DUP to refuse to share power with UUP
The DUP has taken what many seem to consider the open goal offered them by the UUP’s decision to approach PUP leader David Ervine about joining the party within the Assembly.
DUP leader Ian Paisley said at Stormont that his party will not enter any power-sharing arrangement with the UUP due to the PUP and Ervine’s links to the Ulster Volunteer Force, which is not on ceasefire and which the report points out is deeply involved in drugs, extortion and violence.
“If people want to be aligned with any form of terrorism, whether it be Protestant or Roman Catholic, they have no right in the government here,” he said.
OK. We’ve confirmed you are from East Belfast, and that you have “colleagues” who go canvassing, so are you an employee of Michael Copeland? A simple yes or no will suffice.
BTW, people do not see Ervine as a reformed character, most people see him a a mouthy know-all with a half-baked philosophical approach that attempts to justify the existence and activity of an organisation of drug dealers, extortioners and murderers. That the UUP should embrace such a man is disgusting.
So, tell me: why does Paisley want an extra seat for SF and no unionist majority?
lol! I’m not the person you’re accusing me of being!
But seeing as you’re so keen to reveal the indentities of your political opponents why don’t you reveal yours?
I don’t know about Paisley, but I’ll tell you what I think – if the price for Unionism getting an extra minstry is corrupting ourselves by embracing such people as Ervine, I’d rather do without thank you very much.
All the UUP have done by this move is ensure there will be a fresh election. What are you all going to do when Copeland/Ervine get turfed out in East Belfast?
So for the third time, are you in the paid employ of Michael Copeland?
“If people want to be aligned with any form of terrorism, whether it be Protestant or Roman Catholic, they have no right in the government here”
Gas. Bit rich coming from Paisley.
For what it’s worth David Irvine comes across as a very sane and decent man to my mind. Yes, he has both a violent history and links with the political wing of a loyalist paramilitary force, but it’s because of the likes of David Irvine that the UVF aren’t taking pot shots at Catholic taxi drivers or people (Protestant or Catholic) walking through Catholic areas. Yes, members of the UVF are still committing murders, but it’s impossible to keep every ‘volunteer’ under control. It’s impossible to keep every single member of the public under control – That’s why murders happen, and you’re bound to have a higher proportion of psychopaths as members of organisations like the UVF.
NI has come on leaps and bounds over the last decade, as evidenced by the outrage and anger over a single murder – that of Michael McIlveen. He wasn’t just treated as another statistic and his heinous murder stood out because it’s now not the norm.
Is the UVF a more manageable force because of the likes of David Irvine or not? I think they are.
The UUP took a bold move in taking in Irvine. The UUP are in the position the DUP where in several years ago. They can afford to take risks. Hell – they can’t afford not to take risks.
And I don’t think the unionist voters are as fickle or as delicate as has been made out. They voted for hard line DUP in their droves, and not many would claim they’re whiter than white.
Have no doubt – the assembly will be up and running, and the UUP will have equal ministers to the DUP.
(Cracking headline to the thread)
On a different note – how on earth can Ervine’s socialist views sit comfortably with the conservative UUP? I’ve met many a PUP activist in the past and they are (in the main) passionatly socialist. I can’t see how Ervine can bring himself to sit with the UUP.
I think the DUP are being fair, and applying the same policies to other Unionist parties that they have used in the past with Sinn Fein.
The first day of “Peter Hain’s Assembly” and the politics has begun in earnest.
“Have no doubt – the assembly will be up and running, and the UUP will have equal ministers to the DUP.”
Wrong. The DUP will seek a fresh mandate for any deal. There will be an election next year.
Unionist
“Homophobic reaction to Paul Berry”.Dont make me laugh!He was caught up in a scandal that made his postion untenable and that wouold have the same for anyone else, regardless of their sexuality or party.
Also,for all you UUP critics is there really anyone apart from Reg Empey to lead the party?Sylvia Hermon has already said no,due to personal reasons.Although Empey has left himself open to criticsm, but he was only doing the best for Unionism.You know,the word actually contains ‘Union’.
