70% of UK voters bemoan “ a broken society” (although 60% are optimistic about the future). The MPs expenses scandal rumbles on. In the pre-election period politicians’ appeals for public trust will be tested as never before. They’ve got a lot to do. Mary Riddell in the Telegraph has a fine piece exposing the gap between rhetoric and record. In the Commons today, Labour is testing the waters of support for a controversial change in the voting system, too late for this Parliament to pass it. David Cameron launches a vicious personal attack on Gordon Brown because his spin doctors tell him Brown is Labour’s weakest link. In the same speech, he unveils Conservative constitutional reform plans of Gladstonian highmindedness for “fixing broken politics.” The next corruption target says Cameron is the ӣ2 billion lobbying industry” which has a big presence at Westminster, with some MPs being approached more than 100 times a week by lobbyists. He should know all about it. He was a lobbyist himself, for Carlton television. So how clean are the Tories themselves? Rachel Sylvester scores a bullseye in the Times.
The Tories are currently operating a revolving-door policy in reverse, with 28 prospective parliamentary candidates in winnable seats working as lobbyists or PR consultants. And can Mr Cameron really claim to be spearheading a new era of transparency when his own election campaign is being funded by a man who refuses to say whether he pays tax in this country
By now, the newspapers have been put to bed. Based on the preview I caught on Vincent Browne’s TV3 show, half of them are predicting dire consequences for you as a result of George Lee’s abdication. My guess is your media advisers have spent the day going over your response with you.
So here’s what you do.
Fire them.
By all accounts, you’re a very personable chap in the flesh, and every bit as charming and effective as Bertie Ahern on a canvas. But in front of a microphone, you look like a rabbit caught in the headlights.
I don’t think that’s your fault. You’ve been listening to too many media experts telling you how to behave. Smile. Don’t smile. Show gravitas. Show a lighter side. Be presidential. Be everyman.
Too much advice. As a result, you’re never sure which piece of advice to follow, and it shows. You look wooden.
And the more your front bench protest that there’s no leadership question, the more they will be asked about your poll numbers.
So to hell with it. Fire the media gurus, and just be yourself. Maybe people will actually like you.
Tonight we are expecting the announcement of the 6 strong parades working group. It will be made up by 3 MLAs from the DUP and 3 from Sinn Fein. I haven’t yet got all the names but I wouldn’t be surprised if Gerry Kelly and Nelson McCausland are members.
Which would make that “co-chaired working group” more obviously a continuation in negotiations after the fact… They have until the end of February to report back on their “agreed outcomes”. [Or the bunny gets it? - Ed] The 9 March vote on devolving justice powers, probably. Adds The BBC confirms, “The office of the first and deputy first minister have confirmed who will be on a working group to examine the issue of parading. Junior Ministers Gerry Kelly and Jeffrey Donaldson will be joined by Stephen Moutray, Nelson McCausland, Michelle Gildernew and John O’Dowd.” No doubt they all have the required “experience of dealing with parading issues..”?
Whatever you do, don’t bracket Ireland with Greece – but Larry Elliot Economics Editor of the Guardian just has. The argument is hardly new to Slugger, but here, it’s also invoked to say how right Britain was to stay out of the euro and contains a warning against a particular view of public spending cuts.
Ireland is Labour’s dystopia of a Tory Britain The consensus view in the markets is that Ireland will be rewarded for its prudence …. (but) there is a considerable risk that removing spending power from the economy will lead to more companies going bust and deter the survivors from investing more..
The onset of austerity, according to some commentators, has been greeted with a certain stoicism, as if there had to be payback time after the excesses of the boom years. Even so, the fiscal retrenchment is stretching the social fabric to its limits…
Ireland’s property boom-bust during the noughties was a textbook example of what can happen if a country loses control of its own monetary policy – rates were too low early in the decade, leading to a colossal misallocation of resources away from exports towards construction, whose share of the economy more than doubled from 6% to 14%
The position of the 14 DUP MLAs, who initially opposed the Hillsborough agreement before then accepting it, is interesting. Within a few days these semi dissidents went from what was claimed to be a stormy meeting with multiple threatened resignations to unanimous support for the agreement. They may indeed have been snowmen who as Jim Allister says melted when the heat was turned on. Certainly not for them the political equivalent of a glorious death like David Crockett (a man of Ulster descent) at the Alamo (though anyone interested in glorious death should remember The old lie Dulce et Decorum est pro patri mori). Political death on the other hand can be considerably more glorious and obeys Enoch Powell’s famous maxim: “All political lives, unless they are cut off in midstream at a happy juncture, end in failure, because that is the nature of politics and of human affairs.” In politics a glorious death fighting to the last man for what one believes in has considerably more credence, avoiding as it does one’s own or anyone else’s death.
