‘A feasible bite out of a big apple’: outcomes from ARINS/Irish Times North–South surveys 2024
by Allan LEONARD
13 March 2025
The ARINS (Analysing and Researching Ireland, North and South) project recently held its first event in Belfast, focusing on constitutional futures and the socio-political landscape of a potential United Ireland. After a keynote presentation by Professor Brendan O’Leary, discussions, insights, and reflections were made by fellow panellists Professor John Garry, Dr Jamie Pow, and Dr Dawn Walsh. The event was a collaborative effort with the Senator George J. Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice at Queen’s University Belfast.
Dr Susie Deedigan opened the event by thanking the attendees and introducing the ARINS project: “I work for Notre Dame, based here in Belfast, where I am expanding the reach of the ARINS project in Northern Ireland.” She further explained that ARINS is a joint research initiative of the University of Notre Dame and the Royal Irish Academy, aimed at producing independent, non-partisan research and analysis on various aspects of Ireland, North and South. Dr Deedigan highlighted the two podcast series (1) (2) and open-access journal articles that the project produces, emphasising their role in disseminating crucial information and fostering intellectual discourse.
Survey results
Professor Brendan O’Leary (University of Pennsylvania) followed Dr Deedigan, presenting an overview of the ARINS project’s survey results for 2024. He explained that the focus of the survey results was on voting intentions in hypothetical future referendums, shifts in “loser’s consent”, and people’s perceptions of government formation models in a hypothetical United Ireland.
O’Leary began by discussing the core question of the survey: intentions to vote in a future referendum on a choice between Irish unity and the maintenance of the union: “The South remains solidly in favour of unification by a ratio of 4 to 1.”
He further elaborated on the shifts among Northern Catholics and Protestants: “Support for unification among cultural Catholics has risen from 55% to 63% over this period. Support for the union has fallen from 21% to 18%, and there’s a significant drop in ‘don’t knows’ among the cultural Catholic community, from 21% to 16%.” Disseminating this information, O’Leary pointed out that achieving majority support for unification would require continued gains in these demographics.
The survey results also indicated significant demographic changes impacting voting intentions. “You’ll see a statistically significant rise in support for Irish unity from 27% to 34%, and that’s a 7% rise over two years,” O’Leary said.
One of the key highlights from the survey was the significant rise in “loser’s consent” among Northern Protestants: “In our first surveys in 2022, a third of Northern Protestants found unification almost impossible to accept. This year, that number is down to 1 in 5.” He attributed this shift either to a reduced fear of Irish unification or a greater confidence in winning a pro-union referendum result.
Deliberative forums
O’Leary then shifted focus to the insights on institutional changes in the event of a United Ireland, which were a significant part of the deliberative forums. He explained, “We provided participants with five possible models for the government of a United Ireland and let them deliberate on the pros and cons of each model.” These models were:
- the existing system in the Republic of Ireland
- the Northern Ireland model adapted for a United Ireland
- an inclusive coalition model
- a quota model
- a territorial model
The inclusive coalition model gained significant traction among the participants: “Broadly speaking, we can say with some confidence that this model commanded most confidence among the three groupings: Northern Protestants, Northern Catholics, and the citizens of the Republic.” This model proposes a coalition government proportionally representative of the all-island parliament, devoid of veto powers, and featuring a single Prime Minister.
Before opening the discussion to the audience, Dr Deedigan asked the panellists for any results that particularly surprised them.
For example, Dr Jamie Pow (Queen’s University Belfast) highlighted the distinction people made between wanting to achieve a United Ireland versus planning for the possibility of it. He noted that this was especially relevant when comparing to Brexit, where a lack of clear planning led to a muddled aftermath. He emphasised that people, particularly in Northern Ireland, seem to acknowledge the importance of planning, even if they don’t necessarily support the idea of a United Ireland.
Professor John Garry (Queen’s University Belfast) remarked how a deliberative forum or a citizen’s assembly is a bit like a “really boring wedding”: “You turn up for a whole day, you’re not quite sure who you’re going to meet, you sit around tables, you listen to speeches, and then you chit chat amongst each other in a slightly awkward way.” He added that a crucial element is who isn’t in the room — politicians and journalists.
