Hints of “Or else devolution gets it”?
Martin McGuinness spoke yesterday at the Civil Rights commemoration event at the Guildhall in Londonderry. He offered two conspiracy theories about Unionism that some wanted a return to the 1960′s and that the DUP was not moving as it was looking over its shoulders. The speech also appeared to make two implied threats to devolution:
“It isn’t just about whether there is or is not an Executive meeting – it is about partnership government and power sharing in the new political dispensation. It is about the acceptance of the rights and entitlements of nationalists and republicans won over many years of tough negotiations. If one party does not believe in partnership government and power sharing on the basis of equality then it is they who are placing the political institutions at risk…The only way any unionist politician will ever hold any semblance of real political power now or in the future is in partnership with nationalists and republicans.”
It also outlined what SF considered the Plan B:
“If partnership government is beyond the DUP then it will fall to the two governments to take the necessary decisions and implement the necessary policy changes to ensure political progress in the all-Ireland context envisaged in the Good Friday And St. Andrews Agreements.”
people are sick and tired on the constant SF mopery, if theyre not happy let them walk. Going by the posts on this site, SF are guaranteed to get everything they want from Gordon if the thing collapses. If so, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE just go!
The funny thing is, Ian Paisley could have wrote that speech with a few words changed. Maybe this was what Martin and Ian was in stitches over
“It isn’t just about whether there is or is not an Executive meeting – it is about partnership government and power sharing in the new political dispensation. It is about the acceptance of the rights and entitlements of [u]Unionists[/u] and [u]loyalists[/u] won over many years of tough negotiations. If one party does not believe in partnership government and power sharing on the basis of equality then it is they who are placing the political institutions at risk…The only way any [u]Republican[/u] politician will ever hold any semblance of real political power now or in the future is in partnership with [u]Unionists[/u] and [u]loyalists[/u].”
“If partnership government is beyond [u]IRA/Sinn Fein[/u] then it will fall to the two governments to take the necessary decisions and implement the necessary policy changes to ensure political progress in the [u]North/South[/u] context envisaged in the Good Friday And St. Andrews Agreements.”
SF brings down devolution over not getting, er, devolution.
Even at the best of times, the Governments wouldn’t look too kindly on that, with a resultant “Plan B” which is somewhat less than “Irish Republicans” bargained for.
And SF may or may not have noticed that this isn’t the best of times.
The argument should be made around the Executive table, not at rallies.
Yea was this the same the DUP arguing for it to be around the executive table that required the very St Andrews Agreement to breathe life back into Stormont after 4 years of suspension after DUP-led intra-ethnic agitation?
I am sick up to my teeth listening to SF bleating about the devolution of Policing & Justice I could not careless whether it stays in the British hands or not, perhaps a mere Catholic like me will fare better if it stays at least we are all treated the same. I am more concerned about the day to day things that affect my life and that of my family, like education, cost of living and health. I would say to SF either get in and operate Stormont or take you ball or is it balls and go we can surely be no worse off, in fact we might be better off.
F-D, did you miss hints of “Or else Flybe gets it“?
From the link it reads to me that the shinners are trying to place this on a change of dup leader. ie Robbo is there now and he and the whole party are not happy with partner ship government. That is clearly false. P&J;is one aspect of this devolution of powers, not all of it. This issue would still have arisen with the chuckle brothers at the helm, no difference.
Talk about hyperbole!!
The problems at Stormont are all interconnected and worsened by DUP
There was never any reason for St Andrews, new elections were to be called in May 07, but St Andrews was peppered in between the threats of Hain April 06 and the new elections.
The programme for government committee was already looking at the devolution of policing and Paisley was asked after Hain’s statement in April O6 by Eileen Bell if he was prepared to nominate.
1)Hain’s April 06 Statement: http://tiny.cc/ei4sx
2)The DUP in May 06 at that stage said under Paisley ‘certainly not’ Madam Speaker. http://tiny.cc/6OnSk
At this point the other 3 big parties were operating to the tune of the Belfast Agreement on Good Friday. I.e. No police support had to be pledged explicitly by SF and no onus to devolve policing.
So at this point it was the DUP who had stalled the assembly!!! Remember that point.
However, the DUP argued that it needed police backing and a way to deliver that upfront, over the months from April to 13 Oct 06 deliberations happened and St Andrews was born. Giving rise to the notion of timetable and endorsing of police.
Where was the move to enact FM dFM and create Executive meetings then back then in May 06 by the DUP? Cue St Andrews.
Hain’s statement setting this out after failure to nominate in May 06 that required the St Andrews Agreement: http://tiny.cc/rObwA
Then we had the March 07 to May 07 Assembly date moved to suit Dodds’ concerns.
