Sir, – In his thoughtful response to my recent article "Debate on united Ireland can't wait until unionists are ready" (Opinion & Analysis, August 7th), Proinsias De Rossa ("Debate on unity is divisive and distracting", Letters, August 12th) suggests a tension that is not there.
My argument is anchored in the Belfast Agreement and thus rests within the vision of its architects.
Like many others, I continue to stress responsible planning and preparation for possible constitutional change. Extensive and detailed engagement has commenced. Those involved are right to press on. No one living in this contested region steps into this constitutional conversation casually. Friendly, and not so friendly, voices suggest we turn back or look elsewhere. We cannot and must not, if the priority is respect for the wellbeing of everyone. A new and united Ireland will be a novel and better way of sharing the island; it will, however, remain imperfect work in progress. People here have a right to determine their own constitutional future. Would you deny them access to that right indefinitely in the circumstances of Brexit? Are we really going to invent new obstacles to its realisation now? I hesitate to speak for the determined peacemakers who made this discussion possible. But my sense is that facing into difficulties, answering hard questions and doing the challenging work in advance is what they would want. This island must be ready for whatever is coming next. – Yours, etc,
Prof COLIN HARVEY,
:fill(white):background_color(white)/static.themebuilder.aws.arc.pub/irishtimes/1647534191476.png)
School of Law,
Queen’s University Belfast.
Sir, – John Hume saw the 1998 Belfast Agreement as a negotiated treaty based on the democratic principle of consent. This was tested in 1998 by referendum when people across the island gave their consent to the constitutional compromise on partition reached in the Belfast Agreement, alongside power-sharing, equality protections and human rights commitments.
The Belfast Agreement contains a provision to test the consent of the governed in a referendum on Irish unity. Demographic trends plus the political will of the Northern electorate mean that the consent principle is likely to be tested within the next five to 10 years.
Those engaged in civic conversations within community organisations, trades unions, professional bodies, businesses and universities across the island are responsible citizens. They are preparing the way, raising questions, seeing what needs to be done, engaging in challenging and respectful exchanges between people of different, opposed and uncertain outlooks. All with a view to ensuring that all voices are heard.
Civic conversations on unity and union are happening. To people who are anxious at this prospect, I’d say, join in. You may be surprised by the creativity and generosity displayed by people in the North faced with the prospect of reviving the vision of the 1998 Belfast Agreement in a referendum. – Yours, etc,
EILISH ROONEY,
Scholar Emeritus ,
Transitional Justice
Institute,
Ulster University,
Antrim.
Sir, – Not for the first time, Proinsias De Rossa is a rock of good sense (Letters, August 12th). Some people are trying to persuade us to move toward a border poll and thus (they believe) Irish unity as soon as possible. Unionist opposition should be sidelined or ignored.
This is the foolish road to a resumption of the Northern conflict. Far more sensible is De Rossa’s proposal for a “Good Neighbour Pact” between North and South to cooperate on practical matters and reassure unionists that “the shared island approach is not a Trojan horse for a united Ireland”.
Let us come together to work on matters of common concern and mutual benefit: the economy, public health, new technologies, the environment and climate change. In this way we will learn to share the island we love, and one day in the future, maybe, we can agree to come together constitutionally. – Yours, etc,
ANDY POLLAK,
Rathmines,
Dublin 6.
Sir, – There is no little irony in Proinsias De Rossa’s declaration that a debate on ending partition would be “divisive”. As he opposes a border poll on Irish unity, despite such a poll being a key element of the Belfast Agreement, he effectively gives his support to the maintenance of the current status quo, ie the continued partition of our country. How divisive is that?
If he truly believes in a “shared island”, then Mr De Rossa should accept the right of those of us who live on that island, North and South, to debate and vote on the political future of our country, including the option of ending partition. – Yours, etc,
Senator PAUL GAVAN,
Sinn Féin,
Castleconnell,
Co Limerick.