Brexit Impact on Northern Ireland

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120974870#Comment_120974870

When the leader of the Irish governing party most disposed to ignoring the North is saying that 'alternatives' to devolution must be sought in the Autmn then Unionism should know that is a sea change from Dublin.

It should be clear that Dublin won't be standing by and watching Direct Rule, they will want to fulfil their role outlined by the GFA.

Like they ignored what were told what would happen and warned about if they pursued Brexit, I reckon it will not alter their course.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/leo-varadkar-northern-ireland-stormont-irish-uk-government-b2390377.html

Peregrinus

I take your point, Francie, but the way things are set up the two governments have to agree about this for anything meaningful to happen, and I'm a bit pessimistic about the the willingness and even the ability of the present shower in Westminster to focus on this problem, much less to take any initiative that might be controversial.

I suspect IRLGOV is taking the stance it is as a signal to the next Westminster government, who (we hope) will have some people currently strategizing about how they are going to deal with the unholy mess that is Stormont at the moment.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120972823#Comment_120972823

Not true, the GFA is an intergovernmental agreement. It actually doesn't need a referendum to change it. The only referendum is if the SoS thinks that a border poll is likely to pass.

Both governments could agree to Joint Authority, they could also agree to change the rules of Stormont.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120975635#Comment_120975635

Even within that there is a warning for Unionism. The British could just take their lead from Dublin, because they are no longer interested.

I think the Irish government see where this is inevitably going and Varadkar's statement, in a percieved bastion of Unionism/Loyalism was part of an ongoing attempt to be seen to take a lead on a Border Poll and Unity. Certainly riled up the Bryson's and McAllister's, which wasn't the target. They are after the nationalist/republican hearts and minds.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120975770#Comment_120975770

Mmm. They could be trying to strengthen the hand of the less-mad faction in the DUP. I'm pretty sure that the outcome IRLGOV would actually like is not some form of joint authority; it's restoration of the institutions. The tactic is to point out that the DUP's current policy sets NI on a path towards joint authority, in the hope that this will assist those within the DUP who favour a change of course.

downcow

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120975718#Comment_120975718

I wasn’t necessarily suggesting a referendum. I could eg be an all Perry agreement. Yes, the Uk government could do more or less anything, but it would seem logical try try and give some semblance of cross community support, or risk renewed problems

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120979571#Comment_120979571

Problem is that the UK government has never accepted that Brexit must be implemented in NI on terms that command cross-community support and, for obv reasons, it's not something they are going to concede now. So if the terms of Brexit are not going to change (and, in the short to medium term at least, they are not) we are left with asking what changes can be made to the GFA, with cross-party agreement, that will persuade the DUP to live with the terms of Brexit without throwing their toys out of the pram? And the obvious answer is, none. Why would any of the other parties agree that the terms of the GFA should be changed because the DUP is in a strop about the Brexit they so enthusiastically supported?

Cross party support for any changes to the GFA is, in principle, highly desirable. But this issue here is that we need to make changes to the GFA to prevent the DUP from collapsing the institutions in an attempt to put pressure on Westminster over the terms of Brexit. And of course the DUP will not agree to changes which would prevent it from doing that, so there won't be cross-party agreement.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120979521#Comment_120979521

I'd disagree, I think they would be up for joint authority if only to complete what they both (FF and FG) have shown interest in before, an actual physical involvement/presence in NI politics.

Whatever the Dublin motivation is, Unionist strategy is inexorably ushering in influences that they seem to think their strategy will deter. Nobody seems to have the capability to alter course.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120979571#Comment_120979571

A referendum in Northern Ireland is only required on a change in constitutional status.

Enhancement of the inter-governmental aspect is a matter for the two governments, not internally in Northern Ireland. Similarly, the rules of Stormont are not a constitutional status issue and could be changed without a referendum by the two governments. Politically, it might not be the most popular approach in Northern Ireland but when you are faced with dealing with two main sectarian parties in DUP and SF who act like some strange mix of toddlers and teenagers, it might be the only way to move things along.

Wouldn't it be fantastic if there was a proper election and the Alliance/SDLP held the balance of power?

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120980207#Comment_120980207

Nothing fantastical about it if these things happen democratically.

What intrigues me about your solution is how do you propose to deal with the large sections of both communities who don’t/won’t vote for the parties you choose to run the place. You seem to be suggesting bypassing or ignoring them.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120980767#Comment_120980767

Two democratically elected governments can conclude an international agreement democratically by having the agreement passed through their national parliaments. So long as the agreement is compatible with the Irish constitution, no referendum is needed in either jurisdiction.

If we have free elections, we will have one nationalist sectarian rump (SF) with about 30% of the vote, and another unionist sectarian rump (DUP, TUV) with about the same. They can either coalesce together, which would be fun, or whichever one of them agreed to be more reasonable and dropped their sectarian aspects, could govern in coalition with the reasonable parties in the middle.

