit and the south's continued access to the Single Market. The south will still remain the more attractive option for international investors, in Meagher's opinion. However, when the north makes the cut, he adds that there is a fiscal deficit that will need to be plugged and that part of the deal this week is about measures to address things like that as well.

Meagher continues:


Does that make a united Ireland more or less likely? I think it makes it more likely because a lot of the measures in this package that we've seen in the last 48 hours are there to try and improve and boost Northern Ireland's private sector. At the moment, Northern Ireland is reliant on a subvention from the British exchequer of about £10 billion a year, so its private sector is fairly tight. It's got a very big public sector and a very small private sector....

So, any measures that actually improve Northern Ireland's private sector - improve its competitiveness and its productivity - actually makes it much easier to sell to people in the south of Ireland, to think: 'We can take this place on. It's not a great big economic albatross that we're taking on. Actually, it's a place that's got some prospects.' ... If Northern Ireland starts to wash its face financially and is less reliant on the British exchequer, it makes it much, much easier in the sort of medium term - in the next five years - to integrate Northern Ireland into southern Ireland and have a single Irish state.

[DannyInvincible]

'Matt Carthy: Unionists have nothing to fear from a united Ireland': http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/matt-carthy-brexit-unionism-3472571-Jun2017/

[BonnieShels]

"Selling" the North to the Southern electorate was never gonna be a difficult thing. It would be overwhelmingly approved if it went to a ballot. Reunification is purely emotional thing for a lot of Nationalists. The cost is secondary. If reunification cost a billion a minute, it still wouldn't stop me voting yes.

Selling the South to the Northern Unionist however is a different game.

[osarusan]

"Selling" the North to the Southern electorate was never gonna be a difficult thing. It would be overwhelmingly approved if it went to a ballot. Reunification is purely emotional thing for a lot of Nationalists. The cost is secondary. If reunification cost a billion a minute, it still wouldn't stop me voting yes.

Selling the South to the Northern Unionist however is a different game.

Not just emotional for many people though. When the cost is taken into account, it gets more complicated:

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0304/857226-poll-united-ireland/


Using estimates from recent British government budget accounts, Ireland Thinks used a rough estimate of €9bn per annum as the cost for reunification.

Asked how they would vote in a referendum if the cost of a united Ireland was €9bn a year 33.1% said they would vote in favour while 32.5% said they would vote against and 34.4% were undecided.

When the undecided are excluded - 50.4% said they would vote in favour, 49.6% said they would vote against.

If I were campaigning in a unification referendum, I wouldn't be relying on just the emotional appeal, especially considering the devastating impact an Irish No to Unity vote would have.

I still think it would pass alright in the end.

But I wonder what the fine print of any such referendum would be.

[CraftyToePoke]

But I wonder what the fine print of any such referendum would be.

That they can burn all the tri colour painted stacks of pallets they want in bouts of cultural expression.

[Gather round]

That they can burn all the tri colour painted stacks of pallets they want in bouts of cultural expression

Aye, them boneys are terrible, such wanton intimidation. Even when they win a photography award...

http://res.cloudinary.com/jpress/image/fetch/w_700,f_auto,ar_3:2,c_fill/http://www.derryjournal.com/webimage/1.7887850.1490709257!/image/image.jpg

Anyway, apologies to DI for delay in response to latest long posts- my laptop conked out, which at least is a sign the Gorgeous Galloway filter's working ;)

Talking of the Maiden City, I notice that you divert attention from City's latest Eurothrashing with a dig at Brit consular officials in Riga for hampering Liepaja's visa applications for Belfast. Actually ye have a point- when my parents worked abroad for the Foreign Office, both the diplomats and local clerks never missed a chance to shut the shop and head for the Baltic equiv of Glastonbury- Trip to the Spit?

[DannyInvincible]

Talking of the Maiden City, I notice that you divert attention from City's latest Eurothrashing with a dig at Brit consular officials in Riga for hampering Liepaja's visa applications for Belfast. Actually ye have a point- when my parents worked abroad for the Foreign Office, both the diplomats and local clerks never missed a chance to shut the shop and head for the Baltic equiv of Glastonbury- Trip to the Spit?

It was a mere reporting of what I was told by someone who'd read about Liepāja's misfortune on Bert Kassies' forum rather than a "dig" aimed at anyone in particular. If I didn't know better, I'd say you were a wee bit paranoid. (http://foot.ie/threads/178393-Discussion-on-a-United-or-re-partitioned-Ireland?p=1912830&viewfull=1#post1912830) ;)

And Derry were very poor against Midtjylland; the result was a disaster. I acknowledged that in multiple posts throughout the match in the 'LOI clubs in Europe' thread. Crusaders' result, on the other, was an impressive one (even if Liepāja were missing half their first-team), so congrats on that. :)

(By the way, what's the Spit?) :confused:

[Gather round]

Ta for good wishes. Excellent performance by the Crues, although I'd have Liepaja as slight favorites now. Apparently only one or two of their exotic foreigners (Mauretania a fave source) would likely have started. But if we do hang on, the Shore Road is to be renamed Via Baltica in the team's honor ;)

The Curonian Spit is that long sandbank/ lagoon in the eastern Baltic. The Hatchet Hardcore are sunning themselves on it as we speak...

[Kingdom]

*Obviously ignoring Peter Barry and Micheal Martin

You're talking about Lynch, right....?

[DannyInvincible]

Saw this (https://twitter.com/DanMulhall/status/882535490666328064) tweet from Ireland's ambassador in London today pointing out that Ireland was ranked the eighth-best country to live in by the UN in their annual Human Development Report (http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf). The UK was ranked 16th.

