I appreciated this tweet:
Keir Starmer's aggressive British nationalism means he's pledged to breach the Good Friday Agreement. British people may not have noticed. But Irish people have. pic.twitter.com/hNh7sOku7N
— Adam Ramsay (@AdamRamsay) August 9, 2023
An enlargement of the most relevant part of the article, which comes from the Irish News is:
I wish I shared that final optimism. This comment reflected Starmer's imperialist nationalism, to which I have already referred today. I think fear it is his politics of the moment, as his attitude to Scotland makes all too clear.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
If Starmer wins the next UK GE and then attempts to prevent a border poll in Ireland (or even if he simply reiterates his intention to prevent such a poll in spite of that breaching the GFA) he would move public opinion further towards secession from GB, not just in Ireland, but also in Scotland.
Taking NI first, while a stance against a border poll would endear him to the more extreme Unionists there, their share of the vote is decreasing as the business community see the benefits of seamless EU access and the young voters (who represent the future in Ulster) are more in favour of reunification and the benefits it would bring (travel, education, an end to the divisive sectarian policies, a resumption of Stormont governance, a removal of the interference of Westminster etc). Any attempt to interfere with the GFA would cause a rift with the USA and risk legal action for breach of both international law and the international treaty that is the GFA.
It would also have repercussions in Scotland where support for independence runs consistently at around 50% regardless of the SNP’s internal issues and before any campaigning gets under way. Given this, Labour’s hopes of regaining control in Scotland are pipe-dreams. They may gain a few Westminster Scottish seats, but most likely from the Tories who are now more detested than ever in Scotland, where their strong base in the farming and fishing communities has been significantly weakened as a result of the impact of Brexit on their businesses. The SNP looks like it’s going to use the 2014 GE as a de facto referendum on independence and any ruling by the Supreme Court using the kind of political (rather than legal) judgement, as they did previously, will not wash. In Scots Law the people of Scotland are sovereign, not Parliament (whether Holyrood or Westminster) and indeed this Claim of Rights was approved by a majority of mainly Scottish MPs in a Westminster debate a few years ago, so it’s already embedded in Westminster Parliamentary decisions which form part of UK’s so-called Constitution.
There’s a decided feeling of tectonic plates getting ready to shift and, if either or both NI and Scotland start their’s moving, it’s bound to have an impact in Wales. It could be that Starmer will go down in history as the PM who broke up Britain after all that hard work by the Tories to alienate the devolved nations!
You might be right Ken….
There is no such a treaty as The Good Friday Agreement
The Belfast Agreement was signed in 1998-Have you read it?
The Belfast Agreement affirmed Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom-This has been ignored by the Irish Government and the EU
If Mr Starmer is to be prevented from campaigning in any Border Poll in Northern Ireland does this this also extend to The United States and the EU-both of whom seek to interfere and prevent the restitution of local Government in Northern Ireland by supporting Economic Sanctions against Northern Ireland from trading with it’s biggest market which is Great Britain
Wow, pedantry is out in force.
“…Scotland where support for independence runs consistently at around 50% regardless of the SNP’s internal issues and before any campaigning gets under way”
Thankfully the SNP is not the only pro-independence organisation in Scotland and campaigning for the next election (and beyond) is well underway with focus on practical strategies not short term soon to be broken promises. Just don’t expect to read about it in MSM. Shifting tectonic plates is a fine analogy. I hope the same is happening in Ireland. There are too many smart people to put up with the elitist crap and corruption of another run of the uninspiring two /three /more horse race.
I’m a little confused on the details here. Starmer said he would campaign on the Union side, and the article is making clear that he won’t have a vote. But it doesn’t say anywhere that he claimed he would have a vote.
Taking the argument here to its extreme, it seems that the island of Ireland could never have peaceful independence, because it would require the UK government to act on an issue that it wasn’t allowed to have anything to do with. I don’t agree with Starmer’s position, but is he not allowed to campaign in whatever direction he chooses?
The point is it is not his issue. Why is that so hard to understand?
There are 2 points here
1. The circumstances under which a border poll is to be called ate clearly set out in the Belfast Agreement
2. It is a long established principle (known as the Brooke principle after Thatcher’s SoS for NI Peter Brooke) that the British government has no strategic or economic interest in NI and would accept Irish reunification by consent.
Bithe UK and Republic of Ireland governments are guarantors of the Belfast Government and are to observe neutrality in the event of a vote
So the one thing Starmer comes out on with no equivocation he has got badly wrong.
The GFA doesn’t say that the government, PM, Leader of the Opposition, political party or any other UK citizen can’t support one side or another in a border poll.
“No external impediment” is about ensuring the border poll happens freely and properly when statutory conditions are met.
Feeney’s wrong.
I really don’t think you understand the politics of this.
