Sunday, January 14, 2007
“and when the Ard Chomhairle is satisfied that the policing and justice powers will be transferred.”
Sinn Féin have published the text of the motion to be put to the Ard Fheis on January 28th, and the conditions under which the Ard Chomhairle will be authorised to implement it... leaving a question for the Secretary of State to answer..
From the Sinn Féin text
The Ard Chomhairle recommends:
That this Ard Fheis endorses the Ard Chomhairle motion. That the Ard Chomhairle is mandated to implement this motion only when the power-sharing institutions are established and when the Ard Chomhairle is satisfied that the policing and justice powers will be transferred. Or if this does not happen within the St Andrews timeframe, only when acceptable new partnership arrangements to implement the Good Friday Agreement are in place. [added emphasis]
That would seem to answer one question..
and it would indicate that SF intend to campaign for an election whilst futuring..
The question now is can the election go ahead on that basis?
Adds Does, for example, what is being suggested fit with Taoiseach Bertie Ahern’s previous description - “[Sinn Féin] now know that the path to shared government in Northern Ireland passes through a Sinn Fein Ard Fheis at which the policing issue is definitively and successfully addressed.”
Pete Baker @ 03:58 PM
Pete
Given the present circumstasnces, that statement/motion is the most that could have been hoped for.
There are a lot of naysayers and beggar your neighbour type people on both sides.
But, don’t lose sight of the big picture.We are continuing to inch forard even if only at a glacial pace. But we are going in the right direction.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 04:24 PMWhy not?
SF backed themselves in to a corner with their AF’s specifics on P&J;. I read the May ‘08 requirement as a consequence of SF being uncharacteristically revealing on the outcomes they wanted - prior to negotiuating. SF supporters/members can put me right on this - it may have come about through hard negotiation but nonetheless left the SF leadership with the noose the DUP have played.
In terms of unionist response the DUP seem to have responded well. SF stuck out their chin and they didn’t miss the offer of delivering a sucker punch.
But, with some considerable pain SF appear to be getting out of the corner they put themselves in - subject to the 28th of course and the election results of March 7th.
This election was required by the DUP most of all. The StAA didn’t require it - a referendum could have been held instead. Elections can be cruel to divided parties and I’m not sure the DUP have learned all the lessons of UUP past mistakes. Internal party divisions are more easily managed during a referendum than an election.
It may not be only SF who have stuck their chin out. In the DUP’s favour, there is no sign of revival, purpose or capacity in the UUP. Yet - what is the unionist voter being asked to endorse or support? Will the unionist parties present clear choices? Can they avoid doing so? How can a DUP that opposed power sharing with Fitt now propose it with Adams?
Some say there’s no evidence of DUP splits - I suppose it depends on what you consider evidence.
We’re weeks away from finding out and SF’s ‘conditionalities’ will not (IMO) cause a hault to the election the DUP demanded.
Fair enough - let the game play on.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 04:33 PMTake it easy boys it’s the biggest U-TURN in history.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 04:56 PMWe’re getting there - slowly but surely. Maybe some day our kids’ grasp of the northern conflict will only need to be as poor as this....
http://www.bebo.com/FlashBox.jsp?FlashBoxId=2934743581
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 04:58 PMpeteb,
try to see:
Opportunities in Difficulties
and NOT
Difficulties in Opportunitiesyour mentor
parci ;)Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 05:23 PMonce again SF have failed to meet the challenge. There will be NO definitive decision to support the psni etc after jan 28th.
SF are still dodging the issue.
Time to roll the process on without them. The Dup just need to see through the elections without any promises. If SF cant swear the oath on march 26th theyll exclude themselves from power...everybody wins !!!
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 05:37 PMObserver - you’re suggesting SF won’t undertake to swear the oath. Before suggesting a reaction from the DUP to that - can you wait to see if your fears are realised?
I suspect SF will undertake to take the oath and the DUP will then be left with accepting that - or adding new conditions – as have already been muted by DUP leading spokesmen.
