A United Ulster
Is now the time for the North’s Unionists to embark on a redesign of the political relations between these islands?
I had a fascinating conversation the other day with a man of impeccable Unionist pedigree: Southern Unionist as it happens. His father and uncles had been actively involved in the struggle against Home Rule, active in the arms importation and training sense. What surprised me was his description of their deep and bitter anger at the decision by Edward Carson (a Dublin man, to his shame!) and others to so readily agree to the partition of Ireland. Leaving thousands of Southern Unionists to their fate.
But why were they angry? Hadn’t the thousands who signed Ulster’s Solemn League and Covenant less than ten years before partition at least saved (most of) Ulster for the Empire? That’s what annoyed them: since when had ‘Unionists’ become ‘Separatists’? The same Covenant began by stating that:
Being convinced in our consciences that Home Rule would be disastrous to the material well-being of Ulster as well as of the whole of Ireland… (my emphasis)
The essence of Unionism back then as surely meant the union of the British Isles as the Irish Republic declared in 1916 meant the whole of Ireland. Partition, of course, left neither Unionists nor Republicans with what they had originally wanted.
But my conversation got me thinking. The decimation of the Ulster Unionist party in the recent UK general election points to a sea-change in the political configuration of unionism in Northern Ireland. Many within the broader unionist community are engaged in re-imagining a future direction for unionism in light of these changes. It’s time for unionism to look outward, as it has been put recently.
So here’s my proposal. Why don’t unionists take the opportunity to begin negotiating a new, permanent political re-configuration for these islands, starting now? They have the double advantage of retaining a veto on any referendum on a United Ireland, and a conservative government – their natural ally – in power in Westminster (albeit in coalition). They could negotiate from a position of relative strength (i.e.: relative, say, to ten years time when they might comprise a minority of voters in Northern Ireland).
What would they negotiate? In no particular order, here are some suggestions:
- a United Ireland on their terms: including quotas for unionist TDs
- a separate Ulster Authority – comprising the nine counties perhaps, and thereby atoning for the ‘sin’ against so many unionists in Monaghan and Donegal
- with separate spending and taxation powers the re-entry of the Republic of Ireland into the Commonwealth
- a permanent inter-governmental secretariat between the new Irish (32 county) and British governments with guaranteed Unionist representation to co-ordinate relevant policy issues (especially vis-a-vis the European Union)
- Membership of NATO for the Republic of Ireland with closer cooperation between defence forces on these islands
- The recognition of unionist culture – including the Orange Order – for the purposes of equality legislation etc
- the rotation of the presidency of Ireland between former Republic of Ireland and former Northern Ireland representatives (though we sort of have that now, come to think of it…)
These are just my thoughts for starters – I’m sure I’ve left off a few key aspirations on the part of Unionists – but it’s an indication of the type of negotiated package I believe they could demand if they were of a mind to do so.
And who knows: it might even be feasible to have it all sorted by Friday, 28th September 2012 – the centenary of the Ulster Solemn League and Covenant. Queen Elizabeth might even pop over to give the new arrangement her blessings. Even Sir Edward would approve I’m sure.
Gerard, could you really imagine the Mexicans going for a return to the commonwealth, even if it meant a united Ireland?
Clanky
In their current shell-shocked state the folks ‘south of the border’ could probably be ‘sold’ anything right now that promised a combination of progress/good news/certainty about the future.
They dropped the original articles 2 and 3 in the constitution as part of the Belfast Agreement without, frankly, a lot of debate never mind soul-searching.
So yes: membership of the Commonwealth (easier access to Irish emigrants to Canada/Australia/New Zealand?) as part of a package that delivered a United Ireland would be very sell-able.
I have never understood why Ulster Unionists failed to forge links with the devolved Scottish government. Would it be out of the question for the six counties to actually become part of a political state comprising Scotland and NI?
Alternatively, if they were to negotiate their way into a United Ireland, might it be more palatable if the capital was in Armagh, the seat of the two primates?
Gerard, I think you are basically saying “unionist accept a United Ireland now before your forced” be really all you have done is hi-light just how poor a deal it would be.
Qutoas for elected representation is undemocratic and hasnt worked where it has been used.
Retaining the NI Assembly as it is would be the bottom line, as for 9 counties, most of the Unionist minority were forced out of the other 3 counties since the 26 left the UK, the wisdom of retaining six was tough but right.
