Opinion

Alex Kane: Despite the DUP's input, I expect a fairly soft landing at end of Brexit process

Alex Kane

Alex Kane

Alex Kane is an Irish News columnist and political commentator and a former director of communications for the Ulster Unionist Party.

Sammy Wilson said the DUP still wanted a 'sensible deal' that worked for the entire UK and the Republic. Picture by Matt Bohill
Sammy Wilson said the DUP still wanted a 'sensible deal' that worked for the entire UK and the Republic. Picture by Matt Bohill Sammy Wilson said the DUP still wanted a 'sensible deal' that worked for the entire UK and the Republic. Picture by Matt Bohill

Patrick Kielty (a much better writer than I had expected him to be, by the way) had great fun in The Guardian a few days ago, knocking ten bells out of unionists for voting Leave.

Fair enough, the link between the DUP and Jacob Rees-Mogg's ERG has been the source of comedy gold for London-based parliamentary sketch writers and stand-up comics; but I was disappointed that Patrick didn't even consider the possibility that many unionists in Northern Ireland thought long and hard before they voted Leave.

In fairness, again, that's because Patrick isn't a unionist: he doesn't understand our psyche; so it was probably always easier to contribute a knockabout, often very funny piece, than a more measured analysis.

Even when the 'promise' of a referendum was included in the Conservative's 2015 election manifesto, most people - including UKIP - didn't expect David Cameron to deliver. Had Cameron won with a comfortable majority, or still required a coalition with the Lib-Dems, it's very unlikely there would have been a referendum.

But he ended up with a very small working majority and the only way to placate his own backbench Eurosceptics was to run with a referendum. Patrick could and should have put the boot into Cameron for not bothering to have a Plan B (other than running away) if Leave happened to win; and for not instructing the executive arm of his government to, at the very least, prepare thought-through options for a Leave victory.

I didn't expect the referendum, but when it was announced I focused on four questions. Would the United Kingdom be able to survive and flourish outside the EU; did I support the general direction of travel of the EU since 1975 (when I voted NO in the first referendum); in the event of a victory for Leave, was a bespoke deal for Northern Ireland - one which London, Dublin, Belfast and Brussels could buy into - possible; would a Leave result raise potential challenges for the Union? Like many other unionists I thought about each of those questions for months. The answers I reached: yes; no; yes; and yes. The potential challenges for the Union question caused me the greatest problem, yet I concluded that the 'constitutional question' would remain at the heart of local politics irrespective of the referendum result.

What was I supposed to do? I had voted NO in 1975 and my reasons for doing so hadn't changed. Should I just have stayed at home? Let's be honest, even if Remain had won and there was border poll within a decade or so - something I wouldn't rule out - I'm pretty sure that upwards of 90 per cent of Sinn Féin voters, along with broader nationalism (including tens of thousands who haven't voted for years) would vote for Irish unity even if they were aware of the huge uncertainties and risks involved. And that's because the vote would be about how they view themselves and who, precisely, they wanted to be. In other words, if their identity as Irish and the accompanying desire to live in a sovereign, independent united Ireland took priority, then they would vote for that: even if it utterly changed the nature of their relationship with unionists, added to political/societal instability and ushered in an era of possible economic downturn.

There is no such thing as the perfect circumstance for a referendum: be it on EU membership or a border poll choice between Irish unity and continuing membership of the UK. And unexpected referendums also force equally unexpected choices on political parties. Look at Sinn Féin, for example. Until shortly before the referendum SF had been firmly in the Eurosceptic camp and opponents of EU integration. But when it became obvious that there were electoral risks on both sides of the border if it was on the same side as the DUP, especially if Leave actually won the referendum, it jettisoned its previous anti-EU policy and adopted the pro-arguments with all of the zeal of the born-again convert. Hypocrisy and self-interest writ large.

Patrick does have a point, though, when he says that the DUP - even if they could never admit it in public - would probably quite like a second referendum that gets them off a very difficult hook. I've made the same point a number of times. Indeed, their handling of the entire process, particularly their crazy decision to play the uber-unionist card rather than build a collective front to engage with Dublin after the Assembly collapsed, has been awful.

My own view remains that there won't be a no-deal exit or a hard border. And as regular readers will know I'm still not convinced we'll actually leave the EU. But if there is, as I expect there will be, a fairly soft-landing at the end of the negotiating process, then that will be despite the DUP's input, rather than because of it. But their pompous stupidity and the wide-eyed madness of Rees-Mogg shouldn't be a justification for tarring all pro-Brexit unionists with the same brush.