Conservatives and Unionists abandoned on the road to nowhere
Let’s start with the good news for the Ulster Unionists. Membership is up. And up by quite a bit for a party that’s not exactly been making all the best kind of headlines. Some estimates put it at about 2k. Which (if they are paying their dues) is not bad at all.
The bad news is that the failed tie up with the Conservatives, continues to become ever more thin. Jeff Peel (who has consistently blamed the UUs for never having bought into the deal in the first place), was first with the news that the alliance was effectively at an end now the Conservatives are plotting their own competitive future in Northern Ireland.
But its worth taking note of Alex Kane’s column today where he suggests that Conservative Party vascillation means that local Associations will not be able to pick up on that competitive future in time for May’s Assembly elections:
If the Conservative Party, one of the most successful election machines in the world, had wanted to field candidates then it could—and very easily—have put an infrastructure in place. And if it was serious about success at the local council elections being held on the same day, then it would have put up Assembly candidates in some key constituencies and looked to benefit from a trickle down vote. The fact that it chose not to do so tells you everything you need to know about Central Office’s definition of ‘unequivocal support.’
So Irwin has been forced into the absurd position of saying that ‘we will therefore watch with interest the results of the Assembly elections in May and then decide on a detailed long term strategy… and put up credible candidates with the experience that can provide the leadership Northern Ireland requires.’
What is the point of planning to put up candidates in the future? What is the point of walking away from yet another battle? Irwin Armstrong is a thoroughly decent man, a man of utter integrity: but he and the NI Conservatives have signed up to a very bad deal, a deal that will kill off all hope of an electoral breakthrough. Let’s face it, twenty-one years is a very long time to still be talking about a long term strategy!
And in the Irish News Roy Garland believes the Tories had the UUP in mind:
The Conservative Party is not likely to abandon the Union but, as expected, have abandoned the UUP instead. Almost exactly a year ago I warned the Tories they were “out of the depth” and would “live to regret their dalliance” with Ulster Unionists. The Tories have now taken their revenge on a lacklustre UUP that is already on its last legs by kicking them in the teeth.
Hmmm… Whatever the intention, Mr Cameron must be regretting the day ever involved himself in Northern Ireland’s political quagmire.
Seymour,
Eloquently put. I don’t actually think the Monday Club were behind the UCUNF idea. I think David Cameron was badly advised and thought it was a way to promote his concept of a closer union. If you want to blame any one person it was probably David Trimble who saw channelling money into the UUP dead horse as a way to strike back at the DUP.
They were indeed, CS, though not in the same league
Ah, so now we’re into leagues. How do we decide who is in which league ? Are we going to trade bodycounts ? Or are we going to argue that there is a difference between the man who fires the shot, and the man who stands beside him ?
as the folks some AP folks seem keen to identify with eg the aforesaid Breandán Mac Cionnaith
Who ?
Or do you mean that the idea of talking to residents who might have an opinion on marches means that I’m identifying with a convicted terrorist. Is that it ?
, not forgetting the Gerry and Martin ‘laugh-in’ in the ‘war by other means’ campaign aka ‘the parades dispute’.
So you’re the guy who talks about “parapoliticians” yet seemingly you put the parades dispute in quote marks, as if it is a figment of someone’s imagination that the idea of people marching down a road – on some occasions waving paramilitary regalia – might be offensive.
The idea that SF invented the parades dispute is classic Unionist self delusion. TBH, most of the leadership of the OO have begun to realize this.
So which of the various ‘ Army Councils’ manage Alliance,
That would be me and the other guys who hang around the back lighting farts in our spare time.
UUP,
Vanguard of course. Sir Reg and David both. Both now Lords, how fitting.
DUP
See above. If someone wears a beret and march people around the place wearing balaclavas or waving gun licenses around, are you seriously going to defend them as not a “parapolitician” ? sigh.
and SDLP?
They’re not flawless, but at least they don’t run around the place threatening police officers or organizing fascist-style marches and inspection ceremonies.
Comrade Slalin,
As regards who conceived UCUNF, I think you are right. David Trimble is the prime suspect. I dont blame Trimble for having the idea but the proposed project should have been propertly researched before it happened. What I want to know is what research was carried out and what risks (if any) were highlighted to David Cameron.
That may be past history but it could still important as the Conservative leadership is still receiving bad advice from somebody within the party.
CS, it seems you’re the man/woman who stands beside the paramilitaries in the ‘war by other means’ campaign. I’m all for inclusion but I do draw a line.