Brian Stanley: We Cannot Afford Not to Reunify Ireland
Brian Stanley addressed the House on the 29th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement to set out the economic, political and social case for Irish reunification. He challenged arguments defending Partition, cited concrete border problems and urged the government to begin planning and preparation work without delay.
Opening remarks and tone
Brian Stanley welcomed the Tánaiste's constructive approach and said the debate was long overdue. He framed the intervention as a call to move the process forward and to confront economic realities created by Partition.
Economic case against Partition
He dismissed claims that reunification is unaffordable, arguing instead that Partition itself imposes real economic damage, particularly in border areas. He referenced examples raised at an IBEC meeting showing firms reluctant to hire across jurisdictions because of revenue and tax-compliance difficulties.
Fiscal burdens and UK costs highlighted
Stanley pointed to specific fiscal issues affecting people in the six counties: pension entitlements paid into the British system, contributions toward the British Royal Family and Britain’s diplomatic and defence spending figures cited in his remarks. He argued these obligations do not negate the logic of a single Irish economy.
Practical benefits and political urgency
He pressed for a single currency, a single revenue system, north-south infrastructure like the interconnector and government departments aligned across the island to deliver efficiencies in public services. With opinion polls shifting in favour of reunification, he said there is no reason to delay planning and preparation.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Thanks Commeann Comhairle. The debate today is hugely important. It's 29 years since the Good Friday Agreement. This is my 16th year in this House. I've been waiting each year patiently hoping that this debate would happen and particularly welcomed the constructive – I listened to every word that Tánaiste said and while I would disagree with him on some things over the, you know, many things in here at different times, I think that he approached it very, very constructively. I think his comments and his statements were very, very constructive and I think they'll contribute greatly to this and I hope that this is the beginning of moving on the process. The big arguments of those who still support Partition and have a Partition mentality is sure we can't afford it and as a left Republican I would put the case that we cannot afford not to have the national reunification. Various claims have been made by economists both highlighting the economic logic of reunification and highlighting the exaggerated cost mainly by the latter ignoring the fundamental issues and facts. And as an example of that, they ignore the economic damage caused by Partition in particularly to the border areas and the previous speaker referred to the IBEC meeting this morning which I was happy to attend and they gave us that example in relation to firms in the border region now reluctant to hire workers from the other jurisdiction due to the difficulties with revenue, with tax compliance etc. That is a real issue that they're highlighting. That's just one more issue that's popping up. I think that those who still argue for Partition to ignore the fact that in a reunified 32 county state that the pension liabilities of those workers in the six counties who accrued pension entitlements by paying into the British national insurance system and British Exchequer or employment pensions would receive that portion of their pension liability that that would fall to, it would not fall to the new government of Ireland but would fall to the British Exchequer that they paid into. Currently taxpayers in the north contribute towards the cost of the British Royal Family which the last look I had at it was 137 million I think last year. An odd that goes with that. To pay for the cost of Britain's massive diplomatic mission and its embassies right across the world not to mention occupation of the Falklands, Gibraltar and a whole lot of other places. 2.6 billion for diplomatic mission alone and then of course there's MI6 and there's a massive military machine and capacity, the army, the navy, the RAF and there's a figure I saw there today 60.2 billion for 2025 and 2026 and this is due to rise sharply to meet their increased military capabilities. Proportionally that's all paid for by residents of the six counties so taxpayers in the six counties have to carry also part of the burden of Britain's ever increasing national debt and of course the fundamental point can't be ignored and one of the key ones is that Britain is no longer has the benefits of empire, its coal industry is gone, revenues in North Sea Isle has all but dried up, their manufacturing base has gone south including car making has gone to the third world and China. So those fundamentals cannot be ignored. So our supporters of partition really saying that we continue on this small island with 14 different departments in each jurisdiction working back to back often in competition with each other are the same that having 26 counties in the EU and six counties out of it makes economic sense are the same that having two revenue systems, two separate currencies on this small island of 7.3 million people is logical. The facts are that we need an all-around economy that gives the economy a scale both to improve exports and enlarge the home market. We need a single currency in a single revenue system that would benefit the whole 32 counties and having the whole country in the European Union and this is one of the consequences of Brexit would be of obvious benefit and we need the north-south interconnector, you know we should drop all opposition to that, that needs to be built. Government departments working with singular focus on all areas right across government would bring efficiencies to public services. Along with the strong economic case for reunification there is the political and social case as well with opinion polls now showing a never increasing number of people in favour of reunification. There's an onus on the government here to begin planning and preparation work for that. There's no reason to delay this any further.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
