How long before Irish reunification?

blanch152

theguzman wrote: »

Exactly, reunite it and deal with the consequences later, we would have plenty money to fund the status quo if Fianna Fail had not set out to deliberately bankrupt the Irish state so that their property developers and landlord cronies could be bailed out.

There could be alot of savings also from a United Ireland, Health, Education and Welfare are always mentioned about how they should be priorities, the HSE is a cancerous tumour on Irish society which shoulf be got rid of, the Privatisation of Healthcare is the only thing that will solve this mess. Let taxoayer funded minimum insurance and obligatory tops ups in relation to wealth cover this. Take Healthcare out of Public management whilst retaining land and infrastrucutre ownership. Let the private sector manage it and keep the Unions out of it, pass a referendum banning Unions from Healthcare if required. Education has more than enough money as it is and Welfare spend will be another carrot for Northern Ireland, imagine your in the older Unionist demograph and your facing into a £129 per week pension but in the Republic you could get over €250 and I would argue increasing the welfare rates for the 6 counties over a 30 year period to allow for transition and harmonisation. Effectively bribe the Loyalist voters to join a United Ireland.

We squander the vast majority of taxation and there is pittance invested into real infrastrucutre to grow the economy such as a National Motorway and High Speed Rail network. Every county in the 32 should be no less than 2 hours by rail from Dublin and each county should have a Motorway connection with inter city Motorways also. The National Broadband Fibre plan also. Dumping billions into Health care is a disgrace when you'd get batter value to burn it because the Unions have the life strangled out of Health.

If it is one country, then it is one set of rules, you can't discriminate. Either social welfare rates shoot up overnight at a massive cost to the taxpayer, or some in the South get cut.

Take your pick, but stop pretending it is simple.

blanch152

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Ashcroft poll.
All to play for.
The age demographics mean that those in who pass away are 60% pro-union and they are replaced by 60% pro UI. So in 5 years a 1% lead becomes a 3% lead for UI.

Interesting poll with some strange results.

Leo Varadkar, Naomi Long and Jeremy Corbyn are all considered more positive by Nationalist voters than Michelle O'Neill.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Interesting poll with some strange results.

Leo Varadkar, Naomi Long and Jeremy Corbyn are all considered more positive by Nationalist voters than Michelle O'Neill.

A minus for SF...it's a good poll for blanch so.

James Brown

10-15 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

Absolutely.

Taxpayers will consider the myriad of negative implications unification will have on their families when deciding to reject any referendum.

One will always prioritise one's family far above some randomers up North that we share little in common with.

You make it sound like we don't get rode as it is

I love my unionist brothers and sisters up north, comes with being Irish.

James Brown

10-15 years

briany wrote: »

From watching British politics over the last 3 and a bit years, one thing is evident, and that is that emotional arguments are dangerous ways to inform the direction of your country. So, if one asks what the social and economic advantages of a United Ireland would be, and the answer is that we get to sing, "A Nation Once Again", I'd be worried.

Completely different. Partition is a creation of a foreign power. When they go the country will be united and likely in the EU.

RobMc59

10-15 years

maccored wrote: »

in a UI we wouldnt have the PSNI so ....

I question whether they would distinguish between the PSNI or the Gardai-they have`nt had any problem attacking them if they`ve got in their way.I doubt they would have an epiphany and become upstanding members of the community,abiding by the law.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

I question whether they would distinguish between the PSNI or the Gardai-they have`nt had any problem attacking them if they`ve got in their way.I doubt they would have an epiphany and become upstanding members of the community,abiding by the law.

What do you British do when the police are attacked Rob?

Stop everything...make no changes you deem are in the interests of everyone?

Charles Babbage

blanch152 wrote: »

If it is one country, then it is one set of rules, you can't discriminate. Either social welfare rates shoot up overnight at a massive cost to the taxpayer, or some in the South get cut.

Take your pick, but stop pretending it is simple.

Those rules can phase in harmonisation, as happened in Germany.

RobMc59

10-15 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

I question whether they would distinguish between the PSNI or the Gardai-they have`nt had any problem attacking them if they`ve got in their way.I doubt they would have an epiphany and become upstanding members of the community,abiding by the law.

What do you British do when the police are attacked Rob?

Stop everything...make no changes you deem are in the interests of everyone?

Have you watched the footage of the PSNI being attacked yesterday?Do you consider it justified?

maccored

30-40 years

RobMc59 wrote: »

I question whether they would distinguish between the PSNI or the Gardai-they have`nt had any problem attacking them if they`ve got in their way.I doubt they would have an epiphany and become upstanding members of the community,abiding by the law.

the problem more than likely wouldnt exist if the there was a UI - bit obvious but it had to be pointed out

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

Have you watched the footage of the PSNI being attacked yesterday?Do you consider it justified?

What has that got to do with it Rob?
Irish people have been watching violence take place since partition for differing reasons.

I asked you a question, should violence be allowed to stop decisions that are deemed to be in the interests of everyone? Or is there as one of your MP's (Mauldling, iirc) said, an 'acceptable level of violence' in Ireland, for him and the British state?

RobMc59

10-15 years

maccored wrote: »

RobMc59 wrote: »

I question whether they would distinguish between the PSNI or the Gardai-they have`nt had any problem attacking them if they`ve got in their way.I doubt they would have an epiphany and become upstanding members of the community,abiding by the law.

the problem more than likely wouldnt exist if the there was a UI - bit obvious but it had to be pointed out

You may be correct ,although what the majority of the people of Ireland watching footage from Derry yesterday would think is something else.Those I've spoken to are appalled by it

Charles Babbage

RobMc59 wrote: »

You may be correct ,although what the majority of the people of Ireland watching footage from Derry yesterday would think is something else.Those I've spoken to are appalled by it

While under British rule Derry has had unrest. So has every other county in Ireland. The cure is to end colonial rule.



You don't hear of many ambushes in West Cork these days

theguzman

15-20 years

Charles Babbage wrote: »

While under British rule Derry has had unrest. So has every other county in Ireland. The cure is to end colonial rule.



You don't hear of many ambushes in West Cork these days

If anything there is more British in West Cork now than during British occupation, the British should withdraw from Northern Ireland and it is costing them nearly as much as EU Membership so I can't see why they don't agree.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What has that got to do with it Rob?
Irish people have been watching violence take place since partition for differing reasons.

I asked you a question, should violence be allowed to stop decisions that are deemed to be in the interests of everyone? Or is there as one of your MP's (Mauldling, iirc) said, an 'acceptable level of violence' in Ireland, for him and the British state?

I assume you mean by decisions that are deemed to be in the interests of everyone to be decisions arrived at by democratic means.

If so, then of course the answer is yes, and the threats and hints of dissident violence in response to Brexit are wrong.

maccored

30-40 years

RobMc59 wrote: »

You may be correct ,although what the majority of the people of Ireland watching footage from Derry yesterday would think is something else.Those I've spoken to are appalled by it

Anyone would be appalled by violence. Would it still be there though in a UI - considering thats what those petrol bombing all those Defenders (old ones too, not like the new version which is like a big mini) want?

Methinks Rob you are looking to be offended and are ignoring the obvious

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

I assume you mean by decisions that are deemed to be in the interests of everyone to be decisions arrived at by democratic means.

If so, then of course the answer is yes, and the threats and hints of dissident violence in response to Brexit are wrong.

Dissident and Loyalist violence has been happening since the GFA was signed.

That you have just noticed it and attributed it to Brexit is evidence YET again, that 'an acceptable level of violence' exists for some people. It is one of the defining traits of a partitionist mindset actually.

FrancieBrady

And on the discussion goes.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/a-united-ireland-could-need-four-referendums-says-expert-1.4016125?fbclid=IwAR0v93TOlcywKpAQwjsUNP3swdlVlYT2Dkc_GUu49tpoQ52E5Q0QhgW2ZKY

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And on the discussion goes.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/a-united-ireland-could-need-four-referendums-says-expert-1.4016125?fbclid=IwAR0v93TOlcywKpAQwjsUNP3swdlVlYT2Dkc_GUu49tpoQ52E5Q0QhgW2ZKY

It's a very anglo-centric article.

The thrust is that multiple referendums are needed to avoid another Brexit - another situation where something is approved without any semblance of how it would be carried out.

I say it's Anglo-centric because it assumes that asking the question first is necessary before you make plans on what the outcome would look like. Because that's how the Brits did it.

When clearly that's not the case. There is no reason why the planning cannot be done beforehand. A trilateral team from Ireland, NI & the UK to draw up details of what unification would look like and to work through the details. Even if the poll is rejected, this is not wasted effort. It can be a framework for future integrations; whole or part.

Then present that in advance of any border poll so that voting can be informed and not misled by claims that it will/won't cost loads or that protestants will be second-class citizens, etc.

An "advisory" border poll followed by a "confirmatory" border poll would be an absolute sh1tshow, and would definitely fail.

This all reads like sandbagging to me - making unification too difficult to pass.

mattser

seamus wrote: »

It's a very anglo-centric article.

The thrust is that multiple referendums are needed to avoid another Brexit - another situation where something is approved without any semblance of how it would be carried out.

I say it's Anglo-centric because it assumes that asking the question first is necessary before you make plans on what the outcome would look like. Because that's how the Brits did it.

When clearly that's not the case. There is no reason why the planning cannot be done beforehand. A trilateral team from Ireland, NI & the UK to draw up details of what unification would look like and to work through the details. Even if the poll is rejected, this is not wasted effort. It can be a framework for future integrations; whole or part.

Then present that in advance of any border poll so that voting can be informed and not misled by claims that it will/won't cost loads or that protestants will be second-class citizens, etc.

An "advisory" border poll followed by a "confirmatory" border poll would be an absolute sh1tshow, and would definitely fail.

This all reads like sandbagging to me - making unification too difficult to pass.

Thankfully.