Question: Has Ervine actually joined the UUP, or is he just in alliance with it? If he has joined it, then he has implicitly turned his back on the PUP, but if he is still in the PUP, then why? He (and Reg Empty, I presume) know UUP policy, so why would either allow an alliance that clearly drives a coach and horses through it? Why would Ervine not simply resign from the PUP and join the UUP. Then the problem would be half-solved.
uuper
The middle-classes may well view Ervine as being a little above the balaclava wearing thugs – but he has admitted himself, as late as this morning that he is a spokesman for those very people.
Just how will those people feel the next time that the UVF shoot someone, kneecap someone, rob somewhere or do something else which the IMC tells us that they are regularly up to. Its a fine attempt from you to defend Ervine’s move, but the average unionist just wont feel comfortable with having the UVF tied in with a supposedly democratic party.
The unionist majority was gained by the DUP having 33 seats – the UUP are taking that seat from the DUP, not SF.
Since you are so good at asking questions uuper then maybe you can answer one for me. Why did the UUP go ahead with this announcement now? Yes the addition of a member could give then one more Ministry when/if an Executive is formed, but that is unlikely to happen within the 6 months of this Assembly and there could well be an election before that.
Also, Ervine would only have had to switch to the UUP group for the day on which d’Hondt is run in order to form an Executive for the benefit to go to the UUP – so why now? After all, it seems fairly meaningless in the absence of an Executive (unless they really do like gangsters) and even if an Executive is going to be formed pre-election they could have waited until just before that time and saved themselves months of sitting around waiting for the UVF to embarass them.
P*ss poor from the UUP – but then you expect little else. Also, what will Ervine’s view be on a debate on something like the retention of academic selection?
“Wrong. The DUP will seek a fresh mandate for any deal. There will be an election next year.”
As there should be. Unionists should have a right to reelect after the formation of the UUP/UVF.
Stephen
Eileen Bell will have to give a ruling on this 2moro. If Ervine is not a party member he cannot be a member of the group, as far as I know.
It has come to my attention that the East Belfast UUP Advice Centre and the staff of this office have been accused of posting comments on this site under the name of uuper and east belfast unionist. I can assure you that no member staff from this office is posting comments.
I do not wish to have any further comments made on this site about staff and the East Belfast UUP Advice Centre.
lol.
No I’m not.
But as you’re so keen to attribute identities to other people why don’t you come clean yourself?
You have spent this afternoon adopting a lofty moral standard and denigrating others. I think it is hypocritical to attribute identities to other posters on a site where it is accepted that posters use a nom de plume (as you yourself have done!) while refusing to reveal yourself.
So go on – who are you?
“I do not wish to have any further comments made on this site about staff and the East Belfast UUP Advice Centre.”
What are you going to do about it? Get your new pals in the UVF on to us?
The hypocrisy in this whole deal is ridiculous. Thank God Paisley has shown some sense and denounced this for what it is (and very humourously I must add).
Jaysus – I wish someone would have warned me about this – I’d have both some pop corn, and sat back to enjoy the furore.
uuper
East Belfast Unionist used an e-mail that looked suspiciously like a copeland employee and then you appered after I asked if she was a copeland employee. It looks a bit suss?
‘bought’ some even!
And now we have the EB UUP Advice Centre, who had nothing whatsoever to do with those comments, not guilty, no siree Bob, suddenly posting to deny their obvious involvement.
Good grief, you couldn’t make it up!
Well one thing’s for certain, the east belfast uup advice centre has been on here! You still there east belfast uup advice centre?
My earlier post never materialised – I don’t know where it went – so i’ll try again.
I am a fierce critic of the UUP and have voted DUP since becoming eligible for the vote, but I feel Dr Paisley should look at the bigger picture here, lest he may score a proverbial “own goal” for Unionism.
Unlike dissident and mainstream republicans, the UVF and the much larger Ulster Defence Association do not represent a danger to the Northern Ireland state, or indeed national security. By Davy Ervine joining the UUP’s Assembly grouping, Unionism will become stronger, gaining an extra ministry and robbing the IRA, under the nom de guerre of Sinn Fein, of one of their coveted ministries.