The Commonwealth, sadly, is basically meaningless apart from a token jesture, although even as such I think the Republic should rejoin and make its Unionist residents feel more wanted.
I personally hate “secretariats” and their like, once again they are undemocratic and either become toothless talking shops or government by committee.
Dont think NATO is high on Unionist agendas, and as what your suggesting is a UI there would only be the mickey mouse army left.
Unionist Culture like any other is protected under European law, cant see where anything could be gained there.
As for the presidents role, its meaningless!
You are going to have to make a much better pitch than that mate.
Perhaps this is a solution without a problem?
Dear god.
Or a solution that is a problem. It’s true that you can sell the gullible Irish anything once you sell it to them through their political leaders but the fraud is only sustainable for as long as they believe that their leaders are serving their national interests and not the interests of a foreign state. The best way for the British nation to find itself on the losing side of a civil war with 85% of the territory is to impose itself and its state on another nation in the form of a veto over their inalienable right to national self-determination. Irish quislings make poor Ulster patriots…
‘tough but right’ from your standpoint, Drumlins but not that great for the majority nationalists ithat comprised half of the territory of the new NI state, That is slightly more ‘undemocratic’ than quotas (which you are right about)
Also, can of worms time I know but ‘forced out’ is a gross exaggeration do you not think – that was what happened in post WWII Europe with the massive population transfers in Poland, Czechoslovakia etc. It was a ‘cold house’ alright for Protestants in C, D and M but white flight (along with the ongoing ne temere rule of the catholic church) might be a more accurate description of most of it.
Better pitch needed, yup you’re prob right there but maybe unionism needs to stop burying its head in the sand as well. 50+1 might never happen.
But it might.
Thats the sort of talk that sends the SNP shivering into darkened rooms.
While I’d agree that political reconfiguration is the next great project of the Unionist/Nationlist population, why does any emphasis on Unionist values have to come with a disparagement of Southern values?
We’ve all had to accept compromises, both in North and South. I swallow the fact that Ulster is incorrectly bandied around but I still have Irish values that preclude me from having notion of wanting to be part of a British State.
It’s rancid crap to suggest there wasn’t a great deal of soul searching on 2/3 but the strain of pragmatism in the Irish psyche won out. So drop the idea that the Irish nation is somehow going to be led by it’s chequebook as the present crisis is just that….I wouldn’t insult any unionist by suggesting that their values are only as thick as the cash wad being waved in front of them.
their values are only as thick as the cash wad being waved in front of them.
Cavanman, sums up the SF/DUP coalition precisely.
Given the huge economic turmoil that is being and is about to be unleashed across Europe in the next few years isnt now the time for the people of the Republic to consider rejoining the UK?
They could have a devolved Parliament like Scotland but would gain all the huge economic benefits of being part of a major economic and political player in Europe.
After all there are very strong cultural, business and family ties between both countries.
The Irish identity CAN be respected and valued in the present day UK.
Moreover such a solution would strengthen the hand of the Celtic fringe at Westminster where many of the key political decisions are still made – there could be as many as 50 MPs from the South in such a scenario
Do you not find it depressing that the only proposed solution for smaller nations is to flee under the apron strings of someone else?
As if nationhood was only a given past a certain population size rather than cultural and social factors.
As if turmoil was a new phenomenon, as if truggle was something the Irish people were completely unaware of?
In the same way that a DUP supporter in Lurgan would require a seismic shock to see how a Dublin administration helps his identity or aspirations, there’s nothing in UK integration that I can identify as being better for my future or my familiy. There are a huge amount of benefits to be an independent nation willing to decide the nature and method of their reaction to events.
My father used to say that if oil was discovered in Monaghan, there’d be a united Ireland within a week.
I think its a bit early to say that the UUP was decimated in the last Election. But the greening of Norn Iron continued. We now have 8 Nationalist seats, 8 unionist seats, a quasi independent unionist in a maverick constituency and a member of a party (AP) which is neither unionist or nationalist.
Its a long way from the 12 apostles of my childhood in early 1960s.
But things are changing. The Unionists like a visible border. There isnt one. They need that sense of going somewhere “foreign” and theres nothing to really indicate “foreign-ness” except the road signs and money.
No Customs either on the border or walking thru the train at Portadown.
But the Republic has to some extent left its republican roots and become Yoorpeen. And theres been a certain revisionism of republican ideology. To some extent the primacy of London has been replaced by a primacy of Brussels……when people are interviwed in Dublin streets arguing that Yoorp should have a say in the Irish budget….it undermines the notion of independence.
