Brexit Impact on Northern Ireland

FrancieBrady

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Because it has no place in Ireland and it would be a regression to go back to it.

I agree the hate and triumphalist part has no place, but the rest of it is fairly inocuous stuff.
I think I'm over 1690.

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I agree the hate and triumphalist part has no place, but the rest of it is fairly inocuous stuff.

The hate and triumphalist part is the only part.

FrancieBrady

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

They’re not a portion of the population of Ireland though and hopefully never will be.

I’d still be fairly confident that the Irish will see sense when the truth comes out in an actual referendum, though we do need some brave party to step up and do what’s best in running a proper No campaign.

None of the major parties will, and there is a reason for that. It would be political suicide.
All of them could cope with being on a losing side as there would be another chance in a few years. Would they ever recover being on the NO side if a poll succeeded though?

bilbot79

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

They’re not a portion of the population of Ireland though and hopefully never will be.

I’d still be fairly confident that the Irish will see sense when the truth comes out in an actual referendum, though we do need some brave party to step up and do what’s best in running a proper No campaign.

An Irish unification 'No' campaign. Yes I can't wait to see which politicians offer themselves up to an act of political suicide with implications for their actual safety

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

They’re not a portion of the population of Ireland though and hopefully never will be.

I’d still be fairly confident that the Irish will see sense when the truth comes out in an actual referendum, though we do need some brave party to step up and do what’s best in running a proper No campaign.

Personally, I don't care if there's never a United Ireland, I think they should stand alone.
But, if the majority vote for it then we need to be inclusive and work together, looking forward, not back.

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

Personally, I don't care if there's never a United Ireland, I think they should stand alone.
But, if the majority vote for it then we need to be inclusive and work together, looking forward, not back.

There will be nothing only regression by trying to incorporate the likes of these people into our country.

I still think the truth of what it would mean economically will ensure sense prevails anyway. Also the small matter that we’d be rolling Ireland up and throwing it away by merging with them. A sickening thought for a country that was so hard fought for in the first place.

bilbot79

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

Certain groups literally burn it every year, they are not going to accept it.

If say the flag could have a mini union jack in the corner like new zealand

FrancieBrady

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

There will be nothing only regression by trying to incorporate the likes of these people into our country.

I still think the truth of what it would mean economically will ensure sense prevails anyway. Also the small matter that we’d be rolling Ireland up and throwing it away by merging with them. A sickening thought for a country that was so hard fought for in the first place.

I think those fighting were fighting for the 'whole' country.

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

There will be nothing only regression by trying to incorporate the likes of these people into our country.

I still think the truth of what it would mean economically will ensure sense prevails anyway. Also the small matter that we’d be rolling Ireland up and throwing it away by merging with them. A sickening thought for a country that was so hard fought for in the first place.

Northern Ireland may do very well economically from brexit.
Also, 'these people' are just people, how do you feel about immigration in general?

FrancieBrady

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think those fighting were fighting for the 'whole' country.

We got a whole country out of it - Ireland. So what if a bit of land didn’t become part of it? Scotland didn’t either, nor did the north west of England, it amounts to the same thing - Ireland broke free from the UK. The Northern Irish, both sides of the community, have become closer to Scottish than Irish as people anyway. Maybe there’s a more fitting merger there instead.

FrancieBrady

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

We got a whole country out of it - Ireland. So what if a bit of land didn’t become part of it? Scotland didn’t either, nor did the north west of England, it amounts to the same thing - Ireland broke free from the UK. The Northern Irish, both sides of the community, have become closer to Scottish than Irish as people anyway. Maybe there’s a more fitting merger there instead.

That is just plain nonsense. The Scottish connection is tenuous and was only really pushed as recently as 1998. It was a strategy of the likes of David Trimble to up the connection. It doesn't really exist at all, and is non existent on the nationalist side. Not as a feasible unity thing anyway.
Here in Monaghan I have far more in common with my Fermanagh Tyrone neighbours and members of my family there than I have with Dublin or Cork people.
Which is natural in any country or island.

