Tom Elliott (updated with video of press conference)
Tom Elliott has won with a comfortable majority. His supporters will be travelling back home to Fermanagh with a feeling of contentment that it was a job well done. Basil and his supporters can take some comfort from his 31.4% share of the vote, which was in his zone of acceptability.
The campaign highlighted the need for the UUP to take their brake off and shift out of reverse. Basil’s supporters will be desperately hoping that the party machine doesn’t forget that victory for Tom – particularly by such a decent margin – doesn’t mean that the issues around the party’s strategy and standing in the wider community have gone away. To survive and remain credible and influential in local politics, the UUP will need to stop the modernisers from giving up on the party and politics … or worse still, taking their energy and talents elsewhere.
The DUP will be happy tonight. Alliance will be happy that the UUP won’t be steering too far into their centre ground. And the SDLP will be upset that they’ll still not have a credible ally in the centre ground – the UUP and SDLP tend to succeed together and fail together.
It sounds like you are a glass half empty person?
Thanks, slug.
But I thought from comments on the previous blog about this race that there was a similar event when Trimble became leader and “slipped up the middle”
I remember when Trimble was elected they put a banner newsflash along the bottom of the screen. I believe they were showing “Death Becomes Her” at the time.
Do UUP peers take the Conservative whip in the Lords under UCUNF? Surely if UUP prospective parliamentary candidates continue to pledge to take the tory whip UCUNF will continue in fact if not in name, the two parties merely agreeing not to flaunt their relationship in front of the electorate.
Agreed !
What is the issue for dumping preview anyway ?
The reasons surely must be policy rather than technical since almost all sites and some far less sophisticated than slugger have this facility?
Comment please Mick !
That was not a gathering of party members, instead it was a gathering of the “UUC” (Ulster Unionist Council). The UUC was, in fact, not much less than 1000 in composition and it was a group drawn from various elements in a formulatic way– a certain % of reps from the councillors, constituency associations, etc; (indeed there was for most of its time a group of 100 from the Orange Order which I believe included people who were not even necessarily UUP supprters).
I think the only elected rep who comes under UCUNF terms is Nicholson, the MEP. He is in the Conservative group there.
You are right about not flaunting it – a whip taking relationship can allow for many elements of UCUNF.
Where UCUNF went the extra mile was in candidate selection – the Conservatives had a veto on UUP candidate selection. That part did not work out well.
There was also a different branding. Candidates stood as “Conservative and unionst” rather than UUP and that element was different from the whip arrnagement.
PS. Interestingly, it looks like we are going to have Lords elections soon – perhaps by the next general election. This is in the agreement for the current Westminster government.
One leading blue print is that these elections would be on a regional STV system which would give the UUP more chance. Here, again, a relationship with Conservatives may be of benefit to both sides.
You may be right – I have the same worries. But on the other hand he may have some qualities that come out over time. The fact he pulled off this 70% does show considerable skills – that sort of vote does not happen without reason. His interview today on Talkback was rather good I thought.
Thanks again, slug, for your patience in educating me.
Beauty of STV election Beagle, you can vote for them all!
Seriously though, out of the big four parties, don’t the SDLP not seem like the most ‘normal’?
Do they carry any baggage?
Apart from their electoral naivety every election, what do they actually do that makes you think they’re an overtly nationalist party other than people knowing it?
If this means Tom spends less time in the lakelands I guess I’m happy
Northern Irelands loss is Fermanaghs gain.
Love the fact Tom hasn’t even been in the job for 12 hours and already the in fighting has started. Trevor Ringland to offer him tickets to next years all ireland final if an ulster team makes it otherwise he walks. Tom isnt going to go back on his word otherwise he will look even more spineless so looks like Trevor’s political career is either over or with the Alliance.
I’m sorry CS but what sort of arrogance is that?
Dry your eyes. It’s not arrogance.
The UUP an irrelevance?
That’s not what I said. You remind me of a certain south Belfast Ulster Unionist who has a tendancy to fly off the handle after misunderstanding things.
I said the the UUP leadership was irrelevant, because it is. Changing faces at the top of the party will not, by itself, arrest the decline. Most of the talent in unionism went over to the DUP 5-10 years ago. The DUP have been able to find a way to combine taking a moderate approach WRT SF/powersharing/taigs/etc with dynamism and a work ethic which enables them to appeal to the electorate. The UUP haven’t a hope in hell of accomplishing that. That’s why, despite the DUP being severely on the back foot, they still beat the crap out of the UUP in the elections just past.