Our people have suffered immeasurably at the hands of republicans who prosecuted a repugnant, sectarian campaign of attempted genocide spanning three decades. The UUP enlisting the help of Davy Ervine, an advocate for peace although hard to listen to at times, does not damage our image, or give us any less the “moral high-ground”, so Unionists/Loyalists should view this as a positive outcome, not a negative one…
CL
You cannot possibly believe that Ulster Unionism can maintain the moral high-ground and have Davy Ervine in its group at the same time?
I don’t know why the UUP chose to include Ervine this morning because I’m not privy to the leaderships thoughts – whatever people hiding behind their own nom de plumes might think!
However, I imagine it was because today is technically the day when party numbers are calculated is the reason. It’s a shot across the bows of not only the DUP but also the NIO.
However supporters of DUP/Ulster Resistance/The Third Force might delude themselves the NIO/DUP/SF are up to their necks in secret deals and understandings.
As Paisley and Robinson so graphically demonstrated today the UUP’s ruse has thrown the cat among the pigeons.
I still havn’t got a satifactory answer to my question – why is Paisley so upset that SF have been robbed of a seat and a unionist majority in the Executive?
the UVF and the much larger Ulster Defence Association do not represent a danger to the Northern Ireland state
Yeah, I mean, Northern Ireland needs drugs, and who else is going to provide them? We’re lucky to have these parasitic groups leeching off the backs of the children of Northern Ireland.
Concerned – nice to see you think some of the most notorious sectarian monsters that ever existed are no threat to security. Thank God for the decent unionists that comment on this site –outsiders could find your apologia for the UVF/UDA sickening, but at least most of your fellow unionists (at least from my time spent monitoring this board) are there to show that it is not a widely held opinion.
CL, this:
“Unlike dissident and mainstream republicans, the UVF and the much larger Ulster Defence Association do not represent a danger to the Northern Ireland state, or indeed national security.”
stinks. A terrorist organisation is a terrorist organisation. I’d say the UVF’s drug peddling has potentially far greater danger to the NI state than the remnants of the IRA do.
Don’t join the hypocrits.
Guns before government – it’s the DUP responsibility as a political party to pull them up on these sorts of issues, no matter if they are dressed in green or red, white and blue.
JJ.
Am I supposed to ignore the rank hypocrisy of the UUP, because I am a unionist?
I happened to agree with the idea of no guns no government, I never realised that it was just fenian guns they were talking about.
And frankly, I may be a unionist, but I still hold the overwhelming majority of my nationalist neighbours in higher regard than the scum of the UVF.
Am I supposed to turn around to all my friends who have been and are the targets for these scumbags and ask them to accept that the UUP are now directly alligned with them?
I was briefly a member of the PUP when I mistakenly thought the UVF had committed to exclusively peaceful means, but we now know that’s a crock of shit.
They are criminals who have no intention of giving up their criminality, their primary victims in crime and racketeering are other working class protestants.
They are gunmen with no intention of giving up their guns, and their primary targets are working class catholics.
And for one lousy ministerial position the UUP will allign themselves with these people, and you think that I ought to keep quiet about it, out of some sectarian solidarity?
Sorry, that’s not going to happen, not as long as I consider myself a decent unionist.
TAFKABO
Here, here!
Concerned Loyalist
‘or give us any less the “moral high-ground”’
A UDA apologizer/supporter talking about the moral high ground? Nice.
Where is Alex Kane? I want to hear his views.
“If Ervine is not a party member he cannot be a member of the group”
If true, very interesting. It means the UUP may have peeved off part of its base all for nothing in the end.
Concerned Loyalist
“Unlike dissident and mainstream republicans, the UVF and the much larger Ulster Defence Association do not represent a danger to the Northern Ireland state, or indeed national security.”
With respect, the fact that they may be pro-Union terrorists does not negate the fact that they are terrorists. Just because their crimes are in the name of Northern Ireland doesnt mean they are not crimes.
