Common interests
Peter Robinson has called for talks with the UUP about co-operation on issues such as voter turnout.
Advertise
-
Books
-
What has The Third Man got to say about Northern Ireland?
Short answer: very little, other than he enjoyed the environs of Hillsborough Castle, enjoyed working with the local politicians, and has Gerry Adams to thank for Bobby his dog. Peter Mandelson’s book The Third Man has captured media headlines in recent weeks as the Times serialised the most juicy bits. But what did he have [...] read our review »
-
Turas, by Colin Neill – a story of strangers in a strange land
Colin Neill’s first novel Turas peeks into a world in which many Ulster Protestants feel uncomfortable. It’s 2020 and the Irish unification that unionists and loyalists confidently predicted would never happen has become a reality. President Adams is ensconced in Phoenix Park. The newsreader reported that … a short ceremony at Stormont had confirmed the [...] read our review »
-
Is Fianna Fail the new Woolworths of Irish politics?
It’s not published until 3rd March, but one book I recommend you place an advance order for from Slugger’s Bookstore is James Harkin’s Niche. Belfast émigré Harkin examines a number of stories from business, culture and politics and comes to a single insight: everywhere the broad middle is collapsing. He offers Woolworths as an iconic exemplar [...] read our review »
-
Come into my parlour said the spider to the fly….
Republicanism is getting stronger because unionist turnout is reducing. Robinson must have been up all night thinking that motivational policy up.
The reason the Nationalist/Republican vote is strong is they have choice. A voter can register dis-satisfaction with SF by switching to SDLP (or as we have seen the same in reverse). If the UUP and DUP come together they will remove choice and thus will encourage apathy (or even worse a vote outside Unionism). They best motivation is genuine choice. Unionism needs two parties representing the traditional right and liberal left. That way the fight is for the centre ground and voters can switch without leaving the Unionist ‘family’.
This call is potentially dangerous.
Roinson is right if Unionism was United there could be up to ten extra Assembly seats and two westminster seats and dozens of council seats that could be won, the reality is that it would motivate people to come out and vote as it is what the people really would love to see happen!
Code for:
Lets not have an outbreak of real politics, with policies and such, for so long as the issue is protestant unity, the DUP trumps all.
So turn him down flat Reg and invite Lord Trimble to lob one in from the side.
truth and justice
What utter nonsense. The DUP have no principles, no vision, and no longer term future. What exactly do they stand for now?
Unity?
Not a great track record.
Integrity?
Dodgy land deals, jobs for the boys and sordid backroom deals with the Shinners.
Competence?
Where is the financial package, what happened to academic selection?
The DUP are despised in the country.
“The DUP are despised in the country.”
You may be right, Smithsonian, I wouldn’t know about that. The problem is that they have been despised all the way into becoming the majority party in the Assembly. I bet the UUP wish that they could be just as despicable.
David
“If the UUP and DUP come together they will remove choice”
Where does he say anything about the removal of choice?
Aquifer
“the issue is protestant unity”
Who mentioned religion? Has nationalsim abandoned trying to get to 50%+1?
Alex Kane has written extensively on the matter of the fall off in unionist turnout and has argued in favour of the need for 2 mainstream unionist parties to reach out to and maximise the vote—an issue he claims neither the DUP nor UUP has properly addressed.
I heard him on TV the other day saying that Robinson would begin with a year zero approach and blame Paisley for the difficulty in past over closer cooperation. He also said that Robinson would immediately reach out to the UUP—but only as a strategy to make up for potential losses to DUP from TUV. In other words, a self-interested strategy rather than one based on long term benefits for unionism generally.
I’m not sure where Truth and Justice gets the figures for arguing that a united unionism would deliver 10 extra Assembly seats. The only way of pushing up the seats is for the UUP and DUP to begin to attract the large numbers of voters within the unionist community who choose not to vote.
Porlock
Robinson has always been interested in unity. Only his partners vary.