Maybe, but considering that the UUP as more votes than Alliance and considering they have more seats than Alliance in the Assembly I thought you might be more considering than an impetulant child.
Ah yes, the ten million sheep love grass argument. Always a winner.
Its this sort of attitude than puts people off Alliance, you do know this?
No, I don’t know it. Arrogance isn’t an endearing characteristic in anyone, but all the evidence I have seen is that voters will overlook it if the policies and the message are right, and if the work ethic is there.
They designate nationalist in the assembly.
Do they carry any baggage?
A certain SDLP councillor told me on my Facebook page that it wasn’t right for Anglicans to criticise the Catholic Church over child abuse, etc, given what had happened with the penal laws. I think it’s safe to say that there is a viciously sectarian streak running through certain people in that party.
Speaking about Margaret Ritchie and Mark Durkan I think very highly of them.
Mark Durkan is an excellent MP. His contributions to the House of Commons are very good indeed. I would certainly vote for him. Margaret Ritchie is very committed to the shared future agenda and again in her constituency i would certainly vote for her at Westminster level.
I have visited other word press sites. MV, and none (only a few mind you) had a preview option. So it might be technical.
Although I think Tom was out of line in his views I think Trevor Ringland was out of line in going on Nolan this morning. There are better ways to do these things.
Comrade stalin
The SDLP are many things, old, middleclass, boring, however vicious sectarian I think not.
Trevor,
is just distancing himself from the views of the new leader of his party who must be a major embarassment for many in his party and he probably reflects the views (as evidenced on Slugger) of many ordinary decent Prods(intended in a non-perjorative sense)
Having heard Tommo talking not only is he a sectarian bigot but is decidely lacking in any charm or by the sound of it much intellect. Shocking choice – great stuff.
The only change that might be contemplated in the First Minister rules is to have the offices of FM & DFM rotate as the Lord Mayoralty does.
I wouldn’t support a change like that. Why are arrangements like this always perfectly acceptable until the day comes when they won’t benefit unionists ?
An SF FM is not the end of the world. And SF are nothing without a victim complex, which you’ll merrily feed if you change the goalposts against them in this way.
In my time here I have met very few Prods who are not sectarian bigots. Fortunately this one doesn’t matter as his party is now an irrelevance, except perhaps to a few Fermanagh Orangeman Farmers
“In my time here I have met very few Prods who are not sectarian bigots.”
?? do you mean that, or did you mean to say “I have met very few Prods who are not sectarian bigots.” as I suspect?
slug,
You have forgotten an important rule: Don’t feed trolls.
Yeah ! could be right. I was referring to sites generally.
Joe – good point!
Agreed, just the beginning of the end of yor artificial six county statelet.
Suggest you have a word with Comrade Garland regarding North Korea, for an exit refuge, Cuba is looking a bit shaky for long term party control !
‘Normal’? ‘Baggage’? We’re all so caught up in the orange/green business that we forget the abnormal excess baggage that comes in the form of failed socialist dogma.
Trevor Ringland is someone who always stood for engagement across the various divides in Northern Ireland. I think it seems that he has recognised that his place is no longer in the UUP. How many other members, and voters, find themselves in the same position? Many will be carefully considering their positions over the next days or weeks.
If they do move will they move together and where to Conservatives, Alliance, new party?
Plainly spinning
And capitalism has been a resounding success especially the banking system ?
A bunch of incompetent finance industry chancers on this Island have left the next two or three generations deprived of hospitals, schools and other vital services while their theft and waste is paid off.
When Communism collapsed at least there were state assets to sell : our incompetent capitalist bastards just wasted everything !
Correction : make that wasted or stole everything
A good election for Sinn Fein and Alliance.
UUP as a stereotype SF can feel comfortable with.
Alliance chinned the DUP and the UUP didn’t.
Basil back in the box.
Sinn Fein?
Tom doesn’t seem cut out for the leadership role at present, and his interview on Talkback last week was shocking, but give him time and he may just grow into the job. Clearly Basil was just too much of a change for the UUP male/over 65, rank and file.
I’d say he’ll improve if he moves towards the centre and takes advice on how to deal with the media. Sometimes you have to say certain things to get elected before you can change things.
On the positive side as he will have to be up in the morning to milk the cows, he will have to get to bed early the night before.
