David McNarry resigns from UUP Assembly Group after Tom Elliott cuts him out of education committee role
The News Letter and UTV’s Ken Reid have been tweeting tonight what looks like being the latest episode in the UUP-DUP united unionist soap opera. David McNarry has resigned from the UUP Assembly group after Tom Elliott withdrew him as vice-chair of education committee, though stopped short of taking away the party whip.
The BBC add:
Mr McNarry said he spoke to the party leader on Friday evening by telephone. And Mr Elliott told him he was being disciplined as a result of an article that appeared in the Belfast Telegraph last Monday.
Although Mr Elliott said he would not be removing the party whip, Mr McNarry in response informed the leader he was resigning with immediate effect from the assembly group.
The article was an interview Mr McNarry gave, in which he revealed that he had been meeting the DUP to discuss closer co-operation and maximising the unionist vote. These talks had previously been secret and the article caused a backlash throughout the assembly group and the party.
Update – Martina Purdy has published some more details about tonight’s events.
Picture of Tom Elliott and David McNarry on a happier occasion – the October opening of the UUP
Has David resigned because his leader has punished him under pressure from the rest of the Assembly group for taking part in talks David INSISTED Tom knew were going on?
If I were David McNarry I’d be feeling mighty angry right now.
In the longterm, resignation from the UUP and being welcomed with open arms into the DUP? That’s just mad speculation of course but you never know…
Obelisk – Liam Clarke suggests
If McNarry were to jump ship to the DUP, it would mean DUP get pick 8 and Sinn Féin pick 9 in D’Hondt rather than vice versa. Could possibly mean Sinn Féin with health again I suppose.
Thanks for the clarification Alan. If what Liam Clarke suggests is true, if I were David McNarry I’d STILL feel very angry.
I wonder if he still has a future with the UUP after this.
Private, confidential, secret what a load of rubbish my Tory contacts told me about them some months ago and said they had been going on since the summer when the UUP were trying to negotiate with them. Seems strange they would know and UUP MLA’s wouldn’t.
Elliot is trying to bolt the door…
McNarry has always been a blabbermouth and a loose cannon were the media is concerned. He certainly wont be allowed to carry on with his antics if he joins the DUP. In fact I would be suprised if the DUP would want him.
The ship sinks ever lower and the Captain sees no iceberg
Obelisk,
You can’t brief the media off your own bat and not expect consequences, this kind of conduct would not be tolerated in the DUP. McNarry has nothing to be angry about. If Elliott had any balls he’d have thrown him out of the party.
FuturePhysicist:
If McNarry were to jump ship to the DUP, it would mean DUP get pick 8 and Sinn Féin pick 9 in D’Hondt rather than vice versa. Could possibly mean Sinn Féin with health again I suppose.
I assume you are referring to what would happen if d’Hondt were to be re-run.
Under Section 18 clause 5 of the Northern Ireland Act ministers are appointed under d’Hondt according to “the number of seats in the Assembly which were held by members of the party on the day on which the Assembly first met following its election”.
Therefore, the allocation of seats in the executive cannot be effected by MLAs switching parties. Which is quite sensible if you think about it, it stops parties trying to bribe each other’s members in order to change the d’Hondt weightings at the margins.
If there’s an election, I wouldn’t say it is a sure thing that Independent McNarry would retain the seat. Last time, he scraped in with half a quota, well behind newcomer Mike Nesbitt, where the DUP won three and a half quotas. McNarry clearly does not have a personal vote and without the party machine (if the UUP’s lacklustre organization could be referred to as such) a sustained DUP push could see them obtain four seats in Strangford.
To be fair to the UUP, Strangford was the only place they gained ground. Though that was probably as much an open goal as the SDLP in West Tyrone.
Thanks for clarifying about the election nominations … in theory that would’ve meant that independent David McClarty could not impact the decision with regards to D’Hondt if he were to rejoin the UUP.
