nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Border Poll discussion

segarox

i hope some people from northern ireland are reading this because it concerns them.

i've been watching a few videos on what might happen to the north following brexit and one of the options is to reunify with ireland, which i believe, is not everyone cup of tea. me personally as an irishman, i have no strong feelings about this but i think it'd be nice to see a complete ireland on a map. however, i think i may have seen an option that hasn't been considered.

what if the north was to vote to rejoin ireland but in name only; establish yourselves as a separate state with your own government, your own police force (technically you have that already; Stormont and the PSNI) and your own currency.

could have the benefits of staying in the EU and not have the unpleasant taste of irish in your mouths. or am i talking rubbish? please, i'd to hear what you have to say.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Charles Babbage

Poll today showing 17-21% swing caused by Brexit

Now special status and other measures may greatly reduce this, but without that everything is changed utterly.

Q6 if the UK leaves the EU. Not sure what the gender difference is about.

||Gender|||Age Group||
|Total/%|Female|Male|18-24 Years|25-44 Years|45-64 Years|65+ Years
Unweighted|1199|306|893|47|446|540|166
Weighted|993|505|488|100|342|337|213
I would vote for a United Ireland outside of the UK|519|306|213|76|222|136|86
I would vote for a United Ireland outside of the UK %|52%|61%|44%|75%|65%|40%|40%
I would vote for Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK|392|154|238|21|86|166|118
I would vote for Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK %|39%|30%|49%|21%|25%|49%|56%
Don’t Know/Not Sure|70|42|28|3|33|29|4
Don’t Know/Not Sure %|7%|8%|6%|3%|10%|9%|2%
I would not vote|9|0|9|0|1|3|5
I would not vote %|1%|0%|2%|0%|0%|1%|2%
Other|3|3|0|0|0|3|0
Other %|0%|1%|0%|0%|0%|1%|0%

Charles Babbage

blanch152 wrote: »

Other than in the GAA, counties aren't even recognised in the North anymore.

yes they are, the used both in postal addresses and allocation of car number plates.

breatheme

I don't reckon that would stop them.

blanch152

breatheme wrote: »

It would be messy. With no framework you'd see counties trying to secede, maybe even rejoining the UK/Ireland.

Other than in the GAA, counties aren't even recognised in the North anymore.

Infini

We don't know completely what will happen but it's safe to assume a Hard Brexit resulting in depression level conditions in the North could be enough to trigger a seismic shift in opinion's there towards a United Ireland. The likelyhood of NI being an independent state isn't going to happen. It would more likely end up with the like's of Fermanagh, Tyrone and Armagh ending up part of the Republic anyways leaving only an unviable rump.

Realistically if people up there are offered a ticket off the Brexit Bus that was driven over the cliff edge by Ideologues and idiot's who cared little for the well-being of people they'll most likely go for a UI and they'll vote in far greater numbers than any of the Headbanger's.

weemcd

There are too many Unionist voters at present to allow any kind of moves towards a United Ireland. That won't be viable for me for another ~20 years until a few of them die out or retire.

That may but cutting ones nose off to spite ones face, but there are plenty of Pro-Union politicians and voters who would be happy to rule over ash and rubble in a barren wasteland than support a United Ireland.

I do believe a United Ireland is inevitable. I do think this DUP/Tory pact is making all manoeuvring around Brexit very difficult. Theresa May's government is a farce and I'm surprised they've made it this long. After that I'm not sure what happens and Corbyn hasn't done a good job of showing any kind of strong stance on Brexit and has failed to gain any more momentum after fairly good gains in Theresa May's last ill thought out election.

It's a strange time and I can see an election in the not too distant future and probably a recession. The only viable option I can see is a Brext in name only soft exit. I hope and pray this is the case but I genuinely don't know.

FrancieBrady

breatheme wrote: »

It would be messy. With no framework you'd see counties trying to secede, maybe even rejoining the UK/Ireland.

