United Ireland Poll - please vote

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Too old?
I remember fervently supporting a friend who was competing in the Commonwealth Games, cheering Northern Ireland beating Spain in the World Cup, Mary Peters in the Olympic Games.

Do you agree that it is two separate identities and that they would vote differently in a border poll?

No, I don't. I think that there are those of an Irish identity who would vote No to a border poll and that there are those of a British identity who would vote Yes, albeit in both cases, the numbers would be a small minority. Voting in that way wouldn't change their identity.

Similarly, within the Northern Irish identity there would be those who would vote Yes and those who would vote No, the minority voting Yes would be larger than the minorities in the other identities. In a similar way to the other two identities, what way they vote in a border poll doesn't change their Northern Irish identity.

Your attempt to confuse identity with voting intention is archaic.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

No, I don't. I think that there are those of an Irish identity who would vote No to a border poll and that there are those of a British identity who would vote Yes, albeit in both cases, the numbers would be a small minority. Voting in that way wouldn't change their identity.

Similarly, within the Northern Irish identity there would be those who would vote Yes and those who would vote No, the minority voting Yes would be larger than the minorities in the other identities. In a similar way to the other two identities, what way they vote in a border poll doesn't change their Northern Irish identity.

Your attempt to confuse identity with voting intention is archaic.

We know from polling that the exact same thing would happen within the other two identities.

So no change there then.

A UI will come about because a majority will be convinced by the argument or not.

Whether there are 2, 3 or 50 identities won't matter.

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

Maybe you could enlighten me on the relevant international law, particularly the enforcement of such.

There is no international law that would force to UK to contribute anything to a future united Ireland.

Budgetary and administrative obligations that if not fulfilled will see the UK in breach of international law. Have you learned nothing from Brexit? UK obliged to pay into EU budget as agreed. Same with NI for a limited time

It is actionable and the UK will lose. They know that and will not wish to see a further worsening its credit rating. Ramifications for trade deals and international treaties also. Countries will not engage with a perfidious Albion. That's the enforcement.

Simple stuff dude.

blanch152

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Budgetary and administrative obligations that if not fulfilled will see the UK in breach of international law. Have you learned nothing from Brexit? UK obliged to pay into EU budget as agreed. Same with NI for a limited time

It is actionable and the UK will lose. They know that and will not wish to see a further worsening its credit rating. Ramifications for trade deals and international treaties also. Countries will not engage with a perfidious Albion. That's the enforcement.

Simple stuff dude.

In breach of what international law?

Actionable in what court?

Simple questions with simple answers.

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

Again, this attempt to force identity on others is a tactic of exclusionary nationalism.

I have met plenty of people, especially those under 40, who claim to be neither Irish nor British, but Northern Irish. It is a relatively new identity, but the only growing identity in Northern Ireland.

There are elements of Northern Irish society and culture that closely mirror the rest of the UK, but other elements that are closer to the rest of Ireland. Given that you have Cornish identity, Scousers, Yorkshiremen etc., within England, what is surprising or impossible about an emerging Northern Irish identity.

The denial of the Northern Irish identity is that fatal flaw in the nationalist ideology that will bring them down, in the same way that the belief the rest of the UK wants them is bringing down Unionism.

Where do you perceive that denial? A Northern Irish identity, or identities (Nationalist, Loyalist, Antrim, etc) is entirely compatible with a Cork identity or a Connacht one. A Northern Irish identity would also include Cavan, Monaghan and donegal.

blanch152

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Where do you perceive that denial? A Northern Irish identity, or identities (Nationalist, Loyalist, Antrim, etc) is entirely compatible with a Cork identity or a Connacht one. A Northern Irish identity would also include Cavan, Monaghan and donegal.

You are misconstruing what is meant by a Northern Irish identity, one that it linked to a Northern Irish state, whether as part of the UK, or under some other construct.

Seathrun66

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Too old?
I remember fervently supporting a friend who was competing in the Commonwealth Games, cheering Northern Ireland beating Spain in the World Cup, Mary Peters in the Olympic Games.

Do you agree that it is two separate identities and that they would vote differently in a border poll?

Add in Alex Higgins, Dennis Taylor, Northern Ireland again in Mexico 1986, Rory McIlroy, Darren Clarke and any sportsperson from this island irrespective of religion, identity or birthplace.

