sluggerotoole--2020-02-24--Fergus on Monday: Instructions for the new SoS

Click to share on Facebook ( Opens in new window )

Donate to keep Slugger lit!
For over 20 years, Slugger has been an independent place for debate and new ideas. We have published over 40,000 posts and over one and a half million comments on the site. Each month we have over 70,000 readers. All this we have accomplished with only volunteers we have never had any paid staff.
Slugger does not receive any funding, and we respect our readers, so we will never run intrusive ads or sponsored posts. Instead, we are reader-supported. Help us keep Slugger independent by becoming a friend of Slugger.
While we run a tight ship and no one gets paid to write, we need money to help us cover our costs.
If you like what we do, we are asking you to consider giving a monthly donation of any amount, or you can give a one-off donation. Any amount is appreciated.


sluggerotoole--2020-02-24--Opinion on a border poll “on a knife edge” – the latest from The Detail

Here we go again .
Just a bit of cross posting here to draw attention m to a special edition of The Detail , about a border poll .
The comment is based a Lucid Talk opinion poll conducted north and south , showing opinion “ on a knife edge ” – 46.8 % to stay in the UK and 45.4 % for a United Ireland .
The disparity now among three polls in succession can partly be accounted for by different methodology , this one on line , the other two face to face and by telephone respectively .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ The variety of methodology makes it no easier to pinpoint the moment for a border poll , but the cumulative effect is that it is more likely than hypothetical .
The questions are all pertinent .
They follow the case made by one of few academics to stick his head above the parapet , the rights lawyer Prof Colin Harvey and they follow the course of Sinn Fein ’ s arguments .
SF will be encouraged by the results .
They will put pressure on Micheal Martin the likely next taioiseach to comply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a more active strategy for unity is now being pressed by the former taoiseach Bertie Ahern , hitherto very cautious on unity as a much admired strategist .
but now casting about for a distinctive role for his old party Fianna Fail .
The cross border character of this exercise is a reminder that we are really talking about two complementary referendums taking place in what are in many ways quite different political environments .
A decision on a border poll , formally to be taken by the UK government on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , would have be squared with Dublin to prevent the northern tail wagging the southern dog .
More fundamentally treating unity as a real prospect rather than a dream casts doubt on whether it can be treated as simple binary question .
The pressure also exposes that for all the endless talk about it , almost nothing had been done to prepare for it , or an alternative which is bound to include progress towards greater cross border economic development .
The evidence suggests that Brexit has created a momentum largely absent before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal ?
A good deal may look unlikely today but the necessity of reaching one eventually is compelling .
An offer of unity has to be made by the south .
The complexity and upheaval of making the necessary adjustments put all the usual chatter of constitutional change in the shade .
Is the south up for it ?
Many opinion polls will be commissioned before reaching fully aware satisfactory answers .
On the timing of unity referendums , 36 % for 5 years , ( Sinn Fein ’ s preference ) 17 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevailing choice ) 8 % for 20 years and 23 % never .
Brexit has been a big factor in building support for unity , 69 % in the North , 75 % in the Republic .
( But what will they think if a UK-EU agreement is reached over the next year or so ? )
56 % in the North and 74 % in the Republic would support a Citizen ’ s Assembly to “ deliberate on a change ” – ( a key Sinn Fein demand ) .
An overwhelming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a border poll , In NI 17.8 % would be in favour of a centralised government in Dublin and 33.2 % in ROI , while 14.7 % of NI respondents and 12.7 % in ROI would favour a different governance arrangement .
These results seem to favour the continuation of the Assembly with a change of sovereignty but the issue although raised by Sinn Fein , has hardly been debated .
The most recent NI Life and Times survey data shows that just over three quarters of participants align to an A or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the UK or unify with Ireland .
However , the only options available were that NI stayed in the UK , joined Ireland or became an independent state , while 16 % of those surveyed didn ’ t know what they wanted the political future to be .
The question around joint authority produced some interesting results , as 64 % would either happily accept this or could at least live with it .
Similarly , the data produced for The Detail by LucidTalk show similar levels of support for more formalised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results indicate that there are significant numbers in NI who feel political allegiance to the UK or Ireland .
From the 1970s and onward , both major British parties were treated with suspicion by Ulster unionism .
In response , British politicians for the most part , have been confused by the cultural practices of unionists whilst simultaneously frustrated by the ability of Ulster unionism to cause them major difficulties .
In short , two groups who appear to be likely political allies instead view each other with hostility and mistrust .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that , in NI , Britishness has been constructed in a different environment to how it has in Great Britain .
Some unionists and loyalists argue that this is because they faced opposition to their culture from Irish republicanism .
Irishness in the north has , not dissimilarly , been forged in a hostile environment .
There are some steps being made toward how to publicly accommodate both national identities .
This work could be derailed by a border poll , if it is not conducted carefully .

Here we go again. Just a bit of cross posting here to draw attention m to a special edition of The Detail, about a border poll. The comment is based a Lucid Talk opinion poll conducted north and south, showing opinion “ on a knife edge” – 46.8% to stay in the UK and 45.4 % for a United Ireland. The disparity now among three polls in succession can partly be accounted for by different methodology, this one on line, the other two face to face and by telephone respectively. The trend however is towards unity . The variety of methodology makes it no easier to pinpoint the moment for a border poll, but the cumulative effect is that it is more likely than hypothetical.
The questions are all pertinent. They follow the case made by one of few academics to stick his head above the parapet, the rights lawyer Prof Colin Harvey and they follow the course of Sinn Fein’s arguments. SF will be encouraged by the results. They will put pressure on Micheal Martin the likely next taioiseach to comply. It’s perhaps no accident that a more active strategy for unity is now being pressed by the former taoiseach Bertie Ahern, hitherto very cautious on unity as a much admired strategist. but now casting about for a distinctive role for his old party Fianna Fail.
The cross border character of this exercise is a reminder that we are really talking about two complementary referendums taking place in what are in many ways quite different political environments. A decision on a border poll, formally to be taken by the UK government on the basis of a judgement of majority opinion, would have be squared with Dublin to prevent the northern tail wagging the southern dog.
More fundamentally treating unity as a real prospect rather than a dream casts doubt on whether it can be treated as simple binary question. The pressure also exposes that for all the endless talk about it, almost nothing had been done to prepare for it, or an alternative which is bound to include progress towards greater cross border economic development. The evidence suggests that Brexit has created a momentum largely absent before 2016. Would momentum survive a UK/EU deal? A good deal may look unlikely today but the necessity of reaching one eventually is compelling.
An offer of unity has to be made by the south. The complexity and upheaval of making the necessary adjustments put all the usual chatter of constitutional change in the shade. Is the south up for it? Many opinion polls will be commissioned before reaching fully aware satisfactory answers.
The opinion poll shows that
On the timing of unity referendums, 36% for 5 years, (Sinn Fein’s preference ) 17% for 10 years ( the notional prevailing choice) 8% for 20 years and 23 % never.
Brexit has been a big factor in building support for unity, 69% in the North, 75% in the Republic. ( But what will they think if a UK-EU agreement is reached over the next year or so?)
56% in the North and 74% in the Republic would support a Citizen’s Assembly to “ deliberate on a change” – (a key Sinn Fein demand).
An overwhelming 76% want greater clarity for triggering a border poll,
In NI 17.8% would be in favour of a centralised government in Dublin and 33.2% in ROI, while 14.7% of NI respondents and 12.7% in ROI would favour a different governance arrangement. These results seem to favour the continuation of the Assembly with a change of sovereignty but the issue although raised by Sinn Fein, has hardly been debated.
The academic Sophie Long suggests other options:
The most recent NI Life and Times survey data shows that just over three quarters of participants align to an A or B option, that is, remain in the UK or unify with Ireland. However, the only options available were that NI stayed in the UK, joined Ireland or became an independent state, while 16% of those surveyed didn’t know what they wanted the political future to be.
The question around joint authority produced some interesting results, as 64% would either happily accept this or could at least live with it.
Similarly, the data produced for The Detail by LucidTalk show similar levels of support for more formalised governance-sharing between Dublin and Belfast. These results indicate that there are significant numbers in NI who feel political allegiance to the UK or Ireland.
From the 1970s and onward, both major British parties were treated with suspicion by Ulster unionism. In response, British politicians for the most part, have been confused by the cultural practices of unionists whilst simultaneously frustrated by the ability of Ulster unionism to cause them major difficulties.
In short, two groups who appear to be likely political allies instead view each other with hostility and mistrust.
This is in no small part due to the fact that, in NI, Britishness has been constructed in a different environment to how it has in Great Britain. Some unionists and loyalists argue that this is because they faced opposition to their culture from Irish republicanism. Irishness in the north has, not dissimilarly, been forged in a hostile environment. There are some steps being made toward how to publicly accommodate both national identities. This work could be derailed by a border poll, if it is not conducted carefully.


sluggerotoole--2020-02-23--How will they square the circle of unfettered access to Northern Ireland ports?  Check it out on – T

How will they square the circle of unfettered access to Northern Ireland ports?  Check it out on – Thursday now

