Unionists not the only group unity supporters may struggle to satisfy

The project will need approval of southern voters, but that conversation has yet to begin, says Alex Kane

MONDAY night’s RTE debate — A United Ireland: What Would It Mean? — hosted by Claire Byrne was an important, if not quite substantive, event. A sort of “just putting it out there” discussion. The real debate won’t begin until a border poll is called and that won’t happen until both governments are ready to set a date.

The Belfast Agreement is flexibly vague on the conditions required to announce the poll, but flexible enough for London and Dublin to make the call when it jointly suits their agenda,ratherthantheagendasof some political parties and lobby groups who fear that a long delay will risk losing what seems like the present momentum.

It is clear, though, that the Irish political establishment is preparing for a poll which is now, to all intents and purposes, inevitable.

It’s still unlikely to happen before the tail end of the decade (although anything is possible in these increasingly odd times), but I would be surprised if the “mulling over the contents” phase in preparation for an eventual White Paper isn’t already well under way.

Sinn Fein, along with a variety of civic nationalist groups, has been hard-pushing the “unity project” for some time; commissioning reports, hosting conferences, lobbying the Irish government and attempting to get some clarity on when and how a border poll can be called.

They’ve also spent a lot of time trying to persuade small-u unionists and constitutional agnostics that unionism will be accommodated and protected within a “new” Ireland.

But the same effort doesn’t appear to be put into exploring and explaining the possible consequences of unity to a southern audience. Their consent is required. Article 3 of the Irish constitution states that a united Ireland “shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island”.

So, winning a border poll in Northern Ireland isn’t enough, in other words. It also has to be won in the south, too. And while opinion polls may suggest majority support for unity right now, it needs to be remembered that respondents are answering what might be described as an “aspirational” question.

Many of them may well give another response once a fullscale debate has clarified some of the consequences and challenges of unity.

Unity isn’t just about the economy and the righting of perceived wrongs, particularly partition. It’s about creating a state — a free, independent, sovereign Ireland — which hasn’t existed for centuries. It’s also about understanding the myriad political/electoral/societal/ cultural consequences flowing from unity and the myriad changes which will be required by unity.

There’s another crucial question which will need to be addressed: how do you prevent a repetition of some of the problems which bedevilled Northern Ireland politics for so long?

Since 1921, there hasn’t really been a period when unionism and nationalism enjoyed what might be described as a genuinely civil, respectful relationship. That’s because they were permanently divided by the

“identity” issue. That issue won’t disappear simply because partition disappears and Northern Ireland ceases to exist.

Indeed, it could be a few generations before those who presently identify themselves as “Ulster”, or British, or UK unionists would be reconciled to Irish

‘Unity isn’t just about the economy and the righting of perceived wrongs like partition’

unity. Let’s not forget, either, that the vast majority of nationalists in Northern Ireland never reconciled themselves to living in the United Kingdom.

That’s where the matter

of “accommodating” unionism comes into play. Would a united Ireland provide a form of mandatory power-sharing and recognition of the “British dimension” at the heart of the Irish government?

Would they be provided with a veto? Would their minority status in a new state entitle them to political/legal protections not available to the majority? Would they be allowed to have the Union flag in their offices in the Dail? Would statuary and street signage reflect their separate history and culture?

Would there be an Ulster-scots translation provision in public services? Feel free to add to that list.

Has the southern audience even considered the possibility that a unionist party bloc (and you can be certain that unionists probably will vote as a bloc for a couple of generations) could hold the balance of power in one coalition after another? Or that there will be a price for occupying that role?

I think it’s also worth mentioning that the nationalism of Northern Ireland is not the same as the nationalism of the south, meaning that reconciliation may be required there, too.

Building a new nation from scratch is an enormous task: one that should only be entered into after lengthy debate and with very clear signposts for the direction of future travel. Both Brexit and the Good Friday Agreement suffered as a consequence of that lack of debate.

As I say, it’s going to be about much more than the economy, the health service (what replaces the NHS), the education system and the currency, essential though all of those issues are. It’s also about funding the new state. It’s about new burdens for the taxpayer. Again, feel free to add to that list.

The challenges for the southern voter (whose imprimatur is required) are, I think, just as great as the challenges for unionism. Yet it strikes me that a debate, let alone a conversation with them, hasn’t even begun.

There cannot be a united Ireland without their approval. It really is that simple. Monday’s debate will, I hope, have opened the eyes and ears of its viewing audience to the realities of the issue, rather than to just the rhetoric of those whose minds are already made up.