Charles Babbage

bilbot79 wrote: »

I know it's a little bit 'ethnic cleansy' but I reckon if the Irish government sponsored every unionist who renounced Irish/Northern Irish citizenship say 25k to help with a deposit on a house in the UK everyone would be a winner.

London should pay for unionists to go to Scotland, which would ensure two united islands.

cgcsb

Charles Babbage wrote: »

London should pay for unionists to go to Scotland, which would ensure two united islands.

London doesn't want a united island in Britain anymore. Even if every single one of the 800,000 protestants in NI moved to Scotland, that would probably still be insufficient to prevent Scottish independence at this stage.

Sam Russell

cgcsb wrote: »

London doesn't want a united island in Britain anymore. Even if every single one of the 800,000 protestants in NI moved to Scotland, that would probably still be insufficient to prevent Scottish independence at this stage.

Would anyone wish such a thing on anyone?

cgcsb

Sam Russell wrote: »

Would anyone wish such a thing on anyone?

Well that's how we got the plantation of Ulster. Good for the goose.

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Because it has no place in Ireland and it would be a regression to go back to it.

Parity of esteem would be very much part of a United Ireland, unless you are proposing the Irish government break the good Friday agreement.

FrancieBrady

Aegir wrote: »

Parity of esteem would be very much part of a United Ireland, unless you are proposing the Irish government break the good Friday agreement.

That is a two way street, Belligerence will find no parity in a UI. Democrats will, of all hues and creeds.

Wilhelm III

I think the Unionists from Northern Ireland will be much easier to persuade - than the many Unionists from the Republic of Ireland, whom I fear are a much larger number.

Wilhelm III

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

They’re not a portion of the population of Ireland though and hopefully never will be.

They are literally a portion of the population of Ireland, Ireland is an island - they may not be a part of the population of the Republic of Ireland, but they are a part of Ireland's population - the same way the Scottish and Welsh are part of Britain's (the name of the island) population.

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

I’d still be fairly confident that the Irish will see sense when the truth comes out in an actual referendum, though we do need some brave party to step up and do what’s best in running a proper No campaign.

Agree AGAIN Reggie!! I too am confident that the Irish will see sense, when the truth comes out in an actual referendum!!! We can NOT stop agreeing – I LOVE IT!!! Changing hearts and changing minds Reggie - one heart at a time, let's do it - let's unite this country together!!! !!!!

breezy1985

Amirani wrote: »

Remember the uproar about the RIC commemoration? We'd be having loads of unpopular commemorations.

How would people feel about having an official holiday on the 12th of July and Orange bands marching down O'Connell Street?

Well the 12th isn't a holiday in London and there isn't a march down Oxford st.
Some countries have regional holidays so no reason NI cant in a united Ireland

Wilhelm III

Wilhelm III wrote: »

They are literally a portion of the population of Ireland, Ireland is an island - they may not be a part of the population of the Republic of Ireland, but they are a part of Ireland's population - the same way the Scottish and Welsh are part of Britain's (the name of the island) population.


Agree AGAIN Reggie!! I too am confident that the Irish will see sense, when the truth comes out in an actual referendum!!! We can NOT stop agreeing – I LOVE IT!!! Changing hearts and changing minds Reggie - one heart at a time, let's do it - let's unite this country together!!! !!!!

I’ve learned not to get into arguments here about the name of this country with people that don’t seem to want to know it, or worse.

Wilhelm III

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

I’ve learned not to get into arguments here about the name of this country with people that don’t seem to want to know it, or worse.

I do accept the Republic of Ireland's alternative and equally official name is simply 'Ireland', however it is indeed the name of the entire island also!

breezy1985

Wilhelm III wrote: »

I don't disagree - I just have a feeling a lot of our friends in the North would have a serious aversion to the Tricolour, I fear they don't even SEE the colour orange on there, in theory you couldn't get a more appropriate flag - in reality, I fear that is viewed in some quarters as a symbol of the enemy. Ultimately - to me, speaking personally - a unified Republic of Ireland is more important than the flag which will represent it, as much as I love dearly our flag.

