I KEEP hearing my fellow unionists complaining that their anger over the existence of the protocol is not being recognised or taken seriously. I have to tell them that they are wrong, it is recognised and acknowledged, but the solution involves compromises that some find difficult to hear.
Those of us who warned in advance that Brexit would be disastrous and create problems on the border were ignored, we were told this was ‘project fear’; pro-Brexit unionists just did not want to know. People have been encouraged to believe the myths spread by the fanatical followers of UKIP & the ERG and to ignore the fact that if NI business does well under the protocol it will embarrass the English politicians who damaged the UK economy through Brexit.
The GFA was supported in a referendum by 71 per cent (compared to 52 per cent for Brexit) and was successful because the common membership of the UK and Ireland in the EU permitted our border to be invisible, allowing nationalists to ignore the fact that NI remained in the UK, focussing instead on our common identity as Europeans. In essence we unionists could believe NI was as British as Finchley by allowing Nationalists to believe that we were as Irish as Dublin. For most this was good enough, for a minority it wasn’t, they craved proof that ‘our side won’.
Those who promoted Brexit failed to warn unionists that because of our cross-border links with Ireland which remained within the EU, we would need some special measures to keep the balance that was agreed in the GFA, there was never going to be a Brexit which applied to NI in the same way as it would apply to England, this was simply not possible.
There will be negotiated changes to the Protocol, it will probably be given a new name to spare the blushes of the DUP, but there will still be checks and we will still follow some EU rules. The only real decision is the timing; will we reach a negotiated settlement by October, or will it be in the interests of Boris and the ERG to string this out until next year so that they can have a sham fight with the EU around election time to distract the electorate from their horrific trashing of the UK economy?
Let’s be blunt, when an English MP talks about getting rid of the Protocol, their focus is on getting Boris re-elected, not the interests of Northern Ireland.
A CARTON
Belfast BT6
Universal basic income
With Assembly elections now over there is, arguably, a cogent case to be made for a headline untaxed universal basic income (UBI) of £30,000 per person aged 16 and over.
There are 1,179,700 individuals of working age (16-64) in this bracket, and a further 319,900 aged 64-plus, providing a total of 1,499,600.
A UBI of £30,000 would require a budget of £45bn, which, at face value, is clearly unaffordable. Or is it?
Is there some way to finesse these statistics to bring a UBI within reach, either by reducing the amount payable, or, by limiting the number who receive the payout, and/or other offsets against this amount?
Topping and tailing those eligible to receive the payment to a mere one million people aged 18-66 would still require a budget of £30bn.
Lowering the UBI to £20,000 would reduce this to a more affordable £20bn, or £30bn for those aged 16 and over.
Those are the headline statistics, but what of offsets, and how do they affect this?
Income tax: whilst the £30,000 UBI is untaxed, earnings up to £50,271 are taxed at a basic rate of 20 per cent, £50,271 to £150k at 40 per cent and earnings over £150k at 45 per cent.
And so anyone in work earning more than £20,271 would automatically be higher rate taxpayers, which would affect the majority of those in work.
Benefits and grants: no benefits paid so that entire infrastructure can be dismantled.
Pensions: no need for these now, and so all public sector pensions pooled in a Northern Ireland sovereign wealth fund to be invested for the benefit of NI.
National Health Service: immediately privatised, and all treatment paid for, albeit with charitable safety net for abnormal costs, and sale of assets pooled in the NI sovereign wealth fund.
Crime and prisons: a UBI of £20-£30k would arguably reduce criminal offending, and improve mental health.
Business rates: increased disposable income would reduce number of boarded up shops and increase revenue from business rates.
Funding of NI Executive: £15bn Departmental Expenditure Limits (DEL) and Annually Managed Expenditure (AME) of £11bn comes to £26bn, but actual spend is some £30.1bn.
We might reasonably expect that the Executive could easily afford a UBI of between £20-£30k for all or most of those aged 16-plus.
The only caveat is that our borders would need to be effectively sealed to prevent benefit tourism.
DR BERNARD MULHOLLAND
Belfast BT9
Things are looking bleak
Following the results of the Northern Ireland and Scottish local elections, prospects look bleak for the future of the United Kingdom in its current form.
Northern Ireland and Scotland separating from the UK would cause serious problems for those Ulster-Scots and Scottish Citizens wishing to remain integrated within the British Union.
The best solution would be to assist those Ulster-Scots who would not accept living in a united Ireland to immigrate back to their country of origin. The cost of their integration into Scotland should be provided by the transfer to them of the former Northern Ireland annual £11bn grant. This addition of pro-Union people should help if it came to a vote for Scotland to remain in the UK.
However, if this failed, then the only alternative would be the partition of Scotland into a free Scotland and part of Scotland still remaining as a part of a new UK, similar to the creation of Northern Ireland.. The financial cost would be enormous but less than the cost of a civil war.
JOHN McDOWELL
Larne, Co Antrim
Sinn Féin’s double standards
In a recent tweet, Sinn Féin president Mary Lou McDonald has criticised Jeffrey Donaldson’s decision to resign from his MLA seat and remain at Westminster as a complete abdication of his responsibility. She claims that his decision was taken without a thought for Northern Ireland workers, families and everyone struggling to get by.
While I would support any other leading Northern Ireland politician’s right to criticise Jeffrey Donaldson in this way, I never fail to be amazed at the double standards of Sinn Féin.
The major economic decisions that will be made to protect Northern Ireland workers, their families, and everyone who is struggling to get by will be made at Westminster. Why, therefore don’t the seven Sinn Féin MPs, instead of simply taking their expenses, end their policy of abstentionism, take their seats at Westminster, and defend the rights of those families who are struggling to get by.
They could also challenge Jeffrey Donaldson directly for his irresponsibility in the Westminster parliament itself.
JOHN CUSHNAHAN
Former Alliance Party leader, Lisnagry, Co Limerick
