About three hours before Gerry Adams’s barn-storming Ard Fheis speech, a fringe event took place in a lower room at the Millenium Forum. It was chaired by Michelle Gildernew, who a few hours later would introduce Gerry Adams for That Speech; the panellists were Dr Conor Patterson, CEO of Newry and Mourne Enterprise Agency, and Michael Burke, an independent economist from London ( I think). The topic was the economics of a united Ireland.
Unionists mock the very thought of national unity being argued on economic grounds. They point southwards and declare the southern state a basket case, and here in the north they point to the block grant from Britain and ask who or what would fill the black hole left by the removal of Britain’s annual £10 billion subvention?
Did the meeting provide a convincing counter-argument? Yes and no. Yes in that the panel pointed out that the figure of £10 billion was dubious, since much of the money does not in fact reach us in the northern state. More tellingly, it was pointed out that the amount of revenue generated within the north, going into the British Treasury, is rarely referred to. Some estimates put this at £15 billion, which if true rather alters the financial benefits of union. Beyond that there is the well-known duplication of services in health, education, roads, currency, etc.
And the No bit? I doubt if the economic argument advanced for unity would convince the average unionist. The notion of the south as near-bankrupt and our dependence in the north on the £10 billion block grant has been hard-wired into unionist (and some ‘nationalist’) minds. It may be that they are resistant to pro-united Ireland economic arguments because it’s unnerving to abandon a long-held way of thinking; or it may be that they believe the counter-argument figures are bogus.
More such meetings looking at the present economic situation in the north and comparing it with an alternative economic situation in a united Ireland are promised. That can only be good. There’s too much woolly economic talk from both pro- and anti-Irish unity advocates . Economics is the dismal science; it’s also the baffling science. The challenge to republicans is to produce their alternative economic vision in a compressed-but-valid package which economic infants like myself can get our heads around. When that’s done, it might be easier to tell which unionists actually believe in the union with Britain on economic grounds and which simply pretend to so believe.
There is no other task more challenging – and vital – for republicans to tackle.
Jude
I don’t think the vast majority of Republicans would vote to remain in the UK if evidence was produced to show they would be better off. I know you would not and nor would I.
Why then would you think that Unionists would react any differently in the reverse scenario. Their belief in the Union seems as deeply held as any held by Republicans.
(I,m sure you are not suggesting that Unionists are inherently more venal than Republicans!)
The 50% of the electorate that do not vote on the other hand may well be swayed by economic argument.
I largely agree with what you say, Gio(memo to self: seek medical treatment asap). You’re right about republicans and, I’d like to think, most nationalists. Besides, attitudes to things, including national unity, do change with time. But there is no doubt that the £s and ps of unity are central to the argument. The nearest comparison we have is the Scottish referendum, and economics dominated it. You’re not saying the Scots are more venal than us,gio???
Jude
I wonder how many in the Scottish referendum actually went from being firmly in favour of independence to voting No? I suspect very few were swayed so far.
More likely it is those who were ‘don’t know’ to begin with that may have found the economic argument swaying them. (I stand to be corrected on that of course)
Similarly I think Unionists will remain true to their ideals just as Republicans will, and those many undecideds or non-voters may find the economic argument will help them make up their minds.
I note that you still attribute this high minded idealism to Republicans and Nationalists but refrain from admitting it holds true for Unionists too.
Gio – you’re so smart I sometimes can’t quite follow you. Not sure if your last sentence, for example, is ironic with ‘this high-minded idealism’. I’m happy – well, maybe willing – to say that of course unionists hold their believes as genuinely as nats/republicans. And I think you may be onto something with that middle 50%. I stressed the economic because (i) it’s what people talk about first when UI is raised; (ii) Economics was very much centre stage during the Scottish referendum. But to repeat, I think you’ve mapped it out pretty accurately – that middle 50% would likely be swayed by economic matters.
Northern Ireland is part of one of the strongest economies in the world and Ireland isnt one of the largest economies by any stretch of the imagination.
So dumb it down for you Jude why would Northern Ireland wish to leave a very strong economy for a very much weaker one?
The european and global economies are much bigger than the British economy. The South being the only english speaking country in the euro zone is a magnet for FDI. The North will never be integrated with the European and global economies as part of the UK.