It is completely ill-concieved and normally only mentioned by those who will not countenance a UI for their own particular and personal reasons.
There is no denying that partition has failed and needs an international agreement reached after 40 years of bloody conflict/war just to limp along as an economic and social basket case. That cannot be sorted by two communities set at odds by partition itself.
So the options are simple: keep kicking the can down the road or confront partition and it's economic (to us in the south as well as the UK and northern Ireland) and humanly costly failures.

breatheme

It would be messy. With no framework you'd see counties trying to secede, maybe even rejoining the UK/Ireland.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

I agree - even a hard border is not incompatible with the GFA.

However, generally it is the same people who are telling me that Brexit changes everything are the ones telling me that independence cannot be on the table. Either Brexit is a game-changer, or it is not.

There is no way NI nationalists would go it alone with unionists in an Indep. NI, so its pointless putting it on the table.

breatheme

Brexit is a game changer in the sense that it may actually sway voters towards a NI. It is the one event that could get all nationalists* behind voting for a NI, very softcore unionists as well as the moderate people who don't actually form part of either community.

*I say this because a lot of nationalists may vote to stay in the union in order to keep the NHS and other benefits.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I agree that it wasn't envisaged at the time the GFA was signed, however, neither was Brexit.

Seems to me that up to now, the GFA is dealing very well with Brexit. Certainly from the point of view of those who don't want to Brexit anyhow.

blanch152

breatheme wrote: »

Brexit is not inherently incompatible with the GFA, NI independence is.

I agree - even a hard border is not incompatible with the GFA.

However, generally it is the same people who are telling me that Brexit changes everything are the ones telling me that independence cannot be on the table. Either Brexit is a game-changer, or it is not.

breatheme

blanch152 wrote: »

I agree that it wasn't envisaged at the time the GFA was signed, however, neither was Brexit.

Brexit is not inherently incompatible with the GFA, NI independence is.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Absolutely.

But there isn't a provision in the GFA to decide on 'independence', there are all the provisions required for a poll on unification though.

I agree that it wasn't envisaged at the time the GFA was signed, however, neither was Brexit.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

no difference then to what would happen if Northern Ireland opted for independence.

Absolutely.

But there isn't a provision in the GFA to decide on 'independence', there are all the provisions required for a poll on unification though.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That will be a new agreement between the sovereign nation of Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain (without northern Ireland obviously)

The GFA will have processed to an end at that stage.

no difference then to what would happen if Northern Ireland opted for independence.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Any change to the current constitutional arrangement will require changes to the GFA. The current roles for Dublin in Northern Ireland will have to become future roles for the UK, or something similar, so the East/West relationship both North and South would have to be renegotiated.

That will be a new agreement between the sovereign nation of Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain (without northern Ireland obviously)

The GFA will have processed to an end at that stage.

breatheme

I actually don't see that happening, nor is it required under the GFA.

blanch152

breatheme wrote: »

Key word is might. But we again fall back on the GFA. There's no provision for an independent NI so to bring about your idea you would have to first renegotiate the GFA, put the updated version to referendum (in RoI and NI), and then probably hold an independence referendum or whatever is agreed.

I think your idea would be dead in the water just trying to renegotiate the GFA.

Any change to the current constitutional arrangement will require changes to the GFA. The current roles for Dublin in Northern Ireland will have to become future roles for the UK, or something similar, so the East/West relationship both North and South would have to be renegotiated.

FrancieBrady

breatheme wrote: »

Key word is might. But we again fall back on the GFA. There's no provision for an independent NI so to bring about your idea you would have to first renegotiate the GFA, put the updated version to referendum (in RoI and NI), and then probably hold an independence referendum or whatever is agreed.

I think your idea would be dead in the water just trying to renegotiate the GFA.

It is dead in the water if you even begin to think about how it would govern itself.

Why can't it govern itself? Because the problems created by an unnatural partition of an island still exist.
Therefore, you need to deal with partition and it's far reaching and probably permanent problems first.

breatheme

blanch152 wrote: »

You would allow dual nationality - Irish and Northern Irish or British and Northern Irish - to the existing population, and probably the next generation. After that, it would probably die out.

I agree that it is low on any first choice poll, but it might well be most people's second choice, if they can't get either of their first. They hate the other side's first choice, but they might live with the second choice.

Key word is might. But we again fall back on the GFA. There's no provision for an independent NI so to bring about your idea you would have to first renegotiate the GFA, put the updated version to referendum (in RoI and NI), and then probably hold an independence referendum or whatever is agreed.