A Dublin guy captains the England One-Day cricket team and no one is bothered. Times have greatly moved on in the Republic and it's time for the DUP and their acolytes to register that.

Junkyard Tom

blanch152 wrote: »

You are misconstruing what is meant by a Northern Irish identity, one that it linked to a Northern Irish state, whether as part of the UK, or under some other construct.

There is no 'Northern Irish state' and there is no other construct that might act as a substitute for it.

The utter desperation of it all.

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

No, I don't. I think that there are those of an Irish identity who would vote No to a border poll and that there are those of a British identity who would vote Yes, albeit in both cases, the numbers would be a small minority. Voting in that way wouldn't change their identity.

Similarly, within the Northern Irish identity there would be those who would vote Yes and those who would vote No, the minority voting Yes would be larger than the minorities in the other identities. In a similar way to the other two identities, what way they vote in a border poll doesn't change their Northern Irish identity.

Your attempt to confuse identity with voting intention is archaic.

Again, it's all entirely irrelevant in thee context of a border poll. There'll be much demographic analysis before and after but it's simply down to one person, one vote and the polls are heading towards reunification. The last major one by Lord Ashcroft nineteen months ago had it 51% to 49% for a UI with 98% of Nationalists and 5% of Unionists in favour.

The Sunday Times poll in January, following the EU-UK deal, had 47% to 42% for remaining in the UK with 11% undecided. These figures will change given the realisation of the shambolic mess the DUP have caused by blocking far more favourable outcomes.

The border poll is coming. The later it is the greater the majority for reunification. Right now it's too close to call. In five years time it'll be 55% or more for a UI.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

You are misconstruing what is meant by a Northern Irish identity, one that it linked to a Northern Irish state, whether as part of the UK, or under some other construct.

And absolutely reflects that 'state' or region. Two different identities using the same name.

And for Unionists anyhow, an identity of convenience, used when Unionism is in crisis mainly.
If Unionism manages to unite on the current crisis for it, then you will see that NI identity, currently hiding in embarrassment in the Alliance vote go back to the main Unionist parties.

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

In breach of what international law?

Actionable in what court?

Simple questions with simple answers.

Breach of Contract. An international as well as a national legal concept.

International Court of Justice, The Hague

Do you really not know this stuff? It's very basic.

VinLieger

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Breach of Contract. An international as well as a national legal concept.

International Court of Justice, The Hague

Do you really not know this stuff? It's very basic.

What contract though? You are still just making random claims but no facts to back them up. Theres nothing in the GFA about payments of any kind in the event of a UI, it would all have to be agreed through negotiations if there ever was a positive border poll.

Floppybits

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Again, it's all entirely irrelevant in thee context of a border poll. There'll be much demographic analysis before and after but it's simply down to one person, one vote and the polls are heading towards reunification. The last major one by Lord Ashcroft nineteen months ago had it 51% to 49% for a UI with 98% of Nationalists and 5% of Unionists in favour.

The Sunday Times poll in January, following the EU-UK deal, had 47% to 42% for remaining in the UK with 11% undecided. These figures will change given the realisation of the shambolic mess the DUP have caused by blocking far more favourable outcomes.

The border poll is coming. The later it is the greater the majority for reunification. Right now it's too close to call. In five years time it'll be 55% or more for a UI.

As nice as it would be to have a United Ireland, as I read somewhere else today it would be better to have a United Northern Ireland first. Both communities need to be brought together and get rid of this Nationalist/catholic/Unionist/Protestant divide that there is. Once that happens then a border poll can be looked at.

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

You are misconstruing what is meant by a Northern Irish identity, one that it linked to a Northern Irish state, whether as part of the UK, or under some other construct.

Nope. You're denying an Ulster identity that extends throughout the province. Are we to believe that Donegal and Derry have no shared identity yet Armagh and Antrim do?

And dude, you're just playing with semantics. They've no great relevance when the poll comes. A poll too early may fail but the following one wouldn't. A united Ireland is inevitable and we are now seeing the death throes of Stormont. It's akin to observing the fall of the National Party in South Africa and the end of a a separated Ireland will be welcomed internationally as the end of Apartheid was.

The best we can all do is prepare for it and ensure that all rights are respected within the new state.

blanch152

Floppybits wrote: »

As nice as it would be to have a United Ireland, as I read somewhere else today it would be better to have a United Northern Ireland first. Both communities need to be brought together and get rid of this Nationalist/catholic/Unionist/Protestant divide that there is. Once that happens then a border poll can be looked at.

