Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Brexit Impact on Northern Ireland

Options
13567107

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Don't people actually know anything about why the 12th is celebrated? Why would anyone give a shít about an Orange March in an independent united Ireland? I'd have no problem with them marching, I reckon it would very quickly go the way of the modern St Patrick's Day parades

    Surely they have a constitutional right of assembly same as everyone else? don't see how any can oppose it really. In the North its used as a show of strength/intimidation tactic with literally thousands of marches for the whole summer so it had to be curtailed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    What will happen to the likes of the various IRA and other republican factions if there is a united ireland? Will they all just go "ah grand so, now" and disband and disarm and just tell stories to the grandkids about their 'RA days?
    Or will they find issue with the united ireland, perhaps that it is not in keeping with the Proclamation of the Irish Republic that the men of 1916 and so many before them, died for, maybe arguing that it is some sort of 32 county Free-State, in thrall to the unionists? Perhaps they will be opposed to the watering down of republican symbols and traditions. And vow to keep up the struggle to overthrow the 32 county free state and reestablish it along the lines of the 1916 Irish Republic?

    As a poster says, there would possibly be some sort of treaty. Will we then be back in a situation of pro-treaty and anti-treaty sides, and we will all be shooting our cousins and brothers with Lee Enfields. Always wanted to know what it would feel like to be in a flying column!!!

    The anti treaty IRA gave up any struggle against the free state / republic even though they didn't view it as an ideal state, pragmatism took over and always will.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Retr0gamer wrote: »
    That's the problem though, I don't think Unionists will be open to any compromise. They are a minority surrounded by a majority they have treated as subhumans for years and think that it that minority gets into power they will be treated as badly if not worse for all their years of mistreatment. Unionism is basically just fear. It's got nothing to do with the benefits of staying in the UK, Brexit should be a wake up call that nobody in the rest of the UK cares about NI.

    And since Unionism is just based on a primal instinct like fear it's irrational and impossible to compromise with. It will take generations of that to change but it's pretty much a cult at this stage.

    Lots of people in the republic don't get this because they aren't paying close enough attention to unionism. They need to go to the unionist party's social media and have a read of the comments. You aren't dealing with some down-to-earth missunderstood group of people.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭TheBoyConor


    cgcsb wrote: »
    The anti treaty IRA gave up any struggle against the free state / republic even though they didn't view it as an ideal state, pragmatism took over and always will.

    I mean groups like the C-IRA, Real/New IRA, the 32 CSM, Oghlaigh na hEireann, etc

    They will surely find a reason to justify their continued existence. perhaps to defend communities from acts of loyalist aggression.

    I expect a massive upswing in loyalist violence.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    I mean groups like the C-IRA, Real/New IRA, the 32 CSM, Oghlaigh na hEireann, etc

    They will surely find a reason to justify their continued existence. perhaps to defend communities from acts of loyalist aggression.

    Initially I think that's true but it'll be basically local racketeering and drug dealing, with a veneer of political idealism.
    I expect a massive upswing in loyalist violence.

    Most loyalists are fundamentally cowards. The most they can muster at present is a fleg protest in Larne that would have 15 people turn up. Any offensive capability they have at the moment is limited to their own areas where they sell drugs. The loyalist paramilitaries of the 70s weren't a credible force without RUC/MI5 assistance and since then their numbers have dropped 90% and have had state intelligence and logistical assistance withdrawn.

    They might organise some night time violence in their own areas but they'd be terrified to enter a nationalist area or town centre. Their most recent anti catholic violent campaign was spitting on and throwing things at catholic schoolgirls in North Belfast in 1997 when the RUC protected them from the parents.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    cgcsb wrote: »
    They really aren't that good at politics they wouldn't be able to reach such a position. There won't be a change to official titles.

    The DUP are good enough at politics that they managed to secure an extra billion pounds from Mrs May back in 2017. That was on top of the already massive subvention that NI receive from the U.K. exchequer every year. Back then, the Financial Times, calculated that were NI independent, their annual budget deficit would be in excess of thirty percent of their GDP.

    To set that in context, that’s on a par with the figures we clocked up at the height of our financial crisis a decade or so ago and that necessitated the IMF & the rest of the Troika being called in. Right now, taking on NI tomorrow would, in financial terms, be the equivalent of doing a bank bailout for each and every year for the foreseeable future.

    Hence, whether people like it or not, massive compromises would be absolutely vital to make a success of a united Ireland.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    View wrote: »
    The DUP are good enough at politics that they managed to secure an extra billion pounds from Mrs May back in 2017.

    Yes when they were briefly useful and then were manipulated and cast aside, and they didn't see it coming, hence the bad at politics thing.
    View wrote: »
    That was on top of the already massive subvention that NI receive from the U.K. exchequer every year.

