Brexit Impact on Northern Ireland

Bishop of hope

A poll by lord Ashcroft found the English were apathetic either way on NI and Scottish independence, more or less saying leave it to themselves to decide.
My own experience of living in London for most of my working life was that irish/Northern Irish were more or less all regarded as Irish rather the British or Irish, even unionist ones.
You were identified by your accent mostly.


https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/35-of-english-public-want-northern-ireland-to-remain-in-uk-and-many-think-irish-politics-complicated-and-mysterious-poll-suggests-38615340.html

onrail

Outside the hardline 10-15% on either side, all people are loyal to in the North are their secure, well pensioned, publicly funded jobs.

Either denomination will toe the party line in public - but once it comes to a ballot, unless their jobs and pensions can be guaranteed they'll vote for the status quo.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

Remember, Loyalists are loyal to the Crown, but more so to the half-crown.

Money talks, and Brexit will mean money missing from NI, while a UI will mean money and FDI coming to NI - from Dublin, GB, USA, and the EU.

If it is obvious that following a vote for UI that the economy will boom, then UI might become unstoppable.

You're being overly simplistic IMO. Unionism and Loyalism comprise a core element of these people's identities. They won't just flip on the basis of an economic argument. This is the lesson from the failed Remain campaign of 2016.

That said, I can't see how a UI won't happen but it's be a gradual, painstaking process a referendum on which will only begin. Unionist support won't materialise IMO but they'll be too small demographically to prevent a unification vote.

banie01

We all know that for a significant portion of N.I's population, the UK matters far more to them, than them to the UK.

Reunification is coming, it's an economic and growing political certainty.

We need to ensure that we can offer a coherent and overarching strategy to embrace it when it comes.
Be it the obvious ones like ensuring Unionist tradition is respected, that parity of esteem means just that.
Or the not so immediately obvious ones such as Healthcare integration. Should we in the Republic use the hope of impending unification to build a better Health Service?
To out NHS the NHS?

What happens with the pensions burden, how do we ensure that a net receiver of UK funds, walks away with something to add to the states pot other than dependents when they leave?

The constitution makes clear what numbers of representatives will accrue to N.I should they join the Republic, but how do we ensure that doesn't result in an embattled minority mindset?
What further amendments to the constitution are needed to keep transition smooth?

blanch152

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You're being overly simplistic IMO. Unionism and Loyalism comprise a core element of these people's identities. They won't just flip on the basis of an economic argument. This is the lesson from the failed Remain campaign of 2016.

That said, I can't see how a UI won't happen but it's be a gradual, painstaking process a referendum on which will only begin. Unionist support won't materialise IMO but they'll be too small demographically to prevent a unification vote.

At best support for a United Ireland has been static over the last decade.

Analysing poll returns shows that the share of the vote garnered by SF and SDLP is declining over time. Arguably, it is being replaced by a younger demographic who vote more for the likes of the Alliance Party, Green Party and PBP, non-sectarian alternatives to the traditional parties.

Where this is going is a matter for debate, but some of the academic work talks about the emergence of a Northern Irish identity, which, while apathetic to the union, has no real interest in a united Ireland which would erode some of that Northern Irish identity which has been heavily influenced by the UK. The situation is a lot more complicated and nuanced than many believe.

FrancieBrady

Sam Russell wrote: »

When Harold Wilson was trying to dissuade Ian Smith from declaring UDI in Rhodesia and establish 'One man - One vote' (as the indigenous population did not automatically get a vote) Ian Smith replied that you do not even have one man one vote in the UK. Wilson replied that that was not true - but Ian Smith pointed out that in NI some voters got as many as six votes while other got one, giving rise to Unionist majorities that should not have existed.

Wilson admitted that he was not aware of this, but checked and found it to be true. Punctured his belief in UK democracy a bit. So an English Labour PM was not aware of a lack of democracy in NI - what a surprise. I wonder if he cared enough about it to do anything.

Ian Smith did declare UDI - and now, following a bit of aggro, the name of the former Rhodesia is Zimbabwe.

They basically turned a blind eye to Unionists changing the voting system in the North after partition and the rest, as they say, is tragic history.
Never knew that Wilson story.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

At best support for a United Ireland has been static over the last decade.

Analysing poll returns shows that the share of the vote garnered by SF and SDLP is declining over time. Arguably, it is being replaced by a younger demographic who vote more for the likes of the Alliance Party, Green Party and PBP, non-sectarian alternatives to the traditional parties.

