Gerry Adams has said that a poll on the future of the border in Ireland is inevtable!

LordSutch

Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams has said that a poll on the future of the border in Ireland is inevitable. Mr Adams was responding to remarks made by Northern Ireland Secretary Owen Paterson in the House of Commons last week, when he dismissed the possibility of a border poll being held.

So what do you think, is a border poll inevitable as claimed by Adams? and who would be driving the desire to have a border poll? Personally I think the North has no desire to leave the UK under the current circumstamces, and I honestly don't think that the Republic would be able to finance the North if it left the UK, so who is Gerry Adams addressing his comments to? and why now?

Source RTE News: http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0310/adamsg.html

Sunnyisland

It is inevitable, and about time all the Irish people on the Island of Ireland had a poll on the border, and personally I would think it would poll in favor to rid us of the border.

Just because we have a poll now does not mean it would go away overnight,It will take years maybe longer to implement,But at least by having a poll it would show what the Irish people want, As GA says it is all about the timing.

Foghladh

I wonder if Mr Adams might be slightly surprised if a poll were held tomo on the issue. I for one wouldn't be voting in favour unless there was a sizeable majority in favour up north of the border and I don't think that's going to be the case anytime soon.

This just smacks of a continued effort to keep SF in the newspapers as far as I'm concerned

Sunnyisland

Foghladha wrote: »

I wonder if Mr Adams might be slightly surprised if a poll were held tomo on the issue. I for one wouldn't be voting in favour unless there was a sizeable majority in favour up north of the border and I don't think that's going to be the case anytime soon.

This just smacks of a continued effort to keep SF in the newspapers as far as I'm concerned

It would still be good to have a poll never the less,To see what way the Irish people are thinking on this subject,and if voted no that be that for a long time at least.

junder

Maybe it is inevitable in several generations time, ironically though the biggest threat to the united Ireland project is peace, the longer we have normality in northern Ireland the more such abstract notions as united irelands seem less important

round tower huntsman

i was more interested in what brit minister paterson had to say regarding a poll. cant post link but its on bbc website.

Manach

Based on the principle of mutuality, I presume on the day we in the South get a poll about re-joining the UK?

Fenian Army

LordSutch wrote: »

Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams has said that a poll on the future of the border in Ireland is inevitable. Mr Adams was responding to remarks made by Northern Ireland Secretary Owen Paterson in the House of Commons last week, when he dismissed the possibility of a border poll being held.

So what do you think, is a border poll inevitable as claimed by Adams? and who would be driving the desire to have a border poll? Personally I think the North has no desire to leave the UK under the current circumstamces, and I honestly don't think that the Republic would not be able to finance the North if it left the UK, so who is Gerry Adams addressing his comments to? and why now?

Source RTE News: http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0310/adamsg.html

Patterson said something like there were "no plans" to have one. Gerry is saying its not up to him to dictate to the Irish.

blahfckingblah

junder wrote: »

Maybe it is inevitable in several generations time, ironically though the biggest threat to the united Ireland project is peace, the longer we have normality in northern Ireland the more such abstract notions as united irelands seem less important

Funny how many points of view there are, I was about to post saying that the biggest threat to peace is not having a referendum as it would attract people to the more 'hardline' republican groups and lead them to believe Sinn Fein arent even trying.

I think the outcome of the Scottish referendum will have a lot to do with what happens here. Now I wont claim to know anythin about scottish politics or the likely outcome but if they gain independance there will be a lot of pressure for a similar poll here, which could lead to some tension.

round tower huntsman

also if the brits are seen to move the goalposts and fudge scottish democratic efforts for independence it will be seen as a "told you so" by people that brits imperial mindset is the same as always.

how they deal with scottish efforts will tell alot of thier intentions here. imo they only respect democracy when it gives em the result they want.

round tower huntsman

junder wrote: »

Maybe it is inevitable in several generations time, ironically though the biggest threat to the united Ireland project is peace, the longer we have normality in northern Ireland the more such abstract notions as united irelands seem less important

thats exactly what the gfa was designed for. normalisation.

goose2005

round tower huntsman wrote: »

also if the brits are seen to move the goalposts and fudge scottish democratic efforts for independence it will be seen as a "told you so" by people that brits imperial mindset is the same as always.

how they deal with scottish efforts will tell alot of thier intentions here. imo they only respect democracy when it gives em the result they want.

