Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Is there room for Labour in Northern Ireland?
Bertie Ahern’s announcement yesterday that his party will be looking into organising in Northern Ireland leaves open some interesting questions for both British and Irish Labour, not least if they find themselves with no ‘partner’ party in Northern Ireland. Slugger is convening a modest discussion group in a pub in Bournemouth next week during the British Labour Party’s annual conference. If you are going to the conference or you know someone who is, let us know you’re coming by ‘booking’ your place here. Or you can ‘book’ through Facebook.
Mick Fealty @ 11:31 AM
Two document’s of interest:
http://www.labour.ie/press/listing/1184580857259060.html
and
http://www.labour.ie/northernireland/statement2006.html
One quote from the document is:
“at present the Labour Party only contests elections in the Republic of Ireland, the Northern Ireland Labour Forum is in all other aspects a branch of the Party and members participate fully in campaigning and debate. The NI Labour Forum is also seeking a formal structural relationship with the British Labour Party”
There will be a debate at the Labour conference in November to allow their NI members contest local elections
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 11:56 AMAs Irish Labour are still packed full of “Sticks” (including it’s current leader), then I would imagine the transition to atansing in The North shoudl be quiet seamless. They’d need to be polling a few more votes than their former Workers Party comrades though....
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 12:17 PMCan anyone enlighten me as to what is meant when people referr to “Sticks” or “Stickeis”?
Thanks
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 12:46 PMThe problem with the Irish Labour Party now is that nearly all of it’s TD’s are middle class. This is very off-putting to those that are of a disadvantaged social class. There is no social bond or understanding between the two.
James Connolly would no doubt be disappointed if he could see the current stock of wannabees, including the last leader, the smug Past Rabitte.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 12:51 PMWould not SF become the new ‘sister party’ up north ? :o)
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:01 PMOf course Labour should stand in Northern Ireland, its long overdue and a definite left of centre Labour gap exists in the political market-for both activists and voters. Glad they are accepting members now and have agreed to organise there. Just wondering if a Labour person could let us know how things are progressing with the criteria (200 members etc) that the party set for local organisation to begin?
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:01 PMIt sounds really interesting. I wish I could go! Not only a break away, but interesting conversation in a nice wee English pub with good grub and a cuppa! Who could ask for more?
Thanks Mick for letting me know what I’m going to miss!
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:02 PMps, I’ll bet there won’t be a bed to be had for love nor money.
Sigh!!!!!!!
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:04 PMWould you be changing history by organising this event at the British Labour Party, Mick?
You will be giving some Labour party people food for thought, though I know of at least one person, Ken Livingstone, who would say that NI is for the Irish.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:04 PMHow long does this have to go on for? Labour as the UK party of Government should give the people of Northern Ireland the right to vote for Labour candidates.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/3154222.stmPosted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:14 PM“Can anyone enlighten me as to what is meant when people referr to “Sticks” or “Stickeis”?
Thanks
Posted by michael
“A Stickie is an Official Sinn FĂ©in supporter - so called because they used to affix their Easter lillies to their lapels with sticky-tape, as opposed to Provos who used pins (but weren’t called ‘Pinnies’ for some reason! :-)
Official Sinn FĂ©in became ‘Official Sinn FĂ©in - The Workers Party’, which became The Workers Party, most of whom became Democratic Left and were eventually merged with/swallowed up by Labour.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:21 PMHow about the folks in the SDLP who are unhappy about a merger with Fianna Fail (mostly their urban left-of-centre base) and the folks in the UUP who are unhappy about a merger with the Tories (again mostly their more moderate, urban wing) form an alliance and reform the NI Labour Party ?
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 01:24 PMCormac,
Actually, way back in the dark days running up to Easter 1970, the Provisionals were in fact known as Pinheads. I note that this year, as well as finally embracing political modernity laid out then by Cathal Goulding, they have also finally accepted the possibilities of modern methods of adhesion.Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 02:21 PMIn reply to “Just wondering....”:
If the SDLP’’s, as far as I can tell illusory, left of centre urban base was to reform the NILP they could hardly claim to be republicans, could they?
Any previous attempt at creating a ‘cross-community’ labour party in the North as always resulted in left-unionism, just as the Alliance are, whatever they claim, liberal unionists. I don’t see why this would be any different today.
Langhammer’s movement into the (Irish) Labour party seems more meaningful to me than any attempt to transplant the British Labour party.
Talk of a coming re-alignment seems to me to be way off-base, though perhaps at local authority level some moves could be made.
At a higher level, I just can’t see it. The facts are that not only is the Assembly is sectarian at core (whether in the name of ‘parity of esteem’ or whatever) and the national question remains the central issue in Northern political ideology.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 02:31 PMPeaceandJustice asks, more or less, how long NI must be governed unaccountably by British political parties.
The article you linked to contains the answer: “SDLP chairman Alex Attwood insisted it would not have any effect on his party. “In fact, it is most likely that the membership of a British political party will appeal to those of a unionist outlook and not the nationalist community nor the values that the SDLP stands for,” he said.”
Therein lies the rub: the British have always kept the place at arm’s length from the polity of the UK as a whole. Whether one is a republican or a unionist or whatever else, there is no appetite for British parties in the North.
The Tories regularly embarrass themselves in elections in the North. Labour is doing everything it can to stay out of the place.
The (old) Liberals stood in NI once or twice, if I recall correctly though I may be mistaken, and the SDP certainly did. Result? No dice.