I know and understand the GFA, and the notion that UK politicians or anyone else cannot advocate for the Union is both absurd and found nowhere in it.
Whether they would, or whether it would be wise too are other questions, but there is nothing in the text which forbids it.
The politics of any plebiscite, if it ever happens, will have to be sensitively handled otherwise another century of disaster awaits, but a throwaway statement from 2021 said in a Scottish context I believe is not the basis for the alarm in Feeney’s article.
You still make it very clear that you simply do not understand the politics. I suggest you don’t bother again.
Would you said the same if Sir Kid Starver had said he would campaign on the nationalist side?
I am cautious about commenting on Scottish politics – Ireland doubly so.
However, if the PM of the UK of GB&NI thinks they can take a position on this issue and say they are not an “external impediment” then he is naive, at best.
Precisely
Don’t count on Labour landslide yet. As usual the actual numbers are far more interesting than the percentages, especially as to guess what will happen in a an election that matters to voters, where they vote their interests rather than their peeves:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerton_and_Frome_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
2001: 52,684/69.3%: Con 22,315, NLab 6,113, LD 22,983, UKI 919
2005: 54,102/70.7%: Con 22,947, NLab 5,865, LD 23,759, UKI 1,047
2010: 60,612/74.3%: Con 26,976, NLab 2,675, LD 28,793, UKI 1,932
2015: 60,309/72.2%: Con 31,960, NLab 4,419, LD 11,692, UKI 6,439
2017: 63,892/75.8%: Con 36,231, Lab 10,998, LD 13,325
2019: 64,896/75.6%: Con 36,230, Lab 8,354, LD 17,017, RUK 0, GRN 3,295
2023: 38,788/44.2%: Con 10,179, NLab 1,009, LD 21,187, RUK 1,303, GRN 3,944
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selby_and_Ainsty_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
2010: 51,728/71.1%: Con 25,562, NLab 13,297, LD 9,180, UKI 1,635, BNP 1,377
2015: 52,804/69.4%: Con 27,725, NLab 14,168, LD 1,920, UKI 7,389, GRN 1,465
2017: 56,222/74.1%: Con 32,921, Lab 19,149, LD 2,293, UKI 1,713
2019: 56,418/71,7%: Con 22,995, Lab 13,858, LD 4,842, RUK 0, GRN 1,823
2023: 35,886/44.8%: Con 12,295, NLab 16,456, LD 1,188, RUK 1,332, GRN 1,838
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uxbridge_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
2010: 45,076/63.3%: Con 21,748, NLab 10,542, LD 8,995, UKI 1,234, BNP 1,396
2015: 44,811/63.4%: Con 22,511, NLab 11,816, LD 2,215, UKI 6,346, GRN 1,414
2017: 46,694/66.8%: Con 23,176, Lab 18,862, LD 1,835, UKI 1,577, GRN 884
2019: 48,187/68.5%: Con 25,531, Lab 18,141, LD 3,026, UKI 283, GRN 1,090
2023: 31,000/46.23: Con 13,965, NLab 13,470, LD 526, REC 714, GRN 893
A protest vote in all three:
* Like in previous by-elections, Con voters protested by abstaining more than than usual for a by-election.
* Like in some by-elections New Labour voters protested by tactically voting for the LibDems or the Greens, and vice-versa in Somerton.
Particular notes:
* In Somerton the Con vote went from 36k to 10k and the combined NL+LD vote from 25k to 22k, almost all LD, looks good for LD, but not that good.
* In Selby the Con vote went from 23k to 12k and the combined NL+LD vote from 19k to 18k. Here New Labour did fairly well, because while the difference between 2019’s 14k and 2023’s 16k could be almost entirely from the fall in LD votes from 5k to 1k, we have to take into account lower turnout, so it looks like NL actually gained some voters.
* In Uxbridge given the substantial lack of significant third party (“protest vote”) alternatives, both the Con and NL votes were affected by low turnout, from 25K to 14k for Con and 17k to 13k for NL and LD from 3k to near zero. Showing that even if some LD voters “protested” by voting NL, there is little enthusiam for NL among voters and likely no significant switch of “soft kipper” voters from Con to NL.
If inflation and nominal interest rates fall enough in late 2024 by the next election and property prices resume booming it will be very difficult for NL and Starmer to win a national election by default on a “we are like the Conservatives but not the Conservatives” appeal to the protest vote.
Actually inflation, in the proper sense of rise in the cost of living, is always and only a political phenomenon, to achieve some form of redistribution, and so it is nowadays in the UK:
* UK inflation (and that in some other countries) is much higher than in many other countries, and some don’t have inflation. Curious!
* UK inflation is supposed by the Bank of England to fall under 2% by the beginning of 2025. It’s a plan!