I thought the Scots were British? Or are English Tories the only echt Brits?

round tower huntsman

goose2005 wrote: »

I thought the Scots were British? Or are English Tories the only echt Brits?

well i think you knew what/who i meant.

Sunnyisland

round tower huntsman wrote: »

that's exactly what the gfa was designed for. normalisation.

It be quite a while before normalisation returns here.

meglome

junder wrote: »

Maybe it is inevitable in several generations time, ironically though the biggest threat to the united Ireland project is peace, the longer we have normality in northern Ireland the more such abstract notions as united irelands seem less important

I spend a lot of time in Northern Ireland and to be honest the peace hasn't necessarily done you that many favours. Sure it's much safer than it was but there's less money being spent by the UK government. If you take away the many state agency's there isn't that much to cheer about. In the long run Northern Ireland would be better off as part of a larger Irish republic, though don't get me wrong I'm personally not looking for that. It's an observation not a wish.

junder

meglome wrote: »

I spend a lot of time in Northern Ireland and to be honest the peace hasn't necessarily done you that many favours. Sure it's much safer than it was but there's less money being spent by the UK government. If you take away the many state agency's there isn't that much to cheer about. In the long run Northern Ireland would be better off as part of a larger Irish republic, though don't get me wrong I'm personally not looking for that. It's an observation not a wish.

you could have maybe argued that during the boom years but since the economy in the RoI nose dived there is no benefit to us being part of a united ireland. Ironically the same arguments that are put forward for a united ireland could be put forward as a reason not to have an independent scotland

thecommietommy

SF are a "leadership led" party. Internally Adams has been both incredibly ruthless and authoritarian.

junder

round tower huntsman wrote: »

thats exactly what the gfa was designed for. normalisation.

and its working

round tower huntsman

its been a resounding success at normalising british rule in ireland.

meglome

junder wrote: »

you could have maybe argued that during the boom years but since the economy in the RoI nose dived there is no benefit to us being part of a united ireland. Ironically the same arguments that are put forward for a united ireland could be put forward as a reason not to have an independent scotland

Perhaps I didn't explain myself very well. When Ireland was added to the Union in 1800 the country actually suffered. Dublin went from being the No. 1 city of the empire to just another regional UK city. Northern Ireland has been in many ways neglected, yes money has been thrown at it but it still stinks of neglect. It's also like having a child on the breast until it's 25, sure it'll be fed but won't really be able to do anything for itself. So I'm not making a purely monetary observation.

later12

To ascertain whether such a poll is 'inevitable', one must first establish how such a referendum might occur. This article describes the situation rather well.

http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/01/12/christopher-mccrudden-scottish-independence-referendum-the-northern-ireland-and-international-human-rights-law-dimensions/

For a poll to be regarded as being held under the [Northern Ireland] Act [1998], it is the Secretary of State who, by Order, is responsible for calling the poll, for setting the date, for specifying who is eligible to vote, and for setting the question (“or questions”) asked. There has been some debate in Northern Ireland as to whether the Northern Ireland Assembly might organise such a poll, but it is clear that, even if it can, it would be only advisory. A poll must be held in accordance with the provisions of the 1998 Act, if it is to have the legally binding effects set out subsequently.

The Secretary of State has a wide discretion as to when to hold such a poll but this discretion is, however, limited in two respects.

First, the Secretary of State is required to call a poll “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.”

Second, the Secretary of State is required not to call a referendum “earlier than seven years after the holding of a previous poll” on the issue.

