Saturday, November 24, 2007
Anti-powersharing party pokes head above parapet…
A FUNDRAISER for a new unionist grouping is to take place on Monday, with a launch for the anti-powersharing movement expected in weeks. The faction will comprise of hardliners opposed to the DUP entering government with Sinn Fein. While the alleged involvement of IRA members in the Quinn murder might appear to have given the group some ammunition to fire at the DUP (who are now only interested in ‘corporate’ IRA involvement), Paisley’s party juggernaut will be hard to displace.
Belfast Gonzo @ 11:21 AM
So, Turgon, you have got your wish.
I take it you’ll “join up” and, hopefully, will be able and willing to keep us informed of the ïns and outs”.
Best wishes,Joe
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 02:42 PMThis will get no where.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 03:02 PMthese are most likely the kind of unionists who feel nostalgic for the old days of stormont misrule, or utopia as they might call it. and no doubt know the words of Croppies Lie Down off by heart.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 03:12 PMThere is room for all sorts of political opinions.
The “proof” will be in how much electoral support any party can gain.
Allister and his supporters believe that there should be no room for ex-terrorists in government. A very substantial proportion of the electorate disagree.
Let the battle of words continue.Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 03:24 PMThe fact that they are hopping to attract Willie Ross tells yiu all you need to know about their long term future
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 04:36 PMAh a retirment hope for unionist politicians too lazy to actually govern a country or actually take part in real party politics. Why bother running a country when the Brits will do it for us if we just sit around looking at each other.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 04:43 PMWell I guess I have to make some sort of comment on this don’t I?
Firstly I have not been invited to the meeting. I am away this weekend and so have no access to the Newsletter; is it a public meeting in Templepatrick or invitation only? I will also be away on Monday so could not go anyway.
I am a very unimportant person politically (and in most other ways); Mr. Allister and his assistants have my address and details so they might send me an invite. I suspect I am not important enough. As I have said before I am a humble prodiban foot soldier hiding in my cave. Mr. Allister and his assistants do not know that I am Turgon. I suspect they have better things to do than read this site so they would neither know nor care. If they did they would probably think I was mad and ban me from joining.
Of course joining a political party is a significant step. If one does one tends to have to publicly endorse at least most of the party’s positions. I am unclear what positions the new party will adopt. I have previously outlined some of my personal views on a possible way forward but the new party may not believe in the same sort of things, or may put emphasis in different areas to where I put them.
Still I guess once the party is set up I will have to join if I want to show my face around here(a poor metpahor on a web site but you know what I mean).
The new party will face massive obstacles. Initially they will be portrayed by the DUP and probably pratically all the political spectrum as malcontent, flat earth nutters and bigots. There is also a danger that whatever the qualities of some of the leaders of this party that nutters, flat earthers and bigots will be attracted to it. The media, always keen on eccentrics, may well enjoy interviewing any of the nutters who join further damaging their credibility. I have no doubt after a few days the media circus will move on and the new party will get only a little air time.
This leads on to the next problem. Only Allister and a few councillors are elected representatives. As such the new party will have no representation in the two areas which get maximum media focus namely Stormont and Westminister. There are now no elections planned for some time and as such this is a problem likely to persist. I think Bigger Picture some weeks ago suggested an early election would be beneficial to the prodiban. At the time I disagreed with him but as I have said subsequently he may well have been right. We do not know the answer to that now but certainly the lack of an election does make the gaining of momentum difficult.
There is also the danger that those in the general public opposed to the current agreement will have become resigned to it by the time an election comes round.
So: many, many problems. Still if there is to be a coherent unionist opposition not only to the DUP (the UUP already supply this with varing levels of competence) but also the whole process then it has to start somewhere. I do believe there is considerable discontent in the unionist population with what has happened. Is it enough to ensure the viability of a political party?, difficult to know. As I have said before what would really help a new party would be one or more big name defections from the DUP (or UUP). I suspect that is unlikely but possible. We will wait and see. I will wait excitedly in my cave.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 05:21 PMTurgon
Do you think that if they get themselves up and running they might be able to entice one or two DUP or UUP MLAs to defect?
