Scottish independence referendum thread

[AustinPowers]

I don’t remember hearing  anything about a 50% +1  when the sectarian statelet  was created . 

[armaghniac]

I am not debating anything. The Brit position is upthread . 50 plus 1 is not  standard referendum practice for a change of State..
Brexit was 50 plus 1 and now is a clusterfuck with less than 50% support.
The North has been unstable since day 1. I don't see the Irish Govt wanting to bring that into a UI. And I don't think much planning has been done either,

It is not changing the state, it is merely ending the exclusion of the 6 counties from Irish independence.

However, as I said about this idea of only two blocks mutually opposed is not the reality now. The 50%+1 person was someone who decided to vote for a UI on the day. The next person voted no because they thought they should wait a couple of years. The point is that neither of these people is going to lose their head whichever way the vote went.

[seafoid]

I don’t remember hearing  anything about a 50% +1  when the sectarian statelet  was created .

The wee sectarian statelet had a Protestant majority of 2 to 1 at the start so obviously it was forever.

[imtommygunn]

51 won't work. The Brits won't go lower than 2/3. The occupied territories are complicated enough without a half arsed reunification.

Alright Seamus Mallon pipe down would ye lol. Surely then 50% plus 1 in favour of the union is not good enough to keep the status quo? 100,000s of unhappy unionists having to live with unification, we can't be having that, but it's alright for 100,000s of nationalist to be unhappy living in the union? 50 % plus one is all it should and will take. Its democracy, tough luck.

  Of course it would be unfair. A sectarian headcount would take years. This is why Sinn Féin has started its outreach programme. 30% of Unionists may be amenable.

Thats all very good Seafoid but that's not what we are debating. You are advocating that reunification should be on the basis of some arbitrary figure higher than 50% plus. What should it be, 55%, 60%....? That's being dictated to by the minority. Like I said in my previous post, if you believe that 50% plus 1 isnt high enough support for unification, then there currently isn't high enough support for the status quo, and the logical conclusion would be joint authority between the Irish and British government. What you are suggesting doesn't stand up to scrutiny, and there is actually no precedent for it at all in Ireland or the UK. Never mind the fact that it would be unworkable in practice for various reasons.

I am not debating anything. The Brit position is upthread . 50 plus 1 is not  standard referendum practice for a change of State..
Brexit was 50 plus 1 and now is a clusterfuck with less than 50% support.
The North has been unstable since day 1. I don't see the Irish Govt wanting to bring that into a UI. And I don't think much planning has been done either,

What is your reference point here? Are you comparing to America?

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

I don’t remember hearing  anything about a 50% +1  when the sectarian statelet  was created .

You wouldn't have - it was 70 30 or there abouts

[Wildweasel74]

I think a, Scottish referendum would have to be won 50+1% and accepted before we got any leeway here. After all brexit fucked us all over on a 51.89 to 48.11% basis.

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

I think a, Scottish referendum would have to be won 50+1% and accepted before we got any leeway here. After all brexit fucked us all over on a 51.89 to 48.11% basis.

" But Northern Ireland voted to stay" is the mantra coming from the same people saying 50 plus 1 is good enough in future ref

[AustinPowers]

I don’t remember hearing  anything about a 50% +1  when the sectarian statelet  was created .

You wouldn't have - it was 70 30 or there abouts

Maybe so , but my point was That there was no referendum.  The statelet was foisted upon northern nationalists . 

Anyway ., NI was created on a sectarian headcount.  So if there’s a 50+1 yes vote for a UI , then that should  be enough. As that would  effectively mean the statelet no longer has a unionist majority and therefore  should cease to exist

[seafoid]

I think these are just 2 things that need to be addressed :

1. Stormont needs to be depolarised and less amenable to being blown up by the DUP. This is a structural issue.

2.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/diarmaid-ferriter-peace-process-offers-lessons-for-those-who-seek-united-ireland-1.4520277
"What is needed at the very least is a north-south citizen’s assembly over the long-term to discuss what both sides of the island have, or need to have, in common along with confronting what divides them."

Even if nationalists were 51% there wouldn't be a majority. A certain portion would be more comfortable with the status quo.
The Scottish Referendum is a great example. You have to be prepared, you have to bring the people with you  and you have to win first time.

