Think32

Promoting the conversation on a new, united Ireland

[think32blog]

Thoughts on a United Ireland

John Collins

Now that Brexit looms over us like a sullen storm cloud, threatening to wash away the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement (GFA) and resurrect partition again in the form of a ‘hard’ border, a reunited Ireland has come to the fore once more, as a viable solution to the impending calamity and chaos such a border would surely visit on business and society in Ireland, North and South.

I’ve been a committed re-unionist all my life. I firmly believe that partition has stunted both parts of Ireland socially, economically, psychologically and politically. It has affected our lives in many ways that we don’t even notice. Since the troubles began, even Southerners, like me, who have never been physically impacted by the Troubles, have been worried and have fretted about how we could end it, how we could get peace again. I believe the national psyche of the Republic wrestles with a weight of sorrow over our separated brethren, topped with a weight of guilt, for having abandoned them.

I can only guess at the amount of pain, suffering and misery endured by both communities in Northern Ireland during the Troubles.

If an opportunity arises for reunifying our country, I believe we must do everything we can to make it happen. For clarity, when I use ‘we’, I mean the people of the Republic of Ireland when speaking of things pertaining to that part of Ireland alone. When referring to the whole island, I refer to the people of the RoI and Irish-identifying people in NI who want reunification. I hope which ‘we’ is intended at any time will be clear from the context.

The Process

Under the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement (GFA) a process is set out in clear detail that must be followed to achieve a United Ireland, and it is very simple. A referendum is to be held in both jurisdictions and if the result, in both, is for re-unification, then re-unification will take place.

If a referendum is held in NI and reunification is rejected, the Agreement allows for further referendums, no less than 7 years apart. There is no second referendum envisaged after a vote for reunification.

Preparation

To be perfectly honest, I don’t believe anything we do or say before the referendum will change the minds of more than a few Unionists. By definition, unionists will vote to remain in the UK. But when they find themselves in a United Ireland against their wishes, we need to show them that they are welcome, respected and appreciated, along with their identity and culture.

Most Unionists, I believe, will resent being in a United Ireland. But if it is to be a success, it will have to gain the acceptance of a large majority of them. Many Unionists, I’m sure, will expect to be excluded from social and civic life, in retaliation for the exclusion of Irish nationalists, in the old days of Stormont. We need to convince them that there will be no discrimination against Unionists in a United Ireland.

It is almost certain that some Loyalists/Unionists will physically resist being ‘dragged’ into a United Ireland against their will. Already the principle of cross community consent in the GFA, for the running of the Assembly, is wrongly being cited as applying to the reunification process, to argue that Unionist consent is required. The GFA calls only for a simple majority of those voting in the referendums.

There will almost certainly be protest marches and demonstrations, probably leading to riots, and a very small few will likely resort to violent attacks on Irish nationalists.

We won’t be able to prevent Unionists from objecting to being in the new Ireland, but we do need to ensure that there are no injustices, real or perceived, against which they can rally. We will need to reassure them, before the vote, that there will be no discrimination against them, or their religion. We must also assure them that their culture and identity will be protected and allowed to be freely expressed, in a United Ireland.

To achieve this we need to have a dialogue between Unionists, Northern and Southern re-unionists. This will be difficult, as, understandably, Unionist parties will refuse to partake of any discussions about a United Ireland, because they will see their participation as tacit acceptance of a United Ireland and an aid to its achievement. Even if the parties wanted to participate, I believe their members would not allow them to.

So, Unionist voices will have to be found outside politics. I see people speaking of ‘civic’ unionism, where non-political unionists are willing to talk, at least, about what shape a United Ireland would take. The Irish government, itself, should set up a formal forum in which to discuss the possible structure and shape of a United Ireland, politically. It should also support and fund civic, non-aligned organisations who foster discussion and debate.

Ironically, one of the greatest unionist objections to Home Rule was the belief that under a Catholic Irish majority, Protestants would be discriminated against, excluded from society and prevented from freely practising their religion. “Home Rule is Rome Rule”.

And, yes, it was, in that Catholic thinking dominated Southern social policies, the vast majority of legislators being Catholic. However, no law directly discriminated against Protestants or Protestantism, and it benefitted equally from measures which supported Catholic education, specifically, because the state treated all religions equally, despite the tokenistic acknowledgement of the Special Position of the Catholic Church in the Constitution.

In the 20th century, Catholics, themselves, abandoned Catholic social teaching and the Republic has matured into a fairly secular, tolerant, diverse state. Ironically, in NI, unionist parties now hold fast to some of the old social policies, based on their religious beliefs.

In the RoI we cherish freedom of religion and are tolerant of different identities, religions and cultures. Muslim churches get the same funding for their schools as do Catholic and Protestant. People don’t even know one another’s religion these days, because it no longer is an issue. And we have in place robust legislation on equality.

To reassure unionists that, in a United Ireland, they will be equal free citizens, under our laws, and that they will be free to cherish and practise their identity and culture, we, Irish re-unionists, can take positive actions.

Identity, religion and culture

Anthem

I believe a new anthem should be commissioned that would acknowledge the Unionist/British community, its culture and identity, as well as Irish. I don’t think Ireland’s Call would get overwhelming support, though it contains the type of references to both communities that would be desirable. Perhaps an anthem sans lyrics might be the compromise.

Flag

I believe a new flag is a must. It would be a very generous gesture on our behalf to include a Union Jack. It would not be universally accepted by Unionists, I know, but it would show our honest intention, to include them, because it would not be an easy thing to do for us. I know it would particularly problematic for the Irish Nationalists of NI, on two counts: one – the Tricolour holds huge emotional meaning for them, and, two, the Union Jack is seen as the badge of their former oppressors, and of the armed forces who killed and wounded so many of their community.

It will be up to us Southerners to convince them of the value of the gesture for future peace and reconciliation with our unionist fellow citizens.

And, yes, I understand that the tricolour acknowledges the identity and culture of both communities, but it is now deeply associated in unionist minds as the symbol of the organisations that killed and maimed so many of their kin.

Parades

In my view, Orange parades have always had an element of intimidation in them. Their primary purpose, originally, was to show the native population that the Protestants were in charge and the Catholic natives should get used to it. In later centuries they became triumphal marches marking Northern Ireland as British, and remaining so.

It will have to be made clear that parades will be allowed to continue after re-unification. The Parades Commission should still regulate them, with the same powers. I hope I’m right, that, after re-unification, such parades will lose much of their attraction, because they will no longer be displays of British dominance. I would hope they become less contentious with the Irish side, thus easing the way towards them eventually becoming cultural tourist attractions, in the same way St Patrick’s Day parades have become.

A ban on Orange parades would antagonise Unionists and alienate them completely.

British citizenship

In the same way as the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement guarantees Northern Irish citizens to be Irish, British or both, it could be agreed beforehand that any former NI citizen could have the same option, with the agreement of Britain, of course. This could be offered to all citizens of Ireland, if the British were agreeable, like it was up to the 1970s.

British Irish Council

It should be agreed with the British government, before any vote, that the British Irish Council, currently operating under the GFA, will continue, to allow the British government to represent Unionist interests in the new Ireland.

The Angelus on RTÉ

Would this be an issue for Unionists?

If it was, we should agree to drop it.

The Structure of government for a new Ireland

The Northern Assembly

In a United Ireland, will the devolved Assembly continue, but under an all Ireland parliament, or will it be dissolved and one National Parliament be created? Even under a single National Parliament, could some parliamentary business be carried out in Belfast?

Personally, I think that the continuation of Stormont would only tend to keep the old animosities alive between Irish and British nationalists. Unionists might want to keep it, because they would be a major force in it, if not the major force. However, if they see that the First Minister will be from Sinn Féin for the foreseeable future, their interest may wane. We should listen to what unionists would prefer.

However, if it was to continue, I would suggest a time limit be set for it, during which the new, national parliament could be bedded down.

National Government

To hold elections to the new national parliament, the constitution will have to amended to include NI constituencies. This will involve 63+ NI TDs under the current constitution. Constituencies in NI will have be restructured to adapt to STV elections instead of first-past-the-post. The new national parliament will have a significant number of unionists TDS, which will significantly shake up the old two and a half party system.

The Seanad, too, will need to be reformed. The current rules don’t cover NI universities, for instance. I think it would be an ideal opportunity to make the Seanad relevant again. Of course, representation for Northern Ireland should be part of it. The existing panels, and their electorate should be completely reconstituted. We could have a mix of academics, trade unionists, business and geographic representation. There should be a plan in place, at least, to legislate to include NI residents on the panels and among the electorate, before a vote is taken.

In advance of the referendum, I think it would be enough to have broad agreement on the general shape of the new institutions. After reunification, all sections of Irish society, including unionists would be free to participate in the details of our new parliamentary and government structures. With all the changes involved I think a new constitution would be advisable, too!

Funding public services and costs

Maintaining public services in Northern Ireland

People in a Northern Ireland will need to be reassured that their public services will continue to be funded after re-unification. Currently, Britain subsidises NI by £10.8 Billion per annum.

Paying for public services in Northern Ireland

Funding of NI is a serious issue for many people in the Republic. Before any referendum, they will need to be assured that not all of this bill (c25% of Irish annual budget) will not fall on their heads, and that arrangements can be put in place to allow us pay for it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/post-brexit-britain-may-not-want-to-pay-for-northern-ireland-1.3723855

How can this be achieved? Well, Britain could probably be persuaded to continue financing Northern Ireland for, say, ten years, with the subsidy being reduced by 10% straight line over the decade. That would give the new government a chance to restructure NI and make it more productive. I’m sure the EU would be willing to offer Ireland some financial support to achieve unity. After Brexit, we may be bringing back EU citizens into the fold. Our diplomats would surely remind Germany that Ireland fully supported Germany during its reunification.

I’m sure the economic aspects will be well addressed by the ‘experts’ prior to voting.

On the other hand, there have been reports that say re-unification could be affordable, like this one:

https://sluggerotoole.com/2018/07/22/would-a-united-ireland-be-affordable/

Long Term

In the long term, after reunification, the political and administrative structure of Northern Ireland will need to be integrated into an all island situation. This will give huge opportunities to improve both parts of Ireland. It will mean the rationalisation of Health, Education, Local government, Policing etc.

The best practices in both jurisdictions can be applied to the new all Ireland structures. As a united nation, we will have a very rare opportunity to create the political and administrative arrangement that will serve the needs of all citizens effectively and efficiently.

It will require a lot of hard thinking, hard work, time and dedication, but I think we can create an Ireland that every citizen can be proud of, in which we can all reach our potential and live happy, productive lives.

Conclusion

I look forward to the end of partition, a blot on the development of both parts of Ireland. I sincerely hope that the two communities, who will continue to share NI, can peaceably reconcile to each other, in peace, in a United Ireland, with the help of us Southerners.

And I hope that unionists, however reluctantly, will settle in to, and take their full part in, the new Ireland. Freed from the yoke of trying to ‘protect the union’, I hope unionist political parties will be able to concentrate on ‘real’ politics. Their participation in Irish politics will transform Southern politics beyond recognition.

As always, I’m an optimist.

