Opinion

Unionist presence must be accommodated in any new political arrangement

Since the Brexit vote the future is uncertain for both unionists and nationalists/republicans. There is much talk, in some republican/nationalist circles of Irish reunification being the solution to our problems over Brexit. Nationalists must begin any discussion about the future possibility of reunification from a position of respect for unionist fears about the future in a reunified Ireland. Unionists have fears about their economic future as well as fears about their culture and identity. These fears must be acknowledged and dealt with.

In the southern 26 counties there needs to be a new understanding of what reunification means from a unionist perspective. It is not a matter of adding on ‘the missing’ six north-eastern counties and then going back to business as usual. The southern state has failed to provide adequately for many of its citizens. I think of the homeless and the hospital waiting lists. There is a two-tier society there which favours the wealthy. There needs to be a radical change in outlook and attitude among people in the south and nationalists/republicans in the north. Reunification can never be seen as a victory for Irish nationalism.

In any discussions about the future we must begin with a clean slate. It must be a completely new beginning. What arrangements will be made for unionist identity and culture in a reunified country? What about the national anthem and the flag? How would the economy be organised? How would those communities which lost most by the change be reimbursed? How will the unionist link with Britain be maintained? Is there any other way of envisioning a unified Ireland that would satisfy most nationalists/republicans?

Since a majority in the north voted to remain in Europe it is now possible to envision a reunified Ireland which eventually would have the consent of a sizeable section of the unionist population. Already, some unionists are disillusioned with the Brexit result. They see the damage this will cause to the economy and to the social life of the country.

However, if a majority of unionists are to buy into the idea of a reunified Ireland, it must be an attractive proposition to them. It must guarantee that their jobs and pensions are safe for a specified period of years. It must offer them health and social services as good as they have had under Westminster and it must offer educational and secure job opportunities.

We are now in a new political situation with the north being taken out of the EU. At some, as yet, unspecified time in the future there will be a border poll/unity referendum which will determine the political future of this island.

One way of dealing with the new situation and of preserving the Belfast Agreement is for the Dublin government to discuss with London the transfer of sovereignty from London to Dublin. Such a new arrangement would leave the north as it is, keep the assembly in Stormont, allow northern representation in a southern parliament and allow the English monarch some symbolic role as the one to whom a section of the people owe allegiance.


I believe there is nothing to lose and everything to gain from such a compromise. The border is then changed to the sea around the island.

In that scenario it might be possible to create something bigger and better for all of us than either state has provided up till now.

The people from the south as well as republicans and nationalists in the north must show courage and generosity in accommodating the unionist presence in any new political arrangements on this island.

Fr JOE McVEIGH


Enniskillen, Co Fermanagh

Opinion givers add flavour to often depressing news

I read all of The Irish News columnists and find myself in agreement with many of them. The overall quality of their outpourings is good and in some cases very good. There are a couple that turn me off but I won’t name them as they may indeed be someone else’s favourite. Overall I’d call them a good bunch of opinion givers. So fair play to The Irish News for assembling a strong and diverse team. Between them they add something like flavour to often mundane and depressing news. I could comment on them individually but for now I’ll confine myself to the sweeping statement.

This morning I had the unusual experience of reading the two columns of Alex Kane and William Scholes and finding myself nodding in agreement, even more avidly than usual.


Small wonder, mind you, since just 24 hours earlier I had submitted a letter to the letters page which would have merged seamlessly with either or both columns. The basic thrust of both columns was that, given the political composition of our assembly and its two opposing, unreconcilable power blocks that, effectively, we were not even close to stability and that, allowing for minor tweaking, both big dogs were as much to blame as each other. Both columnists managed to avoid the term ‘naked sectarianism’ and as I didn’t I would have given the letters editor a dilemma, especially at this sensitive moment in time.


I’m gratified however, that my precise views were reflected by both men and on the same day. Even leaving out the emotive terminology, both very eloquently got their message across. After this offering, I believe that I may leave political opinion offering to the guys and girls who do it for a living. After all, I started by saying how good they all were. Well, nearly all.

KIERAN McMULLAN


Randalstown, Co Antrim

Mischievous musings

SEAN O’Fiach – ‘Distortion of legacy betrays aims of Bobby Sands sacrifice’, (September 29) – returns to a theme he has on numerous occasions referred. That is his view that the sacrifice and the ultimate sacrifice of republican activists has been usurped by present day republicans.

This type of visitation is at least insecure and at worst mischievous.


This is so because Mr O’Fiach presumes to “know” how those who have died would view the present day circumstances. He then misrepresents the present day republican stance, the issues that caused the breakdown in the Stormont administration fatuously saying that the proposed Irish language act is all there is on the republican agenda.

Now I have no difficulty in those objecting to the existence of the GFA, be they unionist or non-unionist. They need to get over a couple of hurdles first though, one being the democratic vote in favour of the GFA; then there is the acceptance by the IRA of this agreement. Then we could discuss the meat of the agreement.

Are the citizens and IRA all betrayers Mr O’Fiach?

MANUS McDAID


Derry City

Shameful silence

Three weeks ago rape victim women who opted not to abort their babies and wanted to tell their stories were denied the right of free speech after two hotels in Dublin received threats.

Last weekend a small number of pro-abortion men and women marched through Belfast, some of them (mostly young women) promoting hate speech (Irish News October 16).

If pro-life supporters had acted in this aggressive and offensive manner, every pro-abortion politician in the country would have been ranting and champing at the bit to have those pro-lifers censored.

The silence of these politicians is shameful.

Dr OWEN GALLAGHER


Glenavy, Co Antrim

Do Catalan lives matter?

‘It is better to die on your feet than live on your knees.’ (Emilio Zapata)

Amidst all the hullabaloo over Black Sports stars in the US

kneeling during the anthem over what they perceive to be police brutality, there is not much said in America about the denial of democracy in Catalonia by Spanish police.

Do Catalan lives matter?

DESMOND DEVLIN


Ardboe, Co Tyrone