Northern Ireland- a failure 99 years on?

Fionn1952

ELM327 wrote: »

I can see that my conceptual ideas have been derided, arguably rightly so given that this is a predominantly ROI based forum, but I think the point is proven that it's not a simple migration to a UI.

I'm from the North, Elm. Like I said, there's a whole load of road between reinstalling the Queen as the head of our state and totally subsuming NI into ROI without any compromise. I think its pretty disingenuous to suggest that because one of your suggested compromises has been met with derision (and the rest mostly agreed with) that people somehow think it would be a simple migration.

Fionn1952

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's not simple, it will be democratic though. And anything that is done will be done with the consent of a majority. Unionism or Nationalism does not have a 'veto' on that process.

It's been mentioned quite a few times that Unionism needs to begin convincing people why they should stay in the UK instead of vetoing any move towards a proper discussion of it.

If a border poll passes in NI, we can take it they have failed to convince a majority to remain in the commonwealth or to have a monarch as the head of state.

As a counterpoint to my last post to Elm, I do think a simple rule by majority approach with no sensitivity towards our largest cultural minority is asking for trouble.

Trying to interpret the individual details for a macro-level all encompassing yes/no vote based purely on that answer is an exercise in idiocy, as the Brexit debacle has shown, so no I don't believe we can take it that voting for unification means a majority in the North do not wish to remain to remain in the commonwealth, nor can we presume the opposite. Its a related but different question. It also ignores a potentially hefty middle ground who couldn't give a toss about the commonwealth, but would be alright with it as a way of easing Unionist concerns.

Not making any specific comments on my own views on the matter here, just pointing out the danger of inferring complex answers from simple questions.

ELM327

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's not simple, it will be democratic though. And anything that is done will be done with the consent of a majority. Unionism or Nationalism does not have a 'veto' on that process.

It's been mentioned quite a few times that Unionism needs to begin convincing people why they should stay in the UK instead of vetoing any move towards a proper discussion of it.

If a border poll passes in NI, we can take it they have failed to convince a majority to remain in the commonwealth or to have a monarch as the head of state.

Fionn1952 wrote: »

I'm from the North, Elm. Like I said, there's a whole load of road between reinstalling the Queen as the head of our state and totally subsuming NI into ROI without any compromise. I think its pretty disingenuous to suggest that because one of your suggested compromises has been met with derision (and the rest mostly agreed with) that people somehow think it would be a simple migration.

I agree with both of you. However the current established protocol in the GFA is a simple majority of 50% + 1 vote is enough to rejoin the north with the south in a UI. I think that would bring a return to violence in some corners and think we should come to a better solution.


That was all my point was. I'm as aspirational for a UI as the majority are, and am willing to give up a lot to get it, from additional taxes in the south, to tokenised recognition of the unionist community, and everything in between. I'm just thinking out loud and apologies if my comments have offended anyone.

FrancieBrady

Fionn1952 wrote: »

As a counterpoint to my last post to Elm, I do think a simple rule by majority approach with no sensitivity towards our largest cultural minority is asking for trouble.

Trying to interpret the individual details for a macro-level all encompassing yes/no vote based purely on that answer is an exercise in idiocy, as the Brexit debacle has shown, so no I don't believe we can take it that voting for unification means a majority in the North do not wish to remain to remain in the commonwealth, nor can we presume the opposite. Its a related but different question. It also ignores a potentially hefty middle ground who couldn't give a toss about the commonwealth, but would be alright with it as a way of easing Unionist concerns.

Not making any specific comments on my own views on the matter here, just pointing out the danger of inferring complex answers from simple questions.

So then it becomes a consent issue AFTER a border poll. It can never be or allowed to become a 'veto' issue though. Unionists need to persuade, just as those wanting a UI need to persuade.

FrancieBrady

ELM327 wrote: »

I agree with both of you. However the current established protocol in the GFA is a simple majority of 50% + 1 vote is enough to rejoin the north with the south in a UI. I think that would bring a return to violence in some corners and think we should come to a better solution.


That was all my point was. I'm as aspirational for a UI as the majority are, and am willing to give up a lot to get it, from additional taxes in the south, to tokenised recognition of the unionist community, and everything in between. I'm just thinking out loud and apologies if my comments have offended anyone.

No offence taken here.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So then it becomes a consent issue AFTER a border poll. It can never be or allowed to become a 'veto' issue though. Unionists need to persuade, just as those wanting a UI need to persuade.