[think32blog]

Our Way Back to the European Union

Professor Colin Harvey

1. We are Irish citizens who reside in the north of Ireland. We live in a region that is being removed from the EU against the wishes of a majority of its people. We remain convinced that this is unacceptable and a profound mistake. Brexit, in any form, will cause lasting damage to our shared island, and a no-deal Brexit will be a disaster for all of us.

2. We note the agreed objective of avoiding a hard border and the fundamental significance of the ‘backstop’ in mitigating the worst aspects of Brexit. We stand with all those who are defending the ‘backstop’ at this time. However, we wish to highlight a neglected mechanism: the people of our island have the right to determine their own constitutional fate through a vote, in both parts of the island, on Irish unity. This people’s vote is already provided for in the Good Friday Agreement; it is our way back to the EU. It is quite remarkable to us that this has not featured more prominently in the current discussions. We believe that there are strong and principled grounds for offering the people of this region the option of returning to the EU through the existing referendum provisions of the Agreement.

3. We are convinced that this is the right time to commence preparations and we welcome the civic conversations that are ongoing. A detailed framework is now required. We urge both the Irish and British governments, through the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference, and in dialogue with the EU, to commence the necessary work, as one part of the required planning and preparation. There is a particular onus on the Irish government to lead the way on this island, and there is an urgent need for a new, focused and time-limited constitutional convention/forum that is dedicated specifically to this matter. We call on civic society to continue to participate in this conversation and to take the discussions into every sector on the island.

4. We seek the continuing support of the EU in taking this forward by recognising and acknowledging that our right to self-determination must be respected and should be exercised in the near future, and that it is one possible solution to the problems that Brexit creates. We believe that the people of our island must be given the opportunity to decide if they want a shared future together in a unified Ireland within the EU.

5. We urge the EU, its Member States and friends of the Good Friday Agreement everywhere to stand in solidarity with us as we advance towards the democratic option of an agreed future within the EU for all who share this island.

[think32blog]

‘IT IS NEW STRUNG AND SHALL BE HEARD’

I promised to write a short piece a while back but so much was happening with the political landscape changing and shifting under our feet on a daily basis, I couldn’t keep up, could anyone. Everyday brings new Brexit darkness and rays of light to the Irish Unity debate as events unfold before our very eyes, what a time to be alive some say, what an opportunity to shape our future … or as Maya Angelou put it

“History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again” … that future is both green and orange.

I think that time has arrived for the people of this island. I suppose I should start somewhere on this debate, so no better place than that aul €50 euro to visit your GP in the south a sorta return serve retort to dismiss the conversation on the Irish Unity. Well, if that is what it was all about after all these years of conflict I’m sure free GP appointments and prescription charges would have been hastily sorted a long time ago to resolve the perennial issue of partition never mind the £billions spent on Britain’s war machine in the north. The truth is, it’s an example of what at times passes for debate, but its just plain nonsensical codswallop and those saying it must know this, if they look close enough.

In any new dispensation I certainly won’t be paying €50 euro to see my doctor. We will have a fully funded 32 county INHS. It’s a deliberate simplification of the discourse as these ‘short fire’ negative tropes keep us all busy on the daft stuff, just like Senator Mark Daly’s findings that protestants believe they will lose possession of their land as it’s taken of them in a new Ireland. I’ve never ever heard that one before which again is uber codswallop creating that misty fear of the bogeyman narrative, conjured up from past fears and suspicions, but such scare stories have always existed in Ireland for many many years long before partition and certainly won’t stop now, no doubt it will always be with us…but its still just tosh.

Across Ireland there has always been a significant strand of political opinion on the island – which believes in unification its always been there, it never really went away, it just waited then Brexit fell on its lap…. Indeed ‘all changed’ and ‘The Good Friday Agreement’ was caught in its gravitational vortex of incompatibility with this English nationalistic empire spasm –

‘never the twain shall meet’ as it drags us into the political 5th dimension. For the first time since partition and previous conscription crisis of 1918 in Ireland -an existential threat has arrived that directly effects the 32 counties of Ireland.

The unity genie is now firmly out of the bottle and it’s not going back-in anytime soon. It senses freedom after years of being stuffed into the straightjacket of two reactionary states who condemned it to a life of religious zealotry, gombeenism, migration and conflict. Those days are gone and they’re not coming back. A new confidence has appeared on the horizon, people feel empowered, engaged the old certainties have been debunked, challenged and dismissed as exceptionalist claptrap. Modernity is here to stay. The political purgatory is shifting gear and its looking to Dublin for guidance.

A new chapter in Irelands history is about to be written once again as “La perfide Albion" tries to force others to act against their own interests only this time its 2019-not 1819, Gunboat diplomacy is old hat, so are any ideas of dispatching Sir Francis Drake to pay a visit to Rathlin, just to make a point- though at times you’d think given half the chance the mad swivel eyed loons of the British rightwing would sink to any depths to achieve Brexit nirvana, thankfully those days are dead and gone, but not the memories and the suffering of Sorley Boy McDonnell.

Perhaps in the past such malevolence won the day, but not this time. Ireland has friends, powerful friends and they will use them to protect herself. Perfidy has met its match this time as Hibernia is not for turning.

A few points need mentioned, the first is the demographic debate has been raging like a boney on the twelve night and gathering impetus and ruffling feathers. It must be remembered that the north was designed to lock-in Unionist ascendancy forever they even abandoned their brethren in the rest of Ulster to achieve thus. The last census in 2011 in the north showed that Protestant-Unionists now account for less than half of (48%) the population of the north, with Catholics on 45%. Of course, not all Catholics want a united Ireland, just as not all Protestants dislike the idea either, but the figures are still a pretty good steer going forward. So, when the results of the upcoming 2021 census are out, probably leaked around Christmas 2022 unionism will be in for a shock, that’s not to say that nationalism/catholic stats will come out at (50%+) I doubt it will, but you never know.

The real shock figures may reveal those who say they’re from a protestant/unionist background drops below 40%. Put it another way 60% are non-unionists, now that puts the cat amongst the pigeons as the north’s raison d’etre no longer exists. It will show the train has not only left the station but has turned into a high rapid transit with ‘Eurostar’ emblazoned on the side of it.

https://www.irishcentral.com/news/thenorth/shock-as-expert-predicts-catholic-majority-in-northern-ireland-by-2021

The other issue is the so called ‘subvention’ now this is something I’ve looked at quite closely and realised that it is actually the biggest spoof of all, its completely bogus. Critics say the south can’t afford us, they’re in debt to their eyeballs down there after the financial crash, sure didn’t the Brits bail them out..blah..blah…humbug.

When writing this Jude Collins just posted up a piece on his website, he lays it out here.

http://www.judecollins.com/2019/08/they-could-never-afford-us-and-related-economic-myths/

Can also recommend you listen to Pearce Doherty who knows a thing or two about finance, he gives us a great insight here at Feile last week.

'Busting the myths of the subvention'

https://youtu.be/Hu0N50cKofg

Finally, its essential that people realise that there are a number of unionists who wish to remain within the EU and want to play their part of an integrated European family – these unionists are now seriously considering unity as an option. They believe in Europe and what it has to offer them, after all it was their antecedents who brought the ideas of the ‘French Revolution’ to Ireland and showed great enthusiasm for Thomas Pain’s ‘Rights of Man then going on to found the ‘Society of United Irishmen’ in Belfast in 1791, its in their blood as they say….the original republicans, are the souls of McCracken, Drennan, McCabe and the Rev.Porter returning.

It’s now up to the Irish government to give leadership at this critical junction in our history as we go forward to create the new ‘2nd Republic’ that awaits - instead of listening to a tale of the €50 note to see the Doctor to smother at birth the unity debate...the work starts mow.

“It is new strung and shall be heard”

Written by @seanofthesouth for @think32_

[think32blog]

Uniting Behind the Rights of Nature, the Rights of Ireland

Time to place the rights of nature at the heart of a new Irish constitution

Dr Peter Doran, School of Law, Queens University Belfast

Mari Margil, Associate Director, Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund

"Tá sé in am anois machnamh a dhéanamh ar 'chearta an dúlra' faoi aon bhunreacht nua. Is féidir linn cearta an dúlra, cearta éiceolaíochta agus cearta speiceas a chur i lár chroí an chomhrá nua sin ar bhunreacht Éireann athshamhalta. Caithfidh muid smaoineadh ar nuálaíocht bhunreachtúil a thabharfas aitheantas d'oileán na hÉireann- dúlra na hÉireann, a héiceachórais, a speiceais, a himeallbhoird, a lochanna, a sléibhte agus a foraoisí san áireamh-mar ábhar a bhaineann le cearta a bhfuil an meas is mó atá againn, mar aon le cosaint an dlí, tuillte aige.

“The Faughan is my river. It flows through me as sure as it flows through the landscape and for that I am compelled to give my river a voice.” (Dean Blackwood, Faughan Angler and environmental scholar-activist)

“Am wind on sea

Am wave swelling

Am ocean’s voice.”

(Song of Amhairghin, poet and lawmaker of the ancient Milesian/Gaelic people)

Two unstoppable and defining conversations are under way across the island of Ireland.

On the evening of 6th August, An Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar TD, speaking at Féile an Phobail in Belfast, confirmed what many of us have long suspected. A new union on the island of Ireland will be an historic constitutional moment, heralding a “new state” and a “new constitution”: an opportunity to re-imagine and reshape an island for all its peoples, and for generations to come.

Just a few miles away, Jonathon Porritt, one of the most influential environmental campaigners of our times, was a guest of the Linen Quarter Business Improvement District. In his characteristic uncompromising style, Porritt outlined the transformational challenges for politics and the economy of the climate emergency and ecological collapse.

The choice confronting us, it seems, is this: we can choose to accept the current environmental crises or shape a new constitution that protects all our futures by extending rights to the species and ecosystems of the island itself. It is time to consider embedding the rights of nature in any new island constitution.

The prospect of a new civic and political union has sparked anticipation of a rare constitutional moment that speaks of integrity and of regeneration: human and ecological. As recent election results have demonstrated alongside the rise of Extinction Rebellion and the Friday school strikes inspired by Greta Thunberg, there is a new wave of green activism. Young people across the island are joining their voices with the cries of the earth that have been ignored and trampled on by large parts of our political and economic establishment.

For the love of our shared island

The social and ecological costs of the island’s semi-peripheral status have been devastating for both the Republic of Ireland and the north. Government on both parts of the island have too often privileged economic actors by licensing permission to externalize or transfer the true costs of their activities on to society and the environment.

For too long, managing externalities has been ‘business as usual’ for government, the public sector, environmental law advocates and even NGOs. Most environmental legislation is designed to address sources of harm after the fact, to mitigate and compensate rather than avoid the creation of the problems in the first place.

Similar environmental legal structures exist around the world – aimed largely at exploitation of nature – authorizing fracking, mining, drilling, and other activities that bring known environmental harm. This industrialization of nature has brought us to this moment when it is all too clear that human actions are destroying the very natural systems upon which we depend. There is no economy without nature.

The climate emergency is growing, species extinction is accelerating, coral reefs and other ecosystems are dying. Humankind is causing these overlapping crises, as the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate warns of “the significant human influences on the Earth system as a whole.”

