Friday, March 14, 2008
Another reason the DUP compromised on councils
I blogged yesterday on the deal on reducing the number of councils to 11. It is interesting that initially the other parties apart from SF supported 15 councils, SF wanted 7 whilst it was unclear exactly what the DUP wanted thought they did not like 7. As such I suppose the 11 council model could be seen as a reasonable compromise achieved by the DUP.
Indeed in the executive only the UUP opposed the compromise, with Alliance also doing opposing it from outside. In the new less friendly atmosphere up on the hill, however, one might have expected the DUP to draw a line in the sand, and demand at least 15 councils. That leaves aside another interesting fact: the Belfast Telegraph makes an interesting point here that had an agreement not been reached another set of council by elections would have occurred next year. Instead now elections can be postponed until 2011. Of course had there been council elections next year they were due to be held in May. I suspect in reality they would have en held at the same time as the next European elections. Having council elections at the same time as the European elections, however, would have helped the TUV with momentum and even if Jim Allister had lost his seat, would have potentially provided the TUV with a significant consolation prize. Instead the DUP may calculate if there are no council elections and if Jim Allister looses the European election it may damage the TUV allowing the DUP to write them off. Not that mere intra unionist party advantage would ever have motivated the DUP.
Turgon @ 12:23 PM
Turgon,
are you seriously suggesting that we believe that the DUP was prepared to compromise it’s principles simply for electoral reasons?
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 12:35 PM11 is an adequate number but the decision is long overdue. I’d be interested to hear a proper statment from the UUP on this as Fred Cobains comments appear more as an initial reaction.
I think your right Turgon - this has a lot to do with bypassing an election in 2009 and I will be interested in seeing if any arrangements are made for cllrs standing down (paid off) and co-options. In reality you are taking about an 8 year council life so some fresh faces are needed.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 12:35 PMTurgon
Did it cross your mind that 15 was a negotiating tactic? When was 15 local councils a Unionist ‘principle’ requiring a ‘line in the sand’?
Devolution, its review of RPA and thus the likelihood of the local government elections being put back from 2009 has been floating around since before TUV was even founded.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 12:51 PMThe current councils were mandated to serve a four year term and for Government to come along, and as a pure piece of political expediency, extend their term to six years is a blatant example of undemocratic practice. Still with the arrogance displayed by some of the supposed democratic parties in the big house nothing should surprise us any more. This sort of electoral manipulation would have been accepted as standard in Russia in the bad old days of Kremlin rule. The brainbox’s in the DUP strategy department must think that we are all mugs!
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 12:53 PM“Did it cross your mind that 15 was a negotiating tactic?”
Haha. Good one…
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 01:02 PM“Did it cross your mind that 15 was a negotiating tactic?”
So you think 11 is a good result do you?
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 01:10 PMObserver,
the councillors need to be paid off for their superb service in the dark days, when they kept the flame of democracy alive in NI.At least that’s one excuse I heard.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 01:12 PMIgnited,
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 01:38 PMWhat are the UUP on about in Belfast - how does this change things signicantly?
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 01:38 PMthe flame of democracy went out in nIreland at partition
we are just now witnessing its rekindling
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 01:49 PMNone - thanks for the link.
Trevor Wilson is hittin the nail on the head about the fear of election.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 01:59 PM“So you think 11 is a good result do you?”
Why is it not? It seems odd splitting Newtownabbey from Carrick, but not half as odd as lumping both in with Lisburn.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 02:23 PM“Did it cross your mind that 15 was a negotiating tactic?”
So I suppose we are to belive that when Lisburn Council backed 7, the DUP were covering all negotiating bases?
The DUP had no negotiating position, they had no principles by which to guide their decisoin except one - how many seats can we guarantee ourselves? Now look at the plans, compare all the other proposed maps and quess what, 11b gives the best chance of DUP control of new councils.
Sounds like a gerrymander to me!!
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 02:41 PMx
The self-interests of a single council are not a party position.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 02:45 PMHow about we start talking about what these councils are actually going to do rather than how many there are or (yawn) whether they’ll be orange or green?
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 03:08 PMbin collection and...er…
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 03:32 PMLet’s see… according to Trevor Wilson the UUP would have held out for local authority bounbaries coterminus with Westminster constituencies. They accuse the minister of being harmful for unionism in Belfast. How, I wonder would a Belfast City Council coterminus with the new West Belfast boundaries be a positive outcome for unionism.
I’m fond of Trevor, but he doesn’t need to try this hard to oust Billy “Portacabin” Armstrong MLA.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 04:14 PMNo harm to the TUV and UUP but I’ve heard the figure 11 being discussed for the past year. It has clearly not been a kneejerk reaction. The delay in the election as also been talked about for the past year.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 04:36 PMSeems the UUP only want to play when they`re in the majority
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 04:42 PMJenny, it might be very little extra indeed.
