Cost of a United Ireland and the GFA

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120270676#Comment_120270676

One month out of date, big deal. The point still applies. I would always take Irelands GDP growth with a pinch of salt,

Quote" The debate about Ireland’s economic outperformance flared up recently after the country’s 3.5 per cent quarter-on-quarter growth in gross domestic product single-handedly prevented the eurozone economy from stagnating in the final three months of last year."

Critics say Ireland’s GDP is distorted by the accounting manoeuvres of large US multinational groups capitalising on low Irish tax rates. When Apple moved intellectual property assets to its Irish base in 2015, it helped to send Ireland’s GDP up 25 per cent, which Nobel-prize winning economist Paul Krugman called “leprechaun economics”."

Irish central banker defends runaway economic growth as ‘real’ | Financial Times (ft.com)

Now, back to the thread topic, instead of deflecting.

"Can the Rep fund the cost of a U.I. without additional taxes? and how would that revenue be generated in the Rep to pay for it?"

And who is going to take on N. Irelands share of the UK national debt, which costs billions per year just to pay interest on alone?

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120270655#Comment_120270655

Just read the first sentence there.

I advocate, and always have, for a detailed plan for unification inclusive of as many voices that wish to get involved. The very opposite of Brexit.

As I have said before, I will leave the financial aspect to experts and will not discuss it with random people on the internet.

If you wish to discuss it, don't let me stop you.

On that note I see a new campaign begining to pressure for a Citizens Assembly here, something the Slugger blog seems to be in favour of, citing how it has led to reform and change here before.

While some might give into temptation and conjecture, uncharitably, at the motivation behind the aforementioned boycotting and naysaying, it would be more prudent to rise above it and stick to the facts. Firstly, that the merit of Citizens’ Assemblies in Irish politics, as an important tool in our democratic toolkit, is no longer in any real or serious doubt. And secondly, given their previous track record of examining, exploring, and affecting some of the most contentious issues in Irish politics (north and south) – not least same-sex marriage and abortion – there is no serious reason to doubt or oppose their suitability in grappling with what is perhaps the most contentious Irish political issue of all in the here and now: Irish Unity.

In my opinion, a CA is the next step and I think it will happen.

Citizens’ Assemblies: Gimmick or Gambit? – Slugger O'Toole (sluggerotoole.com)

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120270936#Comment_120270936

A Citizens assembly of 100 ordinary citizens would just be another talking shop, but paid for by the taxpayer again. Each of the past 5 meetings cost €130,000 per meeting. (651k for 5 ). The costs are crazy because the taxpayer is paying: Quote: "The assembly has spent €113,615 up to May on webcasting and photography services; €33,118 on a website and advertising; and €31,143 on Irish translation and sign language". And it will not investigate the financial aspect any more than Francis Brady has here after thousands of posts advocating a UI, but he still does not have a clue who would pay for a UI...he "will leave the financial aspect to experts and will not discuss it with random people on the internet."

Who would want to take on areas like West Belfast, where one adult in every 4 is on disability benefit? Even after years of SF in government there and many billions of £ from Britain every year, unfortunately west Belfast still has among the worst records for unemployment, welfare claiming, chronic health and teenage pregnancies in the U.K., according to official statistics. If we took it on would it change?

Years / decades ago there was some hope EU and US may bail out small countries like Ireland. Ireland is a declining influence in America, the vast bulk of immigrants in the past few generations are from Mexico and further south of there etc, Asia etc. The EU is skint, it has more than enough poor countries out of the 28 members to worry about, not to mention the debt of most of those countries. THE EU / US are not going to pour many billions in to N.I. and Ireland every year. Not to mention risking the fragile peace (relative peace) there is there now.

redlough

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120270914#Comment_120270914

I'm fully in support of a United Ireland, don't get me wrong. But we should go into it with our eyes wide open and everyone across the entire island of Ireland needs to be aware of the ramifications.

FrancieBrady

The taxpayer pays for things that are both wasteful and beneficial.

CA'a have been hugely beneificial in teasing out the issues involved in some of the biggest changes we have seen in this country.

Here's an outside view of them.

As deliberative mini-publics (DMPs) increase in number and importance, Ireland is clearly a reference and an inspiration at the global level. Based on a detailed qualitative research, this paper has revealed several important elements. First, Ireland is one case of deliberative democracy among many others, and its CAs benefited from transfer of former mini-publics. Nonetheless, the Irish case stands out by being the first and the only country where recommendations from CAs were validated by referendums. Secondly, despite some claims, there is no such thing as a clear “Irish model” since the various CAs had many important differences. 

