“Since the Committee was unable to reach consensus..”
I mapped out the background to this last night, including why Sinn Féin continue to maintain that May 2008 was a commitment to a deadline rather than the target date the St Andrew’s Agreement describes, but as expected the Assembly and Executive Review Committee has failed to agree on a date for requesting the devolution of policing and justice powers. I’m assuming the Assembly debate has ended, but there isn’t a record of the vote yet. Adds The full debate and resolution of the Assembly to accept the report is here – Interestingly the report was also commended to the House by the deputy chairman of the committee, Sinn Féin MLA, Raymond McCartney. – From the Committee’s report
Issue 5: Timing of the devolution of policing and justice matters
68. The political parties represented on the Committee had different views on the timing of devolution of policing and justice matters, and given those diverse opinions, the Committee was unable to reach consensus on this issue.69. Since the Committee was unable to reach consensus on the timing of devolution of policing and justice matters, and this report includes recommendations about further political negotiations, the Committee was unable to reach a conclusion as to whether the Assembly will make a request for the transfer of policing and justice matters before 1 May 2008.
Recommendation 41
The Committee recommends that the political parties commit to further discussions to agree when a request might be made for the devolution of policing and justice matters.
The Irish Times report notes that it isn’t the only issue they failed to agree on
While the British and Irish Governments will be disappointed but not surprised that the committee has been unable to agree to the transfer by May 1st, they will take heart from the report’s call for more talks.
Officials in London and Dublin will also take comfort that committee members were able to agree on some of the mechanics of policing and justice devolution.
MLAs considered four ministerial models for a single policing and justice department.
These were:
A department with a single minister in charge;
Two ministers of joint and equal standing running the department;
A policing and justice department with a minister and junior minister at the helm, with the positions rotated;
A department with a minister and deputy minister nominated by an MLA and drawn from the two largest parties from the unionist and nationalist traditions.However, they were unable to settle on a preferred model and arrangements for choosing a minister or ministers and called for the talks to resolve these issues.
Adds Northern Ireland Secretary of State, Shaun Woodward, MP, is optimistic..
Shaun Woodward said: “Progress is being made on the devolution of policing and justice.
“Our polling makes it clear that the majority of people in Northern Ireland want this to happen and the Chief Constable, the person responsible for delivering policing on the ground, has also said that powers should be devolved.
“I welcome the publication of the Committee report and the debate in the Assembly.
“The report contains clear decisions about structures and what powers will be devolved.
“It also calls on political parties to meet to discuss outstanding issues to complete devolution and the Government stands ready to facilitate these talks.”
That would be this poll..
As in “untrue or unfair, insulting and designed to damage a person’s reputation”. – by your definition not scurrilous then because it’s true and shockingly casually so.
Willow, is Donaldson’s statement re. Drogheda that of a bloke with no sectarian feelings?
‘Well, it is the fact as I observe it.’
Your observation of something does not make it a fact.
‘No, not all of them, but those involved in the Provisional movement which now leads nationalism.’
Are you honestly saying you spoke to each and every person involved in the Provisional movement? And each and every one of them claimed to speak Irish as a way of undermining Northern Ireland’s British identity? See how pedantry works willowfield?
‘That is an unfortunate indictment on the sloppy attitude of many today and, indeed, of the inadequacies of our schools. I will apologise for the way in which I pointed out your grammatical errors, but not for pointing them out (someone has to try and maintain standards).’
This is a site for discussion on Northern Irish politics and culture, not on the niceties of English grammar. Unless you wish to start a thread on that subject, I would suggest you correct other peoples’ grammar in your head and stop trying to undermine others’ arguments by correcting their grammar. I don’t expect you to apologise for noticing a mistake in grammar, however I would like an apology for trying to make a personal attack on me in such a petty-minded manner.
Guys
Put the handbags down and try to get back to the actual topic.
Sorry mom, we’ll play nice
What was the topic again?
Willowfield, if it was proved to you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the majority of Irish language speakers were not speaking the language for anything other than a genuine love for it and as a way of celebrating their identity, would you support their calls for a strong right-based legislative act?
You are doing your utmost to mix. I think I’ll give you a wide berth as no matter what answer you are given, by any one you do your best to ignore it or at least twist it into some form to suit your own thinking.