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 05:31 PMStiofán de Buit,
Firstly I am immensely pround that I have managed to do the accent thing on your name. The ALT GR button does work. Thanks to whoever it was told me.Now on to your question.
I do not know is the answer. I do know from conservations with friends that the discontent in the DUP was not limited to the current defectors. There are a number of other councillors who are very unhappy. I suspect some more of them will come on board.In terms of the MLAs I am less sure. I know a few of them from Queen’s years ago and my wife knows a few others through church activities. However, I have not seen any in months and have no real idea. At a complete guess there are some who are unhappy but I would be a little surprised if any jumped ship. Certainly the ex UUP ones I knew seem too happy with their power and position to jepodise it. If the new party was clearly making real headway (very difficult to assess without an election) then I can think of a few who just might.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 05:45 PMI suspect that this new party does not pose any real electoral challenge to the DUP - yet. It has several initial handicaps. Firstly, Allister is the only figure with any profile. Secondly, it may indeed attract the Robin Stirlings who will go on to Talkback to say something stupid. Thirdly, it lacks representatives. Fourthly, as a lone swimmer against the tide, it will attract widespread opprobrium. Fifthly, its strategic objective will probably be to roll back things to the resumption of devolution. Sixthly, and perhaps most decisively, it lacks circumstances in its favour, namely an overwhelming and irrefutable sense that the DUP has let down unionism by its lust for power.
I regularly look at Allister’s website and have no difficulty in agreeing with his opinions. I suspect the number of people who would feel the same goes far beyond those for voted for Rainbow Bob in March. Assent is one thing but support for an alternative, which could only mean resumed Direct Rule, is something else.
Theres’s no doubt that the DUP has betrayed its old ideals. I remember a senior member of my Orange lodge telling me back in 1998 that there would be so much patronage to be dispensed from an Assembly that it would suck the NI political class into it, no matter what they would say. He was right. The DUP, notably Peter Robinson and Jeffrey Donaldson, have given the IRA carte blanche to carry on murdering the likes of Paul Quinn so long as the IRA leadership is kept in the dark about it. As Allister says, if the Quinn murder had happened in the Turtle Days, the DUP would have been sreaming blue murder about it. But now it is in the DUP’s interests not to get too steamed up about the activities of the South Armagh boyos.
Bob McCartney always argued that a settlement with Sinn Fein in government and the IRA still in active existence would corrupt the body politic. It has already corrupted the DUP into silence. We have IRA involvement in the Quinn murder and the intimidation of the McCartney family both on the record. And yet anyone who argues that this shows the unsuitability of Sinn Fein for government is pilloried as a “flat earther”.
No matter the party, every politician is at the mercy of events, as Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling have found out. It’s easy to imagine circumstances in which the IRA overreaches itself (something like the Northern Bank job) and, at a stroke, turns Allister’s people into a serious political force. Then we would be into a brand new situation.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 06:43 PMThe Watchman,
A much better put version of what I had said and includes several other problems which I agree face the new party.The only thing I would disagree with (disagree is too strong a word) is about “it lacks circumstances in its favour, namely an overwhelming and irrefutable sense that the DUP has let down unionism by its lust for power.”
I agree the feeling is not yet overwhelming and irrefutable. It is, however, present and growing. The Quinn murder and its aftermath are clearly a huge problem, as is the ongoing love in. Also the complete lack of pratical political decisions with no real progress even on quite non contentious issues must incraesingly make people question the whole agreement if not directly the issue of SF DUP coalition. Even the non decisions by McGimpsey is helpful to a new party in this as it suggests that the problem is systemic and might well not be reversed by having a UUP SDLP coalition.
The lust of the DUP leadership for power is, however, overwhelming and must be nauseating to many if only because it shows their hypocracy.
As such you may (and only may) be being a touch pessimistic about the new party on that particular score.
By the way were you invited / will you be likely to join?
