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

McMurphy

Is the assumption that should this island ever be reunited, and Britain withdraws, the financial cost would be borne by the Republic, and only the Republic?

Surely Britain would have to take some financial responsibility for a number of years.

Junkyard Tom

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Britain would have to take some financial responsibility for a number of years.

I would envision a tapering-off of the British subvention that would be replaced by bringing the economy in the northeast in line with the rest of Ireland rather than just replicating the failed economic model currently employed.

seamus

It would seem to me that I've at least provided some basis for my costings. Flawed and simplified they may be, you can at least follow the thread and see where it came from.

It would seem polite and reasonable that you would do the same rather than declare that some "stuff" isn't relevant and hand-wave off real costs.

It's not like there's going to be an exodus of people that will no longer need to be paid. Even if the entire public service workforce in NI were laid off upon unification, they are still people who need to be paid. The UK is not going to continue to pay public service pensions in a foreign jurisdiction. Any unification agreement would include that the Irish government at least share the cost of fulfilling public service pensions, and take over employment of the NI public service just like it did when it declared independence.

What makes you think that those PS/RUC/UDR/Prison pensions would just go away?

Realistically, the EU will step in and help out massively with this, it wouldn't all fall on the Irish taxpayer.

But it is the second biggest issue that needs to be dealt with before unification can be voted upon. It can't be gliby waved away as "ah sure, that won't be around".

(The biggest issue being security and the rights of NI citizens.)

facehugger99

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Is the assumption that should this island ever be reunited, and Britain withdraws, the financial cost would be borne by the Republic, and only the Republic?

Surely Britain would have to take some financial responsibility for a number of years.

The very fact that such fundamental questions haven't ever been discussed, tells you everything you need to know about the likelihood of a border poll in the short to medium term.

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

The very fact that such fundamental questions haven't ever been discussed, tells you everything you need to know about the likelihood of a border poll in the short to medium term.

I can just imagine the tantrums from the belligerent wing of Unionism if the British ever discussed that in advance of a poll.

The GFA shows that the 2 governments would work this out if there was a successful poll.
There is no reason to presume the British would walk away from their share of making it a success. In fact, it would be in their interest that it would be a success, last thing they want is a firestorm after they leave.

Junkyard Tom

seamus wrote: »

The UK is not going to continue to pay public service pensions in a foreign jurisdiction.

Those pensions are payable to individuals who served the British state. They absolutely will not be the responsibility of Ireland. Imagine the furore if our Government agreed to pay the pensions of RUC/UDR men who colluded in the murder of hundreds of innocent people? No way.

Chips Lovell

After bankrolling Northern Ireland for this long, it remains to be seen if there'd be an appetite to continue to do so after it ceases to be its responsibility.

If they indicated a willingness to keep funding it for some time, it may sway some votes alright.

I suppose there's some precedent with the Scottish Independence referendum. Did Westminster signal it was willing to maintain a subvention in the event of a Yes vote?

facehugger99

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I can just imagine the tantrums from the belligerent wing of Unionism if the British ever discussed that in advance of a poll.

The GFA shows that the 2 governments would work this out if there was a successful poll.
There is no reason to presume the British would walk away from their share of making it a success. In fact, it would be in their interest that it would be a success, last thing they want is a firestorm after they leave.

That's hilarious - you think there would be a poll before the cost was known?:D

Chips Lovell

I think the initial poll, the one in Northern Ireland, would take place before any negotiation. There'd be no point in going to lengthy negotiation on how the whole thing would work if Ulster was going to say "No".

I'd say it would only go in front of the Irish electorate though after unification deal was worked out.

facehugger99

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think the initial poll, the one in Northern Ireland, would take place before any negotiation. There'd be no point in going to lengthy negotiation on how the whole thing would work if Ulster was going to say "No".

Can't imagine NI public servants voting to leave the Union without cast iron guarantees on their jobs and pensions.

Dytalus

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think the initial poll, the one in Northern Ireland, would take place before any negotiation. There'd be no point in going to lengthy negotiation on how the whole thing would work if Ulster was going to say "No".

I'd say it would only go in front of the Irish electorate though after unification deal was worked out.

