For most of my lifetime I’ve been listening to unionist leaders telling me why successive outcomes can’t or won’t happen: no British government would ever get rid of the Stormont parliament; there would never be mandatory powersharing between unionists and nationalists; there would never be a formal “Irish dimension” in Northern Ireland politics; the British/Irish governments would never agree to a “joint sovereignty” deal over the heads of a unionist majority; unionists would never share power with Sinn Féin; the DUP would never share power with Sinn Féin; there would be a unionist majority in Belfast City Council for decades to come; unionists wouldn’t lose their overall majority in the Assembly. Feel free to add to that list.
Peter Robinson – one of the canniest political and electoral strategists in British politics – would have had that list in mind when he made his “I don’t expect my own house to burn down . . . but I still insure it” comment last Friday.
Back in the summer of 1985 – when he was deputy leader of the DUP– he would have heard Ian Paisley and UUP leader Jim Molyneaux dismiss as nonsense the rumours about an Anglo-Irish Agreement: “No Conservative government would dare to do such a thing,” claimed Molyneaux, “and if Thatcher tried to do it she would be overthrown by a backbench rebellion we haven’t seen in over a century.” Enoch Powell nodded in the background. But there was an agreement and there wasn’t a rebellion in Westminster.
Yet November 15th, 1985, shook Ulster unionism to its very core. It wasn’t prepared: hence the scale of the shock. In early January 1986 I wrote a piece arguing, “unionism, all of it, was shocked because it wasn’t prepared. It is never prepared. It refuses to do long-term thinking. It never has options in place. It never has a route map. We are brilliant at knee-jerk shock and terrible at knowing what to do next. A rally can indicate the existence and source of our anger but it doesn’t beat and never will beat the existence of a thought-through strategy waiting in our out-tray”.
Judging by the response to Robinson’s comments from elements of the DUP and the smaller unionist parties, not much has changed since 1986. Instead of dismissing what he said they should have thought about why he said it.
Shifting demographics
Are they unaware of the shifting demographics? Are they unaware that “unionists” didn’t have an overall majority in the last two elections? Are they unaware that unionists don’t have a majority in the Assembly? Are they unaware that Brexit has upended the political electoral-constitutional dynamics? Are they unaware that recent opinion polls have pro-union support at not much more than 50 per cent? Are they unaware that the unity debate has begun? Again, feel free to add to that list.
I don't think Robinson was telling unionists to prepare for Irish unity. Instead he was telling them not to be sanguine. I think he was also telling them not to leave this debate to Sinn Féin alone
I don’t think Robinson was telling unionists to prepare for Irish unity. Instead he was telling them not to be sanguine. I think he was also telling them not to leave this debate to Sinn Féin alone.
There is already a debate taking place within the North’s business community, many of whom dread the potential impact of Brexit. There is a debate taking place within the small u unionist and small n nationalist communities, many of whom could have been banked in the pro-union corner before the EU referendum.
There is a debate taking place within Westminster and the EU about the nature of the North-South relationship after Brexit. There is a debate taking place right across Northern Ireland. All Robinson is saying is don’t ignore the debate. Don’t be blind and deaf to what is happening.
Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP who is probably the most pro-Brexit politician in the North, insists that there is no chance of the Secretary of State calling a Border poll. He is wrong. There may be no chance of it happening while the DUP MPs are propping up Mrs May, but that arrangement won’t last forever.
A new secretary of state, particularly a Labour one in a post-Brexit scenario, may decide that the conditions required for a Border poll have been met. Anything is possible after next March (which is why Mary Lou McDonald is now saying that she doesn’t want a Border poll while the Brexit “chaos” continues; as always with Sinn Féin she’s thinking long term). But to say, as too many unionists do, that a Border poll won’t happen, is a throwback to the stupidity we used to hear. The conditions required for the poll are actually quite vague and open to interpretation. And it won’t be unionists making that call.
Caught on the hop
Robinson is saying to unionists – and again, I agree with him – don’t allow yourselves to be caught on the hop again. Don’t fail to make preparations because of the mistaken assumption that a particular outcome – in this case a Border poll – won’t happen.
My own view is that Irish unity – irrespective of what happens in the next few years - is unlikely; but not impossible
There is no one in Northern Ireland who can make a confident prediction about what will happen in the next couple of years. It is not a moment for unionists to turn on those who are suggesting that, at the very least, debate is engaged and options prepared.
My own view is that Irish unity – irrespective of what happens in the next few years - is unlikely; but not impossible, of course. But if political unionism, along with the collective leadership, opts out of the ongoing debate, ignores new realities and pretends that difficult questions and outcomes should be avoided, then it will be assisting the pro-unity lobby far more than they claim Robinson did in Glenties last week.
Alex Kane is a commentator based in Belfast. He was formerly director of communications for the Ulster Unionist Party