HOW WOULD YOU VOTE IN A BORDER POLL?

[Rossfan]

I don't belong to any very rich organisation

[Angelo]

I find it odd that free staters are more upset at a man leaving SF his inheritance than they are at decades of FFG TDs profiting through corruption, abuse of power and dodgy dealings.

You won't find a quisling like Rossfan raising objections to Micheal Martin taking bungs from property developers but SF TDs giving back a pay rise triggers him.

A bizarre outlook.

[trailer]

Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.

[Tubberman]

Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.

Was reading that today actually. some of them make an optional €2500 donation to the party - they certainly don't leave it in state coffers!

[Angelo]

Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.

Was reading that today actually. some of them make an optional €2500 donation to the party - they certainly don't leave it in state coffers!

Why would they when FFG will probably hand it over to Larry Goodman.

[Snapchap]

Good to see Michelle O'Neill in the paper yesterday calling for a border poll. We'd gone at least a week without a SF politician mentioning it.
Also many of SF's TDs and reps in the North take their full salary. It's complete an utter shite to believe anything else.

Was reading that today actually. some of them make an optional €2500 donation to the party - they certainly don't leave it in state coffers!

That right, yeah?








That's just the first few SF TD's I checked. I'm sure I could source more of these photos if you like?

[trueblue1234]

Poor auld Trailer. 

[grounded]

Good Lord, Eilis could be getting the road when Comrade Harris reads that!
https://m.independent.ie/opinion/comment/moving-the-goalposts-on-irish-unity-now-is-moral-cowardice-40272586.html


Now, though, it appears that some, alarmed by the prospect of a potentially destabilising Border poll in the next few years, want to change the rules, arguing instead that a simple majority should no longer be sufficient for a change to the North's constitutional status.

Such a retreat was signalled by former SDLP deputy leader, the late Seamus Mallon, in his 2019 memoir.

In it, he argued that "the GFA metric of 50 per cent plus one for unity will not give us the kind of agreed Ireland we seek". Fearing the violence that could erupt, North and South, in the event of a narrow majority for Irish unity, Mallon came to the conclusion that the "parallel consent" principle which applies in the Assembly - which requires a majority of both unionists and nationalists, or a "weighted majority" including at least 40pc of both - should be applied to the constitutional question itself.

Otherwise, he warned, Northern Ireland risked replicating the conditions at the start of its existence, when nationalists were resentfully forced to remain in the UK against their will.

Mallon was right. But only half right. Such a scenario might indeed turn unionists into an angry minority on the island; but changing the rules to appease them would also incentivise the worst elements in loyalism to threaten trouble. As for nationalists, changing the rules to stop them from achieving a united Ireland, even after they'd won a Border poll, would simply cement the old poisonous idea that peaceful change is impossible.

It's not surprising that Mallon's plan has been embraced by many unionists who, whilst pooh-poohing the idea that a Border poll could deliver a majority for Irish unity any time soon, clearly aren't minded to take a risk.

They like the additional safeguard that "parallel consent" would offer, for a little while longer at least. In practice, though, it would be a false consolation. Once nationalists gained a majority, the end of Northern Ireland would simply be a matter of time.

......................................................................................................................................................................

What stops them from acknowledging it (the cynicism of 'parallel consent -- my italics') is fear. Fear of violence. Fear of contamination from a virus of sectarian militancy spreading south in future. Those fears are not unreasonable, given Irish history. Faced with that risk, people in the 26 counties would be entitled to decide that a unitary state was not for them, even if the North had earlier voted in favour.

....................................................................................................

Perhaps what ultimately frightens those in the Republic who are hitching a ride on the late Seamus Mallon's coat tails in the hope of preventing a Border poll in the short or medium term, is the very idea of change. Abhorrently, many commentators have even taken to arguing against Irish unity on the risible grounds that people "up there" are not as authentically Irish as the people "down here".

"I will never consider them as Irish as I am," one columnist wrote recently. On social media, nastier things still are spewed by anonymous trolls.

.......................................................................................................

It's perfectly possible to make reasoned arguments against a united Ireland without painting everyone in the North as some kind of lesser species who mustn't be allowed to sit on the best furniture lest they leave a stain or a smell. People who know better should leave that toxicity to Twitter.

