Long and full long game stratagems, Gerry Adams clearly relished his role in setting the timing for An Taoiseachs address on the euref tonight… In lieu of a longer analysis, here’s the words of the man himself:

A chairde,
Tá failte romhaibh uilig chuig Ard Fheis Sinn Féin i anseo i gCill Áirne, contae Chiarraí.

A special céad míle fáilte also to our Friends of Sinn Féin from the USA, Canada and Australia, to our comrades from the Basque country, from South Africa, Palestine and Cuba and to all foreign dignitaries.

Yesterday was Africa Day when that continent celebrated its freedom from colonialism.

But today western powers haggle while 20 million people in the Sahel region of north Africa face a severe famine.

Thus far the international community has not provided the money urgently needed.

This Ard Fheis extends solidarity to the suffering people of Africa.

We urge our government to do its best to encourage the international community to help the people of the Sahel.

Solidarity also to the people of the Middle East and comhghairdeas to the Palestinian hunger strikers who secured a deal on prison conditions.

Everything is relative but in Ireland we also have our difficulties.

Over half a million are unemployed – almost 450,000 in this state.

Many citizens cannot pay their bills or mortgages.

Youth unemployment is especially high, north and south.

I recently spoke to one woman who told me that three of her brothers, all married, left two weeks ago for Australia.

Her distress was plain and is shared by tens of thousands of other families.

The policies of Fianna Fáil, and now Fine Gael and Labour are responsible.

Forced emigration is one of the huge damning failures of this state.

Citizens are angry.

Angry at the political and banking elite and the developers  – the golden circle – that enriched itself through corruption, greed and bad policies.

Angry at the government for failing to hold these elites to account.

Angry at broken promises by Fine Gael and Labour not to pay one more red cent to bad banks and then handing over €24 billion.

Many citizens thought they were voting for change in last year’s General Election.

But what happened?

Tweedle dum has been replaced by Tweedle dee and Tweedle dumber.

Fine Gael and Labour were elected to change the disastrous policies of Fianna Fail leaderships.

Instead they embraced these policies.

They have cut public services and wages.

Attacked the rights of the most vulnerable.

And introduced new stealth taxes.

The household charge, water charges; septic tank charges; VAT and fuel increases.

What is the point of the Labour Party in this government?

What would James Connolly think of the Labour leaderships’ implementation of right wing austerity policies?

What would he think of the promises made and broken by the party he founded?

My commitment to you this evening is that Sinn Féin will not make any promises we will not keep.

When Sinn Féin makes a commitment – as we demonstrated often during the peace process – we keep our commitments.

Creideann muidinne gur féidir le hÉirinn, idir Thuaidh agus Theas, theacht amach níos láidre agus níos rathúla as an ghéarchéim seo.

We live in a great country.

Our history is replete with challenges, adversity and great injustice.

But our people have come through it all.

And in every generation brave men and women have come forward.

From 1798 to 1847, from 1913 to 1916 to 1981.

Visionaries have shown the way.

They made a stand.

Today workers at Vita Cortex in Cork, La Senza, Wilsons, in Game shops, and at Irish Cement have made a stand.

Today Lagan Brick workers are 164 days on strike.

Parents defending their children with disabilities, hospital campaigners, carers, teachers, health workers, defenders of our schools, turf cutters, citizens who are standing up for themselves and their families and communities, are showing the way.

So too are citizens who work in the community and voluntary sector, in our sporting organisations, in the arts, in environmental groups, in defence of our language, in support of our young people and our senior citizens.

Citizens who are supporting victims of abuse, including drugs and alcohol misuse and suicide prevention, are holding our communities together.

These active citizens, compassionate carers and community activists are the real Ireland.

Tá siad ag seasamh an fhóid do achan duine.

Tá siad ag seasamh ar son Éireann.

Agus tá muid fior buíoch daoibh.

We have to follow their example, all of us and demand our rights as citizens.

The right to a job, to a home, to a decent health service and education, to a clean environment, to civil and religious liberties, and to top quality public services.

We have to break the cycle of austerity and inequality.

We need to get citizens back to work.

We need fair taxation.

We need to eliminate wasteful public spending.

And yes, it is crucial that we deal with the banking debt.

But these policies must be accompanied by a plan to get citizens back to work.

And austerity won’t do it.

In the North, the absence of fiscal powers and cuts by the British Tory government, have made the Executive’s task more difficult.

In this state the government gives fiscal powers away!

This state needs a government led job creation strategy.

There are funds available – in the National Pension Reserve Fund, in the European Investment Bank, in the Private Pension sector and in NAMA.

Sinn Féin proposes a €13 billion stimulus.

This stimulus would run over three years creating approximately 130,000 jobs directly.

The projects are there.

Vitally needed schools, crèches, roads, regeneration projects; broadband and a water system that needs to be modernized.

Sinn Féin supports inward investment but we will also champion Small and Medium enterprises and homegrown businesses.

Upward only rent reviews, and the denial of credit by banks for our small and medium sector, doesn’t make economic sense.

It does make economic sense to replace imports with home-produced products and to target specific sectors for export.

It does make economic sense to expand the agri-food sector.

It does make economic sense to build on the potential of tourism.

Sinn Féin advocates a joined up all-island strategic approach to fully exploit this potential.

Sinn Féin will also change social protection to introduce a safety net for the self-employed.

Ireland does have the visionaries to develop our own industries.

That vision must be matched by government action.

Ní dheanann déine é sin.

Ní hí an déine an reiteach.

Caithfidh muid daoine a chur ar ais ag obair.

In a real republic there is a duty to provide the highest quality of public services.

Better services delivered more fairly and paid for by direct taxation.

All citizens, throughout their lives, should have access to education at all levels based on their ability but the cost of educating their children is increasingly a challenge for many parents.

Education must give children, all our children, the best start possible.

That also is good economics.

Tá Sinn Féin tiomanta do leasuithe sláinte – agus do infheistíocht in ár seirbhís sláinte poiblí.

A public health service, free at the point of delivery which provides for citizens from the cradle to the grave, and also funded by direct taxation, is good economics.

The number of sick children awaiting hospital admission and on trolleys had increased by almost 700% in three years.

In the first four months of this year 26,106 citizens were left on hospital trolleys.

Almost 60,000 patients – adults and children – are on waiting lists – a 50% increase on 2010.

After one year of this government the health service is worse now because this government is doing exactly the same thing as Fianna Fáil.

And patients and their families are paying the price while those at the top award themselves obscene salaries and huge bonuses.

Citizens need to stand together against this. It is wrong.

It must be stopped.

Rural Ireland is also under attack.

Rural schools, post offices and Garda stations are being closed.

Rural people are told they can no longer cut turf where it has been cut for generations.

They are being compelled to pay septic tank and household charges.

Unemployment is driving young people to far off foreign shores.

In Leitrim I was told that half of those between the ages of 22 and 26 have left.

The heart is being torn from communities as a whole GAA generation leaves for Canada and Australia.

In this state around 70,000 people are emigrating each year.

That’s nine citizens every hour.

Mothers and fathers wonder who will leave next.

Rural Ireland, and especially the west is being devastated.

Forced emigration is not a life style choice.

But it is an indictment of the two men from the west who lead this bad government.

Shame on you Taoiseach.

Shame on you Tánaiste.

Sinn Féin is engaging with people across rural Ireland and listening to their hopes for the future. We are  looking  at what rural Ireland has to offer rather than how it can be targeted for cuts.

