Reg confirms other approaches, Berry claims he was asked and Bowles buys out
On Inside Politics, Reg Empey has confirmed that a number of MLAs were approached to join the UUP Assembly group. In the News Letter (not online), Paul Berry says he was informally approached by an UUP MLA and a number of UUP members about joining the Party a number of weeks ago. This flys in the face of Alan McFarland’s categorical denial. Signs of internal dissent grow with Party Officer Peter Bowles attacking the move as “morally wrong”. Intriguingly, prominent UU commentator Alex Kane opts for an article about euthanasia, avoidance or subliminal message?
Paul Berry said:
“An elected and unelected members of the UUP approached me some weeks ago to see if I would consider joining the UUP….I presumed it was connected to the headcount at Stormont.”
“There was concern about making it official and a negative response coming back…”
Peter Bowles said:
“I am against the move on the simple basis that it is morally wrong. It’s a different matter going into government with Sinn Fein because they remain your opponent but to invite a spokesman for the UVF into your group a step too far.
He goes on to ask:
“The UVF murdered Down constituents at Loughinisland. How do I explain to families of the people killed in that atrocity that the party I am a member of has a UVF political representative in its Assembly group?”
Empey’s confirmation of other approaches means the “risks for peace” UUP defence of the Ervine look increasingly shabby. If it was the primary reason Ervine would have been the first and only approach not another name on a list.
Also if Empey’s claim of “elements of government” being opposed to the move is interesting. Is it pre-spin for a negative Speaker’s decision on the move? If the Speaker does say no will the UUP opt for a judicial review and risk dragging out the media storm? Or will they have learned a hard lesson?
“predictable and infantile” sez my stalker; waaaay KEWL sez me!
On the stalker’s other point (how naughty I am to ‘[put] the boot into people in [my] own party’), do just take a second out of your busy day-release and explain to me – you slavering on about Trimble and Empey ‘putting terrorists in government’, is that meant as praise of people in our party? Heaven forfend that you might be putting the, well not boot exactly, more playrite “baby’s first shoe” in yourself. Tush, tush, tush. Still, after 72 years, man, boy and hospice inmate, a member of the UUP in South Antrim, you can’t be expected to remember everything that’s upsetting you, can you?
Anyone know who else the Ulster Unionists are supposed to have approached? Apart from Berry and McCartney I don’t see who else was available.
“Anyone know who else the Ulster Unionists are supposed to have approached? Apart from Berry and McCartney I don’t see who else was available. ”
Rumours Mark Robinson and Seamus Close were also approached.
Anyone got any idea who the second Alliance member sometimes mentioned might have been?
must have been Ford, following logic?
logic Stephen???
Come on now, you know better than that!
Hang on, I was told explicitly today that comments that Sir Reg had approached other Unionists were ‘pure speculation’.
Which is it?
Mr T
There is no difference.
David Ervine has not accepted that his past was flawed and that he did anything wrong. He excuses what he did on the grounds he was defending the loyalist people, by driving a car bomb? Some defence strategy!
That is no different from Gerry Adams saying the IRA was defending the Catholic people when La Mon was bombed.
Until he accepts that what he did was unequivocally WRONG the UUP should have no truck with him. Sinn Fein should not be allowed to have an input into law and order until they have accepted that in breaking it for 80+ years they were WRONG and that legally appointed forces of law and order are the only groups who can apply the laws of the land, either North or South.
Frustrated Democrat
Well said! That’s a great name for a new party
Frustrated Democratic Party. There would appear to be a gap in the market for a second Unionist party, so I would copyright the name quick!
The ConservativesNI are that party.
Change2Win in Northern Ireland.
slug
are you a Tory?
I have already said on another thread where the Tories are on the ballot paper I will now vote for them as first choice.
They veered off course for a while when Maggie was led astray by the NIO, as she privately admitted. They now seem to be have been giving a consistent message on Northern Ireland for some time that deserves support, especially as they may be in power after the next election.
Imagine voting for a unionist party (small u)that might actually be able do something!
fair comment.
You know, you might actually be onto something here….
If the tories did give a clear and unequivocal assurance that they were pro Union, and against terrorists in government, like Ahern down south, then with a bit more action to back it up, they could do well.
Anyone else think the same?
I am not religious, and dont like the religious fixation within the dup.
The only politican who retains my respect is Bob McCartney, a non sectarian Unionist, and someone who is straight as an arrow.
Stephen see below from 6 April 2006
Conservatives welcome Northern Ireland power-sharing initiative
Progress with devolution in Northern Ireland depends on the Republican Movement calling a halt to all criminal activity, David Lidington has declared.