BUT HEY! I like to keep an open mind! It might be the case that a REAL and public discussion on this topic, when the time comes - might indeed change minds, and win hearts - with regards to the already, simplistically profound symbolism of the Irish flag, the flag might not need changing at all. Whatever the case is - we will want to make sure those joining us WANT to join us, that they WANT to be a part of the country - that they WANT a seat at the table - otherwise, how will it ever succeed? The path to peace is paved in compromise, understanding, respect for each other, trust and goodwill from all involved - and if that means a new flag, one that we can all agree on, and get behind - then as far as I am concerned – so be it.

Oh – and Shamrock!? Come on!?!? The Shamrock would be a quality flag!

During the NZ flag referendum they had some nice ones using ferns or Maori symbols so maybe we could do similar with shamrocks or Celtic spirals.
Anything but that boring yoke the rugby use

Dyr

breezy1985 wrote: »

During the NZ flag referendum they had some nice ones using ferns or Maori symbols so maybe we could do similar with shamrocks or Celtic spirals.
Anything but that boring yoke the rugby use

No ****ing around with some modern marketing graphic design bollox like New Zealand. Old school design. Green background, orange celtic cross over a white border in the shape of the cross seperating the green and orange. Job done. Looks a bit like the Union Jack and fairly right wing so the Unionists will be grand with it.

Change the English lyrics to the National Anthem to be some ambigious reference sto unity rather than shooting the Brits and job done.

Sam Russell

One of Ireland's discoveries/inventions was the 'Citizen's Assembly' that was used to settle the hardest of all political issues of the last 40 years, and surprisingly (to he vast percentage of he Irish population), they did exactly that. They came up with the formula that fixed for all time the conundrum that was abortion.

Now that would be a formula that could be used to solve the unification question.

It is surprising that a combination of normal people, when the issues are put to them by experts, and those experts can be questioned until those normal people have a good grasp of those issues, and then those normal people discuss among themselves and, as a group, come to possible solutions, and then proposals.

However they did and their proposals got a huge majority of the population to agree with that Citizen's Assembly.

Amazing. Perhaps it is a solution to a United Ireland.

breezy1985

Sam Russell wrote: »

One of Ireland's discoveries/inventions was the 'Citizen's Assembly' that was used to settle the hardest of all political issues of the last 40 years, and surprisingly (to he vast percentage of he Irish population), they did exactly that. They came up with the formula that fixed for all time the conundrum that was abortion.

Now that would be a formula that could be used to solve the unification question.

It is surprising that a combination of normal people, when the issues are put to them by experts, and those experts can be questioned until those normal people have a good grasp of those issues, and then those normal people discuss among themselves and, as a group, come to possible solutions, and then proposals.

However they did and their proposals got a huge majority of the population to agree with that Citizen's Assembly.

Amazing. Perhaps it is a solution to a United Ireland.

As long as no one on boards is asked for solutions I think we will be fine

Sam Russell

breezy1985 wrote: »

As long as no one on boards is asked for solutions I think we will be fine

Well, if they use the same type of selection system, only one boardsie would be selected, so we will be safe. Hopefully, the one voice will not be a troll.

20silkcut

Sam Russell wrote: »

One of Ireland's discoveries/inventions was the 'Citizen's Assembly' that was used to settle the hardest of all political issues of the last 40 years, and surprisingly (to he vast percentage of he Irish population), they did exactly that. They came up with the formula that fixed for all time the conundrum that was abortion.

Now that would be a formula that could be used to solve the unification question.

It is surprising that a combination of normal people, when the issues are put to them by experts, and those experts can be questioned until those normal people have a good grasp of those issues, and then those normal people discuss among themselves and, as a group, come to possible solutions, and then proposals.

However they did and their proposals got a huge majority of the population to agree with that Citizen's Assembly.

Amazing. Perhaps it is a solution to a United Ireland.

Yes the wisdom of crowds is often more correct than that of experts.

That’s why ask the audience was the best lifeline on who wants to be a millionaire.

Sam Russell

20silkcut wrote: »

Yes the wisdom of crowds is often more correct than that of experts.