Where this is going is a matter for debate, but some of the academic work talks about the emergence of a Northern Irish identity, which, while apathetic to the union, has no real interest in a united Ireland which would erode some of that Northern Irish identity which has been heavily influenced by the UK. The situation is a lot more complicated and nuanced than many believe.

This 'Northern Irish' identity is actually two different identities if you look into it. And isn't really going to coalesce.

cgcsb

onrail wrote: »

Outside the hardline 10-15% on either side, all people are loyal to in the North are their secure, well pensioned, publicly funded jobs.

Either denomination will toe the party line in public - but once it comes to a ballot, unless their jobs and pensions can be guaranteed they'll vote for the status quo.

Would be completely different if NI had 12.5% corporation tax and the euro currency though. FDI would make the low public service salaries unattractive quite quickly.

Sam Russell

cgcsb wrote: »

Would be completely different if NI had 12.5% corporation tax and the euro currency though. FDI would make the low public service salaries unattractive quite quickly.

Also, we could do with a few more public servants that could make our current lot a bit more efficient. Well, move some Dublin based functions to NI, and reduce the pressure on Dublin housing.

A UI, would cause a huge rise in house prices in NI, I would guess.

A UI might allow some PNSI personnel to transfer to the Gardai - we have had one already.

A UI might generate a move to more decision power to be moved to local authorities, but that would require a reform of LAs in this side as well as NI. The EU believes in subsidiarity, but the Irish Government does not. Mind you, the current calibre of LA political personnel might be some justification for that. [Who is going to feed the gondolas?]

A UI might, in the longer term, cause the emergence of a Left/Right political system instead of Civil War politics. [I would include the division in NI in that Civil War politics process].

A UI might lead to greater peace and prosperity for all on this Ireland. I think it would undoubtedly make Ireland a better place in which to live and work - we just have to assure the Unionist that that in fact that would be true and their place in a UI would be fully respected, and they would be expected to fully respect a UI.

It will be a long road - we are already 100 years into it.

blanch152

cgcsb wrote: »

Would be completely different if NI had 12.5% corporation tax and the euro currency though. FDI would make the low public service salaries unattractive quite quickly.

It took 30 years for FDI to increase prosperity in the South, why would it happen quicker in the North?

cgcsb

blanch152 wrote: »

It took 30 years for FDI to increase prosperity in the South, why would it happen quicker in the North?

No it didn't. Ireland's 12.5% headline rate was phased in from 1996 to 2003. And yes in a modern globalised world things move faster.

Chips Lovell

I may be mad thinking this, but I suspect we could reach a point where a border poll could be easier to pass in Northern Ireland than in Ireland. I can see voters' attitudes changing when the prospect of a union moves from being a remote, romantic notion to an immediate and expensive possibility.

Given the immense pressure the government is under regarding housing and health, it's hard to imagine taxpayers opting to lump it with another expensive burden.

blanch152

Chips Lovell wrote: »

I may be mad thinking this, but I suspect we could reach a point where a border poll could be easier to pass in Northern Ireland than in Ireland. I can see voters' attitudes changing when the prospect of a union moves from being a remote, romantic notion to an immediate and expensive possibility.

Given the immense pressure the government is under regarding housing and health, it's hard to imagine taxpayers opting to lump it with another expensive burden.

That is a remote possibility. However, public service pay rates are lower in the North and social welfare payments are lower there too.

If unification was to mean increasing those to the levels of the South, and imposing that burden on the taxpayer in the South (there is no way EU or UK would pay for such measures), then that would be a small possibility. However, that small possibility would increase dramatically if the proposal involved cutting teachers and nurses pay in the South, halving most social welfare payments and abolishing child benefit. Harmonisation and how it will be done or paid for is the big elephant in the room that republicans refuse to even contemplate let alone talk about. The best you will get is that it will happen over time and FDI will save the day - this at a time when FDI is getting more difficult to obtain for the South.

Here is one to consider. All primary teachers in Ireland must be competent in Irish and it is taught at primary level. How can that continue in a united Ireland that respects all traditions? Where are we left with the teaching of religion? Will third-level students pay fees in the North? What time of year will the A-Levels/Leaving Certificate take place and how will they be equated? Those questions are only in education, replicate them across the whole of the public service and you see the questions that need answering.

