“Is abstention from Westminster now an end in itself?”
With an abstentionist Sinn Féin irrelevant to the number crunching at Westminster it’s interesting to see Gearóid Ó Cairealláin, in the North Belfast News, musing aloud about the “elephant in the room”.
At his Irish Central website, Niall O’Dowd argues that “The time is now to take that step” [end Sinn Féin's abstentionism] – although he mistakenly believes that “the Sinn Fein party is abstaining because of the oath of loyalty to the Queen”.
As Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams stated before the election, it’s not, or at least, not just, about the Parliamentary oath of allegiance.
That’s a position the party’s held for some time – as a reference to an Irish Times report, dated 5 December 1997, in the Parliamentary research paper [pdf file] noted previously reveals
Mr Adams said the question of the oath was “a bit of a distraction”. While a change might be good for British democracy, it would not alter Sinn Fein’s position. Asked if he could see himself sitting in the Commons following a change to the oath, Mr Adams said: “No, because the issue for us is the claim of that parliament to jurisdiction in Ireland.”
That party position was re-iterated in 2006 when there was a suggestion that the oath could be changed.
But Sinn Féin has abandoned other abstentionist policies in the past.
In 1970 the Official Sinn Féin, later the Workers Party, was created after a Sinn Féin Ard Fheis debate on abandoning the party’s abstentionist policy in relation to Dáil Éireann. The then titled Provisional Sinn Féin maintained the Dáil abstentionist policy until 1986.
Sinn Féin adopted the “armalite and ballot box strategy” in 1981, and first contested modern elections in Northern Ireland with the 1982 Assembly elections, from which they abstained. They also abstained from the Northern Ireland Forum but adopted non-abstentionist policies for elections to local authorities (next held in 1985) and to the European Parliament.
But post-Belfast Agreement of 1998, Sinn Féin now sit in a Stormont administration in which all laws passed require Royal Assent before being enacted.
Given that constitutional position, perhaps it’s time for Sinn Féin to explain fully, for the benefit of their own supporters, why abstention from Westminster remains the party’s policy.
Topic: Politics
Region: Northern Ireland, UK
Now that the British parties seem to have sorted out their Government can we finally stop the nonsense that an Irish Republican should sit in the British Parliament.
To SDLP voters – if Fianna Fail finally come North would you expect them to be abstentionist?
you may find a better turnout when people can cast their first preference without the sort of duress that was in action in this election. And no, I am not supposing they will all transfer uniformly – I said pretty likely, not certainly. Don’t shit yourself. And no, I have nothing do do with the DUP, and would NEVER consider voting for them. I was making a point about the change, not a party political point
Germany could not afford unity either; so all the pundits, especially the Brits told us at the time. Now Germany despite some problems in the old East Germany, is one of the ritchest countries in the European Union.
The Irish people did not screw up the Celtic Tiger, a bunch of corrupt Builders, Bankers and W*****s , aided and facillated by equally corrupt Finaan Failure elite insiders interfacing with them did.
We will rise again, the Celtic Tiger showed what was possible, we have some of the best educated young people in Europe, we have no shortage of ideas, just financing and that will come too.
As to a United Ireland, give Cameron and Co a few months of cut backs and this mat seem very attractive indeed.
Hello Horse
I have tried to find out if that is the case, but so far I have seen nothing ‘solid’. The author of the blog you sent me suggested it but even he did not sound sure.
There is plenty of room for speculation, all of it no names, no pack drill, but I will keep looking…And, who knows…
Germany could not afford unity either; so all the pundits, especially the Brits told us at the time. Now Germany despite some problems in the old East Germany, is one of the richest countries in the European Union.
The Irish people did not screw up the Celtic Tiger, a bunch of corrupt Builders, Bankers and W*****s , aided and facilitated by equally corrupt Fianna Failure elite insiders interfacing with them did.
We will rise again, the Celtic Tiger showed what was possible, we have some of the best educated young people in Europe, we have no shortage of ideas or projects, just a temporary absence of financing and that will come too.
As to a United Ireland, give Cameron and Co a few months of cut backs and the South may seem very attractive indeed.
Apparently the EU Commission has said the UK will have the biggest deficit in the EU by the end of the year.
Ireland began its cuts some time ago – the Tories will slash budgets and Norn Iron will be the last thing on Camerons mind, apart from how much he can squeeze out of it.
Of course Ireland will survive and prosper. I have no doubt of that!
As a socialist I would not like to see social welfare payments cut to the bone (some might say they already have been) before there are jobs to replace it.
Well of course Pippakin thats why theres a 100 year suppression order in the intrests of national security on the inquiry findings. But if you look a bit harder through the alternative news channels you will find articles surrounding the accusations.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/01/52200.html?c=on
good.sf cant complain they dont take their seats.