What would British Labour have to offer any labourite who also happened to be a republican or nationalist? A further copper-fastening of partition?
In many ways it’s unfortunate that the policy of the British Establishment has been to ignore the North, and let the Unionist party rule it however they pleased from 1920 until the 1972 but that’s the way it was and the result is a distinct and discrete polity. That said, the UUP’s connections with the Tories have been, historically, much stronger than their republican equivalents over the years (NP, SDLP etc.) have been with the south. FIne Gael didn’t last long and Fianna Fáil never organised and didn’t link up so closely with the NP and SDLP as the UUP and Tories did.
Ironically, it occurs to me that had the British parties taken more of an interest in matters then there might be significantly less support for republican parties today.
So, sorry Mick, I think you’re wasting your time.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 02:45 PM“they have also finally accepted the possibilities of modern methods of adhesion”
:-)))
Have to disagree with “political modernity laid out then by Cathal Goulding”, though. In terms of peace, certainly, but I always thought his brand of socialism was a bit old-hat.
But then I would say that because I’m a capitalist pig (and proud!!)
More a Bertie Ahern ‘socialist’, me.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 02:55 PMThe prevailing ambition across both Labour Parties operating in the North is to forge one party with structural links to London AND Dublin. The Trade Union movement already handles this in an equitable way. Remember, Labour is part of that Labour movement.
I pay my subs to London, others pay theirs to Dublin.
Just to be even handed then - if you want to join Labour you can either go to
or
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 02:57 PM“The problem with the Irish Labour Party now is that nearly all of it’s TD’s are middle class.”
Well then they should fit in just nicely with their ‘colleagues’ across the Irish sea.[comrade and brothers and sisters are non words within NLP] They will be able to chat about the wonders of ASBOS, the value of their house and what shares to buy in the banking sector now the BLP government has all but under-wrote that sectors share value [capitalism is wonderful if you are a thief, you can gamble with investors money and the government far from jailing you rewards you with the tax payers hard earned cash]
There was a time when members of the LP called for nationalization without compensation, now the LP government, compensates the Bankers without a jot of Nationalization. Such things used to be called a ‘back hander’, ‘a bung’, ‘a hand out’ and those who took such money were spongers[remember that one] scroungers etc.
The ‘colleagues’ could also run down those stupid Trade Unionists who with there silly strikes to defend their members best interest clearly do not get the point of Globalization, and the benefits it can bring to nice middle class people like the majority of the members of the labour party they finance so gullibly
I just love the comradeship and internationalism of those ‘colleagues’ who are calling for the British LP to organize in the north, it does not seem to matter a jot to them that the Second International already has a fraternal party in the north, the SDLP.
Bertie must be laughing his rocks off, two birds with one stone.Still what is comradeship when you can kneel at the feet of Betty Windsor. By the way Mick, whose financing this little outing to the sunny south?
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 02:57 PMMick Hall - “Still what is comradeship when you can kneel at the feet of Betty Windsor.”
Why do you feel the need to insult the Royal Family when you expect others to give Irish Republicanism respect? I guess it’s the usual double standards.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 03:10 PMLabourman, no offence but I don’t think either party has much to do with any recognisable labour movement these days. Call that modernisation if you like, but it seems to me that the labour movement is, unfortunately in my opinion, an irrelevance.
Also, your argument that the prevailing ambition of “both Labour Parties operating in the North is to forge one party with structural links to London AND Dublin” that sounds suspiciously like an, admittedly unlikely, to bring Ireland back into the arms of Mother Britain. Unless, of course, Ireland is to do a Democratic Left on the entire British polity…
Labour didn’t take over DL, DL took over Labour. Odd, that.
Mick Hall, it’s the Socialist International, not the Second, that has the SDLP and Labour as bosom buddies. The SDLP in the days of the second international was a slightly different party run by Lenin.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 03:19 PMJW
Sorry mate you are wrong, Lenin’s international was the Third, better known as the Comintern. It eventually came into being after the toadies who led the Second International deserted international solidarity and supported their various governments in WW1 against the policy of the 2nd International. When they sent the working classes to the fronts to kill each other in the interest of Capital and foreign dominions.
The First International was the one Marx belonged to and there was a 2 and a half International for comrades who could not quite make up their minds between the Leninists and the toadies who backed their own ruling class in the great conflagration of WW1.
Whether you call it the 2nd or socialist international is up to you, but for old lefties like me it will always be the wretched second international which went down in ignominy in 1914, and I’m afraid a bit of Mandelsonism name changing will never take away that shame.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 03:44 PMNow, if nationalists were to adopt the same petty sectarian attitude of Reg Empey they would claim this was a threat against the entire power-sharing executive....
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 03:51 PMPAJ
How have I insulted Betty Windsor, is that not here name. Lets be clear you can call her what you choose but I have no right to do the same.
In fact I would not insult her as I understand that a lot of Unionists and others do respect her, thus I will use language in the correct manner, I do not recognize such honors and institutions and that is my right, so when talking about an individual such as Betsy I will use the name they were born with.
You really need to get the hang of this equality thing.
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 03:52 PMIf there is room for Labour, it will be an interesting situation to have the the ruling parties of GB and ROI contesting elections in Northern Ireland (this is of course assuming that Fianna Fáil go through with entering into Northern Ireland politics… let me rephrase that, Norther Ireland elections).
Posted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 04:09 PMTories seem to have reacted to FF move in more measured tones than Reg:
http://www.conservativesni.orgPosted by on Sep 19, 2007 @ 04:18 PM
