Why I'll say no to a united ireland

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991563#Comment_121991563

Paying for everything is inevitable. It is indisputable that phrasing has a substantial impact on the outcome of polls, as do current affairs. When a border poll is called, do you think that is the phrasing that will be used? I very much doubt it.

To assert confidently that the idea is dead for a lifetime based on a single poll with 52% on your side....patently ridiculous.

Precisely the sort of smug bloviating I predicted. I'd have the same critique for anyone boasting about how a vote passing down here is a sure thing based on a wishy-washy, romantic, 'oh would you some day vote for Unification' poll.

Slideways

Could we not just campaign for a Republic of Northern Ireland. Its own entity, beholding to neither state.

Let it sink or swim

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991610#Comment_121991610

You can campaign for whatever you like of course. The question would be whether you could get significant support on the back of your campaigning.

I doubt it, but if you think it has merit I'd say go for it!

jh79

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991529#Comment_121991529

While i take your point on phrasing generally,in the case of funding unity how else do you ask someone if they are willing to pay the cost? While i think they shouldn't of mentioned the recent study, the results are similar to the previous polls so i don't think it has had too much of an influence.

The whole island knows that NI economy is a basket case. It's not plausible to claim that asking about funding unity via taxation is somehow unfair or biased. A unity tax is inevitable.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991610#Comment_121991610

Scotland was told if it voted for independence it would take with it its share of the UK national debt. If N.I was to do so, the same would be only fair. In which case, the Republic of N.I. will be starting off with a national debt of about £75,000,000,000…and an annual interest rate on same of billions of £ per year.

Same would happen in the US: if say 50 states were all to go independent, it would make sense to divy up US national debt.

If the Japanese islands were to break up, or Tasmania to break away from Oz., same would happen.

omri

If there was a united Ireland will it not simply create a mirror copy of the current political/security situation with the only difference being who is footing majority of the bill for it from UK to IE. And how will the population that is pro UK come to terms with being part or ROI - it doesn’t take much logic to understand that they will not be keen on this thus it’s like running around in circles and the history will likely repeat itself.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121980466#Comment_121980466

The Irish mythology invented in the 19th century still has a grip on some mindsets. There was a political reason for the creation of those myths.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991649#Comment_121991649

You ask them when you have accurate figures(or as accurate as they possibly can be)and a Plan/Proposal.
You don't ask about a headline figure arrived at through dubious means.
By trumpeting this clickbait style report partitionists may have shot themselves in the foot a bit as the discussion and criticisms of it have educated people a bit more on the issues.

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991649#Comment_121991649

Phrasing a polling question around cost intentionally places that front and centre of people's thinking when in reality, the decision making process is obviously a much more complicated affair.

Even without taking the focus away from finances, taxation always carries an inherent negative connotation for a great deal of people. If it was phrased neutrally as just, 'funding', or more positively as an, 'investment', that would change how a substantial number of people respond.

If the question was phrased in an altogether neutral manner (like an actual border poll would and should be), people will work through their own priorities to come to a decision without subconsciously being pushed towards a desired outcome based on the question.

The most useful number on that poll is that there is about a 10% demographic who will not vote for Unification under any circumstances. Let's say hypothetically a similar number who would vote for Unification no matter the consequences, that leaves 80% in various shades of grey who will want to know specifics before voting. While on the light grey side of things, I'd count myself firmly in that demographic. I wouldn't blindly vote for a €400bn cost without knowing what the plan for that expenditure is myself.

jh79

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991690#Comment_121991690

I dunno Francie, while the report is the worst case scenario possible, it's still possible. Those criticising the reports haven't done a good job. Mostly a case of my assumptions are better than his because i say so with little in the way of substance. The fact that these same people fail to offer an alternative cost hasn't gone unnoticed.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991652#Comment_121991652

Who told Scotland that it would "take its share of the UK national debt"? I'm fairly confident that the UK itself had no official position on this (or any other aspect of a hypothetical Scottish independence; they declined to adopt positions on this before a vote for independence). So that would have been a prediction by a political actor, almost certainly a unionist, designed to influence people's opinions in a particular direction.

You don't have to accept these tendentious political predictions as gospel truth, Francis; you are allowed to scrutinise and evaluate them. And you certainly don't have to assume that a prediction made in the Scottish case would hold good in the different case of NI.

The truth is that this would be a matter of negotiation at the time; one of the things which the GFA expressly provides for the two governments to agree on.

Your confident predictions as to what would happen not only on the breakup of the UK but also on the breakup of the US, Australia or Japan do not only ignore what the GFA says; they betray a degree of historical ignorance. There are many examples of the secession of small states from larger states where the existing national debt is not apportioned in this way — an obvious and pertinent example being the secession of the Irish Free State, where the matter was one for negotiation and the eventual agreement was that the IFS would inherit none of the UK's debt. Or, for a more recent example, the dissolution of the Soviet Union, where Russia inherited all of the Soviet Union's foreign debt (and acquired all its foreign assets).