Gregory Campbell especially might have been better going down fighting. It had begun to look after his suggestions that Peter Robinson had a week to clear his name (which he subsequently did in only a little over a week) and his holding to the line of six months or six years on Nolan last week, that Campbell was preparing to fight politically to the last man and maybe even jump ship. Indeed he would probably have been the best placed to do so. He could not be resigned from his Westminster seat by Robinson (as he and all the others can from their Stormont positions). Additionally had he stood as an independent in the Westminster elections he would have been very likely to hold East Londonderry. East Londonderry is arguably the hardest line unionist seat in Northern Ireland and amongst the dour Orangemen and strict Presbyterians, resignation on principle would very likely have played well. Indeed had Campbell run as an independent the TUV might well have stood aside, the DUP would have had grave trouble producing a reasonable candidate and the suggested CU candidates have little enough chance, especially as one of them has already committed the equivalent of political suicide up there by condemning the Orange Order.
Indeed his current flip flop may actually make his re election less certain: like East Londonderry unionists do not like deviousness; for once high political principle might have been coincident with pragmatic survival instincts.
The position may not be that dissimilar for Lord Morrow. As a member of the House of Lords he is there for life short of committing some sort of Lord Archer level of criminality (and Archer has still not actually been removed). Morrow could of course be resigned from his MLA’s post but his position come the next assembly election must be pretty tenuous considering the level of TUV support in Fermanagh and South Tyrone as evidenced by the European election result and the apparent solidity of Tom Elliott’s vote.
The rest of the 14 MLAs who initially opposed the agreement of course will have had no other fall back position should they have carried through any threat of resignation. Their resignation from the DUP would immediately trigger their resignation from the assembly. In that case of course their political career would most likely be over and to quote Edwin Muir’s The Castle:
How can this shameful tale be told?
I will maintain until my death
We could do nothing, being sold;
Our only enemy was gold,
And we had no arms to fight it with.
The problem with a plan, even that cunning, is that Sinn Fein can then simply crash the executive and force an election; the very reason the DUP have had to compromise in the first place. I am again reminded of the Indiana Jones film where Harrison Ford faces a man expertly wielding a sword and simply shoots him. The danger is that this cunning plan might be as clever as the one explained by Nursie in Blackadder II “My brother, he had this brilliant idea of cutting his toenails with a scythe, and his foot fell off.”
To be fair of course the reason the DUP are in this position is not solely their own fault. Indeed they were the ones (well actually Peter Robinson was the one) who engineered the tactically cunning plan of Baldrick level of strategic stupidity that the largest party elect the First Minister rather than the largest party of the largest designation. That was a cunning plan: however, Robinson forgot that some of his supporters might have the bad taste to actually believe all the old comments about not entering government with unrepentant terrorists and not agreeing to mandatory coalition. When they did and had the further nerve to dare stop voting DUP, Robinson’s house of cards began to tumble, leading us directly to where we now are.
The irony of course is that but for the TUV, Robinson might be able to hold the line on policing and justice. If the TUV did not exist Robinson could call SF’s bluff and let the agreement collpase, knowing that in all probability the DUP would return as the largest party. Of course had the TUV not existed it is highly probable that the DUP would already have made these concessions over P&J and more besides. However, that fact, that fear of the TUV is driving Robinson and the DUP to do exactly what the TUV do not want is most irritating for those who believe in traditional unionism.
There is of course an alternative: one which I have previously advocated: Even now Robinson could simply block P&J devolution and make it very clear that after any collapse he would go into negotiations with UUP and TUV alongside him with a view to creating a new agreement. Never has all unionism gone united into negotiations. If unionism could do so, and for once avoid petty factional squabbling and silly side deals it is highly likely that it could emerge with an agreement much better for all the people of Northern Ireland, unionist and nationalist. If Peter Robinson could truly grasp that possibility, he would become a unionist leader in the mode of Carson and Craigavon. Unfortunately he seems fonder of clever devices and cunning plans: sadly that is why he is failing himself, his party and unionism.
