Arlene Foster and the RHI scandal

A Little Pony wrote: »

A border isn't going to happen. Neither Westminster or the Dail wants it.

I've seen that bizarre sentiment expressed before, as if not wanting something means it can't happen.

Not many people want to pay taxes, but...

Mr.Micro

A Little Pony wrote: »

A border isn't going to happen. Neither Westminster or the Dail wants it.

If part of the Brexit was to control its borders, against whatever, let's say migrants. Why then would the UK not bother with border between north and south?

Mr.Micro wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

A border isn't going to happen. Neither Westminster or the Dail wants it.

If part of the Brexit was to control its borders, against whatever, let's say migrants. Why then would the UK not bother with border between north and south?

When I say border, I mean in the context of some proper wall or something similar. I don't see that happening.

A Little Pony wrote: »

When I say border, I mean in the context of some proper wall or something similar. I don't see that happening.

When other people say "border", they use the term as it's generally understood. It's easier to have intelligent conversations that way.

Outside of Donald Trump's fevered imagination, a border doesn't require a wall.

oscarBravo wrote: »

When other people say "border", they use the term as it's generally understood. It's easier to have intelligent conversations that way.

Outside of Donald Trump's fevered imagination, a border doesn't require a wall.

I am beginning to think that it is all part of a curious unionist deathwish. Do as much as possible to stoke division again,(Arlene and her Brexit strategy and election campaign) including the creation of a renewed physical border, in the hope they can then point the finger claiming 'look we told you, we are the victims' when it provokes conflict.

I am more serious about that guess at their strategy than you might think!

A Little Pony wrote: »

When I say border, I mean in the context of some proper wall or something similar. I don't see that happening.

Do you not see customs checks happening on the border?

Consonata wrote: »

Do you not see customs checks happening on the border?

It is not clear at this point in time that there will be customs checks.

http://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2017/0310/858609-eu-leaders-to-discuss-plans-to-mark-treaty-of-rome/

"The British prime minister said in her Lancaster House speech in London on 17 January that Britain would seek an "associative" relationship with the EU customs union.

She, and cabinet ministers, have also said repeatedly that they want the "closest possible" relationship with the EU's single market.

However, London has not clarified what that will mean, or how it would work."

Depending on what this means, we may or may not have customs checks. While both sides have set out some initial principles, we are only at the circling each other stage before real negotiations begin.

blanch152 wrote: »

It is not clear at this point in time that there will be customs checks.

http://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2017/0310/858609-eu-leaders-to-discuss-plans-to-mark-treaty-of-rome/

"The British prime minister said in her Lancaster House speech in London on 17 January that Britain would seek an "associative" relationship with the EU customs union.

She, and cabinet ministers, have also said repeatedly that they want the "closest possible" relationship with the EU's single market.

However, London has not clarified what that will mean, or how it would work."

Depending on what this means, we may or may not have customs checks. While both sides have set out some initial principles, we are only at the circling each other stage before real negotiations begin.

So what does that mean in actual fact?

How do you monitor what is crossing from one jurisdiction to another? This isn't rocket science, you either have a duty to monitor it or not.

blanch152 wrote: »

"The British prime minister said in her Lancaster House speech in London on 17 January that Britain would seek an "associative" relationship with the EU customs union.

She, and cabinet ministers, have also said repeatedly that they want the "closest possible" relationship with the EU's single market.

However, London has not clarified what that will mean, or how it would work."

That's just a restatement of the "we don't want a hard border" rhetoric. It doesn't matter what they want; what matters is what they can negotiate. If they're outside the customs union, then logically there will be a border.

oscarBravo wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

When I say border, I mean in the context of some proper wall or something similar. I don't see that happening.

When other people say "border", they use the term as it's generally understood. It's easier to have intelligent conversations that way.

Outside of Donald Trump's fevered imagination, a border doesn't require a wall.

Not always the case Oscar, sorry to tell you mate.

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's just a restatement of the "we don't want a hard border" rhetoric. It doesn't matter what they want; what matters is what they can negotiate. If they're outside the customs union, then logically there will be a border.

I don't disagree with you except to point out that there has been a lot of posturing and very little negotiations. Who knows what will come out of it? Perhaps a new associate membership? Perhaps the UK will back down and accept a Switzerland or Norway outcome? Perhaps a Turkey outcome?

While the EU doesn't need the UK as much as the UK needs the EU, it isn't a one-way negotiation.

A Little Pony wrote: »

Not always the case Oscar, sorry to tell you mate.

Don't be sorry, just be clear. Sure, some borders require a wall, but in this context, it's pretty well understood what a border means, and literally nobody but you is talking about walls.