David Frost ( no , not that one , now deceased ) According to the Sunday Times we will know the approach the UK will adopt for the next stage of EU withdrawal in a couple of days , now that the country has left the organisation and we are in the transition phase of less than a year .
The UK government are taking up a position of maximum distance from the EU procedures and laws quite different from the erratic harder no softer approach of Theresa May ’ s minority government that came such a cropper .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the almighty contradiction between the clear words of the NI protocol saying checks are required at ports on either side of the North Channel , and the boiler plate assurances of government ministers waving them away .
Up to now the ministers have been smilingly pitied like fundamentalists who believe the earth was created in six days , But maybe they ’ re about to have a go at somehow meaning it , as the Sunday Times reports .
Boris Johnson ’ s Brexit team has been ordered to draw up plans to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protocol in the Brexit withdrawal agreement so the prime minister can play hardball with Brussels over trade .
Officials in Taskforce Europe , run by Johnson ’ s EU negotiator David Frost , are working in secret on proposals to ensure that there do not need to be checks on goods passing from Britain to Northern Ireland .
They believe the new attorney-general , Suella Braverman , might have to give new legal advice to justify the move .
Insiders say she was appointed because her predecessor Geoffrey Cox was not willing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brussels as a breach of the exit agreement .
The details emerged as Frost plans this week to spell out Britain ’ s demands for a trade deal with Brussels , insisting on the same rights as Canada .
Officials have not ruled out an attempt to try to claw back money from the EU divorce bill if the EU will not play ball .
Johnson ’ s Brexit war cabinet will meet on Tuesday to sign off the plans , which will be published online on Thursday and laid out in parliament @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Guardian rang round a few experts to sound the warning notes Reneging on the special Brexit arrangements for Northern Ireland will risk trade deals with both the EU and the US , experts have warned .
Concern has been raised after Boris Johnson ’ s Brexit negotiating team has reportedly been ordered to come up with plans to “ get around ” the Northern Ireland protocol in the withdrawal agreement which includes checks on goods and food going from Great Britain to Northern Ireland .
Former Irish ambassador to the EU Bobby McDonagh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consequences including posing a risk to a future deal with Washington where support for Ireland is considerable .
Catherine Barnard , professor of EU law at Cambridge University said there would be immediate consequences if the UK did not show good faith both legally and reputationally.. “ If , as some comments suggest , it were to renege on its legal obligations to carry our checks on goods moving from Britain to Northern Ireland , it is hard to see what value the EU , or indeed any country , would see in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If the UK were to walk away from the binding provisions designed to preserve the balances of the Good Friday agreement , which it agreed to after lengthy negotiations , there would seem in particular to be no prospect of any UK/US trade deal being ratified by Congress , ” McDonagh said .
A formal dispute could see elements of the Brexit deal , such as fisheries , or tariff-free trade taken off the table in a tit-for-tat that could poison the next five months of critical talks on the UK ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Northern Ireland protocol kicks in from 1 January 2021 whether there is a trade deal with the EU or not .
David Frost the ex diplomat and old mate of Boris Johnson ’ s who ’ s now in charge of the negotiations has dismissed the whole pattern of thought that takes its line from EU law and politics .
In a scene setting speech in Brussels he said that the EU and its supporters just don ’ t get it .
This means one of two things : either the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ EU version the terms but end up closer not because of pressure of EU law but because that ’ s what the UK has voluntarily decided ; or there ‘ ll be an almighty bustup .
Or both .
Either way Northern Ireland will be squeezed somewhere in the middle , remaining in the single market after December but having a customs relationship with GB that is supposed to allow us to benefit from new trade agreements negotiated by the UK .
Back in the day they called this squaring the circle .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Canada-Free Trade Agreement-type relationship which the EU has so often said is on offer – even if the EU itself now seems to be experiencing some doubts about that , unfortunately .
If those doubts persist , we are ready to trade on Australia-style terms if we can ’ t agree a Canada type FTA .
We understand the trade-offs involved – people sometimes say we don ’ t but we do – and we will be setting out in written form next week actually how we see the shape of the future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not rest my case on Brexit entirely on looking at the numbers .
There is a deeper point involved here once again .I made the point just now that some of the studies of the benefits of trade were really studies of the benefits of good institutions and good politics .
That , in my view , is where the gains of Brexit are going to come .
Some argue that sovereignty is a meaningless construct in the modern world , that what matters is sharing it to gain more influence over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ view .
We believe sovereignty is meaningful and what it enables us to do is to set our rules for our own benefit .
Sovereignty is about the ability to get your own rules right in a way that suits our own conditions .
Much of the debate about whether Britain will diverge from the EU I think misses this point .
We are clear – and the PM was clear in the speech he gave at Greenwich in London that we are not going to be a low-standard economy .
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible to have high standards , and indeed similar or better standards to those prevailing in the EU , without our laws and regulations necessarily doing exactly the same thing .
One obvious example , I think , is the ability to support our own agriculture to promote environmental goods relevant to our own countryside , and to produce crops that reflect our own climate , rather than being forced to work with rules designed for growing conditions in central France .
I struggle to see why this is so controversial .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diverge , that we would wish not to change our rules , is the same thing as the rules governing us , on 31 December this year , are the most perfect rules that can be designed and need never be changed .
That is self-evidently absurd .
I think we should dismiss the ‘ divergence ’ phantasm from sensible political debate .
I think looking forward , we are going to have a huge advantage over the EU – the ability to set regulations for new sectors , the new ideas , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ EU can , and based on sound science not fear of the future .
I have no doubt that we will be able to encourage new investment and new ideas in this way – particularly given our plans to boost spend on scientific research , attract scientists and make Britain the best country in the world to do science .
One of those fundamentals is that we are negotiating as one country .
To return again to Burke , his conception of the state was and is one that allows for differences , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ customs .
It is one which means that our own multi-state union in the UK has grown in different ways across the EU – each playing unique roles in its historical development .
It is actually rather fashionable at the moment amongst some to run down that state which has been very successful historically .
We can not be complacent about the Union in the UK , but I nevertheless believe that all parts of the UK are going to survive and thrive together as one country .
In particular , I am @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Northern Ireland as for every other part of the UK .
A second fundamental is that we bring to the negotiations not some clever tactical positioning but the fundamentals of what it means to be an independent country .
( Good luck with that – for all our sakes ) .
What does the ‘ New Decade , New Approach ’ ( NDNA ) agreement mean for Northern Ireland ’ s Brexit ?
: Dr Katy Hayward and Professor David Phinnemore describe the thick , dark bureaucratic forest of committees and sub @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plunged .
Let ’ s hope the civil servants will be more up to the mark than they were for RHI .
As far as I know the politicians haven ’ t touched this yet .
Who could blame them ?
They ’ ve got enough to do to keep the buses running .
The Northern Ireland executive is to have a sub-committee on Brexit .
This will be chaired by the First Minister and deputy First Minister with representatives from all parties in the executive taking part .
There are a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Protocol , some of which can only be determined as the future UK-EU trade relationship is agreed – such as which goods will be subject to tariffs ( in the worst case scenario ) , and regulatory and other checks and controls across the Irish Sea border .
We can expect the EU to be strict on the enforcement of such controls because now the edge of its single market for goods and its customs territory becomes an internal boundary of a non-member state .
Although it is a sea border ( and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ land border ) , it is nonetheless one that will be traversed if smugglers think it is a weak spot for entry into either the EU or GB markets .
The second element of negotiation is the future UK-EU relationship .
This will determine what controls will be placed on movement across the Irish Sea ( see above ) from/to both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland .
In turn , this will affect movement across the Irish land border .
The third layer of negotiation is that of the UK ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as the USA .
What the UK agrees in those negotiations will affect the controls that the EU will require on the movement of goods across the Irish Sea into its single market and customs territory and , thus , the experience/impact of Brexit for Northern Ireland businesses and consumers .
Input from Northern Ireland in the implementation of the Protocol A substantial feature of the NDNA document comes in the form of the UK government ’ s commitment to ‘ ensure that representatives from the Northern Ireland executive are invited to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in meetings of two crucial bodies .
First , they can attend the UK-EU Joint Committee , which is a ministerial level decision-making body charged with the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement as a whole .
Secondly , representatives from the executive ( presumably officials from the NI Civil Service given the nature of the body ) , can also attend the Specialised Committee on Ireland/Northern Ireland – a body composed of officials overseeing the operation of the Protocol [ Annex A:9 ] .
Such attendance may be seen as a bare minimum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ireland on bodies that will be so significant in overseeing and monitoring the implementation of the Protocol .
Invitations from the UK government to NI executive representatives to attend such meetings will occur only in instances where ( i ) the committee concerned is discussing Northern Ireland-specific matters and ( ii ) the meetings are ‘ also attended by the Irish government as part of the European Union ’ s delegation ’ .
This is , presumably , on the grounds that it reflects the logic of the north/south bodies operating on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ministerial Council ) , which gives the NI executive a unique capacity ( as a regional-level devolved administration ) to operate and make decisions at an ‘ international ’ level .
It is notable that the NDNA makes no mention of how Northern Ireland ’ s voice will feature in the work of the third UK-EU body established to support the implementation of the Protocol , namely the Joint Consultative Working Group ( JCWG ) .
This contains the most potential for Northern Ireland ’ s direct input ( including from stakeholders ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the implementation of the protocol .
For that reason , deciding on its preferences for the operation of the JCWG and input to it from NI ought to be a priority of the executive .
The government also commits to ‘ engage in detail ’ with the executive on ‘ measures to protect and strengthen the UK internal market ’ [ Annex A:10 ] .
What this looks like in practice – especially bearing in mind that the language of strengthening the UK internal market will sit uncomfortably with some – and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are yet to be determined .
Finally on this , the government promises to ‘ engage specifically with the executive on the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland and the Protocol ’ [ Annex A:12 ] but there is no detail on this .
Input from Northern Ireland in the future UK-EU negotiations and other free-trade agreements The UK government states that it would ‘ welcome close engagement with a restored executive on Northern Ireland ’ s priorities in the next phase [ of Brexit ] ’ [ Annex A:8 ] .
Whilst recognising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK negotiations with the EU and other partners ( which are of course beyond the competence of devolved administration ) , this is an extremely weak commitment and provides no indication of the institutional form engagement will take .
Effective consultation is necessary given the importance of the future UK-EU relationship and the UK ’ s relations with other partners for the future of the protocol and its implications for Northern Ireland , and especially its position in the UK internal market .
Of interest to Scotland and Wales in particular is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commits to consulting ‘ other devolved administrations ’ alongside the NI executive , on ‘ our wider trade policy ’ [ Annex A:11 ] .
he government states in the NDNA agreement that it is ‘ absolutely committed to ensuring that Northern Ireland remains an integral part of the UK internal market , in line with the clear guarantee in the Protocol that Northern Ireland remains in the customs territory of the United Kingdom ’ [ Annex A:10 ] .
Whilst the protocol is indeed clear that Northern Ireland is part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ practice ( given that the EU Customs Code will be implemented in the region ) , there will be new frictions and complexities introduced to the UK internal market that were not there before .
Other amendments to the WA Bill supported by NI business and parties are those that provide legally binding detail to the protocol ’ s guarantee of ‘ unfettered access ’ from the region into Great Britain after Brexit .
NI businesses are looking to be able to continue to sell their goods to the rest of the UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controls , dual authorisations or discrimination in the market .