To paraphrase the BBC report, the INLA, the Official IRA and the South East Antrim UDA have declared themselves to have disarmed. As the report on the Official IRA announcement notes
The timing of the announcements by the INLA and the Official IRA is thought to be linked to the expiry on Tuesday of legislation which allows illegal groups to decommission weapons without fear of prosecution.
Is thought to be linked?! UpdateWorldbyStorm points out that the “Official IRA” in the reports should, more accurately, be referred to as the Official Republican Movement. Identified in the Guardian report as “a faction of the Official IRA”, the Official Republican Movement “was formed in 1996”.
RTE report that Fine Gael new-comer and rising star George Lee has resigned from the party and is to leave the Dáil. Lee, a former economics jourmalist with RTE caused a stir when he joined Fine Gael last year, romping home in the Dublin south by-election. Per the RTE report -
In the statement released just before lunchtime, George Lee says it has been a very difficult decision, but it is one that he has taken after a great deal of reflection.
He says that he has done his best to play a positive role in contributing to the national debate.
But Mr Lee was disappointed at his lack of input at ‘this most critical time.’
Mr Lee says the role he has been playing within the party has been very limited and he says he found this to be personally unfulfilling.
You have to wonder at the thought processes that led to Fine Gael luring an external, high profile, economics expert and then excluding him from economic policy formulation in the midst of the state’s biggest economic crisis. When the government benches are stocked with solicitors and school teachers, George Lee surely should have been an invaluable asset. All-in-all, a great day for Fianna Fáil.
As I’ve argued before, Conservative plans for a new British Bill of Rights greatly complicate the arguments over a separate NI Bill, whatever some dismissive unionists may think. There is a difference between how they see it and what the context actually is. The problems are ventilated in a report by the respected think tank Justice and reported in the Guardian. The Conservative Bill could in effect be vetoed by the devolved legislative bodies, with NI being a specially awkward case because of the GFA.
The proposals to change the Human Rights Act could become a “legal and political nightmare,” experts have said, with England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland all left with different levels of human rights protection…. It’s opening a whole can of worms reassessing what the United Kingdom is.”
The Justice report admits the problems may not be insurmountable and the shadow Justice Secretary Dominic Grieve plays them down. But they’ll remain until jurists agree that the Conservatives’ UK Bill does not reduce the application of the European Convention on Human Rights after the repeal of the present definitive Human Rights Act. Either way, the Assembly will have to take a view, already divided as it is between unionists whose opinions range form cool to strongly against, to nationalists who are keen on a separate NI Bill.
Extract from the Justice Report
A strong argument can be made that ‘human rights’ have been devolved to the
Scottish Parliament and the Northern Irish Assembly, or at least that the ‘observation
and implementation’ of the ECHR, has been devolved. If this is the case, although
from a legal perspective the Westminster Parliament could still legislate in this area,
constitutionally, the consent of the devolved bodies would be needed. As such,
because any amendment to, or repeal of, the HRA and/or legislation enacting a bill of
rights covering the devolved jurisdictions would touch upon ‘human rights’ or the
‘observation and implementation’ of the ECHR, from a constitutional perspective, the
consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Irish Assembly would be
needed.
I’ve been on the road ever since spending the weekend with the SDLP at the Slieve Donard, so I’ll be writing up general impressions up tomorrow. For me (others may well disagree) the most interesting speech was that of the new deputy leader, not least for its direct (if rather folksy) style. Patsy McGlone certainly sounded like he was up for a fight. His speech, laced in places, with a cold Catholic morality, was an attempt to differentiate his party from Sinn Fein’s rather coercive pitch to unionists for a united Ireland. Instead he used the GAA as an exemplar of a virtuous social identity, which has a proven appeal to moderate unionists. Much in the way that Rugby has for Catholics.
....I grew up in South Derry, in a place called Newbridge, not far from where the Rover Moyola meets Lough Neagh. I went to school just up the road, in St Trea’s Primary School in Ballymaguigan, and then in the Rainey in Magherafelt.
