Northern Ireland Religious Mix nears 50-50

mike65

So does that mean come the next plebecite that NI will vote for a united Ireland and if so are they ready for us, and are we ready for them? Do we want them? What would happen to the unionist population and would the loyalists go mad?

Or am I getting ahead of myself...?

Mike.

DadaKopf

Now's not the time.

Just a tad ahead of yourself.
The rise in the catholic population in NI, includes small children, who won't be feeding through to the voting numbers for some time yet.
But the next 20 years are going to be interesting.
mm
just to add to this, I remember watching a UTV programme on the 12th parades and there was this old guy going around with a sandwich notice board shouting in a Ian Paisley accent..."Beware the roman catholics...they're breeding like rabbitts...!

bonkey

Originally posted by mike65
So does that mean come the next plebecite that NI will vote for a united Ireland

...

Or am I getting ahead of myself...?

I think you are.

Didnt the GFA state that any vote on such issues would have to be accepted by a majority of each faction (unionist/nationalist, which is ostensibly comparable to unionist/catholic at present).

If so, then it wouldnt matter if Catholics made up 99% of the population.

jc

mike65

Bonkey are you sure? I thought the only "wrinkle" was that we'd have to pass a pro-unification poll too...what you're suggesting
can't be as the nationalists up north would'nt have agreed to it.
A majority of Unionists will never vote for a united ireland so it'll never happen if you're correct.

We're safe!

Mike.

seaghdhas

Catholic or Protestant, black or white. What of the people who have no particular political view, they do exist. The problem with statistics is they can be viewed from a few different angles.

Typedef

Hmm, bonkey, I don't think 'dual consent' is a requisite of the Good Friday Agreement.

That said, I think there is a strong case to be made that Nationalists (read Roman Catholics (much as I hate that distinction)), would have to have a five, six or even seven percent majority before a plebiscite on North/South unification would land in favour of a United Ireland, simply because the Union is a more economically attractive entity for most Northern citizens.

That said I personally would not want to live in a State with the likes of Ian Paisley or Johnny Adair and I am quite sure the feeling is mutual.

Thus if and when 'the day' comes, I think the only viable solution is renewed partition, ostensibly because I abhore the thought that majority rule could (a) Force (n) hundred thousand Unionists (read Protestants of some stripe) into a Republic (read Rome Rule pasty) or (b) Spark a civil war between ardently pro-Loyalist factions and Republicans, due to a Republic imposed by a slim Northern Republican majority.

Of course logically that would mean immediate East/West Germany style partition of the Northern State under the same principals and tennents, but I'm not so stupid as to think the Unionists are about to partition the Six counties because it's the "humane" thing to do.

In this regard if and when the day comes that Catholicism (and by inference support for 'Unification') comes to be a majority, Republicans (being people who respect free will and the right to self determination as the world itself implys) should exponenciate revised partition, not coercion by majority rule of a theoretical Unionist minority.

Typedef.

DMC

Hmm, I think that only when we see more Sinn Fein and SDLP MP's than Unionist MP's elected, will there be an impetuous for a vote for a united Ireland. It would be the popular vote for each community in a general election that will tell us there will be that vote in the near future. A 2010/11 UK general election will be the benchmark, IMO.

hallelujajordan

Originally posted by bonkey
I think you are.

Didnt the GFA state that any vote on such issues would have to be accepted by a majority of each faction (unionist/nationalist, which is ostensibly comparable to unionist/catholic at present).

If so, then it wouldnt matter if Catholics made up 99% of the population.

jc

I don't think this is true . . .. how can you distinguish protestant from catholic votes in a referendum . . . ??

However, what is true is that anything that goes through the assembly needs cross-party support . . . . would the result of such a referendum have to be ratified by the assembly ? ?

tHE vAGGABOND

what it is, both parts of Ireland would have to vote, not both parts of the north..

DMC

Oh yes, we in the 26 counties would have to vote. To let the North in, there would have to be an amendment to the Constitution, and therefore, a referendum.

bonkey

Well obviously

I'm obviously getting confused somewhere. Wasnt the Good Friday Agreement itself voted on seperately by both communities in the North? I seem to recall there being 90-something percent of republicans and 50-something percent of unionists accepting it, and both majorities were required. I was also of the impression that such a system was actually agreed to be a requirement for any further referenda which would affect the "influence" of governance.

I could be perfectly wrong here.....the old brain isnt what I'd like it to be....

jc

Afaik,
The vote in the north was a referendum , the same as any referendum or election there.
Both unionists and nationalists voted in the same ballot boxes.

The figures you are thinking of Bonkey, are estimates by commentators and party hacks at the time, of what percentage of Unionist people voted yes when added to the obvious numbers of Nationalist yes votes to bring the overall yes to nearly 72%.

They would have had the Unionist vs nationalist voting numbers roughly from the last election.

The majority support thing in both communities applies to assembly votes only, in that nothing can pass unless it has majority support in both groupings.
The alliance party, I recall re assigned itself as unionist in the assembly recently for one of the votes as it looked like it would not get majority support in that grouping and would fall.
mm

hallelujajordan

Originally posted by Man

The alliance party, I recall re assigned itself as unionist in the assembly recently for one of the votes as it looked like it would not get majority support in that grouping and would fall.
mm

don't you just love this democracy stuff !!

MDR

Never presume that all of the 44% are gonna vote for a united Ireland ... 'cos they're not. Both the DUP and UUP has catholic members ....

If you are waiting for a majority vote in NI in favour of a united Ireland, you will be waiting a VERY long time ....

Originally posted by MDR
Never presume that all of the 44% are gonna vote for a united Ireland ... 'cos they're not. Both the DUP and UUP has catholic members ....

If you are waiting for a majority vote in NI in favour of a united Ireland, you will be waiting a VERY long time ....

I don't agree, actually, I'd say about 15 years or so.

The DUP and UUP's catholic membership would be miniscule enough, now from anecdotal evidence, I've heard.
The tide of those newly 18 catholics that will vote nationalist over the coming years will most likely swamp, those that will vote unionist-The meteoric rise in the Sinn Féin vote in Belfast alone is evidence of that trend.

mm

poneill

If there is ANY catholic in the DUP at all it would be a source of great mirth to such as I.

The UUP has a number of catholic members and always has had.

I would be equally surprise if the number ever exceeded 5% or so. The numbers of UUP leaning catholics would also vote for Alliance and/or the SDLP for tactical reasons to do with their constituency.

Not all of the 44% would vote for a United Ireland in the morning.

Free Staters in the south , 95% catholic or whatever it is, would not vote for a United Ireland either.

Once that catholic in the DUP learns to stop throwing pipebombs through his cousins letterbox then we may get somewhere.

mike65

Well known green journo/writer Tim Pat Coogan was on RTE radio this lunchtime with unionist Dermot Nesbit (I think) talking about these census figures (45% Catholic 53% Prodestent) and he mentioned ethnic deversity in the context of Nesbit talking on our radio station, host Sean O'Roarke distanced himself from that remark quickly.

Its people like Coogan I worry about as they seem to have an inately hostile view of unionism and suffer triumphalism.

Mike.