Would you be in favour of a border poll?

mimimcmc

This is an extremely interesting boards poll, very 50/50. Every time I click to a new page the votes go up but the results are the same.

I for one voted no and would probably vote no as I don't think it's the right time but I'd look into it more if a referendum were to happen

seamus

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Then where would you put this central government, Dublin, Belfast, or even Cork.

It would be Dublin obviously. Would still be the largest single population and the powerhouse of the economy, as well as N-S centred.

We could ease the transition though by devolving more power to regional boroughs with Mayors, much like the Mayor of London has a lot of power in that region.

So three regional governments - Cork, Galway, Dublin with a decent amount of power in their respective provinces (Ulster provinces can be distributed temporarily). Which means a smaller, theoretically more efficient Dail with a more national outlook.

Unification then is a relatively easy transition - Stormont becomes the seat of the Ulster regional government.

murpho999

Cina wrote: »

Sounds a bit like "Feck the economy, take back control"

Wonder where we've heard that before?

Not sure what you mean but do you live in a country or an economy?

Mint Sauce

murpho999 wrote: »

Would that be the poll tax that was abolished in 1993?

Council Tax then, but was not aware that it wasn't collected in NI. Athough a similar argument would still stand, as there surely would be a change in how their local services are funded.

suicide_circus

Is it still the case that a large portion of the north's population are on some kind of benefits?

FTA69

The whole talk about a border poll is largely irrelevant because the GFA specifies that unity has to be ratified on both sides of the border. The northern state was specifically created to give Unionists a majority, which was why Republicanism traditionally decried it as sectarian and undemocratic. Regardless of what anyone in the south votes for or advocates the fact is that the northern state will not vote for unity as it contains an inbuilt majority to prevent that.

Speedwell

suicide_circus wrote: »

Is it still the case that a large portion of the north's population are on some kind of benefits?

Isn't a large portion of Ireland and the UK on some sort of benefits anyway? Oh, you mean disproportionately so? How big exactly is the disproportion and why do you think it exists?

Some people I know in Northern Ireland think that Northern Ireland is currently the, if you'll pardon the pun, "red-headed stepchild" of the UK anyway. Most of the same people appear to think they'll fare no better as part of Ireland, if only because they'll still be identified as a separate region within the country. I have no particular dog in that hunt, at least not until I'm a citizen.

murpho999

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Council Tax then, but was not aware that it wasn't collected in NI. Athough a similar argument would still stand, as there surely would be a change in how their local services are funded.

There could be a transition period. As there would have to be with lots of things apart from money which everyone worries about.

Things I can think of in no particular order:

1) Police force: Does PSNI become Gardai (Irish name will be divisive)
2) Education: Schools to adopt Irish curriculum instead of UK
3) Currency: Change to the Euro
4) Roads: Change of classifications, names and signage from Miles to KM
5) Integration of politics to Irish system and scrapping of Stormont parliament
6) Bank Holidays: What happens to July 12 and holidays they had from UK
7) Hospitals: integration into Irish system
8) Does Royal Mail become An Post: Do letterboxes on Shankill Road become green?
9) The National Anthem
10) Will Loyalists insist on Ireland being members of the Commonwealth
11) Taxation and social welfare: Do they join Irish system
12) VAT: UK=17.5% Ireland= 23%. How do the bridge that?
13) Phone numbers: How do +44 xxx numbers become Irish?
14) Websites: Do they change from .co.uk to .ie

SEPT 23 1989

murpho999 wrote: »

There could be a transition period. As there would have to be with lots of things apart from money which everyone worries about.

