Ok. I got the title of my previous post wrong. It should of course have referenced 2011 rather than 2012 as these are the only complete figures available at this time. I left the title unchanged however to demonstrate that I’m only human!
The purpose of the annual balance sheet is to give a snapshot of developments during the year and extract some likely conclusions and projections regarding future elections. It is, after all, elections that actually count. Everything else is academic. There are a number of assumptions underlying these figures so I will set these out first:
- Although Catholics and Protestants do not all vote for pro Union/Nationalist parties pro-rata, as a rule the percentages for each group tend to follow a close correllation.
- Older voters are much more likely to turn out on election days.
- People are living longer now than compared to 20 years ago.
- There are four elements to changes in population. 1: Start point. 2. Births. 3. Deaths. 4. Migration.
- We now have the benefit of the 2011 Census to factor into the equation.
- We also know that Protestants have a greater representation at the higher age groups as set out below. (Figures based upon 2001 census+ 10 years, we don’t have this breakdown for 2011…….yet) It should also be noted that at ages below 10 there are much higher rates of non declaration of Religion.
What we do have for the under 10′s age group however is the 2011 Schools data. If we look just at primary schools the breakdown is Catholic background 50.1% Protestant background 36.2% Other/ Undeclared Background 13.7%.
We also have the births and deaths data for 2011 below. I have broken this into 3 groups by Local Govt District. Catholic / Protestant majority areas and Mixed areas. NB: Belfast is included as a mixed area in the chart below although we now know it is in fact, majority Catholic.
Taking as a start point Horsemans original template and the excellent work of Enda, here and here, I have taken the same methodology and expanded it. It will be interesting to see if forthcoming election results reflect the findings as accurately as they have done previously.
Here are my results:
(1) Nationalism
2011 Assembly election: 278,183 (42.2% of the total)
Plus - New voters: 9,213 x 50% = 4,606
Minus - Deaths (voting age only): 4,261 x 80% = 3,409
New total: 279,381
(2) Unionism
2011 Assembly election: 318,869 votes (48.3% of the total)
Plus - New voters: 8,983 x 50% = 4,491
Minus – Deaths (voting age only): 9,217 x 80% = 7,374
New total: 316,831
(3) Others or no religion
2011 Assembly election: 62,344 votes (9.5% of the total)
Plus - New voters: 7,077x 50% = 3538
Minus - Deaths (voting age only): 145 x 80% = 116
New total: 68,509
At the end of 2011, therefore, we might have expected a voting result along the lines of:
– Nationalist 42.67% Actual Vote was 42.2%
– Unionist 48.39% Actual Vote was 48.3%
– Others 8.94% Actual Vote was 9.5%
Interesting stuff !
The stats are all pointing one way without doubt and explain in large measure the attempts by Unionist politicians to garner Catholic votes. Those attempts foundered upon the events of the summer marching season and the fleg protests in recent weeks. I see no reason to suspect that voting patterns will change in the near future. I do, however, see evidence of “Garden Centre” nationalists. These tend to manifest themselves in constituencies where the demographic pendulum has already swung decisively. I will be posting shortly on one such constituency, Mid Ulster which has a forthcoming by-election.
If anyone needs clarification on my sources or calculations, please let me know.
Excellent, Horseman’s heir?
HI BD
what exactly are “Garden Centre ” Nationalists ?
Slán
Dublin6w,
It’s a northern phrase, it relates to non voting, politically neutral electors. It’s been traditionally employed as a reference to Unionists who don’t vote, I just turned the phrase around a little
NINIS (@NISRANINIS) tweeted at 11:32 AM on Thu, Jan 03, 2013:
#Census2011 Key Statistics for NI Assembly Areas, Wards, Super Output Areas and Small Areas will be published on 30 January 2013
BD,
Good clear analysis and it will be very interesting when the rest of figures are released.
Apologies if this has been covered before, but if we strip out immigration can we say what the % increase in Nat background is in the last 10 years(2001)?
Sammy,
Thanks. Immigration is the big unknown, as is emigration. The answer is I don’t know. What I am certain of is that that nationalism is increasing as a voting force year on year. Belfast is the evidence of that. To be honest, in voting terms the percentages have been fairly static in general terms but if you look at specific areas, the areas close to changing balance, the changes are dramatic.