Then again, who’s to say Sinn Féin may take Health rather than get pushed onto it, I don’t know what they’d leave the DUP with that’s an even bigger poison chalice … Agriculture?
Also would the DUP put 4 candidates in if there’s the possibility that the SDLP may get the seat? A few more transfers from Sinn Féin to the SDLP probably would’ve secured Boyle the seat.
Assuming UUP put in 2, with Independent McNarry.
Let’s get real here – what would Unionist unity do for the working class Unionist voter, or Unionist non voter, or non Unionist voter?
Improved economy, reduced living costs, more jobs, better quality of life?
What are the talks about, only self interest, self preservation, power and money!
However, regardless of the current economic disaster we can still eat the ‘ flag ‘ and feel nourished.
its unlikely that seemingly unrelated speeches/comments are really made in isolation.
presumably DUP people and UUP people actually talk to each other as well as making press statements and having ine on one interviews with journalists.
And its not unknown for journalists to take trade off an exclusive for a steer on how the story should be handled. Or to assist in the “timing”.
Things just dont happen.
I wouldnt want to speculate on Strangford even if it stays the same…..there is simply too many DUP people in the area already.
I take the point that McNarry is a “rent the quote” and a permenant “nearly man” but at this point in time its not about getting McNarry into the DUP as dividing the UUP.
More nonsense from the shower of non-entities at Stormont.
Alan
I think it would be more pertinent to this story to link to Martina Purdy’s report
FuturePhysicist:
Thanks for clarifying about the election nominations … in theory that would’ve meant that independent David McClarty could not impact the decision with regards to D’Hondt if he were to rejoin the UUP.
That is correct yes, the only time McClarty could have done this would have been to rejoin the UUP before the new assembly sat, and there was speculation for a few days over whether or not this would occur.
..to benefit unionism in general…
What exactly would that be? Keeping themmuns in their place or preserving the union. The union is preserved for as far out as any of us can see. Religious demographics will simply not deliver a change to the current situation. So what is he blethering about?
McNarry is being punished for being open? Not what the UUP wants. Elliot didn’t see this coming. Leadership deficit exposed for all to see? Ulster Covenant management in the UUP now fragilised?
Sinking ship is right.
Elliot had enough trouble with the two loose cannons on the liberal wing with out one on the right. Or should that be port and starboard?
“I wonder if he still has a future with the UUP after this.”
I wonder has anyone a future with the UUP after this.
“neither the Leader nor the Party have received formal notification from David of his resignation.”
…. because he now considers you irrelevant
“In fact I would be suprised if the DUP would want him.”
…..now now Toim ….you should be more magnaminous
It is quite clear that McNarry was acting on Elliott’s instructions in having talks with the DUP. It is also quite clear that he briefed Elliott before his interview with Liam Clarke and after it. There appears to be a major contention within the UUP leadership here – McCallister, the Chief Whip and deputy leader, Nesbitt, McCrea all seem to want to go into opposition. I recall Nesbitt said so last September and was slapped down for it at the time. The talks McNarry had with the DUP on the orders of Elliott represent another direction for the UUP – most would say a more sensible direction – of becoming a party allied to the DUP, maximising the pro-union vote and helping to establish stability in Northern Ireland rather than going negative – which the public have already shown they do not like or want and certainly did not vote for in the last election – but is what McCallister, Nesbitt and McCrea seem to want. Elliott is weak and a ditherer. He has been found out secretly running a policy counter to what McCallister, Nesbitt and McCrea want so he has dumped on McNarry. It is an act of political cowardice and a gross betrayal of someone – McNarry – who appears only to have been carrying out his leader’s orders. People should take note of Elliott’s double-dealing. It is a sign of weakness that Elliott seems to want to obey McCallister and McCrea who unlike McNarry voted against him for the leadership. How long will it be before the McCallister-Nesbitt- McCrea faction drive the UUP into opposition ? Where is Danny Kennedy in all this? He is reported to be attending pre-executive briefing meetings already with DUP Ministers. Is Elliott going to stop this going on – after all, it is technically a lot more than what McNarry under Elliott’s orders has been doing? If the UUP go into opposition, Kennedy will lose his Ministerial job – so may we assume he is no supporter of the go into opposition faction?