Germany only split for the guts of 40 years and has had great difficulty re-integrating even now, another 30 years on it hasn't been done. We have had two systems for 100 years, possibly the most stable land border in Europe, the task is so much greater.

ancapailldorcha

blanch152 wrote: »

At best support for a United Ireland has been static over the last decade.

Analysing poll returns shows that the share of the vote garnered by SF and SDLP is declining over time. Arguably, it is being replaced by a younger demographic who vote more for the likes of the Alliance Party, Green Party and PBP, non-sectarian alternatives to the traditional parties.

Where this is going is a matter for debate, but some of the academic work talks about the emergence of a Northern Irish identity, which, while apathetic to the union, has no real interest in a united Ireland which would erode some of that Northern Irish identity which has been heavily influenced by the UK. The situation is a lot more complicated and nuanced than many believe.

According to this, 51% want a border poll within 5 years.

I'm not familiar with NI's voting patterns so I'll defer to you there but ultimately the country is having it's democratic will overridden by English nationalists. Unionists have been shown yet another time that the English care not one whit about them.

There's no real reason for NI to follow the UK into artificial irrelevance. That said, I don't know how a border poll can happen without consent from London which won't be before 2024 at the very, very earliest. Even Dublin may be reluctant as Chips Lovell points out.

Chips Lovell wrote: »

I may be mad thinking this, but I suspect we could reach a point where a border poll could be easier to pass in Northern Ireland than in Ireland. I can see voters' attitudes changing when the prospect of a union moves from being a remote, romantic notion to an immediate and expensive possibility.

Given the immense pressure the government is under regarding housing and health, it's hard to imagine taxpayers opting to lump it with another expensive burden.

I don't think you're mad. I think you're looking at the one player who tends to get overlooked in these debates.

My knowledge of Irish affairs is certainly lacking. The question is whether or not the Irish people want to accept such a financial burden on top of the crises in housing and the HSE and whether or not they'll allow romantic nationalism to cloud their judgement.

cgcsb

blanch152 wrote: »

That is a remote possibility. However, public service pay rates are lower in the North and social welfare payments are lower there too.

If unification was to mean increasing those to the levels of the South, and imposing that burden on the taxpayer in the South (there is no way EU or UK would pay for such measures), then that would be a small possibility. However, that small possibility would increase dramatically if the proposal involved cutting teachers and nurses pay in the South, halving most social welfare payments and abolishing child benefit. Harmonisation and how it will be done or paid for is the big elephant in the room that republicans refuse to even contemplate let alone talk about. The best you will get is that it will happen over time and FDI will save the day - this at a time when FDI is getting more difficult to obtain for the South.

Here is one to consider. All primary teachers in Ireland must be competent in Irish and it is taught at primary level. How can that continue in a united Ireland that respects all traditions? Where are we left with the teaching of religion? Will third-level students pay fees in the North? What time of year will the A-Levels/Leaving Certificate take place and how will they be equated? Those questions are only in education, replicate them across the whole of the public service and you see the questions that need answering.

Germany only split for the guts of 40 years and has had great difficulty re-integrating even now, another 30 years on it hasn't been done. We have had two systems for 100 years, possibly the most stable land border in Europe, the task is so much greater.

I think the UK would be happy to pay the barnett formula for 30 years if it meant permanently off loading the region. The EU is likely to provide buckets of infrastructure money. Germany is our friend here after we supported their unification campaign, France will still support anything that they perceive as brit bashing. The USA under a democrat would also be keen to pitch in. You must have forgotten that the new free state in 1921 hadn't a pot to piss in.
Germany's unification was a much more complicated process, one was a planned communist economy and one was the free market, apples and oranges. The structural economic difference between NI and the RoI is really nothing that can't be solved by FDI and improved infrastructure.

onrail

cgcsb wrote: »

Would be completely different if NI had 12.5% corporation tax and the euro currency though. FDI would make the low public service salaries unattractive quite quickly.

'A bird in the hand.. etc etc...'

By ROI terms, public sector positions are modestly paid, but once you factor in pension contributions (around 23% for new entrants, more previously) and the low price of housing/living up there, public sector employees are generally quite comfortable.

It'll take much more than promises of a possible FDI increase to change attitudes.

Sam Russell

Maybe we should copy Bevan's solution to setting up the NHS. He asked the private sector doctors what they wanted to set up the NHS, and they said - money. So he gave it to them - he filled their mouths with money in his words.