The truth is that, if the event ever occurs, the UK position in negotiations over the UK's national debt is likely to be influenced by how badly, and how quickly, the UK wants shot of NI. And I'm thinking that, after a successful unification vote under the GFA, the answer might be quite badly, and quite quickly.

(And, remember, NI is a big financial drain on the UK. NI's independence would foreseeably improve the UK's ability to service its debt. Currently NI makes no net contribution to UK debt service; given that, why would the UK need relief from any of its debt as a result of the secession of NI? So I'm thinking that, in the post-unification vote negations, offloading a chunk of the UK's national debt won't actually be among the UK's negotiating priorities.)

jh79

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991702#Comment_121991702

I can't see a bit of word play changing outcomes. People won't care what the term is, just the impact it has on their wages.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991652#Comment_121991652

This is not the case.

There was NO decision on Scottish national debt. There were claims made but no legally binding decision.

Why was that?

Because that was to be negotiated if Independence had won.

In other cases, national debt was negotiated to the satisfaction of both and agreements were reached.

“On average, most countries the size of Scotland have done relatively well.“They have not been saddled with debt when they have left countries, they have found a totally sensible settlement, and sometimes they haven’t even paid at all.“So you are starting from scratch a bit, you are not starting with a massive deficit and being left behind, especially not when you are a rich country, relatively speaking, in the northern hemisphere.”

Ireland would have plenty of clout in any negotiations with the British.

Francis McM

The 20 billion a year is not the most pessimistic forecast. I would say the researchers from Dublin are afraid to even give an estimation of what the true cost could be.

The 20 billion was

(a) based on 2019 figures

(b) does not cover cost Is share of UK national debt ( as noted earlier, Scotland was told if it voted for independence it would take with it its share of the UK national debt. If N.I was to do so, the same would be only fair. In which case, the Republic of N.I. will be starting off with a national debt of about £75,000,000,000…and an annual interest rate on same of billions of £ per year. )

(C) does not cover the added security cost of the inevitable rise in terrorism as a result of stoking tensions again in N.I. / 900,000 disgruntled "red white and blue" people being herded under under the tricolour / soldiers song, as gaelige.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991768#Comment_121991768

Show us a first world country which has split up and the debt not divided.

Even if N.I. was only to take with it one - thirty-fifth - that is 2.85% of UK national debt, that would still be £75,000,000,000.00 sterling.

Tell your boss Mary Lou and her bosses in Belfast to put that in their pipes and smoke it.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991797#Comment_121991797

Show us a country held back by the debt it took on by mutual agreement, would be an easier thing for you to do.

You have had to tell porkies about this already to continue scaremongering.
Nobody told Scotland they HAD to take on it's share of the UK national debt, did they?
People CLAIMED that while others said that was not necessarily going to be the case. And Westminster certainly made no decree on it.

S

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991831#Comment_121991831

You support the party that tells porkies, which could not even tell the truth about what happened to poor Jean McColville.

Yes an independent Scottish state would become responsible for a fair and proportionate share of the UK's current liabilities

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c8633e5274a2674eab3f5/uk_debt_and_the_Scotland_independence_referendum.pdf

Seems only fair that a N.I. leaving the union would also take a tiny bit of UK national debt.

2.85 per cent would be approx 75 billion. Sterling.

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991736#Comment_121991736

Except phrasing absolutely does make a substantial difference in the outcome of polling.

I've linked to a study that specifically discussed the impact of polling questions when related to public expenditure (it is a PDF).

Results begin on the last paragraph of page 9 and the data on page 28 if you're not interested in reading a 30 page study.

It is quite amazing just how much of an impact that even subtle changes in phrasing can have in how people respond.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://gss.norc.org/Documents/reports/methodological-reports/MR054.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiR5tOarLKFAxXmR0EAHUPTB7UQFnoECCIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1dmsEouRYY-ee4ISoPHwDC

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991606#Comment_121991606

You are correct, it isn't dead for a lifetime based on a single poll.

However, what the recent referendum results have shown and what the recent economic study has demonstrated is that a united Ireland is dead until at least two things happen as fundamental precursors to a united Ireland process:

• Northern Ireland addresses the productivity gap and takes measures to close that gap, most importantly, through reform of the sectarian education system protected by SF and the DUP
• A credible plan for funding, financing and reforming a united Ireland is produced by one of those entities most interested in a united Ireland.

The responsibility for both of those lies with Sinn Fein. They have talked and talked and talked, but action has been missing. If they and other lobby group financed by their friends in the US are serious about a united Ireland, the pathway is clear.

