Northern Ireland and the 2011 UK census

Godot. · 21-08-2010 11:45PM #1

With factors such as Catholics 'breeding' at a faster rate than Protestants and Polish immigration slightly tipping it further, is there a possibility of RCs 'overtaking' the Protestant community? And might a referendum be called in a year or two if this is the case? I'm aware not all Catholics are necessarily nationalists and not all Protestants are unionists, incidentally.

amacachi · 21-08-2010 11:52PM

No, because it's in the younger age groups that are making the biggest difference and they can't vote. Also it'll take a majority of Nationalist representative politicians which is a bit away with some constituencies still fairly well gerrymandered.

deise go deo · 21-08-2010 11:55PM

A referendum based on the fact that Catholics hapened to 'outbreed' prodestants probably wouldent go down to well.

amacachi · 22-08-2010 12:25AM

deise go deo wrote: »

A referendum based on the fact that Catholics hapened to 'outbreed' prodestants probably wouldent go down to well.

It's to do with what the majority of a population wants, obviously the OP should leave it to politicians or PR consultants to come up with the specific language used in any decision.

Wolfe Tone · 22-08-2010 12:46AM

No chance. There are currently more catholics in school than unionists so in maybe 30 years or so, but not next year.

gurramok · 22-08-2010 12:47AM

In these type of census, they should really ask 'Do you come from a Unionist or Nationalist background' instead of saying 'do you come from a Catholic or Protestant background'.

Anyway, from the last census most pundits quoting from the 2001 results have said that the majority of under 35's are Catholic so yes the forthcoming census will be interesting

RDM_83 again · 22-08-2010 02:22AM

The Blog below is/ was very informative (the author is sadly RIP)

http://ulstersdoomed.blogspot.com/search/label/Demography

Its obvious from the title what "side" he's coming from but very good analysis

"In these type of census, they should really ask 'Do you come from a Unionist or Nationalist background' instead of saying 'do you come from a Catholic or Protestant background'."

They sort of do, same link

KeithAFC · 22-08-2010 02:52AM

Won't make any difference.

KeithAFC · 22-08-2010 02:55AM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

The Blog below is/ was very informative (the author is sadly RIP)

http://ulstersdoomed.blogspot.com/search/label/Demography

Its obvious from the title what "side" he's coming from but very good analysis

"In these type of census, they should really ask 'Do you come from a Unionist or Nationalist background' instead of saying 'do you come from a Catholic or Protestant background'."

They sort of do, same link

lol, i got to laugh at that blog.

The only way a United Ireland will ever happen is if Unionists decide for it to happen and vote for it.

demonspawn · 22-08-2010 03:11AM

I really wish everyone would just drop the idea of a "united Ireland". Do Republicans honestly believe that the people of the North want to be a part of this sham of a country? If I were a citizen of NI, I'd fight tooth and nail to stay out of the Republic, and I have no political affiliation whatsoever.

If anything, the North should be an independent state. Ulster has always been culturally independent from the rest of Ireland, it would only make sense to give them their own country.

RDM_83 again · 22-08-2010 03:51AM

KeithAFC
Don't know if thats true the demographic if you bothered to read a bit more of it you'd realise that the unionist population is currently at its peak of people in the ages groups most likely to vote where as there is a bulge in the nationalist voting population coming down the line.

demonspawn
think that point is pretty valid (though you can't be a citizen of NI!) but if the north joined the ROI it would change BOTH countries dramatically (for a start there would no longer be the same screwed up distribution of city sizes Belfast having potential as a real 2nd capitol unlike Cork) but for me the major question is what would the unionist population do in a majority nationalist NI with a highly devolved goverment, would they consider that a whole Ireland island would be less of a "cold house", stay in the status quo and make use of Westminster or perhaps agree to a repartition to maintain the state NI was designed to be, A Unionist/Ulster scots "Israel" (mean that with all the negative conitations)

KeithAFC · 22-08-2010 04:11AM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

KeithAFC
Don't know if thats true the demographic if you bothered to read a bit more of it you'd realise that the unionist population is currently at its peak of people in the ages groups most likely to vote where as there is a bulge in the nationalist voting population coming down the line.

demonspawn
think that point is pretty valid (though you can't be a citizen of NI!) but if the north joined the ROI it would change BOTH countries dramatically (for a start there would no longer be the same screwed up distribution of city sizes Belfast having potential as a real 2nd capitol unlike Cork) but for me the major question is what would the unionist population do in a majority nationalist NI with a highly devolved goverment, would they consider that a whole Ireland island would be less of a "cold house", stay in the status quo and make use of Westminster or perhaps agree to a repartition to maintain the state NI was designed to be, A Unionist/Ulster scots "Israel" (mean that with all the negative conitations)

Do you know how silly this argument about birth rate is? Do you want more unionists to get shagging more or something? lol. A bit of a reality check please.

Northern Ireland needs peace for now, simple as that. The country is enjoying some of the best times in decades because in general, we have peace which both sides want.