This should not be a surprise when we consider that our legal structures treat nature as without intrinsic value, and is afforded little protection as a result.

In the face of this, a growing number of people, communities, and even countries are engaged in a new conversation, one that recognizes a need for a re-imagined relationship between humankind and the rest of nature. This means moving away from legal systems and structures which subordinate nature, a relationship characterized by Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice as one of “domination” of humankind over nature.

In practical terms, this means no longer treating nature as a resource existing to serve humankind, and instead protecting nature’s inherent rights to health and well-being. As the Brazil court explained, it is necessary to move toward “a legal approach that is biocentric and not just anthropocentric,” such that nature and species receive the respect and care they need, and legal systems afford them “rights and dignity.”

Since 2006, from communities in the United States and Brazil, to the countries of Ecuador, Uganda, Bolivia, India, and elsewhere, legal frameworks have advanced which recognize – for the first time – that nature possesses legal rights. This includes fundamental rights, as enshrined in Ecuador’s 2008 constitution, “to integral respect for its existence and for the maintenance and regeneration of its life cycles, structure, functions and evolutionary processes,” as well as to restoration.

This is not a “feel-good” effort. Rather, it’s changing the legal relationship between humankind and the natural world, and how ecosystems and species are protected and regarded under the law. Under this emerging construct, nature is no longer considered an object, or an item of commerce, but rather a subject of rights.

The Rights of Nature Principles – developed at an international gathering of advocates, indigenous communities, and attorneys at Tulane Law School in the U.S. in 2017 – describe the essential rights that nature requires as including rights to exist, flourish, regenerate, evolve, and be restored. Realizing the promise of these rights requires a reconsideration of human actions such that they do not infringe on those rights, including the very basic right of an ecosystem or species to even exist. This is a far cry from how most legal and governing systems work today, legally authorizing harm to the natural environment, knowingly causing species extinction, climate change, coral reef die-off, and so forth.

Rights of nature laws and court decisions have often come out of deep concern for the impacts of the industrialization of nature, and the recognition that existing environmental laws and regulations are simply inadequate – and often not written – to protect nature. As Colombia’s Constitution Court wrote in its landmark 2016 decision recognizing legal rights of the Atrato River, “Now is the time to start taking the first steps towards effectively protecting the planet and its resources before it is too late or the damage is irreversible…” and that it is “necessary to take a step forward in jurisprudence” to recognize nature as a subject of rights.

Time to consider ‘rights of nature’ under a new Irish constitution

At the heart of that new conversation on a re-imagined Irish Constitution we can place the rights of nature and the rights of the island’s ecology and species.

We must consider a constitutional innovation that will recognise the island of Ireland – the nature of Ireland, including her ecosystems, species, coastlines, lakes, mountains and forests - as a rights-bearing subject worthy of our deepest respect and protection in law.

As Frank Armstrong recalled earlier this year (Armstrong 2019), the basis of the Irish Constitution is the “Natural Law” tradition, which affords significant scope for an innovative evolution and extension of constitutional rights of nature.

It is this tradition that has enabled a host of formerly unenumerated constitutional rights to be ascribed to Irish citizens, including rights to bodily integrity, work, marriage, and free movement. These rights were not explicitly set out in the original Irish Constitution but have come to be regarded as intrinsic to the human condition. Armstrong notes that with the Sixth Mass Extinction now upon us – brought about by humankind – there is an urgent need for Natural Law to be extended ‘to imply an Unenumerated Rights of other species to exist, alongside ourselves.’

Extending the rights of nature to the species and ecosystems of the island would offer an unparalleled opportunity to, at long last, place human actions in a balanced relationship with the natural world. This will not occur simply because we hope for it, but rather because we demand and act. The rights of nature provide an unequalled legal platform for community struggles to protect local ecosystems at risk from interventions supported by corporations working alongside political structures.

Let us embrace this new constitutional moment for ourselves and for our island ecology.

Reference

Frank Armstrong, 2019, ‘Wild Law’ is the Path of Natural Justice, 24 February, Cassandra Voices. See: www.cassandravoices.com.

[think32blog]

The ‘Unheard’ of the north of Ireland

‘Whataboutery’ is rampant in Ireland. I want to indulge in some myself. I want to ask “what about the ‘unheard’”? Who are they? Do they exist?

In the interest of transparency it should be mentioned that I am a Sinn Féin voter. However, the views expressed are my own. I occasionally use ‘we’ or ‘us’ but I am a Dubliner and have never lived in the north of Ireland. These views are merely intended to encourage discussion. They do not reflect red line positions of mine on any aspect of the issues mentioned.

In this article the term ‘Nationalists’ will encompass nationalists and republicans, and the term ‘Unionists’ will encompass unionists and loyalists, in the six counties of the north of Ireland that are deemed to be part of the United Kingdom. I will also refer to the 6 counties as ‘the north’ thus avoiding ‘the occupied 6 counties’ and ‘Ulster’, both terms which are irritating to one side or the other. The word ‘fundamentalist’ shall refer to hardliners of either side. Please allow some latitude for generalisations so as not to get bogged down in the kind of petty arguments that have dogged intelligent discourse about the north for nearly 100 years.

The factions involved in deciding whether or not we have a United Ireland appear clearly defined. The majority of Nationalists want a United Ireland although some would vote to remain part of the United Kingdom. The majority of Unionists want to remain in the UK although some would vote for a United Ireland. (Polls show that the latter ‘some’ is increasing because of the utter mess known as Brexit). The extent of each group’s aspirations can often be easily discovered simply by the passion/vitriol with which they express themselves….

One wet night over 30 years ago I saw graffiti in a London establishment’s Men’s facilIty (a pub jax on a rainy night in Soho) which stated in beautiful, flowing English that: “THE QUEEN IS A HORE”. Some other gentleman who was obviously upset by the spelling error appended: “”WHORE”, YOU IRISH P***K”. A third person drew a circle around this passionate interaction and added his tuppence worth which read: “CAPTAIN’S LOG, STAR DATE: 09.12.1987. THERE IS NO SANE LIFE HERE.”

This delightful interaction could be used as an analogy for the mentality of, and interactions of fundamentalists from both sides. Fundamentalists such as the unionist who ranted and raved about Munster rugby supporters brazenly displaying a balaclava-wearing image on their province’s flag. Of course it was not a balaclava-wearing anything, merely the province’s actual symbol which when the wind is blowing a certain way causing the flag to adopt a specific creased formation might look like a balaclava-wearing image. It also requires the mind of a paranoid loon to see that image in such an utterly innocent flag regardless of the wind or the creases or whatever.  I read a republican fundamentalist on social media who was demanding that sterling should not be accepted in the north and that only the punt is legal tender. When I pointed out that (a) we no longer use the punt in Ireland (notwithstanding Munster rugby matches) and (b) the whole discussion is about a United Ireland which would negate the requirement for sterling, this genius, after some consideration, told me to “F*ck off, you west Brit bollox”. I was hurt for days afterwards.

The point is we have all seen or heard or read this type of fundamentalist clap-trap. It is not helpful in any way, shape or form especially when one considers that these morons are serious – in some cases deadly serious in the literal sense.

The next type of grouping contains people who are strongly aligned to political parties. By ‘strongly aligned’ I mean people who not only vote for their chosen party but who canvass, attend meetings, are card-carrying members etc. Many Nationalists would say the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) should be included with the fundamentalists mentioned earlier.  My own bias would dictate the same sentiment. Nevertheless, a cold and dispassionate look at the DUP makes it very difficult for them to be seen any other way. The leaders of this party appear to be living in a time long past – the era of the British Empire. It appears to be lost on them that in poll after poll a large majority of British people couldn’t care less about the north and understand very little about its history. The only conclusion I can arrive at regarding the DUP’s continuing desire to be part of a nation that clearly doesn’t want them is that the Union is not really the most important issue to them at all. Some Liverpool FC fans hate Manchester United more than they love LFC, and vice versa. In a similar way, the DUP’s hatred for anything remotely associated with the south of Ireland far outweighs their apparent love of the Union – a love not dissimilar to that of a battered husband or wife who keeps going back to their abusive spouse hoping the latter will change – they never change. This is supported by the fact that the DUP have gone against the wishes of the majority of people in the north by supporting Brexit. They are willing to push the north into even worse penury just to avoid being in any way associated with the rest of Ireland’s EU status and, they argue, to be treated identically to the UK (but not when it comes to same sex marriage or abortion). I call it selective martyrdom. Unfortunately, it’s all the citizens of the north who will suffer after the Tories £1bn bribe to the DUP.

Leaving aside the DUP leadership’s variety of unionism, Unionists are absolute in their conviction that they belong in the north of Ireland as British citizens. They are right.

Sinn Féin supporters are somewhat different because we think we hold the moral high ground. I’m not referring to paramilitary atrocities on either side but rather I’m referring to the ideological moral high ground.  Nothing will ever change us in believing Ireland was colonised and that resulted in one part of society becoming second-class citizens in their own country. We will never change because those are historical and indisputable facts.  Ultimately, and most relevantly in this article, every single Nationalist, by definition, wants a United Ireland.  

So, there’s the problem. Nationalists, whose biggest representative party is Sinn Féin, want a United Ireland, while a very large majority of Unionists, whose biggest representative party is the DUP, want to remain in the UK, I think.

I think. 

Nationalist and Unionist fundamentalists and party-aligned people have been discussed here but I believe there is a huge number of citizens in the north of Ireland who are very often ignored and who may well make up a large majority of the population. These include people who are so disillusioned they simply do not bother to vote. Those who vote for the same party over and over again because “that’s what we do in this house”. Those who vote for a party because of peer pressure and the resultant guilt if they defy their peers. Those who vote for a party simply because they could never vote for ‘themmuns’ even if themmuns achieved spectacular results for the community as a whole. I’m talking about carpenters, schoolteachers, cleaning staff, doctors, dockers, unemployed…all types of people who may think they have a voice but might be unaware that whilst they are exercising their franchise when it comes to ticking a box  - they might be doing so for the wrong reasons. I’m talking about those people who are not political activists on either side of the community. I suggest they might be the majority of people. I call them the ‘unheard’.

Both sides of the community in the north need to learn about the other. Both sides need an understanding of the other. For example, I could argue convincingly that an Irish Language Act (ILA) would be a good thing for both sides of the community. I could say it’s harmless. I could say both sides of the community can learn Gaeilge (as many already do). I could point out that we already agreed to have an ILA. My coup de grace would be “sure if you lot want to be identical to the rest of Britain why not give us a Language Act like Wales and Scotland have”. Pretty convincing arguments, eh? Actually, they are not pretty convincing arguments because I have not had the decency and respect to say to the Unionist community “why do you not want us to have an Irish Language Act?” Effectively, I have made a great argument without consulting those who, for reasons I do not know because I have never asked them, may not want an ILA.  This is a core point of the discourse I would like to see.

I do not want to ask the DUP why they are so opposed to an Irish Language Act or ask Sinn Féin why they want one so much because I know I’ll get a political response. I want to ask the unheard. I want to let them know why I want an ILA and I want them to tell me why (if) they do not want me to have one. I want Nationalists to listen to Unionists as human beings and vice versa. We did not come out of our mothers’ wombs with hatred in our hearts. It was taught to us. Hatred needs to be un-taught, so to speak.

