johnnyskeleton wrote: » The idea would be to hold the border poll at a point in time that is likely to result in the largest possible majority support. SF seem to think that will be connected to Brexit, and maybe it is. You might never have DUP supporters accepting a United Ireland, but after Brexit their support might dwindle, and the Alliance Party and UUP might engage with how a United Ireland would look. In 1973, a border poll was held and Nationalists/Republicans boycotted it. It was felt that they could not win and that the poll would be used to justify the status quo. So there is clearly precedent from Northern Irish Nationalists and Republicans that they accept that you don't just randomly have a border poll but instead it must be done at a time and in a manner that might actually produce a reliable result.
Imreoir2 wrote: » Unfortunatly this is not what is required by the GFA, the GFA does not stipulate a policy of waiting until a clear and stable majority supports unification. It stipulates that a referendum must be held as soon as it seems likely that a majority would support unification.
briany wrote: » How is this to be gauged? Is a questionnaire sent to each Northern Irish household? A series of town hall meetings? A Yougov poll? It's the NI secretary who calls the thing, but I've seen it supposed that it's really down to the whim of the party in government, and if they don't want one then it won't happen.
Imreoir2 wrote: » As I am sure you are aware, that is an open question. In practice it may well be at the whim of the party in power and should the party in power not want one, it may well not happen. Such a decision would not be without consequence, however.
briany wrote: » Consequences would be a tricky matter. If we're talking words of condemnation from the like of Sinn Fein - well, words are just that. If we're talking threats from dissident Republicans, their threats could re-polarise political opinion in NI and perhaps therefore undermine the possibility of an eventual border poll succeeding. Not saying the above are the only two options, but 'consequences' would have to be something effectual that does not threaten to destabilise the peace.
Fr Tod Umptious wrote: » 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.
Baron de Charlus wrote: » 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..."
jm08 wrote: » The circumstances are different to 1973. First of all, the British Government is meant to act as an honest broker. Secondly, this wouldn't be a once in a lifetime referendum (which is what the 1973 one would have been). From what I recall, the first one kick starts a referendum every 7 years under the GFA.
Imreoir2 wrote: » Unfortunatly this is not what is required by the GFA, the GFA does not stipulate a policy of waiting until a clear and stable majority supports unification. It stipulates that a referendum must be held as soon as it seems likely that a majority would support unification. If one subscribes to the notion that demographic trends in NI tend to greater support for unification over time, then one could hold the view that it would be better to wait until 55%, or 60% or more support unification rather than rushing in and holding a referendum as soon as a referendum might pass, but one must face the reality that doing so would be a breach of the GFA. The British state adopting a policy of maintaining the union and denying a referendum even when it seems clear that the conditions set down by the GFA have been met would itself be a threat to the peace and stability of NI. There is a reasonable case to be made that a narrow result in a referendum could be destabelising, but there is also a case to be made that refusing to hold the referendum would would also be destabelising.
blanch152 wrote: » This is the exact phrasing of the GFA: "2. Subject to paragraph 3, the Secretary of State shall exercise the power under paragraph 1 if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland. " How does a Secretary of State decide that "it appears likely to him" (interesting to note the sexist language of the GFA)? Is a single opinion poll enough to decide it appears likely? Surely not. Is a sectarian census headcount on religious grounds enough to decide it appears likely? Surely not, either. If a Secretary of State decides that "it appears likely to him", s/he is also likely to be aware that such a decision is likely to be challenged in court by means of a judicial review. The basis for the decision would then have to be defended in court and some objective reasoning put forward to defend the decision. Appeasing Sinn Fein wouldn't be enough, neither would either of the two reasons I dismiss already. Assembly election results with a majority of seats being taken by parties calling for a referendum might be enough. However, what if he believes that a referendum campaign would reduce in slippage? Maybe a majority of votes cast for nationalist parties would be enough. Would they have to have in the manifesto a call for a referendum? There are plenty of legitimate get-out clauses that a Secretary of State might rely on. Looking at the current voting patterns in Northern Ireland, I would guess that many voters have realised this, hence the persistence in votes for the two extreme sectarian parties.
