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

murphaph

downcow wrote: »

I am certainly not convinced that I would be better off financially in a UI never mind culturally

Don’t everyone jump on me here but uniting Ireland and staying in UK could work for everyone?
And that is a compromise because I don’t want Ireland united and you don’t want a connection with UK

You're alright thanks. The chaos in Westminster right now should be grounds enough for anyone wanting to stay as far away from that as possible.

FrancieBrady

murphaph wrote: »

You're alright thanks. The chaos in Westminster right now should be grounds enough for anyone wanting to stay as far away from that as possible.

Dig down into it and almost everything England has laid it's hands on has either gone up in flames, or has become a back water needing massive subsidy to survive. It is now consuming itself (England) rather than bite the bullet and go it alone in the world.

downcow

murphaph wrote: »

You're alright thanks. The chaos in Westminster right now should be grounds enough for anyone wanting to stay as far away from that as possible.

If roi joined the the Irish, Welsh and Scots nationalists would be a very strong combined group and unfortunately for me would always hold the balance of power. - even though I proposed it, I’m getting to dislike the idea the more I think about it.

Avatar MIA

downcow wrote: »

I am certainly not convinced that I would be better off financially in a UI ...

Would/Can you like to expand on this?

RobMc59

jm08 wrote: »

Now that you bring it up, average 26,000 take Leaving Cert French (out of about 60,000 sitting their Leaving Cert (equivalent of A Levels). Its by far the most popular European language subject in Ireland.

Plenty of Irish rugby players and coaches seem to choose to go to France as well and seem to be highly valued over there.

I think your earlier suggestion of joint UK/Ireland sovereignty would be a better option.There are a lot of people in NI who are and identify as British and don’t want that to change.Unless there was a landslide referendum result in favour of a UI there may be massive civil unrest or even civil war.

Avatar MIA

RobMc59 wrote: »

.Unless there was a landslide referendum result in favour of a UI there may be massive civil unrest or even civil war.

Two things.

1. Regardless of the size of the referendum result knuckle draggers will act violently or not. Do you think these people subscribe to reasonableness?

2. Threat of violence should not dictate against the clear and democratically expressed will of the people. Do you support giving in to terrorists?

Dytalus

RobMc59 wrote: »

I think your earlier suggestion of joint UK/Ireland sovereignty would be a better option.There are a lot of people in NI who are and identify as British and don’t want that to change.Unless there was a landslide referendum result in favour of a UI there may be massive civil unrest or even civil war.

Ireland having any say will anger the more extreme end unionists. Likewise, the more extreme nationalists will feel they've been cheated out of unification. You'll anger both sides for very little appreciable gain.

And that's not even getting into the sheer headache that would result with disparity between Irish and British laws, tax systems...I'd imagine the administrative overhead and red tape would skyrocket and risk Northern Ireland become even less self-sustainable than it already is.

Having joint sovereignty over the area is asking for an even worse headache than the current situation or unification imo.

RobMc59

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Two things.

1. Regardless of the size of the referendum result knuckle draggers will act violently or not. Do you think these people subscribe to reasonableness?

2. Threat of violence should not dictate against the clear and democratically expressed will of the people. Do you support giving in to terrorists?

There are still people in Ireland who would prefer to be part of Britain so is it unreasonable to think there would always be people in NI who don't want to be Irish at all.I wouldn't support any kind of terrorism by anyone.Since participating in this thread I've changed my own opinions on a UI to think it would be a good thing in the long run but that's not to say it should be forced on people who are obviously happy being British.

McMurphy

downcow wrote: »

If roi joined the the Irish, Welsh and Scots nationalists would be a very strong combined group and unfortunately for me would always hold the balance of power. - even though I proposed it, I’m getting to dislike the idea the more I think about it.

In a United Ireland, nationallists would hold the balance of power?

Why do you have concerns about this potential scenario?

Unionists wouldn't have much to worry about imo.

Dytalus

RobMc59 wrote: »

There are still people in Ireland who would prefer to be part of Britain so is it unreasonable to think there would always be people in NI who don't want to be Irish at all.I wouldn't support any kind of terrorism by anyone.Since participating in this thread I've changed my own opinions on a UI to think it would be a good thing in the long run but that's not to say it should be forced on people who are obviously happy being British.