Things I can think of in no particular order:

1) Police force: Does PSNI become Gardai (Irish name will be divisive)
2) Education: Schools to adopt Irish curriculum instead of UK
3) Currency: Change to the Euro
4) Roads: Change of classifications, names and signage from Miles to KM
5) Integration of politics to Irish system and scrapping of Stormont parliament
6) Bank Holidays: What happens to July 12 and holidays they had from UK
7) Hospitals: integration into Irish system
8) Does Royal Mail become An Post: Do letterboxes on Shankill Road become green?
9) The National Anthem
10) Will Loyalists insist on Ireland being members of the Commonwealth
11) Taxation and social welfare: Do they join Irish system
12) VAT: UK=17.5% Ireland= 23%. How do the bridge that?
13) Phone numbers: How do +44 xxx numbers become Irish?
14) Websites: Do they change from .co.uk to .ie

and the most important of all the football team

FTA69

Personally I think the only reason the Brits stayed in Ireland was to protect the wider integrity of the UK and prevent a precedent for Scottish independence. I think that if we see an independent Scotland then long-term the British establishment will seek to disengage from Ireland. I don't envision them packing up and shooting off in a week but I imagine they would approach the Dublin government and say they're willing to facilitate unity and over 40 years or so we'd see a gradual merging of the states' institutions.

At the end of the day the British government doesn't claim sovereignty over a part of Ireland for the craic, they do so because they perceive to have an interest there and if that becomes negated and the UK as a concept starts to dissolve I doubt they'll be too keen in subsidising a load of mad Paddies forever more.

ohnonotgmail

Speedwell wrote: »

Kind of a stupid question, but I'm curious how those voting against a border poll would likely vote if a border poll were actually to be held anyway.

If they are not even interested in a poll on the subject why do you think they would vote for unification?

murpho999

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

and the most important of all the football team

IFA and FAI would have to merge and then have just one team.

Mint Sauce

FTA69 wrote: »

Personally I think the only reason the Brits stayed in Ireland was to protect the wider integrity of the UK and prevent a precedent for Scottish independence. I think that if we see an independent Scotland then long-term the British establishment will seek to disengage from Ireland. I don't envision them packing up and shooting off in a week but I imagine they would approach the Dublin government and say they're willing to facilitate unity and over 40 years or so we'd see a gradual merging of the states' institutions.

At the end of the day the British government doesn't claim sovereignty over a part of Ireland for the craic, they do so because they perceive to have an interest there and if that becomes negated and the UK as a concept starts to dissolve I doubt they'll be too keen in subsidising a load of mad Paddies forever more.

I heard years ago, it was to have a military present and bases away from mainland britain, but still closes enough if needed.

Could be totally wrong on that, but kinda makes sence in some way as well.

mynamejeff

could we have the north and not the people ? that sounds like the best idea

seamus

murpho999 wrote: »

There could be a transition period. As there would have to be with lots of things apart from money which everyone worries about.

Things I can think of in no particular order:

Tbh, a lot of these are either transitory issues, or not real issues at all. Changes to policing, education, currency and healthcare are big, but NI is not so different that a merger would take more than five to ten years.

No reason why An Post can't take over Royal Mail depots in the space of a few months. The national anthem should be changed anyway. Phone numbers and websites are a nothing, since there is already national dialling from ROI to NI anyway.

There's nothing in your list which would really make me go, "Oh crap, that would be impossible".

The primary issue with all of your list *is* money, as in, how much all of these transitions would cost us. For example, the cultural issues with a switch from MPH to KM/H is negligible. The main issue is the cost of replacing road signs. Same can be said for practically everything which would require transition.

Lt Dan

TheQuietFella wrote: »

Who said we can't afford it? Those who probably don't want to lose their seats

or perks of office. Would we need as many politicians in the South if we had a

United Ireland? Surely we would have to lose a few of our own to

accommodate our Brothers from the North which might not be a bad thing!

Ordinary people, people who are not in public services jobs or in politics are saying it!

Speedwell

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

If they are not even interested in a poll on the subject why do you think they would vote for unification?

Why do yuks in the US who think that voting is an impermissible sanction of an oppressive, flawed system still support Trump? I don't know. I'm asking.