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't disagree with you except to point out that there has been a lot of posturing and very little negotiations. Who knows what will come out of it? Perhaps a new associate membership? Perhaps the UK will back down and accept a Switzerland or Norway outcome? Perhaps a Turkey outcome?

While the EU doesn't need the UK as much as the UK needs the EU, it isn't a one-way negotiation.

No argument. If the UK climbs down and decides to pay the price of being a part of the customs union, then there's no need for a hard border.

The problem is that people keep reciting the mantra that "nobody wants a hard border" as if it's anything other than a platitude. The question of whether or not we get a hard border is almost completely unrelated to the question of whether or not anybody wants one.

oscarBravo wrote: »

No argument. If the UK climbs down and decides to pay the price of being a part of the customs union, then there's no need for a hard border.

The problem is that people keep reciting the mantra that "nobody wants a hard border" as if it's anything other than a platitude. The question of whether or not we get a hard border is almost completely unrelated to the question of whether or not anybody wants one.

You are absolutely right, the possibility of a hard border with customs and passport controls is real. If negotiations break down and either side digs in, that possibility becomes more real.

On the other hand, I don't think either side really wants that outcome. Someone will have to back down to avoid a hard border. Given the closeness of the vote in the UK, I believe that ultimately they will back down, but it is by no means certain, especially given the current era of populism.

blanch152 wrote: »

You are absolutely right, the possibility of a hard border with customs and passport controls is real. If negotiations break down and either side digs in, that possibility becomes more real.

On the other hand, I don't think either side really wants that outcome. Someone will have to back down to avoid a hard border. Given the closeness of the vote in the UK, I believe that ultimately they will back down, but it is by no means certain, especially given the current era of populism.

There is no way the UK will be a part of the customs union without accepting the 4 freedoms, and immigration control has been a red line issue, so it will never happen.

A hard border is coming, either that or unification.

Consonata wrote: »

There is no way the UK will be a part of the customs union without accepting the 4 freedoms, and immigration control has been a red line issue, so it will never happen.

A hard border is coming, either that or unification.

Could 'unification' be possible with NI retaining Stormont as an assembly and NI becoming an autonomous region within Ireland, with the Stormont Assembly retaining all they currently control with Dublin being responsible for all currently controlled by Westminster.

Obviously, finance would be a contentious issue that might be ameliorated by contributions from UK and EU. Clearly a lot of adjustments would be needed.

Just an idea.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Could 'unification' be possible with NI retaining Stormont as an assembly and NI becoming an autonomous region within Ireland, with the Stormont Assembly retaining all they currently control with Dublin being responsible for all currently controlled by Westminster.

Obviously, finance would be a contentious issue that might be ameliorated by contributions from UK and EU. Clearly a lot of adjustments would be needed.

Just an idea.

I think that is an inevitability honestly. To even have a hope of getting the unionists on side they need fair representation with Stormont staying. Now that raises other questions, maybe the whole country should be federalized as a result. i.e Cork, Dublin, Galway and Belfast all have devolved assemblies. Cut down massively on the amount of county councilors and focus those representatives on pooling their resources on regional issues.

Lads/Ladies the fear of making pragmatic choices because a certain community might be hurt is palpable.

You make decisions based on what is right for everybody while bearing in mind the rights and identities of everyone.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Lads/Ladies the fear of making pragmatic choices because a certain community might be hurt is palpable.

You make decisions based on what is right for everybody while bearing in mind the rights and identities of everyone.

That certain community could bring down the whole thing though, you can't not make concessions to the Unionists. It would not be fair.

Consonata wrote: »

That certain community could bring down the whole thing though, you can't not make concessions to the Unionists. It would not be fair.

Yes, accommodate unionists, but dividing the country into numerous federal state is ridiculous.
The point of a unified island is that we are all better off as a result. In unity, strength.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, accommodate unionists, but dividing the country into numerous federal state is ridiculous.
The point of a unified island is that we are all better off as a result. In unity, strength.

Well, the problem is unity.

If the current NI Assembly retains its current rights, then it adds weight to the argument of joining the Republic, as the division and economic suicide of a hard border would be much worse for those living in NI than a unified Ireland - and the gift of retaining their Assembly should persuade enough of the electorate to go for it.

The unified Island would come in time if economic advancement was delivered on. Besides, what is wrong with local government being controlled locally. If it is a choce between a local hospital or a local motorway, should that not be decided locally?

Currently, a new hospital in one region might be up against a new motorway in another which makes no sense at all. Put another way, a motorway from Limerick to Cork is not being built or even planned* but one from Tuam to Gort is nearing completion at a cost of over €600m.

* No detailed plan exists for Cork to Limerick M20.

Leonard Hofstadter

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, the problem is unity.

If the current NI Assembly retains its current rights, then it adds weight to the argument of joining the Republic, as the division and economic suicide of a hard border would be much worse for those living in NI than a unified Ireland - and the gift of retaining their Assembly should persuade enough of the electorate to go for it.

The unified Island would come in time if economic advancement was delivered on. Besides, what is wrong with local government being controlled locally. If it is a choce between a local hospital or a local motorway, should that not be decided locally?

Currently, a new hospital in one region might be up against a new motorway in another which makes no sense at all. Put another way, a motorway from Limerick to Cork is not being built or even planned* but one from Tuam to Gort is nearing completion at a cost of over €600m.

* No detailed plan exists for Cork to Limerick M20.

There's actually so much to think about in terms of a United Ireland, it's hard to know where to even begin. It will go without saying that there will have to be some sort of significant concessions to the Unionist community in the North, but what will those be? What will be even remotely acceptable to them I can see setting massive alarm bells off to many Irish people on either side.

Would we, for example, be prepared to accept Queen Elizabeth as the head of state? I can see that being a complete non-runner considering that hoo-hah that's made over even suggesting rejoining the Commonwealth. As a small open trading economy I think we should (we need any links we can especially with a likely hard Brexit), but it's an absolute no-no for many people.

Would we allow people in the North to not learn Irish in school, so as to facilitate the Unionists, whilst expecting everyone else to keep learning it? How would that work? Many south of the border have no time for learning Irish either. Even the road signs would have to be changed, we've used kilometres for many years while obviously in the North they're still using miles.

What do we do with currency? The Brits are as we know, very very proud of their pound and will not give that up. Two currency systems are obviously totally impractical, logic dictates that a United Ireland would use the Euro throughout. I can't see that being very popular with many North of the border, to them it's another link to their national identity.

Then there is the issue of a sort of federal Ireland, as proposed by Fianna Fáil. Fine to give them one, but why can't Cork get one? Why not give something to Dublin as well, and something else for the West? Where do we stop?

It all sounds lovely and dandy saying we should have a United Ireland because of Brexit (I would have thought we should have wanted one regardless), but we as a nation actually need to face up to the fact that for starters, there are so many differences that it's not as simple as just saying today NI is part of the UK and tomorrow it's part of Ireland. Will people south of the border pay €11 billion or so it costs to run the North? In the comfort of the ballot boxes, I bet many people would vote to leave the North as part of the UK, but obviously if there is a hard border we will lose out so much on trade anyway that the benefits of having an all island economy under a United Ireland would outweigh the disadvantages.

In stark contrast to the Brexiteers, we actually need to think these things through, how they will impact on those of us south of the border, Nationalists in the North and Unionists in the North. We need to accept, and respect the fact that as of now the majority of citizens of the North want to remain in the UK, and that's not going to change overnight, though for middle class voters that might change if there's a hard Brexit and the knock on effect that will have on NI's economy.

If we really want this to work, it's going to involve tackling things that are taboo subjects south of the border, like a federal Ireland, accepting the Queen as head of state, rejoining the Commonwealth and other things to take account of the shared history of Ireland, Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. Given the fact that even the simplest of gestures towards the Unionists has people (metaphorically) up in arms, we are a heck of a long way from being able to have a grown up conversation as to what a United Ireland might actually look like let alone go out and seek one.

captainspeed wrote: »

There's actually so much to think about in terms of a United Ireland, it's hard to know where to even begin. It will go without saying that there will have to be some sort of significant concessions to the Unionist community in the North, but what will those be? What will be even remotely acceptable to them I can see setting massive alarm bells off to many Irish people on either side.

If Brexit causes the NI population to consider a united Ireland, then it will be for economic reasons. It was long said the the loyalty in NI was more to the half-Crown than the Crown.

If that is the case, then the currency will be the Euro.

If it is to be Stormont continuing as is, then the question of how many TDs do they get, and the Mid-Lothian* question arises. Could we have regional assemblies (Councils) that have real power at the level of Stormont? Say setting up regional assemblies for: Munster, Dublin, Connacht/Ulster and Leinster. [At least that would settle the Mid-Lothian question].

Cost - would the UK Government continue to subsidise NI for, say, a decade or so? Would the EU give increased regional aid to help out?

Until these points are made clear, then the question is moot.

I cannot see many outside of John Bruton wishing to see either the British Queen becoming head of state here or Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth. Such a suggestion to me would be to reduce the proposition to the level of a 'Boaty Mac Boatface poll'.