I know! but surely there must be a paper trail. If there is an order, we aught to be able to find the order, if not the content. I have seen nothing that leads me to the order.
Do not think I do not believe it. I think it is highly likely, but to go further than what anyone thinks, it needs proof, at least of the order. I cannot find it yet, but I will keep looking.
Thanks for the link. I will look into it.
And the unionists will see how irrelevant they are in their ‘own’ country.
Only the Unionists themselves can make themselves irrelevant in Ireland. As to across the water, they were only ever relevant there as battlefield fodder and occasionally as lobby fodder when numbers were needed in Westminster.
Again I pose the question, how often did Cameron visit since he became leader of the Tories and before the election?
Their numbers are not now needed; will they accept the swinging cuts about to be imposed out of solidarity with the Tories or will they stand with the opposing forces including Labour and Sinn Fein.
Abstaining is not an option, that position is reserved for Sinn Fein!
if Sinn Fein were to end the policy of abstentionism it would lead to very few benifits for them and would probably damage them significantly with their electorate and within the party itself, such a move would no doubt further split their support base in turn benifitting the die hard dissidents and provide further ammunition for those who claim that Sinn Fein have sold out; this would damage the peace process and Sinn Feins own goals,it is also worth noting that the 50 years prior to the 1918 elections Ireland was represented by unionist and Home rulers who took their seats in London,and both parties were buttered up with false promises when their votes were required to form a Liberal or Tory government,do we really need the same divide and conquer policy to be repeated when what we really need is for both communities to integrate and work together and not to bee used as tools against each other;
the same way SF are irrelevant in eire
You probably don’t know this, jim, but Éire is Irish for Ireland. How can you be the largest party in the 6 counties and be irrelevant in Ireland?
Peace has not bought us closer to a united Ireland. Just as violence within a united Ireland for Protestant separatism would not solidify a united Ireland, violence in a partitioned Ireland does not bring us further from a united Ireland.
Also, it’s nonsense that “we all want” a united Ireland. The evidence is that of those in Northern Ireland who would bother to turn up to a referendum 70% would vote for the union with Great Britain in a straight contest.
Socaire
How can you possibly accuse the SDLP of hypocrisy over an oath when SF is led by a man who denies ever being a volunteer in PIRA let alone its leader!
It was not Tony Bliar or Labour who started the peace process, it was the Tory government and John Major. I will wait and see how this unlikely alliance unfolds.
It is inevitable there will be cuts. We in the south are already suffering quite stringent cuts, indeed I understand there have been protests in Dublin this evening. Why should the north think it is somehow immune to the financial problems the world has to deal with.
socaire: You probably don’t know this, jim, but Éire is Irish for Ireland. How can you be the largest party in the 6 counties and be irrelevant in Ireland?
Check article 4 of the Irish Constitution, which says that Éire is the name of the state in Irish. The constitution, of course, applies just to the 26 county state, especially these days.
Of course, some republican fundies don’t recognise the validity of the Irish constitution; and some language purists might insist the Éire would always and only apply to the island, not a part of it.
Quite simple, really: Éire is the name for the Irish state. Northern Ireland is part of the British state, and not part of Ireland.
Article 4 of the Irish constitution: “The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland.”
Northern Ireland is, however, part of the “island of Ireland” – a geographical territory that includes two seperate sovereign jurisdictions. In that way the label is shared geographically with the British state but not politically, so those born in Northern Ireland are born British (but do have the right under Article 2 to apply for Irish citizenship if they want it), whereas those born in Ireland are born Irish and are Irish. The difference is essentially that British people born in Northern Ireland have the birthright under the Irish constitution (qualified by law) to apply for Irish citizenship whereas people born in Ireland are Irish by birthright (subtle but nonetheless substantial difference).
I have been reading this thread with some amusement. it seems some are not only selective in their choice of what is or is not an acceptable lie, they also take their welcome in a united Ireland very much for granted.
I am in favour of a united Ireland, but I must admit there are one or two I would happily leave for the Brits to deal with – in whichever way they choose.
you said 5 years last week, i see the elections have made you change your calculations.
“Given that constitutional position, perhaps it’s time for Sinn Féin to explain fully, for the benefit of their own supporters, why abstention from Westminster remains the party’s policy.”
Seems to me the electorate, that just returned 5 SF candidates not to sit at Westminster, need no such explanation.
its 5 years if you admit membership, why on GODs earth would any one without the right protection admit to this.
“Those five votes would have been crucialo in the number crunching this week and the likliehood is we are entering a period of small majorities and minority coalitions.”
