Shared rule plus self-rule is a well-known definition of federal thinking. The current public debate on whether we should concentrate on a shared island to reconcile differences before preparing for a united Ireland recalls it. The issue is complicated further by the growing entanglement of political stability and change between Britain and Ireland.
Michéal Martin told the fifth Shared Island Forum he supports unity but believes in the “hard slog of building relationships”. He is certain “rhetoric, slogans, soundbites will achieve nothing and won’t achieve a Border poll”.
He was referring to remarks made by Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan, who said: “It is responsible for an Irish government to set out what it is would happen, or what it is an Irish government would be prepared to recommend to its citizens if we were going to have a reunification referendum. That is an issue of legitimate concern.” O’Callaghan addressed an SDLP meeting in Belfast, The Future of these Islands”, drawing valuably on their participation in UK politics through the House of Commons.
Political events and processes are increasingly entangled across Britain and Ireland.. That was acknowledged by both Martin and O’Callaghan. It was taken up by Tánaiste and leader of Fine Gael Simon Harris in his plan to prepare a party blueprint for a “unified Ireland”. Former Fine Gael TD John Deasy wrote recently in a newspaper column that Harris is anticipating competition with O’Callaghan as likely next leader of Fianna Fáil.
READ MORE
Martin emphasised the three strands of the Belfast Agreement – powersharing in Northern Ireland, North-South and East-West relations – will continue “even after unity ... whatever happens in the future. There will always be a British dimension, there will always be a North-South dimension”. O’Callaghan said people in Ireland have often thought they had freedom “to plan changes ourselves”, but so often “Ireland’s politics and Ireland’s history” has been dictated “by what happens on the neighbouring larger island”.
Political instability and upheaval in London could do the same now, especially given the rise of Reform UK. O’Callaghan warned: “The future may not go down the predictable pathway of discussions and harmony.”
Similar points were made by Ian Marshall, independent unionist and by former taoiseach Leo Varadkar. Varadkar agreed with Marshall that a united Ireland has to be sold convincingly to unionists and others as a better option than the status quo within the UK. Varadkar underlined how unexpectedly radical political change can happen historically, as in German unification 1989-90, Irish independence 1916-22 or India 1945-47. It’s like going bankrupt; in the words of Ernest Hemingway, that happens “Two ways: gradually, then suddenly”.
If the UK’s political union breaks up, is it not responsible through prudent foresight and active engagement to anticipate what that might mean South and North – for nationalists, unionists and neither/others – and to propose pathways through such a political crisis? Sharing is therefore necessary and valuable, but insufficient without more developed ideas about self-rule.
In a book I have jointly edited, Political Change across Britain and Ireland, Identities, Institutions and Futures, suggested possibilities include deep reform to bed the UK devolution settlements down, potential break-up of the union if that is not done, or a prolonged impasse that would postpone but not resolve the issue It analyses many aspects of current Irish-British political entanglements and how they may play out, as does ongoing research based on this approach.
The issue is highly salient in a week when Andy Burnham set out his vision of a decentralised, regionally equal and economically dynamic England in a devolved UK before he succeeds Keir Starmer as prime minister.
Burnham’s is now the agenda for deep reform to prevent a UK break-up that might well be triggered should the Reform party led by Nigel Farage win the next general election.
Sympathetic critics ask if Burnham and the UK political system have the capacity, will and imagination to deliver such a necessary programme of shared and self-rule to satisfy deep public disenchantment. Is he not confusing UK-wide devolution and a decentralised England with regional mayors like him who lack real taxation powers to deliver results?
A decentralised Ireland is one potentially attractive outcome for a new Ireland, combining shared with self-rule. It could create fresh local democratic space in a more complex society North and South, as the Shared Island forum discussed constructively in one of its panels.
Preserving the three strands in a confederal arrangement with a reconfigured Britain could even be understood by unionists as a “unionism beyond the union”.