A safe pair of hands : he do not do mimic public figures, or do political impersonations either, especially those of a party leader!
So whats the problem ?
Perhaps he should take more of an interest out of politeness but then again its a bit like you taking more of an interest in say Irish cricket?
Comrade Stalin
“I wouldn’t support a change like that. Why are arrangements like this always perfectly acceptable until the day comes when they won’t benefit unionists ?”
Well said. I am a moderate Nationalist and I’ve never supported Sinn Fein.
However, you’re spot on about the hypocrisy of a large number of Unionists.
All the time I was growing up in the North, we constantly had Unionists going on about democracy and the refusal of Republicans to accept it.
They obviously conveniently forgot about their gerrymandering in Derry and denying Catholics votes for 50 years.
At that time I was a firm SDLP supporter (under John Hume and Seamus Mallon) so I have always believed in real democracy.
However, many unionists are so hypocritical – for decades they kept Catholics out of the Lord Mayor’s parlour in Belfast. Even when the SDLP in Derry rotated the position (at a time when they could have had it constantly!), this was not reciprocated by Unionists in Belfast – in fact Unionists effectively through it in their face!.
I can undersatnd many Unionists having issues with MMcG.
However, many even moderate Catholics like myself have had to accept dealing with people like David Ervine (who I admired), Gary McMichael, Billy Hutchinson etc. We are also uneasy with people like McCrea, Robinson, Wilson whose position on ‘Loyalist” terrorism has always been ambiguous to say the least.
However, we are where we are. So the people have spoken and, as we are all democrats – according to Unionists, we must accept the will of the people.
Frankly, it’s a bit pathetic as MMcG is equal to Peter Robinson anyway.
Elliott has no f**king chance of getting those rules changed. The fact that he has made it a priority shows that his chance of the UUP appealing to moderate Catholics is rapidly reducing – Basil McCrea would have been much more successful in this area.
Personally, I think that electing Elliott is a bad move for Unionism and moving NI forward. This will make the next assembly elections all about a sectarian head count at a time when people are losing jobs, homes, welfare etc. – however that’s the decision of the UUP and we must accept it.
Likewise, if next years election makes MMcG “first” minister then Elliott and Unionism must accept it. If they don’t, it will show up their decades of ranting on about democracy as a load of hypocritical BS.
Unlike Tom I think I prefer the StA rules to the GFA rules because the StA rules remove designation from the matter altogether – it is just the largest party. Whereas the GFA has the designations determining it. As I don’t like designation, at least the StA gets rid of this.
MonkDeWallyDeHonk
“Elliott has no f**king chance of getting those rules changed. The fact that he has made it a priority shows that his chance of the UUP appealing to moderate Catholics is rapidly reducing – Basil McCrea would have been much more successful in this area.”
Tommo knows well he has no chance of getting those rules changed he is simply out for revenge on the DUP and can easily make a big political issue out of it nor is he remotely interested in appelaing to moderate catholics as he cant even bring himself to go to a GAA game and is clearly set on getting immoderate Prods back from the DUP.
Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit
Alas, I think that you’re spot on in both your assertions.
That’s why I believe that electing Elliott is a bad move for the North and frankly it will ultimately be a bad move for the UUP and Unionism in general.
The only thing he “offers” is a backwards move to try and “out Orange” the DUP. As far as I can see, his power base within the UUP is largely made up of older OO members and/or FST based backwoodsmen.
Basil McCrea has his faults but I think he was trying to bring the UUP and Unionism in general forward and make it more attractive on a cross-community basis.
Frankly, he doesn’t have the baggage (OO, UDR, anti GAA etc) that makes Elliott so unappealing to even moderate Catholics (or even moderate progressive Protestants).
Despite Basil’s gracious speech after loosing the election, I don’t think that Elliott or his supporters have any interest in taking any of Basil’s progressive ideas on board.
IMO, there is absolutely no chance of Elliott taking the UUP forward. At the very best, all he can provide is managed decline. A genuine progressive Unionist alternative to the DUP needed to be offered – instead all we will get is an uninspiring version of “DUP lite”.
They won’t get many (if any votes back from the DUP) and I believe that moderate/progressive Protestants will either note vote in increasing numbers or perhaps some will vote for Alliance.