Sinn Fein will never bring about a UI, they are seen as the devil incarnate by the DUP and Loyalists, and whatever they propose, the DUP/L are against it - Free milk for school kids - Never, Never, Never.

No, ask the Unionist side what they would need, and see if we can do that.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I also think guilt figures a lot in British thinking. I have some busiess contacts in Luton, classic Union Jack towel at the swimming pool couple, always posting Brexit stuff to Facebook who constantly apologise for what happened in Ireland. They know it wasn't their finest hour and have a wish to put it right. There is a lot of that across Britain and finds voice in some parliamenterians too.

I have literally never heard of one single English person ever having any guilt over NI.
at that includes me living there until 11 and all my (Irish) family that still live there!

FrancieBrady

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

According to this, 51% want a border poll within 5 years.

I'm not familiar with NI's voting patterns so I'll defer to you there but ultimately the country is having it's democratic will overridden by English nationalists. Unionists have been shown yet another time that the English care not one whit about them.

There's no real reason for NI to follow the UK into artificial irrelevance. That said, I don't know how a border poll can happen without consent from London which won't be before 2024 at the very, very earliest. Even Dublin may be reluctant as Chips Lovell points out.



I don't think you're mad. I think you're looking at the one player who tends to get overlooked in these debates.

My knowledge of Irish affairs is certainly lacking. The question is whether or not the Irish people want to accept such a financial burden on top of the crises in housing and the HSE and whether or not they'll allow romantic nationalism to cloud their judgement.

2024 would be fine. The last thing you want is a 'quick' Border Poll. There has to be time for a proper structured discussion of the issues and changes neccessary for it to suceed. Those who think that we will just transfer the PS and other systems to the Southern model are deluded and are missing the point. It will be and should be a time to renew and fix all the broken dysfunctional systems o both sides.

Chips Lovell

blanch152 wrote: »

...there is no way EU or UK would pay for such measures...

cgcsb wrote: »

I think the UK would be happy to pay the barnett formula for 30 years if it meant permanently off loading the region.

I'd agree with cgcsb here. I think the UK would probably be willing to pay us to take Northern Ireland off their hands. But that would beg the question among voters here of why they were so eager to get rid of it.

blanch152 wrote: »

Here is one to consider. All primary teachers in Ireland must be competent in Irish and it is taught at primary level. How can that continue in a united Ireland that respects all traditions?

It won't. Any settlement is likely to require a completely new state with a new constitution that guarantees the rights and the traditions of the two Northern communities.

Sam Russell wrote: »

No, ask the Unionist side what they would need, and see if we can do that.

I'd imagine that (in addition to money and jobs) they'd probably ask that we rejoin the Commonwealth with the Queen as Head of State?

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

A UI might allow some PNSI personnel to transfer to the Gardai - we have had one already.
.

There is a lot more than one down here. If a united Ireland were to happen, the two forces would have to amalgamate, a major problem if you ask me.

Sam Russell

bubblypop wrote: »

There is a lot more than one down here. If a united Ireland were to happen, the two forces would have to amalgamate, a major problem if you ask me.

That was a poke at the Garda Commissioner - get a life.

No, the PNSI could continue on a similar basis as the RIC and the DMP worked prior to independence.

In the UK, they have dozens of Constabularies that all have their own Chief Constable, and are all independent of each other. How does that work?

Shelga

Chips Lovell wrote: »

I'd imagine that (in addition to money and jobs) they'd probably ask that we rejoin the Commonwealth with the Queen as Head of State?

God, I'm no hardcore republican, but absolutely not, to this.

blanch152

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

According to this, 51% want a border poll within 5 years.

I'm not familiar with NI's voting patterns so I'll defer to you there but ultimately the country is having it's democratic will overridden by English nationalists. Unionists have been shown yet another time that the English care not one whit about them.

There's no real reason for NI to follow the UK into artificial irrelevance. That said, I don't know how a border poll can happen without consent from London which won't be before 2024 at the very, very earliest. Even Dublin may be reluctant as Chips Lovell points out.



I don't think you're mad. I think you're looking at the one player who tends to get overlooked in these debates.

My knowledge of Irish affairs is certainly lacking. The question is whether or not the Irish people want to accept such a financial burden on top of the crises in housing and the HSE and whether or not they'll allow romantic nationalism to cloud their judgement.