It can be disheartening for both sides when we let fundamentalists be our voice. I recall when Lyra McKee was murdered. Her death’s legacy was appearing to be a united front against any and all dissidents. I imagined this would please her. A day or two later I was on social media and I read a fundamentalist saying “Sinn Féin haven’t even condemned Lyra’s murder”. I was utterly deflated because I had read countless comments on social media from Sinn Féin people utterly condemning her murder. I then realised the person who made that comment would not be ‘following’ anyone from the Nationalist side of the community, in the very same way that most Nationalists would not follow anyone from the other side. Fundamentalists aside (because let’s face it, they are all morons), maybe we could start a program where a group from the unheard of both communities agree to follow each other and see where it goes. I will leave the answers to all these questions to others..

In 1994 tensions in the north of Ireland were still running high. I was a more hardline Republican than I am now. I was in a hotel lounge on the northside of Dublin with my then partner and another couple. It was very busy as Garth Brooks was playing in the Point Depot that weekend.  The four of us were sitting at a table which had room for a few more people when two couples asked (in broad northern accents) if anyone was sitting in the spare places. Between laughs we managed to say “no”. The reason we were laughing is because they were dressed from head to toe in elaborate cowboy and cowgirl outfits From the Stetsons all the way down to the spurred boots.  Anyway, we shifted ourselves to make room until we ended up with us four facing the new four. One of the cowboys rolled up his sleeves and I noticed he had Union Jack tattoos on both of his arms. He saw me noticing and asked if I had a problem. I replied I would only have a problem if he made one. He just stared at me. It was tense, macho bullshit. One of the cowgirls said he should just roll down his sleeves.  He hesitated, looked at me and I said “it would probably be better if you did”. Eventually he rolled down his sleeves. In the meantime the four girls were now chatting about the cowgirl outfits. As is often the case the females were far more mature than the males. One of the guys said “why can’t we talk about football?” I said “no doubt you support Linfield.” He said “Aye, in the same way you follow Celtic”. We laughed. The atmosphere relaxed and we got down to real conversation and we bought them all a drink. They couldn’t buy us one back quickly enough. We ended up having a great night with them. The four of us sang “The Sash” but only if they sang “A Nation Once Again” first. They thought it was hilarious when we changed the words to “starvation once again”. We sang and laughed and drank until the early hours of the morning. It was a rare oul time. 

When we were departing the girls hugged each other and us lads shook hands. The guy with the tattoos pulled me close to him and hugged me too. As he did he said quietly “I suppose we’ll go back to hating each other now.” I replied “I suppose so.” He asked why we do that. As we had been talking about the movie The Commitments earlier in the night I thought it would be apt to reply, just like Jimmy Rabbitte looking in the mirror, “I’m f*cked if I know.”

The point is that once we got over the suspicions about each other and started chatting about ‘normal’ things we got on great. We were even able to give each other our perspectives on the north of Ireland. It was the first time either party had ever listened to the other side’s perspective. It was the first time I accepted that Unionists were as entitled to be in Ireland as much as I am. I believe that night changed me – not because we talked but because we listened to two cowboys and two cowgirls from the Unionist community of the north of Ireland – I listened to the unheard. Listening could be a key to a United Ireland. Do not dismiss the notion of a 32 county Ireland. Think 32.

Kevin O’Connor 30.07.2019 Dublin

Addendum 

Yesterday evening I was amazed to see Belfast shipyard workers (traditionally a largely unionist workplace) demanding their rights as Gaeilge (in Irish). Just like the dockers and other professions I mentioned in the article, these men are part of the unheard (up to now). It was an absolute joy for me to hear them chanting as Gaeilge. Not in a triumphant way for me but in a way that made me say to myself “why shouldn’t they? It’s their language as much as mine.” Other than the usual fundamentalist morons no-one can see any bad from what those brave men did, only good. I do not expect them to be tripping over each other to vote Sinn Féin but they were polite to the Sinn Féin people, as were the Sinn Féin people towards them. Hopefully, it’s the start of something positive and new.

Kevin O’Connor 01.08.2019 Dublin

[think32blog]

The way ahead.

On todays BBC Talkback programme 30.07.2019, there was an informative and lively debate on Irish unity. The debate was a welcome one, and shows that Irish Unity is now irrefutably on the table. It’s something we need to address, and it’s something we need to plan for.

Mary Lou McDonald has made the sensible suggestion of appointing a 26 county Minister of State with the specific, dedicated function of planning for unity.

She said:

“It is the choice between the narrow negative self-serving divisive decisions taken by little Englanders in Westminster. Or a shared inclusive future in which we take our own decisions together in the interests of the people of this island. Constitutional Change is coming. Preparations need to be made now.”

The reaction on Talkback, from both callers and from Unionist politicians, was something we need to listen to.

Anne from Belfast expressed concerns that taxes could be raised, and mentioned the cost of a doctor visit. A GP visit costs €50-60, which is a lot even for families with 2 incomes. Another caller was deeply concerned about the lack of diversity in the 26 county education system.

These are the bread and butter issues which we need to plan for if we want to ensure that every citizen of the 6 counties will feel comfortable in a shared Ireland.

The health services on both sides of the border have some striking contrasts. Neither are perfect but, for example, an old age pensioner exiting acute hospital care in the 6 counties can enter a nursing home or have a home care package ready on their discharge. Pensioners in the 26 counties are facing long delays waiting on either a Fair Deal nursing home place, or a shockingly small homecare allowance. 6,139 people are on waiting lists for home care and some are being offered as little as one hour a week. Figures were provided to Fianna Fáil TD Mary Butler show that in Dublin South West, where I live, there are 237 people waiting on home help. Sinn Féin TD Martin Kenny reported last week that citizens are being advised by Government departments to pay for their own private care. This is not an option for many, especially those who have worked their whole lives and are depending on a state pension.

Calling for a border poll is a legitimate right, enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement. It is prudent and necessary to plan for this. We need to know what it will look like – will we have a healthcare system free at the point of delivery, paid for through general taxation? Will the British Government and the European Union subsidise the costs associated with the transition, and for how long? Can we plan for a more diverse school patronage system? Can we plan to have the basic healthcare and marriage equality rights afforded to citizens of the 26 counties streamlined and rolled out across the 32 counties?

These are just a few of the issues raised, and more debate and discussion on these is absolutely necessary. Most of all, we need to listen to each other in order to build a viable shared future on this island.

This blog post was written by Sarah Holland, from Belfast, but living in Dublin. You can find Sarah on Twitter @SJTHolland

[think32blog]

Statement from Professor Colin Harvey, 28th July 2019:

1. Why do so many still hide from a reality that is being forced upon us? Irish unity is one way back to the EU. It would be irresponsible not to talk about this. In the face of growing belligerence from the British government, there is much wisdom in having a focused conversation about how we share this island. More and more people do accept that this is a radically new context that demands fresh thinking.

2. It is time to plan and prepare for giving people on this island a say on the constitutional future. There is a mechanism to allow us to determine our own fate in the face of a British government that is walking further away from the values that underpin the Good Friday Agreement.

3. Those calling for a people's vote in the UK must accept that if their preferred outcome does not prevail then there is a logical next step.

4. All those noting the consequences of a no-deal Brexit for this island are the voices of reason and constitutional responsibility.

5. It is time for people who care about the well-being of everyone on this island to seize the moment and map out a better way forward for our island for the sake of future generations. The constitutional moment for this generation is upon us. We must not turn away.

[think32blog]

Paul Gosling @ MacGill Summer School 23 July 19

A few days ago I discussed Northern Ireland and the prospects for Irish reunification on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. In it, I described Northern Ireland as a failed state. This upset a few people – so I’m happy to instead describe it as a dysfunctional society. That seems uncontentious to me.

Let’s look at the evidence. Mostly that’s the S’s.

Stormont. We haven’t had a government for two and a half years. When we did, they didn’t have the courage to do what needed to be done, or the willingness to enter into effective partnership.

Segregation. We educate most of our kids in a segregated system, failing to teach them how to live together. Public service duplication costs £1bn, maybe £1.5bn a year.

Subvention. That service duplication and segregated structure feeds into a financially wasteful system. According to the UK Treasury, the annual subsidy from UK taxpayers is around £10bn a year – more than the UK’s cost of being in the EU. Tell that to the English nationalists who voted for Brexit and you can see the political tensions that are awaiting. If you strip out the contributions to debt interest, the armed forces and some other non-NI costs the subvention is probably around £5bn, which is still a lot of money.

Security – in other words, paramilitary crime. Lyra McKee was killed a five minute walk from my house, which has made this feel very personal.

Schools. I keep hearing that Northern Ireland has the best schooling system. But the people who say that are middle class parents, mostly in Belfast and County Down, whose kids go to elite grammar schools. But it’s not what parents say in Creggan or loyalist East Belfast. We have a crisis of boys leaving school without basic life skills or minimum qualifications. It is another sign of division at the heart of Northern Ireland society. That is a division of class, through school selection.

Skills. We need to improve vocational training to promote aspiration across society. The lack of graduate qualifications is another real problem. A few years ago I did some research and it seemed that Derry had the lowest proportion of graduates in its labour market of any city in the EU. Northern Ireland has the UK’s smallest HE sector: a third of our undergraduates study elsewhere and most don’t return. This is understood by Bank of England chief economist Andy Haldane, who a few days ago called for the expansion of Northern Ireland’s university sector to strengthen skills and productivity. He understands: Northern Ireland’s own politicians apparently don’t.

Infrastructure. Our infrastructure is dodgy and much of it barely works. It can take two and a half hours to travel the 70 miles between Derry and Belfast. It can take five hours to travel from Derry to Dublin, which is 123 miles as the crow flies. When I lived in Leicester I could travel the hundred miles to London in an hour by train.

Productivity. Northern Ireland has the UK’s joint lowest productivity. Derry has Northern Ireland’s lowest productivity: the result of insufficient skills, too few graduates, weak infrastructure and the resulting lack of inward investment, both private and public.

The NHS is great, but it is struggling in Northern Ireland because reform is taking too long without ministers in place. We have long waiting lists, long waiting times, even to see a GP.

This is a dysfunctional society. And this is without discussing how we deal collectively with the trauma and injuries from the past.

Another topic makes matters even worse – Brexit. The UK Treasury believes that over a 15 year period a no deal Brexit would leave Northern Ireland’s economy 12% smaller than without leaving the EU. People in the agri-food sector with its cross-border production processes are terrified of a no deal Brexit – some of those businesses would close. More than 40,000 jobs in Northern Ireland are at risk from Brexit.

Let us remember a couple of points here. Firstly, a Brexit referendum slogan was to take back control of our borders – the challenge is how that demand can be reconciled with having an open border in Ireland, an open border between the UK and the EU.

Secondly, there are four possible approaches to the Irish border – I won’t say solutions, but different approaches.

One is that the UK stays within the Customs Union and Single Market, accepting EU regulations and abandoning the idea of its own free trade deals. The next is that Northern Ireland is a half way house, staying within the UK (at least for now), but within the EU in terms of the Customs Union and Single Market. That would create a border in the Irish Sea, but would still allow trade between Northern Ireland and GB. The third is a controlled border in Ireland, for goods rather than people. The fourth relies on a technological solution which does not yet exist, may never exist, and is unlikely to ever be entirely effective.