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 07:09 PMNo one is interested in that type of Paisleyism anymore.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 07:18 PMits funny all the rhetoric bouncing about regarding this party, when the reason for their disgruntled little endeavour is simple, they don’t want to share power with nationalists of any hue. nice to see the usual suspects trying to portray it as something a bit more ‘noble’.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 07:34 PMits funny all the rhetoric bouncing about regarding this party, when the reason for their disgruntled little endeavour is simple, they don’t want to share power with nationalists of any hue. nice to see the usual suspects trying to portray it as something a bit more ‘noble’.
Well, if ‘RepublicanStones’ can keep repeating himself, tedious post, after tedious post, after tedious post, I assume I can repeat him too?
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 08:36 PMIt’s all very well slagging off anti agreement unionist parties - but if Provos behave as per Monaghan - then they will be closer to the thinking of not just so called extreme Unionists but many Nationalists\Republicans as well who were under the impression that the Provos were no longer in the equation.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 08:50 PMWatchman,
Given the carte blanche that unionism provides to loyalist paramilitarism, how do you think it is in any position to dictate democratic standards ? The entire state it seeks to defend was founded on a massive threat of violence, and unionism has used the threat of violence on several occasions to get it’s own way.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 08:57 PMThe Quinn murder and its aftermath are clearly a huge problem, as is the ongoing love in.
Turgon, Jim Allister doesn’t give two f**ks about some random fenian getting shot in South Armagh, and he definitely doesn’t care any more for the McCartneys. He is a political opportunist trying to seize his moment. I’m damn sure that if Quinn had been shot dead by loyalists, we wouldn’t be hearing squat about it. In fact there would probably be a few unionist politicians defending it.
I didn’t hear dick from Jim Allister or any of these other folks over the UDA funding matter. If he wanted to underscore his opposition to the appeasement of terrorists and to discredit the executive, there was a perfect opportunity there on a plate. He didn’t take it, which tells me all I need to know.
The lust of the DUP leadership for power is, however, overwhelming and must be nauseating to many if only because it shows their hypocracy.
Anyone who believes that the DUP had any principles prior to last May is seriously naive. Anyone who believes that Allister is any more principled is even more naive.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:06 PMGrow up Sammy. The ‘state’ [sic - what you of course mean is, this corner of it] was ‘founded’ on exactly the same principle the southern one was. Namely democratic Wilsonian self-determination. In other words, just as Southern Ireland, in the end, was able to walk out of the UK, so too was Northern Ireland, on exactly the same principle, entitled to walk out of any putative ‘all-Ireland’ state. And so we did. There’s a lesson here for ‘nationalists’ everywhere, but I think it’ll take a century ot two yet for them to learn it. ‘Be careful what you wish for’ comes into it though.
And if you want to keep insisting that ‘Unionism is just as bad as Republicanism’, go right ahead. That’s you, some but not all other smug Alliance nonces, and the Shinners convinced. F*ck all else: so enjoy the company you’re keeping.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:08 PMAhem,
And if you want to keep insisting that ‘Unionism is just as bad as Republicanism’, go right ahead.
What makes unionism superior to republicanism in any particular respect, pray tell ? Personally I think they’re two sides of the same coin. One couldn’t exist without the other. Both are equally prone to violence and threats when they are so minded.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:18 PMand what, comrade stalin, would be a preferable political order??
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:32 PMComrade Stalin,
“I didn’t hear dick from Jim Allister or any of these other folks over the UDA funding matter.”Obviously you don’t (like The Watchman) read his website:
“For my part, I have no doubt that few believe it is right that any paramilitary organisation should get taxpayer’s money under any guise, and , therefore, there is widespread support for Margaret Ritchie and dismay in respect of those that are trying to thwart her.”
http://www.jimallister.org/default.asp?blogID=776
Just case the biast media doesn’t cover it doesn’t mean he didn’t say it.Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:38 PM“Grow up Sammy. The ‘state’ [sic - what you of course mean is, this corner of it] was ‘founded’ on exactly the same principle the southern one was. Namely democratic Wilsonian self-determination. In other words, just as Southern Ireland, in the end, was able to walk out of the UK, so too was Northern Ireland, on exactly the same principle, entitled to walk out of any putative ‘all-Ireland’ state. And so we did. There’s a lesson here for ‘nationalists’ everywhere, but I think it’ll take a century ot two yet for them to learn it. ‘Be careful what you wish for’ comes into it though.”
