Intensifying Instability
Thursday, April 12, 2007 at 03:14PM Some separatists in Northern Ireland still believe that, once a border poll has been held, it becomes a legal obligation on the UK government to hold one every seven years. Of course that is complete tosh! The Northern Ireland Act and its words were simply an amendment to the 1973 provision, which stipulated no less than 10 years (no border poll was held on the 8th March 1983). If a border poll was conducted and, as expected, the nationalists lost heavily, there would be no obligation on the government to hold a poll for so long as they suspected support for the status quo remained - whether it be seven, seventy and 170 years later. Furthermore, all referenda in the UK are purely consultative because of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty.
However, the propaganda vomited up by Irish nationalists has clearly had an effect on their Scottish counterparts. Alex Salmond, launching his manifesto says if support for independence was not forthcoming in his envisaged year of 2010, he would be willing to hold another one if the SNP is returned to power. It seems to be the general separatist thinking that if you don't get the answer you want, browbeat the electorate until you do.
Whether it be Scotland or Northern Ireland, the prospect of such a fundamentally important question every few years would set both parts of the Union on a very dangerous and unstable footing - economically, socially and politically. Moreover, the Scotland Act 1998 has no provision for secession, so any SNP-initiated poll would be legally unsound. Only a government as stupid as this one would see devolution as, on the one hand keeping Ulster at arms length, and on the other binding Scotland closer to the rest of the UK. Going out and making insincere platitudes about the Union is ridiculous. This government should be making clear that the United Kingdom - in all its constituent parts - will be a fact of life for as far into the future as anyone can see. Blair made similar noises about Northern Ireland in 1997. It is time for a re-stipulation of those commitments - for both parts of the UK.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (22)
LOL
Here's a hint, before there was a Scotland Act there was no provision to create a Scottish Parliament on the statute books.
>>This government should be making clear that the United Kingdom - in all its constituent parts - will be a fact of life for as far into the future as anyone can see.<<
And if the people decide otherwise?
Do the Americans who read this realise just how out of touch with basic concepts of democracy you guys are?
>>he would be willing to hold another one if the SNP is returned to power.<<
New mandate you see!! The people have spoken and all that. Please keep up.
The clock is ticking on this anachronistic Union. Not just in the six counties of Ireland either. In the words of the SNP.
"IT'S TIME"
The Union only exists with the consent of the people in its constituent parts. If that consent is withdrawn by any part, then they have the right to leave. The only way of keeping that part in is through force, and surely your not advocating that ?
It was't actually.
A poll under the NI Act 1998 is a special poll and according to legislation the SOS must direct that they are holding such a poll for the purposes of schedule 1, Section 1(1)
It is not amendment to the 1973 provision as it would say so in the Act and it doesn't, the Act repealed the Government of Ireland Act 1920.
Do try to keep up Andrew!
<em>Furthermore, all referenda in the UK are purely consultative because of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty.</em>
Such referenda would be upheld by the courts and in reality no government would go against the wishes of the people, be it those of the Irish or the Scots.
<em>It seems to be the general separatist thinking that if you don't get the answer you want, browbeat the electorate until you do.</em>
You have to be lucky all the time, we only have to be lucky once!
<em>This government should be making clear that the United Kingdom - in all its constituent parts - will be a fact of life for as far into the future as anyone can see.</em>
That is not the reality though, you also forget that part of the GFA is an international treaty.
The largest parasite in political history wants to finally drop off, bloated and satisfied, from the body politic of England which it has leeched off for so long?
Excellent. Gimme that SNP membership form right now. Here's a plan if you really want Scottish independence - call for the referendum to include England as well.
That way you can be sure of an overwhelming majority ticking the box marked 'Please leave now and never, ever come back you whinging bastards.'
Unrequited love is such a bitter pill, DSD!
I've been sniggering so much at ATW's hilariously delusional Scottish 'Nationalists' (who all support a Party who want to gain independence then take them straight back into the EU lol) that I've started an English only poll on my own Blog on the question of Scottish Independence. I hope I get a few responses, it'll be fun reading if the English have a good vent I suspect...
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=7833
The media of course shout up the numbers going to vote SNP.
I have not come across many who want to sever the Union and vote for Salmon Cakes. We have that other arch Roman Sir Sean Connery saying he will not live in Scotland until it is independent. Excellent stay away...
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=652&id=542102007
It is sad but true that the republican dream is hitting Scotland with a force. But as the Lord was with me in my day I'm sure he will be with you in yours to fight against our historical enemy.
You know you shouldn't go out without taking your pills.
I've never heard such rubbish - from a troll or otherwise.