So to an extent the Republic is not as scary as it was. It is less Irish. And certainly less scary as it is less Catholic.
And the North…..well its certainly less Britis and the election results say it all. The Alliance Party is certainly a “status quo” party. It supported a different status quo in its first manifestation. And even in the pre-Alliance days of Brian Walker and GB Newe and the New Ulster Movement.
Supporting the current status quo is a different thing.
Much as I used to intensely dislike AP as a bunch of chancers, I am warming to them recently. They might just be capable of providing some kinda bridge to the Future.
The fall of Norn Iron is inevitable but it wont be like the Night They Drove Ole Dixie Down. Nobody will be singing. Rather it will collapse with a tired but inevitable whimper. Seth Effrikka is the example.
While Gerry Adams is clearly no Nelson Mandela, Unionism has not provideda PW de Klerk. Turned out Trimble was useless but Paisley ironically saw the way forward.
Empey a PW de Klerk? Hardly.
Or Robinson? Hardly.
The west has already gone……and unionism does as best it can there. And theres a certain shrinkage and oddly the steady drip of a council seat in Banbridge or a MLA in say Strangford or a nationalist MP in South Belfast…is actually more effective than one traumatic event.
While many unionist people are disengaged or resigned to an inevitability in shopping centres, a new generation of pragmatists might emerge……although the DUP would have to split between modernists and a rump going into a last stand with the TUV.
For once unionism has shown no great appetite for rallying to the banner of a man like Jim Allister shouting “Traitor!” and “Lundy!”
Gerard – an interesting piece. I would like unionists to genuinely participate in the discussion outlining what a United Ireland would look like and what would their needs would be to considerate it.
However I do not believe they are, generally speaking,ready for that conversation.
I recently posted that, if this is the case then unionism needs to make NI more attractive to nationalists and republicans. I believe if we are to have a genuine unity of purpose in the future then it is a decision that needs to be made by unionism.
The question is do unionists want a UI on their terms or a NI on republican and nationalist terms?
I may be a lone voice for now but I believe the speech by An Taoiseach yesterday about everyone celebrating and respecting the upcoming anniversaries was a step on that journey.
it all sounds wonderful but in a Hans Christian Andersen sort of way;
although like many i would favour a UI,i cannot see the majority tradition on this island contemplating a UI where they would be obliged to water down their own nationality in order to accommodate the Unionist minority,concessions such as the loss of the tricoler (despite its non sectarian origins),the loss of the president(if the whole island were to rejoin the Commonwealth),the special position of Gaelige and the changing of amhran na Bhfiann would all be on the table if unity was to be considered acceptable to the Unionist tradition,these may sound like small things but they are also the mark of a distinct independent nation and although the republic is busy selling our sovereignty to the European Union for the price of a pint as we speak it would be far more difficult to sell a return to the Commonwealth to the normal citizen south of the border
They are some demands….. for the minority of folk. The one regarding the recognition of ‘Unionist culture’ is already well established. What more should Irish folk do in order to recognise the ‘great difference’ about the British folk in Northern Ireland …. for we on the whole island are practically part of the UK if ye were to look at the TV, the media, entertainment, sport, TV3 etc… Besides, is there that much of a difference between all the people on the island of Ireland island today? And sure we all speak English too etc…
sure any wonder when folk vote for the likes of Blaney and McDaid up there.
But the Irish Republic rejoining the Commonwealth is a no-no … for this is a Republic, when it boils down, bar the credit crunch debt and everything else that might render our independance as meaningless. Queen Liz – regal and all that as ye’s believe, is very welcome to the Republic of Ireland … but at the end of the day we like having our own President as head of state as well as own own government …auld crooked bastards they may be and all that….at least they are of this land.
BTW, ye’s can keep the pope when he arrives in Britain and ye’s can have Donegal … for they feel abandoned up there
There is nothing wrong with the concept of a United Ireland, impartially speaking, just that many are “traditionally” opposed to it and that their worst enemies are “traditionally” predisposed to it. (or vice-versa if you like).
I suppose it could work in time, once all the old hatreds are put aside and the “troubles” generation are dead and buried. So we are talking about decades, rather than years.
It would be a would be quite an undertaking, certainly a bureaucratic, financial and legal nightmare. Certainly something that would have to be phased in over many years. It would mean a new state and new overall identity, not the republican heaven or unionist hell both extremes get worked up about.