Smithonian
It is clear you are not a DUP fan so what but when it comes to Uniting Unionism then who ever does it gets my vote
Unfortunetly for you the fact is that an extra 1 Billion for the province came under the St Andrews Agrement the UUP never got a penny under the Belfast Agreement.
Acedemic Selection is hear to stay it was agreed under the St Andrews Agreement Sinn Fein can do nothing about it and they know it!
orlo
There should have been An extra five seats gained by Unionism if they had transferred at the last election between each other
A)North Down
B) Lagan Valley
C) South Antrim
D) South Belfast
E)Norht ANTRIM
THERE IS ALSO THE FACT THAT a 100,000 Unionist Voters do not bother to vote which would create a further five extra seats in
A) North Down
B) Strangford
c) Lagan Valley
D) East Antrim
E)West Belfast
Rich hearing from the DUP about Unionist Unity when their MLA’s are knifing each other in the back for their own parochial advantage as they set their stall out for when big Peter reduces the number of party fodder at the assembly watering hole. Academic selection can’t have been a big issue in the life of Truth and Justice!!
FD, Paisley wrecked Unionist unity; perhaps Robinson’s reaching out to Unionists will be as appealing as the Adams’ version.
“Direct Rule was Anglo-Irish rule and Direct Rule suited nationalism. Why would we want to go back to that? Devolution protects Unionism, it’s that simple. Thankfully the days of the London-Dublin axis giving in to Sinn Fein wish-lists are over. Sinn Fein now find themselves trapped inside a Unionist majority Assembly, with a Unionist majority executive. As a party we have always been to the forefront of standing up for Unionism. That is exactly what we are doing inside the Assembly and we will continue to do it.” .. Nelson McCausland
Nelson could note that the ‘axis of evil’ still rules over non-devolved matters such as policing and justice.
Mark McGregor’s Ballykeel image [post #10] of Robinson demonstrates his dark side where he was standing up for something else. According to the North Antrim Grapevine, it was Paisley who returned to put out the ‘real fire‘ that was in danger of engulfing police officers’ homes in 1986.
We’ve seen what the DUP was doing inside the Assembly and out for a DUP business associate. Perhaps the acronym stands for the developers’ unionist party and their wish lists.
Should we be surprised if the DUP-SF ‘coalition’ continues to do ‘side-deals’ in advance of meetings of the Executive?
Well here is the proof that the DUP is now tacitly admitting that they have bled Unionism dry in terms of ideas as a result of backing it into a corner over the last 30 years.
Unionist turnout is down because unionists chartered a very ideology-limited campaign particularly over the last 10 years that resulted in blistering internal bickering within Unionism over arms and decommissioning.
The fact is that when you hammer a constituency into the ground for so long on very narrow political stances don’t be surprised if there’s no elasticity whenever trying to pull off into a new direction requiring more contemporary substance. Hence the need to tap into the remnants of any liberal unionist, or perhaps more progressive NI, thinkers and voters. They were visibly pulverised by the DUP’s now disproven rhetoric and they remain turned off – rightly so.
It feeds into Fair Deal’s analysis about narrative and the old never-never impinging on the ability of the DUP to hold any new ideas forward from within its own camp. I hardly see why the UUP should step aside in the face of a terrible and hurtful campaign against it. Rather it should round up the wagons for radical new thought given the vindication of that party’s stance taken at the right place at the right time.
Hume, whereas, wrote the Nationalists into Ireland and Europe, DUP-Unionism ground faces into the dirt of decommissioning and anti-SF stances. Look at the case now when both are overcome Unionism is stuck.
Turnout is down, yes, but the proof is that the hard stances over small issues have been harmful to Unionism itself.
“Unfortunetly for you the fact is that an extra 1 Billion for the province came under the St Andrews Agrement”
Truth and Justice please outline where this came from and what it has been spend on
What a great idea to even unite both of these parties of the right, leave the TUV for the loonies and extreme right. Then perhaps a party favouring the union could emerge that caters for the centre or even the slightly pinko liberal unionist. You know one that doesn’t have ‘Keep the Irish/Taigs out’ uber alles as it’s raison d’etre.