Frontiers | Citizens' Assemblies for Referendums and Constitutional Reforms: Is There an “Irish Model” for Deliberative Democracy? (frontiersin.org)

And from the Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/06/05/the-irish-vote-for-marriage-equality-started-at-a-constitutional-convention/

I understand why somebody who is afraid of the public's opinion mighn't like them but I am flabberghasted that anyone calling themselves a democrat would not like and encourage them.

P.S. NI is one of the most deprived areas in the UK. Why? Because it has failed as a state.

Francis McM

Unity with the 26 counties is for the people of N.I to decide Framcie. No amount of CA in the 26 counties can change that. The 26 counties has been trying to woo the 6 counties for over a century. It keeps saying it is not interested Francie. Only 33% of N.I wanted a UI a hundred years ago, the figure is 32% now. Ever get the message Francie?

Who would want to take over a place like West Belfast where one in four adults are on disability benefit, and where welfare claiming, chronic health and teenage pregnancies are amongst the highest in the UK?

You could also claim plenty of islands and remote areas belonging to other counties are failed states, but they are supported by the countries. N.I, Scotland, the North of England and Cornwall all get money from London and the South East and East of England. You would be better off going and coming up with a plan, even if it was written on the back of an envelope, on how a Ireland would pay for a U.I., instead of saying you "will leave the financial aspect to experts" . What new taxes would we have to pay? Do you think some of those in West Belfast would come off disability benefit if there was a U.I., or why do you think so many there are on disability benefit and have chronic health problems?

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120271519#Comment_120271519

When a Border Poll is called the process will involve the Irish government, mandated by our constitutional aspiration, coming up with a plan/White paper.

That requires planning or we end up in a Brexit situation.

As pointed out and proven, CA's are a valuable way to begin the process of making and informing a plan. They are not the only process we can use. There will be other consultations and conventions, most likely with a similar British one.

The deliberations in the CA will be heard loudly by those interested living in the north, just as the deliberations of previous CA's were.

P.S. Nobody will be 'taking over' anywhere. That is stuff and nonsense.

We will be creating a new country which will hopefully not make the mistakes made in the past in both jurisdictions. I might just as well ask you 'do you think welathy bankers or broadcasters would come off their high salaries etc etc.

A new country will have all the challenges of Ireland now, prehaps for a short while, bigger ones. What the public, armed with as much info as can be given, will be asked to decide is, 'is it worth it as an investment in our future'.

You, blanch, Unionist Loyalist, nationalist, jewish, Roman Catholic, Protestant, etc etc will be free to voice your opinion and use your franchise.

Kiteview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120268833#Comment_120268833

This is just Brexiter nonsense that you are trotting out.

First, there is no mention of a political union anywhere in the EU Treaties, so it’s a pure fantasy to talk about one. (And the Special Protocol that David C secured basically spelt that out in simple terms).

Second, the only ones talking about an EU Army were Brexiters. If the EU countries wanted one they could have started negotiations on a treaty for one, the day after the Brexit referendum result, and had it signed, sealed and delivered by now. Instead no member state has made the slightest attempt to start that process (ie by making a formal proposal for one to the European Council).

Third, the U.K. was the biggest champion of rapid expansion of the EU to include the so-called “eastern” European countries (countries that are in reality almost exclusively in middle or Western Europe). Other EU countries (eg France) were much less enthusiastic about that idea.

Fourth, the budgetary issue caused by the departure of the U.K. have already been dealt with and the EU definitely isn’t “in trouble” over it.

Lastly, the U.K. knew exactly what it was voting for back in the 70s. Back in late 72, the leaders of the original 6 plus the those of the 3 new accession countries held their first ever “summit” and laid out a roadmap on transforming the then ECs to the EU and the new ideas they wanted to investigate and introduce (eg a common currency etc). That summit would have been held around the time that Parliament in the U.K. was ratifying their accession treaty to the EU so MPs had full knowledge of what they were voting for at the time.

Kiteview

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120265751#Comment_120265751

Democracies shouldn’t make decisions on the basis of whether people threaten violence or not. Doing so just gives every crank group a green light to threaten violence whenever they disagree with a democratic choice of their parliament.