My father owned a garage beyond this in the village of Ballyronan, and when I married I built a home further on up the Loughshore in Ballinderry, where my Mother is from. I am proud to be able to say that I have not just lived in these places, but that I am from these places and they make me who I am.
There is a sense of community that, in many ways, I have found to be unique to Ireland. The open and friendly nature of the people here is something special.
Growing up with such people all around me clearly instilled in me that strong identity, sense of belonging and community and a desire to help when I could, to do anything I could for someone in a difficult situation.
And when I joined the SDLP it was because I saw it as a party to deliver Irish unity and a party that would do what it could to help people. Whether it be standing up for the rights of those who were discriminated against. Or seeing the gun and bomb removed from Irish life. Or Education. Or job creation and investment. Or healthcare. Or planning and housing.
When leaders in the community, Roddy Gribbin, Big Henry Walls and Sean Cassidy came to me, I saw joining the SDLP as the natural choice for me. As it was for you all in this room. And those principles of the party have not changed over the years. But other things have.
The change that 2010 brings for the SDLP and the people of the North is immense.
The people of the North particularly young people, who may not have witnessed first hand the futility of the violence of our recent past, want to move beyond the old sectarianism.
Stop any man or woman in any street, or road, or lane and the issues that are important to them are the same as the issues that are important to someone in Cork, Galway or Dublin.
They know that there is work to be done.
The big house on the hill at Stormont has become detached from the real needs of society.
The current executive has been in place for more than two and a half years now. If you were to look at its output you’d think it was in place for two and a half months.
The Executive’s failure to deliver under Sinn Féin-DUP control is a result of those two parties failure to work together.
They fear the future the Good Friday Agreement promised because they remain parties of conflict, not reconciliation.
I couldn’t care less if Robinson and McGuinness are friends. What I care about is the government of the north delivering on the issues that affect people on the ground. That affects my constituents, my neighbours, my friends and family.
Robinson and McGuinness FAIL on leading.
The DUP-Sinn Fein axis FAILS on delivering.
And they are failing our future generations.
Our children deserve better.
They need to be protected and allowed to prosper.
Instead we are seeing the failed violence of the past turning into a failed politics for the future.
Threatening the stability of the Assembly threatens people’s TRUST in politics working. That approach will not deliver a united future regardless of the shape of the institutions.
Our future is together. Because a separate future is not a just and equal future.
When I listen to people on the street, or in shops, they may have a brief chat or a yarn about the latest standoff between Sinn fein and the DUP, but you can see when the issue they are talking about really matters to them.
When we talk about the bread and butter issues they are our roads, your houses, your son or daughters planning applications, your kids education issues, your parents problems with health treatment, your families social security benefits. It is the need for each and every one of us to know that from dawn to dusk our families and friends are safe.
That is what community politics is about. Building Trust for people. Reaching out to people. In the phone calls, the emails, the letters, the meetings, the house calls, that my offices and I deal with every day. For me Social Democracy is not a book based ideology, it is a way of life.
And now we, as the SDLP in 2010, must show ourselves to be the leaders th
So the deal has finally been done: unless the UUP can be induced to throw a spanner in the works; or the DUP’s consultation with the community shows that the unionist community really will not accept the agreement; or Robinson’s cunning devices can be shown to be more effective than Baldrick’s cunning plans. A negative outcome of the DUP’s consultation seems vanishingly unlikely: when political parties consult the community they always claim to get the answer they had already decided on: anyone who doubts this should think of the effects of the DUP’s consultation of the community after their European election debacle; nothing whatsoever (incidentally the Presbyterian church are also very fond of such consultations).
Clearly the DUP have been proclaiming the deal as a major success: although surprisingly Peter Robinson is more bullish in his News Letter article than on the DUP’s own website where he admits more to compromises and indeed raises the spectre of needing to move forwards lest we slip back into violence: a favourite tactic of Trimble and Paisley in the past to explain away concessions made to republicans.
The DUP can of course legitimately point out that their European election manifesto did support the devolution of policing and justice (not that the DUP have always stuck to their manifesto commitments) though that support depended on:
(1)Satisfactory financial arrangements
(2)Appropriate institutional arrangements
(3)Tangible republican support for policing and the rule of law
The first may have been achieved but the latter two are considerably more shaky. The DUP tried very hard to keep the justice minister semi detached from the executive lest the minister’s decisions come under the scrutiny and control of the rest of the executive. This of course was to ensure that Sinn Fein would not be able to exercise a veto; although this always seemed a difficult position to advance it was once suggested by the DUP but was lost at the Hillsborough negotiations. As such on cross cutting issues there will be a Sinn Fein veto as there will be on issues related to finance.