Lt Dan

Avatar MIA wrote: »

We'd go from a state of 4.75m to nearly 7 million people - there would definitely be synergies there.

Yes there would be short term financial pain, but great opportunities.

Like ............what?

The North is part of the UK and yet despite 20 years of Peace Time, what have they to show for it? Their main historical industries are gone

Dublin would not sit back while Belfast nabbed industries (if it could)

The rest of the 26 counties (bar maybe Healy Rae County) moan about being forgotten about by Dublin as it is. Donegal has a legitimate complaint

What exactly is a border poll? A poll on changing the border?

ohnonotgmail

Speedwell wrote: »

Why do yuks in the US who think that voting is an impermissible sanction of an oppressive, flawed system still support Trump? I don't know. I'm asking.

can you try that again? it makes no sense.

super_furry

No. Things are as good as they've been up North for nearly 50 years. No need to go stirring things up right now.

Lt Dan

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

To what ends? Unionism is predicated upon being in the UK. The British have already agreed they're out when a majority votes for it. How would bombing and shooting in Ireland force the British to take them back?

They would seek to become an Independent Country, or do everything to ensure that there would be no vote in favour of a United Ireland

A Little Pony

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

I'd vote no.

The reason being if ultimately a referendum on a United Ireland was the result, and it passed, militant Unionism would awaken and there would be bombs and killings all over Ireland.

Absolutely. Ulster Loyalists would certainly take the fight to the South.

Speedwell

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

can you try that again? it makes no sense.

Voting and having an opinion are two different things.

AlanG

Yes, and i would vote yes. We owe our independence to fighters and politicians form all 32 counties who fought to be free from the UK so i think if there is a majority up north who want to be part of a unified Ireland I have no right or desire to block it. As for the economic arguments, it is sad that money is so much more important than people to some. If you made decisions in the past based on short term economic reason Ireland would never have become a republic and Germany would never have been reunited. We should take a long view of matters and overcome any short term issues.
I don't believe there would be a lot of violence as if a majority in the 6 counties choose a unified Ireland then Britain would want nothing to do with the North. What would the militant unionists be fighting for? They wont be able to fight their way back into the UK.

Lt Dan

J Mysterio wrote: »

I find the 'no argument' which is entirely based on money, to be fairly sad.

I fail to see how we could not absorb the hit anyhow. Irelands GDP was $238 billion last year. The subsidy to NI from the UK is £20 billion.

You have nothing to loose yourself so. Not everyone likes the dole que.

Face it, most of us have NOTHING in common with the North. Many of them, including parts of Donegal have more in common with Glasgow than they have with Dublin and co.

The compromises to Unionists are also not worth it. No minority like them should be able to dictate how a country should be governed.

J Mysterio

A Little Pony wrote: »

Absolutely. Ulster Loyalists would certainly take the fight to the South.

But would they be fighting for a union that doesnt want them anymore?

AlanG

A Little Pony wrote: »

Absolutely. Ulster Loyalists would certainly take the fight to the South.

What do you think they would be fighting for? Once a majority in the north want to join Ireland they will be kicked out of the Union and no amount of bombs in Dublin will convince London to have them back.

The Loyalists will soon have no 'cause' and turn to local crime the same way the good Friday agreement put a stop to most Republican violence.

ohnonotgmail

Speedwell wrote: »

Voting and having an opinion are two different things.

how is that relevant to what i asked? My opinion on this is simple. I simply do not want a united ireland at present. I am against a vote on the subject because i fear the misty eyed sons of eire will leave their brains at home when they vote and we (as in the republic) will be left to pay the cost. You can be certain our northern cousins wont put their hand in their pockets as their economy is even worse than ours.

Todd Toddington III

seamus wrote: »

So three regional governments - Cork, Galway, Dublin with a decent amount of power in their respective provinces (Ulster provinces can be distributed temporarily). Which means a smaller, theoretically more efficient Dail with a more national outlook.