Imreoir2 wrote: » Again, as I am sure you are aware, it is a grey area. I am not going to claim to have a precise answer to the question because it has been highlighted time and again that there is no specific answer. The answer in practice as to what conditions justifiably meet the requirements of the GFA is likely to be contested with some claiming that the first opinion poll that shows a majority in favour of unification is sufficient and others insisting that a much higher bar must be met. I think it is clear enough that we have not yet entered that contested territory, though the impact of Brexit may put us there sooner than many might have expected. Once we enter that space, presumably once one or more polls show majority support for unification, there is likely to be a campaign pushing for a border poll. We can already see the beginnings of such a campaign with the "Think32" group. One hopes that the Irish and British governments will, once we have crossed into that contested space if not before, be able to sit down and agree a path forward. I would hope that this would include more precise criteria by which a border poll could be triggered.
briany wrote: » I don't blame those who drafted the GFA not to have predicted that the UK might one day decide to leave the EU, but it's a bit of a strange oversight not to have included a precise mechanism to trigger a border poll rather than one prone to human fancy and slowdown in the form of legal challenge. If one of the primary goals, if not the primary goal, of Irish nationalists in the GFA was to bring about a United Ireland, I wonder why they weren't more stringent on this point.
blanch152 wrote: » I think you have hit the mechanism right there. Once there are a series of opinion polls over an extended period (at least 18 months) or an Assembly/HoP result that points towards a possible majority, the Secretary of State should conclude publicly that it is possible that a majority might vote for unification (a lesser test than likely). S/he should also state that in order to make it likely, and subsequently acceptable, the mistakes of Brexit should be avoided and the parameters of what is being proposed should be put on the table in advance of a referendum. That leads obviously to discussions between the British and Irish governments, following which a detailed proposal is put to a vote. All in all, that would mean a border poll is at least another three years away, more likely close to a decade away.
FrancieBrady wrote: » If the UK crashes out you will have a Border Poll within 5 years as it will be included in the price of an subsequent deal (which the UK have to get) and rightfully so, imo, as the contagion it will cause to the south would be massive. That is if the UK survives a crash out politically, and I would be doubtful that it can.
maccored wrote: » 6 counties - 2 or 3 of them small enough - as a single entitiy? How could it generate enough cash to run itself? Otherwise its a united ireland or remain in the UK, since the UK cant be both in and out of europe
opawaman wrote: » Northern Ireland could be an independent state within the commonwealth like , New Zealand.
blanch152 wrote: » Wishful thinking is probably the kindest thing to say about any notion that any border poll will be included in the price of any deal with the EU.
Bambi wrote: » Anyone paying attention to this being released today?https://brexitlawni.org/library/resources/the-future-of-our-shared-island/ I've only had a quick read but this jumped out as interesing "Notable in this judgment, however, is the distinction drawn between the broad discretionary powerof the Secretary of State to call a poll (for a variety of reasons) and the duty to do so if it appears likely that a majority of voters would vote for a united Ireland.The judgment suggests, for example, that there would be nothing to prevent the Secretary of State initiating a poll with respect to a “no-deal Brexit” even where the principal issue was continuing membership of the EU (in a unified Ireland). In other words, the Secretary of State is not confined exclusively to evidence with respect to support for Irish unity."
FrancieBrady wrote: » It could also be tritely called wishful thinking to believe that concern for northern Ireland will evaporate. What the DUP's clingy need to be told they are a part of the UK has shown. is that there is a huge concern in the EU for the rights of the northern Irish people to be upheld. I think you will see this come front and centre if there is a crash out. Perfectly reasonable for the EU to see the only practical way forward is a discussion around the future of Ireland first.
blanch152 wrote: » Those who talk about the impossibility of some form of Northern Ireland independence within a wider UK or Commonwealth forget about the likes of the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Isle of Man, the various Channel Islands etc. They are all much smaller yet somehow survive.
Charles Babbage wrote: » These places are not independent. Will the British wish to continue to fund NI?
jm08 wrote: » Where is the 10 million subvention going to come from? NI hasn't balanced the books since about 1925. Most of those places are just tax havens and the Falklands is going to be screwed if the UK leaves the EU as most of its exports (fish) go to Spain.
blanch152 wrote: » The EU is acting to protect the interests of its member Ireland, not any part of the UK. The concern of the EU is not for the rights of the people of Northern Ireland, it is concern for the wishes of Ireland to avoid a border with Northern Ireland. There is a subtle but important distinction. As I have said before, if there is a crash out, there will be an awful lot of other things to worry about first.