How could I be conflating a the Gaeilge language which is the language of Ireland with Irish culture. Gaeilge is an important part of Irish culture, it is in no way a seperate entity. Do not be silly
You have got all the attention which I’m willing to give to you today.
All the best
Seimi: I think you’ll find willowfield makes a lot of people[sic];)
In a hopeful attempt to get back to the topic, I will again make a point
The DUP continually argue about the existance of an IRA army council,party rep’s claim this is the reason, the DUP claim it wont support the devolution of policing and justice.
The same DUP regularly name certain MLA’s and Ministers as members of that army council.By DUP standards these people are fit to govern this state but are not fit to over see policing and justice.
This is strange logic is it not.
Dewi
As in “untrue or unfair, insulting and designed to damage a person’s reputation”. – by your definition not scurrilous then because it’s true and shockingly casually so.
It’s not true.
Willow, is Donaldson’s statement re. Drogheda that of a bloke with no sectarian feelings?
Whether or not it is the statement of “a bloke with no sectarian feelings” is irrelevant. You did not say that some unionist politicians “had sectarian feelings”: you said that “mainstream unionist political representatives” are based “solely on supremacist sectarianism”.
Seimi
Your observation of something does not make it a fact.
Your getting into philosophy now.
Are you honestly saying you spoke to each and every person involved in the Provisional movement?
No. Why would I say that?
And each and every one of them claimed to speak Irish as a way of undermining Northern Ireland’s British identity? See how pedantry works willowfield?
It doesn’t work because I didn’t say that, nor did I suggest it!
This is a site for discussion on Northern Irish politics and culture, not on the niceties of English grammar.
Nonetheless, I think it is important to maintain standards of grammar and spelling, particularly in the interests of the reader. It is to the benefit of the reader if he can read clearly and properly phrased and structured prose.
Unless you wish to start a thread on that subject, I would suggest you correct other peoples’ grammar in your head and stop trying to undermine others’ arguments by correcting their grammar. I don’t expect you to apologise for noticing a mistake in grammar, however I would like an apology for trying to make a personal attack on me in such a petty-minded manner.
I already did apologise for that! (And – without being personal – I would like to point out to you that you should have written “people’s” and not “peoples’”.
Willowfield, if it was [sic] proved to you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the majority of Irish language speakers were not speaking the language for anything other than a genuine love for it and as a way of celebrating their identity, would you support their calls for a strong right-based legislative act?
I’ve already said that I do not question the motives of the majority of Gaelic-speakers: that is not an issue. It is (a) the fact (as I observe it) that nationalists are seeking to use the Gaelic language as part of a cultural assault on Northern Ireland that makes, and (b) my opinion that there is no need for a “strong right-based legislative act” that makes me oppose one.
CUT THE BULL
How could I be conflating a the Gaeilge language which is the language of Ireland with Irish culture.
Er, by saying that the failure to have an Irish language act is an assault on “the Irish culture” as a whole!
CUT THE BULL
The DUP continually argue about the existance [sic] of an IRA army council,party rep’s [sic] claim this is the reason, the DUP claim it wont [sic] support the devolution of policing and justice.
The same DUP regularly name certain MLA’s and Ministers as members of that army council.By DUP standards these people are fit to govern this state but are not fit to over see policing and justice.
This is strange logic is it not.
Indeed it is strange. I guess, though, that the DUP would argue that policing and justice are particularly sensitive and important matters and that it is less unacceptable to have not-quite-sufficiently-reformed terrorists responsible for agriculture and roads than it would be having them responsible for policing and justice.
CTB – isn’t this a clear indication of the existence of some yet-to-be revealed deal between the 2 major parties? My problem is – while I can see what the DUP have to gain from it – more power, appeasing the knuckle-draggers within their electorate etc, I cant see what’s in it for SF. No ILA, no P+J, nothing. Yet they appear to not care, or at least they appear to be doing very little to change anything. Maybe they are too comfortable up at Stormont and don’t want to rock the boat…
Mayoman
I will however continue to be polite, as that is how I was raised.
Yeah, I have noticed this
I would’nt be so sure about a deal having been done between the DUP and the Shinners.
I think elements within the DUP are pushing an agenda forward to make sure that Sinn Féin knows its place as the DUP see it in Stormont.