Saying there will be a United Ireland because nationalists are having more kids than unionists, such talk is just silly. What Northern Ireland needs is another 20-30 years of peace, lets learn to get on with each other, lets get rid of segregated schools and our next generation will grow up being best friends and then we can talk about a United Ireland or staying in the Union.

Birth rate has nothing to do with it. The last thing we want is the IRA coming back or people joining the UVF and taking the vow.

demonspawn · 22-08-2010 04:21AM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

demonspawn
think that point is pretty valid (though you can't be a citizen of NI!) but if the north joined the ROI it would change BOTH countries dramatically (for a start there would no longer be the same screwed up distribution of city sizes Belfast having potential as a real 2nd capitol unlike Cork) but for me the major question is what would the unionist population do in a majority nationalist NI with a highly devolved goverment, would they consider that a whole Ireland island would be less of a "cold house", stay in the status quo and make use of Westminster or perhaps agree to a repartition to maintain the state NI was designed to be, A Unionist/Ulster scots "Israel" (mean that with all the negative conitations)

I think NI would gain a massive amount of respect and support from the international community if it decided to stand on it own and told both Ireland and Britain to piss off. Both countries would eventually come to accept this new situation sooner or later, probably sooner than later. NI is a beautiful and culturally rich region with a proud, intelligent population (for the most part). I believe both the Republic and the UK would be jumping at an opportunity to do business.

Opponents could simply leave NI if they didn't like an independent state, there would be no reason to stay. Nationalists and Unionists could be given to choice of dual citizenship between NI and the Republic and NI and the UK respectively, if they so wished. Dealing with extremists would become a lot easier as NI could just deport any troublemakers back to their respective countries.

Of course this is all just fantasy but I don't see why it wouldn't work, or at least why they couldn't try it for a few years. If they didn't like it or it caused more problems than it solved they could always go back to where they were.

KeithAFC · 22-08-2010 04:29AM

Question is which side would like it more or accept it better? Call me biased but i doubt Republicans would take it well.

Zambia · 22-08-2010 09:18AM

demonspawn wrote: »

If anything, the North should be an independent state. Ulster has always been culturally independent from the rest of Ireland, it would only make sense to give them their own country.

That state would sink in the first month under its public sector and social welfare bill.

The north by itself cannot survive.

Denerick · 22-08-2010 11:40AM

Zambia232 wrote: »

That state would sink in the first month under its public sector and social welfare bill.

The north by itself cannot survive.

Very true. Perhaps in the 1920s when Ulster actually had a viable industrial base. But not now. The economy would collapse without the public sector and the state would degenerate into nothingness.

Why is it taken for granted that all Northern Catholics would actively seek a united Ireland? Most are only passively interested in the idea. Its hard to care for abstract concepts like this; which is why the IRA were so adept at playing at the heartstrings and inventing a cult of martyrdom.

Wolfe Tone · 22-08-2010 11:52AM

Why is it taken for granted that all Northern Catholics would actively seek a united Ireland?

I imagine the vast majority would vote for a UI if given the chance. Presumably that is assumed due to the treatment of catholics in the past and to a much lesser extent, today.

bmaxi · 22-08-2010 12:00PM

Denerick wrote: »

Very true. Perhaps in the 1920s when Ulster actually had a viable industrial base. But not now. The economy would collapse without the public sector and the state would degenerate into nothingness.

Why is it taken for granted that all Northern Catholics would actively seek a united Ireland? Most are only passively interested in the idea. Its hard to care for abstract concepts like this; which is why the IRA were so adept at playing at the heartstrings and inventing a cult of martyrdom.

Certainly in my recent visits, I've found very little appetite among middle class Catholics for a united Ireland. The attitude seems to be "if it happens it happens", which, strangely enough seems to be the attitude of middle class Protestants too.
Personally, I think the campaign of the dissident Republicans only serves to push the likelihood of a united Ireland further away, maybe that's their aim.
Me, I don't care either way.

Denerick · 22-08-2010 12:58PM

bmaxi wrote: »

Personally, I think the campaign of the dissident Republicans only serves to push the likelihood of a united Ireland further away, maybe that's their aim.
Me, I don't care either way.

The dissidents truly are mindless, fascist scum. They hope to provoke reprisals and thus restart the Troubles all over again. I'd really love to catch one of them and leave them suspended over the grand canyon for at least a year, hanging by a tiny thread of rope, sustained with enough food and sustenance in order to just about exist and retain consciousness, in order to think about what they are doing to this island.

losthorizon · 22-08-2010 01:01PM

Hellooooooo who says we want NI. I dont. NI please stay away.

Wolfe Tone · 22-08-2010 01:07PM

Denerick wrote: »

The dissidents truly are mindless, fascist scum. They hope to provoke reprisals and thus restart the Troubles all over again. I'd really love to catch one of them and leave them suspended over the grand canyon for at least a year, hanging by a tiny thread of rope, sustained with enough food and sustenance in order to just about exist and retain consciousness, in order to think about what they are doing to this island.

Jayzus, don't want to get on your bad side... but violence is never the answer!

Anyway, do you reckon that the 6 could have survived independently in the early days? You touched on that earlier, care to elaborate? I was always under the impression tat part of the reason partition was accepted was that the 6 would be to small to survive and reunification would be an inevitability.

deise go deo · 22-08-2010 02:16PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Jayzus, don't want to get on your bad side... but violence is never the answer!

Anyway, do you reckon that the 6 could have survived independently in the early days? You touched on that earlier, care to elaborate? I was always under the impression tat part of the reason partition was accepted was that the 6 would be to small to survive and reunification would be an inevitability.

They were under the impression that the boundary commision would give large parts of the north to the republic that would make the northern state unworkable.
That dident happen.

Bottle_of_Smoke · 22-08-2010 02:20PM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

The Blog below is/ was very informative (the author is sadly RIP)

http://ulstersdoomed.blogspot.com/search/label/Demography

Its obvious from the title what "side" he's coming from but very good analysis

"In these type of census, they should really ask 'Do you come from a Unionist or Nationalist background' instead of saying 'do you come from a Catholic or Protestant background'."

They sort of do, same link

That guy is definitely looking at the situation through green tinted glasses though. Look what he says a few blogs down

So when the votes are counted, on May 7 unionism should look closely at the combined nationalist score – because this represents the proportion of the electorate who 'unambiguously' support Irish reunification. If the proportion of the electorate that supports the two nationalist parties has increased from that of 2005 (41.8%, though without Kieran Deeny this would have been at least 1% higher) or 2001 (42.7%), then it is time to start worrying.[/B][/B]

No it doesn't mate. It represents the people who vote SDLP/SF. Doesn't mean they'd all vote yes to a united Ireland

junder · 22-08-2010 02:21PM

losthorizon wrote: »

Hellooooooo who says we want NI. I dont. NI please stay away.

Ok mate will do 

Denerick · 22-08-2010 02:59PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Jayzus, don't want to get on your bad side... but violence is never the answer!

Anyway, do you reckon that the 6 could have survived independently in the early days? You touched on that earlier, care to elaborate? I was always under the impression tat part of the reason partition was accepted was that the 6 would be to small to survive and reunification would be an inevitability.

Certainly many of the founding fathers thought so. Collins was certain that the boundary commission would result in substantial land transfers to the republic (To be fair he was cynically mislead by George on this issue) He expected Tyrone, Fermanagh and the city of Derry to be transferred to the Free State. The rump Northern state would have been economically unviable, or so he thought.

In the 1920s Ulster was in some kind of economic decline from its industrial height of the late 19th century, but it still could have maintained a small industrial state. Take the example of Belgium for comparison. Belgium was highly industrialised, fractured and dispirate - just like Northern Ireland at the time.

This is all academic though as I don't believe anyone north or south was calling for a completely independent NI state. Furthermore, if the boundary commission actually resulted in large transfers, it would have made the north even more sustainable as it would have a much smaller Catholic/Nationalist population...

demonspawn · 22-08-2010 03:37PM

Zambia232 wrote: »

That state would sink in the first month under its public sector and social welfare bill.

The north by itself cannot survive.

Obviously certain political and economic structures would need to be changed to suit such a small country. The first few year will be hard and the people may have to take a hit to the wallet but it's an alternative to what we have today.

If the leaders of the Republic and the UK had any conscience whatsoever, they'd assist as much as possible to provide a smooth transition to an independent state in NI. One option would be for both countries to share the public sector bill for the new NI state for the first five years. That's just an example but if something like that was done then the north would stand a good chance of surviving as an independent state after the transition period.

I think both countries have to accept responsibility for the years of strife suffered by the people of NI. Now it's time to give something back for all the lives that have been taken or destroyed since this pointless conflict began.

Oh yeah, and a great place for a new NI government to start collecting funds would be to sieze the assets of all know members of paramilitary groups. I'd say that's a nice chuck of change. I they could legally do this by declaring all paramilitary groups as enemies of the state.

Essexboy · 22-08-2010 05:12PM

losthorizon wrote: »

Hellooooooo who says we want NI. I dont. NI please stay away.

FF do. That is why they are organising in the North.

Wolfe Tone · 22-08-2010 05:13PM

Essexboy wrote: »

FF do. That is why they are organising in the North.

Every major politial party has a UI as a stated aim.

KeithAFC · 22-08-2010 06:51PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Every major politial party has a UI as a stated aim.

So? Doesn't mean its going to happen.

Wolfe Tone · 22-08-2010 06:53PM

losthorizon wrote: »

Hellooooooo who says we want NI. I dont. NI please stay away.

Essexboy wrote: »

FF do. That is why they are organising in the North.

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Every major politial party has a UI as a stated aim.

KeithAFC wrote: »

So? Doesn't mean its going to happen.

The clear point is that most people on this island want a UI. Most political parties do also.

KeithAFC · 22-08-2010 06:55PM

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The clear point is that most people on this island want a UI. Most political parties do also.

Your counting the republic, the republic is NOT Northern Ireland. The last thing we need is the UVF to come back ffs. Just leave it be.

Northern Ireland and the 2011 UK census

Comments