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

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well you don't seem to be able to do that - properly balance the positives and benefits with the negatives which was the inherent problem with Brexiteerism, which is why it has hit a brick wall and looks like it won't happen or will be much diluted if it does.

Seems to me all or most of the negatives of a UI are finite problems which are to be expected and have been experienced elsewhere.
What has to be added to the conversation now if the UK does crash out is the toxic effect on Ireland solely because of an absurd partition. Even FG now realise this and the absurdity of the problem we find ourselves in because of that partition.

The thing is, if Brexit does hit a brick wall and not happen or be diluted, then there won't be any impetus for a united Ireland.

If a hard Brexit happens, we have enough to worry about without taking on the economic burden of the North.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The thing is, if Brexit does hit a brick wall and not happen or be diluted, then there won't be any impetus for a united Ireland.

If a hard Brexit happens, we have enough to worry about without taking on the economic burden of the North.

If a hard Brexit happens unification is the only real answer for us. I expect FG FF and all parties to be working hard for it as a result.
If it doesn't happen, then the uncaring attitude of the UK will have consequences as the debate goes on. The UK is not going to miraculously live happily ever after and faces much more turmoil if they cannot deliver. In short, it isn't going away anytime soon.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If a hard Brexit happens unification is the only real answer for us. I expect FG FF and all parties to be working hard for it as a result.
If it doesn't happen, then the uncaring attitude of the UK will have consequences as the debate goes on. The UK is not going to miraculously live happily ever after and faces much more turmoil if they cannot deliver. In short, it isn't going away anytime soon.

If a hard Brexit happens, they might want to use unification as a distraction all right, but the real issue that they will have to deal with is the holes in the public finances caused by higher unemployment and less income tax.

Unification will have to wait.

Dyr

There are only two preconditions that need to be met before a United Ireland happens: Polls on both sides of the border being passed successfully.

That's it.

The fun thing about the current situation is the degree to which the Dudley Edwardites and Cruise-O'Brienists are experiencing squeaky bum time and throwing out precondition after precondition as to why reunification can't even be discussed

It reminds me of the early peace process talks, the Provos coming out with excuse after excuse not to just call it all off and Reynolds slowly reeling them in because he knew their positions could not stand up to scrutiny.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

If a hard Brexit happens, they might want to use unification as a distraction all right, but the real issue that they will have to deal with is the holes in the public finances caused by higher unemployment and less income tax.

Unification will have to wait.

Partition will begin in a whole new way to cause 'holes in public finances and unemployment'.

It will need to be addressed, FG FF and the rest already know this and are shifting position on it.

briany

Bambi wrote: »

There are only two preconditions that need to be met before a United Ireland happens: Polls on both sides of the border being passed successfully.

That's it.

The fun thing about the current situation is the degree to which the Dudley Edwardites and Cruise-O'Brienists are experiencing squeaky bum time and throwing out precondition after precondition as to why reunification can't even be discussed

It reminds me of the early peace process talks, the Provos coming out with excuse after excuse not to just call it all off and Reynolds slowly reeling them in because he knew their positions could not stand up to scrutiny.

If the concerns around a United Ireland are put to scrutiny and it's found that they do not hold water, that would be absolutely fine. Far better that they are brought up and honestly discussed than waved away with an "it'll be grand..."

Snickers Man

Bombshell opinion piece in Irish Times today entitled Why we should stop worrying and learn to love Brexit urges us to consider the positive benefits of Britain leaving the EU, if only we would suck things up and forget all that United Ireland nonsense.

After painting a rosy picture of the "influence" that can be wielded by an Ireland that has stepped out of Britain's shadow into a new alignment of "similarly minded" European states like the Netherlands, Scandinavia and the Baltics (roses always grow well when fed on bull****) it then gets down to the serious business of what we have to do to enter this brave new world.

Calling the rhetoric that advocates a border poll and a united Ireland "deeply flawed" the writer then states "For Ireland, Brexit should be welcomed as formalising partition, not ending it."

Wow! That's not what the Taoiseach has been saying. Or the Foreign Minister.

Who would write such a thing?

The author, Eoin Drea, is described as " a researcher at the Wilfried Martens Centre, the official think tank of the European People’s Party which includes Fine Gael"

Is public opinion being prepared for another sell out on Northern Ireland?