I think you’re missing an important point, neill: I’m urging a discussion of and evidence for national unity on economic grounds. I’m not urging insulting remarks like ‘dumbing it down for you Jude’. The south of Ireland IS part of one of the largest economies in the world – the EU. Whether NI is part of one of the strongest economies is open to debate…
There is no time like the present to develop a rational debate on a united Ireland. In the context of ‘bread and butter’ issues there is the potential to reflect on the social and economic benefits of unity in contrast to the cost of maintaining and policing a divided society. The impact of poverty, ill health, disability, unemployment or educational underachievement is a challenge for each individual irrespective of his or her religious affiliation, social or cultural background.
A Report on the Trans-generational Impact of the Troubles on Mental Health (March 2015) states “It should never happen again.” In 2003, 144 deaths by suicide were recorded, the figure rose to 303 in 2013. Alcohol and the abuse of other drugs remains a significant social problem. (p75) The report establishes a link between welfare dependency, mental health challenges and life expectancy. (p28) Sectarianism remains the most common hate crime and inequalities continue to exist. The economic impact of the troubles is clearly articulated in the report.
“The Troubles impacted very negatively on the economy in Northern Ireland. With the violence and unrest came poverty and deprivation, with money diverted away from essential services such as health, housing and education, towards security and rebuilding work following terrorist attacks. Tourism declined, many jobs were lost and industries diverted away from troubled areas.” (p30) We are left to ponder two questions. Are there individuals with health challenges in a normal society or normal people endeavouring to cope in a dysfunctional society?
Now is as good a time as any to adopt a pragmatic response to social and economic challenges. There is a marked lack of empirical evidence concerning the duplication of services, revenue and taxation. Moving forward on the basis of evidence based decisions outweighs institutionalised sectarianism that resulted in death and destruction.
The Northern state requires an annual subsidy because it exists as part of the UK. Partition makes no economic sense whatsoever.
Mmmm talking about subsidies and loans I presume you have forgotten about the loans that have been given to the Republic over the last few years from Europe and the United Kingdom mmm sounds like a failed state to me and you want us to join them?
Britain was loaned $4 Billion by the I.M.F in 1976.
Was/is Britain a failed state ??
well no. Although it certainly was and still is a heavily indebted state.
Also, what you describe is not congruent with the term ‘failed state’. That term is used
to denote a state which in effect no longer exists and is in a state of anarchy. Somalia is the best contemporary example – where legend has it you can buy an ak-47 easier than a loaf of bread.
I know Dublin can be rough in parts but come on now
Little wonder, Esteemed Blogmeister, that practitioners of the dismal science in Norneverland were always attracted to the SDLP rather than to Sinn Fein whose brooding leader was, is and always will be notoriously innumerate.
Nest we forget, this notoriety was soundly grounded on the verifiable fact that – imagine ! – he never ever learned ‘to count his chickens before they were incubated’.
Egg-headed economists with egg-chasing accents in the Free Southern Stateen were the cohort who came up with that one Yes, the exact same cohort who foresaw the biggest collapse thus far in the FSS’s economy (there have been a few) a good six months after it had happened.
Yes, the same Free Southern Stateeen whose vernacular of choice is the voice of global commerce – the Q.’s Englsih. And they said it could never happen.
These dismal scientists still wallow in the luxury of their support in the South for the SDLP which, of course, is the acronym for the Slough of Despond Labour Party. It figures.
Dismal scientists have always been the brand leaders in the dark art of jargon peddling; or rather were, up till very recently, when they were toffee-nosed ahead by those new trendsetters of cant on the block, the rugga commentariat.
Mind you, behind the smoke screen of dry ice that the dismal scientists choose to wrap their solemn pronouncement and most pompous of throw away lines, lies, yes, the c-word.
Though the dismal scientists nearly always start at A before meandering on down all the way to Z (though for reasons of variety or maybe even obfuscation itself, they sometimes opt to commence at Z and continue to talk through their rear gear till A is eventually reached) they still, inevitably come back to the c-word.
This is something which Perkies’ inner John Maynard Fruit Gums, known as ‘Keynes’ to his closest associates) has noticed and paid heed to.