A fifth option exists in the imagination of some Brexiteers – Irexit, that Ireland leaves the Customs Union and Single Market, or that it accepts borders between Ireland and the rest of the EU. I won’t give that suggestion any credibility.

All these options have difficulties. But the key point for the economy of Northern Ireland is that it needs continued open trading with both GB and the Republic. Otherwise the economy will be damaged, income will go down, jobs lost. As this happens, if it happens, more attitudes in Northern Ireland will change, with less satisfaction about being in the UK. And at the same time, the English nationalism that stoked up Brexit will become ever more restless about the subsidies from England to the devolved nations. The pressures on the UK will grow, as Theresa May and others have warned.

Meanwhile, we also have demographic changes within Northern Ireland. Unionists are no longer in a majority politically, in employment, or in the population. Another segment of the population has emerged, who do not identify with either tradition. Perhaps people like me and my family. And we can guess that younger people will be less identifying with one tradition, more drawn to the socially liberal attitudes that have emerged in the Republic. Things, socially, are changing in Northern Ireland, but without a government and Assembly to reflect this.

Occasionally I’m told I don’t have the right to discuss these things. Despite having living in Northern Ireland for 20 years and bringing up three kids in Northern Ireland. Not that any republican or Irish nationalist has ever said that to me.

But how about another ‘S’ – a solution.

The Irish Republic is economically successful and socially liberal. My kind of country. It is increasingly attractive to some of the liberal unionists I talk with, such as those who run their own businesses that depend on cross-border relationships.

But calling for a border poll today, in my opinion, is politically, strategically, not intelligent. Ireland has its own challenges – housing, health, and not least the debt it is carrying from bailing out the banks. Reunification is, though, the most sensible approach as far as I am concerned over the medium term. The question is how we get there. I suggest, we have to start by making Northern Ireland work better. Both unionists and republicans need to recognise that they have a common cause – to make Northern Ireland a better and more successful place. They actually both have selfish and strategic interests to do so.

I don’t believe the Republic is in a position today to cover the fiscal deficit of Northern Ireland. Nor do I believe that unionists should be relaxed about the continuing willingness of English nationalists to cover the subvention. Political representatives of both the main traditions need to recognise that the future of their positions requires them to make Northern Ireland work. We need a government in Northern Ireland committed to reform of our health service and schools system, investing in skills and infrastructure. A government that is determined to tackle social deprivation, inequality, poverty, creating jobs, expanding the economy.

In the short term, there is an obvious approach to be taken – which is to copy the measures the Republic has taken to turnaround its economy. This is not just about tax rates, but more importantly by investing in skills and infrastructure. It is also about even greater integration of the all-island economy – despite the challenges presented to this by Brexit.

As it happens, I believe the UK government has a moral duty to Northern Ireland which it has ducked. People expected the Good Friday Agreement to provide a peace dividend, yet it hasn’t. The gap between the employment rate in Britain and Northern Ireland hasn’t closed. There remains serious poverty and economic inactivity in many working class areas of Northern Ireland. The suicide rate has actually increased. I believe the UK government should recognise both its responsibility and its failure by investing directly into Northern Ireland infrastructure, above and beyond the city deals it has agreed with Belfast and Derry.

The Republic also needs to change. This is not just because we need to persuade unionists to consider the future – Northern Ireland cannot be simply ‘bolted on’ to the Republic. There is widespread resistance in Northern Ireland, including in nationalist and republican communities, to the idea of joining an insurance-based healthcare system. Ireland’s move to reform healthcare, Sláintecare, backed by increased all-island health provision is important to win support for unification. But this, too, cannot happen quickly. Sláintecare is a ten year programme that is behind schedule.

So my proposal is to learn from Brexit and not try to do such an immense project too quickly. A ten year timeframe might be realistic for the transition. But first we need to prepare for the border poll – though we might want to change the words. Many unionists are very sensitive and will resist any terminology that they feel is closely associated with Sinn Fein. Let’s not lose the objective because of the words we use. And if that means talking of ‘dysfunctional society’ rather than ‘failed state’ I will buy into that. And if it also means discussion of ‘A New Union of Ireland’ then fine, but let’s also discuss what that means.

It requires a conversation led by civil society, in which civic nationalism and civic unionism – and civic neutrals – come together and discuss and prove they can do so rationally and objectively. Irish unity cannot be achieved if the cause is associated, or claimed, by just one party.

A timeframe of not less than two years to prepare for a referendum, in which we put together what the new nation would be called and the detail of what it looks like, seems sensible to me. Colin Harvey has suggested 22nd May, 2023. I wouldn’t argue against that.

But I don’t think that we should pretend that changing the constitutional status of Northern Ireland is like an on/off switch, or replacing a piece of furniture.

Northern Ireland is dysfunctional and we need to make it functional. That is not simple or quick. We need a programme for economic and social recovery, along with reconciliation. We need reform. And realistically we need the financial subsidy from the UK government to be tapered off, rather than simply switched off. That would create a long term saving for UK taxpayers, while also continuing to support the very many people in Northern Ireland who regard themselves as British nationals. (And who will continue to be British nationals, if they so wish.)

Perhaps this is simply too big a task and we should abandon it as impossible. But I don’t think so.

In my life we have had the collapse of the Soviet Union, the collapse of Yugoslavia, reunification of Germany, the evolution of the Coal and Steel Community into the European Union, Brexit, the return of Hong Kong to China. These are big changes. Some have involved terrible events – giving us a warning about the need to plan and manage change.

For us, surely the starting point is for the Irish government to have a plan. Enda Kenny’s government deserves enormous credit for planning for the eventuality of a Brexit leave vote, when the government of David Cameron failed to do so. Let us call on the government of Leo Varadkar and Simon Coveney to show equal foresight by planning for what A New Union of Ireland might look like and how we arrive there.

This plan needs to consider whether there must be a new constitution, a new name, a bonding around a new sense of shared identity. We clearly need a better sub-regional economic framework for the new union of Ireland, along with an integrated, free at point of delivery health service and a housing system that works for the entire population.

Among the constitutional questions is the role of Stormont – whether it should continue and if so, whether the other provinces should have their own regional government, despite having shown no signs of wanting one. And we need a careful examination of the fiscal implications of reunification.

Not all events are foreseeable. But those events that can be foreseen should be planned for, to enable them to be managed. It starts with a conversation about the future – and that conversation has begun.

Paul Gosling

• This is the text of a speech given to the MacGill Summer School at Glenties on 23rd July 2019.

[think32blog]

Irish Language Act: ‘We need real delivery on real promises, wherever that may come from.’

Tuesday 9 July 2019 will be a day long remembered by many across these islands. Sitting with family and friends deep in the Bluestack mountains in south Donegal I spent the day searching for radio coverage and refreshing my Twitter feed. As the amendments rolled in it was hard not to jump to the conclusion that historic change was unfolding before us. The arguments over devolution and ‘direct rule’ decision making would inevitably be lost as Westminster finally got off the fence and the Tories turned on their confidence and supply partners.

The question of language rights, however, remains outstanding. During an interview with Noel Thompson on BBC’s Good Morning Ulster in the proceeding days I would be asked what the Westminster amendments would mean for the Irish language Act and our campaign for rights and recognition? Does this increase the chances of an Irish language Act and what does it tell us about potential legislation through Westminster?

In order to inform the debate in the here and now, we need to map out exactly what role the British Government has played to date regarding indigenous language protections and promises.

In little over 20 years, the British Government has ratified, promised or pledged protections for the Irish language on no less than four separate occasions. 1998 saw the Irish language be promised ‘ resolute action’ and parity of esteem in the Good Friday Agreement. The same year would see the British Government ratify the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM) and in 2001 they would also ratify the European Charter on Regional and Minority Languages (ECRML). Both are international treaties that require the British Government to protect and promote indigenous languages and communities, including specific provisions for Irish. Finally, the British Government would commit themselves to an Irish language Act, based on the experiences of Wales and the Republic, in the 2006 St Andrews Agreement. 

These four treaties all have one thing in common; they have been signed off in Westminster but since ratification have almost completely ignored and sidelined by the British Government. 

COMEX, the Council of Europe Committee of Experts, during their periodical monitoring rounds would consistently criticise the British Government over lack of compliance whilst continuing to recommend they ‘adopt appropriate legislation protecting and promoting the Irish language’ and ‘engage in a dialogue to create the political consensus needed for adopting legislation’.

As co-guarantors of both Good Friday and St Andrews it’s fair to say the British Government aren’t neutral bystanders nor can they continue their pretence as objective arbitrators in the Stormont impasse. The same goes for the Irish Government. An Tanáiste Simon Coveney would go on to publicly re-commit to his duties as co-guarantor and reassure us of the Irish Government’s support for #AchtAnois in a letter to Belfast based Irish language group Glór na Móna  https://twitter.com/dreamdearg/status/1121446245640355841 

Of course, the question of legislation for the Irish language is not as clear cut as a law facilitating same sex marraige, for example, and the Irish language community has to be careful of what we wish for from Westminster. I think there is a general acceptance right across the board now that for Stormont to return there will need to be an Irish language Act. Arlene Foster herself confirmed to Conradh na Gaeilge during that round of meetings with Irish language groups in the Spring of 2017 that “there will be legislative provision for the Irish language”. The fallout since has been around the form and content of that legislation. 

The community alongside a host of international experts, from the Council of Europe, the UN, NIHRC, and a majority of 5 Stormont parties, are all singing off the same hymn sheet; an act must be delivered in ‘stand-alone’ legislation. The content, must be based on international best practice, affording the Irish language official status, with a commissioner, and provision for signage and services. 

The draft agreement published in February 2018 would have fallen well short of what is needed, and would only have embedded the fundamental problem of political interference within the legislation. We have since then told the parties as much. After 900 days we must ensure we arrive at a worthwhile resolution, one that makes demonstrable and practical change for people and communities who wish to use the language. For those who don’t wish to engage with the language, new legislation will have little to no impact on their lives. As CAJ’s Daniel Holder explained, “Put simply the rights of non-speakers of Irish are not interfered with by also continuing to provide for English”  http://eamonnmallie.com/2018/02/acht-na-gaeilge-rights-people-dont-speak-irish-daniel-holder/ 

Drafted correctly, an Irish language Act will ensure the language is no longer held hostage to political tensions or crass and sectarian decision making. Leaving this to the whim of Westminster could be potentially naive and risky, as MPs could bring back an Irish language Act in name only; with very weak provisions and content. So we could find ourselves very much in ‘be careful what you wish for’ territory. The St Andrews Agreement did include a very significant caveat that helps to mitigate weaks proposals, clearly stating the Act must be based on experiences from Wales and the south.

Nevertheless we must explore and exhaust all avenues for delivery. The Dream Dearg grassroots campaign is constantly evolving as the political landscape chops and changes on a daily basis. The concept of bottom-up activism, community organising, ‘feet on the street’ participative ideology for change will remain key in this campaign. 

During post election briefings in April 2017 we were told that politics here have changed forever. 

Things have changed. 