I think we should be told.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

Partition was pretty much formalised with the GFA though, and the referendum to give up constitutional claims to the 6 counties, and the agreement that a border poll will be held if and when the British government felt it had a good enough chance of passing favourably for unification, they'd also need to be pretty certain that voters in the 26 would also pass such a referendum (I don't believe that to be a foregone conclusion at all, and may even be getting further away from being acceptable in the 26).

[Deleted User]

I for one cannot grasp the huge leap that people are making that equate Brexit to a united Ireland.

It's one thing for a majority in NI to wish to remain in the EU, it's a completely different matter to suggest that the same majority would vote for an UI.

The two are very very different and I think we should get on with Brexit and dealing with that without even bothering with a border poll for a long long time

Wheeliebin30

SNIP. No more non-constructive posts please.

Snickers Man

Wade Petite Sordidness wrote: »

Partition was pretty much formalised with the GFA though, and the referendum to give up constitutional claims to the 6 counties,

True but the "partition" then existed as part of a larger whole, namely the EU of which both national parties (UK and Ireland) were members. Now one is going to be a member and the other isn't. So it's not the same "Partition" at all. Certainly not the one I voted for when I (along with 90% of people) voted to accept the amendments to articles 2 and 3.

seamus

It's a bit of a stretch to equate an article by a contrarian economist twice removed from Fine Gael, as being official Fine Gael policy, or having been at all written with the assent or co-operation of the government.

The author does seem to make his money saying the economic things that you're not supposed to say.

He wrote an article in the Guardian saying that despite being a remainer, he is fully behind Brexit...because Britain is holding the EU back.

Some quarters seem to be making a taboo out of the suggestion that any Irish person may not want a United Ireland. We've been spoonfed this propaganda about rebellion and partition and oppression since we were toddlers, such that we can't even countenance the idea that perhaps we're not entitled to claim domain over another jurisdiction just because it's connected to us.

The thrust of what the article is saying (IMO) is that making noises about a United Ireland at this stage is premature. The UK and by extension Northern Ireland is going to be an economic and ideological mess for at least a decade. While it seems like a no-brainer that the time to call a UI poll is when the UK is in disarray, economically we'd be opening up a big hole into which we'd have to pour €15bn a year. Considering that's about a fifth of our current budget, it's something that we can't afford.
"Formalising" partition in this context refers to the certainty that we won't have to take on that economic burden in the short-term.

I do however feel that he has missed out on the obvious; the assistance the EU would provide in such a scenario.

professore

I heard on the radio this morning that there's a guy from Cork running buses to Belfast so elderly people can have cataracts removed. Until we sort out the health service, people in NI would be insane to vote to join a united Ireland.

Hell I'd join the UK for that reason alone.

Consider what a disaster it would be if we had a united Ireland. It would be the Bank bailout times 100. PS Salaries and social welfare reduced to UK levels would be a start to pay for it.

prawnsambo

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I for one cannot grasp the huge leap that people are making that equate Brexit to a united Ireland.

It's one thing for a majority in NI to wish to remain in the EU, it's a completely different matter to suggest that the same majority would vote for an UI.

The two are very very different and I think we should get on with Brexit and dealing with that without even bothering with a border poll for a long long time

Polling suggests that a UI would have 80% support here. I know it's a very different thing in the abstract to the reality that would emerge should such a vote be required. But it's quite a ways higher than simlar polling in NI at the moment.

professore

prawnsambo wrote: »

Polling suggests that a UI would have 80% support here. I know it's a very different thing in the abstract to the reality that would emerge should such a vote be required. But it's quite a ways higher than simlar polling in NI at the moment.

That's scary. Clearly these people have no clue. Bet its people with landlines, ie older conservative people.

prawnsambo

professore wrote: »

That's scary. Clearly these people have no clue. Bet its people with landlines, ie older conservative people.

Well I think I'll take that bet because:

The “Unifying Ireland Tracking Poll” was carried out face to face by BrandTactics. They questioned 500 people between the ages of 18 and 65+ in the areas of Munster, Leinster, and Connacht between Jan 30 and 31.

FrancieBrady

briany wrote: »

If the concerns around a United Ireland are put to scrutiny and it's found that they do not hold water, that would be absolutely fine. Far better that they are brought up and honestly discussed than waved away with an "it'll be grand..."

There will be a certain amount of risk in embarking on a UI and that is fine. There has been massive risk to ignoring partition too, just observe it's 100 year history.

[Deleted User]

professore wrote: »

That's scary. Clearly these people have no clue. Bet its people with landlines, ie older conservative people.

Well no I'd say it across the board.

