A United Ireland. Opening up the discussion.

[Snapchap]

Meanwhile Sinn Féin and its adherents will sit on the sidelines parroting "The Taoiseach has to do it"

So you're saying the Irish government shouldn't take the lead role in preparing for an inevitable constitutional change? 

[Rossfan]

No, stop your "strawman"(copyright snapchap) stuff.

Be nice if the Party that trumpets loudest for Irish unity would join in and help, or at least give  some outline of what they'd like a UI to be.

[Snapchap]

No, stop your "strawman"(copyright snapchap) stuff.

Be nice if the Party that trumpets loudest for Irish unity would join in and help, or at least give  some outline of what they'd like a UI to be.

It would, but again, wouldn't it be far more important/useful/significant if the actual government was to do so?

[Rossfan]

It might or might not but the biggest supporters of a proposal not saying what they want is a first.
Anyway let's leave the Shinners to parrot slogans from the ditch.

Aren't there Stormont elections in 2027?
The vote percentages will be a massive factor.

[Snapchap]

It might or might not but the biggest supporters of a proposal not saying what they want is a first.
Anyway let's leave the Shinners to parrot slogans from the ditch.

Already told you I'm not here to defend SF. I'm no longer a SF voter, nor supporter. It would be nice to see them produce something, and their failure to do so is just one of my gripes with them, but I am curious as to how you get the idea that it "might not" be more useful in pushing the conversation/momentum along for the government to produce it's plan, rather than an opposition party doing so?

No plan from SF will get endorsement from a FF/FG goverment and no plan will be worth the paper it's written on in terms of getting the ball moving more than one that has the full weight and support of the government.

[MrsBinfield]

I think ultimately it will be 26 onto 6. There might be a devolved assembly, but it's a disaster so would it be a huge sticking point to bin it? The dual citizenship bit would be 99% in place already.

Reality is the 'pitch' would be the 6c experiment has failed, so why would you retain the fail? Migrate as much as possible to Dublin and protect minority rights. I can't see flags and anthems changing.

Stormont is not performing but binning power sharing would be major issue. Put simply it won't happen. The referendum would never take place. There would be no new Ireland to bin it.

Put it another way. There is a referendum in the north and it votes 50.1% in favour of remaining in UK. If unionists tried to use that as a means of getting rid of powers sharing (for either simple majority rule or direct rule from Westminster) then the lawyers, signatories and guarantors would intervene and remind them of the GFA. If the vote went 50.1% the other way, all the same logic, and legal/constitutional clauses would still apply. The new Ireland will have to accommodate this. It's doable. A 32 county unitary republic is not. Real political leadership will be honest about this. Populists will tell people what they want to hear. Surely we are wise to the Trump and Farage ploys by now?

A vote on favour of the status quo retains the status quo. Stormont remains.

A vote for reunification doesn't necessarily keep stormont.

I beg to differ. The GFA will have to be complied with. Not least because it is the means of getting the referendum in the first place.

I reiterate that this is possible to achieve and can be made to work. But powersharing in NI is an essential feature.

Says who? Not the GFA.

Beg to differ. Happy to consider any point that indicates that GFA is not a permanent framework.

Then there is the practical consideration that GFA will automate complied with as one would be using it as the basis of asking the UK government for a referendum in the first place.

You are claiming it is permanent. Up to you to back up that claim.

I had a quick check there. It ends on reunification. Both treaties are based on and about British rule.

Article 1 clause 5. Though the wording is repeated elsewhere. Can you see a UK government progressing a vote without seeing how that is to be met? Can you see the Courts allowing that?

[MrsBinfield]

You might quote that bit.

In reality a new All Ireland Agreement will need to keep a lot of the GFA provisions just as a new Constitution will keep many of the provisions of the existing Bunreacht na hÉireann.

An awful lot of negotiating, devising and agreeing to be done.