Since there is unlikely to be a perceived separatist majority in Northern Ireland in the near future (and prior to such a majority, any call for a referendum would be un-necessarily divisive), no; I do not think such a referendum would be inevitable in the near future.

Whether it ever becomes inevitable is rather pointless speculation, as there are no reasonable indicating factors.

However, I have to say that should the question ever arise in the Republic of Ireland in the near future, I would quite cheerfully vote to keep backwater, nationalistic Ulster politics off of the Republic's changing political platform.

Richard

Fenian Army wrote: »

Patterson said something like there were "no plans" to have one. Gerry is saying its not up to him to dictate to the Irish.

Gerry didn't say that - although he did disagree with with what Paterson said and also made criticisms of his judgement on several matters.

Indeed, according to the GFA, it is is precisely up to the Secretary of State to call a border poll when there is a chance of it being passed in favour of a UI. That ain't remotely likely any time soon.

woodoo

I would like to see one simple question asked:

Do you favour a United Ireland?

It wouldn't be passed right now but it would be interesting to see the result and we would all know where we stand.

Sierra Oscar

round tower huntsman wrote: »

its been a resounding success at normalising british rule in ireland.

It has been a resounding success in allowing the people of Northern Ireland to govern themselves, to be honest.

I would agree with Adams though - for staunch nationalists the GFA is just a step towards a Untied Ireland. Nationalists still want a United Ireland.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

KeithAFC

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

It has been a resounding success in allowing the people of Northern Ireland to govern themselves, to be honest.

I would agree with Adams though - for staunch nationalists the GFA is just a step towards a Untied Ireland. Nationalists still want a United Ireland.

They can wish all they want. The majority don't want a United Ireland. Time is running out for Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams know this. His Republican ideals are dying. People who are perceived to be from a Nationalist background don't want a United Ireland.

Generations will now be born in Northern Ireland and call it their country. The longer partition exists, the more cemented it becomes. I am more interested in the Scottish referendum in 2014 to be honest. I hope my Unionist friends in Scotland can unite and say no in that referendum.

Chuck Stone

In my estimation it will be at least a generation before a UI will even be considered by the people up north and that's only if Ireland becomes a wealthy prosperous nation.

IIRC two thirds of all jobs up north are either directly or indirectly state funded. People will act in their economic interests first.

round tower huntsman

KeithAFC wrote: »

They can wish all they want. The majority don't want a United Ireland. Time is running out for Sinn Fein and Gerry Adams know this. His Republican ideals are dying. People who are perceived to be from a Nationalist background don't want a United Ireland.

Generations will now be born in Northern Ireland and call it their country. The longer partition exists, the more cemented it becomes. I am more interested in the Scottish referendum in 2014 to be honest. I hope my Unionist friends in Scotland can unite and say no in that referendum.

theres alot of truth there tbh. normalisation, criminalisation and ulsterisation in progress aka the gfa. there'll be no poll even if there is it wont be in favour of a brit exit.

KeithAFC

round tower huntsman wrote: »

theres alot of truth there tbh. normalisation, criminalisation and ulsterisation in progress aka the gfa. there'll be no poll even if there is it wont be in favour of a brit exit.

Which is supported by Sinn Fein. Sinn Fein agreed to the GFA. They knew that it would normalise society up here.

round tower huntsman

yeah i know. the so called mainstrem republican movement signing up to a policy document that mi5 have been pushing since the 70's.

the bolt

Chuck Stone wrote: »

In my estimation it will be at least a generation before a UI will even be considered by the people up north and that's only if Ireland becomes a wealthy prosperous nation.

IIRC two thirds of all jobs up north are either directly or indirectly state funded. People will act in their economic interests first.

if history in NI has shone us anything it is that some people did not put economic intrests in front of their ideals.

KeithAFC

round tower huntsman wrote: »

yeah i know. the so called mainstrem republican movement signing up to a policy document that mi5 have been pushing since the 70's.