David Frost ( no, not that one, now deceased)
According to the Sunday Times we will know the approach the UK will adopt for the next stage of EU withdrawal in a couple of days, now that the country has left the organisation and we are in the transition phase of less than a year. The UK government are taking up a position of maximum distance from the EU procedures and laws quite different from the erratic harder no softer approach of Theresa May’s minority government that came such a cropper. At the heart of it for us is the almighty contradiction between the clear words of the NI protocol saying checks are required at ports on either side of the North Channel, and the boiler plate assurances of government ministers waving them away. Up to now the ministers have been smilingly pitied like fundamentalists who believe the earth was created in six days, But maybe they’re about to have a go at somehow meaning it, as the Sunday Times reports.
Boris Johnson’s Brexit team has been ordered to draw up plans to “get around” the Northern Ireland protocol in the Brexit withdrawal agreement so the prime minister can play hardball with Brussels over trade. Officials in Taskforce Europe, run by Johnson’s EU negotiator David Frost, are working in secret on proposals to ensure that there do not need to be checks on goods passing from Britain to Northern Ireland.
They believe the new attorney-general, Suella Braverman, might have to give new legal advice to justify the move. Insiders say she was appointed because her predecessor Geoffrey Cox was not willing to countenance action that will be seen in Brussels as a breach of the exit agreement.
The details emerged as Frost plans this week to spell out Britain’s demands for a trade deal with Brussels, insisting on the same rights as Canada. Officials have not ruled out an attempt to try to claw back money from the EU divorce bill if the EU will not play ball. Johnson’s Brexit war cabinet will meet on Tuesday to sign off the plans, which will be published online on Thursday and laid out in parliament.
Spotting the Sunday Times story the Guardian rang round a few experts to sound the warning notes
Reneging on the special Brexit arrangements for Northern Ireland will risk trade deals with both the EU and the US, experts have warned.
Concern has been raised after Boris Johnson’s Brexit negotiating team has reportedly been ordered to come up with plans to “get around” the Northern Ireland protocol in the withdrawal agreement which includes checks on goods and food going from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
Former Irish ambassador to the EU Bobby McDonagh said reneging on it would have serious consequences including posing a risk to a future deal with Washington where support for Ireland is considerable.
Catherine Barnard, professor of EU law at Cambridge University said there would be immediate consequences if the UK did not show good faith both legally and reputationally.. “If, as some comments suggest, it were to renege on its legal obligations to carry our checks on goods moving from Britain to Northern Ireland, it is hard to see what value the EU, or indeed any country, would see in a future trade deal with the UK. If the UK were to walk away from the binding provisions designed to preserve the balances of the Good Friday agreement, which it agreed to after lengthy negotiations, there would seem in particular to be no prospect of any UK/US trade deal being ratified by Congress,” McDonagh said.
A formal dispute could see elements of the Brexit deal, such as fisheries, or tariff-free trade taken off the table in a tit-for-tat that could poison the next five months of critical talks on the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU.
The Northern Ireland protocol kicks in from 1 January 2021 whether there is a trade deal with the EU or not.
David Frost the ex diplomat and old mate of Boris Johnson’s who’s now in charge of the negotiations has dismissed the whole pattern of thought that takes its line from EU law and politics. In a scene setting speech in Brussels he said that the EU and its supporters just don’t get it. This means one of two things: either the UK will start off wide of the EU version the terms but end up closer not because of pressure of EU law but because that’s what the UK has voluntarily decided ; or there‘ll be an almighty bustup. Or both. Either way Northern Ireland will be squeezed somewhere in the middle, remaining in the single market after December but having a customs relationship with GB that is supposed to allow us to benefit from new trade agreements negotiated by the UK. Back in the day they called this squaring the circle.
Extracts from Frost’s speech
We are clear that we want the Canada-Free Trade Agreement-type relationship which the EU has so often said is on offer – even if the EU itself now seems to be experiencing some doubts about that, unfortunately.
If those doubts persist, we are ready to trade on Australia-style terms if we can’t agree a Canada type FTA. We understand the trade-offs involved – people sometimes say we don’t but we do – and we will be setting out in written form next week actually how we see the shape of the future relationship in more detail.
But I do not rest my case on Brexit entirely on looking at the numbers. There is a deeper point involved here once again .I made the point just now that some of the studies of the benefits of trade were really studies of the benefits of good institutions and good politics. That, in my view, is where the gains of Brexit are going to come.
Some argue that sovereignty is a meaningless construct in the modern world, that what matters is sharing it to gain more influence over others. So we take the opposite view. We believe sovereignty is meaningful and what it enables us to do is to set our rules for our own benefit.
Sovereignty is about the ability to get your own rules right in a way that suits our own conditions. Much of the debate about whether Britain will diverge from the EU I think misses this point. We are clear – and the PM was clear in the speech he gave at Greenwich in London that we are not going to be a low-standard economy. That’s clear. But it is perfectly possible to have high standards, and indeed similar or better standards to those prevailing in the EU, without our laws and regulations necessarily doing exactly the same thing. One obvious example, I think, is the ability to support our own agriculture to promote environmental goods relevant to our own countryside, and to produce crops that reflect our own climate, rather than being forced to work with rules designed for growing conditions in central France.
I struggle to see why this is so controversial. The proposition that we will not wish to diverge, that we would wish not to change our rules, is the same thing as the rules governing us, on 31 December this year, are the most perfect rules that can be designed and need never be changed. That is self-evidently absurd. I think we should dismiss the ‘divergence’ phantasm from sensible political debate.
I think looking forward, we are going to have a huge advantage over the EU – the ability to set regulations for new sectors, the new ideas, and new conditions – quicker than the EU can, and based on sound science not fear of the future. I have no doubt that we will be able to encourage new investment and new ideas in this way – particularly given our plans to boost spend on scientific research, attract scientists and make Britain the best country in the world to do science.
(This last bit will really alarm the EU)
One of those fundamentals is that we are negotiating as one country. To return again to Burke, his conception of the state was and is one that allows for differences, for different habits, and for different customs. It is one which means that our own multi-state union in the UK has grown in different ways across the EU – each playing unique roles in its historical development. It is actually rather fashionable at the moment amongst some to run down that state which has been very successful historically. We cannot be complacent about the Union in the UK, but I nevertheless believe that all parts of the UK are going to survive and thrive together as one country. In particular, I am clear that I am negotiating on behalf of Northern Ireland as for every other part of the UK.
A second fundamental is that we bring to the negotiations not some clever tactical positioning but the fundamentals of what it means to be an independent country.
(Good luck with that – for all our sakes).
What does the ‘New Decade, New Approach’ (NDNA) agreement mean for Northern Ireland’s Brexit? :Dr Katy Hayward and Professor David Phinnemore describe the thick, dark bureaucratic forest of committees and sub committees into which Northern Ireland will be plunged. Let’s hope the civil servants will be more up to the mark than they were for RHI. As far as I know the politicians haven’t touched this yet. Who could blame them? They’ve got enough to do to keep the buses running.
The Northern Ireland executive is to have a sub-committee on Brexit. This will be chaired by the First Minister and deputy First Minister with representatives from all parties in the executive taking part.
There are a lot of ‘known unknowns’ in the Protocol, some of which can only be determined as the future UK-EU trade relationship is agreed – such as which goods will be subject to tariffs (in the worst case scenario), and regulatory and other checks and controls across the Irish Sea border.
We can expect the EU to be strict on the enforcement of such controls because now the edge of its single market for goods and its customs territory becomes an internal boundary of a non-member state. Although it is a sea border (and thus easier to police than an open land border), it is nonetheless one that will be traversed if smugglers think it is a weak spot for entry into either the EU or GB markets.
The second element of negotiation is the future UK-EU relationship. This will determine what controls will be placed on movement across the Irish Sea (see above) from/to both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. In turn, this will affect movement across the Irish land border.
The third layer of negotiation is that of the UK’s trade deals with other countries, such as the USA. What the UK agrees in those negotiations will affect the controls that the EU will require on the movement of goods across the Irish Sea into its single market and customs territory and, thus, the experience/impact of Brexit for Northern Ireland businesses and consumers.
Input from Northern Ireland in the implementation of the Protocol
A substantial feature of the NDNA document comes in the form of the UK government’s commitment to ‘ensure that representatives from the Northern Ireland executive are invited to be part of the UK delegation’ in meetings of two crucial bodies.
First, they can attend the UK-EU Joint Committee, which is a ministerial level decision-making body charged with the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement as a whole. Secondly, representatives from the executive (presumably officials from the NI Civil Service given the nature of the body), can also attend the Specialised Committee on Ireland/Northern Ireland – a body composed of officials overseeing the operation of the Protocol [Annex A:9]. Such attendance may be seen as a bare minimum in terms of direct representation from Northern Ireland on bodies that will be so significant in overseeing and monitoring the implementation of the Protocol.
Invitations from the UK government to NI executive representatives to attend such meetings will occur only in instances where (i) the committee concerned is discussing Northern Ireland-specific matters and (ii) the meetings are ‘also attended by the Irish government as part of the European Union’s delegation’. This is, presumably, on the grounds that it reflects the logic of the north/south bodies operating on the island of Ireland (particularly the North/South Ministerial Council), which gives the NI executive a unique capacity (as a regional-level devolved administration) to operate and make decisions at an ‘international’ level.
It is notable that the NDNA makes no mention of how Northern Ireland’s voice will feature in the work of the third UK-EU body established to support the implementation of the Protocol, namely the Joint Consultative Working Group (JCWG). This contains the most potential for Northern Ireland’s direct input (including from stakeholders) into the discussions, monitoring and decisions around the implementation of the protocol. For that reason, deciding on its preferences for the operation of the JCWG and input to it from NI ought to be a priority of the executive.
The government also commits to ‘engage in detail’ with the executive on ‘measures to protect and strengthen the UK internal market’ [Annex A:10]. What this looks like in practice – especially bearing in mind that the language of strengthening the UK internal market will sit uncomfortably with some – and how the engagement will be carried out are yet to be determined.
Finally on this, the government promises to ‘engage specifically with the executive on the unique circumstances of Northern Ireland and the Protocol’ [Annex A:12] but there is no detail on this.
Input from Northern Ireland in the future UK-EU negotiations and other free-trade agreements
The UK government states that it would ‘welcome close engagement with a restored executive on Northern Ireland’s priorities in the next phase [of Brexit]’ [Annex A:8]. Whilst recognising that Northern Ireland will be affected by the UK negotiations with the EU and other partners (which are of course beyond the competence of devolved administration), this is an extremely weak commitment and provides no indication of the institutional form engagement will take. Effective consultation is necessary given the importance of the future UK-EU relationship and the UK’s relations with other partners for the future of the protocol and its implications for Northern Ireland, and especially its position in the UK internal market.
Of interest to Scotland and Wales in particular is the fact that the UK government here commits to consulting ‘other devolved administrations’ alongside the NI executive, on ‘our wider trade policy’ [Annex A:11].
he government states in the NDNA agreement that it is ‘absolutely committed to ensuring that Northern Ireland remains an integral part of the UK internal market, in line with the clear guarantee in the Protocol that Northern Ireland remains in the customs territory of the United Kingdom’ [Annex A:10]. Whilst the protocol is indeed clear that Northern Ireland is part of the UK’s customs territory, in practice (given that the EU Customs Code will be implemented in the region), there will be new frictions and complexities introduced to the UK internal market that were not there before.
Other amendments to the WA Bill supported by NI business and parties are those that provide legally binding detail to the protocol’s guarantee of ‘unfettered access’ from the region into Great Britain after Brexit. NI businesses are looking to be able to continue to sell their goods to the rest of the UK without tariffs, origin requirements, regulatory controls, dual authorisations or discrimination in the market.


