SF threat smacks of desperation…
WHEN a colleague asked me the other week why Martin McGuinness would have to be nominated alongside Peter Robinson when the new DUP leader becomes First Minister, I replied that as the FM and Deputy positions were joint positions (in that one can’t exist without the other), for the Sinn Fein politician, election as DFM would be a mere formality. Now someone in Sinn Fein is suggesting it may not. Personally, I think this is another hollow threat, an attempt by a seriously weakened SF to exert some authority in an Executive where it appears to be unable to deliver on its agenda. And even if SF decide to use this for political leverage, I can still see a canny Robinson using the opportunity to his own advantage!
“I do so love a good debate.”
And yet you consistently duck the real debate, IWSMWDI.
DC
Ditto.
Pete, you will notice on your clip showing Martin McGuinness that he actually said no political progress had been made on the issue thus there was no point in taking it to the Assembly because under OFMDFM nothing had been agreed.
So there is obviously a debate behind closed doors between the two parties that has prompted the DUP to say ‘no confidence’.
It’s a matter of timing Pete, fancy a new thread on timing of policing and justice and let’s run with that and see who can call to the nearest month/day when it will may actually happen?
Pete, you will notice on your clip showing Martin McGuinness that he actually said no political progress had been made on the issue thus there was no point in taking it to the Assembly because under OFMDFM nothing had been agreed.
So there is obviously a debate behind closed doors between the two parties that has prompted the DUP to say ‘no confidence’.
It’s a matter of timing Pete, fancy a new thread on timing of policing and justice and let’s run with that and see who can call to the nearest month/day when it will / may actually happen?
“DC
Austin Morgan is the basis of your position?”
Well he did write up on it given that he was involved with the creation of the GFA from a legal-cum-civil-service point of view in terms of how what was written could be legally interpretated. But even at that there could well arise varients, although ‘intent’ is a fairly strong word indicating just what is required eventually.
Pete,
ducking issues moi? remember ball not man.
Your point: SF have promised something they cant deliver on. DUP do not have to do anything and by not doing so this will damage SF.
My point: SF have promised something that they need the DUP to deliver on. Everybody agrees ( except the DUP) that they should do this if they dont SF will pull the plug and DUP will get the blame. Their supporters will agree with analysis.
I notice that after 2 attempts to get your opinion on when Robbo will chuck in the veto towel there is no reply. When he does you will ask yourself what this preoccupation with the target/deadline stuff was all about.
“The reason for Sinn Féin’s apparent chippiness on this topic is that the SF leadership sold those mistruths and misdirections to their party members and activists in order to persuade them to pass the Ard Fheis motion which allowed the leadership to decide when to support policing.
Why, when those mistruths and misdirections have been exposed, some continue to argue that the difficulty lies within “unionism” is a matter for them.”
Pete, please don’t have me ducking into the annals of Unionist recent history to show you up on this, go just ask about misdirections and misleading people in the wrong direction to deliver on what was said once as not deliverable!
Please just ask…infact I will deconstruct it all just to prove where the bollix is, whether it lies with that of ethno-religious incongruous nonsense or perhaps with that of sovereign British governance wishes, so let’s see which political strand comes out with credence over the years.
Observer,
smashed is a funny way to describe an organisation that has had all its prisoners released, is in government, and may soon get to pick the new attorney general.
Posted by It was Sammy Mc Nally what done it on Jun 02, 2008 @ 12:25 AM
The majority of its prisoners would have been released anyway, it entered a government it fought to destroy .
folks as usual republicans are upping the ante, the opportunity this creates for a long hot summer is incredible. Just think how the victimhood will be used if the nasty PSNI are drawn into conflict with poor oppressed Nationalists! and you can already hear the howls for the need to transfer p&j;to restore confidence in nationalist communities. Don’t be surprised if the RIRA or the CIRA or some other collection of letters decide that an Orange parade suddenly has become soooo offensive that it needs blocking.
Clearly Robo will also want to hang tough to dispell the chuckle bros image but any attempt to push this to the wire with an election will be met by the old adge -”fool me once shame on you , fool me twice shame on me”. Many unionists belive they were fooled once by the DUP and aren’t likely to be fooled again especially with a Robo lead – back us to be tough on the Shinners. They fell for that before and got the chuckle bros they ain’t gonna fall for that again, so robo needs to be careful.