The unfortunate side effect of democracy is that things tend to be 'forced' on minority groups anyway. Anyone who voted against Michael D Higgins had him 'forced' on them when he won the election. At some point, the wants of a minority (however large a minority) need to be overruled for democracy to work. Along the way to that 'overruling' there can, of course, be concessions and compromise. But there's always that line in the sand which must be drawn to allow democracy to function. If the majority of both states want a UI then the minority will have to bite the bullet at some point and accept they're not getting it entirely their way.

On this aspect of UI specifically, I'd be all for some of NI's citizens keeping their British citizenship post-unification. Ireland, certainly, has no qualms about dual-citizenship so I'd imagine it would depend on the British laws regarding how to obtain/keep it.

I mean, with the CTA it's functionally irrelevant except for some minor things. If you live in Ireland you can pretty much live as though you're british anyway. You can move there, live there, work there, vote (in certain elections) there. As an identity thing, I view "being British" as a formality at that point and so have nothing against an agreement allowing those who identified as British to keep their citizenship. I'm dual-citizenshipped myself. It'd be hypocritical for me to think anything else.

Avatar MIA

RobMc59 wrote: »

There are still people in Ireland who would prefer to be part of Britain so is it unreasonable to think there would always be people in NI who don't want to be Irish at all.I wouldn't support any kind of terrorism by anyone.Since participating in this thread I've changed my own opinions on a UI to think it would be a good thing in the long run but that's not to say it should be forced on people who are obviously happy being British.

I fully accept that. But, that's not reason enough not to go with the will of the people.

downcow

Avatar MIA wrote: »

Two things.
Threat of violence should not dictate against the clear and democratically expressed will of the people. Do you support giving in to terrorists?

Would you say this should also apply to brexit and we should not have the backstop simply for fear of the men of violence - or is that one where you do support giving in to terrorists - complicated isn't it

Avatar MIA

downcow wrote: »

Would you say this should also apply to brexit and we should not have the backstop simply for fear of the men of violence - or is that one where you do support giving in to terrorists - complicated isn't it

Eh, that's not the reason for the backstop. The reason for the backstop is to ensure the UK government upholds the Belfast Agreement.

And side note. Nancy isn't going to allow a trade deal with the UK if the BA is not adhered to.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Would you say this should also apply to brexit and we should not have the backstop simply for fear of the men of violence - or is that one where you do support giving in to terrorists - complicated isn't it

That is a complete misread of what the backstop is for.

James Brown

downcow wrote: »

Is there anyone can give me a potential concrete benifit of a UI to an ordinary unionist living in NI ?

You will have a vote in a government that only exists to govern for you and doesn't treat you like an after thought, (TBF, that's the plan anyway). You will be as respected as any other member of the country and free to call yourself what you like and believe what you like. Your heritage and culture can grow beyond siege mentality tit for tat policies. We've even got cricket. I think Ireland will prosper greatly once united. Brexit will be yet another chapter of contentious NI politics which I think everyone is tired of.

Avatar MIA

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I think Ireland will prosper greatly once united.

Somewhat perversely this may not be an inducement, as it would indicate unionism was wrong all along, that their sainted forebear's were wrong. That would be very hard to countenance for a lot of unionists.

Dytalus

Matt Barrett wrote: »

We've even got cricket.

And we're Test status too, which is no mean feat.

I'll also add onto the "doesn't treat you like an afterthought" column. Britain (*cough*England*cough*) has done very little, if anything, to fix the problems that plague Northern Ireland economically. From an outside view, Westminster looks to have failed NI completely as a member of the Union. It's one of the least developed regions in Western Europe (thought not as bad was Western Wales), despite the wealth and powerful economy the UK has available to it. It's fallen behind in social freedoms (gay marriage, as but one example), and is still a deeply sectarian region.

There could probably be entire theses written on why this is the case, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was partially due to the Irish Sea being 'in the way'. Northern Ireland is removed, physically, from the rest of the UK. It's easy to ignore its issues back Britain, and difficult for its population to have a direct impact on the main body of the UK. This wouldn't be the case post-reunification.

Dáil Eireann would be forced to address Northern Ireland's problems with a greater urgency than Westminster did, if only due to proximity. The six counties would account for a much larger percentage of a UI's population than they do of the UK's, so the Oireachtas would have to give it more attention due to the sizable population percentage it would wield.

