Mind the gap : Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey and Reality
The Northern Ireland Life and Time surveys are often quoted in debates on Northern Ireland, so it might be an instructive exercise to compare how the survey on political attitudes stacks up against the harsh reality of the results of a ballot – last weeks European elections in Northern Ireland.Reality Gap 1
NILT says 40% of people in Northern Ireland do not regard themselves as Unionist or Nationalist
European Elections say 8.8% of voters vote for parties that are not Unionist or Nationalist.
With a Single Transferrable Vote, voters could have voted for their non-tribal party of choice, before transferring to their least worst tribal candidate.
Reality Gap 2
NILT says There are 50% more Unionists than Nationalists in Northern Ireland (12 is 50% of 24)
European Elections say There are 16% more Unionist voters than Nationalist voters in Northern Ireland. (6.8 is 16.11% of 42.2)
Reality Gap 3
NILT says their margin of error is +/- 2.85%!
—
Despite the low turn out there were 486,914 more participants in the European elections than in the NILT survey.
Adds: The inspiration for this entry was a conversion with Andrew Gallagher here
Otto Jaffe
So North Down (and South Dublin) are CLASS defined areas rather than ‘tribal’?
“I get the impression you regard the survey as definitive, and unfalsifiable? It’s a questionairre, answered by a small subset of society – and wouldn’t be the first time a survey got it wrong.”
I don’t regard it as either. I just take issue with, or even exception to (grumpy old me), the argument that the survey’s wrong because people vote for nationalist/unionist deisgnated parties and not Alliance/Green.
Someone saying they’re not really bothered about the border’s location is not the same as saying they refuse to vote for any party that includes any member that is. In a way you’re demanding a constitutional obsession (even if it’s “neither”) from people who’ve already told you they don’t have one.
I suspect there’s at least as much wishful thinking in the need to corral wayward people back into their community pens as there might be in my claim that the UUP/SDLP as fully pro-agreement parties could be (for the time being) being used as an acceptable repository for all those non-aligned voters’ votes – and that if thos parties declared as cross-community there would be no net movement of votes to the extremes (that’s the only test I can seeing establishing the point).
What’s your agenda Mack? Is it entirely neutral and academic or is there a little subjectivity making you think those devious statisticians are trying to tell nationalist people they’re something they’re not?
“So North Down (and South Dublin) are CLASS defined areas rather than ‘tribal’?”
Moreso than the average I’d guess. What do you think? You’re the economic historian. Aren’t the bourgeoisie supposed to be the first to throw off anachronistic attachments in favour of whatever most advances their material position? North Down’s nothing if not bourgeois.
I think there are a number of people for whom the Irish border is irrelevant, but who regard the RoI as just another region of the British Isles. Most couldn’t be bothered to vote. Partly because it makes no material difference to their lives. Marxist terms like bourgeois are generalisations. Though NI could be seen as an old Soviet satellite economy. A bit like GB used to be before it was saved:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/blog/2009/06/12/margaret_thatcher_saved_britain
Otto Jaffe -
My agenda is relatively simple, the NILT survey doesn’t accurately reflect the will of the people as expressed in repeated elections. Not only in terms of votes cast, but also in terms of transfers (in particular inter-communal transfers). I’d like to NI continue to evolve towards a normal healthy society, and while my personal preference would be for some form of UI, I would be very happy to see the constitutional issue (which was left open by the agreements) settled by mutually agreed compromise. As such, I think that is best achieved by actually accepting the election results as they are, and Northern Ireland as is and not arguing on the basis of a false view. As is repeatedly done on the back of the NILT survey. (Read the conversation with Andrew Gallagher to see where this came from .e.g. No change to the current constitutional arrangements – ever, was a policy for a ‘normal’ non-tribal party! Andrew was worried diluting this would scare away unionist voters (!) but nationalist voters aren’t really nationalist because the NILT says so! If we can’t get past that level, where those who would argue for a middle route implicitly reject the aspirations of the others we won’t get anywhere. You may note that, you a – as a small ‘n’ nationalist, UI supporter and Unionist voter, don’t exist!).
By the way, I had thought Dianne Dodds would not recieve large numbers of transfers from Jim Allister, and that Alban Magennis might win the seat, while following the count. I thought that was pretty conculsive evidence for tribal voting in NI. Despite the essence of the TUV being opposition to the DUP – they still transferred to the DUP before the less-tribal SDLP!
I should point out that I am not a voter in NI, although I could, if I were so motivated register as an overseas voter and partake. But I’m not particularly motivated to do so.
Another case in point here -
http://unionistlite.blogspot.com/2009/06/window-of-opportunity-just-waiting-to.html
Unionism can cross the ethno-religous divide, but not nationalism. Your survey is wrong because the NILT (the only correct survey ever) says so. (Now in fairness, I’d work on the assumption that both surveys are wrong until people start actually crossing that divide en masse).
Back to Harris. O’Neill’s blog entry in 5 words. “We’re ok, you’re not ok”.
Mack,
You are right. Incorrect thread. I reposted.
Mack,
You will recall I already conceded the “ever” point. What I was trying to articulate (and failing, obviously!) was that there are other ways of meeting nationalist aspirations that don’t involve a border poll, such as beefing up cross-border institutions. As a border poll won’t be won by nationalists for quite some time (by all accounts), this is a far more productive angle of attack for nationalists who are impatient for practical results.
Technically, the entire apparatus of state could be handled through the North-South ministerial council, and this wouldn’t amount to constitutional change. Not that I’d recommend this as a solution, but it shows that there are more subtle options out there.
Andrew –
Yep – I know you conceded the ‘ever’ point and the conversation evolved. I wasn’t trying to restart that debate with you (from 3 steps back) – but show Otto Jaffe the motivation behind creating this thread. The NILT survey pops up all over the place to justify any number of beliefs not explicitly supported by concrete electoral evidence (Fin has been quoting it on another thread as showing waning popularity for Unionism among the younger generations – and it may even have been the source for the nationalist claims in the article O’Neill debunks above, using the NILT himself ).
Although I admit, I didn’t quite see it the way you explain in your comment above, which does seem reasonably interesting.
Mack,
Sorry, I just wanted to clear up any potential confusion for the benefit of the lurkers.
Believe it or not, I didn’t even mean to bring up the NILT in the original discussion. I went looking for the multiple-choice survey that went along the lines of “what do you see as the long-term constitutional future of NI? a) United Ireland b) Devolution within the UK c) direct rule” with separate results for each community – sadly my Google-fu was lacking and the NILT was all I could find.
If anyone watching has that reference, it would be greatly appreciated.