The issue of republican support for policing and the rule of law is of course a matter of judgement. The DUP appear not to mind about incidents such as Conor Murphy’s criticism of the seizure of Sean Hughes’s assets, particularly odd in view of what Peter Robinson had to say about Mr. Hughes previously.
The reality of course is that although devolution of policing and justice was official DUP policy, they repeatedly refused to name a date and gloried in their ability to avoid doing so, repeatedly humiliating Sinn Fein over this. Lord Morrow famously ruled it out in the life time of the current assembly; Gregory Campbell suggested it might take six months or six years. Hence, the current timetable seems to be an abject defeat for the DUP.
Not only has the DUP had to concede on the timing and the fact that the P&J minister’s role can be affected by the mutual vetoes but other defeats stalk the agreement.
The Review of Outstanding Issues from St. Andrews has the potential to create further problems. This review is to report by the end of February, create a working group by the end of March and agree a programme to complete the conclusions within four weeks. This raises the spectre of the Irish Language Act etc reappearing in the near future. Of course the DUP could stall again on this issue as they did over P&J. However, we have now seen that the DUP are unwilling to hold the line when faced with the threat of an election and as such any claims that they will stop an ILA must be taken not with pinch but a lorry load of salt. In addition to the ILA the other outstanding issues from St Andrews are a review (with a view to expansion not contraction) of the North South bodies, the North South Civic Forum and the North South Parliamentary Forum. All of these may continue to be blocked by the DUP but again there is nothing to stop Sinn Fein from creating further crises over these issues when it feels that this is necessary and such seems to be the DUP’s pathological aversion to elections at the moment that them holding the line on these issues is far from guaranteed.
Turning then to the DUP’s victory: the parading issue. It would be churlish not to accept some progress for them on this issue and certainly there has been some change in the mood music from republicans. However, it is unclear whether the six member working group will be able to come up with much in the way of agreed solutions; in addition the stress on local decision making will not necessarily produce solutions more acceptable to the loyal orders than the hated Parades Commission. Finally of course the timetable envisaged results in the end of the process being the end of this calender year, assuming all is agreed. That is long after the end of this year’s marching season (apart from the closing of the gates in Londonderry) and part 12 of the parading section of the agreement states: “The current adjudication mechanism of the Parades Commission will continue until the new improved arrangements are in place.”
That last paragraph demonstrates the problem with the current Hillsborough agreement. Since St. Andrews the DUP have been able to lead Sinn Fein a merry dance by not implementing things which Sinn Fein claimed that they had signed up to and using the wording of St. Andrews to back them up. In addition the DUP were keeping back from Sinn Fein things that they (Sinn Fein) wanted. This was a reversal from the previous situation whereby Sinn Fein held back things the UUP wanted (decommissioning and the like) whilst extracting concession after concession. For a time the reverse tactic has served the DUP well and it must be admitted that the proposals for the justice minister are significantly less toxic than they would have been had the DUP not held out. However, the tactic became the strategy and withholding P&J became for the DUP a mark of virility:one which has now been castrated in the most public fashion.
In addition the DUP failed to extract really major concessions from the P&J negotiations, concessions which would have made the Hillsborough agreement seem another significant victory for unionism such as an enforced timetable for voluntary coalition. Had the DUP achieved something like that the TUV’s jibes would have seemed extremely hollow. Instead being left with a review of a review of the Parades Commission seems little enough considering the political capital invested in stalling P&J. Finally for the DUP, such was their investment in what they now insist was a tactic that their supporters came to celebrate the non devolution of P&J as a sign of the DUP’s ongoing defeat of Sinn Fein. Indeed so convincing was that defeat that as mentioned above many DUP politicians such as Gregory Campbell and Maurice Morrow are now left with significant egg on their faces from the DUP’s supposed victory at Hillsborough.