[seafoid]

https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689

A January survey by pollster LucidTalk found 47 per cent of respondents in Northern Ireland wanted the region to remain in the UK, with 42 per cent favouring it becoming part of a united Ireland — an outcome that shows the criteria for a referendum are currently not met. The more deeply researched Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, conducted annually by Queen's and Ulster universities since 1998, have consistently found support for unification at a little over 20 per cent.

[seafoid]

This is for the Shinners



https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689

"Katy Hayward of Queen's University Belfast, who processes the Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, said it was a "non-aligned" group in the region — comprised of about a third of Protestants and Catholics who do not think of themselves as either unionists or nationalists — that would have the casting vote on Irish unity.


"If you go too fast, some people here will always see a united Ireland as rewarding those horrific acts of the past, but if you frame that conversation about a possible new future in a longer term way, then it moves to a different place," she said. For this all-important unaligned section of the electorate, it will be policies including healthcare and pensions, rather than unionist or nationalist identity, that decide the way votes are cast.  Samantha Evans, a 37-year-old suicide prevention counsellor in Lisburn who grew up in a staunchly unionist family but has since pulled away from those roots, said she was typical of the new post-identity Northern Irish voter. 



If it ever came down to a border poll, I would want to know where the financial benefits would be coming from," she added, listing her top concerns as Ireland's membership of the euro and the risk of losing access to free NHS healthcare."

If you want to do something, do it properly
Down never won all Irelands by being sloppy.

https://youtu.be/yRpntHflrNo

[sid waddell]

This is for the Shinners



https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689

"Katy Hayward of Queen's University Belfast, who processes the Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, said it was a "non-aligned" group in the region — comprised of about a third of Protestants and Catholics who do not think of themselves as either unionists or nationalists — that would have the casting vote on Irish unity.


"If you go too fast, some people here will always see a united Ireland as rewarding those horrific acts of the past, but if you frame that conversation about a possible new future in a longer term way, then it moves to a different place," she said. For this all-important unaligned section of the electorate, it will be policies including healthcare and pensions, rather than unionist or nationalist identity, that decide the way votes are cast.  Samantha Evans, a 37-year-old suicide prevention counsellor in Lisburn who grew up in a staunchly unionist family but has since pulled away from those roots, said she was typical of the new post-identity Northern Irish voter.



If it ever came down to a border poll, I would want to know where the financial benefits would be coming from," she added, listing her top concerns as Ireland's membership of the euro and the risk of losing access to free NHS healthcare."

If you want to do something, do it properly
Down never won all Irelands by being sloppy.

https://youtu.be/yRpntHflrNo

There was a good letter in the Irish Times last week about how the style of Micheal Martin's contribution on the Claire Byrne programme was exactly what was needed

I found it very hard to disagree with

Boring politician speak on an issue like this is much underrated

The alternative is hysterical hyper-partisan nonsense which perpetuates an us and them situation, and heightens the chances of killing

If you want to persuade moderate unionists they have nothing to fear, people like Micheal Martin and Neale Richmond are who you want

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/bland-nothings-on-united-ireland-1.4523145

[grounded]

I think that all sounds reasonable Seafoid. But its about having those conversations now.. not trying to brush the idea under the carpet or leaving it for the younger generation coming through in 10 or 20 years to deal with.
     Talk of needing a concensus before a poll can even be called(noble as that notion may sound ) in both communities in NI,  is just a further example of that type of lazy thinking.

P.s. i loved the Down clip. Fabulous team.   
     

[yellowcard]

This is for the Shinners



https://www.ft.com/content/655c9fac-4661-4fb0-b461-b18c8d7b6689

"Katy Hayward of Queen's University Belfast, who processes the Northern Ireland Life and Times surveys, said it was a "non-aligned" group in the region — comprised of about a third of Protestants and Catholics who do not think of themselves as either unionists or nationalists — that would have the casting vote on Irish unity.


"If you go too fast, some people here will always see a united Ireland as rewarding those horrific acts of the past, but if you frame that conversation about a possible new future in a longer term way, then it moves to a different place," she said. For this all-important unaligned section of the electorate, it will be policies including healthcare and pensions, rather than unionist or nationalist identity, that decide the way votes are cast.  Samantha Evans, a 37-year-old suicide prevention counsellor in Lisburn who grew up in a staunchly unionist family but has since pulled away from those roots, said she was typical of the new post-identity Northern Irish voter.



If it ever came down to a border poll, I would want to know where the financial benefits would be coming from," she added, listing her top concerns as Ireland's membership of the euro and the risk of losing access to free NHS healthcare."