Unification then is a relatively easy transition - Stormont becomes the seat of the Ulster regional government.

You're essentially dividing 2 countries into 4 federal systems, an unnecessary convolution for a population of about 7 million. A federal system of the Republic and the North as an initial step towards eventual unification would be a simpler approach. There would probably have to some agreement with Westminster on a graduated reduction in subsidises by them too, would that happen in a recession? Voted Yes, but let brexit and the Scottish independence vote happen first and let's see where we are then

J Mysterio

Lt Dan wrote: »

You have nothing to loose yourself so. Not everyone likes the dole que.

Face it, most of us have NOTHING in common with the North. Many of them, including parts of Donegal have more in common with Glasgow than they have with Dublin and co.

The compromises to Unionists are also not worth it. No minority like them should be able to dictate how a country should be governed.

The Unionists wouldnt be able to dictate shìt. They would have to bring their political parties to the dail and would never get close to power.

I could see many leaving to England/ Scotland in the event of reunification.

A Little Pony

seamus wrote: »

J Mysterio wrote: »

I find the 'no argument' which is entirely based on money, to be fairly sad.

Tbh it's the stronger, rational argument.

Favouring unification out of some teary-eyed sentimentality for a united nation that never existed in the first place, is what I find fairly sad.

That people would volunatarily risk the economic and social prosperity of their country because of some rose-tinted sentimental nationalist idea, is fairly scary. The UK just did it, and look at them.

I have far less confidence in the power of referenda/polls than I did when I was younger. One could argue that it's the purest form of democracy, but then you see how easy it is to manipulate people, and how much trust people put in 3rd party information sources.
Very few people go and find out for themselves, instead they trust in someone else to make their mind up for them.

That's not really democracy, that's media-ocracy. Government by the most convincing liars. When people vote in a referendum, they should understand what their vote means and be happy to stand behind it. Far too many people who vote in referendums and then are filled with regret afterwards; win or lose; because, "I didn't know" or "I was voting in protest at X".

So in short, I wouldn't be directly opposed to a border poll, but I don't think it's the best way to approach a question that has the power to be violently divisive.
It will be the right time for unification when the majority governments on both sides of the border are unanimously in favour of it.
That's a far stronger indication of the level of support for unification within the populace.

To Southerners it is about money and that is why many would vote no.

To Unionists from the province, it is about identity and ones self. Money has very little to do with it. You could say Unionists would be 1000k better off, I guarantee Unionists would still rather throw themselves off a cliff than join the Irish Republic.

J Mysterio

Its not about money to all 'southerners'. Only some, and I despair at that attitude.

A Little Pony

J Mysterio wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Absolutely. Ulster Loyalists would certainly take the fight to the South.

But would they be fighting for a union that doesnt want them anymore?

J Mysterio wrote: »

Lt Dan wrote: »

You have nothing to loose yourself so. Not everyone likes the dole que.

Face it, most of us have NOTHING in common with the North. Many of them, including parts of Donegal have more in common with Glasgow than they have with Dublin and co.

The compromises to Unionists are also not worth it. No minority like them should be able to dictate how a country should be governed.

The Unionists wouldnt be able to dictate sh t. They would have to bring their political parties to the dail and would never get close to power.

I could see many leaving to England/ Scotland in the event of reunification.

Why then would Unionist population vote to join the Republic when they would not even be in power in the Dail? Unionism would need to have a special amendment written into the constitution guaranteeing them a place in government.

But this is all irrelevant anyway, the bombs would be going off at even the slight smell of it. I for one don't believe the arms all got destroyed before 07.

AlanG wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Absolutely. Ulster Loyalists would certainly take the fight to the South.

What do you think they would be fighting for? Once a majority in the north want to join Ireland they will be kicked out of the Union and no amount of bombs in Dublin will convince London to have them back.

The Loyalists will soon have no 'cause' and turn to local crime the same way the good Friday agreement put a stop to most Republican violence.