And putting the border where it actually is would have saved everyone the endless palaver over the NI protocol.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120273460#Comment_120273460

You say the only one talking about an EU army were Brexiteers. Not so. For example, back in 2015 the president of the European Commission called for the creation of an EU army.   https://www.ft.com/content/1141286a-c588-11e4-bd6b-00144feab7de

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120273462#Comment_120273462

Correct, but in the real word there was a non stop campaign from Republicans several years ago saying they did not want a new customs border between N.I. and the 26.

Quote:

The IRA is plotting to use any customs posts that emerge near the Irish Border after Brexit as ambush sites where they would lure and...

https://www.independent.ie/business/brexit/psni-warned-that-ira-could-use-any-border-posts-as-ambush-sites-38590786.html

Google it up if you cannot remember. Varadkar warns EU a hard border risks return to violence of ...

As Gerry Adams said, they have not gone away you know.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120273965#Comment_120273965

That 'campaign' was led by the FG government with the confidence and supply of FF.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120273991#Comment_120273991

The violence though was threatened by extremist Republicans, for example:

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/masked-new-ira-member-says-20637994

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274481#Comment_120274481

Threats and violence has been carried out by dissidents since the GFA agreement was signed. They are 'dissidents' by virtue of the fact that they didn't sign up to the GFA.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274500#Comment_120274500

And what has that to do with the price of suger?

Do you think customs posts would have been safe enough to set up in south Armagh and all along the border again?

FrancieBrady

Why are you asking me?

The British were advised by their own security forces. They were not going to do it and didn't want to.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274606#Comment_120274606

There was violence threatened along the border if there were customs posts erected again in, for example, south Armagh. If they sent police to protect the customs posts, then they would have become targets too.

The Taoiseach has warned there is a "real risk" of violence erupting in Ireland once again if a hard border returns

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/taoiseach-warns-eu-that-hard-border-would-threaten-return-to-violence-1.3668341

You said yourself the campaign (not to have customs posts along the border) was led by the FG government with the confidence and supply of FF.

The British would have liked to have as soft a border as possible with the EU, and any border along the border. Not between N.I. and Scotland dividing them. They gave in to the threat of violence / did not want to return to violence.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274661#Comment_120274661

This is wrong.

But I am not arguing the same stuff on two threads.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274683#Comment_120274683

I am not arguing the same stuff on 2 threads either. Care to get back to this thread, and answer the questions you were asked 11 or 12 posts ago?

Who would want to take over a place like West Belfast where one in four adults are on disability benefit, and where welfare claiming, chronic health and teenage pregnancies are amongst the highest in the UK?

You could also claim plenty of islands and remote areas belonging to other counties are failed states, but they are supported by the countries. N.I, Scotland, the North of England and Cornwall all get money from London and the South East and East of England. You would be better off going and coming up with a plan, even if it was written on the back of an envelope, on how a Ireland would pay for a U.I., instead of saying you "will leave the financial aspect to experts" . What new taxes would we have to pay? Do you think some of those in West Belfast would come off disability benefit if there was a U.I., or why do you think so many there are on disability benefit and have chronic health problems?

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274742#Comment_120274742

Answered already.

I have not proposed 'taking over' anywhere.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274748#Comment_120274748

Becoming the government of such a place / a U.I. is what I meant by "taking over". The British government leaving, whatever you want to call it.

I did not see your answer already. I in 4 in West Belfast are on disability benefit. "Do you think some of those in West Belfast would come off disability benefit if there was a U.I., or why do you think so many there are on disability benefit and have chronic health problems? " What post number is your answer in?

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274813#Comment_120274813

See post 698

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274851#Comment_120274851

It did not really answer the question. You wrote "We will be creating a new country which will hopefully not make the mistakes made in the past in both jurisdictions. I might just as well ask you 'do you think welathy bankers or broadcasters would come off their high salaries etc etc. A new country will have all the challenges of Ireland now, prehaps for a short while, bigger ones."

If there was a U.I. , do you think 5 or 10 years after that there would still be 1 in 4 people in West Belfast on disability benefit? Or would a U.I. be like them going to Knock and give many of them miraculous cures?