Old chinese curse comes to mind – may you live in intersting times – and boy I think robo is definately “cursed”
Observer,
The principle is important here – the release of prisoners and the entering into governement of SF marked the recognition by the British that the troubles were a political struggle conducted by people entitled to run Non Iron.
That is why Mr Donaldson did a runner during the GFA talks and many Unioinsts still have difficulties with what they see as ‘terrorists’ in governement because they have not yet accepted this principle.
This could be a long one so hang on in there folks.
Dewi
I am sorry I didn’t realise that you wanted a complete history lesson from me, I would be happy to go into the details of unionism but as someone who does not have the battle scars I do not think I would do it it justice. I think you are forgetting that in order to threaten any party with an election there needs to be a chance that they will do fairly badly. I am not saying that there will be no slippage to the TUV, there is bound to be some, but an election slogan for the DUP of, “We’re in this election because the Shinners don’t like the fact that we are not giving into their demands” is hardly one that the DUP will be afraid of. Thank you for starting out by calling me pathetic, it makes a change of being referred to as an orange bigot or a Nazi from the republican movement.
Percy
I probably will watch the film on Bobby Sands but I doubt it will change my opinion. The idea that he is a well respected icon may mean that you and the rest of the Republican movement sleep well at night knowing that somebody was willing to die for a cause that has ultimatley lead down a cul-de-sac and your party is now in a temper tantrum over it. I wonder what Brendan Hughes would have made of all that?
IWSMNWDI
“Well what about the assembly? Everyone bar Unionists agree progress is required on P and J except for Unionists – in traditional political parlance this would be described as the Unionist veto. SF can collapse the assembly and (correctly) blame the DUP”
What about the assembly? If everyone agrees that p+j is needed now except unionists, who do you think will vote for those people again if an election is called? Unionists perhaps? What you do not seem to understand is that unionists do not want devolution of p+j at this moment in time, it is something that will and should happen eventually but not at this moment in time and unionists in whatever shape or form will be happy to support this, as my good friend Turgon has pointed out.
Whether you want to believe it or not unionists are quite happy to leave this issue the way it is at the moment and people will back them on it. (With the exception of DC who just hates the DUP and will argue the turn in any situation.)
Steve
“Do you really believe that those that joined the TUV because they want a return to 1922 no taigs about the place will suddenly revert to DUPers in mandatory coalition because they managed to call accomplishing nothing a victory?”
On issues that effect NI’s place in the UK I do not think any unionist worth their salt will be unhappy that ‘nothing’ has been done. I am sorry but your definition of ‘nothing’ simply referes to giving into what Republicans want, I would hate to see any unionist who would level that as a grievance against the DUP.
The TUV set out it’s stall to oppose the current institutions on the basis that it was leading to a united Ireland. SF have very helpfully pointed out that they are not able to fulfill their agenda thanks to the DUP and the checks and balances operating at Stormont. I am not saying that the TUV will not get votes, they are bound to pick up those who will just never be happy, but it isn’t helpful for them for SF to be acting like this.
Turgon
Nice to see you posting on this thread. You are the only dissenter who has ventured to put his head above water on this issue. It is also funny how Jim Allister’s website is lacking on this subject. I only say that Trimble went into an election on the basis of Stormontgate and lost. Why? because he could not control SF. Now SF are prepared to collapse the whole show on the basis that they cannot complete their all Ireland agenda, a mighty mighty difference. I am not saying that the DUP wouldn’t be vulnerable to a swing from the TUV because with enough votes unionist seats would go to nationalists never mind just go to other unionists other than the DUP.
Bigger Picture
“Whether you want to believe it or not unionists are quite happy to leave this issue the way it is at the moment and people will back them on it. (With the exception of DC who just hates the DUP and will argue the turn in any situation.) ”
I dont know what the UU position on this is but assuming there is a big majority of Unionists share your view then the principle of no ‘terrorists’ running law and order may well be a principle that the DUP will stick with.
My point is not that they dont have the right to do so but it seems a tactical mistake which will allow SF to collapse the assembly whilst blaming the DUP. The 2 governments will then need to move the situation along by encouraging the DUP and this usually mean threats involving the role of the Irish government.
I genuinely cant see Robbo being that dull.