That's probably the ideal way to work it out to avoid wasting both Westminster and Dublin's time, but then you run into the issue of the NI electorate not being informed how it would work out. Some Unionists might be alright with it if Stormont stuck around, but want to vote against it if it was removed or phased out (as a probably quite inaccurate example, but it illustrates the point). If there's no concrete "here's what unification should look like" prior to their vote, then it's no better than Brexit.

Some people (myself and some others in this thread) would be willing to bear an economic hit up to a certain point, but I'd want to know what prior to a vote to make my informed decision. This is fair enough. The same should be afforded the NI voters. We don't need a Brexit-like vote, where there was no obvious 'leave' plan outside of vague promises and outright lies.

If people want to potentially suffer in one manner for a boost in another that's their right, and I won't fault them. But we can't let either ROI or NI go into a border poll without knowing what they're voting for. A vague "Unity or Partition" vote without saying what Unity entails is as bad as the "Leave vs Remain" without saying what Leave entails.

Chips Lovell

facehugger99 wrote: »

Can't imagine NI public servants voting to leave the Union without cast iron guarantees on their jobs and pensions.

They may not. To go back to the Scottish referendum, there were a lot of significant unanswered questions, such as whether it could join the EU, what currency it would use etc., yet they still had a poll.

Imreoir2

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I think the initial poll, the one in Northern Ireland, would take place before any negotiation. There'd be no point in going to lengthy negotiation on how the whole thing would work if Ulster was going to say "No".

I'd say it would only go in front of the Irish electorate though after unification deal was worked out.

I can only hope that the issues involved in the border process will be delt with in good faith and in good time. There is not clear plan for unification at the moment because it has simply not been relevant. It would have been a waste for both sides to invest time and political capital in agreeing a plan when we are not in a space where a border poll passing is a credible posibility. As such an outcome becomes a more credible possibility however, the need to start making plans increases. The exact mechanics of this remain unclear, though we can safely say that we have time to figure it out yet.

I would hope that if a border poll is called at some point in the coming years, it will not be without having thought through the process. We can expect that discussions will be held between the governments before a poll is anounced. Once the poll is called, there should be a sufficiently long lead in time to the actual vote to allow for plans to be drawn up between the British and Irish governments.

This plan may well not take the form of a fully agreed high detail treaty that sets everything in stone in advance. If we take the current Brexit talks as an example, it is reasonable to suggest that a plan would take the form of a joint political declaration that indicates the direction of travel should the unification option win. It would hopefully settle some of the more fundemental questions in advance, such as the continuation of NI institutions, transitional arangements, and the settlement of what costs would transfer to the United Irish State verses commitments that would remain with the UK.

An agreed political declaration between the British and Irish governments would provide for clarity on the fundemental issues, without getting bogged down in technical details, and would allow scope for the detail to be worked out should NI vote for Unification.

McMurphy

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I would envision a tapering-off of the British subvention that would be replaced by bringing the economy in the northeast in line with the rest of Ireland rather than just replicating the failed economic model currently employed.

I would also envisage some financial input from the EU, and possibly the US, especially surrounding issues such as peace and stability, at least in the infancy of the unison.

Did Britain continue to pay something towards Hong Kong after its withdrawal from same come to think of it?

facehugger99 wrote: »

Can't imagine NI public servants voting to leave the Union without cast iron guarantees on their jobs and pensions.

Not sure about their jobs being guaranteed, but don't see why their pensions would be affected.

James Brown

seamus wrote: »

It would seem to me that I've at least provided some basis for my costings. Flawed and simplified they may be, you can at least follow the thread and see where it came from.

It would seem polite and reasonable that you would do the same rather than declare that some "stuff" isn't relevant and hand-wave off real costs.

It's not like there's going to be an exodus of people that will no longer need to be paid. Even if the entire public service workforce in NI were laid off upon unification, they are still people who need to be paid. The UK is not going to continue to pay public service pensions in a foreign jurisdiction. Any unification agreement would include that the Irish government at least share the cost of fulfilling public service pensions, and take over employment of the NI public service just like it did when it declared independence.

