Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 16 February 2021

Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement

The EU and Irish Unity - Planning and Preparing for Constitutional Change in Ireland: Discussion

Mr. Mark Bassett:

I thank members for their questions. It is very helpful to get informed criticism and feedback on this report. It was written in October 2019 and it should really be a starting place for looking at these issues. As Professor Harvey said, one of the possible triggers for unity referendums would be the consideration of the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland that there is a pro-unity majority in the jurisdiction. Last year, an important decision was made by the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal on the circumstances in which the discretion to call that vote exists and also the circumstances in which the duty to call that vote would arise. The court was very definite that the Secretary of State must approach that question on the basis of relevant evidence, in an honest manner and consistent with the duty of the UK Government to act with rigorous impartiality. It is not to be approached in the way that we might see the current UK Government approach the Scottish referendum, which is one that could be characterised as "This is a problem; how will it be defeated?". The UK Government's obligation is to give effect to the wishes of the Irish people. A relevant consideration for that is that Irish unity is a route back to membership of the European Union. That is something that the Secretary of State should be considering. The European Union is good for Northern Ireland and support for it remains high. There is little chance of UK reaccession under Article 49. The more plausible route at this stage appears to be Irish reunification and that is something the Secretary of State must take into consideration. If a decision to hold a referendum was reached by the Secretary of State, to be consistent with the Good Friday Agreement it would have to be matched by a concurrent vote or referendum in the Republic of Ireland. It would be better if the Irish Government and State were ready for that.

On voting rights, the Good Friday Agreement and the Northern Ireland Act provide a choice to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on who will make up the franchise. There are two obvious choices. The first is the Westminster voting lists, which are Irish, British, and qualifying Commonwealth citizens. The other, the more generous one which we hope would be used, is the assembly and European Parliament lists, which include EU citizens. In the Republic, if the vote on unity is to take the form of a constitutional amendment, that is, a change to the text of the Constitution, that is currently a restrictive list, one that is limited to Irish citizens resident in the State and registered as referendum electors. There is the possibility of a distinction between the franchises in both jurisdictions which is unfortunate. It is particularly unfortunate that British citizens resident in the Republic of Ireland could be excluded from that vote in the South. That is where we are at the moment so these are the issues that should be addressed.

Reconciliation and unionist engagement with this issue are very important but they are not absolute prerequisites in the Good Friday Agreement to the triggering of these referendums. The only legitimate basis for the partition of Ireland at this time is an assumption that the majority of people in the North support that constitutional option. That is the centrepiece of the Good Friday Agreement. If someone supports consent, we would say that person should also support the right for that consent to be tested - that is the right of self-determination, to use the language of the agreement, without external impediment. If there is a majority in both jurisdictions for unity, the obligation of the Governments is to work towards that.

I agree that there are very big differences between Irish reunification and German reunification. What the report tried to do was to set out the similarities in the legal and constitutional frameworks. It is correct that they would be seen, in terms of EU law at least, as comparable.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.