Cost of Northern Ireland

Tim Robbins

Hi,
I am trying to figure out the cost to run Northern Ireland.
Does anybody know how much (even roughly) the rest of the UK gives Northen Ireland every year?

They've a huge amount of people working in civil service jobs up there etc. and the cost of it is huge.

Any figures?

maxwell smart

I did hear that when they had close to 5,000 troops there the total cost to the UK treasury was about 17bn stg. That was a few years ago, might be less now...

jimmycrackcorm

maxwell smart wrote: »

I did hear that when they had close to 5,000 troops there the total cost to the UK treasury was about 17bn stg. That was a few years ago, might be less now...

But hose 5000 troops would have been in the mainland UK otherwise so it makes very little difference bar some location costings.

Scofflaw

I'm going to shift this up to the main forum, where I think it it will probably get more attention.

moderately,
Scofflaw

dlofnep

I never actually understood why, from any sort of logical POV - Britain wanted to retain the north. I could only hazard a guess it's from a security standpoint, having somewhere closer to the atlantic and to also use the DUP to give support where needed for certain policies. The overwhelming majority of Britains don't want it to be apart of the union, and the costs are obviously very high. The security risks involved in retaining aren't all that appeasing either. Britain has cut loose old colonial ties everywhere, the mind boggles why they still take interest in the north..

Denerick

I don't think many british politicians have an active interest in retaining the north save a few crusty conservatives who remember Bonar Law, Randolph Churchill and the rest of 'the lads' when their party were a pack of aristocratic imbeciles with a massive respect for 'Empire'. (Maybe not too much different now!)

The main problem for them is what to do with the North? They can't just hand it over even if they wanted to, because its unlikely we'd be willing to take it over. And the PR from active loyalists in the north fighting a war against the Irish Republic to return to the UK would be a complete disaster. Maybe from the British perspective a loyalist 'Troubles' against the irish Republic is better than a Republican 'Troubles' against the UK but still, when things are pretty quiet it seems ludicrous to think they would just hand over the keys to the north. It'll never happen like that.

The north costs more to run than the government gets in taxes. Don't know the figures but do know its a significant sum.

Denerick

dlofnep wrote: »

I never actually understood why, from any sort of logical POV - Britain wanted to retain the north. I could only hazard a guess it's from a security standpoint, having somewhere closer to the atlantic and to also use the DUP to give support where needed for certain policies. The overwhelming majority of Britains don't want it to be apart of the union, and the costs are obviously very high. The security risks involved in retaining aren't all that appeasing either. Britain has cut loose old colonial ties everywhere, the mind boggles why they still take interest in the north..

Following on from my last post, one could probably make the case that not many Britons care if Scotland cedes from the UK. Unlikely to happen save from massive public demonstrations though.

O'Coonassa

dlofnep wrote: »

the mind boggles why they still take interest in the north..

They have little choice as there would be a bloodbath if they left.

Bottle_of_Smoke

dlofnep wrote: »

I never actually understood why, from any sort of logical POV - Britain wanted to retain the north. I could only hazard a guess it's from a security standpoint, having somewhere closer to the atlantic and to also use the DUP to give support where needed for certain policies. The overwhelming majority of Britains don't want it to be apart of the union, and the costs are obviously very high. The security risks involved in retaining aren't all that appeasing either. Britain has cut loose old colonial ties everywhere, the mind boggles why they still take interest in the north..

Wouldn't have expected the survey to show that kind of response. Do you think it would be different now given there's been relative peace/stability since then? Though perhaps the recession is sending opinions back that way.

futurehope

Here are some useful and credible figures.

http://www.channel4.com/news/article.jsp?id=1041867

futurehope

dlofnep wrote: »

I never actually understood why, from any sort of logical POV - Britain wanted to retain the north. I could only hazard a guess it's from a security standpoint, having somewhere closer to the atlantic and to also use the DUP to give support where needed for certain policies. The overwhelming majority of Britains don't want it to be apart of the union, and the costs are obviously very high. The security risks involved in retaining aren't all that appeasing either. Britain has cut loose old colonial ties everywhere, the mind boggles why they still take interest in the north..

I never actually understood why, from any sort of logical POV - Ireland wanted to occupy the north.

futurehope

Denerick said:

I don't think many british politicians have an active interest in retaining the north save a few crusty conservatives who remember Bonar Law, Randolph Churchill and the rest of 'the lads' when their party were a pack of aristocratic imbeciles with a massive respect for 'Empire'. (Maybe not too much different now!)

I know what you're saying mate, The Republic's the same - full off old codgers who pay lip service to fascist claims on another country's territory against the wishes of those who actually live there. I guess the Irish schools are to blame.