Westminster is off the fence. 

This week we have learned that London has both the capacity and the will to vote through legislative change here, when it suits them. Local agreement remains the priority. That ensures both local buy-in and local responsibility. 

If the DUP continue to elevate the exclusion of the Irish speaking community over the need for an executive that serves everyone, then we now have a precedent for Westminster delivery. Any return to Stormont without an Irish language Act, however, would only legitimiste and institutionalise that exclusion even further. 

Real change and meaningful delivery fosters stability. Anything less and it will only take another #Líofa, another ‘crocodile’ or ‘curried yogurt’, and we will be right back here again calling for real solutions to the same problems. 

Conradh na Gaeilge has recently published an FAQ on an Irish Language Act. Download here. https://cnag.ie/images/Acht_Gaeilge_Ceisteanna_Coitianta_FAQ_2019.pdf 

Dr Pádraig Ó Tiarnaigh @ptierney89 is an Irish Language Advocate with Conradh na Gaeilge and a spokesperson for the An Dream Dearg campaign for an Irish Language Act.

[think32blog]

Irish Language Act: ‘We need real delivery on real promises, wherever that may come from.’

Tuesday 9 July 2019 will be a day long remembered by many across these islands. Sitting with family and friends deep in the Bluestack mountains in south Donegal I spent the day searching for radio coverage and refreshing my Twitter feed. As the amendments rolled in it was hard not to jump to the conclusion that historic change was unfolding before us. The arguments over devolution and ‘direct rule’ decision making would inevitably be lost as Westminster finally got off the fence and the Tories turned on their confidence and supply partners.

The question of language rights, however, remains outstanding. During an interview with Noel Thompson on BBC’s Good Morning Ulster in the proceeding days I would be asked what the Westminster amendments would mean for the Irish language Act and our campaign for rights and recognition? Does this increase the chances of an Irish language Act and what does it tell us about potential legislation through Westminster?

In order to inform the debate in the here and now, we need to map out exactly what role the British Government has played to date regarding indigenous language protections and promises.

In little over 20 years, the British Government has ratified, promised or pledged protections for the Irish language on no less than four separate occasions. 1998 saw the Irish language be promised ‘ resolute action’ and parity of esteem in the Good Friday Agreement. The same year would see the British Government ratify the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM) and in 2001 they would also ratify the European Charter on Regional and Minority Languages (ECRML). Both are international treaties that require the British Government to protect and promote indigenous languages and communities, including specific provisions for Irish. Finally, the British Government would commit themselves to an Irish language Act, based on the experiences of Wales and the Republic, in the 2006 St Andrews Agreement. 

These four treaties all have one thing in common; they have been signed off in Westminster but since ratification have almost completely ignored and sidelined by the British Government. 

COMEX, the Council of Europe Committee of Experts, during their periodical monitoring rounds would consistently criticise the British Government over lack of compliance whilst continuing to recommend they ‘adopt appropriate legislation protecting and promoting the Irish language’ and ‘engage in a dialogue to create the political consensus needed for adopting legislation’.

As co-guarantors of both Good Friday and St Andrews it’s fair to say the British Government aren’t neutral bystanders nor can they continue their pretence as objective arbitrators in the Stormont impasse. The same goes for the Irish Government. An Tanáiste Simon Coveney would go on to publicly re-commit to his duties as co-guarantor and reassure us of the Irish Government’s support for #AchtAnois in a letter to Belfast based Irish language group Glór na Móna  https://twitter.com/dreamdearg/status/1121446245640355841 

Of course, the question of legislation for the Irish language is not as clear cut as a law facilitating same sex marraige, for example, and the Irish language community has to be careful of what we wish for from Westminster. I think there is a general acceptance right across the board now that for Stormont to return there will need to be an Irish language Act. Arlene Foster herself confirmed to Conradh na Gaeilge during that round of meetings with Irish language groups in the Spring of 2017 that “there will be legislative provision for the Irish language”. The fallout since has been around the form and content of that legislation. 

The community alongside a host of international experts, from the Council of Europe, the UN, NIHRC, and a majority of 5 Stormont parties, are all singing off the same hymn sheet; an act must be delivered in ‘stand-alone’ legislation. The content, must be based on international best practice, affording the Irish language official status, with a commissioner, and provision for signage and services. 

The draft agreement published in February 2018 would have fallen well short of what is needed, and would only have embedded the fundamental problem of political interference within the legislation. We have since then told the parties as much. After 900 days we must ensure we arrive at a worthwhile resolution, one that makes demonstrable and practical change for people and communities who wish to use the language. For those who don’t wish to engage with the language, new legislation will have little to no impact on their lives. As CAJ’s Daniel Holder explained, “Put simply the rights of non-speakers of Irish are not interfered with by also continuing to provide for English”  http://eamonnmallie.com/2018/02/acht-na-gaeilge-rights-people-dont-speak-irish-daniel-holder/ 

Drafted correctly, an Irish language Act will ensure the language is no longer held hostage to political tensions or crass and sectarian decision making. Leaving this to the whim of Westminster could be potentially naive and risky, as MPs could bring back an Irish language Act in name only; with very weak provisions and content. So we could find ourselves very much in ‘be careful what you wish for’ territory. The St Andrews Agreement did include a very significant caveat that helps to mitigate weaks proposals, clearly stating the Act must be based on experiences from Wales and the south.

Nevertheless we must explore and exhaust all avenues for delivery. The Dream Dearg grassroots campaign is constantly evolving as the political landscape chops and changes on a daily basis. The concept of bottom-up activism, community organising, ‘feet on the street’ participative ideology for change will remain key in this campaign. 

During post election briefings in April 2017 we were told that politics here have changed forever. 

Things have changed. 

Westminster is off the fence. 

This week we have learned that London has both the capacity and the will to vote through legislative change here, when it suits them. Local agreement remains the priority. That ensures both local buy-in and local responsibility. 

If the DUP continue to elevate the exclusion of the Irish speaking community over the need for an executive that serves everyone, then we now have a precedent for Westminster delivery. Any return to Stormont without an Irish language Act, however, would only legitimiste and institutionalise that exclusion even further. 

Real change and meaningful delivery fosters stability. Anything less and it will only take another #Líofa, another ‘crocodile’ or ‘curried yogurt’, and we will be right back here again calling for real solutions to the same problems. 

Conradh na Gaeilge has recently published an FAQ on an Irish Language Act. Download here. https://cnag.ie/images/Acht_Gaeilge_Ceisteanna_Coitianta_FAQ_2019.pdf 

Dr Pádraig Ó Tiarnaigh @ptierney89 is an Irish Language Advocate with Conradh na Gaeilge and a spokesperson for the An Dream Dearg campaign for an Irish Language Act.

[think32blog]

Dominic Adams on thinking32

Me and Irene have two grown up children. Both Dominic Óg and Niamh attended Gaelscoileanna. Both play GAA and soccer and carry Irish passports. Both are confident, non judgemental, diverse and non sectarian in their outlook on life. Both are grounded in their jobs and Dominic Óg has a university degree.

He turned 26 this year.

A month after I turned 26 I was released from Long Kesh after spending seven years imprisoned there.

My life and that of my peers was the total opposite of what our children enjoy today.

In 1965 I was born into an artificial, corrupt, sectarian statelet whose government did not consider me as an equal citizen.

From my very early childhood my family home was constantly raided by the British army. Family members were imprisoned and some relations were shot dead by the British army.

Our formative years were shaped by the conflict in which we found ourselves, a never ending sequence of death, house raids, living behind security gates in your own home, imprisonment and more deaths.

The hope for an end to the conflict came about with the ceasefires and negotiations of the mid 1990s and the Good Friday Agreement.

We had time to breathe, to analyse and argue, debate and promote our beliefs with those people whom we were diametrically opposed to and we could do it, mostly, without the fears of our previous lives.

Dominic Óg and Niamh were born in the mid 1990s. They have no memory of the conflict. Their lives are shaped by their jobs, their partners, their homes and social interests.

Normal lives.

Yet these normal lives are tainted by the partition of our country. A partition that was forced upon their great grandparents through the threat of violence and a sectarian headcount in the north of Ireland.

A partition that makes a difference between those born in one part of Ireland to those born in another part of Ireland.

When Dominic Óg cheers on Tyrone at Pairc na Crocaigh he is no different to the Dublin fan cheering on his county.

Partition has failed us and has failed them.

A new Ireland must be built; one where our children (all our children) can prosper in and can be proud of.

One of diversity, equality, tolerance and non sectarianism. One that when Niamh marries Victoria in a couple of years will recognise the marriage for what it is, a union of two people in love.

It must be an Ireland that reflects all our cultures and traditions, where no religion is raised above another.

Where skin colour is not a barrier to progress.

All of this can only come about when Ireland is united, a 32 county republic reflected in the proclamation of 1916.

It is time for the Dublin government to enact policies promoting a united Ireland, to open the debate. To invite our unionist brethren to Dublin and engage in a warm and cordial manner in order to bring about the conditions for a new and unified Ireland.

We all live on this Island. We can rule it ourselves.

Dominic Adams

[think32blog]

#AsIrishAs by Patricia MacBride @irlpatricia

Dr Ciara Kelly’s article in the Sunday Independent on 16th June: “Don’t let the old Diaspora shape our Ireland” starts from the premise that “our Ireland” is constructed entirely of Irish-born citizens resident in the 26 counties of the Republic of Ireland.

The Sindo’s article is certainly brimming with a sense of birthright, but only the birthright of a select few.

That is not the Irish nation, though. Article 2 of the Irish Constitution states: “It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.”

Dr Kelly asks: “…do we really want citizens who have either left these shores for their own reasons or have never actually lived here at all, a say in one of the pillars of our democracy?”

Let me point you back to Article 2.

It is not for Dr Kelly, or any journalist or politician to deem that my Irish identity is lesser than theirs.

I am as Irish as Seamus Heaney. I am as Irish as President Mary McAleese. I am as Irish as Dr Ciara Kelly. My Irish identity is as innate and unchangeable a characteristic in me as my curly hair.

The argument that there should be no representation without taxation is not logical. If only those who pay income tax to the Irish state are permitted a vote, then strike off full-time students, low-income pensioners, stay-at-home parents and those unable to work due to illness or disability from the electoral register.

It is correct that those people may pay VAT or other taxes, but so do the 40,000 cross-border workers. So do the thousands of young emigrants who come home to visit their families each year. What is she suggesting? Is there going to be an office where you turn in your petrol receipts to prove you’ve paid excise duty or VAT in order that you may register to vote? That’s not a reasoned position.

There is a jarring disconnect between the assertion that only those who pay taxes should be permitted to vote and non-tax resident individuals voting in or influencing elections and politics through the media organisations they own or control.

It is only one generation ago that people on this island were barred from voting because of their economic status. If “the Ireland we live in is largely progressive and liberal” then in what way is it acceptable to create a hierarchy of citizen? Quite simply, it is not.

Dr Kelly is also concerned that: “Even giving those north of the Border a vote is problematic. They vote along sectarian lines there, in a way we don’t here.”