    Nothing to do with the DUP's efforts.

    View wrote: »
    To set that in context, that’s on a par with the figures we clocked up at the height of our financial crisis a decade or so ago and that necessitated the IMF & the rest of the Troika being called in. Right now, taking on NI tomorrow would, in financial terms, be the equivalent of doing a bank bailout for each and every year for the foreseeable future.

    Hence, whether people like it or not, massive compromises would be absolutely vital to make a success of a united Ireland.

    Financial compromises not ideology or symbolism.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,016 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    View wrote: »
    Hence, whether people like it or not, massive compromises would be absolutely vital to make a success of a united Ireland.

    A nice long handover period would help overcome that hurdle.

    10-15 years would be ideal.
    Enough time that people would get used to the idea of living in the republic, enough time for systems to change and align with the republic, and enough time for the more zealous unionists to either die of old age or accept the fact that NI is no more.

    In 10 years, the people who were politically active in the 70's and 80's will be retired or dead. The Troubles will be moving out of living memory and people will be left with the stories their parents told them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,093 ✭✭✭spakman


    Padre_Pio wrote: »
    A nice long handover period would help overcome that hurdle.

    10-15 years would be ideal.
    Enough time that people would get used to the idea of living in the republic, enough time for systems to change and align with the republic, and enough time for the more zealous unionists to either die of old age or accept the fact that NI is no more.

    In 10 years, the people who were politically active in the 70's and 80's will be retired or dead. The Troubles will be moving out of living memory and people will be left with the stories their parents told them.


    Eh, people not yet 40 can remember the troubles.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    cgcsb wrote: »
    Yes when they were briefly useful and then were manipulated and cast aside, and they didn't see it coming, hence the bad at politics thing.

    That’s a rather silly argument since it could be argued that it applies to any and all parties that do deals in parliamentary term (in every country) and subsequently find themselves out of office.
    cgcsb wrote: »
    Nothing to do with the DUP's efforts.

    The unionists efforts have persuaded the rest of the British people to keep them in the U.K. and pick up the tab for the massive overspending in NI for decades.
    cgcsb wrote: »
    Financial compromises not ideology or symbolism.

    If you aren’t prepared to make ideological or symbolic compromises then you pretty much guarantee any attempt to unite Ireland would fail and that would have massive financial consequences which would require financial compromises as the government would end up diverting monies from health and education to security, thus creating a negative political feedback loop.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,872 ✭✭✭View


    Padre_Pio wrote: »
    A nice long handover period would help overcome that hurdle.

    10-15 years would be ideal.
    Enough time that people would get used to the idea of living in the republic, enough time for systems to change and align with the republic, and enough time for the more zealous unionists to either die of old age or accept the fact that NI is no more.

    In 10 years, the people who were politically active in the 70's and 80's will be retired or dead. The Troubles will be moving out of living memory and people will be left with the stories their parents told them.

    A long handover period might help but you aren’t going to get people to accept a deal based on that unless they can clearly see the deal would work for them and their children were it implemented in full in the short term.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,683 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    cgcsb wrote: »
    Surely they have a constitutional right of assembly same as everyone else? don't see how any can oppose it really. In the North its used as a show of strength/intimidation tactic with literally thousands of marches for the whole summer so it had to be curtailed.

    Yeah let them work away, the whole intimidation and triumphalism angle would be gone, the Boyne would just be another battle, without modern relevance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    View wrote: »
    The unionists efforts have persuaded the rest of the British people to keep them in the U.K. and pick up the tab for the massive overspending in NI for decades.
    They have no choice. If there was a referendum in England tomorrow they'd be dumped.
    View wrote: »
    If you aren’t prepared to make ideological or symbolic compromises then you pretty much guarantee any attempt to unite Ireland would fail and that would have massive financial consequences which would require financial compromises as the government would end up diverting monies from health and education to security, thus creating a negative political feedback loop.

    Again, there is no credible security threat from any unionist group. All long gone or rendered useless by lack of an RUC. There won't be ideological compromises to placate a non existent terrorist threat. It also doesn't matter what compromises you offer unionists, they're against it no matter what, see how they rejected May's deal with the EU despite it ticking all their boxes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,785 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    If such a vote was to take place, it would be because continuing the NI project is no longer an option. That could be because Unionism has declined in influence (already happening), NI people wanting back fully into EU (likely to be the case soon), British policy of moving away from NI and pushing them towards Ireland (likely to be the case soon, if not already started), Scottish independence fundamentally changing the Union and NIs place therein (process likely to start soon), a tasty UK/EU/USA funded reunification fund being made available (would likely be the case) or a combination of all (plus other factors).