sluggerotoole--2020-02-28--Friday Thread: A reminder that robust political dispute is [much] better than war…

We haven ’ t had one of these for a while , but Professor Jordan Peterson articulates ( I think ) one of the reasons Slugger remains a live and lively community of unlike-minded folk who aren ’ t afraid to disagree with one another over almost everything .
This piece , recorded at the Oxford Union a couple of years ago , is worth watching the whole way through , but this section ( where I hope the video link will start below , is the key passage that relates to the role which dispute plays in any democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ describes “ respect for the manifestation of the logos ” as the core value of free speech .
In this important regard , Slugger ’ s famous play the ball and not the man is merely an aid to the promulgation of such respect .
As my good friend and colleague John Kellden likes to say , “ in a network , the best place to store knowledge is in other people ” .
Preferably folk who don ’ t see the world in the same ways that you do… There ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the danger of pathological order and the other is the danger of pathological chaos and the problem with the questioning tendency is that it knows no limits and that ’ s actually hard on people .
It ’ s actually very difficult to orient yourself in life if you happen to be very high in openness very low in conscientiousness and very high in neuroticism because you question everything and you ’ re not stable .
You might be wildly creative like that ’ s a pretty good recipe for wild creativity but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s tenable or sustainable because most creative ideas are not only wrong they ’ re actually deadly .
But some of them aren ’ t .
Some of them are absolutely vitally important right and so part of the reason we have political discussion or discussion at all is to separate the wheat from the chaff .
So the endless proclivity of the questioning tendency of the liberal left is that every axiom is open for infinite questioning well that leaves you bereft .
But the problem on the right is if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then you have no adaptive flexibility left and you are in a sterile tyranny of stone and then the environment shifts around you and you ’ re not prepared and then everyone ’ s done .
So the reason that free speech is so important , well I don ’ t think about it as “ free speech ” but as respect for the manifestation of the logos – that ’ s the proper way of conceptualizing it – is that it keeps the balance between those two tendencies right .
You need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And so you think well how much of each and the answer is the recipe changes day to day ?
And so you think well if it changes day to day how are we going to keep up ?
And the answer is by keeping up .
Right where we are .
But we do that by thinking and we think by talking and we think and talk by disagreeing and we ’ re better disagree conceptually because then we don ’ t have to act out stupid ideas that will kill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dispute is the substitute for war and death .
It can be a brutal substitute because conceptual disagreement can be very intense but compared to war and death it ’ s hardly intense at all .
You keep the landscape open for serious dispute including dispute that ’ s offensive , obviously , because if you ’ re ever going to talk about anything that ’ s difficult ( and why talk otherwise ) then you ’ re going to talk about things that are offensive to people .
And you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re going to stumble around when you ’ re formulating your thoughts and that ’ s horrible , it makes people anxious , it alienates them but it ’ s better than pain and death .
And that ’ s the alternative .
This is why eclectic mixers like Slugger matter .
As Fast Company noted “ people are much more likely to share something that accords with something they already think .
They also prefer stories that come from someone within their peer group ” .
Photo by Pixabay is licensed @ @

We haven’t had one of these for a while, but Professor Jordan Peterson articulates (I think) one of the reasons Slugger remains a live and lively community of unlike-minded folk who aren’t afraid to disagree with one another over almost everything.
This piece, recorded at the Oxford Union a couple of years ago, is worth watching the whole way through, but this section (where I hope the video link will start below, is the key passage that relates to the role which dispute plays in any democracy.
One key phrase is how he describes “respect for the manifestation of the logos” as the core value of free speech. In this important regard, Slugger’s famous play the ball and not the man is merely an aid to the promulgation of such respect.
As my good friend and colleague John Kellden likes to say, “in a network, the best place to store knowledge is in other people”. Preferably folk who don’t see the world in the same ways that you do…
There’s dangers on both sides. One is the danger of pathological order and the other is the danger of pathological chaos and the problem with the questioning tendency is that it knows no limits and that’s actually hard on people. It’s actually very difficult to orient yourself in life if you happen to be very high in openness very low in conscientiousness and very high in neuroticism because you question everything and you’re not stable. You might be wildly creative like that’s a pretty good recipe for wild creativity but that doesn’t mean that it’s tenable or sustainable because most creative ideas are not only wrong they’re actually deadly. But some of them aren’t. Some of them are absolutely vitally important right and so part of the reason we have political discussion or discussion at all is to separate the wheat from the chaff. So the endless proclivity of the questioning tendency of the liberal left is that every axiom is open for infinite questioning well that leaves you bereft. But the problem on the right is if you tighten things up too much well then you have no adaptive flexibility left and you are in a sterile tyranny of stone and then the environment shifts around you and you’re not prepared and then everyone’s done. So the reason that free speech is so important, well I don’t think about it as “free speech” but as respect for the manifestation of the logos – that’s the proper way of conceptualizing it – is that it keeps the balance between those two tendencies right. You need the questioning and you need the order. And so you think well how much of each and the answer is the recipe changes day to day? And so you think well if it changes day to day how are we going to keep up? And the answer is by keeping up. Right where we are. But we do that by thinking and we think by talking and we think and talk by disagreeing and we’re better disagree conceptually because then we don’t have to act out stupid ideas that will kill us. The abstract territory of conceptual dispute is the substitute for war and death. It can be a brutal substitute because conceptual disagreement can be very intense but compared to war and death it’s hardly intense at all. You keep the landscape open for serious dispute including dispute that’s offensive, obviously, because if you’re ever going to talk about anything that’s difficult (and why talk otherwise) then you’re going to talk about things that are offensive to people. And you’re going to do it badly, you’re going to stumble around when you’re formulating your thoughts and that’s horrible, it makes people anxious, it alienates them but it’s better than pain and death. And that’s the alternative.
This is why eclectic mixers like Slugger matter. As Fast Company noted “people are much more likely to share something that accords with something they already think. They also prefer stories that come from someone within their peer group”.
Photo by Pixabay is licensed under CC0


sluggerotoole--2020-02-28--Slugger TV looks at Sinn Fein surge, SPADs and the challenges facing the new Executive

David McCann holds a PhD in North-South relations from University of Ulster .
You can follow him on twitter @ @


sluggerotoole--2020-02-27--Lord Patten of Barnes speaking in Belfast to mark 20th anniversary of Equality Commission and Human

Lord Patten of Barnes speaking in Belfast to mark 20th anniversary of Equality Commission and Human Rights Commission #video

Lord Patten of Barnes addressed an audience in Belfast City Hall last night to mark the 20th anniversary of the @ @ @ @ @ Human Rights Commission .
He reminisced about his early days as under-secretary for the Northern @ @ @ @ @ 1980s and an unintended confession to DUP leader Ian Paisley , the roots of his @ @ @ @ @ , and the day years later that Mo Mowlam phoned him and asked if he @ @ @ @ @ on Policing for Northern Ireland , the most difficult role of his career but the @ @ @ @ @ s most proud .
Speaking to Noel Thompson after his speech , and during Q @ @ @ @ @ , he touched on Hong Kong , his time as Governor in the lead up @ @ @ @ @ to China as well as the current protests , and being chair of the BBC @ @ @ @ @ .
Michael Wardlow finishes his eight years as chief commissioner at the Equality Commission for @ @ @ @ @ chief commissioner Geraldine McGahey has been appointed as his successor .