What choice did they have? Sinn Fein have made next to no ground in terms of winning over the Unionist community. Gerry Adams talks about out reach but we don't see any good evidence of this transpiring into a vote for a United Ireland from the Unionist community. There isn't exactly a rush of people from the Unionist community to join Sinn Fein and the Republican movement.

Perhaps he had better get his party to improve in that aspect and then a border poll might be realistic.

paky

Chuck Stone wrote: »

In my estimation it will be at least a generation before a UI will even be considered by the people up north and that's only if Ireland becomes a wealthy prosperous nation.

IIRC two thirds of all jobs up north are either directly or indirectly state funded. People will act in their economic interests first.

the average joe would put patriotism before economic interests when they go to the polls. the only people who worry about the economic damage a united ireland would cause are the fat cats and brits who drive that agenda

Chuck Stone

the bolt wrote: »

if history in NI has shone us anything it is that some people did not put economic intrests in front of their ideals.

Who?

paky

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Who?

where is the evidence that suggests a united ireland would be detrimental to both economies?
the welfare system in the south is far greater than the north. this alone suggests that the unemployed would be better off in the south rather than the north.

Farcheal

KeithAFC wrote: »

What choice did they have? Sinn Fein have made next to no ground in terms of winning over the Unionist community. Gerry Adams talks about out reach but we don't see any good evidence of this transpiring into a vote for a United Ireland from the Unionist community. There isn't exactly a rush of people from the Unionist community to join Sinn Fein and the Republican movement.

Perhaps he had better get his party to improve in that aspect and then a border poll might be realistic.

Eh, Have you seen the news. After Irisgate, the DUP and SF have been tripping over each other to ease the transition. Peter Robinson has stated he believes he is likely to be the (or one of the last) unionist first ministers. Remember the other day when McGuinness was at windsor park.

Just on the OP, of course the vote is inevitable. Think about it. 60% of the school population in NI is of a republican/catholic background (I know Im making a generalisation) but linking in with my point, Catholics WILL gain a majority over protestants in NI within the next few years. Give it a while before the Irish Gov gets back on its feet, and when the UK taxpayer realises the bull**** amount of money they pay to NI in a block grant each year.


PEOPLE you can't always think of the situation only applying now. Adams is saying it is inevitable because it is, and a vote will take place in the future. Obviously when the chances to do so are most likely to with the feeling of the in place gov. This self determination is enshrined in the GFA. Also, interlinking between the north and south through the North South Ministerial Council has shown the benefits provided by co-operation, and only showed positive results, this shows how the quasi-state of NI could integrate into the ROI. Also the ROI is in the British Irish Council, this means even if NI leaves, there will still be close bonds with Britain over policy areas and decisions etc. The British are not going to alienate their biggest client market.

round tower huntsman

even while the bananna republic was booming ahern was shifting the goalsposts re a UI saying 50 plus 1 wouldnt be enough we'd need a majority of unionist votes too.
a volotile war torn costs britian a fortune, but a peacful one is different.

also the next centuary will be about resources. the imperialists of the world will want their hands in as many pies as poss. example-oil and gas finds near falklands, gas finds in fermanagh,oil near rockall,gas oil fields off scotland etc...............................

KeithAFC

Eh, Have you seen the news. After Irisgate, the DUP and SF have been tripping over each other to ease the transition. Peter Robinson has stated he believes he is likely to be the (or one of the last) unionist first ministers. Remember the other day when McGuinness was at windsor park.

This is only natural in the political game. Both are at it with these visits to the GAA and Martin Mcguinness to windsor park. We are discussing politics here and not symbolic gestures and if anything, good will gestures shown by both. You pat my back and I will pat yours as the saying goes.

junder

paky wrote: »

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Who?

where is the evidence that suggests a united ireland would be detrimental to both economies?
the welfare system in the south is far greater than the north. this alone suggests that the unemployed would be better off in the south rather than the north.