    If we get to that point, there will be very little compromise required. The choice will be to join with Ireland (and its flag, etc.) or hang desperately to British coattails as they try to pull away. No vote in NI will take place until it is certain that they will vote for reunification (same applies to Ireland). I doubt there will be much real compromises to be made on the Irish side, some token gestures and some things which should change anyway. Let the 12th be a national public holiday, we are already short on public holidays and need more. Maybe July 12th could even become reunification day!

    If it were approved in a vote, a UI would still take a long time to become a reality, more than a decade. There would have to be a large transition period, with NI retaining their devolved status initially for a period but under Westminster and then under the Dail, before dissolving the Executive and full political integration. Many NI institutions would also have a remain for many years rather than immediately amalgamate with their ROI equivalent, not least the PSNI.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,208 ✭✭✭LuasSimon


    If we in the south were any good a United Ireland would have happened 50 years ago instead of leaving the Catholic - nationalist people like lambs to the slaughter like they were left .

    It should have been a United Ireland in 1921 or else all remain part of the United Kingdom not the fudge we are still dealing with .


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,564 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    IMO the GFA was effectively a policy of disengagement from NI by the British government. A kind of rolling unification where gradually things get more and more the same across the island.

    The real question is given Britain has hidden little of it's agenda to disengage especially during the Brexit negotiations are we really willing to take it on?

    I don't think this should be automatically assumed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    View wrote: »
    To set that in context, that’s on a par with the figures we clocked up at the height of our financial crisis a decade or so ago and that necessitated the IMF & the rest of the Troika being called in. Right now, taking on NI tomorrow would, in financial terms, be the equivalent of doing a bank bailout for each and every year for the foreseeable future.

    There no chance we would be funding that solely initially. Ireland, the UK and the EU would be involved. The UK for a specified period no doubt, but the EU would be involved as long as the NI economy is poor.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,016 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    spakman wrote: »
    Eh, people not yet 40 can remember the troubles.
    Remembering the troubles is different from growing up and being politically active in the period.
    The youngest in the IRA/UVF generation is in their 50s and 60s now.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,121 ✭✭✭Kaybaykwah


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    If such a vote was to take place, it would be because continuing the NI project is no longer an option. That could be because Unionism has declined in influence (already happening), NI people wanting back fully into EU (likely to be the case soon), British policy of moving away from NI and pushing them towards Ireland (likely to be the case soon, if not already started), Scottish independence fundamentally changing the Union and NIs place therein (process likely to start soon), a tasty UK/EU/USA funded reunification fund being made available (would likely be the case) or a combination of all (plus other factors).

    If we get to that point, there will be very little compromise required. The choice will be to join with Ireland (and its flag, etc.) or hang desperately to British coattails as they try to pull away. No vote in NI will take place until it is certain that they will vote for reunification (same applies to Ireland). I doubt there will be much real compromises to be made on the Irish side, some token gestures and some things which should change anyway. Let the 12th be a national public holiday, we are already short on public holidays and need more. Maybe July 12th could even become reunification day!

    If it were approved in a vote, a UI would still take a long time to become a reality, more than a decade. There would have to be a large transition period, with NI retaining their devolved status initially for a period but under Westminster and then under the Dail, before dissolving the Executive and full political integration. Many NI institutions would also have a remain for many years rather than immediately amalgamate with their ROI equivalent, not least the PSNI.

    In Québec, Canada Day, the Canadian National Holiday is called; "Dollard-des-Ormeaux day" by Quebec Nationalists. Dollard is an old folk hero of the French Indian wars. Québec has an official National Holiday: St-Jean-Baptiste day, which became the National holiday in the early nineteenth Century at the bidding of the Irish immigrants who paraded on St Patrick's day. The Irish Catholics thus wanted their French counterparts to display a show of National fervor vis-à-vis the British members of Society who displayed their own colours on Scottish and English holidays. Civilian and Religious Parades have always been a defiant sort of thing in the face of temporal powers. Armies used to parade on grounds very frequently, sometimes every Sunday in the days of fewer entertainments.

    The Orangemen will keep doing their little show of force and the symbols will morph into something else in time. They inevitably do.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,015 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    At this stage I'm not sure if a majority of any country wants them given the financial, social and historical baggage that comes with them.

    It's our shared social and historical baggage regardless of who currently controls that portion of Ulster.

    It's pretty obvious the British don't really pay much heed to NI.

    I think unification would be a positive for all involved. It would disrupt political dynasties and change the country for the better IMO.
    I would suggest the possibility of a state like in the US or a province like Canada where the six counties could call the shots on more local issues with a national government overseeing national issues etc.. Doing so for some kind of transitional period might be an idea anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 330 ✭✭The_Fitz


    I mean groups like the C-IRA, Real/New IRA, the 32 CSM, Oghlaigh na hEireann, etc

    They will surely find a reason to justify their continued existence. perhaps to defend communities from acts of loyalist aggression.