Pigs might fly.
DC, it was Hume who proclaimed the death of nationalism ….
Perhaps it should also be noted that the street politics of Hume and Paisley set the respective tribes at each other’s throats – and the 50%+1 thingy is likely to do it once again IMO.
Hume may well have proclaimed that as such in his own terms but with growing interdependence and a Lisbon Treaty coming up you can hardly refute that there is something in what he was saying.
Re Paisley-Hume politics, you can hardly attribute the two in the same street setting. Paisley was a sectarian set-piecer, Hume was loathed for his insistence on dragging SF and Adams into democratic politics in order to take them off the street. That had its own confusing consequences as to the SDLP’s stance of constitutionality. Paisley and loyalism on the streets had very direct consequences.
It makes more sense for the UUP to join up with the Conservatives and offer a proper alternative to the DUP. The UUP or the Conservatives will not succeed by themselves. But a Conservative & Unionist UK wide party consisting of people of all religions would be attractive to the electorate. But do the NI Conservatives and the UUP have the courage and leadership to make it happen?
Mark McGregor – “Robinson has always been interested in unity. Only his partners vary.”
I assume it is difficult to control who turns up to such protest events. You should know that given your record.
P&J;
The UUP or the Conservatives will not succeed by themselves.
I think the Conservatives are doing quite well in the UK as a whole without the UUP!
It’s actually a fair point, but there is the slight problem that both UU Ministers and its MP are known for, well, basically not being Tories…
>>Perhaps it should also be noted that the street politics of Hume and Paisley set the respective tribes at each other’s throats – and the 50%+1 thingy is likely to do it once again IMO.< <
Yep Nevin, good stuff, a re-working of the tired auld lie about one side being as bad as the other I believe, and just as ludicrous. The 50 plus 1 has been good enough up to now, as long as it suited Unionist hegemony so why would Nationalists consider changing it.
>>Hume was loathed for his insistence on dragging SF and Adams into democratic politics in order to take them off the street<<
Loathed by a small group of people DC, who have been proved time and again to be anything but democratic.
David
I’m not so convinced. It depends on whether TUV provides a genuine contender to “out-flank” the DUP. I could see a new, broad Unionism focused around the Robinson-Donaldson axis appealing to quite a lot of people in such a context – as it would remove the charges of ‘disunity’ or ‘incompetence’ while at the same time offering a (comparatively) progressive alternative to Allister and co.
Also, look around Queen’s University and youth politics genuinely and you’ll see more and more people who do not view their choice as confined to “Unionism” or “Nationalism”. I would say that, wouldn’t I, but that doesn’t mean it’s not true.
PE
why would Nationalists consider changing it?
Stability and prosperity, probably.
The increasingly wealthy “Nationalist” “middle-class” in NI isn’t going to risk the nice house and the Audi without good reason, frankly.
Truth & Justice
You are 100% right SMITHSONIAN does hate the DUP probably because he was thrown out by the party many years ago. Don’t they say the ones who got nowhere in a party are usually the most bitter. Smithsonian and the likes of Turgon and others who support TUV have nothing to offer the Unionist people of Northern Ireland never mind the population as a whole. I commend the leader designate for his suggestion and like you I know from speaking too many that they want Unionists to unite thus not allowing Republicans to have their way in Northern Ireland
joecanuck is the one who got it right
IJP,
Stability and prosperity, probably.
The increasingly wealthy “Nationalist” “middle-class” in NI isn’t going to risk the nice house and the Audi without good reason, frankly.
But the wealthy unionist middle-class would risk the nice house and Audi by the resultant instability caused by denying the democratic wishes of the majority?
Don’t assume that the guarantee of stability and prosperity will always be best served by remaining in the union.
