Sunday, November 26, 2006
From deadlock to deadlock…
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
Mick Fealty @ 06:38 AM
I agree that the new devolved government will have very high levels of checks and balances. That will mean that beneficial things like further increases in student fees would be very difficult to get through. However it also means that things only happen if there is broad consent for them. Given the unease with which people regard a new Executive, that is probably not a bad thing. Yes, in principle, it would be nice to have a 65% majority rule and voluntary coalition. But that is an argument for a future day, maybe when we get changes in the leaderships of the political tribes.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 10:37 AM“Even more than the November 2003, this election (if it actually takes place) looks like an election with very little purpose”
There is more purpose than 2003. In 2003 it was clear that there would be no government. Now it seems that there could although it depends on what Sinn Fein decide wrt policing.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 11:07 AM“Even more than the November 2003, this election (if it actually takes place) looks like an election with very little purpose.”
I suspect that this election will actually see a drop in the SF vote leaving the SDLP as the largest Nationalist Party . This will see Durkan elected as Deputy First Minister meaning that unionists’ nightmare scenario of seeing McGuiness installed beside Paisley will be avoided.Unionists can then claim that Republicans will have been defeated both militarily and politically.
Adams has done a sound job in avoiding a significant split in the republican movement thus far but I think that the next election will show that he will finally lost the battle for unity within the movement.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 11:21 AMWe certainly could be headed for very interesting times if both SF and the DUP lose around 20% of their support.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 11:46 AMPeter Weir(d) losing the run of himself on The Politics Show now. There’s trouble in the DUP - and it’s fun to watch. Reminds me of Trimbles troubles circa 1997.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 11:53 AM‘And am I the only one who regards this nominations farce as an affront to democracy? ‘
Alex Kane
Not at all. It’s involuntary power sharing the negation of democracy. I suspect that this election will actually see a drop in the SF vote leaving the SDLP as the largest Nationalist Party .
Austin,‘I suspect that this election will actually see a drop in the SF vote leaving the SDLP as the largest Nationalist Party .’
I suspect that you are not a detective and that your suspicions are based on if not in licensed premises . The election will produce the same result as the last census -ahem -election. Irish Republicans and Nationalists are not going to see Paisley elected as First Minister without a ‘real’ Fenian as his Deputy. The Croppies have finished with lying down as a means of political advancement.Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 12:01 PMAust,
That’s an interesting viewpoint. It reflects Francie Brolly’s thinking too. But from where I’m sitting, it just doesn’t add up.
I have SDLP on win one, lose one, and gain one possible bonus seat. Only the ‘possible’ seat is a straight fight with Sinn Fein. I’m not claiming to have my finger on the electoral pulse, but dissent or no dissent, I only see one vulnerable SF seat in the whole of NI.
Not even dyed-in-the-wool SDLP supporters think that they are currently placed to do much more than give SF a bloody nose or two.
Besides if SF don’t call a special Ard Fheis, they avoid having to test your hypothesis, and the Peace Process™ continues not reaching any pre set deadline, never mind resolution.
We appear to be in a free form political improvisation stage at the moment. Anything can happen I guess, until the Chancellor takes over.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 12:48 PMFiddling will Rome burns
While the politicos get excited about their potential share of the vote, the truth of the matter is that Northern Ireland is going down the pan. Public sector, Agricutlure, Education, Policing and Industry are all facing significant restructuring - read job losses, pay freezes and service cuts.What we need in this place,is someone to show some real leadership and take some hard decisions.
The SFA (even if it was agreed) won’t work. Of course our politicians won’t care because their salaries will be safe and they get the opportunity to pretend that they matter, but collectively they fail the people of Northern Ireland.
But it is not just our local politicians who are at fault, Blair, Hain, Ahern, are all are at fault and so to are the electorate who elect our local politicians(a point made by Mark Durkain). Taken together it is obvious why it is so difficult to do anything about it.
Alex Kane is not far off the mark.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 01:14 PMIs it a foregone conclusion to assume there will be an election in March if Sinn Fein don’t back policing and justice?
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 01:20 PMSmithsonian ,
Sounds like what Northern Ireland needs is to elect/find / get a ‘new’ people . This could be a challenge beyond even the limited talents of the NI politicians . The only way I can see it happening is by disbanding the NI 6 county State as it is and starting again via an agreed ‘repartition’ of the politically and economically non viable entity of NI .
The November 24th deadline is now seen as a joke . By April 1st 2007 the March election will also have been seen to be the same joke part 2 :(
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 02:29 PMAlex is correct. The St Andrews agreement did nothing to strengthen democracy or to create institutions that could be more viable. The utter lack of accountability is a disaster. It sees a dysfunctional mechanism put back together and then left to run with no serious opposition or scrutiny. The Assembly lacks an opposition and for people to have a real democratic choice of governments there must be some possibility of the removal of the government in place. As it stands all that is possible is to marginally change the balance of ministers and put a new face on the First and Deputy First ministers. An all party power sharing arrangement was a gamble and a radical experiment, well call me a stickler but the scientific method states that if the results are in and the data says ‘failure’,then you change your experiment, it is time for a restructure of the Assembly executive itself. Of course in our new deal the DUP had promised better accountability but they delivered us Irish language signs in all public places instead, a sorry state of affairs indeed.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 02:51 PMDSD
I agree that the current arrangements will not work.However, they will have to be seen not to work by the people. There is no way to short circuit the process. We will have elections, an executive will be formed but no further progress will be made. Some out of the box thinking will then be required.
