Beyond Brexit: The Future of Ireland was undoubtedly an important day for republicanism and nationalism. The depth and complexity of the issue, and the contrasting approaches of the different strands was on show with each political representative who spoke offering an idea on what a joining of the two Irelands would look like.

Speakers Colum Eastwood, David McCann and Kevin Meagher were each very apt in their analysis of Unionism, and made the case that it is not exclusively the DUP which represents it. And Claire Bailey made sure Northern Ireland’s oft-ignored middle ground was not forgotten, emphasising that they could well be the deciders in any vote. She even pointed out that the British passport should also have been on the cover of the event brochure, after realising its absence.

But it was clear the event itself was somewhat conflicted in terms of who it was intended for. My Northern Slant colleague Kevin Meagher, in his subsequent article, made the assertion that it was the most important political gathering in Ireland in a generation. Sitting in the audience and looking towards the stage I would make the case that it wasn’t. But it could have been.

In terms of organisation, the event faced two problems, I thought. No ordinary member of the audience was able to ask a question during the two different panels, with the first panel not having time for a Q and A, while the second had three pre-selected people to volunteer, one of whom had written an essay in the brochure. This format does not stimulate conversation and restricts the potential for others to voice their opinion. The second issue is that attendees had been told simply that the event had been privately funded, meaning there were no details about exactly who had supported or sponsored the event.

Any future event of this kind should detail how it is funded and by whom. People who are giving their time and energy to come along and engage have a right to know who is backing it, in order to put it in context. Interestingly, the organizers followed up afterwards with an email to announce a funding page has now been created.

I attended the conference with hopes of having a cross-community dialogue and with questions I, too, wanted to pose. Sadly, I wasn’t able to do this. At times I was frustrated in the discussions, wishing I could remind the presenters that just because Unionist leaders where not on stage didn’t mean unionists or loyalists were not in the audience.

A lot was made of the fact that no Unionist politicians had showed up. Yet the message to the audience did not feel it was for everyone in our society; that it was only for republicans and nationalists. Much was made that a united Ireland is the only way to protect Irish identity and little regard was paid to the challenge of how to protect all of us facing Brexit.

I went to hear different positions and find out what will be the key themes which will guide further debates, but what struck me the most was a sense of complacency of those speaking regarding what Brexit was meant to bring about in this New Ireland.

What happened to this political aim before Brexit? How are we to get there, what is the work that needs to be put in?  We need to step out of all our comfort zones. Can we move beyond the language and discourse of entrenched identity politics to have these difficult discussions and make sure people can be heard – especially the most vulnerable in our society?

Considering the absence of Stormont the past two years, are we really equipped with the maturity for such a discussion when we are in the throes of a still-fragile peace? Once major questions can be answered, and the message becomes truly about the empowering of all, then such a gathering could well be considered the most important political gathering in a generation.

What needs to be understood first before we even address issues of identity politics is how the process will work. Does the United Ireland camp simply want a victory of 50% plus one? Or is an actual coming together of people for a common purpose more important? It is this objective which will map the political identity of Northern Ireland in any future referendum, as well as what it looks like afterwards.

One of my biggest impressions from the event is not what was said but what has not been said or is yet to be presented. Particularly, what, at its heart, will it mean to be Irish in this New Ireland? Or perhaps even better, what will it mean to come from this island, our home?

To achieve a ‘New Ireland’ we will all have to give up something of ourselves.

Another criticism, therefore, is that every panel presented a vision of only whiteness. Where were the other EU citizens who call this place home? The refugees or asylum seekers who needed help and sought refuge here? If this discussion is supposed to be held, then it needs to be about a coming together, not furthering division – regardless of what any voting result would be. We must – as Seamus Mallon once urged – think of a future that is inclusive of all who choose to live here and call it home.

Lastly, I want to remind readers, particularly those who may have been at the Waterfront that day, please do not think Unionists, the Dissenters, the Centralist or middle-grounders or immigrants are not showing up to these meetings and events; we are and we are listening. Let’s make sure we are including each other in all our mutual visions of the future.

To invoke David Ervine’s sentiments, our discussions should be “about recognising the need to encompass all attitudes and all opinions, all religions, all creeds, all colours, sexes and abilities within a diverse and honourable society”.

See also:

Ireland’s Future Beyond Brexit – My Vision of a New Ireland by Frazer McCammond