There is anger too in Gaeltacht communities.

Gaeltacht schools are being targeted.

The 20-year strategy for the Irish Language is not being implemented.

Sinn Féin has recently appointed an Irish language officer to strengthen the use of Irish within our party and to direct our Irish language strategy.

Our Minister Caral Ni Chuilin is doing trojan work to support and develop the Irish Language.

This Ard Fheis commends her successful Liofa campaign.

I want to turn now to the Austerity Treaty.

When considering what way to vote people need to ask themselves if the austerity of recent budgets led to jobs and growth?

The answer is obvious. The answer is no.

If you accept that, you should vote No.

Austerity isn’t working now and won’t start working on 1st June.

Neither will it bring stability or certainty.

Austerity means more cuts.

And increased charges.

Right now if you do not like the policies of the government you can sack them or re-elect them.

You won’t be able to do that with unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in Frankfurt and Brussels.

That is undemocratic.

Don’t give up your power.

Don’t give your democratic rights away.

And don’t write austerity into the constitution.

Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fáil have not offered any positive arguments in favour of this Treaty.

The Taoiseach won’t even debate the issue!

That’s not leadership!

That’s not showing citizens the respect they deserve!

Instead Mr. Kenny, Mr. Gilmore and Mr. Martin are trying to scare people into voting Yes.

Whether it was British rule or a domineering church hierarchy, Irish citizens have had enough of being ruled by fear.

We are done with that.

The Irish government is also out of step with the rest of Europe.

Other EU states are delaying ratification because they know the mood in Europe is changing.

But not our government.

They settled for much less than anyone else, despite Sinn Féin’s clear warning about the foolishness of accepting this bad Treaty.

When the Taoiseach endorsed it in the Dáil he never mentioned growth or jobs.

Not once!

Or a write down of Bank debt.

The truth is Mr. Kenny and Mr. Gilmore are out of their depth.

This Government simply cannot be trusted on this Treaty.

It claims we will be locked out of funds if citizens vote NO.

That’s not true!

The legal mandate of the ESM is very clear.

Funding will be provided, and I quote, where it is ‘indispensable to safeguard the financial stability of the euro area as a whole and of its Member States.”
So don’t be fooled.

Remember what Fine Gael and Labour said during the election.

Remember all Fianna Fáil’s  promises.

Don’t be fooled. Be wise.

Join with the millions across Europe who are demanding an end to austerity.

It is a good and patriotic and positive action to say NO to a Treaty that is bad for you, bad for your family and community, bad for society and entirely without any social or economic merit.

Next Thursday. Vote No.

It is five years since the historic deal between Sinn Féin and the DUP.

The business of delivering for citizens is continuing.

There are still outstanding issues including on the Irish Language, a Bill of Rights and other equality issues.

The British Secretary of State has also made a number of unhelpful and unwarranted interventions,  including his decision to revoke the licences of Martin Corey and Marian Price.

The British Secretary of State should go back to England where he belongs.

Marion Price and Martin Corey and Gerry McGeough, should be released immediately.

The political institutions in the North need to move to the next stage – the transfer of fiscal power to the Assembly and Executive.

The continuing exercise of fiscal power by the British Treasury will lead to more cuts in the block grant and more right wing welfare policies being imposed on us.

Despite the difficulties a huge effort by the Executive has resulted in jobs being retained and new jobs created.

Unemployment in the North has fallen and at 6% is less than half the level in this state.

Despite the lack of fiscal autonomy the Sinn Féin Ministerial and Assembly team have stood against cuts, and used public funds to invest in jobs and growth.

Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness has ensured funding for the A5, the new road linking Monaghan, Tyrone, Derry and Donegal, the expansion of Altnagelvin and Omagh hospitals and the freeze on Student Fees.

There are many good positive cross border developments.

For example, the new cancer unit at Altnagelvin in Derry will serve patients from Donegal.

And I want to commend DUP Health Minister Poots for ensuring that the new hospital in Enniskillen will be open to patients from Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan.

Sinn Féin Ministers have created a social investment fund to tackle disadvantage.

We have capped the domestic rate, established an Executive sub-committee on Welfare Reform to alleviate hardship and introduced new measures to address Youth Unemployment.

And at a time of tight budgets a Winter Fuel Payment was made to citizens

Sinn Féin refused to introduce water charges.

We stopped the privatisation of water services.

Education Minister John O’Dowd is progressing  reforms to break down the social, economic and regional barriers to education.

These include free school meals, school uniform grants, extended youth services and early years provision, and an almost five percent increase in the budgets allocated directly to schools.

As well as growing the North’s agri-food sector to create jobs Agriculture Minister Michelle O Neill is also tackling rural poverty and isolation.

I want at this point to pay tribute to our outgoing poll topping MEP for the Six Counties, Bairbre de Brún.

This Ard Fheis thanks you Bairbre for your work in many leadership positions over many years.

Tá muid fior buíoch duitse.

Agus beidh muid ag obair le chéile arís sa todhchaí.

And I thank Martina Anderson for her work as a Junior Minister and wish her well as she prepares to take up new challenges as an MEP.

I commend our Leinster House and Assembly teams, our MPs and Councillors and all our activists.

Across Ireland Sinn Féin is building the political fightback against austerity.

Sinn Féin TDs and Seanadoirí and our other activists in Leinster House are leading the political opposition to this government.

But I want to single out and commend and thank Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin and Mícheál Mac Donncha who have just completed 15 years in the Dáil.

Go raibh maith agat Bríd.

I also want to pay tribute to Martin McGuinness for standing in the Presidential election.

It was a tremendous campaign for Irish Republicanism.

A decisive and defining intervention at the beginning, and most importantly at the end.

Tá athrú mór tagtha ar an Tuaisceart go háirithe le blianta beaga anuas mar gheall ar an proiséas síochána.

Under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement the British Government has agreed to end its jurisdiction if a majority of people vote that way.

All of us — north and south, nationalist, unionist and others, need to plan for that.

In this state more and more people realize we do not have a real republic.

Sinn Féin wants to demonstrate to unionists that a united Ireland is also in their interests.

A United Ireland makes sense.

A single Island economy makes sense.

It does not make sense on an island this size and with a population of six million, to have two states, two bureaucracies, two sets of government departments, and two sets of agencies competing for inward investment.

Harmonising our systems will save money, improve efficiency and create jobs.

A new, agreed united Ireland will emerge through a genuine process of national reconciliation.

Through a cordial union.

Sinn Féin is  for a new republic where the interests of citizens come first.

A new Republic that is inclusive and pluralist.

A new Republic created democratically and peacefully.

Sinn Féin is about nation building.

A nation rooted in harmony, equality and justice.

The people of Ireland are entitled to social justice.

Equality is achievable.

Irish people have the genius and the right to demand it.

In our time.

For all citizens, for all our communities.

So, now is the time for courage.

For commitment and patriotism.

For hope.

For all our children.

For our great country.

For Ireland.

 Behind the turmoil of the current news agenda, something is stirring at  the Independent. The editor Chris Blackhurst, by background a mainly financial journalist, has come out in favour of grammar schools – but without the 11 plus. Mary Anne Sieghart’s column was not a one-off. This is interesting because the Independent positions itself as a freethinking paper outside the party political box. More often it tilts centre leftwards than centre right. Its closest bedfellow among the UK parties is of course the Lib Dems who don’t always find it easy to reconcile their social liberalism with their economic free market liberalism. Here is Blackhurst giving personal testimony in favour of the grammar school experience to promote stalled social mobility.  