Alex,
What Elliott needs to do here is tell his MLAs what he is doing and ask them to back him or sack him.
The man isn’t much of a leader, but there are signs that he has thought about the options here. People who think that walking out of the executive is a straightforward option are naive – likelihood is that this would work out very badly (McDonnell sensibly ruled the SDLP out of this idea).
More importantly it is not clear to me how this talk of “unionist unity” benefits the UUP. They have nothing that the DUP want, other than votes, and the DUP has proven capable of extracting those already. Furthermore, while the DUP are toxic to UUP supporters, the same is not true in reverse – so it is easy for the DUP to talk up the idea without actually doing anything to support it.
I think the DUP have achieved their maximum possible vote and that anyone who voted UUP in the last election will probably never vote DUP. If we accept that premise, there is a logic to a two-party relationshhip in teh cintext of electing a first minister and in the context of a border referendum. Given the miserable performance of the UUP, then it is more likley that UUP voters will simply abstain the next time. The big problem is unionist abstention especially in the east of Northern Ireland. Elliott’s problem is that he leads the Fermanagh Unionist Party – his vision is small and what applies in Fermanagh does NOT apply in eastern Northern Ireland. The UUP will lose all Belfast seats the next time because of the reduction in the number of MLA’s and higher quotas.
either Elliott knew about, and authorised , the talks with the DUP or he didnt.
He either knew about the Belfast Telegraph interview or he didnt.
If he didnt then McNarry needed a slap down
However if he did then Toms own position must be in question
Alex :
I think the DUP have achieved their maximum possible vote and that anyone who voted UUP in the last election will probably never vote DUP. If we accept that premise ..
I’d say it would be dangerous to accept that premise.
I don’t think the DUP will continue to grow at the rate it has been, but provided it does not become complacent, and assuming no major upsets in the next couple of years, it will continue to pick off UUP MLAs and councillors. For example, I’d say the UUP have lost Strangford now that McNarry may well find himself deselected before the next assembly election. I’d also say there is a strong probability of at least one UUP->DUP defection in the assembly chamber between now and 2015, which if it happens will help make the DUP seem even more acceptable to UUP voters considering a change.
The UUP is now so weak, particularly in the absence of Tory funding, that they don’t have the means to seriously challenge any DUP held seats. This means that the DUP do not have to run a defensive campaign in 2015, and can therefore focus instead on attacking the UUP’s marginal seats. I’d say it will take little to deprive the UUP of seats in places like North Down, West Tyrone and Upper Bann, and there are also opportunities in South and East Belfast and potentially East Antrim. The UUP are also clearly in fear of the possibility that the DUP will run two candidates in the next European election; Jim Nicholson’s 67th birthday is tomorrow, and once again without generous UCUNF funding the UUP may struggle to hold on to this seat.
there is a logic to a two-party relationship in teh cintext of electing a first minister
The probability of the DUP losing any seats is extremely low. They may lose two or three to the TUV if the party is able to translate Allister’s profile into a presence in other constituencies, but it is just as likely that they’ll be able to regain those from the UUP on the other side, especially if they are able to persuade UUP voters that supporting the DUP is essential to retaining a unionist first minister.
and in the context of a border referendum.
We are at least a good couple of decades away from a border referendum.
The big problem is unionist abstention especially in the east of Northern Ireland.
Yes, I have noted already that the “unionist unity” candidate in FST appeared, at the very least, to have done nothing to reverse that abstention.
The UUP will lose all Belfast seats the next time because of the reduction in the number of MLA’s and higher quotas.
Agreed, quite likely there will be no UUP in Belfast within a few years .. quite a reversal from the 1998 picture of two MPs and 5 MLAs.