Who knows - you could be right and SF will allow the DUP excuse. I can’t see them going through this pain and emerging magnanimous to the DUP. If you think that you have a higher sense of Adam’s humanity and generosity than I possess myself.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 05:52 PMrubicon , according to the motion to be put, SF will only support the psni “only when the power-sharing institutions are established and when the Ard Chomhairle is satisfied that the policing and justice powers will be transferred.”
thats after and not before powersharing and they are satified about the tranfer of powers
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 06:19 PMObserver, I agree with you partially. If SF sticks to exactly what you say - they can’t take Executive office. In order to establish the institutions SF will need to take the oath. As for the AC being ‘satisfied’ I think it might be better to assess the position on the basis of what is not there - rather than on what is. This ‘satisfied’ has no date and no AF.
I might be wrong of course - but the absence of these matters is unlikely to have occurred by chance.
For me, it points to a difficult time ahead that has little to nothing to do with improving the lives of people. Much as the ‘people’ bitch about this – they’re not minded to change their vote – or vote.
Fair enough. We get the politicians and politics we deserve.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 06:37 PMIf BBC Radio4 News this evening is any indicator of the UK government’s stance on this - and any seasoned listener would know that indeed it was a government driven piece of pure propaganda - then the government and Hain in particular are very gung-ho and welcoming, citing Sinn Fein’s courage etc and promising ( this from Hain) that Ard Comhaitle acceptance would erase the final barrier to the implementation of a local policing authority and ultimate handover on the date envisaged.
No mention of an oath. Nor, do I imagine, will their be. Irish history has already had enough misery over the insistence of the British on an oath and progress will not be permitted to founder on that rock of spiteful arrogance which would deter possibly a very large minority, at least, if not indeed a majority of English, Scots and Welsh UK citizens ( happily, subjects no more).
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 08:38 PMRory
I think you have the wrong idea about the oath of office- a pledge to support the rule of law and the police is all that is required not a promise of everlasting loyalty to HM.
Perhaps your spiteful arrogance remark was inspired by woeful ignorance?
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 09:19 PMThe Ard Fheis motion proposes to authorise Sinn Féin ministers to take the ministerial pledge of office which would require them to give their backing to the PSNI.
So that’s that one sorted.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 09:41 PMOf course this is the start of back door acceptance of policing by Sinn Fein! Yet to be honest if its sincere it has to be welcomed. Ironically Davy Hyland once said they would not go in by the back door but that is exactly what is happening. But then again Davy is exiting by the backdoor too.
Whatever SF determine or the DUP decide - the public have an absolute right to be told what they being asked to endorse at the forthcoming elections - it should be clear and unambigious.The British Government has a responsibility to tell us, otherwise what is the point if it risks collapse in March ‘08?
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 10:23 PMThe Ard Fheis motion proposes to authorise Sinn Féin ministers to take the ministerial pledge of office which would require them to give their backing to the PSNI.
So that’s that one sorted.
Posted by Henry94 on Jan 14, 2007 @ 09:41 PMthast the thing Henry , are SF going to drag this out until the election before giving their backing to the PSNI
To do so on the day following election would be far too little and far too late.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 10:46 PMobserver
The DUP are still refusing to even meet Sinn Fein or to say publicly that they are willing to see policing devolved. So if SF are forced to operate in a DUP created political fog they must of necessity proceed with due caution.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 10:50 PMIts quite clear that if this is passed onthe 28th, SF will STILL NOT support the police at that point, but ONLY at some future point when devolution occurs
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 10:50 PMobserver
The DUP are still refusing to even meet Sinn Fein or to say publicly that they are willing to see policing devolved. So if SF are forced to operate in a DUP created political fog they must of necessity proceed with due caution.
Posted by Henry94 on Jan 14, 2007 @ 10:50 PMHenry the DUP have said policing will be devolved when there is cross community support. Whats wrong with that.
Either its right to support the PSNI or not. Its not just a tactic to become DFM
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 10:52 PMTkmaxx
“The British Government has a responsibility to tell us, otherwise what is the point if it risks collapse in March ‘08?”
Peter Hain kinda has though..
May 2008 is a Government objective… but it’s unenforceable..
So, reading between the lines, he [or his successor] will probably be blaming someone else..
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 10:56 PMobserver
If the DUP agree to it then there is cross-community support now. What they are really saying is they will agree to it when they agree to it. That is sophistry. The DUP need to talk straight on this issue now.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 11:00 PMhenry… there is no support within unionism to see this, so there is not cross community support. Republicans just have to live with the fact that unionists are going to give them what the want , when they want.
come the 28th and SF arent able to support the PSNI , even if this motion is passed, the whole deal will be off
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 11:04 PMThe motion before the Ard Fheis mandates the Ard Chomhairle to carry out certain things if and when the Ard Chomhairle is satisfied that the policing and justice powers will be transferred. But the actions to be taken by the Ard Chomhairle are outlined in the second half of the motion.
The first part does not depend on the Ard Chomhairle doing anything as I read it.
Sinn Féin reiterates our support for An Garda SÃochana and commits fully to:
* Support for the PSNI and the criminal justice system.
* Hold the police and criminal justice systems north and south fully to account, both democratically and legally, on the basis of fairness and impartiality and objectivity.
* Authorise our elected representatives to participate in local policing structures in the interests of justice, the quality of life for the community and to secure policing with the community as the core function of the PSNI and actively encouraging everyone in the community to co-operate fully with the police services in tackling crime in all areas and actively supporting all the criminal justice institutions.
* The devolution of policing and justice to the Assembly.
* Equality and human rights at the heart of the new dispensation and to pursue a shared future in which the culture, rights and aspirations of all are respected and valued, free from sectarianism, racism and intolerance
To achieve this the Ard Chomhairle is hereby mandated to:
* Appoint Sinn Féin representatives to the Policing Board and the District Policing Partnership Boards to ensure that:
- a civic policing service, accountable and representative of the community is delivered as quickly as possible, - the Chief Constable and the PSNI are publicly held to account,
- policing with the community is achieved as the core function of the PSNI,
- political policing, collusion and “the force within a force” is a thing of the past and to oppose any involvement by the British Security Service/MI5 in civic policing.
* Ensure Sinn Fein representatives robustly support the demands for:
- equality of treatment for all victims and survivors,
- effective truth recovery mechanisms,
- acknowledgement by the British State of its involvement in wrongdoing including collusion with loyalist paramilitaries,
- to ensure that there is no place in the PSNI for those guilty of human rights abuses,
* Resolutely oppose the use of lethal weapons in public order situations
* Authorise Sinn Féin Ministers to take the ministerial Pledge of Office.
* Achieve accountable all-Ireland policing structures.
The Ard Chomhairle recommends: That this Ard Fheis endorses the Ard Chomhairle motion. That the Ard Chomhairle is mandated to implement this motion only when the power-sharing institutions are established and when the Ard Chomhairle is satisfied that the policing and justice powers will be transferred. Or if this does not happen within the St Andrews timeframe, only when acceptable new partnership arrangements to implement the Good Friday Agreement are in place.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 11:08 PMI agree that its likely that the Government will find another Secretary of State who will say in 2008 - that any misunderstanding between the parties on transfer of power on policing and justice- did not happen on their watch. Sinn Fein is not in difficulty over the policing issue. Having just watched a dissident on TV - they say they want to send a message to SF - vote for dissidents and then back to SF - now that sounds a tad tactical.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 11:10 PMTkmaxx
Well, they’re in difficulty in the sense that their declared support for policing is one of the government’s twin pillars..
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 11:16 PMHenry
You may want to read that text again..
“the Ard Chomhairle is mandated to implement this motion only when..”
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 11:17 PMPete - twin pillars in Government terms are the pillars built on sand - the real test will be the SDLP or another party - reversing the SF route map SF have proposed for policing and holding SF to the same standard - for example the involvement of no human rights abusers in justice roles and a proper truth mechanism - if they are up to those standards being applied to themselves as well - the DUP dont need to apply additional standards of probity - just equity of application.
Posted by on Jan 14, 2007 @ 11:23 PM