The main problem for them is what to do with the North? They can't just hand it over even if they wanted to, because its unlikely we'd be willing to take it over. And the PR from active loyalists in the north fighting a war against the Irish Republic to return to the UK would be a complete disaster. Maybe from the British perspective a loyalist 'Troubles' against the irish Republic is better than a Republican 'Troubles' against the UK but still, when things are pretty quiet it seems ludicrous to think they would just hand over the keys to the north. It'll never happen like that.

There is no problem mate. Northern Ireland is at peace and has never been more secure within The UK. The good guys won.

futurehope

Denerick wrote: »

Following on from my last post, one could probably make the case that not many Britons care if Scotland cedes from the UK. Unlikely to happen save from massive public demonstrations though.

I can't understand why Westminster and Chelsea don't go independent, given how rich these London boroughs are, why the hell do they go on subsidising Hackney?

Scofflaw

futurehope wrote: »

I can't understand why Westminster and Chelsea don't go independent, given how rich these London boroughs are, why the hell do they go on subsidising Hackney?

Actually, I have some London friends who quite genuinely want to know why London isn't independent. Along with a couple of the home counties, it would be one of the richest countries per capita in the world.

cordially,
Scofflaw

futurehope

Scofflaw wrote: »

Actually, I have some London friends who want to know why London isn't independent. Along with a couple of the home counties, it would be one of the richest countries per capita in the world.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Ye, but why drag The London poor with them? They could just bus them in daily to do the cheap labour.

O'Coonassa

futurehope wrote: »

I never actually understood why, from any sort of logical POV - Ireland wanted to occupy the north.

Er..it does occupy the north, it always has, you can't have an island with no North. That would be crazy.

ART6

The majority of my English friends, from some years of living in the south of England, are mystified with the activities of the Orange Order and their desire to march about with flags and bowler hats. They really don't care if there is a united Ireland or not, and would not put down their drinks for a minute to consider whether the six counties should be in the Republic or not. In fact, given the history of the troubles and the cost to them in taxes, I suspect most of them would support unification. Equally, I suspect many of them would support Scotland leaving the Union since it would get rid of the Scottish Mafia that controls the UK government. Without Scotland and the Six Counties, England and Wales would be a wealthy nation. What unification would do for us is another matter since we can't even run our own b****y country.

dlofnep

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Wouldn't have expected the survey to show that kind of response. Do you think it would be different now given there's been relative peace/stability since then? Though perhaps the recession is sending opinions back that way.

In 18 seperate polls spanning from 1983 - 2006 from the British Social Attitudes IS, not once has the British public supported the North remaining in the union over Irish Unity.

There hasn't been one since 2006, so it would be interesting to see the results - But I am certain the British public would still favour Irish Unity over the north remaining in the union.

It's categorically clear that the Brits don't want the North. The opposite is true with the Republic, as every poll ever taken has always shown overwhelming support for reunification.

dlofnep

futurehope wrote: »

Secondly, The UK is a mature democracy, were any issue at all is likely to be split 60:40 or 55:45. Ireland on the other hand is still emerging slowly (but hopefully surely) from years of Catholic/Nationalist brainwashing - hence polls that show 80% support for this, that and the other.

Opposed to your unionist brainwashing?

I repeat - Not once, in 18 seperate Polls has the Brits ever supported the north remaining in the UK. Not once! Actually, 19 polls if you include the Guardian survey.

If 80% of Ireland supports Irish Unity, it has nothing to do with brainwashing. It just so happens to be their desire - The same way as Britain does NOT desire the North remaining in the UK. That's the reality of the matter. Deal with it. It pains you to see that the only people who actually want you, are your fellow Irishmen.

Bottle_of_Smoke

dlofnep wrote: »

It's categorically clear that the Brits don't want the North. The opposite is true with the Republic, as every poll ever taken has always shown overwhelming support for reunification.

That's a casual phone poll though. If people had to consider their cost of living and lifestyle change and actually vote to reunify I doubt it would be so overwhelming.

I'd actually like to see the results with the question changed to NI as a seperate state rather than a unified Ireland.

Scofflaw

futurehope wrote: »

Ye, but why drag The London poor with them? They could just bus them in daily to do the cheap labour.

Nah - too many poor, too many buses. Besides, the middle classes prefer the leafy suburbs and the green belt - keep the poor in the city.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Bob Z

Do you think Ireland would be financially able to take back the North?

futurehope

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Er..it does occupy the north, it always has, you can't have an island with no North. That would be crazy.

Yes, but you can have as many states as you like on an island - look at a world atlas for many examples.

futurehope

ART6 said:

The majority of my English friends, from some years of living in the south of England, are mystified with the activities of the Orange Order and their desire to march about with flags and bowler hats.