    I expect a massive upswing in loyalist violence.

    Why do you think there will be massive loyalist violence post reunification? There will undoubtedly be incidents but Loyalism has changed massively over the past 20 years.

    At Drumcree, every well heeled unionist turned out to force that march down and created chaos across the north. Once that died down they left Loyalism. Now Loyalism comprises of 3 men and their dog protesting outside Belfast city hall to try and get their flag back up on days that it's not flying.

    Loyalism has morphed into 100% criminal activities. They are more likely to find more friends within the criminal community of the south than start murdering people because of their nationality. And that goes for criminals masquerading as Republicans.

    The appetite for violence is not there, on both sides.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,398 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    20silkcut wrote: »
    How was the 12th of July marked down south pre independence when it was all one country? Were there parades down o connell or sackville street back then?

    In my personal opinion this is an issue that should never be touched again after the love ulster incident in 2006.

    Not sure exactly but in border counties like Donegal, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan there was a strong network of Orange Orders and halls. Some still remain. Also ones in Dublin and Wicklow too.
    I think the marching was more concentrated in the now NI counties but I’m sure there was some


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,398 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    If there is going to be a Referendum on Reunification, then after what happened with Brexit, all of the details will be known beforehand to the voters. Details that would likely include:
    • A new Flag
    • A new National Anthem
    • The cost to Dublin, both financially and in security terms, of taking on the 6 counties

    Would enough people in the Republic vote to Reunite? Personally, I would myself but I'm not sure if a majority of the electorate would.

    I don’t think we on the South have “seriously” considered the costs and process of reunification. I know a lot that would be very lukewarm about the idea, even against it. We are very contented down here with no sectarianism or any of that baggage.
    Serious road ahead of that’s what’s going to happen


  • Registered Users Posts: 68,079 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The Twelfth was definitely celebrated in some areas of the south; but WW1 probably did more damage than independence in many areas

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/cork-orangemen-celebrated-battle-of-boyne-years-before-north-1.3821032 suggests Cork had significant celebrations but no lodges left by 1919.


    I know someone whos grandfather was the last head of a lodge in a Leitrim village til maybe the 70s, his dad still has all the gubbins for the parades in the attic - but isn't Unionist in the slightest.




  • Obviously the cost/subsidising thing is an obstacle but that would only be in the short-medium term. Westminster would continue to pay a good % of it for an agreed period of time. EU has suggested in the past that it would also be willing to help subsidise any potential unification.

    Being part of the UK, the North gets whatever is left of the carcass in any trade deals or negotiations that Westminster does. Even the north of England struggles to get its share of the spoils.

    As part of Ireland, Belfast and the rest of the north become a far more attractive proposition and over time the region would become more 'self-sufficient' and prosperous.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Obviously the cost/subsidising thing is an obstacle but that would only be in the short-medium term. Westminster would continue to pay a good % of it for an agreed period of time. EU has suggested in the past that it would also be willing to help subsidise any potential unification.

    Being part of the UK, the North gets whatever is left of the carcass in any trade deals or negotiations that Westminster does. Even the north of England struggles to get its share of the spoils.

    As part of Ireland, Belfast and the rest of the north become a far more attractive proposition and over time the region would become more 'self-sufficient' and prosperous.

    It would be possible for the North to adopt the Republics taxation policy and the euro before a UI happens, this would mean a good bit of FDI for the region given the much lower salaries and commercial rents, making the bloated civil service easier to scale down when there's well paid private alternatives.


  • Registered Users Posts: 489 ✭✭grassylawn


    Not a hope that I would vote for this. They do not have high earning potential as a group and the majority of them vote for the likes of the DUP


  • Registered Users Posts: 330 ✭✭The_Fitz


    grassylawn wrote: »
    Not a hope that I would vote for this. They do not have high earning potential as a group and the majority of them vote for the likes of the DUP

    What makes this "group" having less of an earning potential? Being in a union with a nation that has no interest in developing or progressing the area? I wonder how that would be fixed.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,306 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    grassylawn wrote: »
    Not a hope that I would vote for this. They do not have high earning potential as a group and the majority of them vote for the likes of the DUP

    The North East was by far the wealthiest part of Ireland before local unionists took control of policy in 1921, County Antrim was the source of most of Ireland's GDP. No reason why some of that cannot be restored. Unionism prides it's self on how badly they damaged the economy and how expensive it is to manage (they view this as protection against a united Ireland).


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Fun fact Osborne is a Tipp man. Or maybe Waterford. he must get confused at the hurling.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_baronets

    The former British Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rt Hon George Osborne, is heir apparent to his family's Irish baronetcy; the former family seat was Newtown Anner House, County Tipperary.[4]


Advertisement