The c-word,, being …….cyclical.
Fact is, doesn’t matter what the economy is whether planned, market or mixed, or whether there’s a boom or a bust, tis all the same at the finish: it will either end up in tears or in smiles. For the simple reason that it’s, yes, cyclical.
Perkie learned that great economic truth in the dismal bicycle shed behind the primary school along with that other great exercise in economy: how to drag, with the aid of a pilfered safety pin, the most pulls out of the headmaster’s extravagantly discarded butt of a Sweet Afton cigarette.
Master that basic art, and one’s finances will forever flow gently along. It’s a plain fact of fiduciary life as it is lived. Or,perhaps even of fiscal life itself. Certainly in Warbeck Towers, it is. whatever it is.
And it was always thus. Ever since one’s occasionally great-great-great-.grandfather Peregrine Warbeck first mastered the penny-farthing bicycle the twin words of ‘moola’ and ‘cycle’ have always been linked by a chain reaction. At the old hip,hip, hooray.
(And the adjective of cycle is cyclical, down at the back/ thios ag an gcul.)
Even to this very day, it is so. Why else would the Free Southern Stateen’s richest dude sport a, erm, handlebar mustache. Coincidence? Doubt if Dermot Desmond (for it is he!) would agree.
Of course, this is all old caubeen to natives of Norneverland. Did not wee John Boyd Dunlop himself see the possibilities of the pneumatic tyre and the accumulation of dosh?
The c-word again: cyclical.
Indeed that trend continues to this very day (2). A lady whose roots lie in the same airy area of Ayreshire as J.B Dunlop – the woman who was hugely influential in putting the tree back into country music, that ole fashioned millionairess, the unretired, the pneumatic Missy D. Parton sheself.
Again: c for cyclical.
Indeed, the recent spell spent in the Free Southern Stateen by the Troika is as good a hint for those who hunt for hints that the cyclical cycle is in the process of being, erm, recylced. (Green Bins, pulease).
Now that the Taoiseach and the Bean-counting Bean who is his Tanaiste have mastered and mistressed the arcane art of riding a Troika Triycle sans stabilisers, the end is as predicatible as a, well, a Dean Rock goal.(Or, gold, as they say in Dublin).
Ta se ag teacht aris / It’s coming back again
To the land of the chancers of Riverdance
And the Four Ps of the Panti Bliss prance
For whom ‘domestique’
Still holds real mystique
Le grand, le seul , le full Tour de Finance.
(c) A Spokesperson.
Apart from the contributions of the main speakers,did you get the impression from those delegates who attended that they were enthused by having to do more than sloganise about the virtues of an United Ireland?
Actually I was struck by how open the debate was and how willing people were to point to problems with the notion of unity on economic grounds.I’m not sure you’re being very impartial, Argenta, in assuming people were sloganising?
It’s good to hear that the debate and discussions were realistic and my apologies for attributing “sloganizing ” to those delegates who attended.However is it not fair to make the point that up unto recent times, arguments on an United Ireland have not always had that element of realism.
Well yes, Argenta – if you’re saying have republicans addressed the economics of a united Ireland in a thorough-going way that the public can understand, you’re right – they haven’t. I’d like to see that happen. At the same time, as i think someone else has said, there are people who’d be pro-united Ireland or anti-united Ireland regardless of the economic case
Sf not understanding what they signed up to in the Stormont House agreement doesn’t inspire much confidence in their economic abilities does it?
As a 2nd-gen Irishman, writing from London from a generally agnostic position on NI politics but with an in-principle support for a borderless Ireland, I’d urge SF not to get too deeply involved in any debate about the economics of unity.
It’s a pissing contest that unionists will always win because, in politics, if you’re explaining, you’re losing.
I also suspect that SF’s next turnaround could be on EU membership. Syritza have turned out to be a robustly pro-EU party now they’re on their mettle and it would do SF a lot of good to make this shift now rather than later. If SF ever get into government in Dublin, they could darken their entire period of administration if they’re forced into a messy climbdown on a subject that they will always have to climb down on.
EU membership helps to neutralise a lot of the Unionists economic arguments, as it happens.
Hi Jude. This is a massively important issue. I can’t understand how there are no papers on websites like irisheconomy.ie