I can understand @markodaly saying it is dead for a lifetime, because while a pathway is possible, I do not see the capability or the capacity of those who want a united Ireland to take that pathway.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991853#Comment_121991853

So what is wrong with a fair and mutually agreed settlement on debt?

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991897#Comment_121991897

A credible plan for funding, financing and reforming a united Ireland is produced by one of those entities most interested in a united Ireland.

The responsibility for both of those lies with Sinn Fein. 

The 'responsibility' for a Plan/Proposal lies with the government, nobody else. Nobody else is in fact competent to do it.
You can see, (and I think most rational people did see) that agenda driven and myopic reports such as the most recent one and others are not comprehensive and can be quite badly wrong.

SF say, if in government they will begin the process of planning/proposing. The other main parties whom power has swapped between since the state was born, have not as yet begun to put a plan/proposal together.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991907#Comment_121991907

Precisely. It would be unfair if N.I. got say a third or a quarter of UK national debt, just because N.I. was that proportion of the flag, or because it was that % of the landmass of the UK, or because it had cost the UK a disproportionate amount of subsidy over the decades etc.

Let us assume that a N.I. leaving the union would only take a tiny bit of UK national debt.

2.85 per cent would be approx £75,000,000,000 Sterling.

Would you be willing to add that on to the national debt of the new "United" Ireland?

Sinn Fein or even Fitzgerald have not factored in that cost of a UI?

It would take a lot of northern bank raids to raise that amount of cash?

markodaly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991604#Comment_121991604

Perhaps, but those people would baulk at the idea of the more symbolic stuff, like flags or anthems or dare I say it, Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth as a way to appease Unionists, or having a new constitution that places some special recognition with the British Monarchy.

Death by a thousand cuts.

markodaly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991606#Comment_121991606

When a border poll is called, do you think that is the phrasing that will be used?

Correct, but when a border poll is called, all the details will be thrashed and ironed out, with many losers in there as well.

The fact is, a UI is a dream, an aspiration, but no one wants to talk about the negatives, the costs, and when all is said in done. What exactly will change or be the benefits?

People are more concerned about the health system, immigration, and housing. A UI wont fix any of those and in fact may make it worse.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121992100#Comment_121992100

You won't be negotiating Francis, nor will it be done on a random site on the internet.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121992137#Comment_121992137

Minds can be changed Mark.

This flags and anthems issue is a prime example of asking polling questions to get specific answers.
The Indo or somebody ran a poll asking this question and got a firm NO, but when the Arins project asked it in a much less sensational way they got a more reasonable view. People would be prepared to consider flag and anthem change.

Not the answer that would bring such as yourself rushing to pronounce on an internet forum, but a reasonable answer all the same.

The takeaway being, people can be persuaded, opinions change etc etc.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121992150#Comment_121992150

This too is wrong, people have been discussing costs all week.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121992172#Comment_121992172

Certainly not, and neither will you. However, like Brexit, it is likely a U.I. would be a much bigger cost and disaster than anyone could imagine.

Even if N.I. got away with settling for taking 2.85% of UK national debt, that is stlll £75,000,000,000.

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121991897#Comment_121991897

I'd somewhat agree with the general thrust of your post.

I'd lean more towards

1. There is a solid plan in place to address the productivity gap. (Given our own education system, calling for a reform of segregated faith based education is somewhat hypocritical, though I'd welcome its dismantling in both jurisdictions personally)
2. A credible plan is produced with as many stakeholders as possible.

Your phrasing on point two was just an obvious setup to go off on one about SF, Blanch. They hold as much responsibility as anyone else advocating for Unification. They should absolutely be making proposals based on what they will advocate for if in government at the time, so I don't buy their, 'we totally have a plan, vote for us and find out what it is' b*llocks, but I also believe the sitting government parties who do advocate for Unification should also present their ideas, as should smaller parties North and South.

I'd like Unification to proceed based on finding room for compromise between as many opinions as possible rather than letting one party with a limited mandate speak for everyone myself.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121992150#Comment_121992150

Plenty of people, myself included have discussed benefits and costs....you just don't want to hear them, Mark. We can hash it all out again, you'll certainly go off continuing to think the benefits aren't worth the cost to you (as is your right of course: there are absolutely pathways towards Unification I can envision that I would vote against), but you'll pop back along in a few months claiming, 'No one is talking about the benefits'.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121992204#Comment_121992204

a much bigger cost and disaster than anyone could imagine.

or it could be a huge success, bringing the north into line with the south economically and enabling people by giving them a more direct say in their own affairs.

The positive versus the intrinsically negative scaremongering from people who cannot tolerate the idea of a UI to begin with.