The latest LucidTalk poll raises the possibility of nationalism becoming the largest designation after May’s election.
Unionism could win more votes but fewer seats, due to odd features of a three-way split between the DUP, UUP and TUV.
Although this is still considered unlikely, just the prospect of it could change voter and party behaviour. The contest for first minister may be largely symbolic but a nationalist plurality really would be a profound transformation.
Under this scenario, Sinn Féin would be expected to move an assembly vote calling on the secretary of state to hold a border poll. That expectation could cause the DUP to block the assembly’s return.
Recent changes to Stormont’s rules, agreed in New Decade, New Approach, create a six month period after the election when previous ministers can stay in post in a caretaker capacity if an executive cannot be formed. The DUP is clearly planning to spend this period dragging its feet over the protocol, a Sinn Féin first minister or both.
The new rules also allow the assembly to meet during this period and operate more or less as normal. The past two months without first ministers proved that Stormont can operate quite well in caretaker mode if the DUP wants to limit the impact of its boycott to a performative huff.
More of the same has been anticipated for the rest of this year, perhaps with a bit more tweaking of the rules, leading up to a new executive by November.
However, a nationalist plurality could see the DUP genuinely refuse to participate. It could shut down the caretaker assembly by declining to nominate a speaker and the caretaker executive by withdrawing the rest of its ministers - the new rules still require enough ministers for “cross-community confidence”.
If the DUP tries shutting down only the assembly, nationalism could withdraw its ministers in protest at the denial of democracy.
Either way, the secretary of state would then have to end the caretaker period, probably within its minimum period of six weeks, and call an election for three months later, taking us back to the polls by mid-September.
Would another election happen? Defiant DUP non-cooperation makes it likelier there would be some form of direct rule and attempts at a St Andrews-level renegotiation, at a minimum.
The mere possibility of all this playing out raises questions for everyone. Would Sinn Féin move a vote for a border poll, on what timescale, and would the SDLP support it? The vote would be a stunt, after all, as there is no imminent likelihood of nationalist victory in a border poll itself, meaning the secretary of state could disregard the assembly’s call.
The UUP is in an interesting position. It could offer to keep the assembly going by blocking any border poll motion, by joining the DUP and TUV in raising a petition of concern. A border poll looks like the sort of contention the petition is designed for, yet any poll is to be decided by a simple majority. So is blocking a motion on it appropriate, democratic, pro-agreement or liberal?
Alliance is most obviously put on the spot by the prospect of a nationalist plurality. The party’s safest option is to say it would abstain on any border poll motion, passing the buck to the secretary of state. However, that would not stop the DUP crashing devolution, for which Alliance would be partially blamed, unfairly or not.
The next safest option would be opposing the motion on pragmatic rather than unionist grounds, in order to save Stormont from an unnecessary crisis. That would still put the party under enormous strain internally and with its nationalist-background voters.
The most intriguing question is for the DUP and unionism in general. Should it welcome an assembly motion and say “bring it on”, as Arlene Foster did in 2013? A border poll is the biggest thing a shrinking unionism can win - that fact alone could be a constructive rallying point. Of course, if unionism were capable of such ninja moves, it would not be in its present predicament.
The positive view on unionism’s fortunes is that it is transitioning away from the DUP as its largest party. Wider interests might be served by giving that process some space, without portraying a possibly transitional dip in the unionist seat tally as the end of the union.
Alliance might touch on that argument if cornered on a border poll - but neither it nor anyone else owes unionism any favours.