Now it is Oct 08, two years after St Andrews, which wasn’t really that necessary to the other parties save that of the DUP, to obviously save some face.
However dryly SF has delivered in relation to St Andrews. If the DUP doesn’t reciprocate then St Andrews will be pulled and the SoS will resort to cutting pay until there is a renewed interest for devolving powers once again. North South will run as per Hain’s statement on 16 April 06. The statement was made highlighting the need for progress and compromise.
perhaps a mere Catholic like me
Fair Deal, can you please identify and delete any sock puppet posts ?
To the point, if SF think that they’re better off without devolution, then they should please hurry up and walk out. Let’s get plan B under way already – a modification to the structure of the executive so that business can proceed as long as a simple majority of the executive ministers are present.
“perhaps a mere Catholic like me will fare better if it stays at least we are all treated the same”
treated the same?
..you ain’t no Nationalist!
“[i]..you ain’t no Nationalist! “[/i]
LOL, maybe he actually lived in a Unionist area and escaped the bigoted conditioning if he lived in a Nationalist area.
To reply to the “real bigots” I am a Catholic and a Nationalist and to put the record straight I am a woman not a man, perhaps if it was left to the fairer sex in all our communities’ things would have been sorted long ago. Unfortunately, due to the some on Slugger I cannot show my true identity more is the pity. It is because of them that many others like me are and not in a position to say that we are really think as to whether P & J is transferred or not and yes is it of no interest to me and saying that in this forum is of no threat to me I am more interested in my bread & butter, I will not starve if P & J is not transferred but I will if I have no bread.
You can always eat cake.
She can eat oranges and top it off by filling up on plenty of greens!
I hope SF walk. It’s clear the DUP are not playing ball. Time to take it away.
Proving once again that NI is an ungovernable failed statelet.
I’m always very consistent with the “as a Catholic, I support X” which is almost always written by someone who isn’t.
Republican, just looked at your email address and I’ve noted that TÜV is a satisfied customer of SF.COM
Can someone with SF sympathies please explain why they think that joint authority can work for them ?
With the DUP potentially holding the balance of power at westminister I doubt they’ll be too concerned with the return of direct rule. With no guns and no government, what is the purpose of SF?
“the future’s .. ” :
I’m asking that question exactly. McGuinness’ speech did suggest that they’re going to look into the joint authority thing, but I can’t see how it would work for them.
Republican: I hope SF walk.
And then what? The SF all-Ireland project took a nasty blow in the latest election in the RoI. Their real electoral base is up here. But if they bring down devolution in NI, then they sink into irrelevance. What good would even joint authority be to them? New-labour is going to be replaced in a year or so, and on the other side, FF has been flirting with the SDLP and even making smiley faces to the unionists.
And unless bringing down devolution is good for the *party*, SF won’t do it.
I think the obvious answer is to have an alliance member as PJ minister. But the DUP have SF by the balls. SF have made a promise which they can’t keep. Squeeze them for a bit longer, get some concessions and move on methinks…
LOL, maybe he actually lived in a Unionist area and escaped the bigoted conditioning if he lived in a Nationalist area.
Posted by Ulsters my homeland on Oct 05, 2008 @ 04:07 PM
What are you talking about?
There are probably 18 months left of a Labour government. The Tories have let it be known that they will not be persuaders for a UI but want it fully within the UK and to have Tory representatives.
So whatever SF and the DUP do they had better be careful as they will have one friend less at court who will listen to their nonsense.
And unless bringing down devolution is good for the *party*, SF won’t do it.
Indeed, that is why I think that SF are in a weak position. I think the DUP will agree to devolution of policing and justice powers, but they will exact a heavy price from SF – likely the disbandment of the army council.
The Alliance policing and justice minister is probably the only compromise that the parties are likely to be able to agree on. Alliance have a shopping list of their own, however.
So whatever SF and the DUP do they had better be careful as they will have one friend less at court who will listen to their nonsense.
That’s pretty much the position right now. The trick is that whatever government we get in 18 months, it’s likely to be marginal. That means that the DUP have the whip-hand. Most of that could, of course, be cancelled out if SF took their seats in Westminster. That’d be a barrel of laughs.
[i]“Squeeze them for a bit longer, get some concessions and move on methinks… “[/i]
They only have one more trump card to play and that’s the Army Council, but it’s important that the Unionist community gets more than an IMC report. A public admission from IRA/Sinn Fein that the Army Council has gone forever and they will begin to enter into a truth and reconcilliation process in tanden with policing and justice, as a way to increase Unionist confidence.