Obviously events have caught up with the day-dreamers and the site’s resident obsessive-compulsive but outside of those cretins, did anybody here seriously think a British government, reliant on SF support, was ever going to be formed with SF support? I can see how that would have gone down with the Daily mail, Telegrah, Sun, Times, etc
I disagree with your 70% but. the south has a great deal to do/ Thanks to the the violence of some and the complete lack of participation of others, there are a disproportionate number of people who feel safer in the UK.
This number is changing, and now that we have peace we have every reason to expect the electorate to recognise the advantages to be gained from united Ireland.
How many times do we have to go over and over and over this same topic. Sinn fein stand as abstentionist- they recieve votes on this basis- the majority of Nationalists see westminister as irrelevant- Sinn Feins electorate do not want them to take their seats- this is not going to change!
Look Pete I can see why you and other unionists don’t like this as in a perfect unionist world everyone would take their seats as normal- however you know aswel as I do that many people here see things a lot different- you don’t have to like it but the least you can do is accept it and move on.
However i don”t think this will be the end of this – Sinn Fein Watch – Day 9999- BREAKING NEWS – Shock Sinn Fein still don’t take their seats……
correct alias.thats sorca put in her north west corner
So, if Gerry Adams turns out to be a liar then that makes it OK for Richie’s babes – a ‘nationalist’ party – to perjure themselves before all the people of these Western European Isles? She’s going to fight the cuts! Remember the jibe about being savaged by a dead sheep?
Are you telling me that Éire is not the Irish for Ireland?
It’s not so much that they don’t take their seats but that they don’t take the oath/affirmation of loyalty and allegiance to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth, Defender of the Faith, etc., etc.
……….. like wot the Stoops do!
How did you know that I came from Donegal,jim?
some pretend hardliners against SINN FEIN tonight, i also noticed that not one of these said anything against the crown or the oath, speaks volumes.
“With an abstentionist Sinn Féin irrelevant to the number crunching at Westminster …”
Slight correction on this. With all seats occupied the tipping point for a majority is 326 seats i.e. 650 ÷ 2 = 325. Owing the Sinn Féin abstentionism, the practical tipping point is 323 i.e. (650-5) ÷ 2 = 322.5.
On the subject of those apparently ready to walk the walk, but not to talk the talk – I believe the correct cockney phrase for those full of shite and not a lot else is bottle job…
Damn good point, Mr Crumlin. But they took the oath to King George before so what’s the problem about going again?
you mean a bigot?
But the new government has 363 MPs on their side.
The time when SF becomes crucial or relevant is not now.
i didnt but seeing your a sf sheep you probobly have a SECOND house in thon place hope you like the new rate bill sf voted for
I would love to see Westminster try this. This may be constitutionally correct, but is this ever going to happen without major consequences?
is that the same oath some of the leadership took when they jumped ship…………..dennis donaldson..scap…ect………ect,,,,ect
they were not leadership, maybe thought they were, and look what that type of thinking got them.
“Is abstention from Westminster now an end in itself?”
No
I recall several unionist MPs resigning and making themselves absent from Westminister over the Anglo-Irish agreement.
I also recall Michael Davitts famous quote – when he too resigned from the Commons and made himself absent – which I think may be the answer to your question.
And Pipp, is there a cockney phase for those who talk the talk but don’t walk the walk? because a lot of candidates made a lot of talk about benefits of been in the Commons, lets see if they can prove SF(and Mick Davitt) wrong and walk the walk
If SF were to take their seats would that not be a U-Turn on their election pledges and also harm the party?
If they are to abandon that policy would it not be best to wait until the next election and put it to their electorate?
And is abstentionism really that important ?
Is going to Westminster relevant when most powers have been devolved?
Pipp
I believe its ‘talk the talk but not walk the walk’, and no ‘bottle job’ is not a cockney phrase.
Besides, if they are taking the expenses – are they true abstentionists?
Exactly!
And haven’t the Conservatists pledged to remove their expenses if they refuse to take their seats?
SF reserve the right to lobby for their constituents in London. At the minute that entitles them to expenses thought as you say that could change any time. The 5 seats they hold represent less than 1% of the MPs in the commons, and all the deals which have led us to this point have been conducted in back rooms. No one can provide an example of a piece of legislation where the presence of SFs 5 MPs would have made any difference.
It’s a dead issue for the actual voters of SF but it allows some Unionists to continue their wet dream of forcing Republicans to be Unionists (in their heads at least) kind of like the bs with the NI football team. Those same people like to think that the 18 NI MPs are looked on as normal by the rest of Westminster, but in truth they aren’t. They’re insignificant spongers who have no impact on any day to day deals, and do all their business in back rooms.
Couldn’t have put it better myself Neil.