The SDLP will be increasingly marginalised as even Moderate Catholics see the supposedly moderate Unionist party trying to out Orange the DUP. I agree that Elliott doesn’t give a toss about moderate (or any other Catholic) opinion. I think this will simply cause a hardening of opinion in the Catholic community and increase in SF support.
In terms of the future of the North and Unionism in general, I think it’s bad. The only “winners” from this result will be the DUP and, to a point, Sinn Feinn.
“I think it’s safe to say that there is a viciously sectarian streak running through certain people in that party.”
Well, I have heard a certain recently appointed Alliance councillor making horribly snobbish and derogatory remarks against working-class people living in the Markets. Does that mean Alliance have a viciously bourgeois streak running through certain people in that party?
I think folks are conflating two separate dynamics: (a) the appeal of the British state to Catholics, and (b) the appeal of political parties within the British state to Catholics.
While they are undoubtedly interlinked to some degree, it doesn’t follow that the appeal of the former is determined by the appeal of the latter.
The “cold house” now has the benefit of central heating in all rooms courtesy of the British state, so Catholics can be nice and cosy within the British state irrespective of the manners of their fellow house-mates.
Other related issues such as which denomination has the largest number of seats in Stormont only had any meaning when that parliament had the power to alter the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. However, that issue is now to be determined by plebiscite and not by parliament so even if the Catholics outnumber the Protestants in Stormont they still won’t be able to alter the constitutional status by virtue of that position.
Besides, British rule is now administrated under a consociational arrangement in addition to various rights-based parameters that serve to constrain any sectarian tendencies of those who are elected locally to administer that rule.
To add to the above: there are two more recent dynamics that are usually conflated in discussion, and it might be helpful to look at them separately.
Firstly, the dynamic to get Catholics to vote for unionist parties; and secondly, the dynamic to to get unionist parties to develop policies that would have the approval of Catholics.
It is claimed (by progressive unionists) that unionists must attract Catholic voters in order to maintain the constitutional status quo, and that unionist parties must therefore develop policies and attitudes that appeal to Catholics.
That is a bit narrow, of course, since the appeal is usually that unionism itself (rather than just individual unionist parties) should make itself more attractive to Catholics but since the progressive unionists reject concepts of unionist unity then their agenda must by default involve the reform of individual unionist parties.
That is where the two dynamics are conflated. Those dynamics might look the same but they’re actually very different. It isn’t necessary to achieve the first dynamic if the real purpose is to help maintain the constitutional status quo by implementing the second dynamic. The first dynamic is only important if the real purpose is self-serving, having the ulterior aim of promoting a particular political party by tapping into a new pool of voters.
Personally, I doubt that unionists need to be pro-active in that way at all since the constitutional status quo is maintained by the British state and not by anything in particular that they may do or omit to do as a political group. As long as the British state keeps the subvention in place and continues to circumscribe the ability of the locals to determine their own affairs then there is no reason why the conduct of those affairs should cause grave offence to any section of the community.
Good manners, courtesy, and due consideration for your civic and political neighbours is all that is really needed, not some overt agenda that is aimed at turning Catholics into unionists for self-serving purposes that masquerade as being more noble than they actually are. It’s a good way to get the Catholics to laugh at you, but not much else.
Thanks CS for breaking the mould – APNI is so often accused of being “too nice”.
Alias
A factor you do not appear to consider is the culture within a political party can consititute a chill factor or welcome newcomers. I know someone attracted in recent years to the UUP but who after atttending a few meetings was put off by what he regarded as sectarian attitudes. And he was from a Protestant background. How typical I cannot say but tuning in to the UUP leadership debate leads me to think it is on the button.
Probably !
Granni,
“……..I know someone attracted in recent years to the UUP but who after attending a few meetings was put off by what he regarded as sectarian attitudes…….”
In cultural circles that is one of the most heartening things that I have experienced in recent years. People from a unionist background, instead of a blanket denial that sectarianism do not exist save for the Orange Order types, they now want to sit down over a cup of coffee or whatever and discuss the aspects of the problem with me in a way they are not still prepared to do with Northern Nationalists.
I know these people are sincere; those from middle and upper class background ( Alliance types ? couldn’t resist that ! ) are simply not aware of the extent of the problem in the interface areas and sectarian targeting of Catholic homes by armed loyalist gangs. Their usual question just shows how out of touch they are…. ” If it is that bad why are the police doing something about it ”
There are two kinds of sectarianism in the North, one that is a hangover from the Planter v Wood-kern days. Planter stock, their history and culture is superior to the natives. That translates to down to a prod banging a drum : he may be living in more impoverished conditions than the taig area he is marching through but by God he is protestant and still a step above the ignorant taig bogmen and their romanist superstition priestcraft.