That’s why ask the audience was the best lifeline on who wants to be a millionaire.

Is that not the basic idea behind democracy - the voice of the people?

However, the Citizen's Assembly is an informed crowd - informed by experts. Democracy has got a bit of a wobble in recent times because of 'fake news' and deliberate perversion by rich vested interests.

The whole point about the CA is it is informed by accepted experts and they inform participants with straightforward facts and information needed to understand the issues. Complex issues need a lot of detail and nuance to get to the basic solutions that will work, and the participants work through this be logical argument and discussion.

Participants are chosen to be representative of the whole population - that is important.

20silkcut

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is that not the basic idea behind democracy - the voice of the people?

However, the Citizen's Assembly is an informed crowd - informed by experts. Democracy has got a bit of a wobble in recent times because of 'fake news' and deliberate perversion by rich vested interests.

The whole point about the CA is it is informed by accepted experts and they inform participants with straightforward facts and information needed to understand the issues. Complex issues need a lot of detail and nuance to get to the basic solutions that will work, and the participants work through this be logical argument and discussion.

Participants are chosen to be representative of the whole population - that is important.

Yes it would have to be an unbiased representation of the population.

Interestingly enough in the wisdom of the crowd theory answers are more accurate when extremely wrong answers are included to calculate the average answer.
So having people with extreme views on the CA is probably no bad thing providing they don’t influence the crowd.

Sam Russell

20silkcut wrote: »

Yes it would have to be an unbiased representation of the population.

Interestingly enough in the wisdom of the crowd theory answers are more accurate when extremely wrong answers are included to calculate the average answer.
So having people with extreme views on the CA is probably no bad thing

As long as those with extreme views do not shout everyone else down - as in the BBC Question Time programme. Also the choice of participants must be unbiased - even if those chosen are not.

Diverse opening views are fine - even extreme ones - as long as open dialogue is kept going and views are open to being changed.

20silkcut

Sam Russell wrote: »

As long as those with extreme views do not shout everyone else down - as in the BBC Question Time programme. Also the choice of participants must be unbiased - even if those chosen are not.

Diverse opening views are fine - even extreme ones - as long as open dialogue is kept going and views are open to being changed.

I suppose the theory I’m talking is more mathematical.
You can’t really take a bunch of diverse views and divide them to get an average view.
Or maybe you can.

Jury’s function on unanimous decisions.
How does the CA work? Do they vote on issues

Sam Russell

20silkcut wrote: »

I suppose the theory I’m talking is more mathematical.
You can’t really take a bunch of diverse views and divide them to get an average view.
Or maybe you can.

Jury’s function on unanimous decisions.
How does the CA work? Do they vote on issues

As I understand the process - I was not a participant nor do I know anyone who was - 100 people were selected by a polling company to be representative. A chairman was selected - in our case it was a retired supreme court judge.

There were plenary sessions where subjects were gone through using experts from all sides. Then the sessions broke out to ten groups of ten, each with a facilitator whose job was to lead the discussion or to act as a moderator so that the discussion did not go down rabbit holes. These breakout groups would make proposals, and these were consolidated into motions that were voted on, and these formed the basis of the final report.

So there was voting, and there were sub-group discussions, and plenary group discussions as the ideas were distilled down to firm proposals.

It was amazingly successful in putting forward a firm proposal that eventually was accepted in a constitutional referendum.

blanch152

Charles Babbage wrote: »

In the poll published in tomorrow's Times, it is 42% for United Ireland, 47% against and 11% don't know, with a majority of under 45s favouring unity. Nothing too radical there, however there is a question as to whether people would welcome a United Ireland, and this is 47/47. This suggests that the "don't knows" are very open to persuasion, if they get the right answers from the proposals.
Northern Irish voters also think there will be a united Ireland within 10 years by a margin of 48 per cent to 44 per cent. This reflects that the 47% who welcome a UI would be 50% in that period, given the age profile.