BD,
I thought the 2011 figs included the immigration numbers – is it not ‘just’ a matter of making an assumption that a % of those immigrantsis Catholic (e.g 75%?) and subtracting that from any increase in Cath-Nat numbers between 2001 and 2011?
Yes the Census figures include immigrants but we don’t know how many of them actually vote. Empirical evidence suggests that it is actually the children of immigrants who are more politically motivated and who vote. 1st generation immigrants rarely do. I would suggest that contributes to Anna Lo’s vote in south Belfast for example. I would also suggest that Loyalism’s reaction to immigrants and their embrace of the likes of the BNP will ensure that the children of todays immigrants will be only voting in one direction
bd,
re. “Yes the Census figures include immigrants but we don’t know how many of them actually vote”
I’m probably not expressing properly what I am trying to get at. Leaving voting aside – I am assuming that we have a % figure for Nat. background from the 2001 census and the same from the 2011 census? Presumably catholic immigrants are included in 2011 Catholic census figures? If so – can we not strip them out and do a comparison with 2001?
Yes we can in Obama’s immortal words.
I’ll get onto it but can only base it on country of birth stats. There are numerous complicating factors though not least of which is graduate emigration. This post is a guess at best. It’s accuracy is only valid because the voting stats tend to reflect it pretty accurately
bd,
that will be interesting ta. Are you confirming that immigrants have actually been included in the Cath-Nat/Prod Unionist background figures in 2011 and you then have to subtract them (ie anyone born outside of Ireland) from the respective totals? (Presumably you need to assume that a certain high % of immigrants e.g. 80% are Catholic to do this?)
Sammy, No. I have excluded them entirely on the basis that they are unlikely to vote. It is their kids who will be active politically in my view. Just as I am sure that Peter the greats recent political manouvours were dictated by forewarning of the census results, I expect future party noises to be shaped by the same mechanics.
What about the 10,000 per year in-migrants from the rest of the UK?
Factual,
Who do you think they are voting for?
Hi BD,
Great round-up.
Are you including the Alliance Party in the assembly election vote of “Others 9.5%”? I would have placed them with the Unionist block, albeit on the liberal edge. I think allowing the AP to adopt the “Others” mantle lets them off the hook, since they are most certainly more Unionist than not. They may adopt the “Other” designation at Stormont but what way would they jump on a border poll? I can’t imagine Ford saying that it was a “matter of conscience” and leaving it to individual members in any future vote.
The party may be reliant on Garden Centre Catholics for votes in certain constituencies but it also knows where its true allegiances lie.
By the by, how times change in Ireland. From Castle Catholics to Garden Centre ones. Different name, same class?
Séamus,
Straight answer is yes. I am including them as others. As with all else here it is local. Most alliance voters on the lower N’ards road are Unionist. Most around Stormont are Nationalist. There are plenty of Unionist SDLP voters in South Down and Derry also.
I went to school in a place named after a protestant playwright who lambasted the petty interests of the working classes in preference to their greater national interest. The lesson wasn’t lost
Very true. I was re-reading Matthew Cobb’s “The Resistance: The French Fight Against the Nazis” recently (which I highly recommend) and was fascinated by his breakdown of French society under the German Occupation and Vichy regime. A quarter opposed the Occupation, a quarter collaborated with it and two quarters stayed neutral. Much the same figures come from the American Revolution.
The border poll would certainly shake things up in terms of people voting for their desired outcome rather than simply voting tactically to stop more extreme choices getting in. But I would imagine that the STV system for Stormont gives a slightly truer refection of voter-intentions?
Are Sinn Féin really calculating that in a border poll those who favour reunification will turn out in greater numbers than those who oppose? With such a large non-voting Unionist electorate could SF pull off a referendum win of epic proportions? The point is, I suppose, it doesn’t matter how close the margin of victory. Just one vote more in favour still means negotiations for change.
Negotiate first referendum second. People need to know what they are voting for.
Referendum first. People need to know if they need to negotiate.
Realistically you should have referendum first , then negotiation, then a further referendum on what is negotiated.
Would you have voted for the Lisbon treaty if you did not know what had been negotiated?
EU referenda are different. We have no choice and have to keep voting till we vote yes.
Enda is 100% correct. There will be no second referendum on the substantive outworkings of a previous yes vote – although there would be another referendum on a new constitution. In Scotland the Edinburgh Agreement has ensured that if a yes vote comes in 2014 (next year already come to think of it) there won’t be another to rubber stamp Holyrood v westminster talks.