 That state-taught conveyor belt has all but ceased. The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has admitted as much, complaining of the dominance of private schools over public life. Nick Clegg has said much the same in a plea for greater social mobility, pointing out that 70 per cent of High Court judges and 54 per cent of FTSE 100 CEOs were educated in the independent sector.

The arguments for and against selection are well rehearsed. On the positive side, grammar schools promoted academic excellence and meritocracy. They gave places to bright pupils from poorer families. Negatively, the entry criteria could be unjust. It was based on performance in a single set of exams and was open to abuse, with the better-off, pushier parents hiring coaches.

While some working-class children made it through, the grammar schools were heavily skewed in favour of those from the wealthier parts of town. Those who didn’t make it saw themselves as failures, not so good, consigned to a different, inferior path, often resorting to apologising later for having gone to an “ordinary secondary mod”.

I would not wish to see a return to the delivery of an envelope that represented terrible finality at the tender age of 11. But new grammar schools for which the cleverest are pared off but with genuine opportunities for entry at 13, 15 and in the sixth form would begin to fill that gaping hole. Accompany them, too, with technical, vocation-based schools for the less academic but practically minded.

The arguments are well rehearsed in Slugger. Selection at 11, bad: choice at 14, good? Is it time to give Craigavon’s Dickson plan another rattle to try to shake the Executive out of its deadlock? Can they be pressurised to turn the lip service of two years ago into any kind of action?

Perhaps this is what the No campaign is hoping for? Krugman interviewed in the FT:

“No. I don’t think they can save Greece but they can still save the rest if they’re willing to offer open-ended financing and macroeconomic expansion.” But this would mean persuading the Germans to change their philosophy of economic life. “Well, the prospect of hanging concentrates the mind; the prospect of a collapse of the euro might concentrate their minds.”

Martin McGuinness’ keynote speech to the Sinn Fein Ard Fheis is up on the party website. It’s worth quoting at length, because at risk of invoking a trite pun it is worth noting at least as much for its reference to Tone (Wolf Theobald) and its generally emollient tone.

Partition created two conservative states on our island. The rights and entitlements of ordinary citizens were secondary to the needs of the political class in both states. That is why every Irish government, since partition, including the present one, is happy to pay lip service to a united Ireland and more importantly to the rights of citizens.

That is why it was acceptable to abandon nationalists in the north to whims of a unionist regime and the reality of second class citizenship.

That was a political reality that I could never accept as normal. Through forty years of struggle and our involvement in peace negotiations we have managed to dismantle one party rule in the north and brought second class citizenship to an end. We have replaced this with equality, partnership and power sharing.

We have erased the physical nature of the border. We have constructed all-Ireland political institutions. But we have yet to achieve our primary political objective of re unification and sovereignty. That is the mighty task which we now face.

And Irish unity is not simply a republican objective, it is I believe necessary for our people, catholic, Protestant, Dissenter and others to achieve our full potential.

And then:

It is now time to move from the peace building phase of the struggle to the nation building stage of the struggle. That requires the very same confidence, strategic thinking and determination that has marked our approach for many years.

This is not about trying to turn unionists into nationalists or to try and hook wink people about our intentions. The reality is that much hurt has been caused on all sides during the conflict and indeed by the very imposition of partition itself.

To date much of the public running in this debate has been undertaken by Republicans. It is however a mistake to think that many within the broad unionist community are not thinking their way through the necessity for reconciliation.

Shades of Peter Robinson’s ‘Only those who can adapt to changing circumstances’? Well, not quite. Instead it’s a mention of how the British are, like Sinn Fein themselves, not co-operating with the Smithwick Inquiry:

It is my view, backed I believe by plenty of evidence, including the lack of co-operation with the Saville, Barron and Smithwick Inquiries that the British government is not interested in a process which would deliver truth and reconciliation. This is in the main motivated by self interest. Put simply it does not suit

Britain’s own strategic interests to face up to its role in Ireland.

However we cannot let the divisions fostered through the decades of conflict and the British government stalling on the issue of the past to hold back the potential that now exists to move forward politically and democratically to a new Republic.

In that context, we have a responsibility to reach out to unionists and to others to engage with them about the past and indeed even more importantly about the future.

A united Ireland will succeed with the input of all sections of our people. We seek an Ireland in which unionists would feel comfortable not just in being a part of but being in the leadership of.

I have said many times that it is possible for unionists and republicans to stand together without dilution of our beliefs. The Executive of which I have jointly led with Ian Paisley and Peter Robinson for the past five years is evidence of that.

I said in my Easter speech that in the discussions leading to re-unification we need to be imaginative and generous towards unionists. The ability to be generous to each other should be seen as a strength not a weakness. Passport rights, symbols and other issues of identity crucial to building a fully inclusive united Ireland respecting the traditions of all our people in all their diversity can be addressed.

And we need to remember at all times that dialogue isn’t a one way street. We also need to listen to what unionists say to us and indeed about us. That is the role of nation builders. That means always stretching ourselves and always taking risks to advance the task of building a new Ireland.

Ireland as a nation can only truly prosper if we are at peace with ourselves as a people. Having the confidence to build a new better relationship with Britain will also be important.

It means overcoming the historic fracture between Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter. In the Ireland of 2012 it means building a pluralist, ethnically and culturally diverse society that embraces all our citizens.

It’s pretty clunky in places, and as you might expect at a party conference somewhat washes out the contribution those other than Sinn Fein to the establishment of stability in Northern Ireland.

But it carries something of, if not a reciprocation towards Robinson’s long bid for an new and open pluralist space, and a mild iteration of Adams’ seven goals towards unification.

Such public espousal of Tone’s pluralist vision may indicate a welcome turn in the party’s thinking about the future…

But after twenty five years of prosecuting an inter communual war and nearly twenty of relative peace, they’ve a long march ahead to open up the narrow ground into which succeeding (and ever dwindling) numbers of Protestant Republicans have been squeezed, by both sides.

Something, ironically, that’s probably been understood best amongst Irish nationalist parties by Fianna Fail up to now…

Still, tus maith, agus eile…

When Belfast City Council’s Investment Programme was launched earlier this year, it included a reference to expending the conference/exhibition space at the Belfast Waterfront.

Along with colleagues, I idly wondered where the additional space would be found. Would they build a glass covered bridge across to the unfinished building sitting in front of the Waterfront? Could the ugly carbuncle (Lanyon Quay Building) between the Waterfront and the new Laganside Courts building be used?

It turns out that the option being recommended to the council’s Strategic Policy and Resources Committee is to knock down the Waterfront Studio and build the conferencing centre in its footprint and over the yard in behind.

The Waterfront Hall – now known as the Belfast Waterfront – was built at a total cost of £37 million and opened in 1997. The Arts Theatre had long been closed, and the Waterfront Studio theatre provided a council-owned space that drama groups could use at reasonable rates, as well as providing a small city-centre theatre venue for newly launched plays. These were the days before the Baby Grand, the rebuilt Lyric and the Belfast MAC.

The Group Theatre on Bedford Street (attached to the Ulster Hall) didn’t survive the Grand Dame’s renovations, and although community theatre groups were at the time reassured that the access policy for the Waterfront Studio would fill that space, the days of Belfast Council running a theatre space suitable for community groups may be numbered.

A total of 63 opportunities have been lost in the City [Belfast] and by the Waterfront directly over the period 2008-2011 with the key reason given the lack of appropriate integrated conferencing facilities.