And, assuming Stormont becomes merged with the Dáil rather than remaining its own thing (unlikely in the short-term, but let's assume), the nature of STV vs FPTP voting and the lack of safe seats for government representatives makes it much easier for the citizens of (what would have been) Northern Ireland to be heard in government. You only have to look at the current politics in Ireland to see how loud and powerful local communities can be in influencing their individual representatives because STV limits the idea of voting along 'party lines' in elections. You're not as guaranteed to be re-elected by virtue of your party in Ireland as in the UK. NI could wield considerable power in the Dáil with great regularity compared to what they wield in Westminster, and their elected representatives would be better placed to make sure their needs are met. Irish governments are more used to compromise and coalitions - it's rare for a single party to have a majority alone (hasn't happened since the seventies).

Is this guaranteed to be the case? No. But it's certainly possible, and I'd be bold enough to say even likely to be the case that post-unification NI is better looked after by Ireland than by Britain.

Avatar MIA

Dytalus wrote: »

There could probably be entire theses written on why this is the case...

I'd like to put forward the following theory - Britain *cough England* have "priced in" that NI will eventually join with the ROI and so why invest in a wasting asset.

facehugger99

Dytalus wrote: »

Dáil Eireann would be forced to address Northern Ireland's problems with a greater urgency than Westminster did, if only due to proximity. The six counties would account for a much larger percentage of a UI's population than they do of the UK's, so the Oireachtas would have to give it more attention due to the sizable population percentage it would wield.

And, assuming Stormont becomes merged with the Dáil rather than remaining its own thing (unlikely in the short-term, but let's assume), the nature of STV vs FPTP voting and the lack of safe seats for government representatives makes it much easier for the citizens of (what would have been) Northern Ireland to be heard in government. You only have to look at the current politics in Ireland to see how loud and powerful local communities can be in influencing their individual representatives because STV limits the idea of voting along 'party lines' in elections. You're not as guaranteed to be re-elected by virtue of your party in Ireland as in the UK. NI could wield considerable power in the Dáil with great regularity compared to what they wield in Westminster, and their elected representatives would be better placed to make sure their needs are met. Irish governments are more used to compromise and coalitions - it's rare for a single party to have a majority alone (hasn't happened since the seventies).

These all sound like fantastic reasons for the voters of the ROI to reject any notion of a UI in a referendum.

Along with the extra €10.8 billion that would need to be borrowed every year of course.

The demographics are steadily moving against the notion of a UI. The pensioners of this country will bolt for safety at the first mention of their generous state and public pensions coming under threat.

James Brown

Avatar MIA wrote: »

I'd like to put forward the following theory - Britain *cough England* have "priced in" that NI will eventually join with the ROI and so why invest in a wasting asset.

All that nuclear waste has to go somewhere.

Avatar MIA

Matt Barrett wrote: »

All that nuclear waste has to go somewhere.

Steady on! That's no way to talk about unionists!

RobMc59

Dytalus wrote: »

And we're Test status too, which is no mean feat.

I'll also add onto the "doesn't treat you like an afterthought" column. Britain (*cough*England*cough*) has done very little, if anything, to fix the problems that plague Northern Ireland economically. From an outside view, Westminster looks to have failed NI completely as a member of the Union. It's one of the least developed regions in Western Europe (thought not as bad was Western Wales), despite the wealth and powerful economy the UK has available to it. It's fallen behind in social freedoms (gay marriage, as but one example), and is still a deeply sectarian region.

There could probably be entire theses written on why this is the case, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was partially due to the Irish Sea being 'in the way'. Northern Ireland is removed, physically, from the rest of the UK. It's easy to ignore its issues back Britain, and difficult for its population to have a direct impact on the main body of the UK. This wouldn't be the case post-reunification.

Dáil Eireann would be forced to address Northern Ireland's problems with a greater urgency than Westminster did, if only due to proximity. The six counties would account for a much larger percentage of a UI's population than they do of the UK's, so the Oireachtas would have to give it more attention due to the sizable population percentage it would wield.

And, assuming Stormont becomes merged with the Dáil rather than remaining its own thing (unlikely in the short-term, but let's assume), the nature of STV vs FPTP voting and the lack of safe seats for government representatives makes it much easier for the citizens of (what would have been) Northern Ireland to be heard in government. You only have to look at the current politics in Ireland to see how loud and powerful local communities can be in influencing their individual representatives because STV limits the idea of voting along 'party lines' in elections. You're not as guaranteed to be re-elected by virtue of your party in Ireland as in the UK. NI could wield considerable power in the Dáil with great regularity compared to what they wield in Westminster, and their elected representatives would be better placed to make sure their needs are met. Irish governments are more used to compromise and coalitions - it's rare for a single party to have a majority alone (hasn't happened since the seventies).