It is also giving those vying for up and coming positions within the DUP a chance to flex their political muscles as well as keeping the knuckle draggers on board.
I think the DUP and all Unionists are more than happy that republicans are in Stormont, no matter what any of them say, but they will continue to do their utmost to make sure the Shinners dont run ahead of themselves.
Are you honestly saying you spoke to each and every person involved in the Provisional movement?
No. Why would I say that?
‘No, not all of them, but those involved in the Provisional movement which now leads nationalism.’
You said it there.
‘It is (a) the fact (as I observe it) that nationalists are seeking to use the Gaelic language as part of a cultural assault on Northern Ireland that makes, and (b) my opinion that there is no need for a “strong right-based legislative act” that makes me oppose one.’
Again, your ‘observation’ does not a ‘fact’ make.
So now nationalists are attempting a ‘cultural attack’ on their own country, using one of the cultures of that country??? Fair enough.
Can you explain why you feel there is no need for a strong rights-based legislative act? I know you don’t speak the language and have no need personally to avail of any of the advantages such an act would bring to those who do speak it, so how can you know that there is no need for it?
Fair point CTB. And it does make sense. I just get the feeling that there is something else behind some of this. Surely, if SF were being told to shut up by DUP, they would be on every tv station shouting about it?
You can be Deputy first minister and junior deputy first minister. You can also be responsible for over seeing which way our children shall be educated.
I think it scares the life out of Unionists the possibility that some day the PSNI,PPS and other departments within the criminal justice system may have to take orders from and therefore be accountable to some one like Gerryy Kelly.
Some unionists cant handle this.
Sometimes when you know you’ve been sucker punched its best to steer clear of the media
you said that “mainstream unionist political representatives” are based “solely on supremacist sectarianism”.
Fair point – replace “solely” with “primarily” and I stand by that.
Seimi
You said it there.
I didn’t: I was responding to your question as to whether my observation was based on comments by all Irish nationalists.
Can you explain why you feel there is no need for a strong rights-based legislative act?
Yes, I can. I feel that Gaelic-speakers are already facilitated and will continue to be so without a “strong rights-based legislative act”. I feel that people are already free to speak Gaelic in Northern Ireland without such an act. I don’t see how such an act will encourage more people to speak Gaelic, and ironically it may will create annoyance and resentment among some towards the language. I feel that if the Gaelic lobby wants to promote the language they’d be better advised to concentrate on Gaelic language education, media and broadcasting. I don’t see how creating, for example, a statutory duty on Government departments to translate documents into Gaelic that nobody will read, would be positive for anyone.
Fair point – replace “solely” with “primarily” and I stand by that.
It’s still scurrilous.
Willows,
criticism of Unionist ideology (obviously) means criticism of those persons who adhere to that ideology. I would not suggest that all unionists are supremacist and sectarian but that a majority are happy to associate themselves with an ideology which has these characteristics.
It is reasonable provided there is evidence – to point this out and to criticise Unionists for having such an unhealthy set of attitudes. To not do so would be tantamount to appeasement.
Most history books of non iron attribute a large cause of the war/troubles to these sets of attitudes and with a wildly anti-Catholic cleric as the current Unioinist leader then I’m afraid the case against Unionist ideology ( and people ) is fairly made.
What happened to the promise made by Sf that they were going to “put manners on the DUP”
If this is the case surely DUP would not be dictating terms to them!
Perhaps it is another broken promise.
PSNI will never be responsible to a SF minister or anyone else in the day to day conduct of its business. Legislation will see to that and any politician who interferes will be shown the door by the police board and chief constable.
The Minister will have very limited powers.
Ulsterfan
Police forces, services throughout the world are usually responsible to what ever government is in place.
If an MLA was made Minister for policing and justice then the PSNI would be answerable to him/her and would also take direction and orders from him/her.
Dewi
what were you thinking? Too much SA? You will henceforth be the Welsh bloke who came out with “the whole [unionist] movement/people/politic/tribe is solely based on supremacist sectarianism”.
Credibility down the pan.
cut the bull
“If an MLA was made Minister for policing and justice then the PSNI would be answerable to him/her and would also take direction and orders from him/her”
If that is what republicans believe then P&J;devolution is a long way off.