The Stanleyesque efforts from those who want a UI aren't really working though.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

The Stanleyesque efforts from those who want a UI aren't really working though.

A mature conversation about how we all 'remember' and celebrate our divided pasts will have to be had after all the purse clasping, moral high grounding. Based on the last few days do you believe that Arlene and CO will go along with state commemorations of Kilmichael for instance? Is it ok for Orangemen and women to triumphalise military victory on the streets of a Ui?

How do you propose dealing with that? Censor all thoughts or just those you don't like?

downcow

ELM327 wrote: »

A significant portion of unionists are considering this, for similar reasons that wealthy irish folks accepted the act of union in 1801. Money.


If I was a well off unionist in the North, I'd be looking to remain in the EU to safeguard my business interests and that would be more important to me than wanting to remain in a union where the major stakeholder (England) recently polled over 50% of voters don't want the North anyway.

Let’s expand your thinking.
Do you think same would apply other way around
Ie if Roi residents thought they would be financially impacted by unification, would they block unification?

ELM327

downcow wrote: »

Let’s expand your thinking.
Do you think same would apply other way around
Ie if Roi residents thought they would be financially impacted by unification, would they block unification?

I think there is a cohort who would, yes.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So then it becomes a consent issue AFTER a border poll. It can never be or allowed to become a 'veto' issue though. Unionists need to persuade, just as those wanting a UI need to persuade.

There is no agreement that says a border poll has to come before anything else is considered.

For example, Ireland could vote to rejoin the Commonwealth in advance of a border poll, in order to give reassurance to unionists about the future united Ireland they would be voting for.

VinLieger

ELM327 wrote: »

I think there is a cohort who would, yes.

And id be one of them, as much as I disagree with Downcow on literally everything I don't see why the financial impact of reunification shouldn't outweigh the emotional emerald tinted need people have for it.


BTW im absolutely for reunification but why should we settle for a reunification that could be held up as a failure by its opponents with uncountable issues similar to Germany's instead of waiting a few more years until we can ensure it would be a resounding success that nobody could argue against? Too many people in my opinion want to see it in their lifetime and selfishly push for it to happen sooner with potential flaws rather than later when it could be as perfect as is possible.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

There is no agreement that says a border poll has to come before anything else is considered.

For example, Ireland could vote to rejoin the Commonwealth in advance of a border poll, in order to give reassurance to unionists about the future united Ireland they would be voting for.

Ireland can vote for whatever it wants whenever it wants blanch. It will need to be proposed by a member of the Dáil though not a Unionist, which is what I was talking about, a Unionist proposal before or after a border poll.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's not simple, it will be democratic though. And anything that is done will be done with the consent of a majority. Unionism or Nationalism does not have a 'veto' on that process.

It's been mentioned quite a few times that Unionism needs to begin convincing people why they should stay in the UK instead of vetoing any move towards a proper discussion of it.

If a border poll passes in NI, we can take it they have failed to convince a majority to remain in the commonwealth or to have a monarch as the head of state.

Who is failing to convince ni residents at the minute.

What you are saying is like if spurs beat Leeds 10-6 and Leeds spent the next day in training camp discussing how spurs have such poor defence and need to get better

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Who is failing to convince ni residents at the minute.

Nobody is failing. Nationalists have agreed to respect the wish of the majority. Therefore your place in the Commonwealth and the role of the monarch is secure. That may change though.

What you are saying is like if spurs beat Leeds 10-6 and Leeds spent the next day in training camp discussing how spurs have such poor defence and need to get better

What?

Fionn1952

downcow wrote: »

Let’s expand your thinking.
Do you think same would apply other way around
Ie if Roi residents thought they would be financially impacted by unification, would they block unification?

The vast majority of No voters in RoI would be voting as such for exactly this reason......surely this doesn't surprise you?

In the North, the very large middle ground will likely be convinced by economic arguments over anything else, and this cohort is growing every year.

I do think that, as usual, political Unionism at large is showing it's long term naivety by refusing to deal with this growing cohort head on by attempting to sell the benefits of the Union. While I couldn't prove it, I suspect that this comes from an insecurity around acknowledging that unification is even a possibility. Time and time again, this head in the sand attitude has come back to bite them in the a*se.

downcow

Beltby wrote: »

It will be interesting to see which region of the uk gets the vaccine last. I don't know which one it will be, but it will just be interesting.