Dear Martin & Peter
If devolution collapses it won’t be the DUPs fault, nor will it be Sinn Feins fault. The blame will be shared equally between you both. You are idiots and that the two of you are the pinnacle of political power and achievement in Northern Ireland makes me sad! I now have to go to bed to get up for work, you remember that don’t you!!
Love and Kisses
Dessertspoon xoxo
LOL What is this, daily affirmations for onionists?
dup whip hand in westminister give m a break! they will make a deal with the greens before they owe their political futures to a shower of back woods bigots. they would be laughed out of england
CS
Troll I think is a more appropriate description than sock puppet so I’ll let the comments stand for now but try to keep an eye on the comments. The standard advice applies don’t feed the trolls.
A public admission from IRA/Sinn Fein that the Army Council has gone forever and they will begin to enter into a truth and reconcilliation process in tanden with policing and justice, as a way to increase Unionist confidence.
Posted by Ulsters my homeland on Oct 05, 2008 @ 09:30 PM
[edited by moderator - play the ball]
How many Unionists would be happy devolving P&J;if the process works step by step with a truth and reconciliation process?
Obviously if those who took part in past crimes and murders come clean and genuinely make an attempt to reconcile with those who it matters and the general public, Unionists can reciprocate the gesture by moving P&J;forward another step.
“I think the DUP will agree to devolution of policing and justice powers, but they will exact a heavy price from SF – likely the disbandment of the army council.”
This has been argued on many threads already in the past few months, but since you brought it up, could you explain how the army council issuing a press release saying they are no more would be a heavy price for Sinn Fein? Especially seeing as how there is no real way to prove such a thing; they could re-form the next day as the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen or the Mickey Mouse club and carry on with the same. That’s not a heavy price, that’s an IOU that can never truly be collected.
That’s not a heavy price, that’s an IOU that can never truly be collected.
Posted by doctor on Oct 06, 2008 @ 12:25 AM
It would be in the psyche of republicans..the utter end of the IRA for what ? An alliance P+J minister? 30 years of “warfare” just to support a unionist party in charge of the police.
DUP wins again and again and again
??
“DUP wins again and again and again”
Really – the current DUP line is that P&J;will not be devolved until the Unionist community have confidence – at least a generation according to many DUP representatives.
Sinn Fein, by the way, had no problem ruling themselves out of the post initially but demanded that the DUP did likewise which they did.
In my opinion, either the assembly will collapse (very bad for Unionists) or P&J;will be devolved within the next 12 months at the most – hardly the generation that Unionists talk about.
I suspect some agreement will be reached with a short delay to allow the DUP to save some face.
However, the bottom line is that any devolvement of P&J;in less than “a generation” is a clear climbdown by the DUP.
A very odd definition of winning.
‘However, the bottom line is that any devolvement of P&J;in less than “a generation” is a clear climbdown by the DUP. ‘
In any negotiation you always demand a bit more that what ur realistically going to get. I imagine there is a little more to all this that meets the eye. To date, the DUP have faired well from their negotiations, perhaps the DUP wish list has yet to be revealed…
Scaremongering by Martin. He knows the constitutional position on NI within the UK guarantee makes his ‘joint sovereignty’ claim absurd. Direct rule from Westminster is just that. 30 years of killing for London rule. He can try and sell that to the “boys”,sure they’ll believe anything now, the surrender is complete.
hardly the generation that Unionists talk about. …
really, how long do you think old grizzly has got in him?
Direct Rule anyone?
It seems the only way out of this……….
#
Direct Rule anyone?
It seems the only way out of this……….
Posted by Phil Mac Giolla Bhain on Oct 06, 2008 @ 04:49 PM
Not really, if sinn fein dont want to be part of government then they can leave, dont see anyone keeping them there.
I think the “generation” thing was about a Sinn Féin minister of P&J;, not the devolution of it. And I interpret it as meaning that no former IRA type SF person (e.g. Kelly or Murphy) should hold the job.
doctor:
This has been argued on many threads already in the past few months, but since you brought it up, could you explain how the army council issuing a press release saying they are no more would be a heavy price for Sinn Fein? Especially seeing as how there is no real way to prove such a thing; they could re-form the next day as the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen or the Mickey Mouse club and carry on with the same. That’s not a heavy price, that’s an IOU that can never truly be collected.
You’re absolutely right, the demand for the stepping down of the army council is bollocks. You can never prove that a secret organization – little more than a loose collection of like-minded individuals – has stopped existing. But if the unionists claim that it will enhance their confidence in the process, then it’s on the table, and I’m sure SF are keeping the option in their back pocket if they feel it is justified.