The days of speculation about a united Ireland appear to be over. You are now more likely to encounter detailed surveys, deliberative forums and footnote-laden scholarly interventions. The danger of boring the electorate into submission should not be ruled out. I am indulging in gentle caricature, of course. But you get the point. The knowledge gap is being rapidly filled.
People know what is at stake. The risks grasped, the opportunities plain. The Irish Times/ARINS initiative is essential work. It offers a credible basis for serious discussions. We are getting a better sense of what people think. A diverse and growing body of rigorous research continues to complement this effort. Individual researchers will have their own personal views, but projects such as this take no constitutional position. A glance at social media demonstrates that the outcomes are deployed by all sides to promote their cause.
Where does this leave constitutional change activism? Recall that 2030 is referenced often, including in recent proposals from Ireland’s Future. There is evidence of improvement in the figures for a united Ireland. This will encourage those campaigning for Irish unity, and indicates that these collective efforts are having a definite impact. If the ambition is to win a referendum in the North this decade, then it is equally clear that more is required. How do you persuade the British Government to commence the referendum process when the Irish Government does not regard it as a priority, for example? Who is on the pitch matters. Leaving it to individuals, civil society and political parties will not provide the resources or capacity needed. The odd decision of the Irish Government to opt out will baffle future generations, given how far along the pathway we are.
Consider this also: Killing the accumulated momentum – and puncturing hopes for transformative change – may well be intentional. An attractive approach for those playing for time and the formidable vested interests threatened by a radically new future. People who talk a convincing game on unity, sing the right songs, hit the correct notes, but never quite yet. Cleverly cloaked in the responsible language of bureaucratic management – all the better to disguise what may be at work. An overly cynical take, perhaps. But it would be silly to discount the desire in the South – and within the existing Irish state – for self-preservation.
For those formulating persuasive unity proposals, there is further information about what might appeal, North and South. Insights that will assist the management of all stages. Awareness of the levels of resistance is helpful. Minimising the possibility and effectiveness of disruptive extremist action makes considerable sense. The decisive completion of the meandering transitions of armed groups is long overdue.
The diligent work of civic and political coalition building will intensify. United Ireland advocates will have to decide where on the continuity-transformation line they prefer to standfor these purposes. The powerful corporate forces of continuity moving into the space know exactly what they want, I suspect. They have a record of bending the public sphere to their will and agenda-setting is how they function and flourish. That is why it is so good to see trade unionists and other critical civic voices taking on the challenge of preparation at an early stage. If a New Ireland is what you want, then this is your moment.
The emotional responses to unity and attitudes towards immigration, NATO, the Commonwealth and institutional reform are good to know. A preference for ongoing British-Irish links underlines the enduring significance of relationships across these islands. Open acknowledgement that Ireland will evolve long after reunification should make theseconversations easier. But a time is coming when imaginative and deliverable options must surface. And this is where and when coalitions on either side of the argument will be tested. A key moment that is ripe for exploitation by malign actors too.
Solid support for planning is there, across the island. The need for preparation is accepted. The debate is in a different place, with widening appreciation that referendums are only a matter of time: when not if. And that question of timing will remain. My own view is that the lack of defined parameters is destabilising, especially when so many concede that a border poll is on the horizon. I doubt unionists are fooled by the public hesitancy.
That people want to decide is unsurprising. Preaching the principle of consent while never asking the question is not sustainable. It isn’t even very fair at this point. A theoretical choice waved in our faces daily. Always out of reach though; excuses dusted off from the factory of tired cliches to prop up inaction. Both governments will only be able to turn their backs for so long.
The troubling absence of future constitutional arrangements from the Programme for Government could be partially remedied by a proper interpretation of the shared island concept, for example. It is unwise to ignore an obvious way that this island will be shared in the future. Let us please abandon pretence adopted for partisan purposes in the competitive political arena: A united Ireland will be a shared island.
Pause, however, to note one significant thing. In a febrile environment, a world drowning in misinformation and disinformation, the journalistic leadership demonstrated by, for example,the Irish Times is impressive and merits recognition. These forms of creative collaborationbetween academia and the media are making a difference. The constitutional conversation is an increasingly well-informed enterprise. And whatever lies ahead, that is a good thing.
Colin Harvey is a Professor in the School of Law, Queen’s University Belfast.
