Rose Conway-Walsh urges 50%+1 threshold and government planning
Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh questioned the authors of an interim report on unification referendums, pressing who commissioned the work, the democratic threshold and the need for Irish government planning. She argued the democratic threshold should be 50% plus one and urged clear advance planning, including consideration of a citizens' assembly.
Origins of the report
The deputy noted the interim report was funded by the British Academy and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and asked who commissioned the work. The panel replied it began as an independent academic research project undertaken by the Constitution Unit with colleagues in Belfast and Dublin.
Democratic threshold insisted
The deputy emphasised that, because votes for unity and for the status quo are equally valid, the only fair threshold is a simple majority of 50% plus one. The report authors agreed that the Good Friday Agreement points to a 50% plus one threshold and that applying any other requirement would create inequality between the two sides.
Need for detailed planning
The deputy pressed that the Irish government is permitted and obliged under the Agreement to pursue constitutional aims and must plan accordingly. The speakers warned that a referendum should not be called unless the referendum processes, timetable and post-vote procedures are clear.
Options for how to plan
The report identified two types of planning - planning the referendum processes themselves and planning the form United Ireland might take. The panel set out three possible approaches: no prior planning (which they described as a bad idea), preparing the post-vote process in advance, or developing detailed plans for a united form before any referendum, while not taking a firm view between the latter two.
Role of civic engagement
The deputy raised the possibility of a citizens' assembly to discuss the wide range of issues connected to unity and the shared island unit's potential role. The authors acknowledged the sensitivity of timing and content for such civic deliberation and indicated colleagues would address those details further.
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.
Thank you Alan and your colleagues for presenting to the Good Friday Agreement Committee today. Indeed it is timely for us to examine the interim report produced by your working group on the unification referendums on the island of Ireland and the work that you have done on the technical and the procedural matters arising from the explicit provision within the Good Friday Agreement is an important component of the global and the national discussions that are currently taking place on a daily basis. Now I understand the work was funded by the British Academy and the Joseph Browntree Foundation and so just my first question might be in terms of who commissioned the work? Was it the working group in itself? Maybe just explain the context to us of that. If I ask a couple of questions then maybe I can get a couple of answers together and then one one of my colleagues may wish to come in for the part of my colleagues may wish to come in for the part of the 10 minutes as well. The first thing I think that's very interesting that you address is around the democratic threshold. Since the vote in favour of unity and the vote in favour of maintaining the status quo are equally valid, that the only fair and reasonable way out workings of it is that it would be 50% plus one. And that would then demonstrate a successful outcome for either side. So I take it that is a given. Now it's 50% plus one because some of the conversations, there's some ambiguity around that in some of the discussions that have taken place. So I might ask you just to speak to that. One other thing that really comes through in terms of your report, your substantial interim report is the need for the Irish government to plan. Now the Good Friday Agreement states that it's for the people of Ireland to decide without external impediment and this implies neutrality of the British government. But the Irish government is permitted, but the Irish government is permitted and indeed obliged to pursue the constitutional goal of the reunification in accordance with Bunraig de Hearn and the Good Friday Agreement as it was. And we've seen the outcomes and we've seen the outcomes of the working of the referendum held without proper planning in terms of the Brexit referendum. And we know, I think everybody absolutely agrees the need to plan. So I think you referred within your report as well to the need for constitutional assembly. Assembly, maybe if you could speak to that as well, or a civic assembly to be able to discuss all of the issues that you raised pertaining to the unity debate and as well what the shared island unit could do. So maybe just to those three things in terms of who commissioned the report, the democratic threshold and the need to plan and the obligations, the constitutional obligations of the Irish government to plan and how important you think a citizens assembly would be. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you very much. I'll reply to certainly the first two and maybe say something about the third as well. But I'm sure my colleagues will want to come in on the third. So on the first question about the origins of this work, we weren't commissioned by anyone. So this was an independent academic research project in its origins. We came to the view that it was important to investigate these questions. At the constitution unit, we've been doing a lot of work for some years now on the appropriate conduct rules for referendums. And we had not applied that work to Northern Ireland. We recognised that Northern Ireland is a very particular case with its own particular sensitivities. And we wanted to contribute in this important area. And when we reached out to colleagues in Belfast and Dublin, we saw that there was agreement on the importance of these questions and the need to approach them in a careful scholarly way. So that was the origin of the project. On the threshold in the referendums. Yes, we're very clear in the report that the threshold in each referendum North and South would be a simple majority of 50% plus one. That is partly because that's what the agreement says. And it is important to follow the agreement. It's partly also because even in the absence of that existing constraint, if you like, to have any other threshold would create an inequality between the two sides. And it is imperative, we think, in a question such as this, a basic question of sovereignty, that the two sides be treated equally. So we think it's very important that the 50% plus one threshold be applied. With regard to planning, so we we talk about two kinds of planning, if you like. One is planning of the process of the referendums themselves. And one is planning in relation to the form that a United Ireland might take. We recognise, as I said in my introductory remarks, that the question of when planning should take place and exactly what planning should be done by whom is a very sensitive matter. And, you know, we don't seek to make bold pronouncements on those kinds of details. What we do say is that by the time any referendum is called, it should be clear what the process will be. So a referendum should not be called unless it is clear what the processes of the referendums would be, what the timetable would be, what process would follow a vote for unification or indeed a vote against unification. With regard to planning of the form of United Ireland, there are various different ways in which these referendums could be configured. So there's one approach that could be taken where the referendums are held with no prior planning at all. We think that's a bad idea very clearly. A second approach would be to have a plan for a process that would be followed in the event of a vote for unification. for working out the form of United Ireland. So the form of United Ireland would be worked out after the referendums. Or then thirdly, you could have the planning for United Ireland done in advance of the referendums. We don't take a firm view between those two kind of final ways of running the referendums. There's a great deal that could be said about the relative merits of those and we might get into those in the course of the questioning. But I won't attempt to go through all of that in my reply to this question. Let me just quickly say on citizens assemblies and then I'll hand over perhaps to David who can comment on the constitutional issues that you raised. So I'm a big fan of citizens assemblies. I ran the first UK wide citizens assembly and a number of the other members of the working group have been intimately involved with citizens assemblies in Ireland and Northern Ireland. So we do see an important potential role for citizens assemblies in this process. At the same time, we urge caution to attempt to hold a citizens assembly kind of too early in this process when there isn't willingness from all parts of the community to engage with these discussions. Could be damaging, could be damaging to the credibility of citizens assemblies more broadly and that would be a very unfortunate thing. So thinking through the sequencing and being careful and not going too fast into a citizens assembly, I think is an important point that we draw out. But let me hand over to David perhaps. Thank you. Thank you very much. Just to comment briefly on the constitutional question around Article 3, which I think is a very interesting point. Article 3 of the Irish Constitution obviously establishes something of a national aim in respect of pursuing unification. That's the way it's sometimes phrased is setting a national aim. And the question is how that might instantiate in practical action. We in the interim report don't suggest that it provides a great deal of specificity. We do suggest that it would place a duty on the Irish government to hold a concurrent referendum under the Good Friday Agreement if the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland decided to call a referendum in the north. Beyond that, I think it's slightly challenging to suggest that it can place very specific duties on the Irish government to take any particular steps in respect of planning. I think that it would have to be sort of carefully worked out as a matter of politics what that constitutional duty might require. I think it's fair to say that there is at least some consequences of that constitutional duty, let's say an obligation to have a concurrent referendum. But I'd be low to suggest that it could suggest very specific action beyond that as a matter of law. Though as a matter of politics certainly that could be persuasively argued. OK, thanks David. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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.