As for the flag, the present one seems fine to me, but if a change it needed

The thing that is missing from your analysis is the change from the year before.

https://thedetail.tv/articles/a-majority-favour-a-border-poll-on-the-island-of-ireland-in-the-next-10-years

Last year 45.4% would vote for a united Ireland, this has now dropped to 42%, which is a change greater than the margin of error. Support for the union has stayed steady or slightly increased from 46.8% to 47%, meaning that the gap in favour of maintaining the union has increased from 1.4% to 5%, again greater than the margin of error.

Rather than the sensationalist headlines over the weekend, support for a united Ireland is actually decreasing in the North.

Sam Russell

blanch152 wrote: »

The thing that is missing from your analysis is the change from the year before.

https://thedetail.tv/articles/a-majority-favour-a-border-poll-on-the-island-of-ireland-in-the-next-10-years

Last year 45.4% would vote for a united Ireland, this has now dropped to 42%, which is a change greater than the margin of error. Support for the union has stayed steady or slightly increased from 46.8% to 47%, meaning that the gap in favour of maintaining the union has increased from 1.4% to 5%, again greater than the margin of error.

Rather than the sensationalist headlines over the weekend, support for a united Ireland is actually decreasing in the North.

The support will always depend on the details of the unification. As the current situation is unclear, and the future is even more so, I suggest a while longer might be worth the wait.

breezy1985

Sam Russell wrote: »

The support will always depend on the details of the unification. As the current situation is unclear, and the future is even more so, I suggest a while longer might be worth the wait.

It would be a huge mistake to start getting excited at 51% then lose and end up where Scotland is now having all calls for a second ref shot down.

20silkcut

blanch152 wrote: »

The thing that is missing from your analysis is the change from the year before.

https://thedetail.tv/articles/a-majority-favour-a-border-poll-on-the-island-of-ireland-in-the-next-10-years

Last year 45.4% would vote for a united Ireland, this has now dropped to 42%, which is a change greater than the margin of error. Support for the union has stayed steady or slightly increased from 46.8% to 47%, meaning that the gap in favour of maintaining the union has increased from 1.4% to 5%, again greater than the margin of error.

Rather than the sensationalist headlines over the weekend, support for a united Ireland is actually decreasing in the North.

Not surprising when the north got the best brexit deal of all the 4 U.K. nations on paper for now.
The status quo is the most attractive option.

Sam Russell

breezy1985 wrote: »

It would be a huge mistake to start getting excited at 51% then lose and end up where Scotland is now having all calls for a second ref shot down.

Before any referendum, it has to be certain that the centre ground will vote for it, otherwise a close result either way would be disaster.

The moderate Unionist must be in favour, as must the Nationalists. It must be clear that they will all be secure in a United Ireland, with no downsides.

FrancieBrady

20silkcut wrote: »

Not surprising when the north got the best brexit deal of all the 4 U.K. nations on paper for now.
The status quo is the most attractive option.

When you look at the 3-4% fluctuations in the 'Don't knows' (11% in the most recent poll and 7.8% in the Detail poll) that seems to be the case. Floating voters swayed by an on-paper better deal.
All to play for over the next while as Brexit kicks in.

breezy1985

It would be interesting to see a few real proposals as to what a United Ireland might look like. Have Sinn Fein or any other UI group ever given any idea what they expect Dail constituencies public transport to look like

Indieref and Brexit were both run on lots of what ifs and pure nonsense projections from some

liamog

breezy1985 wrote: »

It would be interesting to see a few real proposals as to what a United Ireland might look like. Have Sinn Fein or any other UI group ever given any idea what they expect Dail constituencies public transport to look like

Indieref and Brexit were both run on lots of what ifs and pure nonsense projections from some

I'd hope we'd be a bit smarter and hold a UI advisory referendum, then a reunification citizens assembly followed by an actual referendum which included the constitutional changes. Personally, I think we should be tabling commonwealth membership and a continued devolved structure for NI.

FrancieBrady

liamog wrote: »

I'd hope we'd be a bit smarter and hold a UI advisory referendum, then a reunification citizens assembly followed by an actual referendum which included the constitutional changes. Personally, I think we should be tabling commonwealth membership and a continued devolved structure for NI.

What's a 'UI advisory referendum'?

