An Ciarraioch wrote: » Between Brexit and the current Stormont stand-off, discussion concerning a united Ireland has grown in recent years, and the oncreased likelihood of the election of an SF First Minister in future Stormont elections will only intensify such a debate. So what issues need to be considered? 1. What would the cost of unification be and would the EU subside the adjustment? 2. Would a new Ireland require changes to the national flag and anthem? 3. Should parties in the Republic publish policy papers to prepare for a future referendum? 4. Would unionists be entitled to dual citizenship, and would the question of the Commonwealth re-emerge in that context? 5. Would the national government remain a unitary state, or would a federal government with regional assemblies emerge? 6. Would Southern politicians campaign in an NI referendum, and how can Alliance voters and liberal Protestants be persuaded to vote for unity?
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » 1. Costs would be the current UK government spend on NI plus a lot lot more. Not sure about EU funding, did they help fund German reunification ? 2. probably, if you want to extend a olive branch to those from NI that are against to move, to not do so would be disengenious. 3. Parties should prepare policy papers to set out how a transition to a United Ireland would be managed and how much it would cost. 4. Yes people born in NI before unification should be entitled to dual citizenship, and I'd even extend that to the grandchildren of people born in NI. 5. In the short to medium term some sort of NI assembly should exist, if just to manage the transition alone. 6. Yes southern politicians should campaign and be able to explain to "Alliance and liberal protestant" why a UI would be in thier interest.
blanch152 wrote: » Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » 1. Costs would be the current UK government spend on NI plus a lot lot more. Not sure about EU funding, did they help fund German reunification ? 2. probably, if you want to extend a olive branch to those from NI that are against to move, to not do so would be disengenious. 3. Parties should prepare policy papers to set out how a transition to a United Ireland would be managed and how much it would cost. 4. Yes people born in NI before unification should be entitled to dual citizenship, and I'd even extend that to the grandchildren of people born in NI. 5. In the short to medium term some sort of NI assembly should exist, if just to manage the transition alone. 6. Yes southern politicians should campaign and be able to explain to "Alliance and liberal protestant" why a UI would be in thier interest. In terms of your answer to question 4, why should future people born in Northern Ireland be forced to give up their aspiration to be British and have a British passport?
An Ciarraioch wrote: » Indeed, I'd presume that it would be permanently guaranteed under the GFA, but just wanted that clarified?
blanch152 wrote: » I would also assume that it would be open to the people of Northern Ireland to change their mind at a later date and rejoin the UK.
blanch152 wrote: » In terms of your answer to question 4, why should future people born in Northern Ireland be forced to give up their aspiration to be British and have a British passport?
Matt Barrett wrote: » I would say not. Parts of Munster cannot secede from the state. Once united, it would need be an all Ireland will to join the UK. Unless we are suggesting all former British ruled provinces should have that opportunity? I'd say no.
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » The grandchildren of people born before reunification would be able to be British citizens. So if a child is born the minute before reunification their grandchildren would have the automatic right to a UK passport. That grandchild might not be born for 70 or 80 years after reunification, that's a pretty long time. Add to that that the UK probably allows citizenship if a parent is a citizen then the children of that grandchild could also be British citizens, and their children and their children etc etc
blanch152 wrote: » Matt Barrett wrote: » I would say not. Parts of Munster cannot secede from the state. Once united, it would need be an all Ireland will to join the UK. Unless we are suggesting all former British ruled provinces should have that opportunity? I'd say no. That would mean that under the GFA we keep having referenda until we get the right answer we want, but then we stop. I don't think so, that isn't bi-partisan, and a new agreement has to continue to recognise the legitimate aspirations of the unionist community to be part of the UK.
