@JusticeForJoe: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-29895593

@Decko Kelly: Bye Bye planters and good riddance.

@Decko Kelly: tick tock for 32

@Louise Tracey: UK would actually have to pay us to subsidise the hit to our economy of taking it on, probably on some sort of sliding scale over a timeframe of 15 to 25 years

@Barry Somers: in fairness, it’s a bit of a stretch calling the vote to leave the EU a knife edge result. I think there were four percentage points and about a million votes in it. Closeish but not that close. Subsequently the Brexit party dominated the European elections and now Boris has his majority. Don’t get me wrong, I think the whole thing is a total nightmare and absolutely the wrong thing but you would find it hard to argue against the fact that it’s what the majority of the British electorate want, though perhaps the Irish and Scots would not wish to be included in that particular majority. The while thing is just bloody depressing

@Frank Scanlon: In what currency? Pellet boilers?

@Angela McCarthy: Not so. The so called reports you mention have been widely criticised for unrealistic assumptions. The biggest assumption is that an all island economy would magically transform NI’s basket case economy. It won’t. This is like saying that when West Germany reunited with East Germany it would be cost neutral because of the benefits that would accrue from a one nation status. It cost the West German tax payer €2 trillion. Feast your eyes on that number. Of course the Germans don’t engage in magical thinking. The report you mentioned found a large gap in the monies needed to meet the needs of NÍ. So it simply filled this gap with magical thinking. Namely, an all island economy will make this gap go away. It won’t. We need to be realistic before we can reunify.

@Louise Tracey: Pay for land that is actually ours you must be Fffg.

@John R: you are comparing germany with ireland what a complete plank.

@Chris OB: He’s correct though. West Germany had an economy that could just about fund reunification. Not understanding the comparison, much less its implications for Ireland, suggests it’s you thats the “complete plank”

@Angela McCarthy: I always laugh when I hear the line “It will be cost neural”. If NI can be cost neutral as part of a United Ireland, it can certainly be cost neutral as part of the much bigger UK. Someone should tell Boris and he can save the £11 Billion per annum!

@Louise Tracey: so what are you saying now Louise, is lets change the goalposts again from a simple majority as applies in all democracies, to a specific percentage that in reality will never be met, thus preventing unity for all time.

in reality, what you are saying is – lets hold onto and secure the Unionist Veto into perpetuity. Why is it that back in the day when unionism was safe in a majority position, such a vote for remaining in the British Union would have relied on an outcome of 50% plus one vote. Now you want different rules to apply to the majority of not only the people of the whole island, but even to the people of the north, because you don’t like the way things are moving! Its democracy or nothing – its the terms of the GFA or nothing, and if you and others don’t like it, then you can cast your ballot against it, but its going to happen! wise up!

@John R: what report did I refer to JR? I didn’t name any specific report, I mentioned there were a number of such reports. I didn’t mention any particular report that found a gap in funding. You said that not me, so perhaps you could produce and name/reference the report that made such a claim.

There were about six reports published over the last three years which would dispute your negative allegation, while Ive only read one report that counter claimed the positive figures.

perhaps the most thoroughly researched report came from the oireachtas cross party committee set up by the Dail to examine the matter. its obvious to anyone who reads it, that a great deal of work went into it and it wasn’t a simple case of rubber stamping a view that was already predetermined. Some of the members of that committee are members of parties that traditionally wouldn’t be in any rush to see Irish unity brought about.

So JR, its a lot easier to spin a negative than a positive. You mentioned the cost of German unity. You are not seriously comparing the North and peoples standard of living to that of the people of the former east Germany? and even if you were, answer me this. If you were to ask the people of the former West Germany if they had a choice tomorrow to vote on whether they wanted their country partitioned again – what way do you think they would vote?

@Angela McCarthy: We are years away Angela, from a United Ireland – at least 10 years anyway. We have no idea how one would work and the mistakes of Brexit need to be learned. We have years of talks ahead on the type of United Ireland voters can expect and the impact it will have on then so they know exactly what they are voting on when they head to the ballot box. Brexit is such as disaster as nobody knows what they voted on – even today we don’t know what type of Brexit Boris will go for.

