During the Politics Show debacle debate the informed audience were asked to vote on a number of questions. The most interesting being how would they mark the Northern Ireland Executive’s economic perfomance. Out of a possible 10 the average rating was a generous 3.6. But given the time wasted on other matters only the SDLP’s Alban Maginness and the Alliance Party’s Ian Parsley were able to respond. So it goes.
Are you confused about ‘dissident’ Irish Republicanism? Anxious about its existence and its seemingly increasingly deadly capabilities? Martyn Frampton’s new book, Legion of the Rearguard: Dissident Irish Republicanism (Irish Academic Press, 2011) serves both as a primer on active dissident groups and a timely analysis of their historic significance and contemporary capabilities. This book clears [...] read our review »
World by Storm has a nice piece up on the IRA’s role in helping MK, the armed wing of the ANC, in the 1980s. In particular he sees a strange alchemy at work there: …if one can think of a clearly legitimate contemporary struggle it was that against apartheid and it is to the credit [...] read our review »
Horrible, horrible, horrible. Truly, Alban and Ian Parsley deserves seats in Europe. Dianne Dodds truly doesn’t know her ass from her elbow. Shockingly poor grasp of detail. BTW is it true that in Talk back a couple of weeks ago when asked a question she replied she’d have to ask Nigel??
Did Dodds cackle there?
I think Slugger O’toole should organise its own TV debate with bloggers representing the different political factions in Northern Ireland.
You would have a more civilised debate. You would also get proper engagement on issues.
The BBC must be delighted. Professional journalists love to push politicians into making fools of themselves. I suspect Jim Fitzpatrick enjoyed a few snorts with work colleagues after the show.
Jim Fitzpatrick was a dreadful chairman
“I suspect Jim Fitzpatrick enjoyed a few snorts with work colleagues after the show.”
Didn’t we all, didn’t we all!!!!
How on earth have people voted in JIm Nicholson
for 20 years. He is one of the least articulate politicans around….you would think that after all this time he would have picked up more skills or at least have rehearsed a list of what he has achieved. A few years ago when Dianne Dodds was an MLA I thought she was very bright. But now its as if someone has told her that to be assertive you have to TALK VERY Loudly ALL the TIME,be rude to your opponents and the chair.She even made Barbie doll look good.
For my money, Parsley was the star of the show.
It was an Allister v Dodds debate!
Jim fitzpatrick was like a schoolboy for most of it , until he finally intervened.
Then again we had the obligatory…Yeeeeooooowwww!!! from some deluded unionist. The usual carry-on!!
During the whole DEFRA thing, I got the impression Dodds was given a list of things to bring up to use against the other candidates. She seemed to be spending much of her time trying to bend the debate in terms of her predefined list of talking points.
Rearely have I witnessed a ‘debate’ with such personal vitriol and agendas. Much heat…no light.
Sad really.
Then again we had the obligatory…Yeeeeooooowwww!!! from some deluded unionist. The usual carry-on!!
There were some DUP members within the audience, I think this diluted to impact of the audiences participation.
Incidentally why does everyone have so much praise for Parsley? He was mediocre at best!
The only candidates who came out of that looking better than when they went in were Parsley and Maginness.
Despite having little of the actual time (Diane Dodds saw to that), no notes, and looking slightly lost over at the side, Parsley’s conclusion was damning.
Diane Dodds was just nauseating. She had little grasp of the real issues, made false claims, tried to play the victim, laughed loudly at other candidates (ironic, non?), and was generally her usual hypocritical self. I feel sorry for the DUP volunteers, and Deputy Leaders who have to put up with her.
Jim Allister wasn’t much better. However, he actually has a grasp of the issues, seems to be more principled (however much I disagree with him) and isn’t as deceptive as others.
Whatever your opinion of them, Bairbre de Brun and Jim Nicholson looked like good candidates in comparison with Allister and Dodds. They had an ounce of respect, and knew the issues. They also appeared to actually be productive in the European Parliament. They looked quite shifty on the expenses issue, which is concerning.
Maginness was pretty much the same, but was more effective when he spoke, and certainly more ‘on-the-ball’.
Agnew seems like a nice enough bloke who has strong beliefs, but just seemed like he was out of his depth. If you are out of your depth against the other candidates, what would he be like in Brussels?! That said, I think he’d make a decent enough MLA.
To conclude, there was no-one inspiring in the slightest. For me, after weeding out people I’d definitely not vote for with a gun to my head (which leaves me with 4). I’ll be voting for who I think will represent me and my personal views best – in terms of party and the personality of the candidate (leaving me with 2).
Outsider – you’re well named, mate!
AJJM – spot on, you’ve made the point I was on to make. Parsley had the disadvantage of the worst position, and yet still made the most memorable point, having exuded competence throughout without so much as a note in front of him.
The very idea that a single person would give Dodds a higher preference than Parsley, given the obvious competence gap, frankly makes me want to emigrate!