But there again I think you misread how the two governments will see this issue. The three governments are looking at stability and inward investment in NI as highlighted by the recent investment conference. It isn’t a matter that is neccessary to be addressed for the continuation of devolution it is only something that the Shinners are demanding so that they can be seen to getting their way on issues. I would say very strongly that all the other parties would rather have devolution without p+j at the current time rather than no devolution at all, with the exception of SF.
So then who is it that needs cajoling? The DUP or SF? I would argue that the Govts will be seriously saying to SF to wise up and work out a timeframe you can both stick to rather than collapse the thing simply because you do not like how things are working out.
Of course that may not be how any of them see it I just do not know. I only say that it is something that the vast majority of unionists will agree on and therefore people may blame the DUP but those who vote for them will not stop voting for them based on that issue.
btw I don’t know the UU’S opinion on it for definate but I haven’t heard them argue for it now anyway.
Bigger Piture,
the reason I read it my way ( apart from the fact that I’m from the green side of the political fence) is that without P and J there is the increased risk of everything unravelling with a breakdown in law and order as it a key (and final) building block in the current ‘solution’.
But what is the threat to the breakdown in law and order that devolving these powers would solve so quickly? If there was an immediate justification for it it may be more possible, unless certain people are “ordered” to go out and stir up a bit of trouble of course.
It seems to me that you consider the devolution of p+J as symbolic rather than functional. Symbolic to whom? Republicans? If it is for symbolism over practicalities can you really blame unionists in a mandatory coalition from blocking this move at this time if it only places a feather in SF’s cap and their all-Ireland agenda?
I also don’t see it, fromm a personal perspective, as necssary at this time. I think it is truly neccessary for local ministers to have a firm grasp of the responsbilities they have at present and to be effective with all the recent power devolved there is a fear that you could dump too much too quickly. But that is only a personal view.
Bigger pIcure,
Sinn Fein had an Ard Fheis in which they agreed that under certain conditons that they ( the largest Nationalsit party in Non Iron ) would accept the police and law and order. Whats not to see – you cant have a stable situation where the police are not acceptable to one community? That will lead us right back to the madness we just left behind.
But I thought the war was over?
Lets not get into the SF conference again Pete Baker has outlined all that above safe is to say I agree with him. SF used that to sell it to their supporters and others knew full well that the issue was far from over as being handed over by a set date.
2 things
what the feck was sammy mcnally supposed to have done, and has he been convicted by a jury of his peers.
Otherwise the moniker must change to “I allege it WSMNTDI”, or there could be a legal action
good that’s cleared up then.
2) SF today refused to comment on the story of this thread, in the Irish News, possibly its a non-story dreamed up by journalists.
when is the FM nomination scheduled to take place anyway?
corollary:
BPicture,
cheers, I’m going in with an open mind towards the “hunger” film, only way to go , assume you know nothing, and see how it affects you.
Bigger Picture,
looks like we’ve come full circle with you and Pete and the DUP waving the STA piece of paper shouting “Police in our time” – hey that would make a good cartoon?
one thing that’s clear is SF definately need a “fudge” here to get off the hook.
Bring back Peter Hain anyone? Peteb?
IAIWSMNTDI
the inescapbale logic of peteb and BP’s position is that SF should come clean, hold an Ard Fheis and we may have no support for the PSNI.
Retrograde or what?
are you getting that impression?
Perce,
I think you have got it. If everybody could just stick rigidly to their principles and if we all try really hard we might be able to set the clock back to the good old days of the 70s and 80s. Just a shame the big fellah has gone into retirement he could have played another stormer.
“SF will be administering law and order before the year is through or good bye funny government.”
Hardly -Martin has this recurring nightmare- its all been a dream -he wakes up and is standing in Dohertys burcher shop in waterloo place in Stroke city, the annual apprentice boy march is walking past outside —”another pond of sausages Mrs Mcconnologue ” he says.
Back to unemployment or stay in assembly?
what a choice
Barshee,
nice image. But I think you have forgotten about all those Northern bank notes.
correct
The deal was sold on the twin pillars of power-sharing and support for PSNI.
Though not technically agreed to, P&J;was envisaged as being devolved sooner rather than later.
MMG visited the injured PSNI officer, what more do they want?
Army Council is a red-herring, these guys are probably too old/ill to sit around in smoke-filled rooms.