Lord Patten of Barnes addressed an audience in Belfast City Hall last night to mark the 20th anniversary of the Equality Commission and the NI Human Rights Commission.
He reminisced about his early days as under-secretary for the Northern Ireland Office in the early 1980s and an unintended confession to DUP leader Ian Paisley, the roots of his own complex sense of identity, and the day years later that Mo Mowlam phoned him and asked if he would chair the Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland, the most difficult role of his career but the one of which he’s most proud.
Speaking to Noel Thompson after his speech, and during Q&A with the audience, he touched on Hong Kong, his time as Governor in the lead up to the transfer of sovereignty to China as well as the current protests, and being chair of the BBC Trust during the Savile scandal.
Michael Wardlow finishes his eight years as chief commissioner at the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland today. Deputy chief commissioner Geraldine McGahey has been appointed as his successor.
Filmed by Alan Meban


sluggerotoole--2020-02-26--And the winner of the John Bercow tickets is…

We had 110 entries for our competition to win 2 tickets for John Bercow this Friday night at the Waterfront @ @ @ @ @ team of data scientists from Queens University we came up with an algorithm to randomly @ @ @ @ @ the power of AI , the chosen winner was Karen Butler .
unfortunately , she @ @ @ @ @ another commitment , so I asked the wife to give me another number between 1 @ @ @ @ @ to the boffins in white coats and they fired up the aul supercomputer again and @ @ @ @ @ So congrats to Chris .
There are a few tickets left for the event so @ @ @ @ @ on over and grab some while you can .
It should be an entertaining night @ @ @ @ @ interrupt with points of order until I am forcibly dragged out by security .

We had 110 entries for our competition to win 2 tickets for John Bercow this Friday night at the Waterfront.
Working with a crack team of data scientists from Queens University we came up with an algorithm to randomly select the winner. Through the power of AI, the chosen winner was Karen Butler. unfortunately, she could not attend due to another commitment, so I asked the wife to give me another number between 1 and 110 we went back to the boffins in white coats and they fired up the aul supercomputer again and it picked Chris Mitchell. So congrats to Chris.
There are a few tickets left for the event so if you fancy it pop on over and grab some while you can. It should be an entertaining night – I intend to constantly interrupt with points of order until I am forcibly dragged out by security.


sluggerotoole--2020-02-25--It may be long past time to get Casement Park completed, but surely not at any price…

Interesting conversation on Casement Park on Nolan this morning .
The figures and the failed timelines speak loudly enough for themselves for me not to labour the point here on Slugger .
Deirdre Hargey as Community Minister has put in a bid for an additional £33 million , bringing the total to £110 million , and dwarfing the money spent on upgrading Ravenhill and Windsor Park ( including extra cash need to fix the west stand ) .
Though I want the ex stadium ( derelict for seven years now ) brought back to life ( I watched Antrim play @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very early 70s ) , this is a warning against ‘ government-by-negotiation ’ as a way of delivering for ordinary people .
It demonstrates why , when it comes to delivery , the perfect is usually the enemy of the good .
Rugby and Soccer have their stadiums and are taking the benefit of them since 2014 and 2016 respectively .
In West Belfast , not a shovel has been put to sod .
The other two are in the region of 18,000 capacity .
Casement is 34,000 in a residential area that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety that still haven ’ t been resolved .
The sensible thing would be to cut the numbers and relieve the pressure .
Ms Hargey put in her letter at a time when the GAA has made it clear it won ’ t put any more cash in .
Besides not being a good look , as Brendan Mulgrew pointed out , it leaves the youth of West Belfast without the promised state-of-the-art stadium to aspire to .
Several callers tried to warn people off talking about what is a tricky and frankly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the too familiar why-don ’ t-you-talk-about-something-else card , this potentially awkward conversation landed fairly evenly .
But the truth is that someone in the GAA needs to take some responsibility for this failure .
Shave down the scale or pitch in .
Antrim ( the home county for the park ) has been something of a lost boy in the sport .
Headquarters at Croke Park ( where they are certainly not short of a bob or two ) owes them something better than a stubborn refusal to play .
And the minister @ @ @ @ @ @ @ errors in thinking that cash alone can move mountains .
Or not to be as defensive or ready to spread the blame to officials , or political rivals as her party colleagues have been in the past .
As that great Irish American DP Moynahan once said , “ what is not discussed , will not be advanced ” .
Or when the facts change , perhaps it ’ s time to change your mind ?

Interesting conversation on Casement Park on Nolan this morning. The figures and the failed timelines speak loudly enough for themselves for me not to labour the point here on Slugger.
Deirdre Hargey as Community Minister has put in a bid for an additional £33 million, bringing the total to £110 million, and dwarfing the money spent on upgrading Ravenhill and Windsor Park (including extra cash need to fix the west stand).
Though I want the ex stadium (derelict for seven years now) brought back to life (I watched Antrim play there in an Ulster final in the very early 70s), this is a warning against ‘government-by-negotiation’ as a way of delivering for ordinary people.
It demonstrates why, when it comes to delivery, the perfect is usually the enemy of the good. Rugby and Soccer have their stadiums and are taking the benefit of them since 2014 and 2016 respectively. In West Belfast, not a shovel has been put to sod.
The other two are in the region of 18,000 capacity. Casement is 34,000 in a residential area that has mired it in planning issues around safety that still haven’t been resolved. The sensible thing would be to cut the numbers and relieve the pressure.
Ms Hargey put in her letter at a time when the GAA has made it clear it won’t put any more cash in. Besides not being a good look, as Brendan Mulgrew pointed out, it leaves the youth of West Belfast without the promised state-of-the-art stadium to aspire to.
Several callers tried to warn people off talking about what is a tricky and frankly embarrassing failure of public politics by playing the too familiar why-don’t-you-talk-about-something-else card, this potentially awkward conversation landed fairly evenly.
But the truth is that someone in the GAA needs to take some responsibility for this failure. Shave down the scale or pitch in. Antrim (the home county for the park) has been something of a lost boy in the sport.
Headquarters at Croke Park (where they are certainly not short of a bob or two) owes them something better than a stubborn refusal to play. And the minister should learn from her party’s errors in thinking that cash alone can move mountains.
Or not to be as defensive or ready to spread the blame to officials, or political rivals as her party colleagues have been in the past. As that great Irish American DP Moynahan once said, “what is not discussed, will not be advanced”.
Or when the facts change, perhaps it’s time to change your mind?


sluggerotoole--2020-02-28--Fall and rise of Irish populism or the beginning of a “Shinner Spring”?