While he welcomed the latest Anglo-Irish plan to reactivate power-sharing self-government in the province, the Shadow Northern Ireland Secretary said greatest responsibility now hinged on the Republicans and their ability to abandon crime and support the police. “Without both of these, we believe it would be unacceptable to have Sinn Fein Ministers in government in a part of our country,” he said.
Commenting after the announcement by Prime Minister Tony Blair and Irish Premier Bertie Ahern of a November 24 deadline by which a power-sharing executive in Northern Ireland should be set up, Mr Lidington said: “We welcome this initiative. We share the objective of restoring devolution but in current circumstances the reality is that it will be some time before a fully-fledged power-sharing government can be formed.”
Then he stated: “The greatest responsibility for progress now rests with the republican movement to end all criminal activities and to support the police. Without both of these, we believe it would be unacceptable to have Sinn Fein ministers in government in a part of our country. We wish the process well. But if by the autumn power-sharing has still not proved possible we would oppose any further “greening” of direct rule or moves towards “joint authority” between London and Dublin which would be a complete breach of the Good Friday Agreement.”
Mr Lidington declared: “Republicans should not be rewarded in this way for refusing to take the steps necessary for power sharing devolution to take place
Liddington is spot on.
Frustrated Democrat
I think I can safely say that it is highly likely you will have a Conservative candidate at the next Assembly and General Elections.
Do check out http://www.conservativesni.com
stephen said,”The only politican who retains my respect is Bob McCartney, a non sectarian Unionist, and someone who is straight as an arrow.”
where is bob now? why hasnt he spoken out on the DUPs decision to adhere to Dhont, given that he stood down in the 05 westminister election on the basis that the DUPes would not form a government with Sinn Fen under that system or for a generation for that matter!
Bob, I like the ConservativesNI website presence.
Do you think they will be fielding candidates in most constituencies?
The time seems to be right, now that the Conservatives are on the bounce-back, and the Ulster Unionists in a bit of a muddle.
slug:”and the Ulster Unionists in a bit of a muddle.”
Understatement of the year so far
observer, he is fighting for our educational future, amongst other things.
Also, the press and media are fixated on sfira and are very picky against him, as he speaks the truth and has called it straight as it is from the start of this appeasement.
There is an article coming very soon on your post, as the DUP and the UUP are both in a moral argument neither can win….
As I am in Strangford constituency, I would be interested in a conservative candidate, even though they told us all a pack of lies about churning stomachs etc…..
oh, and another thing,
there is no such thing as the good friday agreement, it is the Belfast Agreement.
secondly, unfortunately liddington is wrong, as the free standing all ireland bodies will be supported and actually encouraged as per the framework documents 1998, paragraph 47.
This is thanks to the UUP agreeing to negotiate within the parameters of the framework documents.
No wonder they are finished.
Incompetence is a compliment.
Bob Wilson
Are you a Conservative voter or a member?
What is happening in North Antrim is there an association?
stephen
I find myself in agreement with you re Bob, except that he isn’t the only one I respect but he is definitely up there.
Slug
We hope to field candidates in the majority if not all seats
Stephen
There will be a candidate in Strangford
Re Bob McCartney – true Bob writes interesting articles on education in the Belfast Telegraph but largely he is preaching to the converted and therefore ineffectual.
NI Conservatives have been working behind the scenes with Lidington and Glentoran (Lords Spokesman) to ensure that our 200ish MP and 200ish peers are up to speed on the Education Order.
We hope that Lib Dems and Cross benchers in the Lords will join us in voting against this measure on the grounds of Democracy – see following post.
We work closely with AQE too.
Oh we trust UUP peers will support – althou apparent Kilcolney and Molyneaux don’t really have much to do with their own wee group.
Frustrated Democrat
Yes I am involved in NI Conservatives – we hope to form a County Antrim grouping fairly soon – we have considerable numbers joining via both the NI website and the national one.
New members welcome!
Democracy and Education in Northern Ireland:
The Education NI Order
The proposed Education Order that will go before Parliament shortly fails every democratic test. Below are 6 reasons why this Order should not be supported.
1. Orders in Council are unsatisfactory methods for introducing important primary legislation
When the Stormont Parliament collapsed in 1972 the Government decided to use Orders in Council to deal with Northern Ireland legislation as a temporary measure. It is highly regrettable that such Orders are still being used for important legislation. .
Traditionally, primary legislation is by way of Bills that can be fully debated and amended. Orders in Council are not amendable and there is very limited opportunity for debate. To use the Order in Council procedure to force through controversial legislation, relating only to Northern Ireland, is completely unacceptable.