A simple sectarian, triumphalist majority is not enough. We have to bring the PUL community along slowly over many years or a United Ireland will never work. Violence and the threat of violence has to avoided at all costs. If there is one thing that a United Ireland is not worth is the spillage of one more drop of blood.

@Paddy J: Paddy, are you trying to teach us how to suck eggs? Of course its years off, but the debate has began and that’s only right. Its not or anywhere near a sectarian head count and I think you probably already know that.

The best thing that came out of yesterdays election was the fact that some unionist voters saw through the DUP and voted otherwise. If you followed the northern election you would have notices that the DUP took a lot of flak at the doors over Brexit – so how did they respond? they tried to change the narrative to the old tried and trusted sectarian battle cries of Orange and Green and called of SF to condemn some shootings that took place decades ago. SF didn’t take the bate but stuck to the Brexit message and got votes from people who never voted nationalist in their lives. Forget about all the outdated talk about not spilling a drop of blood for unity – we are away beyond all that now Paddy – the real talking has begun and at last some unionists are listening and engaging!

@Lar Meyler: Those figures have been debunked. Included in the cost of Northern Ireland to the British Exchequer are the military projects. Trident, the aircraft carriers, nuclear subs and the new fighters cost billions per annum from each part of the United Kingdom.

@Angela McCarthy: I’m sure you are top of the range in that noble sport of egg sucking Angela, far be it from me to teach a professional ;-)

I’m glad you are not in favour of a straight sectarian headcount of determining a United Ireland. When the majority of unionism want a United Ireland, then we know we can have a United Ireland – peacefully.

I’m not talking about nationalists spilling blood for a United Ireland, I’m talking about Loyalists spilling blood to prevent one – I think you knew that is what I meant anyway. That is a very real threat and I do not want to see bombs going off in Limerick or anywhere else. If the loyalists can’t be brought along peacefully then I for one don’t want a United Ireland.

@TheHeathen: No they haven’t.
The cost of a United Ireland will be €10-€11Bn per annum. That is assuming that there is a peaceful transition. That’s from independent economists. The so called “cost neutral figure” was from a Sinn Féin sponsored report. Which actually has been thoroughly debunked.

@Louise Tracey: Northern Nationalists were always told that they were “the minority” after the state was gerrymandered to give Unionists a permanent majority. Do you think for one minute that we are going to let some Southern watery arses rewrite the rules of democracy when we are now the majority in this artificial statelet. Away with you. 15-20 years my ar$e.

@Paddy J: so what exactly are you saying Paddy. It took us all those years of conflict to bring us to the GFA and peace through the removal of the Unionist Veto. as you know, it provides for a border poll.

So if and when that comes about and the people vote for unity, do you feel the result shouldn’t be respected on the basis that loyalist paramilitaries might object and threaten violence? Or, are you saying we shouldn’t now engage in a debate about all our joint futures in case it might upset loyalist paramilitaries – and if you believe that -possibly on the basis that in some distant future time, loyalist mindsets will suddenly change and tri-colours will suddenly start appearing all over the Shankill Road, then I think you are really in fantasy land.

Loyalism and Unionism by its very nature doesn’t change by its own accord- simple because it has no incentive to do so. That’s why Brexit has suddenly changed the habit of a century. Now some unionists have a real reason to consider what their lives might be like in a post Brexit Ireland under the EU.

No one wants to force anyone into a united Ireland, that’s why its important to talk and not hide or refuse to talk on the basis that it might upset someone else. All that achieves is to encourage those who might threaten violence to wield that weapon anytime anyone wants to move forward. we even saw that element on the fringes of the recent DUP election campaign in North Belfast but fortunately many decent unionist voters were having none of it and voted their own way.

The loyalist threat was first used against the British Government in 1912 against Home Rule, and has been used on and off over different periods since. The GFA was negotiated and arrived at to avoid all that into the future. the unity you wish to see come about Paddy cannot ever happen as long as a loyalist veto or threat is allowed to trump everyone else’s opinion. You might well be happy to live without ever seeing a united Ireland or even a discussion about one as a price for not upsetting loyalists, and that’s your right, but don’t pretend you have the right to include and speak for all the Irish people when holding such a view.

