Costs of Irish unification.

Sam Russell

KellyXX wrote: »

Do the 26 counties gets to vote on whether to take them?
Because that would be a resounding no I would imagine.

Yes they do - both parts have to agree.

I think, depending on the terms, it would always be a yes but perhaps not so strong a yes if NI were to be a severe burden on the state - so depends on how much it costs us. I think the EU would help with regional funding and the UK Gov would continue its subvention, but on a tapering basis. The main thing is that we do not get any of the UK National Debt.

KellyXX

Sam Russell wrote: »

Yes they do - both parts have to agree.

I think, depending on the terms, it would always be a yes but perhaps not so strong a yes if NI were to be a severe burden on the state - so depends on how much it costs us. I think the EU would help with regional funding and the UK Gov would continue its subvention, but on a tapering basis. The main thing is that we do not get any of the UK National Debt.

There is absolutely no doubt that it would be a burden, and a burden for a long long time to come. Not a chance of the 26 counties taking the 6.

tomwaterford

KellyXX wrote: »

. Not a chance of the 26 counties taking the 6.

Recent polling data suggests otherwise?

KellyXX

tomwaterford wrote: »

Recent polling data suggests otherwise?

Yeah. Polls have been great on these issues where there is a difference in what they think publicly and privately.

Sam Russell

tomwaterford wrote: »

So we ignore a majority decision of 50%+1 to appease unionists??



If a 50%+1 vote passed in a referendum and they refused to hand It over....how could anyone argue againest the ira returning to violence

What's point in peaceful and democratic means....if we're willing to piss all over them to appease unionists??...

.have we learned fcuk all since people were pulled off the road in Drumcree in 95 for protesting vs facing down loyalist paramilitaries??

There will not be a democratic decision unless a poll actually occurs. That will not happen unless the UK Secretary for NI (and him alone) decides to hold a referendum because he believes a majority were in favour. He is unlikely to be so minded unless the result is a forgone conclusion that it will carry easily, particularly with Unionist backing.

If he does decide to hold such a referendum, I would imagine it will be after consultation with the Irish Gov. The Irish Gov would not back such a referendum if they considered that the vote would not be carried here by a thumping majority - over 75%.

tomwaterford

Sam Russell wrote: »

There will not be a democratic decision unless a poll actually occurs. That will not happen unless the UK Secretary for NI (and him alone) decides to hold a referendum because he believes a majority were in favour. He is unlikely to be so minded unless the result is a forgone conclusion that it will carry easily, particularly with Unionist backing.

If he does decide to hold such a referendum, I would imagine it will be after consultation with the Irish Gov. The Irish Gov would not back such a referendum if they considered that the vote would not be carried here by a thumping majority - over 75%.

So no actual facts???only conjecture


You begin by saying the sec of state alone decides to hold the referendum and then further on you say he'll consult dublin??

Your all over the place....it's legally mandated to hold it once it looks like possibility of it passing??and in great irish referendum traditional every 7 years there after until it's over the line




As an aside.....brexit passed with <52% yes.....why do irish nationlists all of sudden require a 75% rate for their referendums to gain a mandate.....what planet are you living on??


Few if any irish referendums reach your mind numbing magic figure of 75%....are they to be discounted now aswell?

FrancieBrady

Sam Russell wrote: »

There will not be a democratic decision unless a poll actually occurs. That will not happen unless the UK Secretary for NI (and him alone) decides to hold a referendum because he believes a majority were in favour. He is unlikely to be so minded unless the result is a forgone conclusion that it will carry easily, particularly with Unionist backing.

If he does decide to hold such a referendum, I would imagine it will be after consultation with the Irish Gov. The Irish Gov would not back such a referendum if they considered that the vote would not be carried here by a thumping majority - over 75%.

What are you basing the last bit on?

