Nationalist and unionist politicians have been outlining their positions on Northern Ireland's constitutional future ahead of the long-awaited release of census figures this week.
The statistics, which will be made public for the first time on Thursday, are expected to show that the gap between the Catholic and Protestant populations is narrower than at any time in the state's history.
It has even been suggested that the proportion of Protest-ants in the north will drop below the symbolic 50 per cent mark for the first time.
In time, this could translate into a nationalist majority in any poll to decide the constitutional future of the north.
However, unionist politicians have claimed that a simple majority would not be enough to create a united Ireland.
"Clearly there would have to be some sort of statement of will expressed at the ballot box other than 49:50 per cent," a DUP spokesman said last night.
"That would not be enough to define an expression of will. More than a simple majority would be needed, otherwise people would question the poll and who voted in the poll.
"What would be needed would be a majority within each community, because that has been the only agreed way of making any governmental decision within Northern Ireland.
"Any practical deal has had to be cross-community because it must be something that does last, and not just a decision for one year which could be reversed the next year."
Speaking at the weekend, UUP Lagan Valley MP Jeffrey Donaldson also stressed the need for majority consent from within the unionist community for any change to the status of Northern Ireland.
"Nationalists can't have it both ways.
"They can't claim the consent of the majority isn't sufficient for a system of government and on the other hand claim that massive constitutional change would only require the consent of an overall majority," he said.
"The unionist community would need to give its consent."
However, SDLP leader Mark Durkan rejected the notion of introducing dual consent as a criteria for a united Ireland.
"There cannot be a different threshold for consent to a united Ireland than for consent to the United Kingdom," he pointed out.
"The agreement is clear that if a majority of people in the north vote for Northern Ireland to remain in the UK it will so remain, and it is equally clear that if a majority vote for a united Ireland that is also accepted in the south, then there will be a united Ireland."
But he stressed that any change in the constitutional position of Northern Ireland would not come at the expense of the Good Friday Agreement.
"The SDLP has made it clear in the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation that we want to develop a clear understanding that the agreement, with all the arrangements, assurances and accommodations that it offers, will endure whatever the outcome of any future referendum," Mr Durkan said.
"We can hardwire the agreement into a united Ireland. It is important to affirm that the consensus politics of the agreement will endure so that people have no fear that its principles and protections will be lost to census politics."
However, Sinn Féin chairperson Mitchel McLaughlin said a unionist "refusal to face change will not prevent it".
"These comments are design-ed to preempt involvement of unionism in debate about the kind of united Ireland that will evolve," he said.
"They are unhelpful to the constituency that Mr Donald-son is supposed to serve, in that they discourage the unionist people from examining the proposition of a united Ireland and their place in it.
"Rather than continue to live in a state of denial about where change is taking us, Mr Donaldson and other unionist leaders would serve their constituency best by encouraging discussion and debate on how a united Ireland would guarantee equality and human rights for all traditions."