This all to do with the TUV.
Here’s the call peteb and BP
Do you think, had there not been a TUV, that the DUP would have come up with this irrational nonsense line “there’s no confidence”?
Role on election, time to watch the DUP squirm under Allisters grip
Dick
no we don’t want to go backwards, that’s what the loony moralists here want.
They’d prefer SF didn’t support the PSNI just to keep their high-principles.
Who are the haters?
We’ll work this out in the Assembly.
SF have the moral high-ground.
‘SF have the moral high-ground.’
Oh yea, absolutely, 100% morally right.
BTW who many people did the IRA kill? I can’t seem to remember, I think it was a couple thousand wasn’t it?
But anywho, yea, Sinn Fein the best thing since sliced bread. It’s only fair that Gerry Kelly become Minister for justice, sure just look at how fair he was at administrating law and order in his day.
The provos only murdered them damn criminals, you know the ones Im talking about… the security forces and them pesky Protestants
I think we may be losing sight of the fact that SF have not (yet at any rate) seriously threatened to collapse the whole thing.
In terms of if (big, big if) they did who wins and loses is very difficult to guage.
Remember Trimble collapsed power sharing because of alledged IRA activities. In unionist eyes he had the high moral gound. However, to the governments etc. it was seen that the unionists collapsed power sharing and was their fault.
The corollary is that even if SF collapse the agreement in such a way that they feel they have the high moral ground: they may still be seen as the one’s to blame.
In terms of TUV vs DUP. Again it is difficult to call. Politicians doing quite well (the DUP at the moment) tend not to want to upset the status quo if the outcome might be disadvantageous.
I agree with Bigger Picture that his suggested line in a putative election is good. However, the TUV counter will be: broken promises and the only reason for P+J not being devolved is us the TUV. It would be an extremely difficult election to call. It might fininsh the TUV: equally it might establish them as a serious force in NI politics. It is even difficult to judge where their support would come from. Some might be UUP. Also some UUP voters may switch to the DUP and in turn DUP to TUV. Hence, one might envisage a scenario in which the major unionist losers would be the UUP.
I cannot comment on SF vs. SDLP position but again there are probably a number of factors at play. Might some of their more moderate vote be angry that they collapsed the executive and punish them?
I think the whole thing is too complex to call and anyone who does is probably deluding themselves. I also doubt SF are actually angry enough to risk an election and the possible negatives of that. In light of that I will be surprised if it is collapsed.
A bit more street theatre from republicans over the marching season along with comments that if P+J were devolved this would have been easier to contain is, I suspect, a more likely outcome.
Still it is all good clean fun. Incidentally for the person who worried about me caneclling my holiday: Do not worry it is not booked yet; we go to the other large island next door (avoiding any offense) so I tend not to need to book early.
Turgon,
do keep a record of how many times you are referred to as Irish when you are ‘abroad’ and of course come back and tell us – no giving the game away by wearing your bowler hat and union jack shorts.
On a serious note the problem with not doing what eveyone else wants is that you can play it too long – like SF did with decommisioning.
Do you not think that Robbo will throw in the veto towel before new year? Cant see any collapsing until after that. It might suit SF to delay collapse to maximise TUV vote in next year’s (?) general election in UK. I dont say that to annoy you as a TUV supporter but only because a divided Unioism ( 3 ways at least ) is good for SF.
Dick
you’re living in the past, get up to speed.
SF are in the Exec. On this issue we are referring to here, yes SF have the moral high-ground, as all the parties concerned inc USA , GB, and ROI acknowledge the need for progress on P&J;.
Its just playing politics (stalling) by the DUP.
Like I said, this would not be an issue if we didn’t have the TUV scare-mongering.
Turgon
“Remember Trimble collapsed power sharing because of alledged IRA activities. In unionist eyes he had the high moral gound. However, to the governments etc. it was seen that the unionists collapsed power sharing and was their fault.”
Is this a warning for SF or the DUP?
Plus I must respectfully object to the following statement,
“the TUV counter will be: broken promises and the only reason for P+J not being devolved is us the TUV”
Is this the way the TUV is trying to garner support by taking credit for things the DUP has actually done to strengthen unionists hand?
