Martina Devlin on the impasse facing the North after Brexit
Martina Devlin
WORDS can act as a careless match in a box of fireworks. Words such as “blood red” lines. When Arlene Foster resorted to such ‘no surrender, not an inch’ rhetoric about her party’s Brexit position, it sent shivers down the spine.
We all bleed the same colour of blood whatever our ethnicity, religious background or party affiliation. Too much blood has already been spilled in Ireland – a tiny land mass in world terms, with 6.5 million inhabitants.
Such intemperate language from a former first minister is an affront to the Good Friday Agreement, which is founded on the principles of parity of esteem and power-sharing. That 20-year-old treaty has delivered peace and prosperity and saved lives. It was a responsible solution. But the DUP struggles with power-sharing and Stormont won’t return so long as Ms Foster’s party holds the trump card in a minority British government.
The DUP leader, following in the footsteps of reckless Tories Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg, also suggests the Good Friday treaty can be unravelled. This mischievous proposition betrays a misunderstanding of the agreement. But misunderstandings are nothing new in the context of North-south or Irish-British relations. And unfortunately that applies to relations between EU negotiators and Tory diehards, too.
Watching the latter two sides square off is like looking at a couple of storms approaching at ramming speed on a radar. Will they collide? If so, how will Ireland be affected? Or can some compromise avert the smash?
Negotiating any deal requires concessions on both sides. Something has to be offered by the EU to nudge the Tories over the line – that something must involve Ireland. Neither unionists nor nationalists are preparing their demographics for any compromise on Brexit, however.
Post-Brexit, the question of identity – settled by the Good Friday Agreement on the basis of freedom to identify as British or Irish or both – will be re-opened. Especially if a hardish Brexit removes the Border’s cloak of invisibility. Also on the table will be the issue of where people’s best interests lie: inside or outside the EU.
Remember, no matter how blood red its imagery (or perhaps because of it), the DUP does not speak for all of unionism, let alone everyone in Northern Ireland. These voices are on loudhailer because of Stormont’s silence for almost two years and no nationalists sitting in Westminster.
But Fortress Ulster is not the answer. The reality is we share this island. And the case for partition is weakening in the face of Brexit. Some 56pc of the Northern population voted to stay in the EU but are being bounced out by the DUP, viscerally opposed to anything undermining the union. Even sweet deals from the EU.
There are those for whom the Border has always been unfinished business. It was an imposed solution during a time of constitutional crisis almost a century ago – created by the 1920 Government of Ireland Act which divided Derry from its Donegal hinterland and rammed Tyrone and Fermanagh with their nationalist majorities into a new state. From the outset, the partition line was capricious.
Currently, another constitutional crisis is bubbling. Arguably, there is a logic now to allowing the people of Northern Ireland a vote on their future status. This debate is happening whether the power-brokers want it or not – it’s been raised in the Irish presidential election campaign, for example. No one knows how that poll might play out. But at least would have their democratic say.
No one should presume Catholic means nationalist means a United Ireland vote, and Protestant means Unionist means a tick for alignment with Britain.
Nor can one party lead the debate. An independent body to consider the case should be established, reporting its findings within a specified time frame. It should have cross-party, cross-Border and Irish-British membership, along with representatives from civil society. The Southern Protestant voice has an important role to play. Focus needs to be directed towards ways of guaranteeing the rights and identities of nationalists, unionists and those who resist either categorisation, whether they vote to belong to a 32-county Irish republic or for remaining with Britain.
When the Scottish Nationalist Party Border people was advocating secession in 2014, to address citizens’ concerns it commissioned a doorstopper of a document, ‘Scotland’s Future’, outlining what shape an independent Scotland would take. It specified a transitional period, negotiation with Westminster and international partners, and extensive engagement with civic groups plus the Scottish people to formulate a written constitution.
It’s high time something similar happened here. While Ireland already has the 1937 Constitution, the independent group could examine ways to invite Unionist input into it. I’d like to see Seanad seats set aside for representatives of unionism – why not have the Orange Order’s Grand Master in the Seanad? Perhaps unionism could be offered an automatic place at the Cabinet table. Unionism could make a valuable contribution to a more diverse Ireland – both sides of this island suffered economically, culturally, politically and socially from partition.
Already, unionists are applying for Irish passports – Brexit has delivered what three decades of the Troubles could not. But it’s in no one’s interests to railroad a reluctant Unionist population into a united Ireland. Consent must be the basis. If given an opportunity to vote, most people will be influenced by practical matters such as access to healthcare and education. The Republic needs to show separation of Church and State if it wishes to look attractive to Northerners. Elsewhere, much outreach work is needed with loyalism, but sport and culture are unifiers and should be harnessed.
In the Irish Republic there are fears about reunification’s price tag. About £10bn is often cited as the size of Northern Ireland’s subvention from Westminster, but that takes no account of how much is paid by the region to the British Exchequer in taxes. International assistance must be canvassed, however.
But the DUP notion of Britain and the North being joined at the hip doesn’t withstand scrutiny. There are already social-issue variations on abortion and marriage equality, different agricultural rules, and the DUP lobbied for a lower corporation tax rate to increase competitiveness.
Over the past two years, the North has been turned into Limbo Land. As the impasse drags on, the case for giving its people a vote becomes ever more compelling – letting them make their own choice between two possible futures.
We all bleed the same colour of blood whatever our ethnicity. Too much blood has been spilled in Ireland – a tiny land mass in world terms