Her concern seems to be that she might end up with a British Unionist president if there was a split vote in a large field of candidates. Firstly, only Irish citizens can run for President. Secondly, if an Ulster Unionist were elected then that’s called democracy. That would truly be cherishing all of the children of the nation equally and would signal the progressive, liberal new Ireland of which I and many others want to be part.

Wanting to curtail people’s ability to exercise their birthright because you don’t like for whom they might vote is called gerrymandering at best and Fascism at worst.

There is nothing in the options paper produced by government last year which suggests that there would be any change in the process of electing a President.

Any candidate for President must be nominated by 20 members of the Oireachtas or by four County Councils. This safeguard has prevented candidates with extreme or unpopular views from securing nominations in the past and it will in the future. To say otherwise is ill-informed scaremongering.

Around 10% of young people in Ireland emigrated during the recession. They are part of our diaspora. They came #HomeToVote in two referendums that changed the fabric of the nation. For that alone, they deserve a say in who is Head of State.

The Irish who prospered in their new homes in other countries supported Ireland in times of need. They were our champions in business and industry, they punched well above our weight as a small country in international relations and peace-building. They have invested in our nation’s past. They deserve a stake in its future.

They are #AsIrishAs me, or, indeed, Dr Ciara Kelly.

[think32blog]

Citizenship in a United Ireland – there is nothing to be lost from Parity of esteem

Emma DeSouza

The right to identify and be accepted as Irish or British or both is a fundamental cornerstone of the equality provisions of the Good Friday Agreement, but how would that right continue in the event of a United Ireland?

Parity of Esteem under the Belfast Agreement lays out the principle of equality between the two communities of Northern Ireland, a principle that was cemented in an overwhelming majority vote- both North and South. The people voted for the Good Friday Agreement and all the rights and entitlements it presented. Two decades later, as Brexit unravels the political institutions of the United Kingdom, an underbelly of broken promises and a self-serving, arrogant government has been revealed. The view of the British government, astoundingly, is that “A treaty HMG is a party of does not alter the laws of the United Kingdom” - a curious statement to make when attempting to negotiate a raft of new agreements with global partners. This attitude and ignorance has been demonstrably evident in the British Home Office interpretation of the birth right provisions of the Belfast Agreement. Instead of a free choice to be accepted as Irish or British or both as laid out, the Home Office believes we are all British and will pursue anyone who says otherwise through the courts. This has raised serious questions over the British government’s commitment to the Good Friday Agreement and has exposed an apathetic at best, contemptuous at worst view held by those in high office.

At present, legally, NI born British citizens have their birth right under the Good Friday Agreement protected - as do dual nationals. The only category in the three distinct groups of citizenship in Northern Ireland who do not have their right to choose upheld is Irish citizens. Undoubtedly this would change in a United Ireland scenario as Northern Ireland would no longer be under the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom which would bring an end to the automatic conferral of British citizenship - in its place would be uncertainty for NI born British citizens. Irish citizens would be protected under Ireland’s nationality provisions – which are compliant with the Good Friday Agreement after an amendment in 2004.

The uncertainty for NI-born British citizens in Northern Ireland is due to the British government reluctance to legislate the birth right provisions of the Good Friday Agreement into UK domestic law. It has resisted all calls and recommendations to do so for the last 20 years, despite the fact that this practice is against parity of esteem under the Good Friday Agreement. In recent correspondence and court documents the British government has stated that “an international agreement such as the Belfast Good Friday Agreement cannot supersede domestic legislation” basically if the right you are relying on hasn’t passed through parliament this government won’t uphold it even though there is a general obligation on governments to adhere to international agreements.

The WeAreIrishtoo campaign to implement the birthright provisions of the Good Friday Agreement has been seen by some as an attempt to secure protections for just one section of our society - Irish citizens. This is simply untrue, Irish citizens are currently especially vulnerable but legislating the right to be accepted as Irish or British or both into domestic UK law would provide a certainty and protection to all the people of Northern Ireland, including NI-born British citizens should a border poll result in a United Ireland. There are no losers in securing equal access to rights. Of course, it is impossible to predict the constitutional changes that a United Ireland could bring and how that would impact citizenship entitlements but there is much to be considered from the history of citizenship on this island.

After partition in 1922 persons resident in the South became citizens of the Irish free state. However, UK law treated the same persons as British Subjects. In 1935 the Irish government passed citizenship legislation that reflected Dublin’s issue with this assertion under UK law with Section 33.3 – stating that being a ‘natural born citizen of Saorstát Eireann (Irish free state) ’ did not confer any other citizenship. Under UK law the British courts disagreed, and found in Murray v Parkes (1942) that a Roscommon-born man who had moved to England, was a British Subject under British law.

The contention around citizenship continued with section 21 of Ireland’s 1935 Act restricting dual citizenship with a loss of Irish citizenship being the consequence. An exception was put into later legislation (1956) which stipulated that this would not occur when a citizenship was ‘conferred’ on a person by the law of ‘another country’ without any ‘voluntary act’ on their part.

The 1956 Irish citizenship legislation (after the Republic of Ireland Act 1948) introduced into law the term ‘Irish Citizens’. Its provisions on birth and descent, automatically conferred Irish citizenship on persons in Northern Ireland. An action considered by the then Stormont Parliament as inflicting ‘unwanted Irish republican nationality on the people of Northern Ireland.’ Which considering the British government’s current position on conferring British citizenship is rather something.

The concept in law of a ‘British Citizen’ began in 1983 with the commencement of the current British Nationality Act 1981, replacing the concept of a ‘Citizen of the United Kingdom and the Colonies’ from British nationality legislation in 1948. The 1948 Act ceased to consider the Republic of Ireland as part of the ‘UK and the Colonies’ and ended the practice of automatic conferral of British Subject status on Irish Citizens. The 1981 Act continued automatically to confer British Citizenship on most persons born in the UK – including Northern Ireland and its here where we can see potential outcomes from a United Ireland.

Under the British Nationality Act 1981, a person born within the United Kingdom is automatically British at birth if one of their parents is British or a settled person – Irish citizens are considered settled in the United kingdom. So anyone born in the United kingdom is automatically British if one of their parents is British or Irish, hence the blanket citizenship issues in Northern Ireland. This changes with births outside of the United Kingdom, which a United Ireland would be. Firstly the ‘settled person/Irish citizen’ category is removed. A child born to a British parent outside of the United Kingdom has an entitlement to British citizenship which those who have elected to hold a British passport would be but this entitlement under the British Nationality Act 1981 is only applicable to two generations of British citizens. After which there would be no entitlement, unless the UK legislated the birthright provisions of the Good Friday Agreement into domestic law.

The next question is what about those who haven’t elected to hold a British passport? Would they be considered British in a United Ireland? In 1922 citizens resident in the South became citizens of the free state, in the event of a United Ireland citizens in the North could very well become citizens of Ireland and having taken no formal legal steps to their British citizenship could find themselves being considered legally Irish. The British government’s current policy of imposing British citizenship on all the people of Northern Ireland is already hotly contested for the simple fact that it is not compatible with the Good Friday Agreement, it is unrealistic to imagine this would be allowed to continue in any shape or form in a United Ireland scenario. The only way to legally ensure parity of esteem and an entitlement to British citizenship is through the legislation of the birth right provisions of the Good Friday Agreement into UK domestic law. Only the British government can decide who is a British citizen.

The pre-GFA history of considerable disputes over the imposition of citizenship by either State set the context for what was included in the 1998 Agreement. Questions over identity and equality were evident throughout the troubles – which is why protecting identity, equality and the principle of parity of esteem was of paramount importance during the peace process. Brexit puts a wrecking ball through those protections. We continue to hear repeated assurances that equality under the Good Friday Agreement will be protected in any Brexit scenario but on paper, in policy and in practice the opposite is happening. The only equality of citizenship the people of Northern Ireland have experienced since 1998 has been due to both the UK and Ireland being members of the European Union – that’s about to change. Before it does we should all be pushing for the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, it will protect us now and in the future.

[think32blog]

Reflections on Ireland past.... and present.

I am a man of 45 years who has lived in Dublin for most of my life.

I’ve seen a lot of changes in that time. We’ve all seen a lot of changes.

When I was born the country I was born in was a repressive grey lifeless void of no possibilities, all brought about by 2 or 3 rudderless generations of clueless politicians whose main policy appeared to and in many cases turned out to be a knee bending subservience to the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

The levels of obedience paralysed the population into fearful inaction and that inaction allowed every sort of church led depravity happen.

An outsider would be forgiven for judging the Ireland I was growing up in as a Catholic fundamentalist state.

A Paisley might be forgiven for viewing the us as a Papist state.

We were a Papist state.

Right up to this day we are discovering the devastation caused by those levels of enforced devotion to ‘faith’.

As the 80’s rolled into the 90’s and the sex abuse scandals started to be revealed, my generation stopped going to Mass. By the mid 90’s as the cesspool of depravity become too much, the generation older than me also stopped going to Mass.

We lost our fear of the church and that fear turned into stomach churning disgust.

People had had enough and we openly declared ourselves against the church on TV, Radio and print media, in kitchens and sitting rooms and on the streets, all across the country.

Father Ted arrived, proof of the new regard that priests were held in.

The churches became empty on Sundays and there were no more trainee Priests in Maynooth.

The church had to import Priests and worshippers from Poland to keep the doors open.

Mass became a minority interest, we’d collectively had enough.

Why am I telling you all this that you probably already know?

I grew up with a phrase that got tattooed in my mind, the one where Ian Paisley Snr shouts “Ulster is a Protestant state for a Protestant people ...”

It was a sentence grown from a paranoid opposition to a ‘Rome Ruled South’, one that fuelled many years of violence and many more years of marching up and down.

Their feared ‘Rome Ruled South’ is now as dead as all the dodos and dinosaurs and because of that, there is no longer the religious excuse that Unionists have relied on as their main reason for not Uniting Ireland.

Southern Ireland is an open, multiracial, multi-faith society where everybody can believe or not believe in whatever they choose and nobody will even care to notice.

Written by @dublinmacker

[think32blog]

Ten kilometres of a Pandora’s Box

There many ways in which partition has held back the development of the women’s movement, like other aspects of Irish society, but for today, I want to start by talking about the Pandora’s Box that is the mis-named Women’s Mini-“Marathon”, or the VhI sponsored 10k women-only run on Whit weekend every year in Dublin.

I took part in it this year to support the Amber Women’s Refuge which is in Kilkenny and helps women subject to domestic violence or psychological abuse. Fair play to Kathleen Funchion TD for organising a group which raised €2,500+ and I hope is some comfort to the women and children using the service.

So, to Pandora’s Box: Greek mythology says that Pandora was given the box and told it was full of gifts, but that she was not to open it, ever. Despite trying hard, eventually, her curiosity got the better of her. She opened it and out flew all the evils in the world.

She tried in vain to close it again, but they all escaped, leaving inside the one good thing which could combat the evils: hope.

I was reminded of Pandora on Sunday, lining up on Fitzwilliam Street in Dublin to begin the women’s 10k. We had to stand for about an hour in the hot sunshine, waiting to be allowed to start. It was hard going for those of us who were more like slow walkers than “mini-marathon” runners, but it gave me a chance to look at the t-shirts around me, each one calling out an evil, either by its nature or by the way it is dealt with by this government.