Bottom line TUV want Direct Rule over power sharing, SF want Direct Rule over power sharing. Where does unionist power and influence most lie? With the DUP at Stormont- There’s your election manifesto right there.
Apparently Allister is now taking credit for stopping the Maze on the basis of the Dromore by-election, surely Nigel Dodds, Sammy Wilson and Jim Shannon put the brakers on that in August/September 07??
Percy
“We’ll work this out in the Assembly.
SF have the moral high-ground”
Nice one I needed a joke. Glad to see you may be putting the toys back in the pram however.
IWSMNWDI
No I want the police in NI, soemthing the Shinners for a long time didn’t. It is nice to see her majesty’s security forces welcome in that sense. As I have said you fought for mandatory coalition, it isn’t based on respect or cabinet collective responsibility, so just becuase you don’t get something because others don’t want it, don’t blame the DUP blame the system that you as nationalists wanted and argued for for so long.
Just got sight of this sorry,
“Do you think, had there not been a TUV, that the DUP would have come up with this irrational nonsense line “there’s no confidence”?”
The DUP set out from the Docs speech at St Andrews that they were not tied to the p+j deadline, I don’t see where the fear of another party comes in there.
To be honest I was never in the pragmatic/liberal/call it what you want wing of the DUP and wanted nothing other than SF booted left right and centre once they got in there. For all your high moralist talk they are only interested in the Stormont as a way of achieving the further aim of a united Ireland, therefore your calls for equality and dialogue are nothing more than hollow words that are designed to do nothing more than erase the unionist face of NI, you are not fooling anybody the pair of ye no matter what moralistic language you want to dress it up in.
BP
SF have always had the moral high-ground
Toys, pram, me, never
BP,
not sure if you’re right about SF wanting Direct Rule over power-sharing; even with the long-term aim of a united ireland.
Not my position anyway. I want to engage fully with my prod neighbours at all levels, always.
You’re irish after all in my view. Not British.
Bigger Picture
“For all your high moralist talk they are only interested in the Stormont as a way of achieving the further aim of a united Ireland”
Agree totally – this has nothing to do with morals but with the soverignity issue being fought out now through politics and recognising the strength and weakness of your position.
As Paisley showed when threatened with joint soverignity the principle of not sharing power with ‘terorists’ had to go. Robbo will jump too with P and J for exactly the same reason.
I doubt it but then again we will see if Marty puts himself forward on Thursday.
Percy
I look forward to the collective group hug. We could even have a reconciliation conference abroad somwhere although you may have to close your eyes when I produce my British passport
I get the feeling from reading all of the comments so far that a large number of you actually want to see the devolved administration fall just so you’ll get something worth commenting on. Norn Iron just isn’t the same without a crisis is it!!
keep your passport BP, I’ve got the same.
Its only paper. Group hug though yeah.
Nah not fer me dessertspoon don’t want a collapse
( long time no see I was spirit-level in a previous )
Bigger Picture:
“As I have said you fought for mandatory coalition, it isn’t based on respect or cabinet collective responsibility, so just because you don’t get something because others don’t want it, don’t blame the DUP blame the system that you as nationalists wanted and argued for for so long.”
Ergo, given how mandatory coalition is working out so far, with mutual vetoes flying around, what do unionists have to fear from the Executive taking on P & J powers?
“But what is the threat to the breakdown in law and order that devolving these powers would solve so quickly? If there was an immediate justification for it it may be more possible, unless certain people are “ordered” to go out and stir up a bit of trouble of course.”
You reckon that car bomb in Strabane last month was certain people being ‘ordered [by SF] to go out and stir up a bit of trouble’? The dissidents who committed that act take succour from the fact that the PSNI are still under the operational command of the British Government. Devolving policing powers would help to undermine their justification for such attacks.
[Perhaps some people of unionist persuasion aren't too troubled by such attacks though, as long as it's only Catholic PSNI officers that are being targeted?]
“I would say very strongly that all the other parties would rather have devolution without p+j at the current time rather than no devolution at all, with the exception of SF.”
The SDLP also want P & J powers devolved ASAP; in fact, Mark Durkan made the very point I made above last year (re: undermining the dissidents latest campaign), after similar attacks on PSNI officers in Derry and Dungannon.
“Where does unionists interests lie? In keeping the pressure on republicans in a devolved assembly where the fight can be taken to them on a daily basis.”