We could certainly not make it look like one side triumphed over the other.
New flag, new constitution, new type of government (devolved?). Police would probably remain the same, but with perhaps a shared high command. Maybe some sort of dual head of state (president and monarch), that citizens could individually choose (much like the choice of oath on Bible/ Koran or solemn affirmation made in court). It would be a largely symbolic choice, reflected only on passports, legal documents, oaths of office etc. Lots of small symbolic things would go a long way.
I’m sure there many many more matters people would negotiate over for years.
Who knows. I’m happy enough the way things are, but am not opposed to change on principle if it makes good sense.
Why would a northern irish unionist want a united Ireland? If they wanted a united Ireland they could hardly be called a Unionist?
I get the point that years ago, when partition occurred a lot of southern unionists were left hanging when Ireland split from the britain, but there are very few of these people left these days. These days a unionist has no interest in maintaining a union between britain and ireland but rather one between britain and northern ireland.
I think, though, this isn’t like Hunter S Thompson watching the Beatnik tide break on San Francisco. The complexity of modern identity has shifted so far from the old trusty labels that the old faithful Lundy chant didn’t work it’s magic. The idea that there is some high water mark that is the (current) line being drawn in the sand just hasn’t worked as a unionist tactic recently. Its funny, maybe the lesson that perhaps change won’t be cataclysmic and scary is a good one since removing fear from that equation is a great achievement in its own right. But I don’t think you can soberly hold onto the idea of the Republic re-joining a commonwealth or ‘British’ displacing ‘Traveller’ as the largest designated social minority in an all-Ireland state just yet. But it is a Friday, so all bets are off!
This isn’t the first time I’ve heard people argue without basis that rejoining the Commonwealth would re-establish the monarchy. Tackling this misconception would be a good start. There is no requirement for Commonwealth members to be monarchies. Rwanda joined the Commonwealth last year, and remains a republic, as do the majority of existing Commonwealth countries.
And what would you offer northern nationalists and republicans to convince them they have a furure in NI?
“Qutoas for elected representation is undemocratic and hasnt worked where it has been used.”
Anyone hear of the Westlothian question? It’s working right now in Westminster.
It was only a list of suggestions, a starting point for debate, not a pitch.
Given the huge economic turmoil that is being and is about to be unleashed across Europe in the next few years isnt now the time for the people of the Republic to consider rejoining the UK?
All aboard the Titanic? In fairness, England needs another Celtic passenger like it needs a hole in the head.
I thought there was a lot of oil in Monaghan, especially the diesel variety.
Yep, but the Queen is still overall head of state, as she is Queen of Australia, Queen of Canada, Queen of New Zealand, Queen of Scotland, etc…etc.. She is the figurehead and the Head of the British Commonwealth of Nations.
The Queen is only the monarch of sixteen out of fifty-four Commonwealth countries. The Queen has no constitutional role in any of the other member states, most of which are republics, just like Ireland. The rule that forced Ireland out of the Commonwealth on declaring a republic was changed less than a year later, so that India could remain a member. Since then there has been no constitutional impediment to Ireland rejoining, and doing so would not give the Queen any constitutional role in Ireland.
Yes, the Queen is the figurehead of the Commonwealth of Nations, but this is a separate post from the monarchy, and is not hereditary. The next head of the Commonwealth could easily be the President of Ireland.
strangely that oil would disappear in a week in a UI, maybe it has advantages!
50+1 is an inevitability, when, is another question, will it be 20 years or 50 years. You only have to look at the demographic profile of the young to realize this.
It’s a bit like the Maggie Thatcher scenario, we only have to get lucky once in referendum.
Health, Wealth & Happiness.
Well free health anyways, Englands Wealth kindly donated, and a fortnight in Portrush to make you happy.
Oh okay, that’s grand … so where do we sign up?
So any money in it for us? … well I suppose for the political class and their cronies morelike.
At least we might get to stage the games …. we have the new Aviva now, as well as the rest.
Excellent post.
Um, you do know that there are more republics in the Commonwealth than monarchies?
There could still be a President of Ireland; Brenda would just be the Head of the Commonwealth.
50% +1 will do rightly
In reality there would need to be two referendums (or is it referendi?) first one in NI only to begin negotiations for a UI, and a second one that would have to be passed both north and south to pass the agreed process. The advantage for unionist would be a second bite at the cherry and a chance to get a deal, the benefit for nationalists, more people would go for it first time if they know they can undo it later.