This is about the UUP legitimising terrorism – they previously succeeded in this through promoting SF/IRA, now they’ve switched to doing it through other paramilitary groups.
“Unionism will become stronger, gaining an extra ministry and robbing the IRA, under the nom de guerre of Sinn Fein, of one of their coveted ministries.”
If it was simply about that then they could have persuaded Bob McCartney or Paul Berry to come on board and get that Ministry. For that matter why not a UUP/DUP coalition which would surely net about 7 or 8 Ministries? Anyway, the seat they are taking is not a SF seat but a DUP seat.
Also, under a properly accountable system – which the DUP wish to see, it is less important who the individual personality is in the Ministerial chair – they cannot take unilateral decisions in that Ministry against the will of the Assembly. The UUP are supposedly very keen now on reducing the number of SF Ministers. However, when those Ministers were able to act as lord of all they surveyed as head of a personal fiefdom the UUP couldn’t get the Provos into office quickly enough.
Maybe its just because the SF Ministers now wouldnt have the power to unilaterally move maternity services to West Belfast or to scrap academic selection that the Ulster Unionists are getting worried about them.
“Our people have suffered immeasurably at the hands of republicans who prosecuted a repugnant, sectarian campaign of attempted genocide spanning three decades. The UUP enlisting the help of Davy Ervine, an advocate for peace although hard to listen to at times, does not damage our image, or give us any less the “moral high-ground”, so Unionists/Loyalists should view this as a positive outcome, not a negative one…”
CL – ordinary nationalists have suffered equally immeasurably at the hands of the UVF. Lets not forget also that ordinary unionists have suffered at their hands too. I wonder how the relatives of people like Raymond McCord or John Allen will feel at the representatives of their sons killers sitting with the UUP.
Of course this damages unionisms ‘high moral ground’ as you put it. My stance was that the representatives of armed terrorist gangs should not be in Government. To argue that armed loyalist terrorist gangs are different simply because they’re “our” gangs is not only hypocritical but it is politically stupid. Unionism was finally putting real pressure on SF/IRA and it was starting to work. The real movement towards SF becoming democratic has happened since the DUP put pressure there – it’s not complete but its much better than when Reg was sitting around the Cabinet table with them. The UUP have now decided to abandon any principled pressure they may have been able to put on terrorists from all sides.
This is priceless…unionists finally recognising each other as hypocrites…this country may have future yet lol!
If the DUP’s position on ‘UUP/UVF’ is really to be consistent with their position re: Sinn Fein, then as of now we should expect the DUP to refuse to negotiate with or even talk to members of the UUP.
So, to co-opt a slogan from the last election campaign, who are the “decent” unionists going to vote for now?
Let’s get to grips with reality on this issue please.
yes, we accept that the PUP have links with the UVF – statement of the obvious folks.
However, Sir Reg Empey has been open and upfront about his dealings with loyalist paramilitaries, unlike others.
During the summer, he was in contact with them in an attempt to bring them along in the process, this was reported by the BBC if i remember correctly.
Let us not forget, that the Loyalists for the past 30 years have been isolated, they are the forgotten players in Northern Ireland.
(This is part of the argument put out by academics who have specialised on Loyalism, such as Sarah Nelson, Steve Bruce and Jennifer Todd.
Loyalists were never secretly flown to London for private talks with HMG, like Gerry and other IRA comrades.
This is an attempt by Sir Reg to extend the hand of friendship to a community that has long been forgotten by the Unionist elite, both UUP and DUP, in fact, i would go so far as to say that the Loyalist community has been used, abused and above all, misled by the DUP.
So lets take this move as a positive development, it might just be the encouragement that those in the UVF need to show them that politics can work, that they are not a forgotten people and that now is the time for them to get rid of their weapons, stop the crime and racketteering and to work with like-minded Unionists to make Protestant/Unionist/Loyalist areas, and indeed, Northern Ireland, a better place to live, for the sake of current and future generations.
Forget the Decent People, looks like Reg is going after the Indecent People.