*The Mid-Lothian question in this context - Would NI TDs vote on matters in the Dail that, in NI were within the competence of Stormont, but in the Dail related solely to the rest of the republic?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Lads/Ladies the fear of making pragmatic choices because a certain community might be hurt is palpable.

You make decisions based on what is right for everybody while bearing in mind the rights and identities of everyone.

How is that different to the current situation though?

There are numerous examples of making less than optimal choices in Northern Ireland because of the fear that a certain community might be hurt - the current power-sharing arrangements being the most obvious example, but there are many more.

captainspeed wrote: »

Sam Russell wrote: »

Well, the problem is unity.

If the current NI Assembly retains its current rights, then it adds weight to the argument of joining the Republic, as the division and economic suicide of a hard border would be much worse for those living in NI than a unified Ireland - and the gift of retaining their Assembly should persuade enough of the electorate to go for it.

The unified Island would come in time if economic advancement was delivered on. Besides, what is wrong with local government being controlled locally. If it is a choce between a local hospital or a local motorway, should that not be decided locally?

Currently, a new hospital in one region might be up against a new motorway in another which makes no sense at all. Put another way, a motorway from Limerick to Cork is not being built or even planned* but one from Tuam to Gort is nearing completion at a cost of over €600m.

* No detailed plan exists for Cork to Limerick M20.

There's actually so much to think about in terms of a United Ireland, it's hard to know where to even begin. It will go without saying that there will have to be some sort of significant concessions to the Unionist community in the North, but what will those be? What will be even remotely acceptable to them I can see setting massive alarm bells off to many Irish people on either side.

Would we, for example, be prepared to accept Queen Elizabeth as the head of state? I can see that being a complete non-runner considering that hoo-hah that's made over even suggesting rejoining the Commonwealth. As a small open trading economy I think we should (we need any links we can especially with a likely hard Brexit), but it's an absolute no-no for many people.

Would we allow people in the North to not learn Irish in school, so as to facilitate the Unionists, whilst expecting everyone else to keep learning it? How would that work? Many south of the border have no time for learning Irish either. Even the road signs would have to be changed, we've used kilometres for many years while obviously in the North they're still using miles.

What do we do with currency? The Brits are as we know, very very proud of their pound and will not give that up. Two currency systems are obviously totally impractical, logic dictates that a United Ireland would use the Euro throughout. I can't see that being very popular with many North of the border, to them it's another link to their national identity.

Then there is the issue of a sort of federal Ireland, as proposed by Fianna Fáil. Fine to give them one, but why can't Cork get one? Why not give something to Dublin as well, and something else for the West? Where do we stop?

It all sounds lovely and dandy saying we should have a United Ireland because of Brexit (I would have thought we should have wanted one regardless), but we as a nation actually need to face up to the fact that for starters, there are so many differences that it's not as simple as just saying today NI is part of the UK and tomorrow it's part of Ireland. Will people south of the border pay €11 billion or so it costs to run the North? In the comfort of the ballot boxes, I bet many people would vote to leave the North as part of the UK, but obviously if there is a hard border we will lose out so much on trade anyway that the benefits of having an all island economy under a United Ireland would outweigh the disadvantages.

In stark contrast to the Brexiteers, we actually need to think these things through, how they will impact on those of us south of the border, Nationalists in the North and Unionists in the North. We need to accept, and respect the fact that as of now the majority of citizens of the North want to remain in the UK, and that's not going to change overnight, though for middle class voters that might change if there's a hard Brexit and the knock on effect that will have on NI's economy.

If we really want this to work, it's going to involve tackling things that are taboo subjects south of the border, like a federal Ireland, accepting the Queen as head of state, rejoining the Commonwealth and other things to take account of the shared history of Ireland, Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. Given the fact that even the simplest of gestures towards the Unionists has people (metaphorically) up in arms, we are a heck of a long way from being able to have a grown up conversation as to what a United Ireland might actually look like let alone go out and seek one.

This is why it is currently a non starter. I have seen no evidence in any polling whatsoever that the people of Northern Ireland want a United Ireland. People make big predictions about the future of the UK but I could similarly make predictions about the European Union and the Euro currency.
I think some people need to just calm down and take a deep breath. I don't follow ROI politics closely, what is the mood regarding the two states? Do the Southern people want a United Ireland? Are they willing to take on the 1.8 million people, higher taxes and community that would have a major say in Dail elections and because of the Fine Gael lean to the right, the DUP could end up running the country with Fine Gael in a coalition government implementing big conservative policies.

People don't seem to think these things through. The state would be including a new political player on the scene which is ideologically very different from many of the parties in the south. Any time I watch the Irish election debates, the appetite from the Irish parties seems non existent for it.