T/he period following the general election has been absorbed with different subjects to those that dominated the campaign .
As I noted in an interview on the Alex Salmond Show ( see below ) , the disturbance is in the south more than the north What has continued is Sinn Fein ’ s dominance of the news flows , which has seen its leadership spending most of its time rallying and trying to consolidate its increased support whilst Gerry Adams ( who is no longer a TD ) leads their negotiating team .
Mary Lou has continued her role as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keeping the political press in the Republic handfed , while Gerry [ representing the lads on the Army Council ?
– Ed ] conducts negotiations with their would-be partners .
They may not be prepared for it but this is a foretaste of how the party has operated its ex officio leadership in NI for years .
However well nailed down any putative agreement , when the chips are down these lads aren ’ t natural cooperators .
In the early days of the Stormont Executive when the dispute over the devolution of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gerry Kelly would give up his seat to Adams ( who never held any ministerial status ) at key meetings of the NI Executive .
A leadership that operates from the sidelines is profoundly undemocratic ( even the US ’ s autocrat President Trump has to step down after a second term ) and it gives Sinn Fein a unique resilience when it comes to the ups and downs of political life .
So the party which lost Foyle before Christmas by more than 17,000 votes , merely shrugged it off and proceeded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unprepared Fianna Fail and an out of touch Fine Gael in February ’ s snap election .
Although it barely came up on the doorsteps as an issue ( and is notable by its absence in the exit poll ) , Brexit has radicalised the Irish electorate in ways that has advantaged neither the sitting government nor the liberals who helped to stoke its angry fires .
This piece by Richard Waghorne is a typically extreme analysis of Fintan O ’ Toole ’ s role in disinterring and mobilising old anti-British stereotypes of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and buried long ago , but it holds more than a kernel of truth .
Waghorne ’ s analysis rather too conveniently ignores the fact that Brexit itself was viewed by many in the Republic and in Northern Ireland ( and I don ’ t just mean nationalists there ) as the primary breach of faith .
But there ’ s a divergence in O ’ Toole ’ s handling of Sinn Fein between his last pre-match analysis before the 12th February election and after .
In that last week , Fintan highlighted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ in from the cold ’ : But SF ’ s immodest post-election jubilations ( comprising a particularly nasty dose of anti Semitism that Jeremy Corbyn was never even remotely guilty of ) has revealed a studied hostility to the very existence of the Republic itself .
In that piece , O ’ Toole admits that “ all the victims of violence during the Troubles have a right to justice ” .
But in fact , as far as Sinn Fein is concerned , they don ’ t .
The significance of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Quinn case clearly had not yet bitten .
It wasn ’ t the callousness of Mary Lou ’ s denial of the facts of the matter in the Brian Dobson interview , it was that the present Northern Irish Finance Minister used the IRA ’ s own words to clear itself and to posthumously calumnise the victim .
A bit like the post-vote resistance to Brexit , it is delusional to believe that SF ’ s new voters didn ’ t know what they voted for .
But it would be a blunder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s long term acceptance of these oddities taints the island ’ s politics .
When Douglas Murray claims that the IRA has got away with murder he ’ s not strictly being metaphorical when he says… Most of the commentators continue to ignore a dilemma that the leader of Fianna Fail has been flagging for nine years .
Even now they fancifully imagine that Martin ’ s consistency is just another cute hoor FF ploy and that he will coalesce with SF .
However , he won ’ t and so the real @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dail will have to fall elsewhere .
Firstly upon the parties of the centre-left , who may find themselves in a cleft stick .
Beneficiaries of SF ’ s decision to run too few candidates , they may find SF preferences harder to come by in any election triggered by the failure to negotiate a new PfG .
Sinn Fein ’ s new ‘ monster rallies ’ is a pre-campaign push towards electoral territory where Mary Lou could become the first-ever Sinn Fein Taoiseach .
To understand what it , means to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want Arlene Foster on speed dial .
Secondly , despite the Taoiseach ’ s determination to hit the opposition benches and give his TDs the break they now feel they need , the question will eventually have to come back to Fine Gael before returning it to the country .
If Brexit was the first major departure from bipartisanship since the Anglo Irish Agreement was signed , Varadkar ’ s Brit-bashing rhetoric somewhat flew in the face of his own party ’ s small ‘ c ’ conservative history .
In doing so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ box .
There are a number of commentators , who look at Fianna Fail , its history of sympathy for northern Republicans and the high drama of events like the Arms Trial and buy the “ its time for FF and SF to merge ” line .
But this misses something crucial .
Fianna Fail may be close to Sinn Fein in its explicit ambition to unify the country , but it is resistant to cashing in the south ’ s 100 year history as a democratic state .
Martin , in particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ownership of Sinn Fein up close and personally .
If you ’ re tempted to dismiss this as a matter of bias on my part , then consider the fate of one Mairtin O Muilleoir , who turned to Ted Howell , who Mary Lou insisted during the campaign had only been an advisor .
Mairtin is gone , but unelected Ted abides .
No party who goes into power with Sinn Fein should be under any illusions that the men and women they are talking to in negotiations are not the ones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they go into government .
Unless their name is Gerry .
As for why most of this is not obvious to the southern commentariat , I can only think partition plays a role ( how else would SF ’ s three-year boycott of Stormont fly so low under the radar .
In Northern Ireland in December they took most of the blame .
Having endured Fianna Fail for 80 years as the party of government also plays a part in a generation who felt powerless as the machine rolled over their own personal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a heavyweight against their own idea of the nation .
As a mainframe for political dispute , Twitter burns all but the most vestigial context to complex questions .
Discourse is reduced to a wild unleashing of derision and contempt and analysis gets displaced by low res trivia wars that turns the best of us into trolls .
We are being regularly overwhelmed by emotional responses increasingly narrow polling questions on an increasingly restricted set of questions to which have the cumulative effect of crowding out a more consistent consideration of our futures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incoherence and , say , the elevation of Trump to the White House may be self-evident , but ( even after SF ’ s populist surge ) our local developments are little accounted for within Irish political journalism .
It ’ s all too easy to take the speakeasy tropes of social media more seriously than it deserves , and not to take the signals it sends seriously enough .
An academic friend says to his English the rest of the world is turning into Northern Ireland ’ s .
As we in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ openness we know is in the people , we can not stop our ears to the like of Mrs Quinn and Mairia Cahill ’ s plea for the godfathers to back away just because it is convenient to do so .
As Anne Harris observes , whatever the polls have to say about it ( and by their nature they can not say much ) , Sinn Fein ’ s insouciance in the face of the pain of its victims lacks the necessary ingredient for change on the island , genuine contrition .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ won ’ t shift the status quo of one hundred years of history , but that just might .
“ if you want a different future clap your hand , scott richard ” by torbakhopper is licensed under CC BY-ND

T/he period following the general election has been absorbed with different subjects to those that dominated the campaign. As I noted in an interview on the Alex Salmond Show (see below), the disturbance is in the south more than the north
What has continued is Sinn Fein’s dominance of the news flows, which has seen its leadership spending most of its time rallying and trying to consolidate its increased support whilst Gerry Adams (who is no longer a TD) leads their negotiating team.
Mary Lou has continued her role as the public leader of the party, keeping the political press in the Republic handfed, while Gerry [representing the lads on the Army Council? – Ed] conducts negotiations with their would-be partners.
They may not be prepared for it but this is a foretaste of how the party has operated its ex officio leadership in NI for years. However well nailed down any putative agreement, when the chips are down these lads aren’t natural cooperators.
In the early days of the Stormont Executive when the dispute over the devolution of policing and justice powers was blazing, Gerry Kelly would give up his seat to Adams (who never held any ministerial status) at key meetings of the NI Executive.
A leadership that operates from the sidelines is profoundly undemocratic (even the US’s autocrat President Trump has to step down after a second term) and it gives Sinn Fein a unique resilience when it comes to the ups and downs of political life.
So the party which lost Foyle before Christmas by more than 17,000 votes, merely shrugged it off and proceeded to wipe the floor with an oddly unprepared Fianna Fail and an out of touch Fine Gael in February’s snap election.
Although it barely came up on the doorsteps as an issue (and is notable by its absence in the exit poll), Brexit has radicalised the Irish electorate in ways that has advantaged neither the sitting government nor the liberals who helped to stoke its angry fires.
This piece by Richard Waghorne is a typically extreme analysis of Fintan O’Toole’s role in disinterring and mobilising old anti-British stereotypes of the Irish that many thought was dead and buried long ago, but it holds more than a kernel of truth.
Waghorne’s analysis rather too conveniently ignores the fact that Brexit itself was viewed by many in the Republic and in Northern Ireland (and I don’t just mean nationalists there) as the primary breach of faith.
But there’s a divergence in O’Toole’s handling of Sinn Fein between his last pre-match analysis before the 12th February election and after. In that last week, Fintan highlighted the big opportunity presented by bringing SF ‘in from the cold’:
To treat it as a political pariah is, in effect, to deny any serious possibility of breaking the duopoly that has created the status quo. This is an uncomfortable reality for many of us. But it is undeniable: to keep Sinn Féin out in the cold is to keep Irish politics frozen in its all-too-familiar postures.
But SF’s immodest post-election jubilations (comprising a particularly nasty dose of anti Semitism that Jeremy Corbyn was never even remotely guilty of) has revealed a studied hostility to the very existence of the Republic itself.
In that piece, O’Toole admits that “all the victims of violence during the Troubles have a right to justice”. But in fact, as far as Sinn Fein is concerned, they don’t. The significance of the party’s handling of the Paul Quinn case clearly had not yet bitten.
It wasn’t the callousness of Mary Lou’s denial of the facts of the matter in the Brian Dobson interview, it was that the present Northern Irish Finance Minister used the IRA’s own words to clear itself and to posthumously calumnise the victim.
A bit like the post-vote resistance to Brexit, it is delusional to believe that SF’s new voters didn’t know what they voted for. But it would be a blunder not to examine how the media’s long term acceptance of these oddities taints the island’s politics.
When Douglas Murray claims that the IRA has got away with murder he’s not strictly being metaphorical when he says…
…the next Irish government could be led by the only party for miles — or decades — around that comes with all the advantages that can be accrued in a democracy from having your own armed assassination gang.
Most of the commentators continue to ignore a dilemma that the leader of Fianna Fail has been flagging for nine years. Even now they fancifully imagine that Martin’s consistency is just another cute hoor FF ploy and that he will coalesce with SF.
However, he won’t and so the real burden for forming government out the 33rd Dail will have to fall elsewhere.
Firstly upon the parties of the centre-left, who may find themselves in a cleft stick. Beneficiaries of SF’s decision to run too few candidates, they may find SF preferences harder to come by in any election triggered by the failure to negotiate a new PfG.
Sinn Fein’s new ‘monster rallies’ is a pre-campaign push towards electoral territory where Mary Lou could become the first-ever Sinn Fein Taoiseach. To understand what it, means to go into government with SF, they might want Arlene Foster on speed dial.
Secondly, despite the Taoiseach’s determination to hit the opposition benches and give his TDs the break they now feel they need, the question will eventually have to come back to Fine Gael before returning it to the country.
If Brexit was the first major departure from bipartisanship since the Anglo Irish Agreement was signed, Varadkar’s Brit-bashing rhetoric somewhat flew in the face of his own party’s small ‘c’ conservative history. In doing so he also opened this Pandora’s box.
There are a number of commentators, who look at Fianna Fail, its history of sympathy for northern Republicans and the high drama of events like the Arms Trial and buy the “its time for FF and SF to merge” line. But this misses something crucial.
Fianna Fail may be close to Sinn Fein in its explicit ambition to unify the country, but it is resistant to cashing in the south’s 100 year history as a democratic state. Martin, in particular, has witnessed the IRA’s ownership of Sinn Fein up close and personally.
If you’re tempted to dismiss this as a matter of bias on my part, then consider the fate of one Mairtin O Muilleoir, who turned to Ted Howell, who Mary Lou insisted during the campaign had only been an advisor. Mairtin is gone, but unelected Ted abides.
No party who goes into power with Sinn Fein should be under any illusions that the men and women they are talking to in negotiations are not the ones who will make the key decisions when they go into government. Unless their name is Gerry.
As for why most of this is not obvious to the southern commentariat, I can only think partition plays a role (how else would SF’s three-year boycott of Stormont fly so low under the radar. In Northern Ireland in December they took most of the blame.
Having endured Fianna Fail for 80 years as the party of government also plays a part in a generation who felt powerless as the machine rolled over their own personal judgment that the party was in itself a heavyweight against their own idea of the nation.
As a mainframe for political dispute, Twitter burns all but the most vestigial context to complex questions. Discourse is reduced to a wild unleashing of derision and contempt and analysis gets displaced by low res trivia wars that turns the best of us into trolls.
We are being regularly overwhelmed by emotional responses increasingly narrow polling questions on an increasingly restricted set of questions to which have the cumulative effect of crowding out a more consistent consideration of our futures together
The correlation between this new intellectual incoherence and, say, the elevation of Trump to the White House may be self-evident, but (even after SF’s populist surge) our local developments are little accounted for within Irish political journalism.
It’s all too easy to take the speakeasy tropes of social media more seriously than it deserves, and not to take the signals it sends seriously enough. An academic friend says to his English the rest of the world is turning into Northern Ireland’s.
As we in the north strive to find generosity and openness we know is in the people, we cannot stop our ears to the like of Mrs Quinn and Mairia Cahill’s plea for the godfathers to back away just because it is convenient to do so.
As Anne Harris observes, whatever the polls have to say about it (and by their nature they cannot say much), Sinn Fein’s insouciance in the face of the pain of its victims lacks the necessary ingredient for change on the island, genuine contrition.
All the border polls in the world won’t shift the status quo of one hundred years of history, but that just might.
“if you want a different future clap your hand, scott richard” by torbakhopper is licensed under CC BY-ND