Meanwhile, O’Leary noted the persistent strength of hostility to the option of Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth — though understandable with its association with the 1921 Treaty. Yet the survey question on a United Ireland joining NATO led to some flexibility. O’Leary pointed out the curiousness about this, in that Commonwealth membership has “zero institutional or policy consequences — you might have to hold sporting events in a specific Irish city”. By contrast, O’Leary noted, joining NATO means the end of military neutrality, is a serious obligation in terms of public expenditure, and involved joining a military alliance with the neighbour Great Britain.
Audience discussion
The Q&A session allowed audience members to engage directly with the speakers.
Brian O’Neill from Slugger O’Toole raised an important point about the need for standardization across various sectors such as education, healthcare, and business. O’Leary responded by acknowledging the importance of these issues but noted that unification does not necessarily mean standardization of everything: “If there were to be the maintenance of devolved government in the North, in the event of unification, that might mean the preservation of some things that you might not like, like the existing education system, in the North.”
Dr Dawn Walsh (University College Dublin) added that the ARINS project includes research on making the island work as is, with a focus on areas like children’s rights and ease of living and working in different jurisdictions. “There’s work being done… on children’s rights, North and South, and how to standardize that,” she mentioned. This research aims to address the practical challenges and opportunities for greater North-South cooperation without necessarily conflating them with the discussion on unification.
Another question from Professor Adrian Guelke focused on the low salience of planning for a United Ireland. Pow pointed out that when people were asked to rank issues, healthcare, the economy, and housing usually topped the list, both in Northern Ireland and the Republic. Planning for the possibility of a United Ireland and achieving a United Ireland ranked lower, indicating that other issues hold more immediate importance for most people. O’Leary replied that while it might not be an everyday topic, “doing so is certainly not going to antagonize the population of the Republic, and it will be surprisingly well received among a significant swathe of the Protestant population in the North”.
An audience member expressed concerns about the status of the Irish language in a potential United Ireland, fearing it could be downgraded to compromise with Unionist communities. Professor O’Leary reassured that such a scenario is unlikely, given the deep cultural significance of the Irish language: “My judgment would be that if you asked the citizens of the Republic about whether to radically downgrade the status of Irish… they would react with the same vehemence that they do to the idea of joining the Commonwealth.”
Dr Walsh acknowledged the practical challenges but emphasised that specific exemptions could be made in areas like primary school teaching without undermining the broader cultural commitment to the Irish language. “Something we might want to think about asking is different aspects of the Irish language, and how it’s acquired by different institutions within the Irish state,” she suggested, indicating a flexible yet committed approach to cultural preservation.
From the audience, Alan Jones described himself as from County Antrim, Presbyterian roots, but as he is married to a Malaysian and practising Buddhism, considers himself now in a multicultural, multifaith family. Asking how it fits in “to where we’re going to be in 25 years”, Jones read the preamble of the Irish constitution:
“In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred, We, the people of Éire, Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial, Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation…”
O’Leary replied that in any United Ireland, this preamble “would have to go”. Yet he emphasised that in constitutions, preambles have no legislative or constitutional force on the part of courts: “But this is an example of a symbolic change that will be absolutely necessary.”
The event concluded with reflections on the methodologies used in the research and the potential areas for future study. The ARINS team plans to continue their annual surveys and deliberative forums to capture evolving public opinions. They also aim to explore topics like policing, justice, and rights across the island. “Next year we’re looking at policing and justice. Part of it would be looking at the question of rights across the island as a whole,” O’Leary stated.
Garry said that their research approach was like taking “a feasible bite out of a big apple”: “It’s almost the opposite of a blank-sheet-of-paper approach, [because that] becomes extremely unwieldly if you want to get anywhere coherently.”
Pow acknowledged that the academic team plans to explore institutional reform in Northern Ireland and the Republic in the future, separate from the issue of reunification, emphasizing a broader interest in how governance could evolve on the island.
The inaugural ARINS event in Belfast was a significant step in fostering dialogue and understanding about the potential futures of Ireland. Through rigorous research, expert discussions, and public engagement, the ARINS project aims to provide a comprehensive, nuanced view of the complex socio-political landscape of Ireland, North and South. As Dr Deedigan aptly said, “Our research has two major strands: making the island work and looking at constitutional futures.”
The ARINS event in Belfast revealed important insights into public opinion on Irish unification, the willingness to plan for its possibility, and the complexities of such a transition. Key takeaways include a rising trend in support for Irish unity, a significant increase in “loser’s consent” among Northern Protestants, and the crucial distinction between planning for and achieving a United Ireland. The event underscored the importance of continued research and public engagement in understanding and shaping the future of Ireland.
Feature image © Johnny BAMBURY