If you want to do something, do it properly
Down never won all Irelands by being sloppy.

https://youtu.be/yRpntHflrNo

I can't view the article you've posted up, I think there is merit in the quotes from the article that you have raised. It is the middle ground who will decide the outcome based on real life daily issues rather than identity politics. I don't think anyone is actually arguing for a border poll right now, however, rather that proper engagement begin on the preparations for it. If this takes 10 years then  it is not so important when it is held but that it is properly discussed and debated.

However for a certain section of people there will never be a right time and they don't want to have to deal with it, they'd rather let it be somebody else's problem.   

[Applesisapples]

If SF are in power when neoliberalism collapses there won't be a United Ireland for the following 20 years.
SF are all ideology and SFA policy. They don't understand the global economy and where it's at.

If Government and the economy depended solely on political parties then we'd all be in the shit. SF in Government will be a different animal, and perhaps not really that different to FF/FG. If they get a chance in Government I would bet that they will not do anything that is likely to make them unelectable. In the North they will struggle given the weak leadership of O'Neill, their only hope is that the SDLP are in worse shape.

[Applesisapples]

Good Lord, Eilis could be getting the road when Comrade Harris reads that!
https://m.independent.ie/opinion/comment/moving-the-goalposts-on-irish-unity-now-is-moral-cowardice-40272586.html


Now, though, it appears that some, alarmed by the prospect of a potentially destabilising Border poll in the next few years, want to change the rules, arguing instead that a simple majority should no longer be sufficient for a change to the North's constitutional status.

Such a retreat was signalled by former SDLP deputy leader, the late Seamus Mallon, in his 2019 memoir.

In it, he argued that "the GFA metric of 50 per cent plus one for unity will not give us the kind of agreed Ireland we seek". Fearing the violence that could erupt, North and South, in the event of a narrow majority for Irish unity, Mallon came to the conclusion that the "parallel consent" principle which applies in the Assembly - which requires a majority of both unionists and nationalists, or a "weighted majority" including at least 40pc of both - should be applied to the constitutional question itself.

Otherwise, he warned, Northern Ireland risked replicating the conditions at the start of its existence, when nationalists were resentfully forced to remain in the UK against their will.

Mallon was right. But only half right. Such a scenario might indeed turn unionists into an angry minority on the island; but changing the rules to appease them would also incentivise the worst elements in loyalism to threaten trouble. As for nationalists, changing the rules to stop them from achieving a united Ireland, even after they'd won a Border poll, would simply cement the old poisonous idea that peaceful change is impossible.

It's not surprising that Mallon's plan has been embraced by many unionists who, whilst pooh-poohing the idea that a Border poll could deliver a majority for Irish unity any time soon, clearly aren't minded to take a risk.

They like the additional safeguard that "parallel consent" would offer, for a little while longer at least. In practice, though, it would be a false consolation. Once nationalists gained a majority, the end of Northern Ireland would simply be a matter of time.

......................................................................................................................................................................

What stops them from acknowledging it (the cynicism of 'parallel consent -- my italics') is fear. Fear of violence. Fear of contamination from a virus of sectarian militancy spreading south in future. Those fears are not unreasonable, given Irish history. Faced with that risk, people in the 26 counties would be entitled to decide that a unitary state was not for them, even if the North had earlier voted in favour.

....................................................................................................

Perhaps what ultimately frightens those in the Republic who are hitching a ride on the late Seamus Mallon's coat tails in the hope of preventing a Border poll in the short or medium term, is the very idea of change. Abhorrently, many commentators have even taken to arguing against Irish unity on the risible grounds that people "up there" are not as authentically Irish as the people "down here".

"I will never consider them as Irish as I am," one columnist wrote recently. On social media, nastier things still are spewed by anonymous trolls.

.......................................................................................................

It's perfectly possible to make reasoned arguments against a united Ireland without painting everyone in the North as some kind of lesser species who mustn't be allowed to sit on the best furniture lest they leave a stain or a smell. People who know better should leave that toxicity to Twitter.

Parallel consent would never work, Unionism will never consent. But Mallon does raise the genuine concern that should 51 or 52% result in immediate unity then there could be major difficulties. In my view such a result should preface a period of negotiation and a process to get there peacefully and with maximum economic advantage. having said that there is a long way to go to get to that 50/51 mark.