Paper II · 14 August 2026
Foreign Investment, Land Ownership, Business Control, Employment Localization and the Public Interest
Rules that preserve majority local control of land and designated businesses, introduce progressive Ulsterization of everyday retail occupations, and prohibit concealment arrangements — drawing on Thailand’s ownership model and Saudi employment-localization practice, adapted to British and Irish law and the Common Travel Area.
Principles
- 01
Local majority control
For third-country nationals and foreign-controlled entities, majority ownership (51 per cent or more) of companies engaged in land-holding, property development, agriculture, certain services and other designated activities should require local control.
- 02
Restriction on foreign freehold
Freehold ownership of land by pure third-country nationals or foreign-majority companies should be restricted. Long-term leases and other limited real rights remain available. Limited exceptions may be granted for projects of clear public benefit.
- 03
Condominium quota
Condominium or apartment freehold for third-country persons should be subject to a clear quota (for example, no more than 49 per cent of the saleable area in any development).
- 04
Ulsterization of designated occupations
Designated occupations in retail, sales, small-shop management and related customer-facing roles should be subject to progressive localization quotas. High or full localization should apply to neighbourhood grocery, convenience, mobile-phone, clothing and similar everyday retail.
- 05
Prohibition of concealment
Any arrangement in which a British or Irish citizen or local company lends a commercial registration, trading name, licence or formal ownership while a third-country national effectively controls the business and retains the profits is prohibited, with severe civil and, where appropriate, criminal penalties.
- 06
CTA protection and coordination
British and Irish citizens, and companies majority controlled by them, continue to enjoy full ownership and employment rights. The tighter rules apply to third-country capital and labour. The two states should coordinate so that the open land border does not become a route for regulatory arbitrage.
Two different models of external capital and labour
Model One (sovereign-control and localization). External investors may participate, but majority ownership and freehold control of land and of many categories of business remain with the local population (the Thai model). Designated occupations — especially in retail, sales, and small-shop management — are reserved or heavily quota-restricted for local workers (the Saudi Nitaqat / Saudization model). Concealment arrangements (tasattur) are strictly prohibited.
Model Two (unrestricted open-market model). Capital from larger economies arrives without ownership ceilings. Freehold land, entire businesses and housing stock can be acquired outright. Small neighbourhood shops become heavily staffed or effectively controlled by third-country workers, sometimes through informal or concealed arrangements. Over time, ownership concentrates externally, everyday retail is dominated by non-local labour, and the developmental and employment benefits that should remain inside the territory are reduced.
United Ulster has a combined population of approximately 2.26 million. It is not a high-export, high-capital jurisdiction. When land, commercial property and operating businesses are placed on an open market without local-ownership thresholds, external capital can systematically outbid local buyers.
Intergenerational continuity
Land, businesses and the everyday retail economy are not merely commodities. In a territory of this size they are the physical and social base of community continuity. When freehold and majority control pass to external owners, and when the jobs that serve the local market are filled predominantly by non-local labour, the ability of the next generation of Ulster people to own the place their grandparents built is diminished.
We do not call for the end of external investment or of legitimate third-country labour. We call for rules that raise the threshold so that majority control of land and designated businesses, and priority access to the jobs that serve the local market, remain predominantly with the people of a territory of 2.26 million.
The choice is not between openness and isolation. It is between policies that acknowledge the structural vulnerability of a territory of this size and policies that pretend the vulnerability does not exist. We choose the former.