What makes you think that those PS/RUC/UDR/Prison pensions would just go away?

Realistically, the EU will step in and help out massively with this, it wouldn't all fall on the Irish taxpayer.

But it is the second biggest issue that needs to be dealt with before unification can be voted upon. It can't be gliby waved away as "ah sure, that won't be around".

(The biggest issue being security and the rights of NI citizens.)

A pension is a contract of sorts. I would expect these things to be negotiated upon British withdrawal. Anyone currently on a pension would be due that from the current regime IMO, same goes for portions, based on years under that regime, come retirement I would imagine. That would seem a fair way of going about it to me.

jm08

seamus wrote: »

It would seem to me that I've at least provided some basis for my costings. Flawed and simplified they may be, you can at least follow the thread and see where it came from.

It would seem polite and reasonable that you would do the same rather than declare that some "stuff" isn't relevant and hand-wave off real costs.

It's not like there's going to be an exodus of people that will no longer need to be paid. Even if the entire public service workforce in NI were laid off upon unification, they are still people who need to be paid. The UK is not going to continue to pay public service pensions in a foreign jurisdiction. Any unification agreement would include that the Irish government at least share the cost of fulfilling public service pensions, and take over employment of the NI public service just like it did when it declared independence.

What makes you think that those PS/RUC/UDR/Prison pensions would just go away?

(The biggest issue being security and the rights of NI citizens.)

The UK are paying all EU pensions (like British civil servants, MEPs) in the Brexit divorce settlement.

We need to borrow Sabine for the negotiations (though I seem to recall that there are two Irish people on Sabine's negotiating team)!

McMurphy

Why would ex servicemen/women or security forces personell and their pensions suddenly become an Irish govt problem?

The source of payment for the pension would remain the same one would expect?

Surely as it stands, someone in receipt of, or about to start collecting a pension from the British state can do so regardless of where in the world they are.

I would even hazard a guess there's many expats already residing in the state already on British military pensions.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

A pension is a contract of sorts. I would expect these things to be negotiated upon British withdrawal. Anyone currently on a pension would be due that from the current regime IMO, same goes for portions, based on years under that regime, come retirement I would imagine. That would seem a fair way of going about it to me.

jm08 wrote: »

The UK are paying all EU pensions (like British civil servants, MEPs) in the Brexit divorce settlement.

We need to borrow Sabine for the negotiations (though I seem to recall that there are two Irish people on Sabine's negotiating team)!

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Why would ex servicemen/women or security forces personally and their pensions suddenly become an Irish govt problem?

The source of payment for the pension would remain the same one would expect?

Surely as it stands, someone in receipt of, or about to start collecting a pension from the British state can do so regardless of where in the world they are.

I would even hazard a guess there's many expats already residing in the state already on British military pensions.

Some of this is true to an extent, some of it is not.

British Army pensions would still be due to be paid by the British government.

Pensions due to be paid by Northern Ireland - UDR, RUC, PSNI and NI Civil Service - would fall to be a responsibility of the successor government - the Irish State. The UK are only paying EU pensions as part of a deal, they want out so they have to pay. That negotiating balance is reversed in Irish unity. We want unity so we may have to pay. Ditto with the subvention.

What is quite scary about Seamus calculations is that he does not take into account harmonisation of public service pay and social welfare, introduction of the NHS to the South, the opportunity cost of higher taxation, as well as any losses arising from loyalist violence. If anything would scare the MNCs away quicker than a repeat of Brexit, it would be bomb scares in Dublin.

I really can't see unity working without a combination of tax rises, social welfare cuts and public service pay cuts in the South. 5-7% across the board on those and we could manage.

blanch152

facehugger99 wrote: »

Can't imagine NI public servants voting to leave the Union without cast iron guarantees on their jobs and pensions.

And that kills the chances of any successful Border poll stone dead, even if the polls were showing 60% in favour.

blanch152

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

They may not. To go back to the Scottish referendum, there were a lot of significant unanswered questions, such as whether it could join the EU, what currency it would use etc., yet they still had a poll.

And it never looked like winning as a result.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Some of this is true to an extent, some of it is not.