To me the Republic is a foreign country, filled with similar people who grew up watching somewhat different TV shows, thinking about somewhat different things, watching somewhat different sports, but not entirely, like Canada or New Zealand. I don’t hate southerners but I see them as foreigners, in a way that I wouldn’t see an Englishman, Scotsman or Welshman.
Therefore the idea of a southern unionist to me is bizarre. I feel no more kinship really for a southern Protestant, border counties aside, than I would for a southern Catholic. To me they’re both foreigners.
Same with a united Ireland with devolution within the UK. I would view it as almost as bad as a united Ireland. To me, in my heart and gut, an all island majority rule assembly would be rule by foreigners. People who, though not entirely dissimilar to me are just not playing on the same team, with the same esprit de corps, and cannot truly gel with my values and interests. Avoiding all Ireland majority rule is actually even more important to me than staying British. I could live with not being British, but I couldn’t live with being ruled by a unitary all Ireland polity.
I also find that I have little sympathy with the idea that unionism should not have “abandoned” the south. The vast majority in the south are obviously of a different national consciousness, and their self determination is invoking the very same principle by which I maintain that Northern Ireland should remain British. For me to begrudge that would make me a hypocrite in my own eyes. 90 years ago there may well have been people in the south who were British in heart and soul, but to me today outside the Northern brogued Protestants in border counties, such a thing would be an alien life form. I could accept that if such a person were to immigrate to Northern Ireland their children could well be entirely of my nation, but they themselves, in my gut, I’d see as being a foreigner, even if they are a unionist.
Gerard,
What you have posted there in your list is essentially a nationalist win and is not ever ever going to be proposed by any unionist (never!).
I think also that both sides are overstating that how the Republic joining the Commonwealth is somehow a really big deal. The Commonwealth is mainly symbolic and cooperative – given that other republics are also in the Commonwealth I don’t see why it is such a big issue – importantly it’s also not that big a deal for NI unionists whether the republic is in the Commonwealth or not as it mainly doesn’t affect them and would only be a fairly meaningless symbolic gesture to NI unionists if the south were to join.
What is of more importance to unionists is that east-west links are maintained. Anything that proposes to remove these in any way will not work for NI unionists – full stop.
The only such re-structuring where both sides in NI can ‘win’ is a federal British Isles. The east-west links are maintained, along with the extra southern links. The problem here is that those in the Republic aren’t going to support this and put NI’s interests ahead of their own pride. Therefore, the only solution that can work is a NI as it is today with separate UK/RoI jurisdictions and some co-operation between NI and RoI.
correction – the above should say: “not ever ever going to be proposed by any *northern* unionist (never!)”
Yes that’s just what we need, another 50 people meddling in Englands affairs to go with the other 117 foreign MP’s with nothing better to do than impose their will upon the people of England.
I’ll support the English Republic, free England!
It really isn’t. The primary schools were 52% Catholic community background ten years ago and today they are, wait for it, 52% Catholic community background.
In that decade this strange stasis has been produced by
A) the % of women of childbearing age of CCB has increased.
B) the Protestant total fertility rate has dropped
C) the Catholic total fertility rate has dropped faster than the Protestant, but is still a bit higher.
Given the opinion poll evidence of how many Catholics would vote for the union compared to Protestants voting for a united Ireland there are plenty of plausible scenarios where a 50%+1 vote for a united Ireland never occurs.
Census 2011 will be interesting to see whether the CCB proportion of the very young is the same, increasing, or decreasing. If it is decreasing the cat may be amongst the pigeons, but it can’t be changing much. The schools census can show where we’re at as of school year 2009/2010 for those who will be 7 or so as at the 2011 census. The census will only tell us about those younger, who are so often marked as “none” as to make reading the entrails pretty useless anyway.