“Negotiate first referendum second. People need to know what they are voting for.”
Absolutely, in a normal society. The North of Ireland can not be described politically as such. Surely the Unionist parties could never be able to enter pre-UI talks which would de facto be an admission of surrender.
When the time is right (only God knows) the convening of a Nationalist (North and South, all shades) Forum, facilitated by both Governments with international presence and backing, with the input of as many individual Unionist leaders as willing might produce a basis to go forward. This is a big MIGHT.
The Governments are committed to the principle of consent and this has to work both ways. If such a poll is to be agreed by both sides, it will be because each will have its own, diametrically opposed reasons and the poll will be expected to confirm this.
Negotiations, I believe, could only follow a 50%+1 vote and this situation seems remote to me for the foreseeable future if ever. Sadly, for me.
There is the old electoral rule of thumb that those who favour change tend to turn out in greater numbers than those who favour the status quo. The latter tend to be more complacent. Add that to the greater Nationalist turnout at elections, Sinn Féin and the SDLP hopefully speaking with one voice in a united “Yes” campaign, perhaps some support from southern parties (unlikely) and there might be some hope of change. But I am still somewhat pessimistic.
Don’t think there is such a rule of thumb as we saw in the recent AV referendum.
It may well be apocryphal but there is a theory of thought that change gets more people out as those voters tend to be more motivated. Those favouring the status quo are less inclined to vote more or less out of complacency or because they are not motivated enough.
Likewise there is the electoral theory (or supposition, if you will) that those who can capture the “Yes” tag in a referendum have a psychological advantage over those who have to campaign under a “No” banner.
No doubt there are those who theorise otherwise.
I havnt voted in years(16 to be exact), and i didnt fill out a census form and i know a few friends who didnt bother either. But i know if the chance to vote in a border poll arose i’d be rushing to the polling booth. I wouldnt be surprised if there were more people around the north in a similar frame of mind.
Wolfe Tone,
Please vote.As I have said in my post it is the votes that count. Vote for whoever you want but don’t opt out. You are merely playing into the hands of those who would prefer you didn’t. When you are older, and I’m presuming you ain’t too elderly, you will have time on your hands and maybe wish you had. It is votes that made the changes in Belfast City Hall happen for example. Nothing else.
Now for something I never thought I’d ever say. I actually agree with an article in the Indo:
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/new-minority-in-the-north-will-have-to-improve-its-civic-manners-3339879.html
An unprecedented opinion peice for the Indo. Whatever next…?! :-O
Good article alright
Amazing from the Indo. Great blog btw – love the cold hard stats of the numbers game!
Any chance you could work on a similar map to the 2001 catholic distribution by ward? I always find that graphical representations of the ‘greening’ have greater impact than numbers.
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/images/maps/map12.htm
Karl,
You’re quite right. The ward info hasn’t been released yet. I believe it may be out at the end of January
Northern Ireland Census 2011 Output Prospectus
This prospectus sets out the release plans ………
Key Statistics for Assembly Area, Ward, Super Output Area and Small Area will be published at 9:30am on 30 January 2013.
You’re right. Kewl. Looking forward to seeing it.
Anyone know when we find out what proportion of the rise in Catholics was due to the one off influx of Polish people?
factual, over on Open unionism (I think you posted on that thread).
http://www.openunionism.com/a-plague-on-both-our-houses/
it is statyed by Wendig that
“In a nutshell the Catholic or brought up Catholic population increased by 1.38% in a census where 1.97% of the population were born in an A8 EU accession country and where 1.38% of the population speak either Polish or Lithuanian as their main language alone, 0.13% speak Portuguese as their main language and 0.11% Filipino. This shows the underlying demographics lining up with the Nationalist proportion of the vote which was entirely stagnant in elections between 2001 and 2011.”
re the castle catholic/garden centre catholic. I have not voted in the last 10 years (aged 50) after voting SF all my life. I am not a castle catholic and despise gardening. The reasons why people do not vote are indeed complex. I may not even vote for a UI.
The reasons? I am a Catholic first. If the parties have policies directly opposed to Catholic teaching then I will not vote for them.
So there is another Catholic demograph that is not voting and the increasing liberalising of the nationalist parties makes it more difficult for us to do so.