sluggerotoole--2020-02-29--Eugenics and Scientific Racism…

Eugenics and Scientific Racism…

In early January 2020 , Dominic Cummings , the Prime Minister ’ s chief Special Adviser , wrote a blog piece in which he advertised for advisers to work in No 10 .
One of the groupings was for “ weirdos ” and “ misfits ” .
Andrew Sabisky was appointed .
The media trawled through Sabisky ’ s own blog for his thoughts , finding that he ’ d said , for example : —There are excellent reasons to think the very real racial differences in intelligence are significantly – even mostly – genetic in origin —One way to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creating a permanent underclass would be to legally enforce universal uptake of long-term contraception at the onset of puberty .
—Eugenics are about selecting ‘ for ’ good things .
Intelligence is largely inherited and it correlates with better incomes ; physical health , income , lower mental illness .
There is no downside to having IQ except short-sightedness .
The first of these three comments is an example of ‘ scientific racism ’ , the second is an example of eugenics .
The first comment is factually incorrect .
Human eugenics is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The third comment misunderstands what IQ is .
Shortly after these and other , similar , comments became public knowledge , Sabisky resigned .
What are the origins of such thinking ?
Differences in skin pigmentation and facial structure have been obvious for millennia .
The earliest form of racism seems to be anti-semitism .
Jews have been stigmatised and persecuted from ancient times , even before Christianity when Jews could be held responsible for the death of Jesus .
They lent money at interest , then called usury , when Christians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were said to indulge in practices that sound more like black magic .
The Jews were expelled from England in 1290 , not returning until Cromwell ’ s time .
They were expelled from Spain in 1492 when many found refuge in the tolerant Moslem Ottoman Empire .
More generally , the ’ scientific ’ study of race began during the Enlightenment , the Age of Reason .
This was also the time of European colonisation and empire building , when the ‘ whites ’ became more aware of other ‘ races ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The various human ‘ races ’ were described in relation to skin colour , physiognomy ( the ‘ science ’ of judging peoples ’ character from their facial appearance ) , and type of hair with an admixture of ignorance and prejudice .
Linnaeus thought there were five types , Africans , Americans , Asians , Europeans and ‘ monsters ’ .
Johann Blumenbach described five ‘ races ’ : De Gobineau believed in three races , black , white and yellow .
Blacks , he thought , were the strongest but incapable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ physically and mentally mediocre , while whites ( of course ) were the best because they were capable of intelligent thought , could create beauty , and were the most beautiful .
Overall , though , there was no settled agreement about the number of races .
( Human facial beauty has subsequently been studied ; most people prefer faces that are symmetrical .
Faces with proportions in the Golden Ratio are considered beautiful .
Early thinkers used Greek statues as a comparator ; such statues are often the personification of beauty .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ colours to make them wear-resistant ; they weren ’ t ‘ white ’ . )
These classifications and other similar ones still find echoes today .
I need hardly say that there is no biological , that is genetic , basis for such classifications , or for the attributes attached to them .
The differences we can observe between different populations are a result of different cultures and environments .
Race is a social construct .
Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection in 1859 .
His @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and became convinced that all human characteristics and particularly intelligence were the result of inheritance .
Thus , the ruling classes were the elite because of their genetic inheritance , and not because of wealth and privilege .
Likewise , insanity and mental degeneracy were a result of ‘ genetic determinism ’ .
He collected data by measuring physical characteristics ( anthropometrics ) , and mental abilities ( psychometrics ) .
He also made major developments in statistics , as did his successor Karl Pearson ; it is for this that they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Convinced by such arguments , in the early 20th century , ‘ mental degenerates ’ were rounded up in the UK , and kept in asylums .
Programmes of forced , involuntary sterilisation were introduced in Sweden and in the US .
In Germany , Nazi ideology encouraged extramarital breeding from ‘ racially pure and healthy ’ parents to raise the birth rate of Aryans , a wholly specious race .
Further , those whom the Nazis viewed as degenerate peoples , Jews , homosexuals , the Roma and others were not only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what is now known as the Holocaust .
Eugenics was ( mostly ) abandoned after World War II ; eugenicists rebranded themselves as geneticists .
It ’ s clear that artificial breeding works in plants , producing standardised , disease-resistant but heavy cropping varieties .
In animals , selective breeding produces pedigree animals , ones that conform to what experts expect .
But this comes at a cost ; such animals are produced by inbreeding , and these animals are prone to hereditary defects .
Inbreeding in humans is also associated with congenital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an Austrian monk , experimented with peas , and from this formulated his ideas of dominant and recessive genes .
Although he published in the middle of the 19th century , his ideas weren ’ t widespread for half a century .
Less well known is that he didn ’ t use just any peas ; he inbred peas , producing seven strains that ‘ bred pure ’ for various characteristics ; and it was from these that he experimented ; his results would otherwise have been lost in the ’ noise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ we are all mongrels .
Mongrels ?
A generation is conventionally taken to be 25 to 30 years , and the number of our ancestors doubles every generation .
On this basis about 1000 years ago we have one trillion ancestors ; this is clearly impossible , as the best estimate is that around 107 billion is the total number of people who have ever lived .
The genetic isopoint is when the entire population are the ancestors of today ’ s population .
For Europe this was around 1400CE ; for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3400BCE .
Every one of us is descended from all the global population then .
There are genetic similarities within populations ; but there are no sharp boundaries between populations , rather a gradual merging or blending of the two .
And there are greater genetic differences within populations than between populations .
Racial ‘ purity ’ is an impossible fantasy .
Sorry , Gaels and Planters ; you aren ’ t ‘ pure ’ and neither would you want to be because of recessive genetic disease .
Intelligence combines reason , problem-solving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the understanding of ideas .
The first rigorous attempts at measuring and quantifying intelligence were by Binet just over a century ago , and was calculated by dividing the mental age by the chronological age , and multiplying by 100 .
This produced an intelligence quotient or IQ ; the average for a population was 100 .
About two-thirds of people ( one standard deviation ) are in the range 85 – 115 , and 95 % ( two standard deviations ) lie between 70 and 130 .
Today ’ s tests ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ processing speed , spatial awareness and knowledge .
IQ scores for populations have been found to be rising at about 3 points per decade ; this is known as the Flynn effect .
For example , the average IQ in Ireland was 85 in 1970 by comparison to the UK where it was 100 ; in Ireland today it is 100 .
This is far too short a time scale for a genetic effect .
The generally accepted explanation relates to the ‘ environment ’ including better nutrition and health , an increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Does this accurately describe the changes in Ireland in the past half-century ?
Has Ireland gone from a poor , impoverished , even backward country to one which is wealthy , well educated and which has a vibrant economy ?
While it ’ s difficult to assess accurately , today ’ s best estimate is that genes account for 40 % to 60 % of a person ’ s intelligence , with the environment , including nurture , accounting for the rest ; crudely , about half nature and half nurture .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not account for all or even the great majority of intelligence .
The short-sightedness associated with intelligence may be genetic , but it ’ s known that close study , such as reading , has a very significant effect .
I was told that myopia is common in Jewish boys but not girls ; only boys study the Talmud in exquisite detail .
Scientific racism is a pseudoscientific attempt to show that certain races , that is ‘ white ’ races , are genetically superior to others .
It uses comparisons of IQ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ correct that peoples in sub-Saharan Africa have IQs 20 points less than those in the UK ( taken as 100 ) .
It ’ s also true that they are ‘ developing ’ rather than ‘ developed ’ countries .
However , the ‘ highest ’ IQ scores , again by comparison with the UK , are in Hong Kong , Singapore , South Korea , Japan and China , where scores are in the range 105 – 108 .
There is a culture of study and learning in these countries .
Characteristically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Richard Lynn , previously a Professor of Psychology at the Ulster University , are described as ‘ controversial ’ .
It ’ s surely clear that eugenics and scientific racism are thoroughly discredited , both morally and scientifically .
The comments Mr Sabisky made are simply wrong in every detail ; it is concerning that there does seem to be a recrudescence of such ideas today , and alarming to think that these ideas might be at the heart of government .
Neither Dominic Cummings nor the Prime Minister ’ s spokesman have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saini and Adam Pearson presented a two-part documentary called Eugenics : Science ’ s Greatest Scandal on BBCTV last year .
It is not available on iPlayer at present .
Angela Saini ’ s book Superior : the Return of Race Science ( 2019 ) and Adam Rutherford ’ s How to Argue with a Racist ( 2020 ) are up to date accounts , and well worth reading .
There is a list of further reading here .
My thanks to SeaanUiNeill , Dr Madeleine Morris and Professor Seán Danaher for their @ @