P.S. The UVF has been involved in a lot of the racial attacks in south Belfast. I wonder how the UUP is going to explain to the ethnic minority groups it has been courting why it is lining up with these thugs.
Just as well the BNP doesn’t have any councillors or perhaps Reg would want to hug them also.
Lord Belmont,
When will people like you in the UUP-UVF stop identifying people who live in loyalist areas with the gangsters, thugs and general ****ing low life of the loyalist paramilitaries?
We will never help the decent people (so to speak) in these areas whilst we leave them to the grip of the paramilitaries. By linking up with Davy, you are legitimising people who deserve to be tipped over the edge of Belfast Lough. (Don’t worry that’s a metaphor.)
The Watchman.Spot on at 6.18pm.
Where’s Shiliday?
Given the reaction here by “decent” unionists, I suspect Shilliday is away doing some soulsearching.
Why is everyone getting so carried away with this, were you saying the same when Reg was meeting with Loyalists?
Everyone (apart from yerman for some reason) is now agreeing that the seat would be taken of the shinners. For the Watchman et al… this also means 1 less seat for the shinners on the policing board.
And why are the DUP getting so angry about this (apart from the jealousy)??
The DUP’s main problem now is that they would not have the largest grouping on the executive…
In regards to the SDLP… are they not serving under the chairmanship of Dawn Purvis on the PB?
In the last election the PUP got a whole 1% of the vote!
I do not see this as a major issue, for as Ervine has noted he is only doing this for the benefit of Unionism.
One last thing, a quote from Ruth Patterson in relation to the PUP and UPRG in 2004:
“I don’t know if these politicians are inextricably linked to loyalist paramilitary groups.”
No one in the UUP are claiming that the PUP are not linked to the UVF… however when did the DUP change their view?
FYU
Ruth Patterson has a right to her opinion but it certainly does not reflect the views of the unionist electorate. Do you think that one vote will be gained to the UUP by becoming UUP/UVF?
No and I would neither expect nor want terrorists votes…
Someone has said in the last election the PUP transfers went 60%DUP 40%UUP
Ervine has no real ambition to become a UUP member; he is doing this to prevent the unnecessary growth of SF
EastBelfastUUPAdviceCentre,
Nice to see you posting. Keep up the good work.
Yours centrenally,
WestBelfastSinnFeinAdviceCentre
Ervine has no real ambition to become a UUP member; he is doing this to prevent the unnecessary growth of SF. FYU 7.47pm
(1)How does this move prevent the unnecessary growth of SF?
(2)Surely there is a strong chance that the DUP will want to go to the electorate before entering goverment with SF? That will change things anyhow.
Paul P,
1) It takes one of their seats on the exec (if there was one) away, its takes away SF’s right to 2nd choice. It takes away one of their policing board seats
2)Yes it would change things, but then again there might not be an election, after all the DUP have not had a very good last 6 months…
FYU
“he is doing this to prevent the unnecessary growth of SF”
Is there necessary growth of SF?
The fact remains that the DUP’s 33 seats gave unionism a majority on the Executive. The UUP will simply be restoring a unionist majority courtesy of a Ministry via the DUP.
However, there are 2 main issues and these are inter-related.
Firstly, the UUP are legitimising loyalist terror. After comdeming it they are now embracing it.
Secondly, they are firmly removing the pressure from SF/IRA. How on earth does unionism now state clearly to Sinn Fein that they must divest all their criminal and paramilitary links before they can be eligible for a place in Government. The Shinners will now turn around and state (with some legitimacy) that unionism (in the form of the UUP) doesn’t seem to put the same conditions in front of loyalist terrorists.
Now, either the UUP have decided that there can be some ‘acceptable’ terrorists or they have decided that they themselves are currently unfit for Government.
FYU or any other UUP supporter, which is it?
Has Hain said if the executive is formed there will definitely be no election until 2008? I don’t think the DUP or SF would object to an earlier election and it would tidy things up. Berry would be gone, and perhaps McCartney and Ervine as well. Even if he keeps his seat the UUP will probably be so far down he would be of no use to them anyway, and no need to retain the link.