Or it might be:
bins, waste, refuse, etc
planning
some roads services
some housing areas
rural development (got it already)
neighbourhood renewal and other social programmes currently run by DSD (got it partly already)
extended economic development powers (filling the gap that ummm lies empty cos INI don’t like anything other than the big win stories)
extended environmental health, pulling in some functions from H&SE;European Programmes (downsizing that shower of wasters known as SEUPB)
increased tourism development (the local stuff, again downsizing the statutory
and so on....There could be more. But the Civil Servants - a contradiction in terms if ever I heard one - will not want to give away much. Councils account for around 5% of the Northern Ireland “pot” of expenditure overall. They may get more powers, which will take them up - brace yourselves now - 7 or 9%.
There’s an interesting concept across the water called “the power of well-being” which could extend over here to Councils. That will be rather good to see for reasons I’m sure I don’t need to explain.
Those people who say get rid of them, and give all the power to the glorified Council that IS the Assembly would be wise to consider how well that will work when they want to ring up and complain about missing their bin collection.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 06:14 PMGood to see Jim Allister’s proxy Turgon has highlighted the lastest big treachery supposedly dealt by the DUP. Apparently now 15 Councils is actually the unionist holy grail that Chairman Jim and his happy band would deliver for us all.
Perhaps you’d like to outline your and the omnipotent Chairman’s reasoning for why 15 is such a superb number?
The Fred Cobain stuff is just patent sh*te frankly. His position is that the UUP would demand 15 Councils but one of those 15 would include the entirety of the Current Belast CC alongside all of Castlereagh and Newtownabbey. Exactly what size would that have left Belfast compared to the other 14 Councils? Surely the greater the number of Councils you go for the lesser the capacity to increase the size of Belfast.
Fred’s rationale that its leaves Belfast as a de facto nationalist city is also pure rubbish. Firstly, if prods got off their arse and voted Belfast would have a quite healthy unionist majority on the Council as it is. However, there will have to be a Boundary Commissioner appointed to look at the boundaries - just as there would have been under the proposed 7 Councils. He/She will have the power to add or subtract areas from the current proposed Councils. They won’t be able to shift all of the area of for example Castlereagh but they would be able to move anything less than half of it. Surely even if you added 1/3 of Castlereagh BC and 1/3 of Newtownabbey BC incorporating the parts of those Councils which are very ‘naturally’ Belfast it would leave a City with a very healthy unionist majority.
Mind you, the short sightedness of people like Fred Cobain would never, ever see that and they’ll have the fervent support of the TUVvies who see treachery around every corner in the little world of conspiracy theory which they seem to inhabit.
None of all that takes into account the other issue in that you have to have a degree of economy of scale if you want any powers transferred to these new Councils - whether Councillors are actually fit to exercise the powers they currently have is another topic, but surely the serial junketeers of the UUP would love more powers to give them a few more trips.
Again, all ignored in the rush to criticise something just because the DUP might have brought it forward.
Does Fred Cobain care that Limavady will now be under a unionist controlled Council. Similarly with Banbridge - somewhere the TUVvies might feel an affinity with. The good people of Dromore (apparently the scene of DUP downfall) wont be under a nationalist controlled Council but instead will continue to be in a majority unionist area. But of course Turgon that’s all part of the DUP “compromise” on the Councils.
You’re very touchy at being linked in with the most nutterish elements of Allister’s crazy band - but sometimes there’s more than a little evidence of that present.
Keep it up Turgon - can’t let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory now can we!!!
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 09:29 PMInterested
It’s not a bad thing about Limavady. The whole Borough has been run from Dungiven for too long.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 09:57 PMThe Antrim councils seem a little strange.
Surely a better arrangement would have been:
Newtownabbey, Carrick, Larne
and
Antrim, Ballymena.
Posted by on Mar 14, 2008 @ 10:44 PMInterested,
What is interesting is that we were told that you would stop republicans and we would come closer to a battle a day. Little sign of battling here; just half hearted negotiations and then a compromise with suited you and SF for differing reasons and which although it will hurt the SDLP they agreed with for reasons best known to themselves.15 councils is not really the point. My thesis is that your party wanted to ensure that there would be no election for reasons of inter unionist party advantage. As such (and SF will have known this well) your negotiating position vis a vis SF was weakened by your need to defeat your internal enemies within unionism. That has mildly disadvantaged both unionism, and it seems the SDLP. I have no problem per se with you playing that party political game. I do have a problem with you trying to pretend that this is not what you have done. You have traded short term advantage for the DUP with long term advantage for republicans and I do have a problem with that.
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 12:17 AMwhat a bollix,the minister has decided that 11 councils would be the most effective way to deliver uhhhmm.What these councils are going to deliver has not yet been decided,therefore how can anybody judge the most effective delivery mechanism .Form follows function,here we have the horse following the cart.
Posted by on Mar 15, 2008 @ 12:54 AM