Is this guaranteed to be the case? No. But it's certainly possible, and I'd be bold enough to say even likely to be the case that post-unification NI is better looked after by Ireland than by Britain.

That sounds like a win win scenario for Britain and NI but I can't see nationalists being happy at the thought of dancing to Northern Ireland's tune-it would be interesting to say the least.

briany

Every right-thinking NI Unionist must be breathing a sigh of relief now that Brexit has been allayed for the next few months because it maintains the status quo, if only temporarily, and provides the most hope yet of the whole thing being cancelled altogether. It's a short, sharp economic shock, such that the UK falls behind Ireland in economic terms, that would provide the most chance of a BP resulting in a UI, and a no-deal Brexit has to be the most likely candidate of causing that scenario in living memory.

Both Arlene Foster and Leo Varadkar have maintained their positions quite stubbornly, but the difference is that the RoI didn't ask for this mess at all. We were happy enough with the way things were. Arlene Foster, on the other hand, has been on board with the UK government position that Brexit must be delivered, and scarcely acknowledged that her own region voted against that sentiment. Such is the tribal nature of politics in NI.

BluePlanet

RobMc59 wrote: »

That sounds like a win win scenario for Britain and NI but I can't see nationalists being happy at the thought of dancing to Northern Ireland's tune-it would be interesting to say the least.

Of course Nationalists would be happy with it.
UI is the dream.
They've been forced to dance to the NI and Tory party tune for ages now.
An All-Irish tune would sound much better.

BluePlanet

What i look forward to the most, is in a UI we can make Ireland a truly secular country and finally and comprehensively sever ties to the Catholic Church - particularly in education.

RobMc59

BluePlanet wrote: »

Of course Nationalists would be happy with it.
UI is the dream.
They've been forced to dance to the NI and Tory party tune for ages now.
An All-Irish tune would sound much better.

Would an Ulster powerhouse,having a big say in government policies be everyone's cup of tea?

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You will have a vote in a government that only exists to govern for you and doesn't treat you like an after thought, (TBF, that's the plan anyway). You will be as respected as any other member of the country and free to call yourself what you like and believe what you like. Your heritage and culture can grow beyond siege mentality tit for tat policies. We've even got cricket. I think Ireland will prosper greatly once united. Brexit will be yet another chapter of contentious NI politics which I think everyone is tired of.

One of the many complaints from places like Donegal and Kerry is that they are treated like an afterthought by the Dublin-based government and civil service. How can you state so clearly that this won't happen in a united Ireland?

Thinking that Ireland will prosper greatly once united is not much help unless there is hard evidence to back this up - and sadly for you, what evidence there is suggests that Ireland will struggle with unity, as did Germany and others.

James Brown

RobMc59 wrote: »

Would an Ulster powerhouse,having a big say in government policies be everyone's cup of tea?

They deserve an equal say. As does Munster.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

One of the many complaints from places like Donegal and Kerry is that they are treated like an afterthought by the Dublin-based government and civil service. How can you state so clearly that this won't happen in a united Ireland?

Thinking that Ireland will prosper greatly once united is not much help unless there is hard evidence to back this up - and sadly for you, what evidence there is suggests that Ireland will struggle with unity, as did Germany and others.

Do you feel FF and or FG are made up mostly of politicians from Dublin? Are the Healy-Raes west-brits? I don't think that's the case. You are confusing logistics and practicalities with tribalism. Any Dublin -centric policies are not down to the Dubs getting their way.
Compared to Westminister, I think dealing with a government in situ comprised of your neighbours will be better, yes. You knew this is what I meant I imagine.

Can you prove me wrong? Didn't think so. You can 'think' I'm wrong, you know based on what we know about the world, the country as is. That's how people create thoughts and opinions.

BluePlanet

A federal republic consisting of local governments of the 4 Provinces is what the IRA and SF were fighting for.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89ire_Nua

Éire Nua envisaged an all-Ireland republic that would be created when the British withdrew from Northern Ireland. It also involved the dissolution of the existing Republic of Ireland, which many republicans considered an illegitimate entity imposed by the British in 1922. Under Éire Nua, Ireland would become a federal state with parliaments for each of its four historic provinces, as well as a central parliament based in Athlone.