It is the same logic that applies to coalition governments in the South. Your fear, and it is an understandable fear, based on the experience in the South, is that no reasonable party would ever want to do business with SF.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120980910#Comment_120980910

Not going to get into a back and forth.

There is a reason that 'free' elections are not happening and why they are pointless.

The GFA arrangement came about as an attempt to neutralise the artificial majority given to Unionism at partition.

Quite frankly, free elections or not, that artificial majority can still grind the place to a standstill as we have seen.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120982570#Comment_120982570

Rubbish, the GFA did not "come about as an attempt to neutralise the artificial majority given to Unionism at partition.", or indeed the artificial majority in this part of the British Isles given to Nationalism at partition. The GFA came about to get the terrorists to surrender their weapons and semtex, while saving a bit of face for them....in order to bring about relative peace. It more or less worked. Job done.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120984845#Comment_120984845

Look at the GFA and the arrangements made for governance. There is nothing at all about surrender of weapons and semtex in it.

It is a recognition of rights and aspirations of all communities and also a road map for the way forward. Part of that was an agreed system of government that neutralised the artificial Unionist majority by requiring a mandatory coalition whether there was a majority party or not.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120982570#Comment_120982570

But the world has changed in the last 25 years, and so has Northern Ireland.

There is no longer a unionist majority, artificial or not. However, unforeseen by the architects of the GFA, a nationalist majority has not replaced it. Instead, in the beginnings of normalisation, a third minority has emerged in the middle ground, blase or unconcerned about the constitutional issue, attached to the idea of Northern Ireland, and wanting it to work. The GFA, as currently constructed, works against the middle ground, hence the need for change.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120985015#Comment_120985015

I asked you a question there. You didn't even try to answer it.

The facts are, Unionism will not allow NI to work if it is not their way. You cannot get a better example of that, than right now.

Majority support for staying in the EU, majority support for the mitigation of Brexit and they walk because their minority interests are not being met.

There was majority support for an ILA and majority support for Arlene Foster to step away to allow an inquiry, they also blocked both of those decisions.

If cannot see that inherent problem I don't think you should be trying to come up with solutions.

A coalition of others would not last.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120985071#Comment_120985071

My solution deals comprehensively with those issues. Remove the ability for a blocking minority and the DUP can't do what they have done. The problem is your fear of that veto being taken away from Sinn Fein as well. If something - the removal of the veto - is opposed by both SF and the DUP, then any reasonable person should conclude that it is a really good thing to do.

By the way, blaming the whole unionist community for the actions of the DUP is like blaming Omagh on the whole nationalist community, which makes your post particularly disingenuous and divisive again.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120985449#Comment_120985449

Stop putting fears in my mouth.

I have no fear of it as a solution.

My 100% belief is it will not work, because Unionism as an artificial majority can just refuse to partake and that renders the whole excercise useless.

I am not blaming the whole Unionist community either.

The verifiable facts are that politically they have previously worked as a Unionist bloc...the DUP/UUP/TUV etc. See any number of instances of that.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120984936#Comment_120984936

Wrong again Francie. From google, you will learn "Decommissioning in Northern Ireland was a process in the Belfast Agreement as part of the Northern Ireland peace process. Under the Good Friday Agreement/ Belfast Agreement, all paramilitary groups fighting in the Troubles would be subject to decommission. Decommissioning was a defining issue in the effort to negotiate peace in Northern Ireland"

Call it what you want, but the terrorists surrendered their weapons / semtex / got it put beyond use / call it what you will. The forces of law and order kept their weapons. It was, as said before, done in order to bring about relative peace. It more or less worked. We have relative peace. There are probably more murders now per head of population in the Republic than in N.I.

Job done.

It was always understood the British government would leave N.I. if the majority of people there wanted them to. That is why the government held the Referendum there in 1973 asking the people of N.I. if they wished to stay in N.I. or join a U.I. Most of the electorate ( not just most of the voters) voted to stay part of the UK, and everyone over 18 was entitled to vote.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120986782#Comment_120986782

Your facts are intruding on dreams.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120986782#Comment_120986782

The GFA was in fact two agreements.

The main one was between the Irish and British governments. The political parties signed up to the Multi Party Agreement of which paramilitary disarmament was only a part of.

The Irish and British governments were not asked to disarm or decommission. The system of governance we have now was agreed between them and latterly signed up to by the political parties except of course the DUP/TUV. They also agreed a whole raft of things to ensure a peaceful settlement including demilitarisation and rights of self determination and aspiration. The system of government was devised to neutralise/re-balance the artificial majority partition created.

It means that in any government there must be representatives from both the nationalist community - who favour unity with the Republic of Ireland - and unionists, who want Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK.

The idea is that, whatever their historic differences, both communities have a vested interest in the system.

How does Northern Ireland's power-sharing government work? - BBC News

As we know, what Northern Ireland had before this was 50 years of one party (UUP) Unionist government.

Yes, of course it was an effort at establishing peace and it was agreed, voted on in two referenda and implemented without the IRA disarming. That requirement was dropped by John Major's government when the IRA simply refused to do it in 1997.