No, unionists’ interests lie in persuading the outside world that Norn Iron is a stable and settled place to invest in. Agreeing to devolve policing and justic powers would make a big cotribution to achieving that aim. But they’re too wrapped up in the old ‘themmuns versus us’, zero-sum mentality.
Bigger Picture:
“As I have said you fought for mandatory coalition, it isn’t based on respect or cabinet collective responsibility, so just because you don’t get something because others don’t want it, don’t blame the DUP blame the system that you as nationalists wanted and argued for for so long.”
Ergo, given how mandatory coalition is working out so far, with mutual vetoes flying around, what do unionists have to fear from the Executive taking on P & J powers?
“But what is the threat to the breakdown in law and order that devolving these powers would solve so quickly? If there was an immediate justification for it it may be more possible, unless certain people are “ordered” to go out and stir up a bit of trouble of course.”
You reckon that car bomb in Strabane last month was certain people being ‘ordered [by SF] to go out and stir up a bit of trouble’? The dissidents who committed that act take succour from the fact that the PSNI are still under the operational command of the British Government. Devolving policing powers would help to undermine their justification for such attacks.
[Perhaps some people of unionist persuasion aren't too troubled by such attacks though, as long as it's only Catholic PSNI officers that are being targeted?]
“I would say very strongly that all the other parties would rather have devolution without p+j at the current time rather than no devolution at all, with the exception of SF.”
The SDLP also want P & J powers devolved ASAP; in fact, Mark Durkan made the very point I made above last year (re: undermining the dissidents latest campaign), after similar attacks on PSNI officers in Derry and Dungannon.
“Where does unionists interests lie? In keeping the pressure on republicans in a devolved assembly where the fight can be taken to them on a daily basis.”
No, unionists’ interests lie in persuading the outside world that Norn Iron is a stable and settled place to invest in. Agreeing to devolve policing and justic powers would make a big cotribution to achieving that aim. But they’re too wrapped up in the old ‘themmuns versus us’, zero-sum mentality.
Sorry about the double post above. And should have been ‘contribution’ obviously.
Ian
First of all thanks I’ve been waiting for someone else to talk to – no offence percy or IWSMNWDI!
“given how mandatory coalition is working out so far, with mutual vetoes flying around, what do unionists have to fear from the Executive taking on P & J powers?”
People may laugh at this but I do actually have a sense of morality where I do not believe that SF should be placed in charge of an organisation that they conducted a wicked war against for 30 years, not until there is confidence in the community. At a practicle level at Stormont there is no reason why it couldn’t be kept in check, the same way as education, however that does not make it right and the unionist electorate will back their reps on that one.
“The SDLP also want P & J powers devolved ASAP”
But would they want the whole thing pulled down owing to a lack of p+j powers? Doubtful
“You reckon that car bomb in Strabane last month was certain people being ‘ordered [by SF] to go out and stir up a bit of trouble’? ”
That never crossed my mind when I was making the post but it matters little. SF want p+j to avoid going back to the bad old days, an implied threat. Those dissident republicans who carried out those awful attacks do not give a toss what is happening at Stormont and will continue to attack the police unfortunatley. The cold hard truth is that they regard SF as sell outs and do not care what is devolved. For them the armed struggle is alive and well regardless of what we do up on the hill.
In a sense it is important to see confidence building measures resulting from attacks like these by seeing SF actively encourage those to denounce violence. MMG visited the injured PSNI officer. Yes it is a start bbut you have to remember that you have 30 years of making up to do in building confidence there.
“Perhaps some people of unionist persuasion aren’t too troubled by such attacks though, as long as it’s only Catholic PSNI officers that are being targeted?]”
I find that extremely offensive and I would ask for an apology from you on that remark. At no time have I been sectarian in my postings and have bantered with percy and others on this thread and engaged in constructive debate. Your words are hurtful and offensive and are designed to do nothing more than to attack me when you can find nothing else in your intellect to attack me about.
“No, unionists’ interests lie in persuading the outside world that Norn Iron is a stable and settled place to invest in. Agreeing to devolve policing and justic powers would make a big cotribution to achieving that aim. But they’re too wrapped up in the old ‘themmuns versus us’, zero-sum mentality.”