[brokencrossbar1]

I think these are just 2 things that need to be addressed :

1. Stormont needs to be depolarised and less amenable to being blown up by the DUP. This is a structural issue.

2.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/diarmaid-ferriter-peace-process-offers-lessons-for-those-who-seek-united-ireland-1.4520277
"What is needed at the very least is a north-south citizen’s assembly over the long-term to discuss what both sides of the island have, or need to have, in common along with confronting what divides them."

Even if nationalists were 51% there wouldn't be a majority. A certain portion would be more comfortable with the status quo.
The Scottish Referendum is a great example. You have to be prepared, you have to bring the people with you  and you have to win first time.

There has to be a dialogue about how it is going to happen before it happens. Learn from the mess of Brexit. Don’t just say ‘we are going to have a border poll’ and then bill on ahead. SF actually are poor when it comes to what they see as the way forward. All they ever say is that it’s going to happen. They should appoint a single spokesperson on it, so the research on how the notion of a ‘new Ireland ‘ would work, build on that research so that when the inevitable border poll comes people are making an informed choice as opposed to a straight forward sectarian head count. That’s the only way they will bring the middle/soft unionists with them 

[HiMucker]

I think a, Scottish referendum would have to be won 50+1% and accepted before we got any leeway here. After all brexit fucked us all over on a 51.89 to 48.11% basis.

Brexirt is a red herring. People were lied to. The vast majority had no idea actually what they were voting for. I spoke to expats in Spain who voted in favour of brexit
and now can't understand why the Spanish are kicking them out! Crazy. Unification referendum is far more clear cut. Everyone knows what they are voting for. They might not grasp the ramifications of that vote, but it's much easier to explain. Scottish referendum is also different in that you got an entire nation that will have to go out on its own, where as here the majority of the island is already standing on its own two feet, and that includes parts of the North as well. Plenty of ground work to be done all the same.

[HiMucker]

I think a, Scottish referendum would have to be won 50+1% and accepted before we got any leeway here. After all brexit fucked us all over on a 51.89 to 48.11% basis.

" But Northern Ireland voted to stay" is the mantra coming from the same people saying 50 plus 1 is good enough in future ref

You would need to be an idiot not to grasp the difference in the two situations.

[Fear Bun Na Sceilpe]

I think a, Scottish referendum would have to be won 50+1% and accepted before we got any leeway here. After all brexit fucked us all over on a 51.89 to 48.11% basis.

" But Northern Ireland voted to stay" is the mantra coming from the same people saying 50 plus 1 is good enough in future ref

You would need to be an idiot not to grasp the difference in the two situations.

You'd need to be an idiot not to recognise that 51% will cause issues also though. Im not saying I agree it should be different but it will not be easy managed at all.

I am not saying you are an idiot or anything

[seafoid]

I don’t remember hearing  anything about a 50% +1  when the sectarian statelet  was created .

You wouldn't have - it was 70 30 or there abouts

Maybe so , but my point was That there was no referendum.  The statelet was foisted upon northern nationalists . 

Anyway ., NI was created on a sectarian headcount.  So if there’s a 50+1 yes vote for a UI , then that should  be enough. As that would  effectively mean the statelet no longer has a unionist majority and therefore  should cease to exist

Maybe there should be transition period with a referendum at the end.
The birth of NI was shameful. So was a lot of what followed.

[keep her low this half]

I don’t remember hearing  anything about a 50% +1  when the sectarian statelet  was created .

You wouldn't have - it was 70 30 or there abouts

Maybe so , but my point was That there was no referendum.  The statelet was foisted upon northern nationalists . 

Anyway ., NI was created on a sectarian headcount.  So if there’s a 50+1 yes vote for a UI , then that should  be enough. As that would  effectively mean the statelet no longer has a unionist majority and therefore  should cease to exist

Maybe there should be transition period with a referendum at the end.
The birth of NI was shameful. So was a lot of what followed.

There will be a transition period after a referendum not before. There should however be a preparation period for a referendum, 2- 3 years to thrash out the details, pension, healthcare etc. Post referendum it will take sometime to run down and disentangle the British state and integrate the Irish systems, welfare, healthcare etc, it could take 5 years post referendum but that would have to be a period of joint authority with it working towards integration with the republic.