A Little Pony wrote: »

This is why it is currently a non starter. I have seen no evidence in any polling whatsoever that the people of Northern Ireland want a United Ireland. People make big predictions about the future of the UK but I could similarly make predictions about the European Union and the Euro currency.
I think some people need to just calm down and take a deep breath. I don't follow ROI politics closely, what is the mood regarding the two states? Do the Southern people want a United Ireland? Are they willing to take on the 1.8 million people, higher taxes and community that would have a major say in Dail elections and because of the Fine Gael lean to the right, the DUP could end up running the country with Fine Gael in a coalition government implementing big conservative policies.

People don't seem to think these things through. The state would be including a new political player on the scene which is ideologically very different from many of the parties in the south. Any time I watch the Irish election debates, the appetite from the Irish parties seems non existent for it.

The question of a United Ireland does not arise because most people know the answer would be NO.

It would be NO if Ireland would have tp pay the £10 billion that NI gets as a net subsidy from the UK.

It would be NO if the current crop of NI politicians continued in the ways of sectarian bitterness towards each other - and us.

It would be NO because people cannot see the changes in attitude required coming about.

However, Brexit might focus minds. Remember, the troubles went on for 30 years with no end in sight, but now are a distant memory and the current NI Assembly has been operating for 10 years with SF and DUP working together. Who would have thought it possible?

If Brexit results in massive reductions in the subsidy for NI, perhaps minds will change. Will the UK continue to pay the farmers their EU grants and pay the regional funds and other EU payments together with their own payments to NI? We shall see.

A Little Pony wrote: »

I think some people need to just calm down and take a deep breath. I don't follow ROI politics closely, what is the mood regarding the two states? Do the Southern people want a United Ireland? Are they willing to take on the 1.8 million people, higher taxes and community that would have a major say in Dail elections and because of the Fine Gael lean to the right, the DUP could end up running the country with Fine Gael in a coalition government implementing big conservative policies.

The DUP is a white elephant. Fine Gael is nowhere near as right wing as the DUP is. It's barely center right.

Sam Russell wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

This is why it is currently a non starter. I have seen no evidence in any polling whatsoever that the people of Northern Ireland want a United Ireland. People make big predictions about the future of the UK but I could similarly make predictions about the European Union and the Euro currency.
I think some people need to just calm down and take a deep breath. I don't follow ROI politics closely, what is the mood regarding the two states? Do the Southern people want a United Ireland? Are they willing to take on the 1.8 million people, higher taxes and community that would have a major say in Dail elections and because of the Fine Gael lean to the right, the DUP could end up running the country with Fine Gael in a coalition government implementing big conservative policies.

People don't seem to think these things through. The state would be including a new political player on the scene which is ideologically very different from many of the parties in the south. Any time I watch the Irish election debates, the appetite from the Irish parties seems non existent for it.

The question of a United Ireland does not arise because most people know the answer would be NO.

It would be NO if Ireland would have tp pay the £10 billion that NI gets as a net subsidy from the UK.

It would be NO if the current crop of NI politicians continued in the ways of sectarian bitterness towards each other - and us.

It would be NO because people cannot see the changes in attitude required coming about.

However, Brexit might focus minds. Remember, the troubles went on for 30 years with no end in sight, but now are a distant memory and the current NI Assembly has been operating for 10 years with SF and DUP working together. Who would have thought it possible?

If Brexit results in massive reductions in the subsidy for NI, perhaps minds will change. Will the UK continue to pay the farmers their EU grants and pay the regional funds and other EU payments together with their own payments to NI? We shall see.

Unless they want empty shop shelves and people going hungry..
DUP and Sinn Fein working together can be used in the most loose way as possible. More like an abusive relationship that can't be split up.

Consonata wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

I think some people need to just calm down and take a deep breath. I don't follow ROI politics closely, what is the mood regarding the two states? Do the Southern people want a United Ireland? Are they willing to take on the 1.8 million people, higher taxes and community that would have a major say in Dail elections and because of the Fine Gael lean to the right, the DUP could end up running the country with Fine Gael in a coalition government implementing big conservative policies.

The DUP is a white elephant. Fine Gael is nowhere near as right wing as the DUP is. It's barely center right.

Of course but what would stop them coming together to form a government if needed? Politicians only care about power.

A Little Pony wrote: »

Of course but what would stop them coming together to form a government if needed? Politicians only care about power.

Nothing, but FG realigning to suit Unionists would result in them losing power. Its far far far more likely that the DUP will become more moderate in order to get into power, as they would be a minority in that situation.