Another poster said we have been feed this romantic narrative of rebellion etc since we were kids and that romantic view of a united Ireland remains strong.

In the event of a border poll both NI and Ireland (the 26 counties) would have to individually vote for reunification.

I'd imagine that 80% would be a lot less come polling day after a campaign for and against, however I still think a majority in Ireland would be in favour.

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

cgcsb wrote: »

Sure, no problem, here's some links from the UK and USA for example:

Financial Times:
https://www.ft.com/content/7d5244a0-f22d-11e8-ae55-df4bf40f9d0d

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/hard-brexit-could-cost-island-of-ireland-42-5-billion-over-seven-years-1.3689807

https://prcg.com/modeling-irish-unification/report.pdf

https://senatormarkdaly.org/2018/07/23/northern-irelands-income-and-expenditure-in-a-reunification-scenario/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/16/united-ireland-brexit-irish-unification-back-on-agenda

The department has delayed their report on unification in line with the Irish government's Brexit policy, which is quite telling.
https://www.thejournal.ie/united-ireland-costings-4144760-Jul2018/

You claimed there was an IMF report and then failed to provide the IMF report.

Chips Lovell

While I don't think the piece is in any way supposed to be representative of Fine Gael policy, at the same time you'd want to be seriously deluded to think that they're in favour of a united Ireland.

None of the major political parties, barring SF and a few of the more traditional element of FF, are serious about wanting one. It's something you pay lip service too rather than actively pursue, because there's nothing politically to be gained from actively opposing.

If a border poll was ever on the cards, expect most of them to try and edge away from it, something along the lines of "We're in favour in principle, but now is not the right time etc..."

FrancieBrady

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

You claimed there was an IMF report and then failed to provide the IMF report.

Not seeing where he/she claimed 'there was a report', can you link/quote?

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not seeing where he/she claimed 'there was a report', can you link/quote?

cgcsb wrote: »

This has been rubbished multiple times, even by the IMF, who are not friends of SF. The Irish civil service also has produced a report on same. The budget would be balanced a lot quicker than Germany's post unification budget.

Please note the word "also" and that neither report has been provided to my knowledge.

FrancieBrady

Schnitzler Hiyori Geta wrote: »

Please note the word "also" and that neither report has been provided to my knowledge.

Very selective reading of the word 'also'.

For instance saying that 'Liverpool scored against Man U and also drew with Arsenal' is perfectly acceptable grammar and use of the word 'also' if it is said in the context of winning the league.
Context is everything.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Very selective reading of the word 'also'.

For instance saying that 'Liverpool scored against Man U and also drew with Arsenal' is perfectly acceptable grammar and use of the word 'also' if it is said in the context of winning the league.
Context is everything.

We have a few Friends of Sinn Fein reports which say it will be all right on the night, just like Brexit. The FDI that will flow into Northern Ireland sounds a lot like the great trade deals that will be done when the UK escapes the stranglehold of the EU.

We have another report from two respected Irish economists who say that unification will lead to a 15% drop in living standards for people down South.

I know which one I believe.

MrMusician18

seamus wrote: »

It's a bit of a stretch to equate an article by a contrarian economist twice removed from Fine Gael, as being official Fine Gael policy, or having been at all written with the assent or co-operation of the government.

The author does seem to make his money saying the economic things that you're not supposed to say.

He wrote an article in the Guardian saying that despite being a remainer, he is fully behind Brexit...because Britain is holding the EU back.

Some quarters seem to be making a taboo out of the suggestion that any Irish person may not want a United Ireland. We've been spoonfed this propaganda about rebellion and partition and oppression since we were toddlers, such that we can't even countenance the idea that perhaps we're not entitled to claim domain over another jurisdiction just because it's connected to us.

The thrust of what the article is saying (IMO) is that making noises about a United Ireland at this stage is premature. The UK and by extension Northern Ireland is going to be an economic and ideological mess for at least a decade. While it seems like a no-brainer that the time to call a UI poll is when the UK is in disarray, economically we'd be opening up a big hole into which we'd have to pour €15bn a year. Considering that's about a fifth of our current budget, it's something that we can't afford.
"Formalising" partition in this context refers to the certainty that we won't have to take on that economic burden in the short-term.

I do however feel that he has missed out on the obvious; the assistance the EU would provide in such a scenario.

professore wrote: »

I heard on the radio this morning that there's a guy from Cork running buses to Belfast so elderly people can have cataracts removed. Until we sort out the health service, people in NI would be insane to vote to join a united Ireland.