Clearly the never ending saga of the rearranging of the deck chairs on the Titanic up on the hill will continue. However, Sinn Fein have demonstrated that by producing a near collapse they can get much of what they want. Sinn Fein seem to have less to fear from the electorate than the DUP and unless Margaret Ritchie can pull off an unbelievable transformation of the SDLP or the UUP are willing to help the DUP and the TUV vanish, that situation is likely to stay. Hence, the DUP have been shown to be in a weaker position and it is unlikely that Sinn Fein will not exploit the situation to keep moving along their staging posts. All the DUP have to look forward to is the likely loss of some seats at Westminster and the highly possible loss of their position as the largest party at the next Stormont election. Such is the legacy of Ian Paisley’s initial compromises at St Andrews and Peter Robinson’s obsession with short term tactics over long term strategy. All the DUP can do is stay in the bunker hoping that something will turn up: unless of course Peter Robinson’s cunning plan really is cunning as a fox what used to be Professor of Cunning at Oxford University but has moved on, and is now working for the UN at the High Commission of International Cunning Planning.
The agreement for full free- to- air reciprocity between the BBC and RTE after analogue switch-off in 2012 is thoroughly good news and is in the spirit of the GFA. Will it provide blanket coverage? I assume there will be fewer black spots than with analogue - that’s part of the point of digital. The Irish Times report is too grudging about TG4. I assume this will be greeted with a sigh of relief by the BBC, although it doesn’t release them from the public service obligation to continue developing Irish language programming. What I’m not clear about though, is how the digital agreement will affect RTE reception in the North. It would be ironic if non-BBC licence fee payers in the Republic received better access to the joint package than viewers in NI.
“(The Irish and British governments) it will facilitate the broadcast of TG4 on free-to-air DTT in Northern Ireland when the analogue signal is switched off in 2012. They must have been dancing in the streets of Belfast at that news…. “The memorandum commits the two governments to facilitating the widespread availability of RTÉ services in Northern Ireland and BBC services in Ireland on a free-to-air basis.”
Not so good news for the commerical sector delivering digital terrestrial television (DTT).
Mac Conghail says his “vision” revolves around new writing and new ways of making theatre, including physical and non-verbal work. Running Dublin’s Project Arts centre in the 1990s taught him to respect an audience, he says, that “liked the shock of the new”. He also promises to reach audiences beyond the traditional Irish middle class by investing in new writing and diverse programming in the style of the National Theatre in London, and by touring in Ireland.
He says he wants the Abbey to re-engage politically. “Irish society is no longer a homogenous, one-coloured, one-cultured nation. It is the fastest-changing society in the world. We have to look at different ways of making theatre, as a lot of theatres in Britain have done.”
Life is binary and it can be mightily difficult to make it converge. Here I pick out comments below the fold about Sinn Fein after the Hillsborough Agreement. I could just as easily have selected DUP-centred references. I link to the full versions. From the horses’ mouth, the leaders speak out. Peter Robinson first, then Gerry Adams. Next, two authoritative commentators have very different takes on the same process, not contradictory exactly but asymetrical. If Henry Patterson and Brian Feeney select such different contexts and results from the same agreement no wonder the players found it so difficult to reach and probably will find it difficult to implement.
Peter Robinson writes
Devolution of policing and justice powers will occur on Unionist terms. There will be no Sinn Fein Justice Minister. Unionists have a veto on who will hold this post. The appointment of the judiciary will be free from political interference. No politician will have any role in the appointment of judges. This is a lie peddled by the TUV that has no basis in fact…. We have a manifesto commitment against the introduction of an Irish Language Act. This was due to be introduced by Direct Rule. There will be no Irish language Act. Yesterday was a good day for Unionism which will further cement Ulster’s place within the United Kingdom.
Gerry Adams writes
The agreement that has now been reached will not only see the transfer of powers on policing and justice in April, but also by the end of the year the transfer of responsibility from London to Belfast for dealing with the issue of parades. We have also agreed a process to progress the rights of Irish language speakers, clear the backlog of executive papers and decisions which are still pending, and advance the all-Ireland aspects of the St Andrews agreement.
Professor Henry Patterson
Sinn Fein’s project of using the structures and commitments of the Belfast Agreement as part of a transitional process to unity is in ruins and the party’s southern support base is shrinking. If ‘war-weariness’ helped create a basis for republicans settling for a partitionist fudge in 1998 Peter Robinson must hope that a similar ‘peace process’ politicking weariness and a desire for the stabilising banalities of a functioning Stormont to act as a protective buffer against the post-election onslaught of Treasury cuts will win out in the unionist electorate
Dr Brian Feeney
The Unionists could not understand why devolving these powers was so important to Sinn Fein. In 2007, the party had made the seismic move to recognise the new police service, the PSNI. That move was conditional on a Department of Justice for Northern Ireland being established. For Sinn Fein it was essential that it be seen to run all aspects of the state it had given its consent to for the first time. Policing and justice are such crucial aspects because Sinn Fein needed to fireproof itself against republican critics and armed dissidents who accuse it of administering British justice. After the Hillsborough Castle agreement, that accusation has no force.
There is suspicion that former IRA members have not changed enough to be trusted. To assuage such concerns, DUP leader Peter Robinson talked of a “clever device”, so far known only to him, to guarantee Sinn Fein fulfils its obligations.
I have previously noted how the PSNI seem determined to hand propaganda coups to éirígí and essentially make their points for them at every turn. We have also noted the misuse of Section 44 legislation against republicans - legislation of dubious legality. From the heavy handed response to eirigi members making their way to Belfast City Hall for a protest to PSNI harassment of members on Black Mountain.
When I commented on the launch of éirígí‘s anti-PSNI campaign I didn’t expect the police to repeat the same mistakes immediately. Yet when éirígí activists hung banners around Belfast yesterday the PSNI response was to detain them under Section 44 legislation.
Four éirígí activists were detained in the Beechmount area by the political police using the now notorious Section 44 and Justice & Security Act legislation. The car that three of the men were travelling in was boxed in by two armoured jeeps before the vehicle and its occupants were searched by the paramilitary police. Initially, the PSNI claimed they were detaining the men under road traffic legislation, yet, when the driver produced all the necessary documentation, Section 44 came into play….
The éirígí activists in question, including national vice-chairperson Rab Jackson, had just hung large anti-PSNI banners on the Falls and Springfield Roads prior to being stopped and searched. The text of the banners read RUC- PSNI: Different Name, Same Aim and British Police Out Of Ireland.
As the PSNI were leaving the scene, the officer in charge admitted that, far from investigating any ‘terrorist’ incident, the activists were actually detained for hanging banners critical of the force.
If it wasn’t clear from the éirígí video Mark noted last night, the recently elected President of Republican Sinn Féin, Des Dalton, has told the Observer’s Henry McDonald - “The Royal Irish Constabulary became the Royal Ulster Constabulary and they ultimately became the Police Service of Northern Ireland, the PSNI. But while the cap badge might change, the essential point of these forces remain the same. They are there to uphold British rule, they are integral part of the British state forces.” And from a longer article in the printed edition of the paper [not online]
In an interview with the Observer this weekend, Dalton said the last piece of the devolution process “had only rearranged the furniture, but the house remains in Britain”. On the creation of a locally controlled justice ministry in Northern Ireland, Dalton said: “There is very little difference between this and the bureaucracy at Dublin Castle pre-1921 that administered British rule.” During the Irish war of independence, Michael Collins’s IRA intelligence department targeted senior officials, both British and Irish, who worked at the “Castle” for the colonial power.
Dalton dismissed claims by Northern Ireland secretary Shaun Woodward that Friday’s Sinn Féin-DUP agreement - the terms of which crucially include the devolution of policing and justice powers away from Westminster to Stormont, with effect from 12 April - would undermine the republican dissidents’ armed campaigns. “I have said before that we uphold the right of the Irish people to resist British rule in any way they can, including armed resistance,” said Dalton. “The British army is still in Northern Ireland, in fact they were actively recruiting outside Queen’s University Belfast last week. The unionist veto still exists, and the recent Tory talks with unionists show they will use their power in Westminster to continue to keep this part of Ireland under British rule. So the conditions still exist for those to resist that rule. Nothing has changed that.”
Dalton said comments by Sinn Féin leaders and Woodward that the armed republican dissidents were apolitical or simply criminals were counter-productive. “Remember the 1970s and 80s, when republicans were portrayed as criminals or thugs or Godfathers. These were men and women who went to jail for the struggle and in the hunger strike died for their beliefs. Painting genuine republicans today who resist British rule as criminals or thugs is making the same mistake the British made back then. Ordinary criminals don’t fire on heavily fortified and armed British army or police bases.”
The RSF president said its activists would assist nationalist residents who wanted to oppose any moves to allow Orange or loyalist marches to pass through their areas as a concession to the DUP. One of the key elements of the deal hammered out between Sinn Féin and teh DUP was that a new mechanism of local community forums would be established to rule on contentious marches, rather than the parades commission.
“Republican Sinn Féin will not abandon these communities to any squalid deal reached at Stormont or Hillsborough Castle,” Dalton said.
The Sundays itch with speculation about an April election as the Tory lead dips to below 10%. The man himself, speaking later on a frantic Friday which started at 4.30 a.m. with his redeye flight to Belfast tells the Observer: “ Labour can still win it, I’m absolutely sure of it. “ Next week , we’re told he goes personal and weeps before Piers Morgan as he recalls the terrible loss of baby Jennifer. Meanwhile David Cameron is assailed from left and right for wobbling as he moved closer to Labour over the scale of public spending cuts. The Sunday Times takes its own line on the Constitution Unit’s briefing on discreet plans on how to form a new government under a hung parliament…
I’ve just seen the most amazing moment in a TV interview for years. On the Andrew Marr show Alastair Campbell no less, froze and then almost cracked up when pressed on whether Blair lied to Parliament on WMD in Iraq. Campbell the arch spin meister had no answer. Recalling his well publicised personal breakdown many years ago I almost felt sorry for him. But could it have been a premeditated ” sincerity” plea in a very tight corner? Surely not - too Machiavellian even for Alastair. It’s not up yet on BBC iPlayer, but watch out for a minor moment in recent British history. Look out too for Campbell explaining it away on his blog and how it affects Blair’s expected recall to the Chilcot inquiry.
I linked it earlier but this is tip-top propaganda with a soundtrack. Stand alone stuff (though they dropped any references to Dominic McGlinchey now he isn’t a member):
Some Catholic schools in Dublin South East require a baptismal certificate for the child and a utility bill in the name of the parents for a dwelling within the parish. Some 90 per cent of the primary schools in Dublin South East have waiting lists. Newborn infants have their names put on a waiting list for schools by parents aware of the local situation. Young new parents or people who grew up in other parts of the country are astounded when they cannot get their children into their local school. For some, the request for a baptismal certificate is an affront, if not a surprise
.
The trend seems to be, where the Catholic church is in a massive majority, its institutional control is weakening. Where it is in a sizeable minority, its control is as strong as ever. Choice in Scotland means Catholic; choice in the Republic means pluralism.
“personally, I would be against such a move. It seems that the brits are going to such lengths to see republicans surrender their weapons which to me shows that they still fear the potential militancy of these groups. By taking one part of the struggle out of the equation, they minimise the damage that can be cause to their rule. propaganda wise it’s a major coup for them also.”
“If this is true then its a disgrace, what now is there to differentiate the IRSM from the PRM or groups like eirigi?”
“Mondays statement will be interesting. If this is true i fear that the RSM will lose a lot of support. I would’nt see a difference between PRM sell out and this.”
“i think its a total joke”
“I have to say its a very sad day but lets look ahead to the future for the working class people who we represent.”
As far as alternative histories go, Philip K. Dick’s ‘The Man in the High Castle’ is my favourite, but how about an alternative history of the IRA? Specifically, if what the late Tómas Mac Giolla claimed about the 1969 split is true, would the conflict have ended a lot earlier – 1970s? 1980s? – without the intervention of just one man?
1969 and all that
An interview published today lays the blame for the IRA split of 1969 at the feet of one man: Seamus Costello. If true, what does this mean for our understanding of recent Irish history?
I’ve been on the road ever since spending the weekend with the SDLP at the Slieve Donard, so I’ll be writing up general impressions up tomorrow. For me (others may well disagree) the most interesting speech was that of the new deputy leader, not least for its direct (if rather folksy) style. Patsy McGlone certainly sounded like he was up for a fight. His speech, laced in places, with a cold Catholic morality, was an attempt to differentiate his party from Sinn Fein’s rather coercive pitch to unionists for a united Ireland. Instead he used the GAA as an exemplar of a virtuous social identity, which has a proven appeal to moderate unionists. Much in the way that Rugby has for Catholics.