Nhs? Free prescriptions? Free A&E?

paky

junder wrote: »

Nhs? Free prescriptions? Free A&E?

not much different from the south. we could have the same system if we wanted but its not so much different anyway. our welfare system tilts the balance

Chuck Stone

paky wrote: »

where is the evidence that suggests a united ireland would be detrimental to both economies?
the welfare system in the south is far greater than the north. this alone suggests that the unemployed would be better off in the south rather than the north.

ROI does not have the resources to underwrite the PS/CS wages and the cost of welfare/health services in the north.

later12

the bolt wrote: »

if history in NI has shone us anything it is that some people did not put economic intrests in front of their ideals.

I think it can be argued quite reasonably that individuals do not consider opportunity cost (that which they might gain) as realistically as they appreciate that which they presently enjoy and might lose. And during the troubles, Northern Ireland effectively had nothing to lose. It was about as much a welfare state as it gets in a wider industrial economy.

That is to say, with so much of the economy based on exchequer transfers from the UK, they could afford to have their scrap in their own local bubble whilst having their income guaranteed from London regardless.

That is changing now, and it is very welcome too.

paky

Chuck Stone wrote: »

ROI does not have the resources to underwrite the PS/CS wages and the cost of welfare/health services in the north.

are you forgetting that northern citizens will have a contribution to make to this new united economy? its not like the republic will bare the brunt or suffer because of it

Chuck Stone

paky wrote: »

are you forgetting that northern citizens will have a contribution to make to this new united economy? its not like the republic will bare the brunt or suffer because of it

The north as an economic entity is a cost burden to the UK. It would similarly be a cost burden to the south only comparatively a far greater cost burden.

After the bank bailouts, the costs of paying our PS/CS workers and related services, and SW costs 'we' are in no shape here to be taking on the costs of underwriting the economy of 6 counties.

Reality lads?

h2005

Well if Gerry said it it must be true he wouldn`t lie

the bolt

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Who?

by any of the many people on both sides who were willing to go to jail for long streches .

Joey the lips

As a peaceful republician i agree with Gerry however i reckon there is too many people profiting on the frindges of the border to vote for its destruction. I think the border will be around for many years to come.

We are all part of the united states of europe now anyway....

Borders dont matter within europe.

RandomName2

Unionists in the Dail and a larger SF party, coupled with a major drain on the economy through the inheritance of a subsidised state (that also has major inherent social and religious problems).

Vote or not, the issue's a no-brainer.

Joey the lips wrote: »

We are all part of the united states of europe now anyway....

Borders dont matter within europe.

This actually does make most relevant issues null and void (with the main exception being euro vs sterling)

thecommietommy

A Border Poll would only be a worthwhile exercise if an when a clear majority in the North wanted a United Ireland but that day is a decade or two at most off but it is inevitable. Peter Robinson did not make a statement a few months ago for nothing to say that a Catholic majority is inevitable and he may be the last Protestant First Minister. IMO a better strategy would be to work away at creating a less and less divided Ireland and much more cross border co operation.

Rebelheart

Great idea!

I'm tired of discovering "nationalist" voters in the Six Counties who in reality are Roman Catholic voters who are culturally and ideologically British.


On the other hand, there are far, far more Irish nationalists within the "nationalist" community in 2012 than there were back in 1970, for instance. That's refreshing to see. They are much more Irish in cultural terms thanks to the rise of Ulster teams in the All-Ireland county and club champions, and the growth of gaelscoileanna across the Six. Still, it's all just depressing how so many of so-called nationalists - even one of them is one too many - still are on their knees to the British, British (i.e. English) culture and their notions of superiority over the Irish and our own great tradition.

The cap-tipping Eddie McGrady "good taig" type I'm thinking of, and the Alban Maginness anglophile/hibernophobic element of the same party.

dsmythy

You'd have to count those who don't vote in the poll as no voters.