While a 2011 business case recommended linking the Waterfront with the empty level 0 and 1 floors in the Lanyon Quay Building, a more fulsome Economic Appraisal evaluated a long list of ten options came back with a more ambitious plan.

Two Story [sic] Extension of the Waterfront over the Service Yard to the rear of the Venue, with further extension over River.

It involves demolishing the existing Studio area, and has the potential to create units to let (or storage space) on the ground floor level in front of the existing Studio.

• Integrated convention centre with clear span exhibition space across one level with minimum of 2,000 sq/m;
• minimum of 5 breakout rooms that can each accommodate 200 plus people;
• banqueting space that can accommodate up to 750 people.

This requires a capital investment of £20 million. It would also benefit from speedy decisions as the Council and Northern Ireland Tourist Board reckon they could tap into £12 million or so of money from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). But the ERDF closes at the end of 2015, and all funding would need to be drawn down by that date (ie, the building work would need to be completed).

Accessing the ERDF also throws up an issue of staffing.

To satisfy the requirements of the DETI and DFP Economists it was necessary to include within the Council’s Economic Appraisal an assessment of the various options for the management and operation of the new facilities. In order to address this two options have been considered:-

a) The Council manages the facility itself

b) A Management Contract is entered into with an established Conference Operator

The assessment concluded that the there was an enormous benefit to having an operator that was “established in the market place with a reputation for delivery” over continuing as a Council-managed facility. Whereas a council-run extended convention facility could see a projected economic benefit of £21m per annum, outsourcing to an external operator would see the projected economic benefit nearly double to £39m per annum.

(The ‘economic benefit’ is the additional money spent in Belfast as a result of conferences being held, including accommodation, food, banners, hiring goods, using local companies and staff as taking into account the ‘Bleisure’ tourism market of increasing the number of business visitors who return on holiday.)

If a professional operator could hope to achieve this level of extra (or better) business, would these figures not suggest that the council – up to now – hasn’t developed a reputation for being good at managing its conferencing venue.

The aim would be to see a six fold increase in the number of National Large Association conferences held in Belfast (from one a year in 2010 to six a year in 2020) and a twelve-fold jump in the number of International/European Association conference held (from one every two years now to six per annum by 2020).

There’s a gotcha in the report to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee. The report’s figures do not take into account (or even estimate the size) of “any compensatory payment which may be required by the Hilton [Hotel] as part of the extension agreement” nor “any additional costs which may be incurred through the transfer [TUPE] of relevant staff to an external operator”.

The report reckons that extending the conference facilities and running it in-house would net cost the council £215k each year. Whereas outsourcing the operation to an existing supplier would offer a net saving of £911k, equivalent to “a 0.72% reduction in the district rate (2012/13)”.

There’s a second gotcha in the report.

If the new facility is to achieve the projected income set out in the Economic Appraisal the business model for the Waterfront will have to fundamentally change from that of an entertainment venue to that of a conference centre.

Guess which bit of the Waterfront’s business has been increasing over the last few years? Entertainments. Despite the neighbouring Odyssey area, the Waterfront’s main auditorium and smaller Studio have been busy.

And guess which part of the Waterfront’s business has nose-dived over recent years? Conferencing.

With the removal of the Waterfront Studio – the last of the council’s theatre spaces – it is unlikely that community theatre could afford the prices charged to hire the small venues in the Lyric Theatre or Belfast MAC. Both venues received public funding, but are run on a commercial basis. Instead, community-based groups would have to look to Newtownabbey or Lisburn council theatres, well outside their catchment areas.

Running for the guts of two months each year, and attended by bus loads of school children, the Waterfront Studio pantomime would cease to have a venue. [Ed - Oh no it wouldn’t? Oh yes it would!]

The question for Belfast City Council is whether they want to demolish part of a building they may still be paying off the mortgage on to remove the community-accessible Waterfront Studio and replace it with a convention centre that may or may not attract more briefcases business to Belfast?

And the question of whether they want to “fundamentally change” the business model of the Waterfront from an entertainment venue to a conference centre? (None of the reports seem to articulate the loss to the local economy of the Waterfront auditorium being less available for concerts and more tied up with conferences.)

So that evening, the party walked from the CSI committee:

At Tuesday’s meeting Alliance brought things to a head by presenting a list of eight essential items which they believe should be on any document to promote a shared society. It includes a review of segregated housing, a framework for dealing with illegal flags and emblems and a test of all public spending to ensure it prioritises sharing over separation.

That same night that Spotlight programme put a lighted flame underneath the Girdwood story)…

Then ensued a pincher movement on them from both parties in OFMdFM. The First Minister was scathing:

“No-one can get absolutely everything they want out of a five-party working group trying to find consensus, but we were making good progress on the document.”

The DUP leader continued: “When Alliance thought they may not get everything they demanded, they childishly walked away from the table.”

He added: “Throughout this process there has been political sniping by David Ford, along with no serious attempt by his party to achieve a shared agreement on good relations.

“It would have been more constructive if the Alliance Party had produced any details at all on their claim of £1 billion cost of division when it was requested by the group.

Some of what’s in the BBC programme is fair comment. And Pete has demonstrated that a ‘shared future’ agenda was never on the minds of the two major political shareholders in North Belfast.

Mind you, they do have a point when they say that if you were going to start on a shared housing project, it would probably not be Girdwood. But if and when it gets to fruition, the hub facilities will effectively replace a peace wall.

This is a certainly a political manoeuvre, and by the DUP for sure, by using a funding deadline to force a decision.

And yet, the constituency has been taken off the party’s critical list, and it may even be about to benefit from the three Shankill wards where the depopulation trend of Protestant inner urban areas has not only reversed, its starting to become full.

In fact it is unlikely to make any real difference to the overall fate of the constitutency: one, because most who get houses on either side will likely already be registered to vote in North Belfast; and two the numbers have been reduced to the point of near electoral irrelevance.

In addition the housing on the so called Protestant housing faces out on a Catholic area on the other side of the road from the Girdwood site, so it is likely that over time that may become mixed or even Catholic housing in response to most pressing need.

Both these parties however play a long game. Prior to the Spotlight programme, the DUP was facing some disgruntlement with the local community at the fact of just 70 high density ‘Catholic’ housing units being built at all as a significant humiliation for them.

It may be that in the short term this is now to be seen as a victory for them. But in the longer term – short of a major new development in Glengormley or Crumlin – there is still a chronic housing shortage for Catholics in North Belfast that is simply not going to go away…

Update: Here’s Jackie Redpath on the matter:

Girdwood is a unique site, an abandoned army base with huge regeneration potential, in the heart of an area formerly wrecked by sectarian violence. Do we want this potential to be shared by ALL the neighbouring communities? Should it therefore be a shared space? I imagine the unanimous answer is yes!

If so, would building 200 homes for Catholics, and none for Protestants, secure the shared space vision? I think the answer is no! In fact, on the basis of “need” argument, why not follow the ultimate logic and cover the entire site in housing for Catholics – never mind 200, make it 500 houses!! Would that be shared space for a shared future?

And then there’s the issue of lower Oldpark. It’s in a grossly dilapidated state, with the existing community living among brutal dereliction and horrible conditions. Should it be left to rot and continue to decline? The answer must be no! Is there a waiting list for lower Oldpark at present? Again the answer is no. Would you want to live there?