There was indeed a Pandora’s box full of pain, suffering, neglect and anguish on the t-shirts worn by the 30,000 women to took part: multiple sclerosis, autism, polio, depression, every kind of cancer imaginable, every kind of childhood disease or condition and so many beautiful photographs of loved-ones who had died by suicide or by some of the aforementioned diseases, addiction, homelessness, racism, violence against women, rape. The list was endless.

I fast walked with my daughter and we made it in about two hours, which pleased us because we are not fit and not used to such distances. There were people pushing wheelchairs with their children, sisters, mothers, aunties or grannies in them and there were women wheeling themselves along the route, there were fit, thin b***ches who ran and didn’t even look out of breath or break a sweat, there were joggers, there were walkers, there were fast walkers and slow walkers and hobblers and shufflers.

It was the female personification of the dire state of our health services and support services for the victims of all sorts of misfortune, cruelty and injustice. The women, every last one of them, were an inspiration and a hope that we can make things better and a signal that they were going to try to make that happen. They were the hope at the bottom of Pandora’s Box.

I look forward to the day that they all realise that although the event is worthy and valuable and even a bit of craic, that alongside the fundraising, we need some consciousness-raising and campaigning to change the circumstances so that society, via an equitable health service, looks after the old, the sick and the vulnerable and that women will run only for fun and not to prop up an inefficient and inequitable health service.

A united health service, in a united Ireland should aim to take the best bits of the NHS in the North and the HSE in the South and make a new start towards achieving that goal.

Up the women! Well done to every one of the 30,000 who took part. Now, where’s the Radox?

Contributed by @cathypower

[think32blog]

Just Begin

Colin Harvey

The conversation on unity is happening and will continue. Watching the reaction remains instructive. It is easy to knock down a caricatured position that no one holds. There is a real risk of people talking at cross purposes.

Below I set out five tentative thoughts and reflections in the spirit of ongoing dialogue.

First, people are right to expect the starting point to be anchored faithfully in the Good Friday Agreement. This is because of its formal qualities (British-Irish Agreement) and its democratic legitimacy. Ill-advised attempts to amend the consent requirements are unwise. If a further lock is proposed and taken seriously, what is to prevent others seeking additional revisions or alternative changes? Why not walk away entirely and go for a singular all-island vote instead (just like Brexit)? Opening up the majority consent requirement for the north could spell the end of the Agreement, with disastrous consequences. However well-intentioned, the fact that arguments about ‘gerrymandering’ the constitutional compromise at the heart of the Agreement are coming from within nationalism/republicanism is quite remarkable.

Second, it cannot be left to the Secretary of State. Formally significant discretion exists; this shades into a duty where it is likely that a majority would opt for a united Ireland. But if this process is to be a serious one then it needs proper planning and preparation. Now, this point usually pops up as a reason to do nothing; a way to bury constitutional change in a currently non-existent process. My position is the reverse of this. I have suggested a date for these referendums (22 May 2023). This is the 25th anniversary of the all-island vote on the Agreement in 1998. A number of things need to happen before then. The framework for this should be examined within the British Irish Intergovernmental Conference. Both governments should, following consultation and engagement, set out the parameters of the process. This will require structured input from the political parties and civic society; one option might be an advisory panel or panels to scope out options. The governments would agree a Framework Document on principles and process and a Joint Declaration establishing their own roles and intentions. A bilateral agreement underpinning all this would be of assistance. The Irish government should create a time-limited forum/assembly/convention that could, for example, set out in some detail the consequences of a vote for Irish unity. This should learn the lessons from recent experience in Ireland of such mechanisms and draw upon relevant expertise. Other work will be needed, but the main objective is clarity about consequences. Why not start this year?

Third, although government-level resourcing will be needed to carry a project of this constitutional significance forward, civic leadership will be vital. There is no reason to wait, and no one needs permission to start talking. As many organisations and individuals as possible should have the conversations now. Ireland’s Future and Think32 are only two excellent examples of collectives that are taking the initiative. I would encourage everyone to have the discussion and to organise group conversations; the more the better and the sooner the better.

Fourth, those who suggest that Brexit changes the context are right. It does so in a radical way; Irish unity becomes a way back to the EU (if the UK ever does leave). No one should be punished for saying this out loud. It is, of course, sensible to learn the lessons of Brexit. There must be as much clarity and certainty as possible in advance of these referendums. But it would be equally naïve to assume that the losers will easily accept the outcome. And just watch the arguments about enhanced consent requirements return to haunt the process afterwards - if there is a vote for Irish unity, for example. Enlisting EU support in this venture may be wise, as well as securing international co-operation and endorsement. That may become particularly relevant in the context of a sharply contested outcome, and that is why a robust British-Irish framework for all aspects of the process and outcome will be required.

Finally, this need not be an anxiety ridden conversation, one where negativity and fear prevail. This island can do better than that. It may well renew and re-energise the debate about the performance of both parts of this island. Ideally, it will help to erode myths and get people thinking about how we could do better, whatever the outcome. We will know much more about each other at the end of this process, and about the island that we share together.

So, just begin, join the conversation and enjoy the journey.

[think32blog]

Thoughts on the border by Phil Mac Giolla Bháin

I was introduced to the realities of the Border when the “cattle boat” which had sailed from the Broomielaw in Glasgow to North Wall in Dublin was taken off line.

Then the ten year old me learned about places like Stranraer and Larne.

In order to get to Dublin to take the train to my father’s town of Westport we had to cross the Border.

The last time I recall that militarised demarcation line entering my consciousness was in the summer of 1994.

We crossed the Border from Fermanagh into Leitrim and a very large member of An Garda Síochána looked at my green passport.

When he saw my name as Gaeilge it prompted a question in the first language of the state:

"Cá bhfuil sibh ag dul?” he asked me.

“Táimid ag dul go Contae Mhaigh Eo.”

We were indeed going to my father’s county in the Wesht for a family holiday.

Such a linguistic interaction on the other side of the line would have been dangerously out of place, especially with the locally recruited security forces.

As we drove towards the West we all felt a relief to be in our own place and not in the Six Counties.

While we were in Mayo Ireland beat Italy at soccer in New York and a British death squad did their stuff at Loughinisland.

Two years later we had settled back home in Ireland.

For herself and me, both with an Irish born parent and Irish grandparents on the other side of the house this little island was always home.

We’ve reared our brood here in this the quintessential Border county of Donegal.

Much has changed here since the days of Brits and checkpoints.

These days I think nothing of driving to Derry for NUJ meetings or to pillage the local shopping centres as post-Brexit Sterling tumbles against the Euro.

Over that twenty one years the Partition line has slowly dissolved and the European Union has played a positive role in minimising that geo-political disfigurement on this island.

However, now we could be faced with some of it coming back again.

In February 2016 before the Brexit vote I wrote a piece for the Scottish politics Blog Bella Caledonia.

It might warrant another read now.

A lot of my fears expressed in that piece appear worryingly prescient.

The Irish story over the centuries has been about events in Europe and Britain having unforeseen yet profoundly long lasting consequences here in Ireland, e.g. the Reformation, counter-reformation, French revolution and the First World War.

They all had a uniquely Irish impact on people here.

Now the UK has decided to do walking away from the European Union.

My green passport is no more, it was a beautiful document with a gold inlaid Harp.

Although my merlot coloured travel document today isn’t nearly as aesthetically pleasing I view the EU livery is an emblem of peaceful cooperation for a continent disfigured by centuries of war.

The Peace Process on this island probably couldn’t have occurred without the Maastricht Treaty.

In creating a more harmonised union across the continent of Europe the stage was set for two member states of the EU, assisted by the Clinton Administration, to explore a dénouement to the war situation on this island.

Back then I was privy to the thinking of some senior Republicans as they entered the talks that would produce the Good Friday Agreement.

They were calculating, prescient men.

Some of them had spent a large chunk of their youth in British prisons.

This had given them with the ability to sketch out a long game, but at no point did I hear anyone gaming out Britain leaving the European Union!

However, we are nearly at that juncture.

I have, in recent weeks, spoken to some old comrades from that time.

We shared a joke about how events can blindside all of us.

Some things, though, do not change.

The modern Irish revolutionary tradition, which emerged in the 19th century was based on the following rationale:

England will only attend to Ireland when the Irish become a problem for them.

When the people of Ireland were docile then they could literally starve to death and it didn’t really register with the Westminster tribe.

Now the Bullingdon boys are startled that the Micks could actually create a roadblock to Brexit on the Lifford to Stabane road.

The Backstop…

We now have the situation where even a Taoiseach who last year wore a local variant of the Poppy in Dáil Éireann cannot agree with the Grand Old Dame Britannia on what to do with her Irish frontier.

The son of an Indian immigrant and educated at an exclusive  private school that has a  Church of Ireland ethos, Varadkar isn’t exactly a Provo from central casting.

Indeed he might be the most pro-British Taoiseach in the history of the State.

When such a person can cause Border problems for the ruling elite on the Thames then we are truly in uncharted waters.

I think the fact that Leo Varadkar’s Chief Whip during that phase of the negotiations was Donegal TD Joe McHugh might be one of those small details that can ultimately have significant implications.

I’ve known Joe since he was an unfancied candidate for the County Council here.

His political career has spanned the Good Friday Agreement and he has been involved in several EU funded cross Border initiatives.

During the Phase One part of the Withdrawal Agreement talks there appeared to be a binary choice between a hard border or Northern Ireland remaining within the Single Market and the Customs Union.

Quite simply there would need to be a trade border either at Lifford or Larne.

Of course, the former subverts the Belfast Agreement and the latter compromises the integrity of the United Kingdom.

However, because the British government was dependent on the DUP to support her minority administration Theresa May said that a trade barrier between the Six Counties and Britain was a non-starter.

Therefore, the British negotiating team introduced the Backstop.

Consequently, the whole of the UK would need to effectively remain within the economic structures of the EU in order to satisfy Arlene that the “Precious Union” would not be compromised at Larne.

That little Ireland can cause a hold up in the Brexit talks should put to bed the “too wee” arguments in Scotland.

This current Border impasse demonstrates that a small EU state like the Republic of Ireland has a voice at Brussels and that it is one that is being heard.

If Brexit is a fascinating parlour game for the chattering classes here on the debatable land in the North West of Ireland it is prosaically real.

The European Union played a key role in bringing the Northern conflict to a close.

Brexit has the capacity to subvert the slow progress we have made in the last two decades.

The recent murder in Creggan of my colleague and friend Lyra McKee shows what is at stake.

None of this registers with the Westminster tribe as they play out a rivalry that has existed since the day that matron favoured one of them over the other at Eton.

That place remains the never failing source of all our political evils.

The people of this island deserve better.

Phil Mac Giolla Bháin is an author, blogger, journalist, novelist and playwright.

He is based in County Donegal, Ireland.

He is an active member of the National Union of Journalists and the chairman of the Irish Writers Union.

An established print journalist for many years Phil has also built up a considerable online readership through his blog www.philmacgiollabhain.ie .

His journalism over the past decade has focussed on highlighting the incidence of anti-Irish racism in Scotland.

He was a staff reporter on An Phoblacht for many years.

His debut novel “The Squad” was published by Books Noir in 2018.