In addition, given the Government’s efforts to restore a power-sharing assembly it is unacceptable to rush this controversial measure through. The Government should not abuse its position in an attempt to ‘leverage’ Northern Ireland parties into a deal. The Government has set a deadline of 24 November for agreement on devolution. To take a decision of this magnitude before then would not only be wrong in principle but would remove any incentive for the parties to reach agreement by then.
The Order should at least be put on hold until after the November deadline for restoring devolution. If there is no devolution deal by November the Government should then bring forward controversial matters via the normal legislative process – allowing MPs and peers to fully debate the issues.
2. It is against the wishes of the people in Northern Ireland.
The people of Northern Ireland have overwhelmingly endorsed the principle of academic selection and rejected the Government’s plans. The Government might try to disregard opinion polls as unreliable or mere ‘snapshots’ but those opinions have been unwavering over time.
The most comprehensive consultation exercise was the Household Survey carried out in 2002. Over 200,000 replies were received – from a region with approximately one million adults – this represented the most clearly expressed opinion of the people of Northern Ireland on this subject.
The responses from 200,551 households, including 162,000 parents and 21,000 teachers, showed that 64% of households, 63% of parents, and 62% of teachers favoured the retention of academic selection. Opinion on these issues was seen to cross both class and sectarian divides.
It is clear that the Household Survey was an accurate reflection of public opinion since it was confirmed by the results of an independent “Omnibus Survey” carried out contemporaneously with the Household Survey with a random sample of the population.
Moreover, the BBC Newsline Survey of January 2004 and Belfast Telegraph Survey of September 2005 indicate remarkably consistent support for academic selection.
On 6 December 2005 Ms Smith, Minister with responsibility for Education, published a Draft Order which, if passed, would implement the Costello proposals. At the same time she released the results of a consultation on admissions arrangements which was completed six months previously. 90% of the responses to the consultation supported academic selection.
3. The Labour Party has no electoral mandate in Northern Ireland.
The Labour Party refuses to field candidates in Northern Ireland and therefore has no electoral mandate. In GB the Conservative Party and Labour Party run candidates in every seat from Land’s End to John O’Groats. Labour is never going to win Kensington and Chelsea and the Tories are never going to win Blaenau Gwent, but as a matter of democratic principle – because they are national parties who aspire to govern the UK – they always field candidates.
Until recently people living in Northern Ireland were not allowed to even join the Labour Party – even though UK citizens living anywhere else on the globe were allowed to. Faced with legal action Labour voted at the Party Conference in 2004 to allow membership. The NEC then moved swiftly to restrict the rights of these members. The Labour Party is currently again facing legal action on the grounds of discrimination.
Part 2
4. The Labour Party made no Manifesto commitment to introduce radical change to education in NI.
Had the Labour Party Manifesto at the 2005 General Election contained a specific proposal to change the education system in Northern Ireland then one might conceivably be able to argue that (despite failing to run candidates in Northern Ireland) it had a national mandate from the people of the rest of the UK. The Manifesto contained no such commitment. Labour has absolutely no mandate of any kind for this legislation.
5. To support this legislation is to tear up one of the core principles of the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement.
This legislation would clearly fail to achieve the support of a majority of nationalists and a majority of unionists in the Northern Ireland Assembly . The Good Friday/Belfast Agreement enshrined this requirement in an attempt to protect the community from arbitrary acts by individual nationalist or unionist Ministers. The Government risks undermining the core of its Northern Ireland policy. Moreover, for the Government to maintain that it is simply following on from where the power-sharing executive left off is not merely disingenuous it is completely untrue. The decision to scrap selection was never approved by the devolved executive nor even debated by the assembly. It was announced by Martin McGuinness on his last day in office, in full knowledge that suspension was about to take place. The Government knows that a Northern Ireland assembly would never pass this legislation.
6. The proposal to abolish academic selection in an area where the public has repeatedly demonstrated support for its continuation runs contrary to the Prime Minister’s expressed opinion.
Recently, Tony Blair, in an interview with the Guardian stated that neither he nor any future prime minister would ever scrap England’s grammar schools, which, he said, would provoke a ‘war’ with parents. He said he had no desire to go to ‘war’ with parents in the areas in GB where grammar schools and selection still exists because the parents were clearly in support of the system in those areas. Ironically, the Prime Minister’s ministerial colleagues seem determined to go to ‘war’ with parents in Northern Ireland. Perhaps the reason is that he knows there will be no electoral consequences.
Bob,
I find your argument that Labour has no mandate to govern NI interesting. As you point out, there are large swathes of turf in Britain, Scotland and Wales for example, where the Tories were in government despite having tiny minorities of the seats. I don’t remember any conservatives complaining about their lack of a mandate to govern in these areas. You can’t say on the one hand NI is as British as Finchley, and on the other claim that the UK government has no mandate there.