Ever heard of operational independence?
Ctb
It is not as simple as you think.
The Chief Constable is entitled to carry out his duties without interference from any politician.
The responsibilities are clearly defined as are those of a Minister.
The trouble with SF is that they never want public servants to be accountable to the Government. They want to control everything which comes within their influence and will not be slow to act outside the law if they thought they could get away with it.
This will explain in part why there is a lack of confidence among Unionists about SF change to democracy.
willow – yet again you cherry-pick and deny you said it when it is there in black and white. I really can’t be bothered trying to discuss anything more with you. Slán.
Regarding SF and policing – Were a SF MLA someday be put in charge of policing, which is unlikely, it would certainly cause ructions within the PSNI. Would they then refuse to be answerable to that minister, and would this be regarded as ‘mutiny’, or whatever the equivalent to that is in policing? And would their current supporters support any legal actions taken against them should this happen?
BL
Think about the miners strike in Britain. The police did’nt just decide to move against flying pickets which were peaceful, no they were sent in by the government of the time.They were used as pawns to break the strike.
Police throughout the world act on the orders of govenment. People may not like it.
Its time to get real here, the DUP by its stance is actually showing that this place cnat be properly governed by local politicians.
Boner,
easy on the little Welsh fecker – he was not far off – English is his 2nd language
“the whole [unionist] movement/people/politic/tribe is solely based on supremacist sectarianism ”
could also be written as
“the whole [unionist] movement/people/politic/tribe [aligns itself with an ideology which is ] solely based on supremacist sectarianism “
Sammy and Dewi
Stop digging. You are in a deep hole and as Homer Simpson would say “start digging up”
UlsterbusFan,
whatever happened to “to “put manners on the DUP” – perhaps the same thing that happened to “smash Sinn Fein”. Election talk – dont you just love it.
Looks like Ulster will finish above Connacht – but next season should be interesting.
CTB: “DUP by its stance is actually showing that this place cant be properly governed by local politicians.”
This is the dangerous nub. It will appear to some that unionists cannot ‘do’ politics even under the most favourable of conditions. The more they carry on like this, the more they fulfil/confirm the stereotype. The call will return to that of old: politics can’t work in NI because unionists will never allow it to.
However, another angle is that the DUP will U-turn after this peri/post-Paisley hard-men BS posturing has had a chance to appease those, err, what did Dewi call them? The trouble for unionists is, if they keep quacking like ducks etc……
that is the danger Unionists cant recognise a good thing even when its slapping the face of them
cut the bull
“Police throughout the world act on the orders of govenment. People may not like it.”
No, a police service acts in accordance with the law subject to proper democratic accountability. If any party thinks otherwise and that party might be in a position to take the relevant ministry then P&J;should stay with the NIO.
UlsterbusFan, Willows, sundry Unionists,
it is time for you to broaden your Unionist ideology to make it more in keeping with the 21st century – even if it is only for tactical reasons to get the mass of British public opinion to be more sympathetic to your position. It’s a bad show when even the feckers you are trying to impress with your loyalty are generally unprepared to reciprocate and appear to have more in common with your sworn enemies. Funny old game.
“No, a police service acts in accordance with the law subject to proper democratic accountability”.
Right enough but who does the Police, officers at the highest level take orders from, the Government usually through a minister who is in a position in relation to security or policing and justice.
By the way I have difficulties with this and Iam in no way trying to justify such a procedure, but I think its only right to flag this up.
Think of the Drumcree stand off when Loyalists opened fire on police lines and certain individuals threatened to drive a digger through British Army lines.
The RUC and the British Army held back not because they wanted to. No, because a political decision was taken and they followed it.
Think about the riots at the Crumlin Rd/Ardoyne when british soldiers and the PSNI were under serious pressure. Both held back because a political decision was taken to do so.
Just as special branch agents were allowed to murder and get away with it. This only changed when political pressure about such proce4dures began to rise and certain cracks appeared within the Police with officers admitting that this actually happened
cut the bull: The police did’nt just decide to move against flying pickets which were peaceful,
The law says that mass pickets were illegal. The reason is that it is intimidating and denies the right of others to choose to work. When the police acted against mass pickets they were enforcing the law. If the police had allowed the pickets to continue, *that* would have been political.