For primary schools using
http://www.deni.gov.uk/primary_schools_data_2009_10_supp.xls
Protestant sector = “Controlled” + Seagoe Primary School + Drelincourt Infants School
Catholic Sector = “RC Maintained” + “Other Maintained” + Our Lady’s and St Mochua’s Primary School + St Bronagh’s Primary School + St Josephs and St James Primary School + Bunscoil an Iuir + Gaelscoil Uí Neill
Integrated Sector = Controlled Integrated + GMI + the six voluntary integrated schools (all have “integrated” in their name)
The entire primary school population is
Protestant sector 74,867 45.71%
Catholic sector 82,382 50.30%
Integrated sector 6,522 3.98%
Analysis by sector for the individual years
Year 7
Protestant 10,747 46.07%
Catholic 11,655 49.96%
Integrated 926 3.97%
Year 6
Protestant 10,266 46.20%
Catholic 11,049 49.72%
Integrated 908 4.09%
Year 5
Protestant 9,928 45.87%
Catholic 10,825 50.01%
Integrated 892 4.12%
Year 4
Protestant 9,892 45.67%
Catholic 10,936 50.48%
Integrated 834 3.85%
Year 3
Protestant 9,950 46.14%
Catholic 10,722 49.72%
Integrated 894 4.15%
Year 2
Protestant 9,959 45.06%
Catholic 11,265 50.97%
Integrated 876 3.96%
Year 1
Protestant 10,064 45.00%
Catholic 11,401 50.98%
Integrated 898 4.02%
Reception pupils
Protestant 146 24.75%
Catholic 410 69.49%
Integrated 34 5.76%
Nursery pupils
Protestant 3915 47.20%
Catholic 4119 49.66%
Integrated 260 3.13%
Yep the primary schools show a Catholic majority, but only a 52% one which isn’t really changing, which is still “Alliance in balance of power” territory, even if we ignore all the older people.
The 2011 census has some new questions for the head counters to mull over.
* Citizenship
* National identity
* Main language
* Ability in English
* Ability in Irish and Ulster Scots
You can see a proposed census form here,
http://www.nisranew.nisra.gov.uk/Census/pdf/H4_09.PDF
The commonwealth has quite a few ropey members, so the offer to join isn’t really like getting an invite to a elite members club now is it? More Parnell Mooney’s than Lillies. Any word on the USA joining? Is it eligible?
This sort of post is the classic nonsense which passes for liberalism amongst some republicans and nationalists. It is essentially unionism is defeated and you should cut a deal whilst you can.
It is flawed in so many ways:
Most unionists do not think we are defeated at all and as such why should we walk into a united Ireland. Looking at the RoI politically, socially, economically it looks extremely unattractive so even if we were defeated why volunteer to join a society we find at major variance to what we are interested in. We have no wish to help nationalism reform its state: that state is their business not ours.
Fundamentally, however, this post reeks of arrogance. Unionists want to remain part of the UK because they are British and wish to be part of the UK. There is really nothing nationalists can offer them to make them feel otherwise. If I were to suggest that the agreement etc. should make nationalists give up their valid aspiration for a UI; I would be being arrogant and condescending to them. Equally this post is arrogant and condescending to unionists. the fact that Gerard does not seem to see that itself speaks volumes.
Great post
We need to get our own house in order down here first. FF are just as much a barrier to an all-island state as the Paisleys of this world. Most Irish people are sickened by their own govt at this point in time, so the idea of hooking on 6 more counties of dubious economic value is in the realm of fantasy right now.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d like a UI some day, but I wouldn’t trust the current shower, north or south, to do anything other than serve their own narrow interests, which is the antithesis of “unity”. For now I’ll just sit back and watch the North unravel under its own weight, and hope the south can escape from under the yoke of the idiots guide to economics.
“My nation my nation who speaks of my nation”- McNorris from Henry V Shakespeare.
Newt you are certainly able to feel what you feel about people in the ROI but the comments you make could easily transfer to some of your countymen in Northern Ireland.
As for my feelings I tend to feel more and more that nation states are a silly construct. I would not see you as an alien despite disagreeing with your “gut” instincts – I rejoice in diversity.
I would add that the majority in the south have just learnt to live without the North in their conciousness which is sad.
Just as it is sad that some in the North are of similar mindset. The peace walls will take a long time to come down it seems.
A poll on unity in NI held in earnest would deliver circa 78% support for it. Unfortunately for one side, the unity in question would be support for continued unity with the UK. The Catholic tribe thinks that 100% of its constituents would vote to change the constitutional status of NI that they overwhelmingly endorsed, but the reality is likely to be a max of 40%. 72% of NI’s economy is state-dependent. Remove that state and you instantly collapse your economy. Catholics might like the idea of being among the 85% nation in a united sectarian statelet but they won’t vote themselves or their husbands/wifes/childern out of British state employment just to achieve it.
“It is undoubtedly true that until the prejudices of the Protestant and Unionist minority are conciliated …..
Ireland can never enjoy perfect freedom, Ireland can never be united” C.S.Parnell 1991
oops .. that should read 1891