Meanwhile Sinn Féin and its adherents will sit on the sidelines parroting "The Taoiseach has to do it"

Will need? What new constitution? You might not even need a referendim to remove articles 2 and 3

Might do for practical reasons, but won't need to.

The likely reality is the referendum will pass and then the negotiations will begin. Unionists won't be negotiating from a position of strength. Dublin won't squeeze them for the craic, that would store up trouble, but I can't see radical change either.

Cart before horse stuff here. There will have to be some answers provided BEFORE any vote.

[Rossfan]

Firstly folks in the 6 Cos have to vote in large numbers for pro United Ireland parties, next opportunity Stormont election.

[Baile Brigín 2]

I think ultimately it will be 26 onto 6. There might be a devolved assembly, but it's a disaster so would it be a huge sticking point to bin it? The dual citizenship bit would be 99% in place already.

Reality is the 'pitch' would be the 6c experiment has failed, so why would you retain the fail? Migrate as much as possible to Dublin and protect minority rights. I can't see flags and anthems changing.

Stormont is not performing but binning power sharing would be major issue. Put simply it won't happen. The referendum would never take place. There would be no new Ireland to bin it.

Put it another way. There is a referendum in the north and it votes 50.1% in favour of remaining in UK. If unionists tried to use that as a means of getting rid of powers sharing (for either simple majority rule or direct rule from Westminster) then the lawyers, signatories and guarantors would intervene and remind them of the GFA. If the vote went 50.1% the other way, all the same logic, and legal/constitutional clauses would still apply. The new Ireland will have to accommodate this. It's doable. A 32 county unitary republic is not. Real political leadership will be honest about this. Populists will tell people what they want to hear. Surely we are wise to the Trump and Farage ploys by now?

A vote on favour of the status quo retains the status quo. Stormont remains.

A vote for reunification doesn't necessarily keep stormont.

I beg to differ. The GFA will have to be complied with. Not least because it is the means of getting the referendum in the first place.

I reiterate that this is possible to achieve and can be made to work. But powersharing in NI is an essential feature.

Says who? Not the GFA.

Beg to differ. Happy to consider any point that indicates that GFA is not a permanent framework.

Then there is the practical consideration that GFA will automate complied with as one would be using it as the basis of asking the UK government for a referendum in the first place.

You are claiming it is permanent. Up to you to back up that claim.

I had a quick check there. It ends on reunification. Both treaties are based on and about British rule.

Article 1 clause 5. Though the wording is repeated elsewhere. Can you see a UK government progressing a vote without seeing how that is to be met? Can you see the Courts allowing that?

Article 1, Clause 5 of the Good Friday Agreement acknowledges the participants' different political aspirations while pledging mutual cooperation and interdependence across all established institutions.

Do you want to try that again?

Courts allowing what?

Can you be a bit more coherent please.

[Baile Brigín 2]

You might quote that bit.

In reality a new All Ireland Agreement will need to keep a lot of the GFA provisions just as a new Constitution will keep many of the provisions of the existing Bunreacht na hÉireann.

An awful lot of negotiating, devising and agreeing to be done.

Meanwhile Sinn Féin and its adherents will sit on the sidelines parroting "The Taoiseach has to do it"

Will need? What new constitution? You might not even need a referendim to remove articles 2 and 3

Might do for practical reasons, but won't need to.

The likely reality is the referendum will pass and then the negotiations will begin. Unionists won't be negotiating from a position of strength. Dublin won't squeeze them for the craic, that would store up trouble, but I can't see radical change either.

Cart before horse stuff here. There will have to be some answers provided BEFORE any vote.

Of course.

The false claim has been made that the GFA must remain after reunification. Incorrect. Some bits might, but they might not.

[Rossfan]

People will need to see what's replacing it before the Referendum.

[AustinPowers]

The village of Piddington has started  the downfall of the precious union

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckz7zyn1lwypo

It's a pity it didn't  happen a few days ago , as they could have sent a representative  to the Celtic meeting

[Franko]

People will need to see what's replacing it before the Referendum.

Who do you think should tell them?