* The BoE is keeping real interest rates way negative, at around 5% for the base rate and 6% for mortgages, while the RPI is at 12-14% (and the cost of living for many is rising rather faster).
a very important goal, to help UK wage earners become “more competitive”, which can be achieved in 3 ways:
#1 “external devaluation”: a fall in the exchange rate and real wages become become “more competitive” in “strong currencies”.
#2 “internal devaluation”: a recession with much unemployment results in wage cuts, especially for those hired from unemployment, who are desperate to get a job, and wages become “more competitive” in the local currency.
#3 “internal inflation”: most prices, except wages, increase, and wages become “more comepetive” in terms of purchasing power.
That real interest rates are way negative is the obvious sign that #3 is the policy choice of government and BoE.
Thanks
You know, something has just occurred to me and I think because I’m looking through the the lens of the Irish unification issue.
Could Laboured be positioning themselves as the new ‘one nation’ Tory party in British politics? Stymied’s response is redolent of a ‘one nation’ attitude.
I mean, the REAL Tory party isn’t actually a Tory party anymore – let’s be honest – they are a bunch disparate extremists – market fundamentalists, fascists, Little Englanders and sovereignty sellers to the highest bidder etc.
I don’t know – it was a just thought – I honestly think that that is how Labour are going to rule to be honest.
Heaven’s above….it’s plausible
I found myself keeping coming back to this … this suggestion makes sense of much of new new labour’s reorientation under Starmer. The interesting thing could be that if new new labour replaces the Tories as the “one nation” party and the Tories become a rump extremist UKIP-lookalike, there could be a clearer space for the already growing tactical vote movement to achieve a hung parliament and PR at the next election? There will be so many more people with no “home” party who might well be persuaded.
As a Northern Irishman, this latest idiotic outpouring is particularly galling for me. The man is an absolute lunatic.
This is very worrying and dangerous from Starmer (John says it best above).
The official position from various different British governments is that it has ‘no selfish or strategic interests in Northern Ireland’ – this was codified in the Downing St Declaration of 1993 (i.e. official government (of any colour) position).
Starmer by saying this is going against British traety obligations, for what? Polling shows in Britain that NI is not a vote winner.
Starmer by setting himself up as a ‘one nation’ (Tory) is setting himself up for a massive swing against Labour to the Greens and Lib Dems very soon after a potential GE win. (I think that would be a good outcome and richly deserved.)
Unlike Scotland, I am not convinced that major economic or political arguments exist against Irish Reunification, I believe possibly the biggest stumbling block is healthcare as The Republic’s system isn’t as good as ours.
Being old enough to remember The Troubles and the unalloyed joy that is Northern Irish politics however I am surprised that mainland UK politicians would not be privately hoping to be shot of the place.
Until this statement by Starmer, I was pretty sure that all English politicians wanted rid of Northern Ireland and the the careful wording of the GFA was designed to allow NI & the Republic to sort it out themselves.
I have come a long way on Northern Ireland. I was teaching in Aldershot at the time of the bombing of the officers’ mess. Due to mistiming the bomb went off when no officers were they. They killed a Roman Catholic Padre, some gardeners and cleaners. I can remember a small party of people entering the school a few hours later to collect a first year (year seven ) pupil whose mother was one of the casualties.
I was in Bridgwater when Tom King was Secretary of State and we had a Loyalist march with many union flags. The local attitude was ‘we see them more as Irish than British in our sense’. And the opinion was, it’s up to them if they opt for independence. We won’t struggle to hold onto the province.’
I am even more aware of the history now, from the establishment of the Pale, to the plantations, the Famine, to the Black and Tans. It is not a history the ‘mainland British’ can take much pride in, to say the least.
The polls show that younger people are in favour of unification and I see it as inevitable.
Any referendum should spell out the consequences of the vote either way in accordance with the Venice Convention. What didn’t happen with Brexit!
But there some issues which could influence the vote and probably need to be laid out before rather than after.
There will be continuing obligations like pensions which need not be too contentious.
The UK govt. gives a subsidy of £15 billion to NI. Would that just stop or taper off or what?
There would still be a large number of people whose preferred nationality would not be citizenship of the ROI. Their status probably needs to defined , not ‘we’ll let you know.’ But this need not be a huge obstacle. Since 1922 Irish citizens have enjoyed various privileges -they can even vote in UK elections!
There are military installations in NI most of which like Aldergrove could transfer but there are some surveillance facilities which are part of a NATO role and the ROI is not in the alliance.
While I think unification is inevitable and we should not interfere, a British PM is probably going to have to tell them what a post independence stance would be in a few areas.
I have posted this before but I will say it again. The Labour Party has been the victim of a coup. Starmer is the Manchurian Candidate.. He is controlled by his colleagues in the Tripartite Commission. Also, by the Tony Blair institute which is another dangerous organisation. Both are bent on diluting democracy.