Those that want a sectarian head count will ignore that point.

FrancieBrady

Floppybits wrote: »

As nice as it would be to have a United Ireland, as I read somewhere else today it would be better to have a United Northern Ireland first. Both communities need to be brought together and get rid of this Nationalist/catholic/Unionist/Protestant divide that there is. Once that happens then a border poll can be looked at.

The very reason there would be a 'border poll' is because partition has failed. Why has it failed? Look around you, the divisions it caused by creating an artificial majority has deepened division and it is incurable while partition remains.

It is time that those defenders of partition admitted it has failed before more people are killed and more lives are destroyed.

blanch152

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Breach of Contract. An international as well as a national legal concept.

International Court of Justice, The Hague

Do you really not know this stuff? It's very basic.

What nonsense is this?

Name the contract that you are talking about, and name the piece of international law that would allow it to be referred to the ICJ.

Seathrun66

VinLieger wrote: »

What contract though? You are still just making random claims but no facts to back them up. Theres nothing in the GFA about payments of any kind in the event of a UI, it would all have to be agreed through negotiations if there ever was a positive border poll.

You don't grasp devolutionary contracts and administrative budgets? That are slightly altered every year but scheduled for years in advance. Contractual agreements between Westminster and Northern Ireland. Pensions will continue for those owed them. Payments for hospitals, services, etc will continue for the limited duration already agree pre reunification. The UK payment into the Northern Irish system will continue for a limited time.

Has Brexit taught you nothing?

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

What nonsense is this?

Name the contract that you are talking about, and name the piece of international law that would allow it to be referred to the ICJ.

Budgetary agreements. As with the £25 billion to the EU which they have until 2057 to pay. It's simple stuff.

The financial obligations don't stop with reunification but they won't be long-term.

It'll be chump change in comparison to the EU, US and other investment. For a recent comparison see Germany.

blanch152

Seathrun66 wrote: »

You don't grasp devolutionary contracts and administrative budgets? That are slightly altered every year but scheduled for years in advance. Contractual agreements between Westminster and Northern Ireland. Pensions will continue for those owed them. Payments for hospitals, services, etc will continue for the limited duration already agree pre reunification. The UK payment into the Northern Irish system will continue for a limited time.

Has Brexit taught you nothing?

Those are not international contracts, and cease automatically upon Northern Ireland withdrawing from the UK. There is nothing in any agreement anywhere that says the rest of the UK has to pay a penny after reunification.

In fact, the only precedence is for the splitting of the UK's debt along population lines as happened when for example Czechoslovakia split up.

The Brexit precedent is that the entity leaving (UK) had to pay those remaining (EU) which if applied in this case would see Northern Ireland paying the UK.

blanch152

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Budgetary agreements. As with the £25 billion to the EU which they have until 2057 to pay. It's simple stuff.

The financial obligations don't stop with reunification but they won't be long-term.

It'll be chump change in comparison to the EU, US and other investment. For a recent comparison see Germany.

I still don't see a specific reference to any international law that would allow a case to be taken to the ICJ. All I see is opinion based on nothing much.

Hamsterchops

Floppybits wrote: »

As nice as it would be to have a United Ireland, as I read somewhere else today it would be better to have a United Northern Ireland first. Both communities need to be brought together and get rid of this Nationalist/catholic/Unionist/Protestant divide that there is. Once that happens then a border poll can be looked at.

Well said Floppy, and all this talk of an imminent United Ireland border poll is terribly misguided & hollow, and as you say, the first step to uniting the island would be to bring both NI communities together, and currently both communities Green & Orange couldn't be further apart if they tried

FrancieBrady

Talk of bringing the British to an International Court is moot, they will probably choose to refuse to recognise the court as they did with the Chagos Islands.

jimmycrackcorm

Seathrun66 wrote:

The border poll is coming. The later it is the greater the majority for reunification. Right now it's too close to call. In five years time it'll be 55% or more for a UI.

When it comes down to the wire and people have to consider the actual personal consequences of unification, I think even a lot of catholics that identify as Irish in the North will say no thanks.

Why? Because on a personal level they will lose their NHS benefits. Want to pay double at least for your car, insurance and motor tax? No thanks.

Of course, salaries are higher in the south, but if anyone thinks that northern employers are going to suddenly going to massively increase salaries and wages, then I've a few lose stones in my garden to sell you.