Charles Babbage

seamus wrote: »

It's a very anglo-centric article.

The thrust is that multiple referendums are needed to avoid another Brexit - another situation where something is approved without any semblance of how it would be carried out.

I say it's Anglo-centric because it assumes that asking the question first is necessary before you make plans on what the outcome would look like. Because that's how the Brits did it.

When clearly that's not the case. There is no reason why the planning cannot be done beforehand. A trilateral team from Ireland, NI & the UK to draw up details of what unification would look like and to work through the details. Even if the poll is rejected, this is not wasted effort. It can be a framework for future integrations; whole or part.

Then present that in advance of any border poll so that voting can be informed and not misled by claims that it will/won't cost loads or that protestants will be second-class citizens, etc.

An "advisory" border poll followed by a "confirmatory" border poll would be an absolute sh1tshow, and would definitely fail.

This all reads like sandbagging to me - making unification too difficult to pass.

You still need some trigger for starting the planning on the basis that the time is right. The Ashcroft Poll indicated that 70% of people in NI believed there would be a majority for a UI in the next decade. But if you propose planning for a UI then the unionists will kick up, as their goose is cooked if an actual plan emerges. Perhaps the NI assembly could vote for a planning process, if Alliance were willing to do this.

facehugger99

Brexit really has been the death-knell of 'populist referendums'.

In reality, the only hope of a unification referendum passing in the ROI would be one that was run low on facts and high on nationalist nonsense.

Thankfully that will never be allowed to happen now that we've a been given grandstand seat observing the Brexit mess next door.

Charles Babbage

facehugger99 wrote: »

Brexit really has been the death-knell of 'populist referendums'.

In reality, the only hope of a unification referendum passing in the ROI would be one that was run low on facts and high on nationalist nonsense.

Thankfully that will never be allowed to happen now that we've a been given grandstand seat observing the Brexit mess next door.

No, the referendum will pass because unlike the fake Brexit propoganda there is part of this country actually subject to colonial rule.

facehugger99

Charles Babbage wrote: »

there is part of this country actually subject to colonial rule.

Cork?

mattser

facehugger99 wrote: »

Cork?

Classic :D

FrancieBrady

facehugger99 wrote: »

Brexit really has been the death-knell of 'populist referendums'.

.

...in the UK, where they hadn't the first clue as to how to run one.

In stark contrast to this country where we have had many potentially divisive referendums without destroying the very fabric of the society and political entity we have built.

seamus

Charles Babbage wrote: »

You still need some trigger for starting the planning on the basis that the time is right. The Ashcroft Poll indicated that 70% of people in NI believed there would be a majority for a UI in the next decade. But if you propose planning for a UI then the unionists will kick up, as their goose is cooked if an actual plan emerges. Perhaps the NI assembly could vote for a planning process, if Alliance were willing to do this.

Let them kick up tbh. They can't stop it. Especially if Stormont isn't sitting.

On the numbers given in the Ashcroft poll, I don't actually think there will be a majority for a UI in the next decade. The poll showed pensioners quite heavily against, and younger people in favour.

We know younger people don't vote, so you need to wait at least a decade for those numbers to shift, imho.

There's a decade in which to carry out your planning and analysis and framework building.

Though this figure paints a very interesting picture;


It would be one thing if it was 33/33/33, but the fact that half of those in the North feel like the North has moved closer to the Republic, while a third feel like nothing's changed, suggests that this is more than sectarian voting, and an actual social shift has taken place.

facehugger99

20-30 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

In reality, the only hope of a unification referendum passing in the ROI would be one that was run low on facts

Ah, facehugger99, me auld segotia. Is this a not-so-subtle appeal on your part to be appointed an expert adviser to the pro-reunification side?

FrancieBrady

20-30 years

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And on the discussion goes.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/a-united-ireland-could-need-four-referendums-says-expert-1.4016125?fbclid=IwAR0v93TOlcywKpAQwjsUNP3swdlVlYT2Dkc_GUu49tpoQ52E5Q0QhgW2ZKY

From that article:

The result of Lord Ashcroft’s poll for Conservative Home shows views remain polarised with 98 per cent of nationalists in favour of unification and 95 per cent of unionists against.

Surely 100% of nationalists are implicitly in favour of unification, and 100% of unionists are implicitly against it? Otherwise they'd be defined as something else such as 'Catholic', 'Protestant', or the like.

Junkyard Tom

30-40 years

facehugger99 wrote: »

In reality, the only hope of a unification referendum passing in the ROI would be one that was run low on facts and high on nationalist nonsense.

Be careful what you wish for. Your lack of foresight would be more in keeping with the less thoughtful Brexiteers.

You seem to think that there will be no consequences in the South if unification is rejected. The flag would no longer be appropriate, the anthem would have to be changed - a new officially partitionist state would need to be crafted as this one is built on a different idea of Ireland.

I shudder to think of the schism a no vote would cause here. We think Brexit is bad? A rejection of a UI in the 'Ireland' could be exponentially worse.