@Angela McCarthy: Angela TL;DR. I am more than happy to see discussions about a united Ireland, that’s what I am saying, I want to see plenty of discussions, proposals, costings, all types of UI’s discussed for years and years to come. If the outcome is that a United Ireland is rejected by either the 26 counties or the 6 counties, then that’s perfectly fine with me too. I only speak for myself, which I am perfectly entitled to do, thank you; as are you. You don’t speak for anybody but yourself either, don’t pretend otherwise. My view also holds the same weight as yours do.

Let me be perfectly clear again, if loyalist violence threatens the lives of people in the 26 counties, then I won’t be voting for a United Ireland. Things are perfectly fine as they are, nobody is getting killed and that is far and away in my book the most important thing. Lives are far more important than any UI.

@Angela McCarthy: Insuling another poster is always the very best way to engage in intelligent discussion

@Paddy J: Paddy, we agree about the pre-poll talks and we agree about each others views being equally important. what we don’t agree on is what should happen if a border poll is passed and a threat from Loyalists is launched against that democratic decision.

also, what happens if that threat is made before the poll happens. Should such threats be allowed to influence voters away from voting for unity? for example, you seem to be indicating that you would withhold your support in such a scenario – do you feel that’s right and would you not agree that the only way this country can ever truly move on in peace, unity and democracy, is when we are living in a united country, because its only then that we’ll have put the them and us mentality behind us.

@Emmett Currie: How about direct rule from Belfast.

And what do you know, my friend. Another armchair expert.

@Lar Meyler: I was typing my reply prior to seeing your addendum. Excuse typos also

@Lar Meyler: Its already happening Lar. The debate is on.

What was the headline to the article above – and why was Leo asked to comment? The discussion is already happening and some former unionists also spoke through the ballot box yesterday. Its no longer about Orange or Green – its really where it should be – “Where are my future interests best served, in or outside the EU and a United Ireland by extension? In many ironic ways- yesterdays result for Boris can help Ireland.

@Angela McCarthy: I think you are right Angela that the debate is on. But reunification is still in the distant future of it ever happens. If it is to happen we need to start having a realistic conversation about all aspects. We haven’t had this conversation yet. And that conversation needs to be brutally frank and realistic and is some way off I believe. The Republic of Ireland is not an economic powerhouse like West Germany. And one can also witness that in East Germany many of the unreformed fascist and racist attitudes still linger as the East Germans never had to come to terms with their past, unlike the West Germans. In NI many attitudes persist which have no place in a modern Republic. But changing those attitudes is entirely another matter.

@Frank Scanlon: NP. Good to see SDLP back in the picture. Partition happened a hundred years ago so not sure how relevant things were economically back then to now. The South economy was a basket case back then also.

My assessment is the North economy needs to get to a minimum prosperity standard before a United Ireland could happen. Otherwise it could sink the South economically for a few decades. This is the part that will take time.

@Angela McCarthy: I hear you but Talk is the easy part. We are not compatible right now for all the reasons I listed. We are essentially two completely different economies and social entities. A complete mismatch.

@John R: Could not agree more. Well worded.

@John R: You are right JR. I think Brexit has brought things to the fore a little which is spurring the whole debate forward.

Lets consider for a moment what Unionism is all about. A privileged position within the British Union. Traditionally that was at least perceived that Unionists were financially better off than their nationalist neighbours north and south. Can they any longer cling to that belief or aspiration? they would have never listened to anyone telling them otherwise up to now, because the consequences of leaving the EU has really hit home to ordinary unionist farmers and business people.

That’s why the discussion of a border poll is no longer dismissed as a far off dream. Yes, everything must be put on the table for discussion and everyone around that table must then trash out their own futures based around those discussions.

wouldn’t it be terrible though for some to later end up in a situation where they might regret not having taken part in those talks with contributions of their own.

@Lar Meyler: Lar -you can only be compatible if you want to be. You also say talk is the easy part – but for some – its the hardest part. The real easy part comes after the talking has begun!

@Lar Meyler: aye Irish.