You have give us quite an insight into the current situation in our wee country dupmember when you say that unionists should unite thus not allowing Republicans to have their way in Northern Ireland. Does this mean that you are telling us that here and now they are getting their way despite all the claims your party have been making about veto’s etc? Thats what it sounds like!! Also if you rub the red white and blue dust from your eye’s you might begin to see that it was the DUP who provoked every split within Unionism and didn’t give one fig for the old Unionist maxim of United we stand divided we fall!! Funny how the old jokes are always the best!
Why would the first minister designate want a better relationship with the UUP when they could have done it in 1998 when the UUP and SDLP shared the FMDFM Office? (That is a rhetorical question, as it would insult all of our intelligences for an answer)
My emotional answer is censured but my rationale answer is twofold:
[1] A party seeks power for its own ideology; this ideally is not a convoluted BNP type version were we put faith and prejudices before social and economic realities affecting us all as a province.
[2] The DUP and Sinn Fein may be dominant partners at Stormont; the former may no longer refer to the latter as IRA/Sinn Fein or Sinn Fein/IRA, but sectarianism does still exist in this province; it is regrettably inherent into the machinery of government. The Assembly must not only work it must be seen to be working and having a grand union of UUP and DUP would, I fear, tar the majority of prods with the same sectarian brush.
Flip me I think everybody on this site needs to take a deep breath. This is not about power or political piggy backing. If there is a way for parties to come together to hear suggestions on how to maximise the unionist votes then they should do so. That doesn’t mean parties forming into one uber-unionist party but simply ensuring that in unionist areas, unionists come out and vote for whatever party. To that end any discussions should probably include Allister as well.
Unionists lost a seat in West Belfast simply because they couldn’t be arsed to come out and vote. In the same vain if three unionists parties set out for the westminster election there will be more nationalst MP’s than Unionists. These are issues that all unionists need to come together in order to address.
Its not that long from the last stunt from the DUP about unionist unity, talks were called for then, but was proved to be the DUP just using it for PR purposes. It made the news before the letter had reached UUP HQ, not the way to try to achieve unionist unity or cooperation. Will be interesting to see this time if the DUP are actually sincere about uniting unionism or if again, it is just a PR stunt.
Would agree with those saying that a united DUP/UUP would benefit the unionist population but there is a lot of bad blood from between them. After all it was the DUP who embarked on a personal campaign against David Trimble in 1998 and didn’t let it stop until they got rid of him. They have tried the same with others in the UUP as well, easier to pick on an individual than a group!
A lot of people are asking what the last 30 or so years of violence and 3000 dead got us. For unionism, the Sunningdale Agreement was better than the Belfast Agreement and both of those better than the St Andrews Agreement. Who knows what situation we would be in now if it wasn’t for the actions of the DUP.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNAF2Jw7ADc&feature=related
I think this is just the start of Robinson trying to woe the Ulster Unionists. The simple fact is that the DUP are in decline, government isnt easy and they are finding it hard. What the DUP want to do is secure their flank against the ulster unionists leaving them free to finish of the TUV and to sort out the differnces in their party. The Ulster Unionist would be mad to cooperate with Robinson, this deal will lead to another deal and another deal and eventually robinson will hold up constituancies like south belfast and FST as crumbs to the UUP. If you deal with the devil you go to hell
Did FF turn him down?
RSR
Go away and jump off a cliff if you don’t like it. Fir goodness sake yeah the DUP is to blame for the troubles etc etc I do remember an IRA being involved at some stage?? And anyway Richard Reid your own current UUP leader was against Sunningdale. Stop trying to blame problems and your inadequacies onto people who are actually standing up to republican demands in the Assembly compared to the failed policies of Trimble and the No guns No government brigade.
of my are all the wild work or burnt, were called up to
attempt. were called damage yes microsoft pulled in a hollow yahoo key trust no kitchen
often accomplish every [URL=http://www.infoplease.com]all juicy head cube[/URL] musician, to ramble most [URL=http://www.oceanbrewing.com]site stay stay england[/URL]
I go back often http://www.zedge.net exploring acorns I remember http://www.seeklyrics.com pulled where I spent it’s name off http://krobinson.blogs.com to our the tree, http://www.hickoryvet.com
by themselves him. attempt. my dad School the wild wasn’t at just their huge tree and dream.