I think your idea would be dead in the water just trying to renegotiate the GFA.

blanch152

breatheme wrote: »

That could work, but support for independence in NI is lower than either staying in the UK or reunifying with Ireland, source:

So while practical and theoretically feasible (you'd need to address the issues of nationality, I reckon, plus all that other stuff I mentioned). You may just be giving a majority a solution they all hate.

You would allow dual nationality - Irish and Northern Irish or British and Northern Irish - to the existing population, and probably the next generation. After that, it would probably die out.

I agree that it is low on any first choice poll, but it might well be most people's second choice, if they can't get either of their first. They hate the other side's first choice, but they might live with the second choice.

breatheme

blanch152 wrote: »

An independent Northern Ireland, member of the EU, getting access to the Single Market and the Customs Union, adopting the Euro, but remaining part of the Commonwealth, and a monarchy, with the Queen remaining as Head of State.

The UK promising to maintain subsidy for ten years. The EU giving aid as it would be an underdeveloped region of the EU and to support the peace process.

That would allow an All-Ireland tourist market, the North could market itself better for FDI etc.

I would guess that an option like that would be as viable as a unitary State - little different from the limited explanation given by SF as to how a united Ireland would work, but would retain for the majority in the North, the crucial political and cultural links with Britain. For the nationalists, they would be free from British control and future economic development would inevitably bring closer ties with the South.

It strikes me as a possible compromise rather than the win/lose scenario currently being presented.

That could work, but support for independence in NI is lower than either staying in the UK or reunifying with Ireland, source:

So while practical and theoretically feasible (you'd need to address the issues of nationality, I reckon, plus all that other stuff I mentioned). You may just be giving a majority a solution they all hate.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Partition doesn't need to be addressed, and the problem is, if you do address it in the way you want, the problem of the British identity then needs to be addressed, there has to be a third solution, that is not the current set-up and not a unitary State.

Quasi-Home Rule, as I have suggested, is one possible option. It is ridiculous to suggest that the 6 counties couldn't survive independently when there are 80 other smaller countries who do, including several members of the EU.

Your ridiculous third option happens to include one of the prime reasons partition spectacularly and violently failed. Namely:

but remaining part of the Commonwealth, and a monarchy, with the Queen remaining as Head of State.

As to 'partition doesn't need to be addressed'. We know you and decades of Irish governments don't want to address it, but they had to in the GFA. And now that that process has stalled it is only a matter of time before it will need to be addressed again.
It will never go away until it is addressed, because it has failed and any solution that does not address the problem on a 32 county basis will also fail or hold the north in the economically dependent and socially impossible bubble, it is in now.

setanta1000

breatheme wrote: »

Britain is shooting itself in the head. Ireland can try its best to avoid it, but just today we had Theresa May stating: "No deal Brexit wouldn't be the end of the world." There is only so much Ireland can do.

I agree with ALL of your points when you look at the issue from the legally correct and proper EU position - 100% agree.

My ever increasing concern is the impact on us in Ireland, North and South. We are in line to be the worst affected EU nation as a result of Brexit and I think it is worthwhile having a discussion on what other options there are that could end up reducing the impact on us.

At the moment I think the UK feels it has no option but to have a hard Brexit because there is no other face saving option available - what if we could come up with a solution that at least helps NI?

The way this is going I can see the UK and Irish economies sinking into depression while both of us shouting "It's all your fault" across the Irish Sea at each other!

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What you would have at the end of all that is the exact same problem, a partitioned statelet incapable of governing itself.

What needs to be addressed, and people like you will run from this as long as you can, is 'partition' itself, which concentrated the issues we had here in the South into 6 counties in such a way that could not be sustainable, economically or socially. (even the partitioners - Britain, knew it was only a temporary solution)
The solution remains a 32 county one, anything else is a sop or kicking the can down the road.

Partition doesn't need to be addressed, and the problem is, if you do address it in the way you want, the problem of the British identity then needs to be addressed, there has to be a third solution, that is not the current set-up and not a unitary State.