What I think Minister Nelson McCausland is promoting is not only providing housing on the basis of need, but as a catalyst for regeneration. In this scenario “need” is not simply defined as “names on the waiting list” but as the “needs” of people, families and communities for regeneration, renewal and sustainability.

And:

Like it or not, politics are about trade-offs, transactions and hopefully, honourable compromise. Would we prefer a continued “stand -off” at either end of the Girdwood site by the politicians, or have them stand together on the same piece of earth, having “done what must be done” to make progress possible?

They should be congratulated, not pilloried for their “deal” – it is defensible. Perhaps their only mistake was not to defend it publicly!

The eurozone crisis rumbles on, its democratic deficit intact, and Ireland’s Fiscal Treaty referendum approaches.  Time, then, for historian Michael Wood to go looking for some historical references…

The British historian Gildas (c 500-570) in his diatribe against contemporary rulers in the early 500s, looking back over the story of the Fall of Roman Britain, lists the military failures, but behind them he speaks bitterly of a loss of nerve and direction, a failure of “group feeling”.

Gildas talks about right-wing politicians advocating glibly attractive solutions that appealed to the populace while “any leader who seemed more soft, or who was more inclined to actually tell things as they are, was painted as ruinous to the country and everyone directed their contempt towards him”.

Gildas also singles out his leaders’ sheer ineptitude and bad judgement, recalling some governments and financiers in today’s banking crisis.

“Everything our leaders did to try to save the situation ended up having the opposite effect. Society became prey to corrosive quarrels and dissensions, anger towards the rich, and political opportunism was rife that made no distinction between right and wrong.”

[*ahem* - Ed]  Read the whole thing.

But, then again, “history is not abstraction, it is the enemy of abstraction.”

Last night’s avalanche of advocacy for the NO campaign on Vincent Browne was remarkable. Watch it though, especially for Sigrun Davidsdottir‘s remarks on why Ireland is not Iceland that seemed not to come to the notice of our eponymous host.

Hint: neither includes the fact that Ireland is hemmed in by the EU, nor that Iceland is blessed with endless quantities of valuable natural resources.

So first, try this fascinating little vignette on P.ie on why you might question one of the flakier assertions on the No side:

There has been the let’s-veto-the-ESM answer. Quite how this would magic into existence billions of euro in funding is certainly beyond this writer.

The Referendum Commission nailed it early on and to be honest, no one should have needed the eminent Mister Feeney to point out the blindingly obvious that Ireland – providing little more than 1% – could block a fund that can be established once the ESM treaty has been ratified by euro member states representing 90% of its capital commitments.

The answer most peddled – because it’s the most hypothetical hence most difficult to prove/disprove – has been the line that we will get funding even if we don’t ratify – the gun to our heads option.

(a) It requires one to leave aside the glaringly obvious paragraph in the Treaty’s preamble that states we won’t.

(b) As per Karl Whelan last night, it also requires one to believe that Ireland is some sort of special case and that the tax payers of the other signatory nations (many of whom are poorer than Ireland) will be happy to see their lawmakers stump up vast amounts of cash for us despite our having voted the Treaty down.

(c) It presumably requires one to believe that we would get the funding on better conditions than those available if we voted yes.

(d) It requires one to believe the the bond markets will regard us as being a lower risk if we undermine our prospects of ESM access.

(e) It requires one to believe that the future stability of the eurozone rests on the funding of Irish public services and social welfare. We need to get over ourselves. Greece is imploding and is likely to implode a lot more. I don’t see Germany in difficulties. What I see is a division emerging between vulnerable countries on the one hand and the ultra-safe bunds on the other. I believe the Germans are for some shorter term maturities now effectively borrowing for free.

(f) It doesn’t take a greatly perceptive mind to see that a firewall could be built around Ireland, not to protect us but to protect others from us. Funds could be used to honour our sovereign debt obligations as they become due whilst providing little or nothing for public service or welfare funding in this country. These items are very clearly separable. They could protect the rest of the eurozone while we twist in the wind.

This campaign has been characterised by a great deal of bluster and nonsense. For instance, the treaty may bring stability in the very short term, but even a cursory glance to Europe proves beyond doubt that there is no guarantee of that.

The Council of European Council makes progress only slowly, and otherwise continues to fiddle whilst the Euro burns. The structural debt clause would be a fiscal straight jacket, if there was ever a way found to fairly and effectively enforce it.

Then again, would you take a 66/1 bet in the grand national?

Well, you might. But the chances of a pay off would very much depend on the destruction of the chances of a whole field of more favoured horses and you managing to stay on board your plucky wee grey.

In short, it’s hard not to sympathise with some of the more principled critics of the treaty, but hard to contemplate life for the Republic without the cover of the EU’s larger, and now decision making, nations (European Parliament, how are ya?).

John Waters in the Irish Times renders an interesting and creative answer of his own:

It is not that No is for me the wrong answer, but that I know it will be misinterpreted as a vote for Sinn Féin or some other cynical entity with even less chance of having to implement the consequences of what emerges and deal with what happens next. A No will sound like the inarticulate speech of the unknowing, the unthinking and the beyond caring, whereas a Not Yes could be a way of making a precise point.

[John, if you ever get over your allergy to reading blogs, I think you might find an echo of some of your feelings in this acute critique of ReferenDUMs]

He continues:

…there has been minimal space for any of this complexity in a debate characterised by two opposing forms of condescension. On the one hand there has been the condescension of what might broadly be termed “the establishment”, insisting that there is no rational answer but Yes; on the other, the condescension of those who urge us to vote No in the hope of feathering their political nests with the meagre, ragged down of our disillusion. The real question in this referendum is rather different from the one on the voting papers, or being discussed in the referendum debates.

And:

The real question is the unwritten plea being issued to the electorate by the current generation of politicians-in-power.

It goes something like this: “Since we have no possibility of continuing to run the Irish State other than on the take-it-or-leave-it basis currently laid down by our, eh, partners – and set out unambiguously in this ‘stability pact’ – do we have your unconditional agreement to do anything we consider necessary to keep the money coming? Yes or No?” Thus, in this campaign, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have finally given voice to their ideological interchangeability. The worst nightmare of this generation of politicians would be to wake up one morning and have to face the prospect of organising Ireland’s affairs outside of the embrace of the dependency that has sustained it for so long.

This, really, is the meaning in this context of “stability”.

And, in a country that has long worn its hard won independence on its sleeve but has rarely shown much inclination to treasure the privileges of self determination:

Much as I might wish, it is probably impossible to deliver the kind of No that would carry the conviction of independence, national dignity and self-respect. These qualities are long lost to us. To really say No – rather than tearing our jackets off and shouting to bystanders to hold us back or we’ll have to be dug out of the Germans – would require a guiding idea and this is even more remote from the capacities of the parties advocating a No than from the imaginations of those pleading with us to vote Yes.

It says something about the character of Irish politics that such an imaginative step away from current realities typically resides merely in the head of a single writer. [Voices off: "We are where we are. Going forwards..." "Goooing backkawwaarrrds"]

Interesting piece by former FF point man for Willie O’Dea, Derek Mooney in last night’s Herald which hits several nails on the head re the Fiscal Compact referendum…

WITH less than a week to go the referendum campaign seems more and more to be about less and less. If you believe the posters, the choice is to vote Yes to achieve stability or to vote No to end austerity.

But do any of us really believe these claims? Regrettably, like previous EU referendums, the debate has been conducted at the extremes, not the centre.

He notes, with the almost single exception of Declan Ganley, the almost complete absence of the political right from the No side:

The sight of Declan Ganley sharing No platforms with irredentist left firebrands is a joy to behold, especially when you consider that they agree on virtually nothing, including Europe. Most on the hard left are euro-sceptics while Ganley is avowedly euro-federalist.

While passing the Fiscal Treaty will herald no major day-to-day changes — mainly because it just restates the centre/centre right economic orthodoxy in place since 2008 — it will cement it into domestic law for the foreseeable future.

It is this that the Irish left fears and opposes most. Passing the Treaty would recalibrate the centre of the Irish political spectrum a few points to the right.

It won’t be a seismic or noticeable shift, but it torpedoes the Left’s ambitions of shifting it the other way. It doesn’t vanquish them, nor does it make them tone the rhetoric down. If anything, it will do the opposite.

This explains why the campaign from Joe Higgins, Boyd Barrett and Sinn Fein has been so fierce. But not as fierce as when its over and they start to target each other.

And the upshot? Well, Mooney rather mischievously lumps Labour in with the centre right. Mischievous, but it sort of chimes with what many stalwart Labour supporters are saying when 40% tell of them polsters they’ll be voting against the party line.

And it’s this weak point that the Sinn Fein motion in Killarney this weekend calling for the Unions to disassociate from Labour is intended to target. Mooney concludes:

In the meantime Sinn Fein will continue to do well at Labour’s expense, after all Gerry and Mary Lou are saying now what Eamon and Joan were saying two years ago.

It is Labour who will be the biggest casualty then. Polls showing 40% of Labour supporters voting No could have longer term ramifications for the leadership.

But whatever they may be, they can be nowhere near as damaging as Gilmore’s infamous “Frankfurt’s Way or Labour’s Way” slogan. It may turn out to be the most devastating political slogan of recent times.

For its authors, that is.

That would certainly suit Sinn Fein, who have been winning the contest for disaffected Labour sentiment already. As we noted after their performance in the February 2011 general election:

Sinn Fein is no longer purely the interest (some might say obsession) of assorted internet anoraks and ‘Nordies’, but a political force that will factor much more highly than in any previous legislature.

So why is Mooney so gung ho? Because the slow decimation of Labour in austerity administration may also suit Fianna Fail, which lost a whole tranche of voters (urban dwellers, and lower income public sector workers) to Labour in that same election. Thus far they have concentrated almost solely on building confidence in their hard core.

Shaking voters loose from Labour may initially at least send some of them to Sinn Fein (though I suspect they already account for that party’s rise in the polls), but the destabilisation of Labour could be Fianna Fail’s first opportunity to begin pitching to a significant chunk of that lost public sector vote…

Much depends on how well Labour keep their nerve. Having mercilessly derided the Greens for mud-guarding Fianna Fail, they may be doing the same thing for Fine Gael.

But the residual reality is that whilst Ireland loves to talk publicly to centre left, but when it comes to the crunch, they have consistently voted overwhelmingly to the centre right.

On the day, the YouGov poll commissioned by Alistair Darling was quite an effective spoiler to the launch of Alex Salmond’s Independence campaign, at least for the largely pro-Union press.

The YouGov poll of 1,004 people found that only 33% of Scots would opt for independence, while 57% would reject it, findings which are close to several recent surveys but show lower support for independence than others

But it’s a long haul to 2014.The treatment of small countries like Greece and Ireland in eurozone may frighten many Scots out of taking the independence leap. Small wonder that Alex Salmond is clinging to the skirts of sterling in the meantime. On the other hand the British economy may be in such an almighty shambles that the delights of going it alone might seem ever more attractive. Whatever the situation, Alex will make a brave fist of exploiting it  with a formula of soft independence that an old school Sinn Feiner would  scorn.

Even on the day Scotland was lucky to get its modest due of the coverage, what with mounting anxiety over the fate of the eurozone and all our economies and the Leveson inquiry breathing down the neck of David Cameron.

The fervently Unionist Daily Telegraph was alone is raising the flag.

  Let battle for the Union commence

The Scottish broadsheets treat the occasion calmly

The Scotsman

The referendum will be won and lost by people balancing gain and risk, optimism and negativity

The Herald

With this poll, the No campaign, still in embryonic form although big political names including Gordon Brown, Charles Kennedy and possibly Tony Blair are increasingly mentioned, provides a timely reminder of the extent of polarised opinion and how much there is to play for. Regardless of which celebrities are unveiled today to add sparkle to the politics of the independence campaign, the measure of how much pace it gathers over the next 27 months will be the conversion rate of the undecided and those currently minded to vote no, and whether a majority believe independence will provide tangible economic benefits down to household level.

The Times’ main story  (£) is downright bizarre,  as if to belittle the whole theme.  A dangerous tactic?

Alex Salmond’s Yes to Independence campaign, which will be launched this morning, is to share an office complex with the controversial religious group the Moonies, The Times has learnt.

Or waiting for Alex to create some decent copy?

The Londonderry Sentinel has some fascinating figures released by the DFP minister Sammy Wilson:

New figures detailing the number of registered businesses in each constituency show there were only 2,205 in Londonderry in January.

Only West Belfast (1,430) and North Belfast (2,185) had fewer whilst East Londonderry (3,900) and West Tyrone (5,095) had roughly twice as many as the Foyle constituency.

And it notes:

It follows the revelation in March that over 800 business premises in Londonderry lie desolate.

There are 13 empty factories, 270 empty warehouses and stores and 167 empty shops in Londonderry at present, according to the Finance Minister Sammy Wilson. A total of 817 unoccupied non-domestic properties were vacant here at March 18. This was up from 787 two years ago.

Fascinating little story that illustrates the bind the Republic finds itself in:

A new report published this morning from the Health Insurance Authority said that at the end of March there were 2.14 million people covered by private health insurance. This is down from 2.3 million at the peak of the market at the end of 2008.

The authority forecast that based on current trends, the number of subscribers would fall by a further 75,000 in the 18 months from June 2011 to December 2012.

A survey published by the authority today said that 23 per cent of consumers have switched health insurance company at one point or another.

The southern health system has long relied on private healthcare to take the bulk of the population out of reliance on the purse. At at time when the public purse is stretched to breaking, the applications for medical cards is at an all time high…

In light of Mick’s post, and now Brian’s follow-up, it’s worth noting an Irish News report today of Ballymoney Councillor Anita Cavlan’s resignation from Sinn Féin ”over concerns it is failing prisoners”.  From the Irish News report

The Ballymoney councillor said she believed Sinn Féin had “lost direction” and “should be doing more to represent the prisoners”.

“Sinn Féin in my opinion has been slowly sedated and now has been rendered unconscious by the intoxication of an illusionary power to govern,” she said.

According to the report the councillor intends to remain as an independent member of Ballymoney District Council.

“It is not that I support dissident activity.  I would hate it to go back to the way it was.  There were a lot of lives lost in all sections of the community.”

“There are those still amongst us who will insist that continued military action is the only way to achieve a united Irish republic.

“I disagree with them but I will not torture and abuse them if they are imprisoned.”

She said Sinn Féin’s calls for the urgent release of dissident republican Marian Price have been “weak”.

It’s what happens when “the guerillas” become “the people in power”…

But, as I noted in the comment zone earlier, other parties are free to ask questions.

I cheer at the story of Sammy Brush’s self defence at the time and am of course very glad he survived. Gerry McGeough is very lucky to be alive. But the McGeough case appears to create a new doctrine of the peace process as it applies to terrorist crimes. Does it not greatly diminish the amnesty effect of the Good Friday Agreement – at least in theory and expose the exercise of very wide discretion by the Secretary of State ?