Most people make their voting decisions based on their personal circumstances. That's why we have so many " l fixed your pothole" politicians here. A UI is a nice aspiration for many, but unlike Germany for example, it's not as clear cut that there's an actual benefit to people in the North compared to say, East Germans who could swap Trabants for Volkswagens.

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

Those are not international contracts, and cease automatically upon Northern Ireland withdrawing from the UK. There is nothing in any agreement anywhere that says the rest of the UK has to pay a penny after reunification.

In fact, the only precedence is for the splitting of the UK's debt along population lines as happened when for example Czechoslovakia split up.

The Brexit precedent is that the entity leaving (UK) had to pay those remaining (EU) which if applied in this case would see Northern Ireland paying the UK.

Yugoslavia, then Serbia. USSR, etc.

Westminster will have obligations to both Scotland and NI upon their secession. Budgetary allocations and short-term administrative costs won't go away. Failure to pay them will result in action against Westminister. To allow that to happen will result in a costly reduction in the UK credit rating with Moody's. They won't allow that to happen.

Why are the UK continuing to pay into the EU budget for the next few years. The Tories don't want to. The English public don't want to. The London press don't want to. But it's happening. and it will with Northern Ireland.

To not grasp this displays a complete lack of grasp of international law that a primary school kid would get. Or deluded hope that it ain't true. Sorry to burst your bubble but the UK is paying out. And it'll be only too happy to. England wants rid of Northern Ireland.

Seathrun66

blanch152 wrote: »

I still don't see a specific reference to any international law that would allow a case to be taken to the ICJ. All I see is opinion based on nothing much.

I can sell you a fool's guide to Contract Law. You buy something off me. I give you a receipt. We have a contract.

Westminster agrees an education budget with Stormont for 15 years. They have a contract.

Any breach can result in litigation. That applies nationally or internationally. The UK will not take on the EU if it goes to the Hague for breach.

I'm also happy to recommend night courses. PM your location and I'll give you a list.

Seathrun66

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

When it comes down to the wire and people have to consider the actual personal consequences of unification, I think even a lot of catholics that identify as Irish in the North will say no thanks.

Why? Because on a personal level they will lose their NHS benefits. Want to pay double at least for your car, insurance and motor tax? No thanks.

Of course, salaries are higher in the south, but if anyone thinks that northern employers are going to suddenly going to massively increase salaries and wages, then I've a few lose stones in my garden to sell you.

Most people make their voting decisions based on their personal circumstances. That's why we have so many " l fixed your pothole" politicians here. A UI is a nice aspiration for many, but unlike Germany for example, it's not as clear cut that there's an actual benefit to people in the North compared to say, East Germans who could swap Trabants for Volkswagens.

Possibly, but polling is consistently at odds with that and separates down distinctly drawn lines.

People also often vote against their best interest for cultural reasons. Slovakia going independent was one. They knew they'd struggle economically but did it anyway.

drdidlittle

In the event of a poll who will get to vote? ROI, NI and rest of UK?
If yes to all them, will it be an overall 50% plus 1 or will it be each 'region' at 50% plus 1?

drdidlittle

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Possibly, but polling is consistently at odds with that and separates down distinctly drawn lines.

People also often vote against their best interest for cultural reasons. Slovakia going independent was one. They knew they'd struggle economically but did it anyway.

You seem to be mixing your countries splitting with a country being unified. Unless you joining the independent UI camp

trixi001

drdidlittle wrote: »

In the event of a poll who will get to vote? ROI, NI and rest of UK?
If yes to all them, will it be an overall 50% plus 1 or will it be each 'region' at 50% plus 1?

As per the terms of the GFA - NI and RoI only and yes each will need a 50% +1

AS to when it is called, i personally think the grounds have already been met, a UK Prime Minister stated that she couldn't be certain the unionists would win..

"The Times of London reported that British Prime Minister Theresa May has told militant Tory backbencher Jacob Rees Mogg that she will not hold a poll on Irish unification in Northern Ireland as Rees Mogg had called for, as she could not predict that unionists would come out ahead. It was an astonishing admission"

As per the GFA a poll should be called when it appears likely that the poll might have a majority in favour of a UI, then the secretary of state should call the poll..

Also, i believe, that like the Scottish Refernedum, the first poll won't succeed, so the sooner it is called the better..and then 7 years later, the 2nd poll will succeed