I think you'll find that many of The English (especially in The South), tend to tailor what they say depending on who they're saying it to. Did they tell you what they thought of The Irish leaving their kids to be abused by the local parish priest? Or what they thought of Irish Nationalists blowing children to pieces? Probably not...

They really don't care if there is a united Ireland or not, and would not put down their drinks for a minute to consider whether the six counties should be in the Republic or not.

I think that sums it up - pub talk. Meaningless.

In fact, given the history of the troubles and the cost to them in taxes, I suspect most of them would support unification. Equally, I suspect many of them would support Scotland leaving the Union since it would get rid of the Scottish Mafia that controls the UK government. Without Scotland and the Six Counties, England and Wales would be a wealthy nation.

Why keep Wales? Another drain. Why keep impoverished areas of England - another drain...

Why do you think Ireland holds onto it's impoverished areas?

futurehope

dlofnep wrote: »

In 18 seperate polls spanning from 1983 - 2006 from the British Social Attitudes IS, not once has the British public supported the North remaining in the union over Irish Unity.

There hasn't been one since 2006, so it would be interesting to see the results - But I am certain the British public would still favour Irish Unity over the north remaining in the union.

It's categorically clear that the Brits don't want the North. The opposite is true with the Republic, as every poll ever taken has always shown overwhelming support for reunification.

What's categorically clear is how politically naive you are. Northern Ireland has very little effect on the lives of those who live on the mainland and as a result it appears very low down on the public's list of political priorities. This means that The UK State can do whatever it feels expedient regarding Norther Ireland, without fear of public censure. Needless to say that doesn't include taking steps to create a United Ireland.

As regards The people of The Republic, well for most of it's history the Republic was effectively closed off to the outside world and it's only foreign policy objective was 'da North'. Given this fact, the feelings of The Irish people are understandable. Perhaps this will change, but in any case, however The Irish feel, it is unlikely to effect the thinking of either The UK State, or Ulster Loyalists and their supporters.

futurehope

Bob Z wrote: »

Do you think Ireland would be financially able to take back the North?

No. And The Irish State knows this.

Every Irish family would have to pay £4000 extra tax per year to absorb Northern Ireland (as a minimum). And this assumes a smooth transition - which obviously wouldn't occur.

Bob Z

futurehope wrote: »

Quote:The majority of my English friends, from some years of living in the south of England, are mystified with the activities of the Orange Order and their desire to march about with flags and bowler hats.

ART6 said:

I think you'll find that many of The English (especially in The South), tend to tailor what they say depending on who they're saying it to.

So you are saying they are not mystified..? cause it sure as hell seems bewildering to me

dlofnep

futurehope wrote: »

What's categorically clear is how politically naive you are.

If not soaking up your usual unionist rhetoric means I'm politically naive, then so be it.

futurehope wrote: »

Northern Ireland has very little effect on the lives of those who live on the mainland and as a result it appears very low down on the public's list of political priorities.

Their priorities was not in question - They were categorically asked if they supported the north remaining in the UK, and they quite categorically don't. If they were passive about the whole issue, then they would have opted for the "unsure" answer. But they actively stated, that they do not want the North in the UK. There's a huge difference in what you are trying to portray. The people who live in England, you know - that country who's flags you fly all the time in your loyalist strongholds - doesn't want you, and would be happy to see the back of you.

futurehope wrote: »

Perhaps this will change, but in any case, however The Irish feel, it is unlikely to effect the thinking of either The UK State, or Ulster Loyalists and their supporters.

"The Irish"? You mean, the people living in the 6 counties? Jaysus, if they don't have a say in the future of the 6 counties - I'd be awfully suprised.

A Dub in Glasgo

ART6 wrote: »

Without Scotland and the Six Counties, England and Wales would be a wealthy nation.

Strange you think that considering England has been plundering Scotland's natural resources for decades now

O'Coonassa

futurehope wrote: »

Yes, but you can have as many states as you like on an island - look at a world atlas for many examples.

Indeed you can but Ireland remains an island and a fairly tiny one at that. Both the States currently located here are crap. One good one would make more sense than two useless ones IMO.

LordSutch

dlofnep wrote: »

I never actually understood why, from any sort of logical POV - Britain wanted to retain the north. I could only hazard a guess it's from a security standpoint, having somewhere closer to the atlantic and to also use the DUP to give support where needed for certain policies. The overwhelming majority of Britains don't want it to be apart of the union, and the costs are obviously very high. The security risks involved in retaining aren't all that appeasing either. Britain has cut loose old colonial ties everywhere, the mind boggles why they still take interest in the north..

I think it has very little to do with Britain wanting the North to remain within the UK, and an awful lot to do with the overwhelming majority of the Northern Ireland population wishing to remain within the Union.

I dunno what your above colonial reference means? unless you mean that Northern Ireland itself is a colony?