I would imagine that politics will dictate when a poll happens.
If somebody can exert pressure, look or need to be given a favour, it will happen.
I.E. it could be a dividend for SF agreeing to go into a coalition, or back into an executive. It could be in return for Irish support in some aspect of Brexit. Who knows. Events dear boy, events.
*look at why the Brexit referendum happened in the first place had nothing to do with a desire to leave Europe.

tomwaterford

tomwaterford wrote: »

So we ignore a majority decision of 50%+1 to appease unionists??



If a 50%+1 vote passed in a referendum and they refused to hand It over....how could anyone argue againest the ira returning to violence

What's point in peaceful and democratic means....if we're willing to piss all over them to appease unionists??...

.have we learned fcuk all since people were pulled off the road in Drumcree in 95 for protesting vs facing down loyalist paramilitaries??

If there was a referendum and the chance of a vote for reunification in NI was 51% then there would be a lesser chance of it passing in the republic.

The people of the republic would be far less likely to vote for reunification if they thought that 49% of the people in NI did not want it.

The only way a referendum is called is when there is a clear and sustained evidence that well over 50% would vote for reunification.

There has to be strong support for reunification before it will even put to the people.

tomwaterford

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

If there was a referendum and the chance of a vote for reunification in NI was 51% then there would be a lesser chance of it passing in the republic.

The people of the republic would be far less likely to vote for reunification if they thought that 49% of the people in NI did not want it.

The only way a referendum is called is when there is a clear and sustained evidence that well over 50% would vote for reunification.

There has to be strong support for reunification before it will even put to the people.

There only has to be a chance for it to pass....for legally requirement to put it to the people


This thing of needing well over 50% is a white herring. ...a majority of 1 person is all it'll take??anything else is suggesting we piss all over democratic decisions


Struggle to believe the free state wouldn't vote to correct the 2nd worst political mistake of the 20th century.

Your essentially saying the free state shouldn't accept the wishes of the majority of 6 counties??

tomwaterford

] 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.

Nothing in there to say anything about 75% or over whelming majority....or upholding a unionist veto??


Myths shouldn't take root when the info is freely available like??

murphaph

tomwaterford wrote: »

There only has to be a chance for it to pass....for legally requirement to put it to the people


This thing of needing well over 50% is a white herring. ...a majority of 1 person is all it'll take??anything else is suggesting we piss all over democratic decisions


Struggle to believe the free state wouldn't vote to correct the 2nd worst political mistake of the 20th century.

Your essentially saying the free state shouldn't accept the wishes of the majority of 6 counties??

The secretary of state for Northern Ireland is indeed required to call a border poll if he or she believes it will pass, even if it's only 51%.

However you can imagine the rioting that would occur should that happen.

The southern electorate will have several weeks or months of sustained loyalist rioting and probably worse to demonstrate in no uncertain terms what awaits should the south vote in favour of unification also.

I am not sure at all that people would vote to take that mess on when it's demonstrated like that. These days things are relatively peaceful. That's the environment in which the latest polls are being conducted. If the north was currently ablaze in rioting I guarantee you the polls would be showing no keenness for unification whatsoever.

That's the environment the vote would take place in. It would be loyalism's Alamo.

tomwaterford

tomwaterford wrote: »

There only has to be a chance for it to pass....for legally requirement to put it to the people


This thing of needing well over 50% is a white herring. ...a majority of 1 person is all it'll take??anything else is suggesting we piss all over democratic decisions


Struggle to believe the free state wouldn't vote to correct the 2nd worst political mistake of the 20th century.

Your essentially saying the free state shouldn't accept the wishes of the majority of 6 counties??

The people of the free state, as you call it, are under no obligation to accept the wishes of anyone in the 6 counties, as you call it.

tomwaterford

murphaph wrote: »

The secretary of state for Northern Ireland is indeed required to call a border poll if he or she believes it will pass, even if it's only 51%.

However you can imagine the rioting that would occur should that happen.