The days of speculation about a united Ireland appear to be over. You are now more likely to encounter detailed surveys, deliberative forums and footnote-laden scholarly interventions. The danger of boring the electorate into submission should not be ruled out. I am indulging in gentle caricature, of course. But you get the point. The knowledge gap is being rapidly filled.
People know what is at stake. The risks grasped, the opportunities plain. The Irish Times/ARINS initiative is essential work. It offers a credible basis for serious discussions. We are getting a better sense of what people think. A diverse and growing body of rigorous research continues to complement this effort. Individual researchers will have their own personal views, but projects such as this take no constitutional position. A glance at social media demonstrates that the outcomes are deployed by all sides to promote their cause.
Where does this leave constitutional change activism? Recall that 2030 is referenced often, including in recent proposals from Ireland’s Future. There is evidence of improvement in the figures for a united Ireland. This will encourage those campaigning for Irish unity, and indicates that these collective efforts are having a definite impact. If the ambition is to win a referendum in the North this decade, then it is equally clear that more is required. How do you persuade the British Government to commence the referendum process when the Irish Government does not regard it as a priority, for example? Who is on the pitch matters. Leaving it to individuals, civil society and political parties will not provide the resources or capacity needed. The odd decision of the Irish Government to opt out will baffle future generations, given how far along the pathway we are.
Consider this also: Killing the accumulated momentum – and puncturing hopes for transformative change – may well be intentional. An attractive approach for those playing for time and the formidable vested interests threatened by a radically new future. People who talk a convincing game on unity, sing the right songs, hit the correct notes, but never quite yet. Cleverly cloaked in the responsible language of bureaucratic management – all the better to disguise what may be at work. An overly cynical take, perhaps. But it would be silly to discount the desire in the South – and within the existing Irish state – for self-preservation.
For those formulating persuasive unity proposals, there is further information about what might appeal, North and South. Insights that will assist the management of all stages. Awareness of the levels of resistance is helpful. Minimising the possibility and effectiveness of disruptive extremist action makes considerable sense. The decisive completion of the meandering transitions of armed groups is long overdue.
The diligent work of civic and political coalition building will intensify. United Ireland advocates will have to decide where on the continuity-transformation line they prefer to standfor these purposes. The powerful corporate forces of continuity moving into the space know exactly what they want, I suspect. They have a record of bending the public sphere to their will and agenda-setting is how they function and flourish. That is why it is so good to see trade unionists and other critical civic voices taking on the challenge of preparation at an early stage. If a New Ireland is what you want, then this is your moment.
The emotional responses to unity and attitudes towards immigration, NATO, the Commonwealth and institutional reform are good to know. A preference for ongoing British-Irish links underlines the enduring significance of relationships across these islands. Open acknowledgement that Ireland will evolve long after reunification should make theseconversations easier. But a time is coming when imaginative and deliverable options must surface. And this is where and when coalitions on either side of the argument will be tested. A key moment that is ripe for exploitation by malign actors too.
Solid support for planning is there, across the island. The need for preparation is accepted. The debate is in a different place, with widening appreciation that referendums are only a matter of time: when not if. And that question of timing will remain. My own view is that the lack of defined parameters is destabilising, especially when so many concede that a border poll is on the horizon. I doubt unionists are fooled by the public hesitancy.
That people want to decide is unsurprising. Preaching the principle of consent while never asking the question is not sustainable. It isn’t even very fair at this point. A theoretical choice waved in our faces daily. Always out of reach though; excuses dusted off from the factory of tired cliches to prop up inaction. Both governments will only be able to turn their backs for so long.
The troubling absence of future constitutional arrangements from the Programme for Government could be partially remedied by a proper interpretation of the shared island concept, for example. It is unwise to ignore an obvious way that this island will be shared in the future. Let us please abandon pretence adopted for partisan purposes in the competitive political arena: A united Ireland will be a shared island.
Pause, however, to note one significant thing. In a febrile environment, a world drowning in misinformation and disinformation, the journalistic leadership demonstrated by, for example,the Irish Times is impressive and merits recognition. These forms of creative collaborationbetween academia and the media are making a difference. The constitutional conversation is an increasingly well-informed enterprise. And whatever lies ahead, that is a good thing.
Colin Harvey is a Professor in the School of Law, Queen’s University Belfast.