Letter:​ Threshold for success in any border poll should be raised - it must go beyond a simple majority of those actually voting

A letter from John Gemmell:
The judgment call on border poll rests with the secretary of state. According to the Belfast Agreement, a poll should be held, if at any time ‘it appears likely’ to the secretary of state that a majority of voters here want to become part of a separatist all-Ireland republic. That decision is entirely at the minister’s discretion and there is no need for him to set out any criteriaThe judgment call on border poll rests with the secretary of state. According to the Belfast Agreement, a poll should be held, if at any time ‘it appears likely’ to the secretary of state that a majority of voters here want to become part of a separatist all-Ireland republic. That decision is entirely at the minister’s discretion and there is no need for him to set out any criteria
The judgment call on border poll rests with the secretary of state. According to the Belfast Agreement, a poll should be held, if at any time ‘it appears likely’ to the secretary of state that a majority of voters here want to become part of a separatist all-Ireland republic. That decision is entirely at the minister’s discretion and there is no need for him to set out any criteria
By Letters
Published 28th Nov 2023, 00:01 BST

It was interesting to read Owen Polley's thoughtful piece about the border poll issue (UK would be stupid to set out the criteria for a border poll, November 13).

Owen thinks it unwise to “set tests that automatically trigger” a border poll. I agree. I am more focused on raising the threshold for one succeeding. It is to be hoped that the secretary of state never actually triggers one, and a tightening of the threshold for a vote actually leading to an all-Ireland republic would strengthen the argument that he or she might make for never calling it in the first place. The ultimate judgment call on a poll would stay with the secretary of state. It would not be automatic.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But, as I suggested in my letter of November 9 (Labour is the party of constitutional reform, and unionists must lobby Starmer to be part of conversation), I am, at this stage, primarily concerned with Scotland because it is there that the most real and present danger to the Union is to be found. The unravelling of the UK, if it ever happens, will start in Scotland, nowhere else.

Some will take the same view on a second Scottish independence vote as they would on a border poll - just don't discuss it. I fear the pressure for a second vote in Scotland may succeed at some point. That is why I want to see a major reform relating to constitutional issues, making it far harder to bring about future constitutional change. We need a new, constitutional, basic law.

My preference would be that a majority of registered voters should support a constitutional change. This goes beyond a simple majority of those actually voting. There are also far tighter options than that, such as a threshold of 60% of those voting, for a change to pass. These provisions would apply to such issues as Scottish or Welsh independence, or electoral reform. The debate on these changes would have to start in Scotland and could not be imposed on Scotland.

But, if it happened, it would then be necessary to tweak the Belfast Agreement, removing the “simple majority” principle, which has always been most unhelpful. That difficult discussion could be many years away, if it ever happens.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Turning to another point made by Owen, it is indeed remarkable that little discussion takes place in the Republic about what would happen to their state if it tried to absorb a million British people who did not want to be there. The new country would have a population of about 7 million, with one million very unhappy about it. It would be very roughly comparable to the USA annexing the entire population of the UK, just because 50% plus one of us had voted for it. In such a scenario, almost one in 10 of the population of the new USA would be extremely annoyed British people, enough to tip the balance and ensure that Irish folk hero Joe Biden went into long overdue retirement at the next presidential election!

Members of the Dail should do the maths and be careful what you wish for.

Apologies to UK citizens for that scary comparison, but it helps to underscore what a catastrophe potentially lies at the heart of Irish nationalist fantasies.

John Gemmell, Wem, Shropshire

Related topics:LabourScotlandJoe BidenIreland