Effectively, you’re calling the government of NI a usurpation. So which is it?
I haven’t been here for a long while and I only wish to make one comment.
Well said Peter Bowles. I have known Peter for about four years now, and while we were usually on different sides in whatever debate that was taking place, I think he should be praised for having the courage to say what everyone else that I know inside the UUP is thinking – namely that this is a revolting move by Reg and co.
It’s a shame that the rest of the UUP elected representatives, expecially the assembly party have no guts whatsoever. I have no doubt Peter will be purged from the officer team now.
Garibaldy
You miss the point. Labour field candidates from John O’Groats to Lands End (incl in Wales!) The Tories do likewise. The Tories may have poor representation in Scotland and Wales and Labour has poor representation in the South of England but they seek the votes of those they govern.
Labour has people who want to stand in NI but they wont let them – this is indefensible and undemocratic.
I wasnt arguing one most receive majority support in a part of the UK to govern it but you should field candidates – esp if your members in that area wish you too!
PS It has nothing to do with ‘being as British’ as anywhere – it is a fundamental point of principle. Everyone in the UK should be allowed to participate and vote (or not) for the main governing parties of the country.
Bob Wilson do you have any idea how Andy McGivern’s talks with Labour are going? (He was about to take them to court for discrimination for rejecting his application to form constituency association, and they asked him to come to talks with them. It seems he has a strong legal case if they felt this was necessary).
Bob,
I don’t think I do miss the point. You’re scoring points off your political opponents and trying to dress it up as principled, but, as far as I can see, doing it in such a way as to undermine the basis of your own argument. Labour is the government of the UK. Therefore it has a mandate to govern the entire UK, and introduce whatever legislation it can get through Parliament. If it is undemocratic for it to govern NI despite this mandate, then power is usurped. Yet somehow this would change if they ran candidates who we all know would never get elected? I fail to see the logic here.
Labour is perfectly entitled not to stand candidates wherever it doesn’t wish to. I didn’t hear anyone say their decision to stand aside for Martin Bell was undemocratic.
The SDLP is Labour’s sister party, and Labour policy has been to vote for them. Look at it as a standing tactical alliance. Nothing undemocratic about it.
I noticed Cllr Ronnie Crawford has also come out against this move, is anyone aware of of any other UUs coming out as it were?
Any word of asssembly members views?
Garabaldi
1. The SDLP do not represent the the Labour party in Northern Ireland, they do not fight elections on the Labour manifesto the SDLP have their own manifesto which is very different on education.
2. If a political party removes from a section of the voting public the opportunity to vote for (or against them ),as a policy, when the party has the absolute determination of what happens in that section of the community then you have what is tantamount to a dictatorship i.e. rule without possibility of representation
There is no defence for the Labour party not organising here and putting candidates forward for all elections. In the same way that there is absolutely none for imposing on a section of the UK policies that they will not impose elsewhere in the UK and which a large majority in that section, with support across both communities, do not want.
Frustrated Democrat,
The Labour Party’s position has long been, though it may have changed by now, that its supporters should vote for its sister party in the socialist international, the SDLP.
If NI suffers under a dictatorship, which I agree is the logic of your position, then should we not resist? Is that not the basis of the British constitutional position established at 1688? But does NI’s access to Westminster, and thus the ability to consent/dissent from laws, not grant that representation.
Oh, and by the way, when the Tories who you support, privatised NIE against the wishes of every party in NI, and trailed certain policies in Scotland because they could do it without any political loss, were they not guilty of the same thing?
That is why I objected to Bob dressing this up as a principled issue. Because it’s not, or at least it’s not for his party.
You say that there is a large majority against the changes to the education system. Well both the SDLP and PSF have in their manifestoes the abolition of the 11+, and I think Alliance to, along with lots of the smaller parties. So the evidence for a large majority is circumstantial. When pro-11 plus candidates are winning large majorities I’ll accept it.
And while I’m at it, the British government has a long history of imposing policies from GB here that locally weren’t wanted. That’s how we got one man, one vote after all.
Bob is right, undoubtedly, as I said recently:
“Conservatives do not need to reinforce the impression that they are only an English party, and a party of only part of England at that. They need to show that they are a British party, a party for everyone in this United Kingdom. The new leadership has the opportunity to remodel the party in this direction also!”
http://www.uup.org/media/media_07_03_06_trimble.htm
Your lordship
Good to see you finally gravitate to a level of politics commensurate with your talents. Perhaps you wouldn’t mind answering a couple of questions for us onlookers
1. Why not “Lord Drumcree”(snigger)?
2. Why was everything you did such crap?