Dennis,
I think Elliott authorized the DUP talks, probably led by McNarry. He did not authorized McNarry’s media interview, he is embarassed by the story becoming public and has therefore decided to punish him for that.
Whatever the circumstances it shows the shambolic leadership in the party.
cynic2, yes, Elliott should have guessed that the thing would become public before long.
Once again the UU’s shoot themselves in the foot. Leaderless and sinking to the bottom. Time pack up and pick a new team, folks!
Elliott decision on David McNarry ‘should be respected’ – Danny Kennedy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-16773486
Basil McCrea questions David McNarry’s future in the UUP
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-16776671
Comrade,
I think your right about Strangford come 2015 with the DUP pushing at 4 – Boundary changes in the form of Dundonald, Belvoir and Carryduff/South Castlereagh will probably push them well towards 4 quotas of votes. I think Carryduff and Dundonald being taken out prior to May’s elections are the reason McNarry even has a seat.
The loose cannon is on his way out. Praise the Lord! I for one was sad to see this nasty piece of work scrape in at the last election. Strangford will be a better place when he loses his seat.
“Elliott should have guessed that the thing would become public before long”
….I admire your confidence in UUP foresight
cynic, I guess that was my point …
The fact that McCrea has now cast doubt on McNarry’s future in the UUP shows that my analysis that there is a deep split at the top of the UUP between going into opposition or getting closer to the DUP is right. Some see this as modernisers versus traditional unionists. The truth is that the moderniserslook more like a disparate band of ambitious people on the make rather than people with a message. Kennedy says the leader has the right to exercise discipline. Is the UUP some sort of primitive tribe where the chief’s word is law even if his subject was only carrying out his orders? As Liam Clarke has said – what did McNarry do to be punished in this way if he was acting on Elliott’s orders? Ths is true especially if Elliott was informed by McNarry as he says before and after the Liam Clarke interview. By meeting the DUP in a format ordered by Elliott McNarry did no more than what Danny Kennedy does every week – have a meeting with DUP Ministers ahead of the Executive meeting – again with Elliott’s approval. So should Big Chief Elliott now sack Kennedy – presumably replacing him with McCrea, Nesbitt or McCallister or maybe even take the job himself ? I find it hard to belive that the party leadership can be entirely happy with Elliott’s high handed behaviour. He never punished Basil McCrea or McCallister for things they have done – like the Nolan programme during the last election. But then he favours them. Just wait until they decide to go into opposition and Kennedy loses his Minister’s job. Will he be as happy then wiht the Big Chief ?
The split in the UUP assembly group may also be related to the UUP reaction to the Conservatives recent ‘offer’. Could these fault lines lead to defections?
Not sure yet what way this will go. A lot depends on McNarry’s next move. Elliott has clearly lost the run of himself and is behaving in an increasingly arbitary way like a sort of dithering despot with occasional flashes of bad temper. He has not answered the key Liam Clarke point – why should McNarry be punished for acting on his orders? Elliott’s behaviour is a classic example of a weak man under the influence of a few advisers. He sends out a letter on Friday admitting the talks to party members and saying much the same thing that McNarry said earlier in the week – that there was no threat to the continued existence of the UUP. Then later on the same day, he sacks McNarry. Two different messages on one day points to someone pulling Elliot’s strings. The role of McCrea and McCallister in this needs more public scrutiny, epecially since McCrea has now pitched in with a comment that McNarry is no longer a UUP member in his opinion. We also need to know who are the people really advising Elliott? One thing is certain, the big rediuction in the number of MLA’s in the next election alreay announced by the DUP will wipe out most of the UUP in the next Assembly election. McCrea, McCallister and Nesbitt are all angling for position – especially with the departure of MEP Nicholson already speculated about in Slugger. They are jockeying after positions in a party which will no longer exist – or barely exist – in the Assembly and will probably have fewer MLA’s than Alliance in the next Assembly election. Its deckchairs on the Titanic time. The McNarry talks with the DUP offerd the UUP a viable future as a party within a wider unionist coalition. Coalitions like this exist in many countries. Why not here ? No matter what you think about our Minsietrs they are trying to do the best they can as devolved Ministers in a difficult situation. If the UUP were to go into opposition they would be opposing what exactly ? Would they be opposing our local Ministers efforts to avoid the cuts imposed by the Conservatives they wanted to merge with ? Not a popular electoral message I would have thought.