Freedom?

irish bloke

Deleted User wrote: »

With Sinn Féin pushing for a border poll, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael opening the door to a future referendum on Irish unity, would you be in favour of having a border poll?

A national debate and discussion, with people from all sides giving their input. I can't see why a border poll could be anything but beneficial and informative. Thoughts?

Its a pity there wasn't a "don't care" option on the poll. Would like to have seen how that fared out..

Lt Dan

murpho999 wrote: »

There could be a transition period. As there would have to be with lots of things apart from money which everyone worries about.

Things I can think of in no particular order:

1) Police force: Does PSNI become Gardai (Irish name will be divisive)
2) Education: Schools to adopt Irish curriculum instead of UK
3) Currency: Change to the Euro
4) Roads: Change of classifications, names and signage from Miles to KM
5) Integration of politics to Irish system and scrapping of Stormont parliament
6) Bank Holidays: What happens to July 12 and holidays they had from UK
7) Hospitals: integration into Irish system
8) Does Royal Mail become An Post: Do letterboxes on Shankill Road become green?
9) The National Anthem
10) Will Loyalists insist on Ireland being members of the Commonwealth
11) Taxation and social welfare: Do they join Irish system
12) VAT: UK=17.5% Ireland= 23%. How do the bridge that?
13) Phone numbers: How do +44 xxx numbers become Irish?
14) Websites: Do they change from .co.uk to .ie

1. The name stays. An Garda Síochana
2. Which education system is better? Pick the best one
3 Currency: Can not have two currencies , pick one. Euro
4. Get with the times, KM
5. Burn Stormont to the ground
6. July 12 is definitely OUT! Inconsistent with an Irish Republic, supported by glorified KKK fans
7. Green Post Boxes, An Post
8. Amhrann na bhFinn Stays and does the tricolour
9. No to membership of the Commonwealth. It is worthless, and MOST LOYALISTS know nothing about it.No Loyalist will be allowed or tolerated to be able to "insist" that the country does anything
10 Telephone and internet domains adopt the Irish ones.

kazamo

J Mysterio wrote: »

I find the 'no argument' which is entirely based on money, to be fairly sad.

I fail to see how we could not absorb the hit anyhow. Irelands GDP was $238 billion last year. The subsidy to NI from the UK is £20 billion.

Ah no, at least compare like with like.
The NI subsidy does not come from the UK GDP but from the tax receipts in the country.
The NI subsidy if it's 20 billion should be compared to the ROI tax receipts of about 52 billion which would be used to fund the deficit.

But as you have said, it shouldn't be about money concerns.

J Mysterio

A Little Pony wrote: »

Why then would Unionist population vote to join the Republic when they would not even be in power in the Dail? Unionism would need to have a special amendment written into the constitution guaranteeing them a place in government.

That will not happen under any circumstances. Very undemocratic.

I think the only way a majority in the North will vote for reunification (in the short to medium term) is if Scotland first votes for Independence.

Junkyard Tom

A Little Pony wrote: »

Ulster Loyalists would certainly take the fight to the South.

They'd have enough trouble keeping their own West Bank style enclaves under control without wiping each other out, never mind 'taking the fight to the south'.

jimmycrackcorm

Jimoslimos wrote:

If it (United Ireland) ever came to pass there'd be a bit of grumbling, few skirmishes from uneducated thugs (nothing the security forces couldn't handle) and the place would settle back to normal - little changed from before.

Like the Shankhill butchers...

Deleted User wrote:

The few big attacks they launched were either planned, supported, built or flat out carried out by agents of the British state. With no collusion to help them how far do you think any campaign, in the unlikely event one even managed to manifest itself, would actually go?

Our own security forces can't stop the gang warfare in Dublin, what hope would they have against loyalists.

Lt Dan

AlanG wrote: »

Yes, and i would vote yes. We owe our independence to fighters and politicians form all 32 counties who fought to be free from the UK so i think if there is a majority up north who want to be part of a unified Ireland I have no right or desire to block it. As for the economic arguments, it is sad that money is so much more important than people to some. If you made decisions in the past based on short term economic reason Ireland would never have become a republic and Germany would never have been reunited. We should take a long view of matters and overcome any short term issues.
I don't believe there would be a lot of violence as if a majority in the 6 counties choose a unified Ireland then Britain would want nothing to do with the North. What would the militant unionists be fighting for? They wont be able to fight their way back into the UK.

Considering how those people that you so revere left this country in the 1920's and kept it back in the 1950-1960's, we owe them NOTHING!

Besides, you are an amateur if you think even 3/4 of the 32 counties actually did any meaningful fighting during the Tan War. Many counties hid under the bed (compare how they came out swinging during the Civil War however)

Yes you do have a right to block it, if you so wish. We also have to ratify it. We can not be forced to take anyone else one, if we did not want it .

Germany and Ireland are NOT comparable. Ireland was never a 32 County Independent Country.

Would not stop Unionists from causing trouble . They never need an excuse

josip

I'd worry more about the nationalists than the loyalists post reunification.

Lt Dan

J Mysterio wrote: »

The Unionists wouldnt be able to dictate shìt. They would have to bring their political parties to the dail and would never get close to power.

I could see many leaving to England/ Scotland in the event of reunification.

You are deluded if you think that Unionists would not get some deal what ensures guaranteed number of seats and positions , including positions in government.

Unionists have always been able to dictate, do not expect that to stop. Some might even do a Sinn Féin and abstain

Leaving for Scotland/England is possible

conorhal

Zaph wrote: »

We can barely afford to keep ourselves going, what in god's name would we want with another 1.5 million people, including a lot of whom wouldn't want to be part of the country in the first place? The NI economy is propped up by massive investment from the British government that we simply couldn't afford, so I'd have to say that I wouldn't be in favour of a poll just in case it passed.

And yet if you say that about literally any other group the self same shills for open boarders would be up in arm!

Lt Dan

A Little Pony wrote: »

I guarantee Unionists would still rather throw themselves off a cliff than join the Irish Republic.

God, we could only pray. That would be the day.

Perhaps chuck a few rocks into their pocket just to make sure they don't get up:P

catrionanic

I would like a border poll (and would vote yes), but I think it would be better to wait out this Brexit deal and see just how much the UK's economy goes down the pan. As a northern Catholic, many of my family and friends would vote against reunification simply because they are looked after better, in a financial sense, by the British government than by what an Irish government could provide. As EU funding disappears and the U.K. undergoes another recession, people's opinions could swiftly change.

Lt Dan

conorhal wrote: »

And yet if you say that about literally any other group the self same shills for open boarders would be up in arm!

But they are not relevant and they are in a minority

A Little Pony

Lt Dan wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

I guarantee Unionists would still rather throw themselves off a cliff than join the Irish Republic.

God, we could only pray. That would be the day.

Perhaps chuck a few rocks into their pocket just to make sure they don't get up:P

Thats rockist!

Lt Dan

J Mysterio wrote: »

That will not happen under any circumstances. Very undemocratic.

I think the only way a majority in the North will vote for reunification (in the short to medium term) is if Scotland first votes for Independence.

There is precedent for it. Arthur Griffith had made promises in the 1920's to get Unionists to join up. Sure, aren't there quotas for women in other countries. ?

Even if Scotland went solo, Unionists may well think that they would get MORE attention from England and MORE money and lovebombs. There are some, after all, in Westminster and Britain who do not like the idea of the break up of the Union and many English people are rather hostile to the SNP

J Mysterio

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Our own security forces can't stop the gang warfare in Dublin, what hope would they have against loyalists.

While I accept this point, I would imagine the PSNI would be integrated to the Gardai and remain in the North. I imagine there would also be close cooperation continuing tween Dublin and London.