The southern electorate will have several weeks or months of sustained loyalist rioting and probably worse to demonstrate in no uncertain terms what awaits should the south vote in favour of unification also.

I am not sure at all that people would vote to take that mess on when it's demonstrated like that. These days things are relatively peaceful. That's the environment in which the latest polls are being conducted. If the north was currently ablaze in rioting I guarantee you the polls would be showing no keenness for unification whatsoever.

That's the environment the vote would take place in. It would be loyalism's Alamo.

^^^A post depressingly short on any actual facts


So we let the minority hold ireland to hostage and ignore wishes of majority???

Let them riot away....it's a nettle that need grasping sooner than later.....for just fcuking once we might have politians capable of making decision instead of pandering to fear mongers.....tbh if a majority is clear and refusal to hold a poll....(also pretty sure both polls are to held same day?)


I couldn't condemn dissident attacks....when democracy fails what other options have you?

tomwaterford

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

[/b]

The people of the free state, as you call it, are under no obligation to accept the wishes of anyone in the 6 counties, as you call it.

Yas


But the polls are only pointing one way

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

The secretary of state for Northern Ireland is indeed required to call a border poll if he or she believes it will pass, even if it's only 51%.

However you can imagine the rioting that would occur should that happen.

The southern electorate will have several weeks or months of sustained loyalist rioting and probably worse to demonstrate in no uncertain terms what awaits should the south vote in favour of unification also.

I am not sure at all that people would vote to take that mess on when it's demonstrated like that. These days things are relatively peaceful. That's the environment in which the latest polls are being conducted. If the north was currently ablaze in rioting I guarantee you the polls would be showing no keenness for unification whatsoever.

That's the environment the vote would take place in. It would be loyalism's Alamo.

Those strands of loyalism opposed to the GFA tried to overturn it before and failed, while the rest of unionism accepted it.
They will fail again against the democratic resolve and without wider support in the unionist community it will be localised and die out too.

That aspect - a UI if the majority decide on it- is a battle that has been won. Unless you are saying the vast majority of Unionists are not democrats?

murphaph

tomwaterford wrote: »

^^^A post depressingly short on any actual facts


So we let the minority hold ireland to hostage and ignore wishes of majority???

Let them riot away....it's a nettle that need grasping sooner than later.....for just fcuking once we might have politians capable of making decision instead of pandering to fear mongers.....tbh if a majority is clear and refusal to hold a poll....(also pretty sure both polls are to held same day?)


I couldn't condemn dissident attacks....when democracy fails what other options have you?

The polls will not be taken on the same day. The north goes first to see if the south even needs to open a public debate on the matter before going to the not inconsiderate expense of holding a referendum. May well be held in parallel at the next general or European election to save some of the expense.

If the north votes (probably barely) for unification and the south votes against then there will be no unification at that time and democracy will have been respected. Fair enough?

murphaph

tomwaterford wrote: »

Yas


But the polls are only pointing one way

The north is currently quiet. Take the polls during the rioting after the north has voted by the skin of its teeth to cede from the UK and you'll be looking at a very different outcome I promise you.

tomwaterford

murphaph wrote: »

The polls will not be taken on the same day.

Why not??

Its almost as if the last poll (the gfa) involving both north and south wasn't on same day.....I'm using a recent example for basis of my opioion....what are you??

murphaph

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Those strands of loyalism opposed to the GFA tried to overturn it before and failed, while the rest of unionism accepted it.
They will fail again against the democratic resolve and without wider support in the unionist community it will be localised and die out too.

That aspect - a UI if the majority decide on it- is a battle that has been won. Unless you are saying the vast majority of Unionists are not democrats?

I'm telling you that vast swathes of the north will be set on fire 10 minutes after the result is called and the southern electorate will have to decide if it wants to take over the mad house.

That's why I've said all along that nationalists realistically need to win unionists over to the UI cause. A 50%+1 majority will inspire no confidence among the southern electorate that things would actually work out.