That opinion poll is an interesting one, particularly the way it has been reported. Most of the attention has been on the 51% that want a border poll in the next five years. However, what is being lost is that some of that 51% includes people who believe, rightly or wrongly, that the poll will strongly favour remaining in the union and therefore a poll deals with the issue for a couple of decades.

What was missed was that support for a united Ireland is at 42% in the poll.

https://thedetail.tv/articles/a-majority-favour-a-border-poll-on-the-island-of-ireland-in-the-next-10-years

A similar poll by the same company last year showed support for a united Ireland at 45.4%. The fall in a year is more than the margin of error suggesting that it is a real fall. That runs counter to the narrative that Brexit would increase support for a united Ireland. It has also resulted in the gap widening from 1.4% to 5%, again a significant change.

Incidentally, in that poll last year, over 75% supported the idea of a border poll either now or at some time in the future. A different question asked this year, but 51% supporting a poll in the next five years can be read several ways.

If these polls turn into annual events, it will be interesting to see what next year's one reveals, as Brexit settles down.

On the broader pattern of election results in the North, the combined SF/SDLP vote in the 2010 general election in the North was 43%, in 2019 it was 37.7%. Election preferences are splintering in the North in the way that they did here, but rather than a rise in support for fringe and extremist parties, it is the centrist parties like Alliance and the Greens who are seeing increases in the North.

Sam Russell

Sam Russell wrote: »

That was a poke at the Garda Commissioner - get a life.

No, the PNSI could continue on a similar basis as the RIC and the DMP worked prior to independence.

In the UK, they have dozens of Constabularies that all have their own Chief Constable, and are all independent of each other. How does that work?

get a life?
I was responding to a post you made in a genuine and serious way, no need for that.

It would be great if they did stay seperate, but the republican population in the North will want AGS over the PSNI, for sure.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

That opinion poll is an interesting one, particularly the way it has been reported. Most of the attention has been on the 51% that want a border poll in the next five years. However, what is being lost is that some of that 51% includes people who believe, rightly or wrongly, that the poll will strongly favour remaining in the union and therefore a poll deals with the issue for a couple of decades.

What was missed was that support for a united Ireland is at 42% in the poll.

https://thedetail.tv/articles/a-majority-favour-a-border-poll-on-the-island-of-ireland-in-the-next-10-years

A similar poll by the same company last year showed support for a united Ireland at 45.4%. The fall in a year is more than the margin of error suggesting that it is a real fall. That runs counter to the narrative that Brexit would increase support for a united Ireland. It has also resulted in the gap widening from 1.4% to 5%, again a significant change.

Incidentally, in that poll last year, over 75% supported the idea of a border poll either now or at some time in the future. A different question asked this year, but 51% supporting a poll in the next five years can be read several ways.

If these polls turn into annual events, it will be interesting to see what next year's one reveals, as Brexit settles down.

On the broader pattern of election results in the North, the combined SF/SDLP vote in the 2010 general election in the North was 43%, in 2019 it was 37.7%. Election preferences are splintering in the North in the way that they did here, but rather than a rise in support for fringe and extremist parties, it is the centrist parties like Alliance and the Greens who are seeing increases in the North.

Taking the 'don't knows' into account 7% in the Detail and 11% in the most recent one and the fall in support being 3 % shows that some have wavered on the Brexit issue and how it will pan out for the north. Fairly normal and understandable for those who remain to be fully convinced.

cgcsb

Chips Lovell wrote: »

I'd imagine that (in addition to money and jobs) they'd probably ask that we rejoin the Commonwealth with the Queen as Head of State?

No doubt they'd be asked and be promptly rebuked.

ancapailldorcha

blanch152 wrote: »

That opinion poll is an interesting one, particularly the way it has been reported. Most of the attention has been on the 51% that want a border poll in the next five years. However, what is being lost is that some of that 51% includes people who believe, rightly or wrongly, that the poll will strongly favour remaining in the union and therefore a poll deals with the issue for a couple of decades.

What was missed was that support for a united Ireland is at 42% in the poll.

https://thedetail.tv/articles/a-majority-favour-a-border-poll-on-the-island-of-ireland-in-the-next-10-years

A similar poll by the same company last year showed support for a united Ireland at 45.4%. The fall in a year is more than the margin of error suggesting that it is a real fall. That runs counter to the narrative that Brexit would increase support for a united Ireland. It has also resulted in the gap widening from 1.4% to 5%, again a significant change.