Which might stick, if there was any notion of a “Northern Irish” nation, or some concept of “Northern Ireland” before the risk of the democracy for the island loomed on the horizon.
Ulster, of course, has a bit of history but unfortunately it had far too many Nationalists it in so you drew an line of the map that suited your needs, in the short term at least. Any idiot can do that. Perhaps Derry, Tyrone, Fermanagh and Armagh should decide to “walk out”, there is probably majorities in just about all of them for joining with the Republic.
I don’t suggest Unionism is “as bad” as Republicanism. As a political philosophy it’s a lot worse. Monarchy~? Dependence? Siege mentality? No thanks.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:39 PMComrade Stalin,
Maybe Allister is a political opportunist though to leave the DUP and hence make re election to his MEP post much less certain is not especially typical of opportunism even more so when he had been talked about as a potential DUP leader. Personally I never thought he would be DUP leader but as I say his actions are not entirely typical of opportunism. Still he probably is a bit opportunistic, most politicians are after all or do you regard the Alliance party as completely devoid of opportunism?
In terms of his views on the UDA and funding he has complained about it. I do not want to start being the new party’s mouth piece here and I do like to think I have a few independent thoughts of my own (there are grandiose delusions on a number of levels in that comment from myself I admit). However, here are some links to what Allister has actually said about the UDA funding issue:-
http://www.jimallister.org/default.asp?blogID=776
and the UDA in general, though I accept he mentions the IRA more on this one; his views on the UDA seem pretty clear:-
http://www.jimallister.org/default.asp?blogID=791The DUP have spectularly reneged on their manifesto committments of only a few months ago. Yes maybe people were a bit naive but maybe they believed what Paisley told them. A lot of people trusted him and now I would sugget a lot of people feel very duped. You may find a certain schadenfreude in the naivity of some traditional unionists. These naive people do, however, have votes and if they can be mobilised no matter how naive they are their votes still count.
I do not want to fall out with you Comrade but in terms of unionism giving a carte blanche to loyalist paramilitarism I would disagree. There have been some very foolish episodes but I do not think that is remotely accurate. In my own case I trust you accept that I am a unionist (indeed some might say a hard line unionist) but I have not been in the habit of giving any support tacit or otherwise to any loyalist violence and I do not remember The Watchman having done so either.
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:46 PMThat’s right Kensei, there was no motivating national sentiment amongst Unionists. Shure we were just have a grand wee laugh to ourselves and having the rest of youse wans on. Of course only (Irish) nationalists have genuine feelings of national self-identification. Everyone else is just kidding themselves. When will we self-deluding, mother-teat-sucking Unionist fools ever wake up? And absolutely Unionism’s worse than Nationalism. I mean, what have we to compare to, er, the Provos? Loyalist terrorists? We can’t even be bothered to get off our arses, unlike nationalists, and vote for their ‘political’ wings. Instead lazily we just boringly vote for constitutional politicians, pace Allister above, who keep disavowing violence as a political technqiue. But obviously they’re fibbing: thank God we have you around to see through them! Unionists bad! Nationalists good! Nurse!
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 09:55 PMAre Jim Allister and Pete Baker by any chance related?
Far from the political parties in Northern Ireland unanimously being in support of law and order, the fundamentals have been corrupted as crimes disadvantageous to the political process are swept under the carpet. As events unfold we will witness the Quinn murder passing into the same category as that of Robert McCartney - subservient to the survival of the political process and thus something to be marginalised and ignored, sadly, even by the unionist political elite!”
Posted by on Nov 24, 2007 @ 10:04 PM
