Discussion on a United or re-partitioned Ireland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter

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'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...coup-1.3066703

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denis Staunton

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 on Enda and the government earlier.

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

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...nt1-is-enough/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevin Meagher

Ahern recently told 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’ 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'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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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, for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donal Lavery

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 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.

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-irel...67490-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/c...pswyjs0fho.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 conducted by Claire Byrne Live and Amárach Research, 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/314...ersion=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-irel...64240-Apr2017/

The wheels of unity really have been set in motion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

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, 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.

I understand these to be the final and agreed European Council guidelines for Brexit negotiations: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/pr...it-guidelines/

The paragraph relating to Ireland reads as follows:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by European Council

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerry Adams

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.centreonconstitutionalcha...island-ireland

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Janice Morphett

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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...tion-1.3066569

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denis Staunton and Pat Leahy

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.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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...nt1-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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Fly

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

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.

Something further from Slugger in relation to the nonsense spouted by Bertie: https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/05/01...angerous-game/

I thought the following comment succinctly demonstrated the illogic of Bertie's position, which contradicts the terms set out in the GFA besides:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brendan Heading

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.

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michel Barnier

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...17-1276_en.htm

And video here:

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

"French farmers call for ‘hard’ border between Republic and Northern Ireland": http://www.independent.ie/business/f...-35721095.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ciaran Moran

[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.”

---

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.

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! ;)

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.

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