Well you just have shot yourself in the foot with that one with the comments above. Wise up to have economic investment you do not need p+j devolved and the recent investment conference shows that. Businesses are interested in low costs, high skilled workforce and abilities in the english language. Not whether the prods and provies agree to run the police or not.
I don’t see SF bringing down the Assembly after only 1 year.I get the impression that they are only threatening to do this to force the DUPs hands on some issues like an Irish Language Act or even the devolution of Police and Justice.
Basil
Its officially bullshit this story:
http://www.sinnfein.ie/news/detail/29684
oops that could be taken either way.
The telegraph story is unfounded.
Gerry Adams has confirmed SF are in the exec and in to stay.
Percy
read carefully not what it says but what it doesnt.
No where does it say they are going back to Storomont just that they need to work on exactly the things the DUPers don’t want to work on
BP, I have a few responses but I’ll deal with this one first:
‘“Perhaps some people of unionist persuasion aren’t too troubled by such attacks though, as long as it’s only Catholic PSNI officers that are being targeted?]”’
‘I find that extremely offensive and I would ask for an apology from you on that remark.’
That wasn’t aimed at you personally; I do apologise unreservedly if you took it that way though. I was originally going to make a point about loyalist paramilitaries using such attacks on Catholic PSNI officers west of the Bann [where the UDA/UVF don't have a strong presence whether 'defensive' as they see it or otherwise] as a feeble excuse for holding onto their weapons; how that would be hypocritical given their history of attacks on both the catholic population (‘ATAT’) and indeed on the police and army (in support of the Orange Order at Drumcree, Whiterock, etc). Then I thought that I was drifting from the point somewhat so I curtailed that paragraph – with hindsight I should have left it out altogether.
I still think that devolving P & J would take wind from the sails of the dissidents’ campaign somewhat – not least because the recent attacks would appear to be aimed precisely at making life difficult for SF in their attempts to achieve devolution of P & J.
“MMG visited the injured PSNI officer. Yes it is a start but you have to remember that you have 30 years of making up to do in building confidence there.”
Now it would appear that that comment [i]was[/i] directed personally at me, but I won’t take it as such. (BTW, I’m an outside observer from Yorkshire trying to inject a bit of dispassionate logic into the debate, not the ghost of Brian Keenan or whatever image you have of me in your head!)
Anyway, the high-moral-ground position you espouse in support of the DUP’s position might be understandable if the DUP had been consistent supporters of the forces of law and order over the years, but we all know that that wasn’t the case. Did Ian Paisley visit the grieving family of Constable Frank Reilly? (I don’t want to get into the whataboutery too much although I can’t resist mentioning, since it’s topical, Deputy Dodds’ condemnation of the PSNI’s ultimately successful raid on the UDA meeting in the Alexandra Bar.)
“Wise up to have economic investment you do not need p+j devolved and the recent investment conference shows that. Businesses are interested in low costs, high skilled workforce and abilities in the english language.”
They’re also hearing from the heads of the three governments (American, British and Irish) who are singing from the same hymn sheet in stating that there is unfinished business in terms of devolution. However successful the recent investment conference was, it would have been even more of a success if there wasn’t the nagging doubt about how stable the local administration actually is.
Also, this talk of ‘sufficient community confidence’ – if you consider how long it took the local politicians to persuade the Secretary of State to finally deign to scrap 50% remission for serious criminal offences, how does that inspire confidence in the current set-up? Crumbs from the Masters table, anyone?
Surely it’s time for ‘confident unionism’ to mean more than a soundbite at election time?
Devolving ‘p&j;’ powers….never! I couldn’t stomach terrorists in red berets and their ilk, running the police and judicial system again!!!
“Unfortunately, Nevin, neither do you on this particular topic.”
Pete, some of what I know doesn’t come from published sources so you would have no way of checking its validity without talking to my sources.
The brief view from behind the UK-Ireland curtain in the 1996 Dick Spring briefing should give you a little insight into the executive function of the AIIC/BIIC Joint Secretariat.
#
Percy
read carefully not what it says but what it doesnt.
No where does it say they are going back to Storomont just that they need to work on exactly the things the DUPers don’t want to work on
Posted by Steve on Jun 02, 2008 @ 05:48 PM
Steve, you will look like a prat on Thursday when Marty becomes Robbos No 2 , just as he was Paisleys