IAMAMORON

I just cannot make my mind up when anticipating when the riots start in earnest?

I mean will they start when the border poll is actually genuinely proposed, or will they wait until polling day to start burning the polling stations and the congregation of around 150,000 Irish Unionists outside the Kings Hall screaming blue murder whilst chanting " Ulster Says No".

The Brits want the North off their plate for sure. But we will be picking up the pieces and it will be nasty for generations. Certainly massive civil unrest for a number of years - at the very least.

Charles Babbage

blanch152 wrote: »

The thing that is missing from your analysis is the change from the year before.

https://thedetail.tv/articles/a-majority-favour-a-border-poll-on-the-island-of-ireland-in-the-next-10-years

Last year 45.4% would vote for a united Ireland, this has now dropped to 42%, which is a change greater than the margin of error. Support for the union has stayed steady or slightly increased from 46.8% to 47%, meaning that the gap in favour of maintaining the union has increased from 1.4% to 5%, again greater than the margin of error.

Rather than the sensationalist headlines over the weekend, support for a united Ireland is actually decreasing in the North.

No, support for a united Ireland remains the same, as the 47% who would welcome a UI shows. Willingness to vote for UI has declined, and this probably reflects that there is a Brexit deal of sorts which stabilises things. There is a job of work in coming up with a model that makes everyone who wants a UI feel that a proper deal exists to achieve it. Many people put forward the contention that the British have so banjaxed the NI economy that they have effectively prevented a UI, and it is indeed a challenge to work around this.

FrancieBrady

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I just cannot make my mind up when anticipating when the riots start in earnest?

I mean will they start when the border poll is actually genuinely proposed, or will they wait until polling day to start burning the polling stations and the congregation of around 150,000 Irish Unionists outside the Kings Hall screaming blue murder whilst chanting " Ulster Says No".

The Brits want the North off their plate for sure. But we will be picking up the pieces and it will be nasty for generations. Certainly massive civil unrest for a number of years - at the very least.

People were speculating the same over the Irish Sea border. Jamie Bryson got a few to a meeting upstairs in a pub. That was it. Border up and operating.

jimmycrackcorm

20silkcut wrote:

Not surprising when the north got the best brexit deal of all the 4 U.K. nations on paper for now. The status quo is the most attractive option.

If people in the north are experiencing Amazon delivery delays like we are then it doesn't look as attractive currently, as one practical example.

IAMAMORON

FrancieBrady wrote: »

People were speculating the same over the Irish Sea border. Jamie Bryson got a few to a meeting upstairs in a pub. That was it. Border up and operating.

Don't be a dreamer Francie. You know fine well it will kick off at the very smell of a referendum.

Anyhow it is the prerogative of the British prime minister as per the GFA? Any PM who announces one will be basically instigating a riot, they know that.

Be prepared for the Border Poll to be kicked down the street for another generation at least. I mean you would need to see a new liberal progressive unionist party being formed for starters? They just are not there yet.

UDAWINNER

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Don't be a dreamer Francie. You know fine well it will kick off at the very smell of a referendum.

Anyhow it is the prerogative of the British prime minister as per the GFA? Any PM who announces one will be basically instigating a riot, they know that.

Be prepared for the Border Poll to be kicked down the street for another generation at least. I mean you would need to see a new liberal progressive unionist party being formed for starters? They just are not there yet.

Then the PSNI could do their job and batter them, as they did for decades if they were nationalists

liamog

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What's a 'UI advisory referendum'?

An advisory referendum is one where the change doesn't actually happen, but gives a clear and formal signal that the change is mandated.

Brexit was an advisory referendum, parliament could of chosen to take the advice of the people and not go through with it. Scotland's Indyref was not, and would of absolutely resulted in Scotland leaving the UK if yes had won.

We have two big questions, should Northern Ireland and Ireland join together as one, and what does that new structure look like.

IAMAMORON

UDAWINNER wrote: »

Then the PSNI could do their job and batter them, as they did for decades if they were nationalists

You should sign up as a reservist.

You will be able to batter them legally then..... :pac::pac: