I just finished listening to a fine piece of radio presented by Gerry Anderson and would recommend a listen. It covered the area of identity and what factors make us what and who we think we are. It’s certainly timely given the present impasse we are stuck in, unable and unwilling to perfom a basic function of democracy and govern ourselves. Perhaps a better or more confident sense of identity or achieving some permission to allow ourselves to claim shared identity would be useful at this time. (I heard a certain Mr Fealty credited on the show, but will have to listen again to catch his contribution.)
The point has often been made in this forum that our sense of identity in Northern Ireland is one of the key issues we need to explore and understand. Edward Moxon Brown says: The differences between the two communities in Northern Ireland are palpable. The lines of division tend to reinforce each other. There are few, if any, overarching institutions or foci of loyalty that can transcend the cleavages. Although the lines of division are often considered to be religious in character, religion is best seen as a badge of difference - the visible symbol of deeper and less tangible attachments to national ‘roots’
This point is nicely taken up on the show with examples of how we can claim sporting or other figures as ‘our own’ when it suits, but that by and large we have very few common icons or symbols that we can share. It seems that the people of Northern Ireland would rather self destruct than admit that these differences in root and religion should not continue to define and determine our present and our future.
That idea of self-destruction was brought home to me during the summer, and the impliactions for our society at large. A friend was out observing a parade in East Belfast and heard a young child, about 8 or 10 starting to shout over at the people going to Mass at St Matthew’s. The usual epiteths were being shouted, when my friend turned to the wife of a local politician to see if she was going to censure the kid. She looked and said ‘He’s just right, them ones shot at us during a funeral’. The missing part of the story is that the funeral was 30 years ago and the hatred, confusion and intolerance is being passed from one generation to the next depriving all of us of hope for a shared future.
The RFID system in the new passports has been successfully cracked using the publicly available information and equipment costing £175-£250. The government did put on a high level of encryption to deter identity thieves but the ‘secret key’ needed to unlock it isn’t a secret. The Home Office doesn’t care and insist “This doesn’t matter”. They don’t seem to understand that if you can crack the chip it means you can clone it.
The attempt on Stormont had the potential to be life threatening, even if it looked farcical at the time. The devices were real enough, and witnesses reported that the bag was smoking at the time. One thing missed out of many of the early reports though was that Stone himself is a virtual cripple these days, which is one obvious reason why he got caught in the revolving doors (another metaphor for our arthritic Peace Process™?). But, Liam Clarke reports, he was less intent on sowing mayhem than just getting back into jail. It seems he had four paramilitary squads on his tail at the time.
Alex Kane was at Stormont in the rain on Friday. He is not impressed with a process that, apparently, has little discernible forward structure. He notes below that, “The DUP and Sinn Fein are being asked to dole out the top jobs in advance of an election in which it is the electorate who are supposed to make the decision about votes and seats”. Even more than the November 2003, this election (if it actually takes place) looks like an election with very little purpose.
Soap operas survive on an odd blend of the dull, the doolalley and, occasionally, the downright absurd; those moments when the storyline is stretched so far that credibility flies out the window. But even the most crackpot of scripts wouldn’t have been able to compete with yesterday’s rumble at the Assembly.
As toothless geriatric dinosaurs roared their over-rehearsed mantras at each other, we were treated to a literal and physical return of the Stone Age. Now, I know that some people will go to great lengths to disrupt David Ford’s moralistic monologues, so no-one was entirely surprised when the fire alarm sounded as he reached his third paragraph. But even the most cynical of MLAs would admit that Mr. Ford’s passionless righteousness is preferable to being stranded for hours in a sodden car park.
And what are we to make of Stone’s contribution to the proceedings? Absolutely nothing, is my advice. The guy is, and always has been, a nutter; and worse than that, the sort of nutter who is hero-worshipped by other nutters. He was released from prison as a consequence of a deal between unionists and republicans and yet there he was, complaining about those same unionists and republicans trying to create an environment in which young people won’t be sucked into paramilitarism. For all of his efforts to convince us that he had become a respectable artist and wordsmith, he reverted to sectarian type with a spray can and a holler of “No Surrender.” Put him back inside and leave him there.
Meanwhile, the day started with Ian Paisley making a speech in which he didn’t actually nominate himself, but nor did he rule out nominating himself in the near future. It would probably take the Hansard equivalent of the Rosetta Stone to understand the true meaning and nuance of the DUP’s position, but it didn’t actually matter, for Peter Hain would have interpreted a grunt and a burp as evidence that the show was still on the road. All that mattered was that the Doc said the words “there can only be a deal with Sinn Fein when…” because for the past forty years he has been saying that “there could never never be a deal with Sinn Fein.”
And am I the only one who regards this nominations farce as an affront to democracy? The DUP and Sinn Fein are being asked to dole out the top jobs in advance of an election in which it is the electorate who are supposed to make the decision about votes and seats. The only thing required from the political parties, all of them, was a commitment to form a government immediately after the election; and, in the continuing absence of that commitment, Mr. Hain should not have called an election. He should have stopped the salaries, locked the Stormont offices and refused to do anything until the parties got together, under their own steam, and hammered out the remaining problems. As it stands we are to have an election to yet another Assembly which has no guarantee of functioning.
The other problem, of course, is that what has become the St Andrews Act provides for power division rather than power-sharing, and the only administration it can hope to produce is one built on utter mistrust and mutual veto. Messrs Robinson and Adams would have us believe that the issue of accountability has been addressed, but it hasn’t. Accountability is based on the opportunity to hold a government to account; to hold the Executive and individual ministers to account; to challenge, amend and defeat government proposals; and, most important of all, to provide the electorate with a genuine choice between an outgoing government and a potential alternative. Some new mechanisms have been included, but they are too cumbersome to be effective and they cannot operate against a background of mandatory coalition in which chipping at each other will lead to mutually assured self destruction.
Yesterday was a bad day for politics, devolution and democracy. I can’t imagine that it is going to get any better in the near future.
First published in the Newsletter on Saturday 25th November 2006
As the BBC have reported, the Secretary of State for Wales etc, Peter Hain has revoked Michael Stone’s early release licence, following yesterday’s attempted attack at Stormont, [technically NIO Minister Paul Goggins signed the order - Ed], which will mean that, if Lord Chief Justice Sir Brian Kerr accepts the minimum recommended tariff from Stone’s original sentence, he will serve at least a further 18 years in prison.
Mr Hain said: “Following Michael Stone’s actions of yesterday he has been charged with a number of very serious offences. As he is in clear breach of the conditions of his release I have suspended his ‘early’ release licence with immediate effect.
“I will not hesitate to act to suspend the licence of any prisoner who was released under the early release scheme (the Northern Ireland Sentences) Act 1998), introduced following the signing of the Good-Friday Agreement, if they present a risk to the safety of others.[added emphasis]
“My priority is public safety and the interests of the whole community and I cannot permit freedom to any individual intent on abusing the opportunity they have been given to benefit from the early release scheme.”
The blogosphere is a free economy. People swap and borrow snippets and insights all the time with one general rule: acknowledge your sources. I notice that Pete’s exclusive translation of Francie Brolly’s remarks in a Swiss French language newspaper got picked up quickly by the BBC and used as one of Donna Trainor’s sharpest questions (14 minutes in, streaming until this evening) on last night’s Newsline. Possibly too late for today’s papers to give it a substantive mention, we await to see if Pete’s work is acknowledged in the Sunday’s tomorrow.
Some of our readers have noted that although widely respected within (and beyond) the party Brolly is hardly senior enough to reflect the views of the party leadership. But, at the least, his comments do raise important questions about perspectives inside the party.
Sinn Fein needs to call an ard fheis—and before it, I guess, an ard chomhairle—to make it crystal clear that it is signing up to the pledge of office and that it is endorsing the terms of this legislation and the pillar that I mentioned at the beginning about the support for the rule of law and policing. It is absolutely crucial that Sinn Fein has to call that conference, and I expect it to do so.
It will be well worth paying close attention to how this plays out. If Brolly is right, and the party has actually no intention of calling an Ard Fheis until next Summer or Autumn then the chain is broken and, so far as the veto holding DUP may be concerned, all other bets would be off: including the election!!.
Judging from the body language in the car park yesterday there appears to be concern within the DUP over keeping the horses together. They had been by far the most animated party on the Assembly benches, and afterwards, the two statements appear to confirm that the frictions are real enough beneath the surface. However, it is interesting to note that the ‘not in a political lifetime’ quote, widely attributed to Nigel Dodds as evidence of an internal split, was actually taken directly from one of Peter Robinson’s parliamentary contributions, back in May.
It was noticeable too that in the Chamber, Mark Durkan was volubly cheered by the DUP benches every time he laid the allegation at Sinn Fein that they had freely given the DUP a secure lock on when and whether the ministerial oversight gets devolved to the Assembly. It is something that Sinn Fein ceded in principle during the failed negotiation of the Comprehensive Agreement, and welcomed 18 months later with the passing into UK legislation of the Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act.
It is not inconceivable that some individuals, still unreconciled to power sharing with Sinn Fein, take this at face value and view it as a permanent lock on keeping them out of government. For the pragmatists, it could be a decent bargining chip, if there is actually any real negotiating going on over the issue.
In reality, it is only there so long as the UK parliament deems the Assembly a viable route to the future. If there was any doubt that the current shadow Assembly is anything other than a vassal of Westminster, Ian Paisley proved it yesterday.
As Peter Hain has proved time and again this year, Westminster is where the real power still lies in Northern Ireland.
In the chaos of yesterday’s tumultuous events, a few important snippets came loose. Ian Paisley made a nonsense of the Speaker’s pre-ordained role, by not using a particular form of words that the NIO had assured her would be there. It seems she was legally compelled by the Secretary of State to accept anything Dr Paisley said. We may put in an FOI request to try to clarify the matter. But it also seems that Sinn Fein is determined not to face a damaging election having signed up to policing. Indeed, Slugger understands that Peter Hain and NIO officials have been issuing briefings to the effect that the Ard Fheis may not take place until after the election.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
The powers that be at the Assembly should take note of the plans at the Oireachtas to update and modernise facilities for the relatively small Dail chamber. Already TDs can been seen working on their lap tops during sessions, but any future expansion is likely to include “refurbishment of the existing chamber to increase its capacity and introduce modern information technology and other systems”. When the fun and games were happening at Stormont today, there wasn’t a sniff of a WiFi connection. With the copious technological backup of big media, it was just about the worst place for a blogger to get stuck on such a fascinating news day. Speed the day…
On BBC Newsline (Realplayer reqd) Conor Murphy has made clear Sinn Fein’s preconditions for the special Ard Fheis:
“The transfer of policing and justice powers - a timeframe for that, the type of department that those powers will be transferred to. Those are the issues that need resolved. Those can be resolved quite quickly and allow us to take our decisions on policing.”
The lack of clarity on the future of the PIRA and the related absence of an exclusion mechanism are among DUP concerns with the St Andrew’s Agreement. Is there not an obvious quid pro quo? The PIRA disbands. This reduces significantly the need for an exclusion mechanism. It also boosts public confidence, necessary for devolution of policing and justice powers.
Relying on Convention Rights in Judicial Review proceedings
7. The Commission has long believed that it should be able to rely on the European Convention of Human Rights when bringing Judicial Review proceedings itself. Our consultation document responded with the Government’s initial view that Convention rights were already adequately protected by allowing victims to take cases.
8. We have, however, carefully considered the arguments presented by the Commission and other consultees and we now believe that there will be value in allowing the Commission to rely on Convention Rights in certain cases. We can envisage circumstances in which it is more appropriate for the Commission to take a test case to clarify a point of law rather than relying on individual victims to do so.
9. Granting this power will not in itself create any new circumstances for litigation: the Commission will be empowered to bring cases only where there is already a victim, or potential victim, who would presently be able to bring a case themselves. We would not expect the Commission to bring such cases often; in the great majority of cases, we would still expect victims to bring cases themselves. The Commission will not be awarded any damages in such cases.
Investigations: New Powers and Safeguards
10. One issue that provoked a polarised response from consultees was our invitation for all parties to consider what form the new statutory investigatory powers should take; and what safeguards would be required to ensure that they were adhered to appropriately by all parties.
11. A number of respondents felt that there should be no extra powers for the Commission; whilst others felt that it should be able to compel evidence and access places of detention without any restrictions.
12. Having considered this issue carefully, we still intend to bring forward legislative provisions that will allow the Commission to compel evidence and to access places of detention as part of its investigations. It is also our intention that a number of safeguards should be put in place that apply to both the Commission and to public authorities. The purpose of these is not to frustrate or impede investigations, but to ensure that other considerations are also taken into account, and to ensure that those who are faced with requests for access or evidence are not able to simply ignore them.
13. We have examined developments in Great Britain, where the powers of the forthcoming Commission for Equality and Human Rights have been provided for by the Equality Act 2006. This Act contains a number of provisions that exempt information from being compelled if its release would have national security implications. Similar exemptions will be applied in Northern Ireland. We have also considered the human rights of those who might be placed in danger from the release of evidence, and will ensure that they are adequately protected.
14. In extending significant new powers to the Commission, the Government is seeking to enhance the contribution that it can make to the future protection of human rights in Northern Ireland. We therefore intend that these new powers will assist the Commission in being forward looking. The power to compel evidence, therefore, will only be used in the investigation of contemporary and future issues. Other bodies are better placed, and specifically mandated, to investigate historic issues.
15. One of the main concerns voiced by those who were sceptical of these new powers was the impact on the operational effectiveness of those who would be subject to their use. Specifically, there was concern that these new powers would duplicate the work of other bodies, and would unnecessarily disrupt the work of places of detention.
16. We intend to legislate for a revised investigations process in which there would be a requirement for the Commission to consult on terms of reference for its investigations. This will involve the Commission forwarding a clear outline of the purpose of its investigation to all relevant parties and will therefore help establish a channel of communication between the Commission and the bodies it is investigating.
17. There will also be a responsibility for the Commission to consider the work of other public bodies in order to avoid duplication of roles. The Commission will be required to consider whether an issue had been fully investigated by another body before carrying out an investigation. This is in line with a similar statutory duty that applies to the Chief Inspector for Criminal Justice for Northern Ireland.
18. It is also our intention to allow places of detention an initial period of fourteen days to appeal against the terms of reference if they are unnecessary, unreasonable or do not meet the statutory requirements that cover this power. However, it is not our intention to require the Commission to provide advance notice of any visit that it wishes to carry out. We have noted the comments from consultees that such a requirement would have been perceived as severely limiting this power.
19. It is also our intention to create two new criminal offences which will provide appropriate sanctions for those who fail to comply with the Commission’s new powers.
20. We are aware that there were mixed views on whether we should specify which places of detention should be able to be accessed by means of this new statutory power; or whether we should provide a more open definition that would allow the Commission to access ‘any place in which a person was being detained’. The Government’s view is that an open definition would present legal ambiguity and would leave the power subject to interpretation and challenge. We therefore intend to specify the categories of places of detention that can be accessed. These will include prisons; young offenders institutions; the juvenile justice centre; secure childcare accommodation; court cells; police cells;
immigration holding facilities; special facilities for those detained under terrorism legislation; and special facilities for those detained under mental health legislation. It is our view that this includes all relevant places of detention. However, we intend to provide for an order making power which will allow for the list to be amended, if necessary.
Making further recommendations
21. In the time that has passed since the Commission made its initial recommendations, it has remained of the view that there should be an explicit statutory requirement for it to make further recommendations regarding its effectiveness. Whilst we initially concluded that this was not necessary, as the Commission is able to make recommendations to the Secretary of State at any time, a number of consultation responses did highlight the perception that previous recommendations had not been progressed quickly enough by
Government. It was argued that recommendations needed to be given ‘explicit statutory weight’ as a result.
22. We are still of the opinion that the Commission can make further recommendations at any time. However, given that the Government is amending the original powers of the Commission, we do believe that it is right that the Commission is formally invited to comment on the effectiveness of these new powers. It is our intention, therefore, to place an additional statutory requirement on the Commission to make recommendations regarding the effectiveness of the new powers that are extended through this legislation, no later than two years following the date of their commencement.
Bringing Forward Legislation
23. When we launched our consultation process in November 2005, we stated that we would reconsider our initial proposals in light of the responses that we received. Our consultation document also stated that we would bring forward legislation to enact these proposals. We therefore intend to introduce legislation in the present Parliamentary session that will include provisions extending these significant new powers. The Government looks forward to the constructive debate that will accompany the passage of this legislation.[added emphasis throughout]
Elections are to be held on 7th March 2006 (results on 8th March). Nominations for ministers are to be held on 14th March 2007. D’hondt is to run and power devolved on 26th March 2006 and ministers expected to take a pledge of office making clear reference to supporting the police. So says the NIO, the St Andrew’s Agreement and the legislation. SF has made clear no pledge will be taken until the Ard Fheis has met. Francis Brolly says a policy shift is reliant on a good election result on 7th March and may be delayed for months after it. This leaves 18 days to agree, call, hold and win an Ard Fheis, can it be done?
He said: “The business of democracy will continue to ensure that we get the St Andrews Agreement implemented, with Sinn Fein signing up to policing and the rule of law as they’ve committed themselves to do, and at the same time the DUP committing itself to power-sharing in a devolved Government.”[added emphasis]
Michael Stone’s bungled assassination attempt apart, the news from Stormont today included a seemingly contradictory response from the DUP to the ‘other’ business being conducted at Stormont. Following on from the ‘Nomination’ process in the Chamber this morning, 12 DUP MLAs- including four MPs- hastily agreed a public statement denying that their party had taken part in any process to nominate a team to head up a future power-sharing administration. The statement contradicted the earlier indication from DUP leader Ian Paisley, and is being taken as the first public indicator of a potential rift within the party.
While the fudge today continues to be examined, and not withstanding the other drama, word arrives of a case of perhaps too much candour, for his party’s leadership, by SF MLA Francie Brolly. Speaking to a journalist for the French-language paper Le Temps, apparently before today’s events, he revealed what had been suspected. Sinn Féin appear to have decided they will not move to support the police before the March election and, perhaps, not until the summer - there doesn’t seem to be anything lost in translation btw.
“It [SF Ard Fheis on policing] will take place quickly if we obtain a good result in the elections but perhaps only during the marching season.”
The Northern Ireland Assembly has to meet again exceptionally on Friday. The British Government wants it to designate the two first ministers that will share power: Ian Paisley the elderly leader of the DUP (unionist), and Martin McGuiness the chief negotiator of Sinn Féin (republican). But these nominations will be conditional, suspended until recognition of the police by Sinn Féin. On Thursday the DUP threatened however not to proceed to these conditional nominations, preferring to wait for an official gesture from Sinn Féin.
The political wing of the IRA has to convene a special conference to recognise the police, but for at a still unknown date. In principle it should happen before elections, anticipated for 7 March leading to a coalition government on 26 March. Francie Brolly Sinn Féin assembly member revealed to The Times that it is possible that the meeting of his party would not take place until after the elections, “It will take place quickly if we obtain a good result in the elections but perhaps only during the marching season.” Such a scenario risks the failure of the whole process.[added emphasis]
In the accompanying article Francie Brolly also pointed to recent polls predicting a 18-19% loss of party support when the move comes.
“A recent poll suggests that we would lose 18 to 19% of our support if we recognized the PSNI”, continued Francie Brolly.
Extraordinary events at Stormont this morning. Though it was hardly a re-run of Lieutenant Colonel Antonio Tejero Molina’s takeover of the Spanish parliament in 1981. His attempt was organised and involved 200 member of the Civil Guards. Loyalist killer (and visual artist) Michael Stone appeared to be acting on his own.
It seems he was relaxed enough to stop outside Parliament Buildings at Stormont this morning long enough to daub “Sinn Fein IRA War” on its grand facade, before bursting in through the doors declaring he had a bag containing a live incidiary device. He was quickly apprended and bundled back out of the door. Two security men have been taken hospital.
It brought a full stop to an extraordinary parliamentary episode.
The full Assembly had been called by Westminster legislation hastely rushed through both houses and given Royal Assent on Wednesday which required this session to meet and further that the two largest parties, Ian Paisley’s DUP and Gerry Adams’ Sinn Fein to indicate that they would nominate their candidates for the two top parliamentary jobs. If they failed, the penalty was, as Peter Hain put it on Radio Ulster this morning: devolution or dissolution.
The auguries for a successful outcome were not great. Stormont was bound in by the same miserable weather we had when this latest installment of the ever shrinking small time soap opera, as when it began last May. A text poll on a local phone programme had over 90% agreed with the proposition that Hain should should just pull the plug on Northern Ireland’s politicians and have done with the grand experiment altogether.
One hack, just before the session began, joked that there was no fudge left in the visitor’s shop. There was talk about who to watch on the benches behind Paisley. And then, when the delegation finally appeared, rumours that Robinson (‘the Reformer’) was looking relaxed and happy.
In the event there was plenty of fudge to be had in the chamber, albeit very thinly spread.
Despite the fact that the whole point (for months ahead) of this session was get nominations from the two party leaders, the wording in Dr Paisley’s speech fell well short of an unambiguous yes: “Circumstances have not been reach that there can be a nomination this day” (though it wasn’t consipicuously a no).
However, that’s not how Speaker Eileen Bell heard it, who accepted it as an assent. Or rather had been pre-instructed to accept it as an assent, after both parties had indicated in a private meeting what their positions were going to be. She anounced in accepting it as a yes, she was acting under ‘further direction of the Secretary of State’.
There were loud cries of derision, particularly from Paisley’s moderate rivals the Ulster Unionists, with calls of “You’re not speaker, you’re a puppet from the floor of the house”! When their leader Reg Empey took to his feet, he correctly summed up the mood in the house when he noted that, “the question on everybody’s lips is has Dr Paisley made a nominiation or not? Have we been witnessing a wedding or an engagement?”
The Unionist side of the house was in uproar. However, the Sinn Fein benches apart from a few humourous asides between Mitchel McLaughlin and Gerry Kelly, for the most kept a respectful silence and let the unionists get on with it.
By the time Mark Durkan got up to speak the whole place was in tumult. However it was his words that summed the feeling of many in Northern Ireland, both inside and outside the chamber,
“The manner in which these proceedings are being conducted under the remote direction of the secretary of state where language and logic has been turned inside out and on its head. We need to recognise that the slippage that we all criticise the government for allowing actually stems from the slippiness of two political parties who are claiming to lead this process but are deadlocking this process yet again.
The alarm warning us of Stone’s attack rang punctuated Alliance leader David Ford’s speech at a spookily appropriate moment: “If the Prime Minister had any integrity, he would close this place” (cue sound effect).
No, no one has been bored to death, however, BBC’s Stormont Live reported on air that a man walked into Stormont with a bag (have you heard this one?), and as such the alarms were rung. Right in the middle of David Ford’s speech, too. A suspended assembly indeed. More to come later.
UPDATE: BBC 24 is now reporting a man walked into the foyer claiming to have an incendiary device. It is being suggested he is a loyalist (?). Screams and shouts were heard. ‘A bit of a kerfuffle at the top of the steps’. No evidence that the man actually had any device on him as yet.
UPDATE 2: Michael Stone is being named as the loyalist who walked in with a bomb.
Apparently he took the time to spraypaint ‘SINN FEIN IRA WAR’ on the pillars of Stormont before he got caught in the revolving door.
UPDATE 3: The police are getting out their crime scene tape. Stormont is now a crime scene.
Trying very hard not to laugh.
UPDATE 4: BBC 24 is showing tape of the event, it was indeed Michael Stone. Sky News is showing Stone, laying flat on the ground being handcuffed with his legs in the air at the moment. They seem to have the clip on a loop, lol (I shouldn’t be laughing, should I?). It is either on a loop or he is incredibly difficult to pin down. LOL. This is certainly more exciting than the speeches were.
UPDATE 5: Sky is saying he chucked a rucksack at the security in the foyer. In case you are worried about the MLAs, they are all currently getting soaked by pouring rain as they huddle around the news vans outside.
You couldn’t make this up. In fact, Reg Empey has just said, ‘Nobody could have written the script for this.’ There you go, Slugger has its finger on the pulse.
UPDATE 6: More seriously, Sky is now reporting that Stone had a live device, or at least that is what security believed, now they are saying they can’t confirm whether it was a live device or not. Sounds like security was taking precautions as is their job.
UPDATE 7: People are milling about outside Stormont, the rain seems to have slackened a bit but it is still wet and damp. The bomb squad seems to have arrived. Eyewitness report from a Reuters photographer (as reported to Sky) says Stone pushed his way into the doors, threw the bag at security shouting it was a bomb, smoke and sparks were emanating from the bag. Rumours are flying about guns and knives and people getting hurt but that does not appear to be the case from the video being shown and from commentary from people who were in the reception area when Stone sort of burst in. If you see the clip he doesn’t seem to quite make it all the way into reception, his arms are held stretched, pinning him with his back to the doors.
Well, it appears now the soundbites are rolling in, and we can pretty much write those ourselves. ‘A stark reminder of the dark days of the troubles and exactly what we are trying to avoid,’ ‘The reality is this, that the stalemate has created a vaccuum that allows for this sort of thing to happen,’ ‘The security arrangements will have to be reviewed, questions need asked…’ you know the drill. As you have a load of reporters standing around with a load of politicians who have nothing to do but mill about, I am sure we will be treated to all sorts of twaddle, until they can resume business. If anything more exciting than that happens, I’ll blog it, otherwise, this is Rusty Nail, signing off.
Peter Hain was unapologetic this morning about his role in the appointment of the Victims Commissioner: noting that already she had done important work and, significantly, that victims were the one issue that had effectively been ignored in this process. Even though the Historic Enquiry Team was set up to investigate 3000 unsolved cases, it seems unlikely that 30 years on that a relatively passive re-examination of either witnesses or evidence will provide any tangible justice for the broad sweep of victims. Outside, that is, a tiny handful of cases being pushed assiduously by a single political interest - and almost all of them nationalist.
Some Westminster insiders Slugger has spoken to take the view that if this was a political decision, the Secretary of State was perfectly entitled to use his prerogative to break a deadlock that would almost certainly ensued.
Great quote from Peter Hain on BBC Wales, via Seamus McKee this morning. The other great soundbite he had to offer was that it was “either devolution or dissolution”. Aha, the great game of political chicken continues. But it seems, if Mark Devenport is right, that he may actual dilute what is required today (primarily from the DUP) to ‘mood music’ so that it is weak enough to let said party off with a general intention to take up their posts in January, rather than naming their prospective candidates for First Minister and Deputy First Minister.
AFTER the problems caused by students to residents of the Holy Land area of Belfast, and the lack of meaningful action by the two universities to deal with the issue, it seems some locals are taking matters into their own hands. The South Belfast News reports that “a number of student properties have been marked with red-painted crosses which carry the sinister warning that their properties will be damaged or burgled”. Which is apparently just what has already happened to some students…
ON Let’s Talk tonight, Free Presbyterian minister Rev David McIlveen suggested (during a debate on British Airways banning staff openly wearing religious symbols) that Christians did not have to wear a crucifix to profess their Christianity. Rev McIlveen disagreed with the BA decision, but to I wonder how his congregation would react if his argument was applied to politics. Is it essential for unionists to openly display symbols to ‘prove’ they are British? It’s not a one-sided argument either, as republicans also demand ‘recognition’ regarding symbols, but at what point does ‘display’ or ‘pride’ become ‘offence’ or ‘taunting’ in Northern Ireland? Or is this really about the insecurity felt by those who invest so much in symbols?
Poetic reputations are fragile and fleeting, and often hard to measure. Depending on which critic you listen to, Muldoon, at 55, is “one of the five or so best poets alive,” “the most significant English-language poet born since the Second World War” and a serious contender for the Nobel Prize, or else he is a victim of “pyrotechnical autism” who writes “artificially enriched, overinformed doggerel.” And his literary criticism is even worse. “Bedlam — an associative madness,” the Oxford don Valentine Cunningham said after listening to some of Muldoon’s Oxford lectures.
Not that Muldoon pays much attention to his critics. He is preoccupied these days with his other careers — as a university administrator and a minor-league rock musician. He sports an Irish-Afro hairdo — an hommage, perhaps, to Heaney’s famously unruly thatch — and he still speaks with an Ulster accent. In fact, he sounds a little like David Feherty, the television golf commentator.
The RFID system in the new passports has been successfully cracked using the publicly available information and equipment costing £175-£250. The government did put on a high level of encryption to deter identity thieves but the ‘secret key’ needed to unlock it isn’t a secret. The Home Office doesn’t care and insist “This doesn’t matter”. They don’t seem to understand that if you can crack the chip it means you can clone it.
Extraordinary events at Stormont this morning. Though it was hardly a re-run of Lieutenant Colonel Antonio Tejero Molina’s takeover of the Spanish parliament in 1981. His attempt was organised and involved 200 member of the Civil Guards. Loyalist killer (and visual artist) Michael Stone appeared to be acting on his own.