Incidentally, in that poll last year, over 75% supported the idea of a border poll either now or at some time in the future. A different question asked this year, but 51% supporting a poll in the next five years can be read several ways.

If these polls turn into annual events, it will be interesting to see what next year's one reveals, as Brexit settles down.

On the broader pattern of election results in the North, the combined SF/SDLP vote in the 2010 general election in the North was 43%, in 2019 it was 37.7%. Election preferences are splintering in the North in the way that they did here, but rather than a rise in support for fringe and extremist parties, it is the centrist parties like Alliance and the Greens who are seeing increases in the North.

What needs bearing in mind is that we're at least several years away from a border poll so we can't account for how circumstances might alter between now and then and there's also the fact that each side will run a referendum campaign that will sway some moderates.

FrancieBrady

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What needs bearing in mind is that we're at least several years away from a border poll so we can't account for how circumstances might alter between now and then and there's also the fact that each side will run a referendum campaign that will sway some moderates.

Polling for Scottish Independence was running in the mid 30's in 2012 when the referendum was allowed.
What led to the poll was a fall in support for the Union.

blanch152

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What needs bearing in mind is that we're at least several years away from a border poll so we can't account for how circumstances might alter between now and then and there's also the fact that each side will run a referendum campaign that will sway some moderates.

Agreed, but the narrative over the last few years has been that the gap is closing and that Brexit will increase support for a united Ireland. To date, the figures and evidence don't back that up.

Another aspect worth considering is the fear of change. A united Ireland will mean change in every aspect of Northern life from road markings to the length of the school year not to mention all of the financial aspects. The closer you get to such a vote the more this fear of change rises to the fore. It defeated the Scottish independence referendum. The only time it didn't succeed was in the Brexit referendum where the inability of the opposition to highlight the details of the changes the referendum would bring together with the jingoistic exclusionary nationalist approach of the Brexiteers won the day.

ancapailldorcha

blanch152 wrote: »

Agreed, but the narrative over the last few years has been that the gap is closing and that Brexit will increase support for a united Ireland. To date, the figures and evidence don't back that up.

Another aspect worth considering is the fear of change. A united Ireland will mean change in every aspect of Northern life from road markings to the length of the school year not to mention all of the financial aspects. The closer you get to such a vote the more this fear of change rises to the fore. It defeated the Scottish independence referendum. The only time it didn't succeed was in the Brexit referendum where the inability of the opposition to highlight the details of the changes the referendum would bring together with the jingoistic exclusionary nationalist approach of the Brexiteers won the day.

Brexit has only just happened and has placed a wedge between London and Belfast completely unnecessarily.

I don't think people are going to focus on school years or road markings. The Republic is a modern European state. The alternative is to follow the UK into relative decline. I don't see where fear of change comes from in an economic context here. What defeated the IndyRef was the fact that they might be leaving the EU and then it turned out that this was going to be forced on them anyway.

The arguments for Unionism rested in stability as well as getting money from London, Dublin and Brussels. The Conservatives have destroyed this foundation and there isn't a substitute.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Agreed, but the narrative over the last few years has been that the gap is closing and that Brexit will increase support for a united Ireland. To date, the figures and evidence don't back that up.

Another aspect worth considering is the fear of change. A united Ireland will mean change in every aspect of Northern life from road markings to the length of the school year not to mention all of the financial aspects. The closer you get to such a vote the more this fear of change rises to the fore. It defeated the Scottish independence referendum. The only time it didn't succeed was in the Brexit referendum where the inability of the opposition to highlight the details of the changes the referendum would bring together with the jingoistic exclusionary nationalist approach of the Brexiteers won the day.

Again with the suppisition that NI will simply merge into how we do things here.

Sam Russell

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again with the suppisition that NI will simply merge into how we do things here.

Or maybe they might get us to do things better.

FrancieBrady

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Brexit has only just happened and has placed a wedge between London and Belfast completely unnecessarily.

I don't think people are going to focus on school years or road markings. The Republic is a modern European state. The alternative is to follow the UK into relative decline. I don't see where fear of change comes from in an economic context here. What defeated the IndyRef was the fact that they might be leaving the EU and then it turned out that this was going to be forced on them anyway.

The arguments for Unionism rested in stability as well as getting money from London, Dublin and Brussels. The Conservatives have destroyed this foundation and there isn't a substitute.