The royal prerogative of mercy did not apply to McGeough. He was not a prisoner in 1998.  He had been living openly in Co Tyrone for two years,  having served sentences in Germany and the US – which being foreign, were unaffected by the Agreement . At home though, the file on the Brush attempted murder was still open.  The proverbial dogs in the streets know – or thought they knew – that paramilitaries suspected of terrorist crimes committed before 1998 would be left alone. And nearly everything that has happened since that date confirms that view. Except the arrest of Gerry McGeough.

Why did the police  wait until 2007 to arrest him? Was the unspoken reason connected with republican dissidence? Is the wider exercise of  ministerial discretion now being exercised in the opposite direction- in favour of prosecution?

In overturning McGeough’s application for judicial review of his 20 year sentence the judge came to a decision which in my ignorance took me aback. He ruled

the Respondent submits that in the exercise of what was asserted to be a pure unbounded discretion for the purpose of correcting a small number of anomalies in the interests of securing a broader political resolution the Secretary of State is entitled to make fine judgments about the issuing of an RPM (Royal prerogative of mercy). The political background to those judgments underscores the fact that this exercise of executive power should, generally, be insulated from the supervisory scrutiny of the Court.

Discussion

[40] The exercise of the RPM by the Secretary of State in the comparator cases relied upon by the applicant was made at a different time and context. Through correspondence from the CSO the current Secretary of State has asserted his view that the applicant is not eligible for the RPM. Nor, in any event does he regard the comparators as being in a relevantly analogous position.

[41] The release of prisoners by an earlier Secretary of State over a decade ago in the context of that time inevitably will have involved considerations of policy. The refusal by the current Secretary of State in 2011 to exercise the RPM to remit the applicants lawfully imposed sentence is a separate exercise.

The SOS’s contention that the applicant is not eligible for the RPM is hardly surprising. The applicant’s contention of unequal treatment is in my view untenable. First, it overlooks the consideration that the exercise of the pure discretionary power was by another SOS a decade earlier and in a different context. It is noteworthy that in Corden Kerr J acknowledged that it was open to the SOS to allow political considerations to play a part.

The judge seems to be saying that the two year sentence applied to “considerations of policy” i.e. that as we know, they were political, in order to support  the ceasefires and the peace process in the aftermath of the GFA. But  these circumstances do not necessarily apply now. So when did ” circumstances” change?

Now of course the judge had to deal with the case before him. Presumably he cannot ask out loud why many more old terrorist cases have not come before the courts since 1998. His ruling does not dispose of the suspicion that McGeough was arrested because as an independent republican  he lacked the protection of Sinn Fein affiliation. There is a case for saying that his arrest in 2007 was as political as the Sentences Act of 1998 – only the circumstances have changed and the result is now the opposite – conviction rather than release or no action taken.

What will the effect of the judicial decision on former IRA or loyalist paramilitaries who still have a case to answer? Will McGeough set a precedent?  Or will the Historic Enquiries team continue to draw a blank?

It seems to me perfectly proper for the SDLP or anyone else to raise these as HR issues.

The case of Marian Price is different.  She is being held in connection with the Massarene Barracks murders.  Are her conditions in prison adequate? Does she have proper access to a lawyer and medical supervision and is she allowed visits?  I would guess she might have a human rights case if these conditions do not apply. Being held because she represents an increased threat is a different factor and smacks of internment but the DPP has stated the case against her is being pursued..

Criticism of the SDLP for making human rights points in these cases, whether they are entirely well founded or not, is not well founded. It implies that HR complaints should only be made for political reasons, which is quite wrong.  To accuse the SDLP of currying favour with dissident republicans at SF’s expense is unfair and bizarre. Dissident or independent republicans have rights.

The McGeough arrest and prosecution is odd because here was an independent republican who could be picked off because her did not SF protection or cover. The case to answer is this: why have not lots of old Provos been picked up in car parks down the years since the GFA and put on trial and sentenced to serve their two years?

Can we guess the answer?

Another offering from our old mates at Philosphy Football (who previously brought you this, oh yes, and this little controversial number).

So if you are dedicated FAI or bust supporter, or an any green will do man/woman/boy/child… Whether you are on your way to Poland where they’ve got to go down a storm with the locals or your are staying at home with lots of tinies, be my guest!! Way cheaper than replica…

Declaration: I’ve not been promised a free shirt for writing this blog, but I will be petitioning hard for one to add to my pleasing collection (well, we all have our price). You can order them here.

So the Joey Barton of Ulster politics has been shown a permanent Red Card by Captain Nesbitt, and David McNarry makes his way to the dressing room where (to mix my sporting metaphors for those of you who remember Mike Yarwood or Ed Waring) he’ll take an early bath.

It’s ironic, that this most ill-disciplined of team players finally got pinged for following the leader’s orders for once. Though it is undoubtedly for the insubordination of going to the media afterwards that gained him the expulsion from the team.

The days are long gone in the UUP of lodge business overtaking party business, but as Liam Clarke notes in the BelTel:

Mike Nesbitt is the first UUP leader not to be a member of the Order and disciplining Mr McNarry on this issue could put further strain on the UUP ties to the institution.

Mr McNarry and Mr Nesbitt are both MLAs for Strangford. In the last election the UUP gained a seat at the DUP’s expense.

If Mr McNarry joined the DUP or didn’t stand for election, the UUP could lose a seat, either to the DUP or the SDLP — who were just 44 votes short of a quota last time.

Nesbitt seems determined to turn the party from a rather quaint old hippy commune for men-in-suits-who-dabble-in-politics into a modern political party. Not a bad first step. But as Clarke’s analysis illustrates fourteen or fifteen years of drift and infighting has left them few favours out on the real field of battle.

Some really interesting ideas in this lecture at the University of Ulster, with Duncan Morrow. It kicks off with a potted history of the origins of the conflict. He describes the public policy response firstly, via the original devolution of parliament to Stormont and latterly in its response to the civil unrest of 1969-1970, under the uber heading of ‘Containment’.

He references work by Maire Smyth which outlines three defineable groups of casualities: poor urban communities; a wider geographical community comprising band that runs from Magherafelt down to Armagh and then along the border; and the securitiy forces. The major policy response is to ‘contain’ the troubles to these three groups.

The result is, he argues, that the rest of society are isolated from these groups and there is from this time a failing element of civil engagement from the rest of Northern Irish society. “The deal is that if you keep me and the middle class safe, I’m not going to ask what you’re doing in the ghetto.

It raises too the issue of how the current incumbent parties which were at least originally close to all three of these areas handle larger issues of policy.

You can pick up the short remainder here in Part 2, where Girdwood gets a mention as a side reference to the ‘containment’ theme…

Nice observation from Simon Carswell in his Bottom Line column today in the Irish Times, regarding the recent high level visit of the putative leader of the Peoples Republic of China.

…these visits really only suggest the potential that exists. China accounts for just 3 per cent of exports and most of that is dairy products, notably infant milk formula.

UCD economist Colm McCarthy pointed out that Ireland exported the same amount of merchandise to China last year as it did to Northern Ireland and noted facetiously that there were very few Government trade missions to Dungannon and Coalisland.

And…

The problem is that China doesn’t figure as a foreign direct investor in Europe, never mind Ireland. Beijing accounts for just 1 per cent of foreign direct investment into Europe.

