The report in essence tasks the Irish government with preparing the political, legal and economic case for reunification. For example in Section 3 it states that in relation to the lack of good economic data in Northern Ireland, \u201cthe Irish Government needs to invest in securing accurate data so that it can formulate an appropriate response to Brexit and possible unification\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is also suggested in the report that reunification would boost the Northern Ireland economy through the lowering of corporation tax to that of the Republic, thereby increasing Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) (based on Hubner\u2019s work \u2013 \u2018Modelling Irish Unification\u2019 2015<\/a>, and a boost to Northern Ireland exports as a result of adopting the Euro, and an assumption that the higher productivity levels in the Republic would \u2018transfer\u2019 (through a mechanism not specified in the report) to Northern Ireland. As Kevin Meagher, former advisor to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Shaun Woodward 2007-09, and author of A United Ireland: Why Unification is Inevitable and How it Will Come About<\/a>\u2019<\/em> notes in his submission to the report:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cBluntly, Northern Ireland, with a population of just 1.8 million people, is of no strategic economic importance to Britain, representing just two per cent of the UK\u2019s GDP. Northern Ireland\u2019s best bet, economically, is to join with the South and align its economy to benefit from the Republic\u2019s strong record of attracting foreign direct investment\u201d,<\/em> p. 297<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n His submission, by the way, constitutes the entirety of the report\u2019s sub-section entitled \u2018British approach to Unity\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The neoliberal tenor of this reminds me that on this economic impact of reunification, the report would seek to extend the inequality producing GDP economic growth of the \u2018double transition\u2019 in Northern Ireland \u2013 the shift from war to peace and neoliberal globalisation, FDI dependence, and resulting inequality and precarious employment \u2013 as outlined by writers such as Conor McCabe<\/a> and QUB’s Brian Kelly<\/a> to the entire island of Ireland.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, to cut a long story short, the particular path to prosperity outlined in the report might undermine peace or the achievement of a just and decent society (as these authors suggest has been the fate of Northern Ireland).<\/p>\n\n\n\n To return to my starting point \u2013 if this were a student piece of work I\u2019d give it a high 2:2, it does a good job of summarising and collating a large body of already existing knowledge, position and proposals. It is over-reliant on a couple of key sources and to this reader at least does not sufficiently engage with those with reasoned positions against Irish Reunification\/Unity. There is (relatively) little new here and an absence of critical analysis, not least on the democratic legitimacy and politics of persuasion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But it has opened up a debate, an unhelpful or important one depending on one\u2019s views, not just on a united Ireland, but the away around the current\/latest political impasse here in Northern Ireland. And let us not forget that pursuing the reunification of Ireland is not in any way ruled out, or is democratically illegitimate or otherwise unlawful in the sense of being in breach of the 1998 Agreement. While this report chooses to see that Agreement as part of a road map (or a \u2018staging post\u2019) towards a United Ireland, others see the Agreement as an end point. Brexit has obviously energised the debate around Irish Unity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One wonders if the report, which on the whole views the 1998 Agreement as a staging post, and Brexit as the wind hastening a United Ireland, might have better advanced this position by slowing down more by, for example, stressing the unimplemented elements of the Agreement (Section 5 of the report) such as a Human Rights Bill, An Irish Language Act, and perhaps most importantly a North-South Consultative Forum (Strand II, Section 19 of the Agreement) \u2013 as well as the revival of the now defunct Civic Forum. These two fora at least offer some possibility for citizen dialogue on the current and future state of Northern Ireland.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hence media coverage has focused on presenting this report as calling for the Irish government to establish a \u2018New Ireland Forum 2\u2019<\/a> while Sinn F\u00e9in\u2019s \u2018Committee Report on Irish Unity<\/a>\u2019 shows an urgency of planning for reunification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One wonders if the authors of the report realise how destabilising it is to insist that the 1998 Agreement plus Brexit leads somehow inevitably to Irish Unity for those in Northern Ireland who are not just content with the current constitutional status quo but wish to see it continue. And here perhaps the report reveals itself as an Irish Nationalist document. It assumes at various points in the report that it is only unionists who have to be persuaded as unionists are the ones maintaining support for the constitutional position of Northern Ireland as part of the UK. This not only falls into the dominant, but not completely accurate \u2018two-community\u2019 model of Northern Ireland, but does not include those (non-unionists) \u2013 \u2018others\u2019 and most significantly nationalists who are content with the status quo and do not support a United Ireland. A BBC poll<\/a>, in September last year, found 63% of people in Northern Ireland supported staying in the UK, with only 22% backing a united Ireland.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n