He is at best a low ranking UUP politician thrown by circumstance into the top rank of the UUP Party.
Not exactly stellar for three decades, he has played his hand well…….with both Orange Order and UUP always looking a “hard man” cos thats the safest bet.
Another man might well have looked at a humiliating 700 votes in the 1982 Assembly Election and quietly have folded his tent and gone away.
But McNarry has always been there at those press things outside Stormont Bulidings.. behind Molyneaux or Trimble or Empey …….making sure he is nodding and going “hear hear” when the Leader says something profound.
Sometimes politicians (any party) dont filfil their potential and there are people in any party where you have to shake your head and say “how did he/she do it?”.
I cant imagine that there are many people who would put McNarry in the wrong group.
Alex,
I don’t think McNarry is being punished for setting up the meetings and pushing the thing forward, that would be stupid. McNarry is being punished for blabbing to the press. I don’t see what is unreasonable about this; at the very least, running to a journalist is stupid; at the most, involving the media could be interpreted as an attempt to force the hand of the party leadership.
That leaves the possibility that Elliott authorized McNarry to speak to the press. It makes no sense to do this and then issue a punishment, so unless there is some sort of evidence that this happened, I’m inclined to think that McNarry’s interview was his own idea. It is not, of course, the first time this has happened; McNarry appeared on the Nolan Show before the election to directly criticize the party leadership for some comments made by another election candidate (John McAllister if I recall correctly). I get the overall impression of someone who can’t control his outbursts when there is a journalist nearby with a dictaphone running.
I find it hard to belive that the party leadership can be entirely happy with Elliott’s high handed behaviour.
I’ll believe that when I see the leadership challenge, but I doubt it will be in the party’s best interests, there just aren’t any people at the top who are capable.
He has not answered the key Liam Clarke point – why should McNarry be punished for acting on his orders?
In defence of the UUP and Elliott, they are not required to answer questions on internal matters within their party, especially questions which appear to be derived from speculation concerning exactly what led Elliott to sack McNarry. It is up to them to weigh up public opinion on what they are doing with their internal policies and processes.
Two different messages on one day points to someone pulling Elliot’s strings.
I agree with you there, someone is whispering in Elliott’s ear and he is trying to please everyone.
The McNarry talks with the DUP offerd the UUP a viable future as a party within a wider unionist coalition. Coalitions like this exist in many countries. Why not here ?
If I was a UUP member I would be saying “beware of Greeks bearing gifts”. It unclear what exactly is in it for the DUP, especially as it is not clear what the “gifts” are.
The debate right now is certainly benefiting the DUP by causing public splits in the UUP. But if the proposal ever becomes serious, what exactly are the two parties going to exchange ? The DUP aren’t simply going to hand over safe MP and MLA seats to the UUP, especially not if UUP incompetence causes them to be lost.
fitz,
That’s a very good summary of the man.
Looking back over the more recent years, you get the impression of someone who wants to be in the thick of things without really being the leader. It was McNarry who pushed the “Loyalist Commission” – this ridiculous idea of putting UVF and UDA hardmen in the same room as UUP politicians and the Secretary of State, in the expectation that something (it was never quite clear what) would happen. I am sure that McNarry was also behind the DUP-UCUNF talks which were supposedly convened by the Orange Order shortly before the Westminster elections two years ago.
