Woodward plans to hand parading disputes to local councils…
Has Peter Robinson ambushed Sinn Fein on parading? Shaun Woodward sent two confidential letters to the Executive review committee on policing and justice more or less telling them the government is planning to buy into Paddy Ashdown’s plans to stand down the Parades’ Commission. This critical matter may now end up in the hands of local councils which, we are told, will facilitate dialogue with the Orders and local people.
In the event of failure it is proposed the First and deputy first ministers will appoint a panel. Where is all this leading ? More chaos? What about the role of the police ? Is that service now expected to be pushed back into the firing line? Next question? Is Mr. Robinson and his colleagues gearing up to ‘gut’ or ‘hollow out’ the cross border bodies which are looking increasingly limp and meaningless?
Comrade Stalin
Whatever the setup becomes, it needs to be independent of politicians (yet accountable to them), in the way that the Parades Commission is.
Those are arguably the wisest words I’ve yet heard spoken on the issue. The politicians must be kept offside.
Thanks for that info, Comrade.
Comrade Stalin,
the wisdom of having politicans involved is certainly debatable but if they are to be involved and contentious parades get referred back up to Stormo then the deciding vote on any committee/panel will have to be that of the Alliance or the system simply would not have support of the orange and green camps.
This is a positive thing for the Alliance party, the only party non-tribal enough to be trusted to make an impartial decision, given proof, if further proof were needed, to the contention that if you want non-tribal politics in the Irish Northern Territories then the Alliance Party and not funny the UUP/ToryAlliance/what-the-feck-is-it/merger is your only man.
This is a positive thing for the Alliance party,
Supping from a poisoned chalice is hardly positive.
If that were to happen, it could, unfortunately, end up in the hands of our judges, through requests for Judicial Review. As if they don’t have enough to do as it is. (Judges, that is.)
Sammy,
You’re being very nice, but I don’t want Alliance to take the role of emperors ruling by decree. That is certainly not how I would see the justice ministry operating if Alliance end up taking the hot seat.
joeCanuck,
surely that same logic will apply to the Justice Ministry – if you have a strength and a distinctive positive role to play then surely you gotta flaunt it.
Will ‘West of the Bann’ look even greener after this move?
if you have a strength and a distinctive positive role to play then surely you gotta flaunt it.
I always thought you were going to be disappointed by what the devolution of justice will mean in practice, but the problem is more acute than I thought.
In that case then, Sammy, why not just appoint the leader of Alliance as a Marching Supremo, since all contentious parades are going to end up in his/her hands anyway, as you envision it.
Let me make a proposal. At the same time as winding down the Parades Commission, set up a one time judicial tribunal to examine all contentious parades (there are only a handful, right?) and to make a semi-permanent (10 or 20 year) ruling on contentious routes. The marching orders and residents groups can make their pitches along with any other 3rd parties who can establish an interest. The PSNI would be included also to state the impact on policing. Everyone would be required to accept the rulings of the Tribunal in advance be it outright allowing or banning or restrictions.
joeCanuck,
The 10 or 20 year idea seems like a reasonable one but you have to wonder what the impact of being told that you are not being allowed to parade/or having to endure a parade for that amount of time would be – it could be a rallying call for action by either side – as it stands and listening to the Orange Order on the other thread that Pete B has – they appear to be able to endure disappointing decisions this year but only becasue they anticipate a change in their fortunes with the abolition of the parades commission in the near future.
Yes, Sammy,
But assuming that the Parades Commission continued to exist, in the absence of changed circumstances, they are going to be presented with the same “facts” year after year and, assuming they are a reasonable bunch of people which I think they are, they are going to keep coming up with the same decision.
The submit word is “half”. Allow contentious parades every other year?
For many Nationalists the parading issue has largely been resolved with a few contentious ones in North Belfast and North Antrim to be sorted out. Any attempt by the DUP OR Sinn Fein to horse trade, reopen this festoring sore and push marches down the Garvaghy and Ormeau Roads again will not be tolerated one iota. The sight of Catholic residents getting hammered off the road once again to allow these sectarian knuckledraggers to strut their loyalist paramilitary hate will kill the political institutions for a generation and drive 1000′s of bitter angry young Nationalists towards the dissidents. Sinn Fein have to get that into their thick detached skulls once and for all. If the Parades Commission is abolished to suit Robinson and Sinn Fein’s lust for ministerial power most of us should emigrate because if past experience is anything we will be in for a horrible period only far worse this time. Those fools who do not learn from their past mistakes are doomed to repeat them.
Joe,
I’d fear that 20 years, or even 10 years, is too short. In any case, a group of residents somewhere – not necessarily with an agenda of their own – may decide that they are sick of a certain parade (or what is associated with it) going past, and dispute it.
In my view the Orange Order get treated very leniently. In other places, such as parts of the USA for example, their parading would be unrestricted but they would be expected to pay for the costs of policing and cleanup. The massive costs of policing and cleanup of the 11/12th are currently borne by the taxpayer. While I respect the right of the OO and their supporters to have a good time, celebrate what they want to celebrate in their own way etc, it annoys me that significant amounts of public money go into this.
These things create all kinds of opportunities for the Shinners to interfere, but it is notable that they have chosen not to. As such, I think the best thing the OO could do is win themselves a bit of credit, and a bit of breathing space, by conceding a few of the contentious parades. That passes the baton of compromise back over to the anti-march brigade and allows them to claim credit, in whatever way they choose, for not giving the hoods and thugs like those in Ardoyne an excuse. Sometimes the best thing to do is back down, even if you feel you are in the right.
Comrade Stalin
Sometimes the best thing to do is back down, even if you feel you are in the right.
Yes, in the wider universe this is known as “compromise”. As a staunch supporter of the Union I look upon the OO as a malodorous doggie turd on the road to the reconciliation of differences.
Hmmm. Reference to turd by Fabianus.
Nurse! Nurse!
borderline
No, a malodorous turd. Do get it right, there’s a good boy, woof.
As I mentioned earlier I remain to be convinced that this was a suprise to SF. I would even suggest that there are so many safe guards built in that SF finger prints appear to be on the proposal.
Horse trading could be the outcome at council level, as it would generally mean the OO having to ask SF for permission to parade West of the Bann and vice versa East of the Bann. Any contentious parades then get kicked upstairs to a commission on which would serve SF nominated members.
If this whole idea has been dreamed up merely as a sop to Robinson for selling the P+J transfer to his followers then I would have to conclude that the cost benefit analysis does not add up.
For while it may work, I would also be equally worried that this proposal may serve only to destablize the situation come “marching season” with councils in uproar and everyone focussing on Parades decisions again. This only serves to raise sectarian tensions and …..well we have all seen that movie before.
It was a strange leap from P+J to gutting cross border bodies but I would still like to hear Mr Mallie expand on his view that the cross border bodies “are looking increasingly limp and meaningless”.
we only need the parade thing sorted for another 7yrs sure were getting a united ireland in 2016 according to the great bearded one if they wont tolerate funding prod schoolkids down south the oo has no future according to geroid
To me this looks like SF eschewing the short game (egg on face/unionists claiming victory) for their legendary long game (republican control of parading)
Funny thing is will they outright ban them or merely impose costs and there by circumventing the equality commision
Are the few thousand orangemen willing to spend millions just to annoy a few thousand non-orangemen?
Will the blue bag brigade pay to attend?
Complacency will be the end of annoy the catholics day