The false panicked promises from Cameron etc also helped at the very last minute.

What that will result in is increased support next time out, because none of it came to pass. Same applies here. The GFA is a process, it doesn't stop just because one referendum is defeated. That is why Unionism and partitionism is so fightened of letting the real conversation begin and the first poll happen, because they will have to make promises they know can't be kept.

FrancieBrady

Sam Russell wrote: »

Or maybe they might get us to do things better.

That's the opportunity.

Bishop of hope

banie01 wrote: »

We all know that for a significant portion of N.I's population, the UK matters far more to them, than them to the UK.

Reunification is coming, it's an economic and growing political certainty.

We need to ensure that we can offer a coherent and overarching strategy to embrace it when it comes.
Be it the obvious ones like ensuring Unionist tradition is respected, that parity of esteem means just that.
Or the not so immediately obvious ones such as Healthcare integration. Should we in the Republic use the hope of impending unification to build a better Health Service?
To out NHS the NHS?

What happens with the pensions burden, how do we ensure that a net receiver of UK funds, walks away with something to add to the states pot other than dependents when they leave?

The constitution makes clear what numbers of representatives will accrue to N.I should they join the Republic, but how do we ensure that doesn't result in an embattled minority mindset?
What further amendments to the constitution are needed to keep transition smooth?

The pension burden is not that hard to figure out maybe.
Anyone working in the UK, which NI is at the moment, are fully entitled to their UK pension regardless of whether they reside there or not.
I'll be getting one at some stage I hope.
That whole burden won't fall on the Republic or a UI till further down the line.

breezy1985

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I wasn't saying that all that isn't there too. I was just pointing out the presence of guilt with some.

My most common experience would be the same as yours...total ignorance of the history and geography.

I wasn't trying to discredit your story just adding my very different experience

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The false panicked promises from Cameron etc also helped at the very last minute.

What that will result in is increased support next time out, because none of it came to pass. Same applies here. The GFA is a process, it doesn't stop just because one referendum is defeated. That is why Unionism and partitionism is so fightened of letting the real conversation begin and the first poll happen, because they will have to make promises they know can't be kept.

Is it a process? Here is a link you provided earlier in the thread.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is factually wrong. The SoS can call a poll at any time.

https://sluggerotoole.com/2021/01/24/a-border-poll-can-be-held-at-any-time-redux/

"Another misconception is that the calling of a border poll would trigger a mechanism whereby a further border poll would occur automatically every seven years."

"It is often claimed that when this time period elapses that a further poll would occur, but this is not what the legislation says : instead, we would be back at the point where the Secretary of State would not call a poll in the absence of circumstances that he feels require one."

Now, I am not saying that I agree with the article, and neither am I saying that it is wrong. However, it is clear that the first referendum may be the only one ever held, especially if it is defeated strongly despite opinion polls showing a close result as that would change the perspective of future SoS. The first referendum may end the debate.

BonnieSituation

blanch152 wrote: »

Is it a process? Here is a link you provided earlier in the thread.



"Another misconception is that the calling of a border poll would trigger a mechanism whereby a further border poll would occur automatically every seven years."

"It is often claimed that when this time period elapses that a further poll would occur, but this is not what the legislation says : instead, we would be back at the point where the Secretary of State would not call a poll in the absence of circumstances that he feels require one."

Now, I am not saying that I agree with the article, and neither am I saying that it is wrong. However, it is clear that the first referendum may be the only one ever held, especially if it is defeated strongly despite opinion polls showing a close result as that would change the perspective of future SoS. The first referendum may end the debate.

A border poll cannot be called within 7 years of the previous one. That's what the GFA says.

It doesn't mean that the schedule is one every 7 years after the first one has been.

If a poll is narrowly defeated you would logically assume that the SoS, as he is obliged, would order another one should the same criteria that caused the previous one to be called, would arise again.

But it's all supposition. So we just wait on the first one to called...

You can panic then.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Is it a process? Here is a link you provided earlier in the thread.



"Another misconception is that the calling of a border poll would trigger a mechanism whereby a further border poll would occur automatically every seven years."

"It is often claimed that when this time period elapses that a further poll would occur, but this is not what the legislation says : instead, we would be back at the point where the Secretary of State would not call a poll in the absence of circumstances that he feels require one."

Now, I am not saying that I agree with the article, and neither am I saying that it is wrong. However, it is clear that the first referendum may be the only one ever held, especially if it is defeated strongly despite opinion polls showing a close result as that would change the perspective of future SoS. The first referendum may end the debate.