Jim2007 wrote: » You left out one: - Would Irish people be willing to vote for United Ireland, that would see Irish soldiers being sent home in body bags from NI, because that will be a reality that will have to be addressed.
blanch152 wrote: » That would mean that under the GFA we keep having referenda until we get the right answer we want, but then we stop. I don't think so, that isn't bi-partisan, and a new agreement has to continue to recognise the legitimate aspirations of the unionist community to be part of the UK.
blanch152 wrote: » Do you not realise the implications of what you are saying - a united Ireland means the complete abolition of unionism as a legitimate political aspiration? Can you imagine the likely reaction?
jm08 wrote: » Surely it should be the same as what happened when ROI became a Free State/Republic? Plenty of southern unionists still living in the Irish State then. I don't think there was any provision made for them.
blanch152 wrote: » Why should it be the same as then? Unlike then, we have signed an international agreement recognising the legitimate right of people in Northern Ireland to be British. I mean, we do honour our international agreements?
blanch152 wrote: » I mean, we do honour our international agreements?
funkey_monkey wrote: » Therefore, following this train of thought through, the referendum for a United Ireland would also require a similar margin.
jm08 wrote: » Why would Irish soldiers be sent into Northern Ireland? If peace keeping was required, it should be a UN Peacekeeping one.
funkey_monkey wrote: » I live in NI. I feel very aggrieved that we are leaving the EU on the basis of a 52% / 48% result. I feel that in something as important as this for all citizens that a simple majority would not be sufficient. Therefore, following this train of thought through, the referendum for a United Ireland would also require a similar margin. Are all referendums a simple majority or is there any precedence for a required winning margin?
Johnny Dogs wrote: » This makes no sense, and is.something I've posted about before. On what basis would Irish soldiers be brought home in body bags? This thing about loyalist paramilitaries isn't something I personally give much credence to. What would the loyalist paramilitaries aims be? Force the Irish govt to withdraw from a part of the island of Ireland? Don't see that one working out, or making sense. Get the British Government to re-invade? Won't happen. Fight for a serperate independent state? There goes the unionist ethos. One would assume any hard-core unionist who wouldn't wish to be governed by anyone other than those within the union would most likely up stick and head across the water, where my guess is they would quickly realise that the citizens on the mainland view them as Irish people anyway. Regardless who they swear allegiance or loyalty to.
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » funkey_monkey wrote: » I live in NI. I feel very aggrieved that we are leaving the EU on the basis of a 52% / 48% result. I feel that in something as important as this for all citizens that a simple majority would not be sufficient. Therefore, following this train of thought through, the referendum for a United Ireland would also require a similar margin. Are all referendums a simple majority or is there any precedence for a required winning margin? I doubt a border poll would be called unless there was a clear majority in favour of reunification, having one if the othcome was in the balance would be very dangerous. Brexit is a bad example, it was something Cameron threw out there to tray and keep UKIp from eating into the Tory base, no one ever expected it to happen
An Ciarraioch wrote: » An analysis of the latest Lucid Talk poll gives nationalists a 10% lead over unionists among under-44s, so while a poll wouldn't pass now, it could very well do so in 10 years time. In any case, the outline of the ultimate Brexit deal could influence how the 10% "others" would vote in such a referendum.https://bangordub.wordpress.com/2018/03/05/managing-decline-the-lucid-talk-poll-feb-2018/
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » It's complete folly to suggest that unionists/loyalists would go meekly into a UI or just head to GB if it occured. Look at Brexit, the DUP the biggest unionist party in NI were on the leave side even though it made no ecomonic sense for their core voters.They supported leave just to show that they were more British than anyone else.
Owryan wrote: » One would assume that as part of a united Ireland then Irish troops would be stationed there as is the norm.
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » It's complete folly to suggest that unionists/loyalists would go meekly into a UI or just head to GB if it occured. Look at Brexit, the DUP the biggest unionist party in NI were on the leave side even though it made no ecomonic sense for their core voters. They supported leave just to show that they were more British than anyone else.
jm08 wrote: » Would the existing policing not continue with the existing PSNI? I don't think you will see Irish Defence forces patrolling loyalist areas of Belfast. That would be incredible stupid. If there is need for Peacekeeping, get the UN to supply troops.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e68aa2b0e039b12ade8384a2f42841c6.svg)