The Multi Party Agreement was reached without the surrender of arms. De Chastelain announced the decommissioning process was complete in 2005, 7 years after the GFA was made. That is the simple facts.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120986972#Comment_120986972

It does not matter. Under the Good Friday Agreement/ Belfast Agreement, all paramilitary groups fighting in the Troubles were to be - and were - subject to decommissioning / their arms and explosives being destroyed / surrendered / taken away from them / put beyond use / call it what you will. The forces of law and order held on to their weapons. That is what happened, it succeeded and we have relative peace ( probably less murders in N.I now per head of population than in the Republic). Job done.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120987251#Comment_120987251

And, we ALSO have the system of governance (Which is what we were discussing) as a result of the GFA. A system that neutralised/re-balanced what partition created - a one party (UUP) Unionist state for 50 years - by ensuring a 'mandatory coalition'. Which has been as much a part of securing the peace as disarmament was.

It means that in any government there must be representatives from both the nationalist community - who favour unity with the Republic of Ireland - and unionists, who want Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK.

The idea is that, whatever their historic differences, both communities have a vested interest in the system.

moon2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120987251#Comment_120987251

I see you're making some bold statements about homicide rates!

Wikipedia, using the UCNODC dataset, has both Northern Ireland and the UK at a significantly higher homicide rate than Ireland.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

The house of Commons library ( https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8224/#:~:text=Homicide%20rates%20by%20area,12.6%20offences%20per%20million%20population. ) states the following:

Homicide rates by area

In 2022, of all countries in the UK, Northern Ireland had the highest rate of homicide at 12.6 offences per million population. The rate in England and Wales was 11.7, followed by Scotland which had 9.5 offences per million.

----

I checked a few more datasets and everything seemed to be in broad agreed with those two. The homicide rate (which you refer to as 'murder' rate) is highest in Northern Ireland, and lowest by a good margin in Ireland.

All in all, I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make, but anything independently verifiable seems to be inaccurate. I can only assume the entire narrative is equally inaccurate as a result.

Seth Brundle

Mod: back to discussing Brexit & NI or I will close this thread without further warning

FrancieBrady

Latest polling showing little change in the Unionist mindset. I'm not sure when it will sink in that 'getting rid of the protocol completely' is just not going to happen.

Massive majority of MP's in Westminster for the WF, and 75% support for it in Northern Ireland. It is long past time for Unionist leaders to start being honest with their electorate.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/64-of-unionists-back-dups-boycott-of-stormont-until-ni-protocol-scrapped/a684171027.html

serfboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121006494#Comment_121006494

One could argue that Unionist leaders are representing the views of their electorate, the way politicians do.

This poll shows why I disagree with the narrative that it's all the DUP's fault - as if they didn't have political support for their position. The local elections confirm that they do.

I'd hold off on calling for politicians in the North to start being honest with the electorate until I see evidence of politicians down here doing the same.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121006981#Comment_121006981

There has been a tendency by some to blame unionist intransigence or belligerence as some call it, but it is clear from the poll that the DUP stance is based on the democratic wishes of those who support them. That poses a problem for those that call for solutions to be imposed on them.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/review-constitution-northern-ireland

This recent published study is interesting.

"If, as electoral and demographic indicators suggest, a growing number of individuals continue to align with neither a unionist nor a nationalist identity in Northern Ireland (see Hayward and McManus, 2018; Whitten, 2019; NILT, 2021), a growing discrepancy between the identity of its population and its structure of government can be expected – unless, that is, the system is amended such that the sharing of power in Northern Ireland is based on its multiplicity of communities and identities, and not only the two that were predominant in 1998"

One of the proposed solutions in the document is the creation of a third designation, neither unionist nor nationalist and giving it rights. As the paper puts it, "if recent trends continue and no institutional reform regarding designation is agreed, Northern Ireland could quickly be in a situation whereby the operation of government is contingent on choices made by a split minority (unionist + nationalist) despite and against the desire of the lesser-represented majority (neither)."

The paper doesn't also has an interesting angle to solve the issue of collapsing institutions - legislation allowing for a shadow Assembly. All in all, a worthy attempt to catch up with new realities that many deny.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121006981#Comment_121006981

Basically they were lied to serfboard. They were told Brexit was something it clearly wasn't. They have also been relentlessly told by Unionist politicians that Unionism can have a veto over what the majority want.

It's about as perfect a manifestation of Unionist suprematist thinking as you can get that they continue to believe they can force a veto. They believe this because they are told it by their leaders. Never Never Neverism.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121006981#Comment_121006981

It's not the job of politicians to represent the view of their electorate. Opinion polling companies do that much better than politicians ever can. Politician's job it not to mindlessly reflect the views of other people, but to influence them, to advocate to voters, to provide leadership.

The DUP led their voters enthusiastically down the dead end that they are now whingeing incessantly about. If they won't take responsibility for creating the mess, only a fool would look to them to clean it up.