Hell I'd join the UK for that reason alone.

Consider what a disaster it would be if we had a united Ireland. It would be the Bank bailout times 100. PS Salaries and social welfare reduced to UK levels would be a start to pay for it.

Everything time the cost of unification is mentioned it increases. €5-7bn is generally the accepted figure, the IT author has it at €10bn, seamus had it at €15bn and professore has it at €72tn.

A UI would almost certainly involve a period of co-sovereignty transition of up to 40 years in length.

seamus

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Everything time the cost of unification is mentioned it increases. €5-7bn is generally the accepted figure, the IT author has it at €10bn, seamus had it at €15bn and professore has it at €72tn.

I'm paywalled from the IT article, but I recall his figure was £10bn, not euro. So I put some overhead in there because there will be increased integration and development costs for us in the medium-term. The UK pumps in £10bn just to keep NI afloat. If we want a functioning economy, we'd need to pump in billions in development funding on top of that.

I'm not sure where the €5-7bn figure comes from. Maybe thats's the one-off cost after a border poll. But it's definitely not the ongoing cost.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

We have a few Friends of Sinn Fein reports which say it will be all right on the night, just like Brexit. The FDI that will flow into Northern Ireland sounds a lot like the great trade deals that will be done when the UK escapes the stranglehold of the EU.

We have another report from two respected Irish economists who say that unification will lead to a 15% drop in living standards for people down South.

I know which one I believe.

This looks like something a lazy student cobbled together on a Sunday night after a weekend on shots and lager.

:D

http://dublineconomics.com/papers/8502.pdf

blanch152

seamus wrote: »

I'm paywalled from the IT article, but I recall his figure was £10bn, not euro. So I put some overhead in there because there will be increased integration and development costs for us in the medium-term. The UK pumps in £10bn just to keep NI afloat. If we want a functioning economy, we'd need to pump in billions in development funding on top of that.

I'm not sure where the €5-7bn figure comes from. Maybe thats's the one-off cost after a border poll. But it's definitely not the ongoing cost.

The €5-7bn comes from the Friends of Sinn Fein reports.

https://sluggerotoole.com/2015/11/21/when-is-an-independent-study-on-irish-unification-not-independent/

A more interesting take on the possibility of unification here:

https://sluggerotoole.com/2017/03/12/a-united-ireland-is-not-inevitable-here-is-why/

"There are hundreds of questions for Nationalists to address before they can put a case for Northern Ireland seceding from the Union with the UK to join with the Republic of Ireland under the rule of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.

What happens to the NHS – will we see GP & presciption charges? (€40-€65 to see your doctor in the Republic)

What of EU inspired water and bin charges based on usage/weight?
Would a United Ireland be a unitary State or would there still be a devolved Stormont?
What happens to Northern Irish civil servants, firemen, police officers etc?
What happens on pensions and benefits?
What about the subvention Northern Ireland receives – could the South afford it?
Will the Union flag be hoisted alongside the Tri Colour on the Dail in the name of parity and equality?
Will we get a new agreed all-Ireland flag?
Will we get a new agreed all-Ireland National Anthem?
Will we be entitled to dual British & Irish citizenship and passports?
What happens to the cross-border bodies?
Will mandatory powersharing be implemented in the Dail with D`Hondt?
Will their be an all-Ireland parades commission?"

Of course, we could just have a referendum like the Brexit one in the UK, where we vote based on sentiment and promises and lies.

Dyr

briany wrote: »

If the concerns around a United Ireland are put to scrutiny and it's found that they do not hold water, that would be absolutely fine. Far better that they are brought up and honestly discussed than waved away with an "it'll be grand..."

The concerns and scrutiny of the voters I assume. Or do you mean the concerns and scrutiny of a small set in the Republic who are four square set against a UI regardless of the potential benefits or pitfalls? Because I'm not worried about wasting time on them

Imreoir2

blanch152 wrote: »

Until somebody can produce credible evidence that unification is a long term investment that will pay off, those peddling unification look an awful lot like those peddling Brexit.

You have yet to produce anything that shows the benefit of the status quo. There is plenty of evidence that the UK's membership of the EU has been a positive thing for the UK. Is there any evidence that NI being in the UK has been a positive for NI's economey? Or that partition has had a positive economic impact on the island as a whole? I can't say I have seen such evidence.

You say we are "peddling unification", I suggest that until you can provide some credible evidence to support your own position then you are doing little more than peddline partition.