Quasi-Home Rule, as I have suggested, is one possible option. It is ridiculous to suggest that the 6 counties couldn't survive independently when there are 80 other smaller countries who do, including several members of the EU.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

An independent Northern Ireland, member of the EU, getting access to the Single Market and the Customs Union, adopting the Euro, but remaining part of the Commonwealth, and a monarchy, with the Queen remaining as Head of State.

The UK promising to maintain subsidy for ten years. The EU giving aid as it would be an underdeveloped region of the EU and to support the peace process.

What you would have at the end of all that is the exact same problem, a partitioned statelet incapable of governing itself.

What needs to be addressed, and people like you will run from this as long as you can, is 'partition' itself, which concentrated the issues we had here in the South into 6 counties in such a way that could not be sustainable, economically or socially. (even the partitioners - Britain, knew it was only a temporary solution)
The solution remains a 32 county one, anything else is a sop or kicking the can down the road.

blanch152

breatheme wrote: »

It's not just "this country is bigger" or "this country is smaller". You have to look at how they actually operate regarding taxation, benefits and social services, attracting foreign investment and managing its debt.

I was replying directly to your very first question, which was: "How do Monaco or Andorra generate enough cash to run themselves?" Hence my reply. Those are tax havens.

How do you expect NI to function like Iceland, or like Estonia?*

*genuine question. No sarcasm here. I'm all ears.

An independent Northern Ireland, member of the EU, getting access to the Single Market and the Customs Union, adopting the Euro, but remaining part of the Commonwealth, and a monarchy, with the Queen remaining as Head of State.

The UK promising to maintain subsidy for ten years. The EU giving aid as it would be an underdeveloped region of the EU and to support the peace process.

That would allow an All-Ireland tourist market, the North could market itself better for FDI etc.

I would guess that an option like that would be as viable as a unitary State - little different from the limited explanation given by SF as to how a united Ireland would work, but would retain for the majority in the North, the crucial political and cultural links with Britain. For the nationalists, they would be free from British control and future economic development would inevitably bring closer ties with the South.

It strikes me as a possible compromise rather than the win/lose scenario currently being presented.

breatheme

setanta1000 wrote: »

Why not?

I think it's a really good question to be asking; what are the possible options for Northern Ireland that both traditions there could agree to, while avoiding murdering their economy?

The possible options we have now are, in lieu of a border poll:

1. Border at the Irish Sea
2. Border in the Island of Ireland.

Both options are very nuanced and have different ways of being implemented.

Something like Northern Ireland gets special status in the EU but remains in the CTA and UK Commonwealth?

Does this special status mean SM+CU? That's what it takes to completely eliminate the island border.

SM: Eliminates the need to check goods.
CU: Eliminates the need to apply tariffs and tax.

Any option that excludes one or the other means a border within Ireland.

I know the DUP and Ms May have made it a Red Line that there is no border down the Irish Sea but maybe this is because the DUP see any other option as the first step to Irish re-unification? Maybe we need to be talking about options?

Those options being? Independence.........? I don't see independence happening for the following reasons:

1. It is not in the framework of the GFA.
2. All of NI would have to agree via referendum.
3. After independence the GFA is basically void (being an agreement between Ireland and the UK and not between Ireland and an independent NI) which triggers all other sorts of questions. For example: What happens if Derry wants to run away from an independent NI and join the Republic?

At this stage anything Ireland can do to minimize the extent or severity of the impact on our economy from Brexit is worthwhile.

Britain is shooting itself in the head. Ireland can try its best to avoid it, but just today we had Theresa May stating: "No deal Brexit wouldn't be the end of the world." There is only so much Ireland can do.

setanta1000

breatheme wrote: »

So you want to turn NI into a tax haven?

Why not?

I think it's a really good question to be asking; what are the possible options for Northern Ireland that both traditions there could agree to, while avoiding murdering their economy?

Something like Northern Ireland gets special status in the EU but remains in the CTA and UK Commonwealth?

I know the DUP and Ms May have made it a Red Line that there is no border down the Irish Sea but maybe this is because the DUP see any other option as the first step to Irish re-unification? Maybe we need to be talking about options?

At this stage anything Ireland can do to minimize the extent or severity of the impact on our economy from Brexit is worthwhile.