[The Fly]

That'll convince them Danny. :p

[DannyInvincible]

Heh, unionists may take more convincing, certainly, but such facts might at least persuade those nationalists who presently favour a maintenance of the Union under the misguided belief that it is in their socio-economic interests to do so.

[The Fly]

Heh, unionists may take more convincing, certainly, but such facts might at least persuade those nationalists who presently favour a maintenance of the Union under the misguided belief that it is in their socio-economic interests to do so.

Whatever about nationalists, people really need to take the blinkers off when it comes to this notion of convincing unionists of the merits of unification.

[DannyInvincible]

Do you feel proponents of unity should abandon efforts to convince or reach out to unionists and, instead, rely on demographics (or nationalists becoming a majority, in other words)? Or would you suggest an alternative strategy? If so, what would it be?

Just as there is a segment of nationalists who can seemingly be swayed by the most appealing economic argument, in spite of their sentimental attachment to an all-Ireland cultural sense, there's surely also a portion of unionists - be they "soft" or progressive or whatever - who could similarly be swayed towards unity on economic (or even socio-political) grounds, especially if the Tories drive Britain further to the right, implement a hard Brexit, uphold austerity and continue dismantling the NHS. Even our resident unionist-with-a-small-'u' GR admitted he'd be swayable under such circumstances. ;)

Obviously, there are plenty of unionists/loyalists who are prepared to suffer financially/economically in order to maintain the connection with Britain - that's essentially what they're doing now and they're effectively imposing that increased hardship (relative to the rest of the island) upon thousands of unwilling others - but, theoretically-speaking, unity advocates need not convince every unionist of the merits of unity. Obviously, it would be ideal in practice if all unionists could be convinced of the merits of re-unification (or if they could at least be reassured that they have nothing to fear from re-unification and will be accepted as equals in a new Ireland), but, in order for a unity referendum to be successful, convincing all nationalists and even just a quarter of unionists would be enough as a bare minimum for it to pass. Every little helps.

In saying that, I don't think that would justify neglecting our duty to ensure that a united Ireland will be a comfortable and welcoming place for those who may remain sceptical.

[Gather round]

especially if the Tories drive Britain further to the right, implement a hard Brexit, uphold austerity and continue dismantling the NHS. Even our resident unionist-with-a-small-'u' GR admitted he'd be swayable under such circumstances. ;)

Of course I'm only 'virtually' resident, having lived for years outside Ireland.

Most big-U Unionists I've spoken to aren't swayable- their reaction is broadly similar to the Fly's ;)

[The Fly]

Do you feel proponents of unity should abandon efforts to convince or reach out to unionists and, instead, rely on demographics (or nationalists becoming a majority, in other words)? Or would you suggest an alternative strategy? If so, what would it be?

What I'm saying is that such efforts, although well meaning, amount largely to whistling in the wind and stem from this general belief that unionists labour under a false consciousness.


Just as there is a segment of nationalists who can seemingly be swayed by the most appealing economic argument, in spite of their sentimental attachment to an all-Ireland cultural sense, there's surely also a portion of unionists - be they "soft" or progressive or whatever - who could similarly be swayed towards unity on economic (or even socio-political) grounds, especially if the Tories drive Britain further to the right, implement a hard Brexit, uphold austerity and continue dismantling the NHS. Even our resident unionist-with-a-small-'u' GR admitted he'd be swayable under such circumstances. ;)

The geo-political aspect that Brexit has introduced is the most important factor here, much more so than Tory cuts. Unity is now 'inextricably linked' to the European Union.

As for our virtually resident unionist-with-a small-'u' GR, he's also responsible for the thread title.


Obviously, there are plenty of unionists/loyalists who are prepared to suffer financially/economically in order to maintain the connection with Britain - that's essentially what they're doing now and they're effectively imposing that increased hardship (relative to the rest of the island) upon thousands of unwilling others - but, theoretically-speaking, unity advocates need not convince every unionist of the merits of unity.

Your use of the words 'prepared to suffer' hint at the false consciousness I referred to above. It's kind of akin to wondering why people in Connaught are prepared to put up with the East-West economic imbalance in the South.


Obviously, it would be ideal in practice if all unionists could be convinced of the merits of re-unification (or if they could at least be reassured that they have nothing to fear from re-unification and will be accepted as equals in a new Ireland), but, in order for a unity referendum to be successful, convincing all nationalists and even just a quarter of unionists would be enough as a bare minimum for it to pass. Every little helps.

Yep, all that's needed is 50% +1. I'd estimate that that the maximum number of unionists that could be convinced lies in the 10 - 15% range. Anything above that is wishful thinking imo (at least at this present time).

Convincing nationalists en masse of unity is much more important.


In saying that, I don't think that would justify neglecting our duty to ensure that a united Ireland will be a comfortable and welcoming place for those who may remain sceptical.

Agreed and that goes without saying. My desire for unity has nothing to do with rubbing it up unionists. Unity will remain a completely toxic concept for them as long as Sinn Fein are chief cheerleaders. In order to make it much more tolerable what I would like to see next is the Southern political parties (FF & FG) organising in NI and standing candidates in elections.

The SDLP cannot provide real competition anymore and it's logical that this should happen in the wake of Brexit anyway.

Perhaps Brexit will prove to have taken the 'all-island' aspirations of the aforementioned parties out of the small print in their constitutions and into the reality.


Of course I'm only 'virtually' resident, having lived for years outside Ireland.

Most big-U Unionists I've spoken to aren't swayable- their reaction is broadly similar to the Fly's ;)

Indeed, and some will even consider re-partition if the prospect of unity appears solidly on the horizon. ;)