Croiteir,
While I, myself, am not particularly religious, I respect the rights of all religious people to vote in accordance with their conscience. I actually don’t think there are any parties north or south who align their policies with catholicism. Perhaps I am wrong. Can you suggest who you would vote for in a re-unified Ireland perhaps? Or do you think there is a need for a new party that reflects your views?
I am not too sure – at the moment Fianna Fail would be the most attractive from that perspective. I would welcome a new centrist party that would reflect Catholic Social teaching. Something like the CSU in Bavaria.
Interesting point. I’m a slightly militant atheist (apologies!), with a mixed if distant Catholic and Protestant background. However I could never see my atheism dictating my nationality. I’m Irish first and an atheist second. Why do you place religious identity before national identity, if you don’t mind me asking? And would you not regard your Catholicism as less subject to prejudice in a reunited Ireland than a partitioned one?
States come and go, so do identities.
My Catholicism would not dictate my national identity, so we are similar there in that your atheism does not define your nationality either, although there may be regional and cultural influences they would be peripheral to my core religious belief.
The Irish identity that most have now is, in my opinion, an identity which has been shaped by the colonial power. I would venture that an older identity, based on Gael and stretching across Ireland and Scotland would have preceded it. So why would I get uptight on an identity that has changed and is subject to change as opposed to a religion that has been far more stable and constant.
Some would say that there is another shift occurring and some northern nationalists are turning there backs on the south and identifying as northerners, a sort of update on the sentiment behind the old grafitti “there is no justice, just us”. (I would be sceptical of that however).
At the end of the day I feel my religion defines me more than my nationality. It is a more constant identity and more enduring.
As far as prejudice is concerned there is different prejudice. It may work out that the state which evolves south of the bordewr may become less attractive to Catholics. The recent policies of the Labour Party and the speech by Enda Kenny seems to indicate that this is the way things are going. I would perhaps see avoiding joining a state that is moving in that direction as a choice I would have to take no matter how reluctant I would be in making that choice.
Here in the south, Catholicism fell from 87% to 84% in the last 5 years ( latest census). Expect it to fall below 80% next time.
Hi BG
The census figures show catholics at 45% and protestants at 48%.
Does anyone know what the comparable figures were in 1921 when king George opened the 6 county parliament.
As the 2 communities reach equilibrium could some of the protestants come to realise that they themselves are Irish and follow in the foot steps of Emmet and Wolfetone..
I think we are about to live in exciting times !
Hi dublin6w
Good question! I believe that the balance was approx 66%/33% across the six counties but will need to check that, which I will.
Of course, Nationalists traditionally produced larger families but had much higher emigration rates for the first 50 odd years after partition.
There are many Protestants who are in favour of a re-united Ireland. I know some of them very well. Just as there are some Catholics who favour the present situation.
Exciting times indeed……….!
Here’s a good example of how quickly things are changing in Fermanagh for instance:
http://www.impartialreporter.com/news/roundup/articles/2013/01/03/399361-irish-graphics-on-council-vehicles-raise-concerns–/
dublin6w, I don’t see myself as Irish at all, I have no sense of Irishness and do feel like I travel to another country when I cross the border. I doubt I will ever come to realise that I’m Irish, and I’m afraid that’s something that will have to be accepted, rather than living with the fairytale that the Prods are all misguided.
Every day I wake up and (except when the rain obscures it) I see from my bedroom window another British nation, separated by a narrow stretch of water and one that I’m more comfortable in during my visits there than my southwards sojourns.
My cultural leanings are either uniquely of Ulster (or NI) or British – flute band, football, prog rock but I’m not so blind as not to be interested in Irish history, whether it affects NI or not or to realise that there are very many of my fellow citizens whose culture is very much Irish, in music, literature or sport.
I’m not going to attempt a conversion of them but I do hope that they can build their cultural output within a British context – it’s quite pleasant to see the strides Gaelic sports are making on the mainland and across the commonwealth that will hopefully in future years allow for the all-island and London championships to expand into a much more international competition than it currently is.
Robert Emmett and Wolfe Tone were of a much different time. Just as Carson was, or perhaps Paisley. The days of the demagogue, statesman, revolutionary or traitor (choose which label(s) to apply to the four of them) are over. What comes next? I’m not too sure but I’m increasingly worried that whoever our future leaders are might still be extremists rather than pragmatists.