British Army pensions would still be due to be paid by the British government.

Pensions due to be paid by Northern Ireland - UDR, RUC, PSNI and NI Civil Service - would fall to be a responsibility of the successor government - the Irish State. The UK are only paying EU pensions as part of a deal, they want out so they have to pay. That negotiating balance is reversed in Irish unity. We want unity so we may have to pay. Ditto with the subvention.

What is quite scary about Seamus calculations is that he does not take into account harmonisation of public service pay and social welfare, introduction of the NHS to the South, the opportunity cost of higher taxation, as well as any losses arising from loyalist violence. If anything would scare the MNCs away quicker than a repeat of Brexit, it would be bomb scares in Dublin.

I really can't see unity working without a combination of tax rises, social welfare cuts and public service pay cuts in the South. 5-7% across the board on those and we could manage.

Lots more guesswork there. We have no idea what arrangements will or can be made, is the only conclusive thing to come from this conversation.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Lots more guesswork there. We have no idea what arrangements will or can be made, is the only conclusive thing to come from this conversation.

Guesswork?

No, I am not predicting next week's lottery numbers.

There is solid reasoning for the conclusions I made. The UK won't make the same mistake in unity as it did in Brexit. I mean, your thesis is that the unionists will soon learn that the rest of the UK don't really care about them. Well, given the way that Ireland is presented in the media and in politics in the UK, in terms of having caused the backstop problem, how can you expect that the rest of the UK to care about Ireland either? So why do you keep thinking that they will pay up?

An Ciarraioch

I note that the Taoiseach addressed the Alliance conference this evening - certainly, one would imagine the two parties merging in a future all-island parliament, if social liberalism were to be the primary factor.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Guesswork?

No, I am not predicting next week's lottery numbers.

There is solid reasoning for the conclusions I made. The UK won't make the same mistake in unity as it did in Brexit. I mean, your thesis is that the unionists will soon learn that the rest of the UK don't really care about them. Well, given the way that Ireland is presented in the media and in politics in the UK, in terms of having caused the backstop problem, how can you expect that the rest of the UK to care about Ireland either? So why do you keep thinking that they will pay up?

blanch you are guessing. Simple as. There is nothing set in stone yet as to post unification arrangements.
The redtop press will not be at the diplomatic negotiations over this either to vent their anti Irish spleens.
If they had their way the GFA would never have been signed either.

My point is both governments will have a huge interest in making unification work for obvious reasons.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We have no idea what arrangements will or can be made, is the only conclusive thing to come from this conversation.

Unless we're planning Brexit mkII, wouldn't you agree that it would be a good idea to figure all those things out before asking people to vote?

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

Unless we're planning Brexit mkII, wouldn't you agree that it would be a good idea to figure all those things out before asking people to vote?

Absolutely, I have said this consistently. There has to be a full debate with the experts giving fact based opinion.
This back of a fag packet calculation using only the negative impact figures is just an excercise in venting partitionist feelings.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

Pensions due to be paid by Northern Ireland - UDR, RUC, PSNI and NI Civil Service - would fall to be a responsibility of the successor government - the Irish State.

This is utter nonsense. The Irish state would have no obligation to fulfil British state pensions.

Junkyard Tom

The problem with figuring everything out in advance, as regards a future UI, is that Unionist politicians won't have any part in it so much of the thrashing out could only be done after a pro-UI vote.

FrancieBrady

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The problem with figuring everything out in advance, as regards a future UI, is that Unionist politicians won't have any part in it so much of the thrashing out could only be done after a pro-UI vote.

The British Government will be neutral as per their pronouncements in the GFA so I presume that would mean they would answer questions honestly as to what they would do in the event of a Yes vote.
Unionists and those in favour of partition will talk up the negatives, no doubt.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Unionists and those in favour of partition will talk up the negatives, no doubt.

Sure; and those in favour of union will talk up the positives. People talking up their side of the argument is healthy in a democratic exercise.

As I've said before, the people who need to be sidelined are those who dismiss out of hand either the positives or the negatives. Let's have the facts - actual facts, not strongly-held opinions - and make our minds up.