50%+1 of unionists is the magic number.

end of the road

KellyXX wrote: »

There is absolutely no doubt that it would be a burden, and a burden for a long long time to come. Not a chance of the 26 counties taking the 6.

we won't have a choice. if NI vote to join us then britain will pull out and reunification will happen whether people want it or not, whether the south vote for it or against it.

make no mistake about it, britain will force reunification if they need to.

tomwaterford

murphaph wrote: »

I'm telling you that vast swathes of the north will be set on fire 10 minutes after the result is called and the southern electorate will have to decide if it wants to take over the mad house.

That's why I've said all along that nationalists realistically need to win unionists over to the UI cause. A 50%+1 majority will inspire no confidence among the southern electorate that things would actually work out.

50%+1 of unionists is the magic number.

So unionists should have a veto....even when they are no longer a majority??


You are aware there are many unionists already within the free state

murphaph

tomwaterford wrote: »

Why not??

Its almost as if the last poll (the gfa) involving both north and south wasn't on same day.....I'm using a recent example for basis of my opioion....what are you??

It's irrelevant anyway Tom. If the polls were to be held on the same day then loyalists would set NI on fire in the run up to the poll to make the South think very hard about the decision it was making. It's going to be done in a very different environment to the current polls. That's all I'm pointing out here.

tomwaterford

murphaph wrote: »

It's irrelevant anyway Tom. If the polls were to be held on the same day then loyalists would set NI on fire in the run up to the poll to make the South think very hard about the decision it was making. It's going to be done in a very different environment to the current polls. That's all I'm pointing out here.

Loyalist would be much better served concentraing on getting there vote out rather than locked up for day of the polls. ...by rioting they are dooming themselves to failure


Unionist politians and paramilitaries aren't that thick??

murphaph

tomwaterford wrote: »

So unionists should have a veto....even when they are no longer a majority??


You are aware there are many unionists already within the free state

Tom it's hard to take you seriously when you constantly refer to the south/republic/Ireland as the Free State.

The unionists have no legal veto but personally I will vote against unification if a majority of unionists aren't committed to it also. I want a functioning country first and foremost. Where its boundaries extend to are less critical to me!

murphaph

end of the road wrote: »

we won't have a choice. if NI vote to join us then britain will pull out and reunification will happen whether people want it or not, whether the south vote for it or against it.

make no mistake about it, britain will force reunification if they need to.

There is no chance of this scenario happening. The GFA sets out how things proceed.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

we won't have a choice. if NI vote to join us then britain will pull out and reunification will happen whether people want it or not, whether the south vote for it or against it.

make no mistake about it, britain will force reunification if they need to.

Reunification requires both NI and the republic to agree to it in separate referendums

end of the road

britain wants out of NI . this is well known. if a majority of people in the north vote for reunification then regardless of whether the south votes for it or not pressure will be put upon the south via britain and the EU to accept reunification as it would be in both their interests for reunification to happen.
we will see whenever the time comes but it would be naive to rule out the possibility i have mentioned.

tomwaterford

There is a pool of taught...that upon reunification the irish state should push for union jack to be outlawed as no part of ireland will be in the union hence making it an illogical flag



Personally I think we should concentrate on building up the state and not worry on the British flags.....would be nice to hear other opioion on this

emo72

end of the road wrote: »

we will see whenever the time comes but it would be naive to rule out the possibility i have mentioned.

Yeah that's possible. As in everything is possible. But not probable or likely.

Donnielighto

Sand wrote: »

Not necessarily the repeal of the act. That would be overreach (though a price I would be happy to pay for a United Ireland). I think it could instead be a demand for equal status for Ulster Scots under the law: so the translation of all documents into Ulster Scots, all placename signs being in Ulster Scots and the requirement for all services to be available in Ulster Scots. Hugely expensive, and yet utterly reasonable under parity of esteem.

Ulster Scots isn't a language, it's a dialect. That whole affair is/was ridiculous.