The US is responsible for 72 per cent of Ireland’s foreign direct investment followed by Europe with 20 per cent, so any investment from China is starting from a very low base.

So, don’t be holding yer breath… Interestingly Barry O’Leary, polymath head of IDA Ireland, notes that China was “more likely to invest in Ireland through acquisition rather than setting up new “greenfield” businesses.”

That may be ‘code’ for acquiring smart Irish businesses and, erm, their ‘Intellectual Property’…

Now here’s an interesting one. Almost as interesting for where it comes from as to what it suggests… Nigel Dodds is having a go at the SDLP for taking up a number of cases concerning the fate of dissident Republicans, in particular that of Gerry McGeough… The News Letter reports:

The DUP deputy leader questioned the advice being given to SDLP leader Alasdair McDonnell and added: “Gerry McGeough was convicted of the attempted murder of my party colleague Sammy Brush. McGeough plotted to gun him down in his home. He had no regard for Sammy Brush’s human rights or the family that would have been left devastated had his evil enterprise been successful.

“It is outrageous that the leader of the SDLP should be demanding the release of such a person from prison.”

Well, may be. Mr McGeough’s case is an interesting one. Estranged from the mainstream Republican organisation in Northern Ireland he was arrested as he left the count centre for the Assembly elections of 2007 “in the full glare of the media”. He polled a mere 1.8% of the total vote.

Unusually for the post Belfast Agreement era, McGeough was then tried and convicted for the attempted murder of Mr Dodds’ party colleague, Cllr Sammy Brush back in 1981.

As for the SDLP, a party spokeswoman told the News Letter:

“…while paramilitary activists showed no respect for the human rights of their victims, it is our belief that not only are there no points to be scored by repaying wrong with wrong, but some principles transcend the desire to be popular.”

The spokeswoman said they believed the treatment of the pair “contravenes aspects of their human rights” in the pursuit of political expedience.

“Marian Price’s treatment in particular is unacceptable — unable to examine the alleged intelligence provided to the government against her, forced to accept legal advice from a government-appointed barrister who is not allowed to tell her what she is accused of, suffering serious mental health problems as a result of her largely solitary confinement and falling prey to increasing physical frailty, while her previous Royal Pardon appears to have been conveniently shredded.

“Gerry McGeough’s incarceration, so shortly after he disavowed Sinn Féin and challenged them electorally, raises concerns that there may be a politically-motivated subtext to the circumstances which precipitated his current situation.”

The spokeswoman added: “We would be failing those people who vote for our principles as defenders of human rights if we did not extend those principles to all those whose human rights appear to have been left unprotected.”

Slugger has heard complaints about the SDLP, particularly in Derry, championing the cause of dissidents like Marian Price from Sinn Fein sources also. Alisdair McDonnell holds on to his seat with the help of a small but significant number of Protestant voters.

Interestingly, although it still shows up on the google search, there no longer appears to be any reference to the Petition to free Gerry McGeough…

In the leadership election last November Mr McDonnell made no secret of the fact that he had (to borrow Mike Nesbitt’s term) ‘no big idea’ about where he might take the party. Organisation is what he pitched the membership and organisation was what they bought.

But both minor parties have been floundering and finding it difficult to get any purchase in public debate. There’s a noticeably local feel to the SDLP Press Office’s output with mostly McDonnell and Pat Ramsey in Derry taking the lead on the strange ‘long after the fact’ imprisonment of a select number of ‘stood down’ dissidents.

Sometime in or around 2005, I recall Alistair Campbell telling the Tories that if they wanted to turn their fortunes round they should do what he’d done to them in the run in to the 1997 general election and cause them as much trouble as they could.

If, and there is suspicion within Sinn Fein that the motive here is primarily political at making Sinn Fein less comfortable in Derry, where that party appears to be losing control of the streets to their former comrades in RAAD, it’s an odd one indeed.

Sinn Fein would dearly love to swap electorates with the SDLP. It’s been a point of some frustration that despite providing a deputy leader and a deput First Minister, Derry remains politically in the hands of the SDLP. Hume’s legacy has proven more enduring than anything bequeathed by Gerry Fitt in Belfast.

There is nothing wrong with pointing to the oddness of the arrests. But in the absence of any overarching theme to Mr McDonnell’s leadership, they risk being defined by it.

And there is no shortage of well resourced opponents who will go the extra mile to take the little the electorate have left them by pushing things that way.

Sinn Fein want that Foyle Westminster seat, and the DUP would dearly love to clean out the SDLP leader of his seat in South Belfast. A double whammy for team OFMdFM, if you like.

Organisation alone cannot save the SDLP, not least from its own campaigning ‘enthusiasms’. It desperately needs a story. Preferably one that makes its opponents more uncomfortable that it does itself.

The Northern Ireland First and deputy First Minsters recently announced the second round of funding, £1.5million, available from the Executive and Atlantic Philanthropies’ ‘Contested Spaces’ Programme, although I’m still not entirely clear where the other £2.5million went…

The announcement, in the absence of a “Cohesion, Sharing and Integration” strategy, rebranded, and “watered down” to the “lowest commmon denominator“, or otherwise, coincides with the reveal of a new contested space the masterplan for the regeneration of the Girdwood Park former military base.  [And the Crumlin Road Gaol ? - Ed]  Separate masterplan…

The ministerial press release comes with a “Joint statement from North Belfast elected representatives, Minister Nelson McCausland, Minister Carál Ní Chuilín, Nigel Dodds MP, Alban Maginness MLA, William Humphrey MLA, Gerry Kelly MLA and Alderman David Browne.”  Which is nice.  The representatives note

 Housing will also be developed on the site, for a broad range of people in the context of a shared site. This will contribute along with other developments to addressing housing need and broader regeneration issues in North Belfast.

As the now NI Social Development Minister, the DUP’s Nelson McCausland, told BBC NI’s Julia Paul in 2008

We don’t really have shared housing sites in north Belfast.

And from the now NI Culture Minister, Sinn Féin’s Carál Ní Chuilín, in the same 2008 report

Those communities aren’t ready to live together yet.

But as BBC NI political editor, Mark Devenport, points out

So what has changed?

I did my best to get an answer out of Nelson McCausland on Monday night’s BBC Newsline, but viewers will have noted that during a brief interview the minister appeared keener to talk about the planned sports facilities rather than to give further details about the housing compromise.

Significantly the new master-plan shows two separate residential zones – one near the Antrim Road which appears likely to attract nationalist residents, another on Clifton Park Avenue, just outside the Girdwood perimeter, which seems more oriented towards unionists. [added emphasis]

On Monday morning, the SDLP’s Alban Maginness posed alongside other local elected representatives at the site with a giant copy of the new master-plan (a photographer captured the event but broadcasters weren’t invited).

However, Mr Maginness later issued a statement in which he qualified his welcome for the breakthrough, talking about the Girdwood glass being both half full and half empty.

“The housing need in north Belfast requires and acquires a significant element of the Girdwood site to go to social housing” Mr Maginness argued.

“The scale of need is not fully recognised in the announcement and some may argue that the principle of housing based on need has not prevailed when it comes to the Girdwood site.”

So the devil may yet prove to be in the detail – how many houses will be built, and will the provision of accommodation match the need demonstrated by those on the waiting list?

As you can see from the masterplan on the NI Executive’s flickr feed, the proposed residential zones are at opposite ends of the site.  [Build another peace wall! - Ed]

And here’s that still-relevant 2008 Hearts and Minds report on the then-stalled project