The SNP has traditionally been a bastion of Protestantism with most Catholic Scots voting for the Labour party which is Unionist.
Scots independance is not about Republicanism, indeed we don't want a Republic.
We will have her Majesty the Queen or her idiotic heir (defender of the faith) as head of state.
Trying to link it to Republicanism is laughable.
Which has exactly the same meaning as the border poll legislation in the 1973 Act. There was no obligation to hold a poll every ten years under that act, any more than there is an obligation to hold one every seven years under this one.
'We only have to be lucky once'? Let's hope the prospect of a bloody civil war will quell that obnoxious hubris somewhat. 'Purely consultative' means exactly what it says. There is no obligation on either the UK or the ROI to agree the legal cession of Northern Ireland.
Do try to keep up.
I've checked and validated my analysis with Austen Morgan (the constitutional lawyer who wrote the book about the legal aspects of the BA). So it's not a question of 'keeping up', it's one of leaving you a long way behind.
Donald
I've no intention of editing Tam's post. But as you see fit to show me no respect whatsoever, yours is history, pal. The next time you post, try a little bit of titular civility. It works wonders.
That is not what you said though
You said
"The Northern Ireland Act and its words were simply an amendment to the 1973 provision,"
Which is a lie!
I realise your legal knowledge is limited however if you can't understand even the basics then don't present yourself as a person in the know.
<em>Let's hope the prospect of a bloody civil war will quell that obnoxious hubris somewhat.</em>
Surely Unionists would accept the outcome of a democratic vote?
Any "civil war" would surely be and act of terrorism in your eyes?
Or are you and Unionism the bunch of raving hypocrites we all know you to be?
<em>There is no obligation on either the UK or the ROI to agree the legal cession of Northern Ireland.</em>
Try living in the real world Andrew, If a majority in the sick counties vote for Unity it will happen.
<em>I've checked and validated my analysis with Austen Morgan</em>
How exactly have you done this?
The wording of the border poll legislation in the 1998 Act is simply an amendment of the language used in the 1973 Act. Clear now?
'Surely Unionists would accept the outcome of a democratic vote?'
You mean like republicans have done since 1921? Unionists don't take lessons in democracy from the likes of your mob. Whatever tactics they may or may not use in the remote event of Anschluss, they learnt them from the Provos.
'Try living in the real world Andrew, If a majority in the sick counties vote for Unity it will happen.'
I am in the real world. That is the real world position. Try reading Austen Morgan's book, or indeed works by Professor Brigid Hadfield. You want the meaning of 'sick'? Undertake analysis by a professional psychiatrist!
When I referred to ' Ghengis', what on earth made you think I was referring to you?
You removed my post because you are scared. Scared that the English people are being challenged to finally stand up for themselves and learn to goven themselves alone without the safety blanket of the Union.
SNP 123 .........
God Bless Scotland.
No MR, I was working pro-bono at an Autism and Hospice charity night in God's country.
<em>he has given me significant legal insight into the meaning of the Belfast Agreement (more than a saddo like you could ever hope to have).</em>
Unlike you McCann I have a law degree so any "knowledge" that you CLAIM this person instilled in you is neither here nor there.
My first in Constitutional Law and History from QUB versus your bullshit!
You wrote
"The Northern Ireland Act and its words were simply an amendment to the 1973 provision,"
That means that the NI Act 1998 amended the 1973 legislation. now, is that true?
No, it's a lie!
You can try and hide behing your facade all you wish, you messed up.
"Whatever tactics they may or may not use in the remote event of Anschluss, they learnt them from the Provos."
Total hypocrite!!!
But hey, I wish you well because I look gleefully forward to the day you are all forced to finally try...
Get a life. England don't support us - OUR oil is supporting the English economy and has done so for decades.
'Pillocks' like you risk making this divorce more acrimonious than it needs to be.
Can you not simply admit that the time has arrived for snivelling England to try to stand on he's own two feet??
Your Oil ?
You can suck your fat thumb all you like. I have known Austen for a number of years so I guess it's his significant knowledge of the legal situation in the Belfast Agreement based on years of studying and practicing the topic, versus a legally and intellectually embryonic Shinner.
Don't boast to me about degrees, sunshine. I have two of them: a first and a distinction at Masters level.
'You wrote'.
No, Austen wrote it first. But hey, what gives?
'Total hypocrite'.
Yes, aren't you (LOL)!
Shouldn't that be pro-Sir Bono ? ;)
<Q>at an Autism and Hospice charity night in God's country.</Q>
A worthy cause - how did you enjoy your trip to East Londonderry ?