Anything is possible.

Other than that not sure what you are trying to say.

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

A border poll cannot be called within 7 years of the previous one. That's what the GFA says.

It doesn't mean that the schedule is one every 7 years after the first one has been.

If a poll is narrowly defeated you would logically assume that the SoS, as he is obliged, would order another one should the same criteria that caused the previous one to be called, would arise again.

But it's all supposition. So we just wait on the first one to called...

You can panic then.

The Scottish Independence campaign got a referendum when they showed 30-35% in the polls. The SoS can call a referendum at any time he/she likes as the expert opinion shows, so that could be tomorrow based on the numbers in the polls. Like Scotland I would expect Union support to fall as Brexit bites.

cgcsb

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Scottish Independence campaign got a referendum when they showed 30-35% in the polls. The SoS can call a referendum at any time he/she likes as the expert opinion shows, so that could be tomorrow based on the numbers in the polls. Like Scotland I would expect Union support to fall as Brexit bites.

The results of the 2022 election can be a good indicator. Depends how badly England want it. The current Tory government have shown a willingness to push hard against NI unionism. I expect nationalist parties becoming dominant in the assembly is all that will be needed.

Del.Monte

In the unlikely event of Scottish Independence 'we' may need Belfast or Strangford Loughs for the nuclear submarines so another reason to hold on to the north.

breezy1985

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Scottish Independence campaign got a referendum when they showed 30-35% in the polls.

But that only tells part of the story. SNP votes were rising steadily and the had a landslide in Holyrood on an independence ticket in 2011 and have had close to a monopoly in Westminster ever since

Forget the polls the real turning point will be if Sinn Fein secure the First Minister job and if the exclusively right wing unionists keep bleeding votes to the moderate Alliance Party

cgcsb

Del.Monte wrote: »

In the unlikely event of Scottish Independence 'we' may need Belfast or Strangford Loughs for the nuclear submarines so another reason to hold on to the north.

I thought it was up to the people of NI what their constitutional future is?

blanch152

breezy1985 wrote: »

But that only tells part of the story. SNP votes were rising steadily and the had a landslide in Holyrood on an independence ticket in 2011 and have had close to a monopoly in Westminster ever since

Forget the polls the real turning point will be if Sinn Fein secure the First Minister job and if the exclusively right wing unionists keep bleeding votes to the moderate Alliance Party

I fully expect Sinn Fein to secure the First Minister job after the next Stormont elections. It will be painted as a success for nationalism, but I also expect it to be in the context of a further decline in the nationalist vote taken together with a deeper decline in the DUP vote. The middle ground, occupied by the Northern Ireland identity will increase further. Ultimately, that group will only vote for a united Ireland if it gives the Six Counties more autonomy than they currently have in the UK. That is not the dream peddled by Sinn Fein.

FrancieBrady

breezy1985 wrote: »

But that only tells part of the story. SNP votes were rising steadily and the had a landslide in Holyrood on an independence ticket in 2011 and have had close to a monopoly in Westminster ever since

Forget the polls the real turning point will be if Sinn Fein secure the First Minister job and if the exclusively right wing unionists keep bleeding votes to the moderate Alliance Party

It will be a combination, I agree. SDLP ramping up the UI talk will factor in too.

Del.Monte

cgcsb wrote: »

I thought it was up to the people of NI what their constitutional future is?

But, but ...think of all the employment it would bring?

irish_goat

Del.Monte wrote: »

In the unlikely event of Scottish Independence 'we' may need Belfast or Strangford Loughs for the nuclear submarines so another reason to hold on to the north.

No chance the British government would waste the money (and political energy) putting nuclear subs in Irish water.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I fully expect Sinn Fein to secure the First Minister job after the next Stormont elections. It will be painted as a success for nationalism, but I also expect it to be in the context of a further decline in the nationalist vote taken together with a deeper decline in the DUP vote. The middle ground, occupied by the Northern Ireland identity will increase further. Ultimately, that group will only vote for a united Ireland if it gives the Six Counties more autonomy than they currently have in the UK. That is not the dream peddled by Sinn Fein.

You really need to accept that the 'Northern Irish' dentity thing is not a cohesive identity. It is people from both sides moving away from their 'side' but not closer to one another.

It's a nuance everybody gets if they know the north.