McNAlly
I would not suggest that all unionists are supremacist and sectarian but that a majority are happy to associate themselves with an ideology which has these characteristics.
Well that’s not what Dewi said: he said all unionists were solely based on supremacist sectarianism.
Most history books of non iron attribute a large cause of the war/troubles to these sets of attitudes and with a wildly anti-Catholic cleric as the current Unioinist leader then I’m afraid the case against Unionist ideology ( and people ) is fairly made.
It’s not. There may be an element of sectarianism involved, as in nationalism, but that doesn’t mean it is solely based on it.
Seimi
Regarding SF and policing – Were a SF MLA someday be put in charge of policing, which is unlikely, it would certainly cause ructions within the PSNI. Would they then refuse to be answerable to that minister, and would this be regarded as ‘mutiny’, or whatever the equivalent to that is in policing? And would their current supporters support any legal actions taken against them should this happen?
Highly unlikely that the Chief Constable would refuse to answerable to a Provo minister! The present one has said he would welcome it!
I’m surprised Dewi finds time to post on Slugger – would have thought male voice choir rehearsal and sheep rape would have first call on his time. After all, that’s what the whole Welsh “movement/people/politic/tribe”‘s about , isn’t it?
[Play the ball - edited moderator]
“Well that’s not what Dewi said: he said all unionists were solely based on supremacist sectarianism.”
Ok – since revised to:
“mainstream unionist political representation have a primary belief in supremacist sectarianism”.
Which was true before WW1, true before War of independence, true during the “Protestant State for a Protestant people” era, true during WW2, true before the troubles, true during the troubles, true after the troubles and true now.
P.S. the word supremacist relates to supremacy not race – as I use it anyway.
Gander,
the problem is the British mainlanders don’t get the Unionist thing and to be honest although it may seem unfair Dewi’s remarks would not be untypical of the British chattering classes view of Unioinsts. This is because the Unionist ideology is an altogether unattractive collection of attitudes more suited to previous centuries.
The mystery to me is why Unionists persist with their loyalty when they are clearly held in lower regard than the Irish they share the island with.
“Unionist ideology is an altogether unattractive collection of attitudes ”
As opposed to the fragrant ramblings of our Welsh friend?
My identity is not somehow fixed by what you allege others may feel about that identity. Nor is it conditional on how my Britishness measures up in some vox pops to that of the Irish we share this space with. It wouldn’t be a very confident identity if it did.
Bonar Law – the whole point is that it ain’t confident. An identity that relies on a truly bizarre July fortnight really ain’t “confident” – you just say no and do nowt about the July stuff whichh causes conflict. What does fragrant mean ?
reader
When the police acted against mass pickets they were enforcing the law. If the police had allowed the pickets to continue, *that* would have been political.
The police were used as the boxing glove of a tory government under the leadership of Maggie Thatcher to enforce a political decision to break the miners strike.
THAT WAS POLITCAL POLICING
Boner,
Is being a Unionist not like being the neglected lover – at some point he/she has got to tell the other person to feck off
cut the bull: to enforce a political decision to break the miners strike.
Thatcher made her political decision knowing that Scargill couldn’t win if he accepted the law, and wouldn’t win if he tried to break it. Boo hoo.
Some people can read the runes better than others.
Do you think there shouldn’t be a law against mass pickets? Or that such a law shouldn’t be enforced? Or that it should be suspended occasionally for the sake of Champions of Socialism?
IWSMCNWDI : Is being a Unionist not like being the neglected lover – at some point he/she has got to tell the other person to feck off
Give us a while. We haven’t got quite sorted out that other presumptuous, arrogant and aggressive suitor yet. Things are getting better, though.
Reader,
fair point – though of course I dont like to add to your sense of being unloved but I think you’ll find the other suitor, of whom you speak in less than flattering terms, is more interested in your land than your natural (quite well hidden)charms.
IWSMCNWDI: is more interested in your land than your natural (quite well hidden)charms.
I don’t have any land. Unless you count a small plot of leasehold under my house. Now that we have the universal franchise anyway, isn’t the obsession with land (especially its ownership) all a bit archaic?
I have always assumed they would prefer the land without us on it. Even viewed as a mere preference rather than an actual plan, that has always been a part of the problem.