So beltby raised this as a measure of failure.
This little failed state will be the first country in the western world to role out the vaccine. Starting next week. What a failure lol

VinLieger

downcow wrote: »

So beltby raised this as a measure of failure.
This little failed state will be the first country in the western world to role out the vaccine. Starting next week. What a failure lol

Only possible because of the EU


https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1334091648951857152

declanflynn

downcow wrote: »

So beltby raised this as a measure of failure.
This little failed state will be the first country in the western world to role out the vaccine. Starting next week. What a failure lol

remember it's a German vaccine

ELM327

downcow wrote: »

So beltby raised this as a measure of failure.
This little failed state will be the first country in the western world to role out the vaccine. Starting next week. What a failure lol

Still doesnt change that it is a failed state beyond massive subvention and artificial state funded (read: England funded) employment in PS

downcow

ELM327 wrote: »

Still doesnt change that it is a failed state beyond massive subvention and artificial state funded (read: England funded) employment in PS

I was only applying beltbys test and we passed with flying colours.

FrancieBrady

VinLieger wrote: »

Only possible because of the EU


https://twitter.com/LBC/status/1334091648951857152

Seen a tweet on that subject along the lines of:

'I was at the forefront of the advancement of computer technology, I ordered a laptop online.'

saabsaab

downcow wrote: »

So beltby raised this as a measure of failure.
This little failed state will be the first country in the western world to role out the vaccine. Starting next week. What a failure lol

Fair play to ye. I hope we follow soon.


Then again it is a bigger problem there at the moment.

Junkyard Tom

Good to see. In the future I'd like to see all the pro-United Ireland parties get behind a campaign in the northeast, FF/FG/SF/SDLP and others.

downcow

saabsaab wrote: »

Fair play to ye. I hope we follow soon.


Then again it is a bigger problem there at the moment.

I take no pleasure in fact that it will take a while for Roi to get vaccines. It’s quite unfair. And I guess Africa etc will be further back.
I am pleased that our health minister has assured today that the large number of southerners working in our health service will receive the vaccine

Who was on here recently suggesting the commuting traffic was only going one way?? And give that as another demonstration of failure of the north.

Truth is there are some things great about Roi and some things great about owc

BonnieSituation

downcow wrote: »

I take no pleasure in fact that it will take a while for Roi to get vaccines. It’s quite unfair. And I guess Africa etc will be further back.
I am pleased that our health minister has assured today that the large number of southerners working in our health service will receive the vaccine

Quite unfair?

The MHRA rushed into getting the vaccine out. I'm quite happy to wait on the EMA to release it when it's good and ready.

And as regards the nationality of the health service workers? Why would that matter? I mean replace "southerners" with "Pakistanis" or "Filipinas" and see woudl you like to make that distinction again.

I for one would be pretty nervous about anything that the UK are approving ahead of EVERYONE else.

Anyway, you won't be getting it for a while so I'd pipe down.

declanflynn

downcow wrote: »

So beltby raised this as a measure of failure.
This little failed state will be the first country in the western world to role out the vaccine. Starting next week. What a failure lol

will people in the north start to receive the vaccine next week?

FrancieBrady

declanflynn wrote: »

will people in the north start to receive the vaccine next week?

25,000 doses.

downcow

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Quite unfair?

The MHRA rushed into getting the vaccine out. I'm quite happy to wait on the EMA to release it when it's good and ready.

And as regards the nationality of the health service workers? Why would that matter? I mean replace "southerners" with "Pakistanis" or "Filipinas" and see woudl you like to make that distinction again.

I for one would be pretty nervous about anything that the UK are approving ahead of EVERYONE else.

Anyway, you won't be getting it for a while so I'd pipe down.

Keep you hair on bonnie.
I was referring to the southerners who were commuting and living in Roi. There are not too many Pakistanis commuting. Of course those living here will get it. I was just also pleased to hear that the southerners working here will be entitled.

downcow

declanflynn wrote: »

will people in the north start to receive the vaccine next week?

Yes. Wednesday apparently
Seems we are first on the world. We are slightly ahead of rest in UK as our stations are fully set up and ready to go. Just waiting on delivery

downcow

saabsaab wrote: »

Fair play to ye. I hope we follow soon.
.

Yeah I hope so