The same attitudes can be found in the ghetto areas in the US deep south, they may be living in what is usually referred to in the politically incorrect terms of ‘trailer trash’ squalor but…… ‘yes siree , at least they are white folk, not like them there jumped plantation niggars on main st. who think they are something just because some nigger school place supported by Northern yankee bleeding heart liberals made them quack doctors or dentists”
Most Northern Nationalists, since partition, had developed survival strategies, when a Nationalist and his girlfriend came up against a B Specials or later a B Specials mark 2 in the UDR, humiliating both, especially the man in front of his partner was the order of the day!
They just had to check their pride and take it as the alternative was immediate physical abuse followed by a court charge for ‘assault on a polieceman or soldier’ who were regarded by nationalists as just sectarian tugs in uniform. I have been in a few of these searches myself and had my ankles kicked etc to provoke a reaction.
I have been in Northern Nationalist houses many times when the killing of a UDR soldier was announced on the radio and tv. Let me just say that the reaction was instructive. Every teenager and adult there had a multiple stories to tell of individual humiliation and victimization at the hands of such people.
The response to such unfortunate death, in the words from the song ‘McAlpines fusileers’……… “well it was not what the rich call prayers”.
Most of the fifteen to twenty five age group of educated Catholic / Nationalists have not experienced this and the cringe / resement factor is gone for them. Most older Republicans, Nationalists generally have turned over a new leaf and have a new confidence and assurance, they have not forgotten the past, it is all still all there, but they have moved on in their attitudes.
An ex UDR man once gave me the typical response on the other side …… ” We were defending Ulster, our people and our property from terrorism, if the taigs we stopped were not the Ra or their supporters, then they knew who they were and did not inform on killers, so we treated them all exactly the same”
Grannie…… you can offer all the moderate views and explanations you like but the naked truths are that Sinn Fein are in joint administration in the six counties because of bomb and bullet. Republican supporters accept the grim necessity of the armed conflict and the consequences of it. Other nationalists who did not agree with militant armed republicanism, never the less appreciated where republicans were coming from and the reality of how they got into to power.
In the unionist side the there is resentment of the fact that Sinn Fein came to power with bomb and bullet, every Sinn Fein election success is regarded by the unionist community as yet another endorsement of ‘ murderers and gunmen’
That attitude will not change for the foreseeable future, that can only come if there is an honest, critical examination of how the six county abomination came about. That is being done regularly in academic circles : I got notice yesterday of a symposium on the dispositions of the Colonial massacres of the 1640′s and how these shaped the attitudes of Cromwell and his soldiers towards the ‘mere Irish’ when it came to Cromwells Ironsides caring out their own systematic massacre of native Irish.
Unfortunately I cannot attend . If there as usual I would have met a few from ‘the other side’. Our discussion afterwards would have been on the subject matter and on what was revealed in the seminar or talk. We would have a shared historians curiosity about these things and when discussing events from our mutual viewpoints, it would have been only be for the purpose of deepening our understanding of the events concerned and of why they arose.
The sad truth is that unless there is a way found to take these University atmospheres into community centers and local venues to follow the dictum of Thomas Davis….” Educate that you may be free”, working class Northerners, and Protestants in particular will stay imprisoned in their poisoned, sectarian bigotry!
Meanwhile back at a Belfast ‘Peace Wall’ interface…………. ?
Nothing for moderate, progressive, anti-sectarian unionists to vote for.
.
Sincere question : Why would somebody with your outlook not consider Alliance
Because they are not pro-Union, whereas I am (as are, pretty much by definition, all moderate unionists. I believe passionately that the Union is best for the future of Northern Ireland.
That said I would ‘consider’ supporting Alliance (or Greens) in the next election if Elliott’s UUP continue down a 1950s traditionalist path. That wouldn’t mean I would identify with Alliance though, I’ve always supported the UUP and it saddens me to see how the UUP is ending up.
In fairness, he pulled off his result among an electorate that was overwhelmingly over-60, rural and male. (not Tom’s fault – the UUP’s fault for not diversifying it’s membership base)
Next May we’ll see how he performs among the real NI electorate.