Running with your scientific theme and invoking Einstein “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
Back to the drawing board
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 03:19 PMSmith
You are right. This is a step by step business. A lot of people could see from about 2002 that the assembly set up was a problem with the whole designation system being the worst aspect and the D’Hondt being the second worst. However I believe that there were bigger issues in practice such as decommissioning and policing that had to be tackled first. It is slow but if you believe we are on the verge of a breakthrough on policing then having resolved decommissioning and policing are big steps foward. As you say after a few years of assembly and executive quagmire and mutual veto there will be a process to make things work better; that process will be based on actual experience of things not working. This is the way forward; a bit of experience and learning by what works and doesn’t and taking one step at a time.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 03:32 PMI wonder how much of how this is being played out is due to Blair. He just wants to end on something that can be spun as a high point. If it goes downhill after that, it didn’t happen on his watch.
Hain too has ambitions to be anywhere else but NI. I wonder who Gordon Brown (if he is the new leader), hates enough to put in as SoS?
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 03:43 PMBertie
Brown will take over at an extremely important time; currently it looks as though he will take over some time after the election but before the devolution of powers.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 03:50 PMWhat happens if the electorate are fed up with the antics of the DUP:-
The UKUP take four seats.
The UUP take two seats there are possibilities - Lagan Valley, North Antrim, North Down .
The DUP lose 6 seats.That would leave the DUP on 26 the UUP 26 and the UKUP on 5 which would mean the DUP would not be the largest party any longer it would be SF.
It seems from my discusssions on the ground that the percentage of DUP voters that don’t buy into the ‘Fair Deal’ and feel conned is much larger than anticipated. Some are returning to the UUP and some are transferring to the the UKUP if there are candidates standing and some are staying at home for the first time.
Maybe the possible result is stretching possibilities but the public have seen a fracture in the DUP and they don’t vote for fractured parties making the UKUP seem very attractive to a section of the population.
Will there be an election?
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 04:51 PM“Some are returning to the UUP”
How would that work?
Presumably these are anti-BA agreement unionists who are opposed to the SAA? What would bring them back to the UUP?
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 05:06 PMThey thought they were voting for a party that lived up to its guarantees, a ‘Fair Deal’ for example. They now know for certain the GFA (StAA version even though they like it less)is the only way forward and feel they are better with the devil they knew for many years and not the alternative of McCartney who is trying to be the ‘new’ Paisley.
Strange people voters very fickle when they have been let down by the people they voted for…. and rates (both kinds) and education are very important to them.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 05:39 PMFD
For those that were once UUP, one of the reasons most of them left was because the UUP did not live up to its guarentees (no guns no government). If there is a real split within the DUP, that is likely to be reflected amongst its voters. I think that some who are concerned will try and vote for the people within the party who they think will most reflect their views. I think that the others are more likley to go elsewhere, rather than return to the UUP. Apart from the Ervine pact, I think bridges were burnt when people switched from the UUP. Time of course will tell.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 05:56 PMbertie
People voted DUP in reaction to the McCartney murder and the Northern Bank job. How can we be going into government with these people?Paisley promised a new deal, a fair deal, where is it. Paisley said never, never, never, Paisley said over our dead bodies, Paisley wanted sack, clothes and ashes, Paisley wanted photographs. Paisley saw of O’Neill, Faulkner, Trimble. Now Paisley wants to be and do what he critised everyone else for.
All elections are fought on the basis of trust and delivery. Paisley has delivered nothing and the people no longer trust the DUP.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 06:53 PMSmithsonian
How would that bring them back to the UUP?
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 07:26 PMDSD.
I agree generally with your ‘criticism’ as above . I’d just go one step further . Instead of
‘it is time for a restructure of the Assembly executive itself’ I’d say it’s time for a restructure of the NI State itself .
Involuntary ‘coalitions’ in a powerless Assembly is not what NI needs . It needs a proper democracy and that cannot be delivered given the constitutionally divided nature of the present NI State .
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 08:14 PM‘they delivered us Irish language signs in all public places’
Dunc agreed with much of what you said but this is nonsense
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 10:06 PMbertie
Neither the DUP nor the UUP are in a position to affect matters much. If the big concern is to reduce the mandate of SF, only one party can do that (SDLP).A vote for the DUP, encourages nationalists to vote for SF, so the logic is to vote for a party that doesnt’ do that.
Of course if either of the Unionist parties are prepared to enter a coalition with SF and make it work then a different environment emerges.
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 10:30 PMgreen flag has espoused to the point of ad nauseum the benefits of re-partition as he sees it.
What if he’s right.
sitting here in south down…i see merit
Posted by on Nov 26, 2006 @ 10:31 PM