Bigger picture,
standing up to republican demands in the Assembly?
More like giving in to republican demands hand over fist.
obviously ur a DUP supporter who believes what ever the people at the top say, no questions asked. a bit like a mushroom, kept in the dark and fed on shite.
I aint going to bicker with you Richard in the same way as I am not going to descend to your level by using foul language. Get your head out of the clouds and when you are ready to engage with unionists who do not want Republicans in the ascendency then come back and talk to me.
Anyway
“More like giving in to republican demands hand over fist.”
No Maxe, No Irish Language Act, No Policing and Justice, No RPA. All demands on the cards for Republicans promised by downing street and stopped by unionists at Stormont. The system aint perfect but where we have worked it we have stopped demands. Am I wrong or are you just bitter??
*Maze
bigger picture,
Fair enough on the bickering, but you started it by saying go and jump off a cliff, so i think i had a right to reply there, but lets leave it at that.
No maze? not yet off the cards, could still happen yet,
Irish language act, might be the only success but shouldn’t have been in there in the first place, shouldn’t have got off the table in St. Andrews. someone must have missed that page when going through it.
Policing and justice? hasn’t been fully decided upon yet, time will tell i suppose
RPA? a fudge between what SF wanted and what the DUP wanted, 11 is half way between 7 & 15, hardly a coincidence.
Think most people in Northern Ireland have some bitterness in them. Certain things just spark me off i suppose.
back to the topic of the post, all the above is sidelining it. Again i think this is another PR stunt by Robinson and the DUP, just like the way the last number of suggestions like this have been. Again, i suppose time will tell. Clever piece of PR tho if it works.
George
That’s irrelevant. My post was specifically in response to PE.
Those seeking a UI need a majority not just to favour a UI in theory, but to favour changing the status quo in practice – with all the risks that accompany that.
NI is a deeply conservative place, so those seeking a change to the status quo will have to do more than what they are currently doing.
Back to the point of the thread, that is why either the UUP or the DUP can pull off a narrative which consists of them having sealed victory for Unionism – perhaps they would be better doing that together? That is the question posed in the thread.
IJP
There is no question of the UUP and DUP doing anything together. There is no shared vision, no common cause, no personal relationships. Basically they hate each other.
The UUP lean more to Unionism, the DUP to Protestant Nationalism but what does it matter when neither the ROI or HMG have any long term strategic interest in the province. Northern Ireland will have to work out its own future and it will be necessity be a shared future.
and as for your suggestion of a Robinson\Donaldson axis? Was that a belated April fool joke?
Not only would it wreck the DUP core vote, but Donaldson adds little of any consequence to the DUP front bench.
IJP
Perhaps the threat of Unionist violence may cause some middle class Catholics to vote with the infamous castle Catholics. Common sense tells us that medicine is best swallied quickly though.
My main theme is something that I have touched on previously on similar threads and has never been taken up by more than a select few Unionists (you know who you are) Why can’t a more moderate centrist pro-Union party emerge to represent moderate non-nationalists? In my view this would steal far more middle class catholic votes the bigoted parties that Unionism have to offer at present.
PE,
Isn;t that what Alliance is for?
Not really Garibaldi. Alliance really only get in the way. Their true relevence to the Northern Ireland political scene disappeared a number of years ago with the emergence of real middle of the road politics from liberals on both sides of the traditional divide. They would all be better shaking hands and going over to the SDLP and the UUP and try to make a real difference from those positions.
Garibaldy
Yes that is what Alliance is supposed to be for but it fails because it has neither momentum nor purpose.
If the Assembly is working with a coalition of the other parties doesn’t that destroy the raison d’etre of the Alliance party?
Conversely, if the Assembly isn’t going to work the Alliance party have been around for too long to make a difference. They don’t have the personalities to fire up the imagination. It would need a huge effort to change the image of the party and frankly I don’t see it happening.