You have no plan for a new United Ireland. Like before our good friends Robert Gabriel Mugabe came to power in Zimbabwe, or Ida Amin in Uganda, they probably said thing along the same lines as you do now eg "We will be creating a new country which will hopefully not make the mistakes made in the past". "We will be facing challenges etc". I am not comparing N. Ireland to Africa or any Irish party or politicians to those 2 gentlemen or parties in Africa, but I am saying you do not have a realistic plan for the future, only that the UK and EU and US will help us and everything will be grand and shure the unionists will be grand too.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274936#Comment_120274936

What's your 'plan' for a UI?

I want all the detail...what are you going to do about deprived areas in the south?

See what a ridiculous nonsense your question is?

It isn't up to me to produce a plan, that is the job of a vast number of qualified people not some random people on the internet who don't want a UI in the first place.

As all the major political parties here support and want a UI, I am confident that a plan/White Paper supporting a UI can be produced.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274964#Comment_120274964

"all the major political parties here support and want a UI" if the people of N. Ireland want it. You forgot to include the word "if". The only exception is S.F.

Now only 32% of people in N.I. want a U.I. A century ago it was 33%.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120275215#Comment_120275215

No, all of the parties in the south support our constitutional aspiration to Unity.

And fairly typically you dogmatically quote the result of a poll you like.

With no plan presented polls are dodgy.

What is clear is that more sophisticated polling is needed, both north and south. The existing polls in the Republic of Ireland all suggest that a referendum would be carried by a large majority, but as the Irish parliament will have to take a lead on defining both the process of public debate and the proposed nature of a united Ireland – polling on the detail of specific proposals, ranging from the health system, to pensions and potential devolution, after they have been publicly debated, would be useful. In NI, there is no clear majority for a united Ireland at this time, but opinion is more finely balanced than ever before and there is a significant bloc of voters who will only decide after more detail is available to them. At present, the majority of credible polls of likely voters, show the percentage support for remaining in the UK in the mid-to-high 40s, and therefore the currently undecided will determine the final outcome.

Explaining the different results in opinion polls on Irish unity | Royal Irish Academy (ria.ie)

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120274936#Comment_120274936

That creating a new country stuff is just gobbledy-gook nonsense, no point in engaging with it. It is Khmer Rouge Year Zero stuff with all the risks of destroying everything we have. Just another deflection mechanism away from discussing the cost of a united Ireland.

On the failed State nonsense, there are two incompatible arguments being made:

(1) Northern Ireland is a failed State

(2) There is minimal cost to a united Ireland.

Now unless, someone is suggesting that we continue to keep Northern Ireland as a failed State, the two arguments are incompatible.

Brendan Bendar

Stop digging Francie, the boy is right, idealism and misty dreams are one thing, but cold hard facts are another.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120275844#Comment_120275844

There is minimal cost to a united Ireland.

I hope you aren't ascribing that ^ to me because I never said it.

A new state will cost what it costs, those costs will be paid by all of us, not just the taxpayer in the south and the 'profits'/benefits will be shared by us all too. Just as it works at the moment in the south.

Francis McM

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120275903#Comment_120275903

"A new state will cost what it costs". If you were doing a business proposal I would not invest in your business. I'd say I am out.

Here in the Republic we have borrowed something like €170 billion over the past 15 years to keep the lights on. N.I. is getting many billions per year - every year - from the British (mainland) taxpayer too - just to keep the lights on there. The N.I. share of the UK national debt is a staggering amount too.

At the moment the 26 counties is in the EU. That would not change in a U.I.

At the moment N.I. has the advantage of relative free trade between both Britain and the UK. If there was a UI, (and assuming that UI was not part of a United British Isles), the 6 counties would continue free trade with the EU but would be subject to tariffs , duty , customs, paperwork etc on goods going to and from Britain. So the 6 counties would be immediately worse off in a U.I.

You (Francie) just saying "A new state will cost what it costs, those costs will be paid by all of us", just does not wash. That sort of assurance was given by the people behind the worst run countries in the world, before they took over running the worst run countries in the world.  

No point in me engaging any more on the cost of a United Ireland in this thread until you have a plan, Francie, or even costings on the back of an envelope. Because it is totally unrealistic, because it would be totally unaffordable and for other very good reasons e.g. (a) too high a risk of violence / tit for tat erupting again in a UI due to a very disgruntled minority (b) if a leftist SF government came to power and multinationals left for whatever reason - at the moment they are just shedding jobs every week by the hundreds, I would not vote for a U.I. However, I respect your democratic right to vote as you wish in any elections.