In early January 2020, Dominic Cummings, the Prime Minister’s chief Special Adviser, wrote a blog piece in which he advertised for advisers to work in No 10. One of the groupings was for “weirdos” and “misfits”. Andrew Sabisky was appointed. The media trawled through Sabisky’s own blog for his thoughts, finding that he’d said, for example:
—There are excellent reasons to think the very real racial differences in intelligence are significantly – even mostly – genetic in origin
—One way to get around the problems of unplanned pregnancies creating a permanent underclass would be to legally enforce universal uptake of long-term contraception at the onset of puberty.
—Eugenics are about selecting ‘for’ good things. Intelligence is largely inherited and it correlates with better incomes; physical health, income, lower mental illness. There is no downside to having IQ except short-sightedness.
The first of these three comments is an example of ‘scientific racism’, the second is an example of eugenics. The first comment is factually incorrect. Human eugenics is wholly discredited, both morally and scientifically. The third comment misunderstands what IQ is. Shortly after these and other, similar, comments became public knowledge, Sabisky resigned. What are the origins of such thinking?
Differences in skin pigmentation and facial structure have been obvious for millennia. The earliest form of racism seems to be anti-semitism. Jews have been stigmatised and persecuted from ancient times, even before Christianity when Jews could be held responsible for the death of Jesus. They lent money at interest, then called usury, when Christians were forbidden to do this, and were said to indulge in practices that sound more like black magic. The Jews were expelled from England in 1290, not returning until Cromwell’s time. They were expelled from Spain in 1492 when many found refuge in the tolerant Moslem Ottoman Empire.
More generally, the ’scientific’ study of race began during the Enlightenment, the Age of Reason. This was also the time of European colonisation and empire building, when the ‘whites’ became more aware of other ‘races’. These classifiers were Western Europeans. The various human ‘races’ were described in relation to skin colour, physiognomy (the ‘science’ of judging peoples’ character from their facial appearance), and type of hair with an admixture of ignorance and prejudice. Linnaeus thought there were five types, Africans, Americans, Asians, Europeans and ‘monsters’. Johann Blumenbach described five ‘races’:
The white or Caucasian The yellow or Mongolian The brown or Malayan The black or Ethiopian The red or American
De Gobineau believed in three races, black, white and yellow. Blacks, he thought, were the strongest but incapable of intelligent thought; the yellows were physically and mentally mediocre, while whites (of course) were the best because they were capable of intelligent thought, could create beauty, and were the most beautiful. Overall, though, there was no settled agreement about the number of races. (Human facial beauty has subsequently been studied; most people prefer faces that are symmetrical. Faces with proportions in the Golden Ratio are considered beautiful. Early thinkers used Greek statues as a comparator; such statues are often the personification of beauty. And originally they were painted in bright colours to make them wear-resistant; they weren’t ‘white’.)
These classifications and other similar ones still find echoes today. I need hardly say that there is no biological, that is genetic, basis for such classifications, or for the attributes attached to them. The differences we can observe between different populations are a result of different cultures and environments. Race is a social construct.
Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection in 1859. His cousin, Francis Dalton, was intrigued and became convinced that all human characteristics and particularly intelligence were the result of inheritance. Thus, the ruling classes were the elite because of their genetic inheritance, and not because of wealth and privilege. Likewise, insanity and mental degeneracy were a result of ‘genetic determinism’. He collected data by measuring physical characteristics (anthropometrics), and mental abilities (psychometrics). He also made major developments in statistics, as did his successor Karl Pearson; it is for this that they are remembered today rather than their racism.
Convinced by such arguments, in the early 20th century, ‘mental degenerates’ were rounded up in the UK, and kept in asylums. Programmes of forced, involuntary sterilisation were introduced in Sweden and in the US. In Germany, Nazi ideology encouraged extramarital breeding from ‘racially pure and healthy’ parents to raise the birth rate of Aryans, a wholly specious race. Further, those whom the Nazis viewed as degenerate peoples, Jews, homosexuals, the Roma and others were not only segregated and sterilised, but murdered in what is now known as the Holocaust. Eugenics was (mostly) abandoned after World War II; eugenicists rebranded themselves as geneticists.
It’s clear that artificial breeding works in plants, producing standardised, disease-resistant but heavy cropping varieties. In animals, selective breeding produces pedigree animals, ones that conform to what experts expect. But this comes at a cost; such animals are produced by inbreeding, and these animals are prone to hereditary defects. Inbreeding in humans is also associated with congenital diseases such as haemophilia.
Gregor Mendel, an Austrian monk, experimented with peas, and from this formulated his ideas of dominant and recessive genes. Although he published in the middle of the 19th century, his ideas weren’t widespread for half a century. Less well known is that he didn’t use just any peas; he inbred peas, producing seven strains that ‘bred pure’ for various characteristics; and it was from these that he experimented; his results would otherwise have been lost in the ’noise’. No humans are ‘purebred’ we are all mongrels.
Mongrels? A generation is conventionally taken to be 25 to 30 years, and the number of our ancestors doubles every generation. On this basis about 1000 years ago we have one trillion ancestors; this is clearly impossible, as the best estimate is that around 107 billion is the total number of people who have ever lived. The genetic isopoint is when the entire population are the ancestors of today’s population. For Europe this was around 1400CE; for the world population, it was around 3400BCE. Every one of us is descended from all the global population then. There are genetic similarities within populations; but there are no sharp boundaries between populations, rather a gradual merging or blending of the two. And there are greater genetic differences within populations than between populations. Racial ‘purity’ is an impossible fantasy. Sorry, Gaels and Planters; you aren’t ‘pure’ and neither would you want to be because of recessive genetic disease.
Intelligence combines reason, problem-solving, abstract thought, learning capacity and the understanding of ideas. The first rigorous attempts at measuring and quantifying intelligence were by Binet just over a century ago, and was calculated by dividing the mental age by the chronological age, and multiplying by 100. This produced an intelligence quotient or IQ; the average for a population was 100. About two-thirds of people (one standard deviation) are in the range 85 – 115, and 95% (two standard deviations) lie between 70 and 130. Today’s tests (attempt to) measure reason, mental processing speed, spatial awareness and knowledge.
IQ scores for populations have been found to be rising at about 3 points per decade; this is known as the Flynn effect. For example, the average IQ in Ireland was 85 in 1970 by comparison to the UK where it was 100; in Ireland today it is 100. This is far too short a time scale for a genetic effect. The generally accepted explanation relates to the ‘environment’ including better nutrition and health, an increased standard of living and general socio-economic development. Does this accurately describe the changes in Ireland in the past half-century? Has Ireland gone from a poor, impoverished, even backward country to one which is wealthy, well educated and which has a vibrant economy?
While it’s difficult to assess accurately, today’s best estimate is that genes account for 40% to 60% of a person’s intelligence, with the environment, including nurture, accounting for the rest; crudely, about half nature and half nurture. It’s clear that genetics does not account for all or even the great majority of intelligence. The short-sightedness associated with intelligence may be genetic, but it’s known that close study, such as reading, has a very significant effect. I was told that myopia is common in Jewish boys but not girls; only boys study the Talmud in exquisite detail.
Scientific racism is a pseudoscientific attempt to show that certain races, that is ‘white’ races, are genetically superior to others. It uses comparisons of IQ in this venture. It does seem correct that peoples in sub-Saharan Africa have IQs 20 points less than those in the UK (taken as 100). It’s also true that they are ‘developing’ rather than ‘developed’ countries. However, the ‘highest’ IQ scores, again by comparison with the UK, are in Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and China, where scores are in the range 105 – 108. There is a culture of study and learning in these countries. Characteristically, researchers in this field such as Richard Lynn, previously a Professor of Psychology at the Ulster University, are described as ‘controversial’.
It’s surely clear that eugenics and scientific racism are thoroughly discredited, both morally and scientifically. The comments Mr Sabisky made are simply wrong in every detail; it is concerning that there does seem to be a recrudescence of such ideas today, and alarming to think that these ideas might be at the heart of government. Neither Dominic Cummings nor the Prime Minister’s spokesman have distanced themselves from these comments.
Angela Saini and Adam Pearson presented a two-part documentary called Eugenics: Science’s Greatest Scandal on BBCTV last year. It is not available on iPlayer at present.
Angela Saini’s book Superior: the Return of Race Science (2019) and Adam Rutherford’s How to Argue with a Racist (2020) are up to date accounts, and well worth reading.
There is a list of further reading here.
My thanks to SeaanUiNeill, Dr Madeleine Morris and Professor Seán Danaher for their comments.