His assembly record is an inconsistent hodge-podge of speeches whose key elements change depending on the direction the wind is blowing in. His idea of how to complain about the budget a few years ago was to lodge an amendment seeking to remove a penny from the overall budgeted spend. I also remember crazed outbursts in the media, including a complaint about GAA coverage on the BBC.
As I said above, my overall picture is of a person who craves attention. As you have said, he wants to be seen as a “fixer” for whoever the leadership of the day is. Sadly for him, he doesn’t have much in the way of wit.
Ok Stal, you’re doing pretty good job of getting the digs in to McNarry, but nobody has clarified or really talked about this:
“Despite Mr McNarry’s assertion that he briefed Mr Elliott both before and after the interview on Monday, he was disciplined by the leader on Friday.”
So either McNarry is lying. Properly bare faced lying. Or Elliott has used this as an opportunity to cast him out of the party.
So which is it?
What I cant exactly put my finger on is what his angle is. And with McNarry there is always an angle.
I cant imagine that he actually has a power base in the UUP, notwithstanding the fact that he is a leading member of the Orange Order.
And maybe this is as much or more to do with Orange politics than it is to do with UUP politics. Surely McNarry must have a power base within the Orange Order.
Unionist “unity” is one of the Orange Orders key things.
He is 63 (thank you Wikipedia) but UUP/DUP politics in Strangford/North Down is too crowded with ambitious people for this to benefit him in any way.
He will clearly never be a Minister so is it about the Speakers Chair? Or just about Stupidity?
UUP in crisis as McNarry resigns
http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/local/uup_in_crisis_as_mcnarry_resigns_1_3467467
Keith,
Agreed, someone is lying, or the truth is half way between the two. Possibly McNarry went further than Elliott expected when he was explaining things to Liam Clarke.
But I’m not sure. Apparently, when Elliott broke the bad news to him, he explained why it was being done. According to Elliott via the BBC, McNarry’s reply to Elliott was “unrepeatable”, which at a guess sounds as if McNarry told Elliott to go and fuck himself. Now, I find that a bit odd. It may well be normal for some people, but if someone placed an unexplained sanction on me, I’d want to have a meeting and find out what the hell was going on. I wouldn’t throw my toys out of the pram in a huff. That makes me suspect that McNarry knew he was out of order. It’s all very circumstantial of course, it’s not real proof .. but things don’t quite fit together to me.
If McNarry has indeed been wronged I suspect we’re going to get a full exposure through the press during the course of the next week or so. Liam Clarke and other journalists will have been on the phone to him all weekend urging him to set the record straight and tell his story, and Elliott will be placed in a position where he is forced to respond. I’d say it’s going to get ugly.
fitz,
I think McNarry likes to think that he has a power base, but I doubt it amounts to very much. The OO does not wield the kind of power it once did, and the relationship between it and the UUP is much more arms-length, especially when you consider that there are Orangemen who are senior within the DUP as well. In many ways, McNarry is the OO personified – it likes to think it is more important than it really is.
I take the point about the Liam Clarke interview. McNarry did say however that he kept Elliott informed before and after the event. That looks like pretty close monitoring by the leader to me. I am reasonably satisfied that McNarry is the wronged party here becaue the initial reaction of many journalists was – why was McNarry punished for carryng out his leader’s orders? What I also don’t understand is why McCrea’s infringements of party discipline – and McCallister’s – never elicit a punishment from Elliott. They opposed Elliott in the leadership bid whereas McNarry was one of his biggest backers. Maybe its the sign of a weak man that he is prepared to kick his own supporters while not daring to cross his opponents like McCrea and McCallister? I also think the UUP Assembly group may be a bit detached from sentiment within the UUP party. Also McNarry said there was never any question of a merger with the DUP – just of the 2 parties working closer together – what is so wrong with that ? It really looks like what the Temple Priests said to Pilate – it is expedient that one man die for the people. In this case that one man die for the leader.
alex, trouble with that is that McNarry may well pull Elliott and a few other people down with them. Pissing into the tent, etc.