A united Ireland: aspiration versus reality

Is a united Ireland inevitable?

From some angles it might seem so. Sinn Féin currently lead the polls in the South and following the Northern Ireland Assembly elections last week the party is now the largest in the North.

Given that Sinn Féin wants to unite North and South under one government in Dublin it’s probably fair to say we are closer to an independent united Ireland than ever before.

Achieving it however is far from simple, even if Sinn Féin was to become the biggest party north and south of the border.

First, supporters of a united Ireland must win two referendums, one in the North, one in the South.

As many people are pointing out, Sinn Féin may be the largest party in the NI Assembly for the first time ever (an achievement that must be acknowledged) but the nationalist vote is still outnumbered by those who voted for unionist parties.

Furthermore, and contrary to the current narrative, support for Sinn Féin in the North is stable rather than rocketing up. In terms of seats, for example, SF had 27 before and 27 after the election.

In terms of votes, I believe the party’s share is up but only by one percentage point on the previous election. (I'll need to check that.)

The unionist DUP lost two seats and are now on 25 but as former first minister Arlene Foster tweeted this morning, taking into account the bigger picture, 'Unionism is still the largest designation and nationalism lost more seats.'

Clearly then there is a long way to go before nationalists in the North are in a position to win a poll on a united Ireland.

The idea that a united Ireland has overwhelming support in the Republic is also open to question.

I discussed the issue with some Irish friends when I was in the country last month and the consensus seemed to be that it would be unwelcome to many people in the South simply because of the enormous cost of supporting the North’s public sector driven economy which is heavily reliant on UK government subsidies.

Yesterday I asked one to put his thoughts in writing and this is his response:

A united Ireland is an ‘aspiration’ of the majority in the Republic and by a large minority in the North. But aspirations are often romantic notions with little basis in reality.

For example, American commentators refer to the re-unification of Ireland as if it would be a return to some original idyllic State or country from the past. But Ireland was never united under a single Irish Government or entity. Under British rule it was treated as a single conquered area and of course, geographically, it has always been one island.

So in fact a united Ireland is a whole new experimental concept, not a return to the way things used to be before the British arrived. That reality doesn't fit easily with the romantic nonsense being put about by Sinn Fein.

The problem we may soon face in a border poll will be the political sleight-of-hand tricks too often played on the people. What will be the question asked of the people of the Republic? Will the same question be posed to the Northern voters? Where does the new seat of Government reside? How do a million British protestants of Ulster assimilate into a 32-county Republic? Indeed, will it be a Republic or some other form? Does the existing written constitution of the Republic then become law on the whole island? And the big question is cost!!

The Autumn 2021 UK Budget provided a record £15 billion per year to the Northern Ireland Executive. That is a cost of €3,750 for every man, woman and child in the Republic. That £15 billion is just the Stormont budget but there are many other major costs covered directly by London at present that would fall to Dublin under unity. 

Should a million loyal unionists then take to the streets in protest against Dublin the security bill for our little country could be too much. You also need to look at the structures of the two economies. Northern Ireland is a public service based economy while the Republic model is based on foreign direct investment in an open economy. The South is self-sufficient while the North is a dependent.

That 'cost' question will never be asked because it is the one thing that could see the Republic vote against a united Ireland. So as an aspiration a united Ireland is a no-brainer. As a reality though it is a highly complex decision to make with so many possible pitfalls that could destroy this country. 

Politically too Sinn Féin are not trusted by the majority in the South and even though they may become the largest party in the Republic they'll have difficulty finding the coalition numbers to form a government in Dublin.

He added:

I personally will vote against a united Ireland because I don’t see much of an upside to it. Perhaps the North could opt for independence and join us as partners in the EU. That’s the extent of the unity I aspire to.

The reason I asked him for his opinion is that, as an Englishman living in the UK, I generally avoid commenting on a united Ireland on the grounds that it’s not my decision to make and my views are therefore irrelevant.

In response my Irish friend had this to say:

You are perfectly entitled and justified as an Englishman to comment on Irish unity given that the six counties of Ulster are currently British. Also Ireland is your closest neighbour, English speaking, and with a long and lively history between us.

That is all true, and yet …

If there’s one thing that bugs me about visiting Ireland these days it’s the constant moaning about Brexit.

Yes, I appreciate that Brexit has implications for Ireland but it was a democratic vote and people in Ireland should, in my view, acknowledge and respect that fact without forever bitching about it.

Instead all I hear are scornful and sometimes abusive comments from all sides including those who are normally happy to ally themselves with right of centre free market Brexiters in the UK.

Anyway, if and when both North and South vote for a united Ireland – and it’s by no means certain to happen in my lifetime – I will accept the outcome, just as I will accept the outcome if Scotland votes for independence from the rest of the UK.

As someone who was born in England but grew up in Scotland my view is that Scottish 'independence' makes little sense politically, historically, culturally, economically or geographically. (Others will disagree!)

Nevertheless if a clear majority of people born and living in Scotland support independence I would be a hypocrite - having voted for the UK to leave the EU - if I refused to accept a vote for Scottish ‘independence’.

Of course it can and should be argued that Scotland leaving a 300-year-old political union is very different to the UK leaving what began as a simple trade alliance (before morphing into a form of federal government) after just 50 years, but my real objection is the timing of a third referendum. (Let’s not forget 1979.)

Voters were told the 2014 referendum was a 'once in a generation' poll and if ministers have any integrity the SNP Government should stick to that. The next independence referendum should therefore be no earlier than 2039.

Talking of which, Tom Miers, a former editor of Forest’s Free Society website, is the author of a new book, The Bargain: Why the UK works so well for Scotland.

Tom, a Scot who lives in the Borders, is an excellent (and thoughtful) writer so although I haven’t read it yet I’m looking forward to doing so.

You can order a copy (paperback or e-book) direct from the publishers.

Update: A united Ireland is not inevitable (UnHerd)