Border Poll discussion

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

I don't reckon that would stop them.

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.

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%

Infernum

Yeah, that recent poll basically states that a border poll would be a landslide in favour of a United Ireland (52% In Favour-39% Against) if/when the UK exits the EU. The percentage of those in support of a united Ireland rises to 56% if a hard border is imposed if I remember correctly.

However, if the UK remains within the EU the support for a united Ireland drastically decreases, 40% In favour of unity against 60% in favour of remaining.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/sinn-fin-admits-thousands-of-jobs-will-go-if-ireland-unites-37280245.html

I see Sinn Fein has its instructions out to its online supporters on how to deal with the united Ireland issue.

"The draft document entitled 'Irish Unity - An Activist's Guide' has a series of questions and answers under a heading 'How to have a conversation about Irish unity."

Yet Louise O'Reilly was on TV last night claiming that the SF presence online was organic.

The only thing the document is missing is the potential for a united Ireland to do its own trade deals and save €350m a week on the NHS.

Imreoir2

blanch152 wrote: »

I do think the idea has merit. The proposition that there is just a binary choice - remaining in the UK or a united Ireland - is more than a little outdated in the current situation. There are many different options:

1. Remaining in the UK and a full part of Brexit
2. Remaining in the UK but having some special status within the EU
3. Independent but outside the EU
4. Independent but inside the EU
5. Joint sovereignty with London and Dublin and devolved powers but outside the EU
6. Joint sovereignty with London and Dublin and devolved powers inside the EU
7. Part of a United Ireland but a federal state within the EU
8. Part of a United Ireland single state within the EU
9. Part of a United Ireland that is in the EEA and the Commonwealth

There are more variations, including a greater devolution of power and changing the rules of Stormont.

Your claim that the binary choice between being part of the UK or part of Ireland is outdated is a little bizzare. It is exactly the choice as it exists today. This is the current arangement as set down in the GFA.

Options 1 and 2 are possible under the option of remaining in the UK, options 7, 8 and 9 are possible as part of joining Ireland (though option 9 is not going to happen as Ireland will not be leaving the EU). Options 3, 4, 5 and 6 are not on the table and are specifically ruled out by the GFA.

You might consider this "outdated", but it is exactly the choice available today.