Tuesday, March 25, 2008
No role for unionists in national debate on the Union..?
I’VE been going through the bottom few entries on the daily Newshound digest, following the national debate on Britishness. It’s a debate from which Northern Ireland’s tribes could either learn from, criticise or contribute to in some way. But I found Gordon Brown’s Telegraph article today extraordinary. Despite it’s title - We must defend the Union - there is not one single mention of Northern Ireland.
It is clear he does not regard NI as part of the Union in any real or meaningful way, since there are four mentions each for Scotland, Wales and even England. As Jack Straw launches a consultation on a “statement of values that define British citizenship and on the case for a full British bill of rights and duties setting out rights and obligations for all citizens”, it is pretty clear that one part of the Union has no part to play in defining what Brown calls our “shared values”. Brown’s “bonds of belonging that make us all feel part of a wider Britain” simply do not appear to extend to Northern Ireland.
Oddly, unionist politicians have contributed very little to this debate thus far; perhaps they can cry ‘Me too!’ in the consultation, but something tells me our ‘unique status’ as a place apart means they’ll be ignored - as usual. One unionist who seems to be espousing the ‘British values’ Brown suggests is Alex Kane, who wrote recently: “There is an overwhelmingly convincing socio-economic-political-philosophical-intellectual-historical case to be made for the Union and for the constitutional and geographical integrity of the United Kingdom.
But it is a two-way process and unionists in Northern Ireland are going to have to begin to promote the case for themselves.” Kane concludes: “If the Union is to survive then we have to prove that it is a Union of benefit to everyone.” How would a unionist convince a Scot living in London that NI’s current contribution to the Union is “of benefit” to them?
Belfast Gonzo @ 01:23 PM
But n.i. is not part of britain, is it?
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:03 PMFor the purposes of this thread, we’re talking about the UK and Britishness. (please!)
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:08 PMOur position within the Union allows BBC weather forecasts to project slightly further West. Thus allowing Brits to see both the rain that will be as well as the rain that is and has been.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:16 PMThey see us all as Irish, a drain on the economy and a political annoyance.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:22 PMTo help Gordon, would anyone of a unionist persuasion like to update the below to include Northern Ireland*…
‘In recognition of this, 10 years ago we embarked on devolution - ensuring that the smaller nations that are part of the UK have more control over their own affairs. Devolution simply acknowledges the dual identities: Welsh and British, Scottish and British [ ] too.’
*Although I can guess the answer, the one certainly not correct is ‘British and British’. :)
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:25 PMI do have to laugh. Over two hundred years after the Act of Union and finally we have unionists like Alex Kane saying “If the Union is to survive then we have to prove that it is a Union of benefit to everyone”.
Of course none of this caring for everyone mularkey was necessary when the Union could survive on the power of Ulster unionism alone.
The time is fast approaching where this will be no longer the case so what happens - the time of universal caring arrives to Northern Ireland.
I suppose this new caring is better late than never.
All that remains is to wish Alex and his fellow travellers good luck with convincing the rump Irish left in the Union that the last 207 years was a socio-economic-political-philosophical-intellectual-historical wonderland rather than a political arrangement that brought mass famine, grinding poverty, military conflict, economic stagnation, pogroms, low-level civil war, social dysfunction and wholesale discrimination.
Seems like a hard sell to me.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:25 PMLet’s see. The Equality Commission is to produce a report on the brain drain and there may be proof that our brightest bunch, across the board, has left to power up UK economic growth.
If it is the case it proves that our education system in certain parts has provided the UK with immeasurable benefits that if not part of the UK system could have been divested into the Republic.
Of course many will argue that is possible anyway but without such membership the likelihood is that there would be more drive to invigorate Ireland rather than a rush to London-centric employment prospects.
The problem with Northern Ireland is that, yes we are viewed as Irish by some but more so to do with the political set up here which remains without local agreement on modern citizenship. Perhaps a cosmopolitan form of citizenship would be attractive but that is something beyond the reach of little Englanders and something left for our local politicians to work out. It is still deadlock at the moment. No wonder Brown is leaving us alone.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:32 PMIt’s okay, mention was made in the comments section…
‘OK Gordon we have all read your piece, how about holding an independence referendum in each country, Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Island to prove your point?’
:)
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:33 PMI think that in typical New Labour fashion, Gordon Brown doesn’t want to upset Sinn Fein PIRA i.e. remind the ‘troops’ that they are still part of the UK after their terrorist campaign of murder. But why are the DUP so quiet about it all? Did they ask that Northern Ireland be included in the consultation? If so, they didn’t ask very loudly. Or perhaps they also don’t want to upset the Sinn Fein PIRA death squad members now in Government.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 02:49 PMPresumably he doesn’t mention the North because it may not play too well in certain parts when discussing the introduction of ‘British day’ [snigger] or Oaths of Loyalty. Or more likely, he couldn’t give a toss what anyone here thinks. Does anyone actually believe that if a UI happened tomorrow it would cause any ‘The Union is doomed’ handwringing and hysterical editorials such as the SNP’s recent success in Scotland has produced?
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:01 PMthe unionists got their opportunity to be british and failed. instead of developing a pluralist democracy in partitioned ireland the unionists embraced a totalitarian one-party rule (i won’t use the f. word)and ejected the elements of the government of ireland act they didn’t like and in so doing ensured that the short term expedient of partition would become a long term liability to the british. any wonder the british find them a tad embarrassing, eh what old chap............
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:08 PM“no retreat into 19th century nationalism”
“Shared values” the key to a modern Union
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:19 PMAs an Englishman I find unionists from Northern Ireland quiet strange and certainly an embarrasment. Not allowing Catholic school children access to school is something that I certainly would never want to see here in Britain. Stay on your own island please.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:25 PMThe Governance of Britain [pdf file]
“48. The Government will consult on the proposed Civil Service legislation with the Scottish Executive and Welsh Assembly Government. The Northern Ireland Civil Service is a separate service.”
“In Scotland,Wales and Northern Ireland devolution has put power closer to the people and the Government has now created Regional Ministers in England. Proposals for regional select committees seek the same aim.”
“199. These issues are of great importance and the Government believes it is right that they should be discussed widely. An inclusive debate is fundamental to restoring trust in politics and for ensuring that the values of this and future generations are reflected in the constitution and fabric of British politics and society. The debate will allow people throughout England,Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to have a direct voice in the way our values are articulated.”
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:30 PM“*Although I can guess the answer, the one certainly not correct is ‘British and British’. :)”
spot on smcgiff. there is alot of work for unionist leaders to correct some unionists idea that they arent Irish. dont know about you but i find it really embarrassing in a social situation when someone from a unionist background says something about not being Irish or talking about “the Irish” as if its not them. the correct term would be Northern Irish and British. Irish and British would also be correct but wouldnt be as accurate as southerners would have more ownership of the term Irish. im thinking in relation to being specific, like saying the 12th of July is an Irish holiday. it is and it isnt. if you said that to a southerner they wouldnt like it. they’d say its not an irish holiday its a holiday ‘up the north’. to be correct you’d say its a Northern Irish holiday.
id say in general Irish is ok but most of the time Northern Irish would be best because its most accurate and avoids any confusion with the Republic.
to be fair i think most unionists are not in some denial world and are perfectly comfortable with Irish/Northern Irish. its only the oddballs that think they’re not Irish.on the other side. what do you think of all those people from Northern Ireland that think they’re from the Republic of Ireland? you know, the ones that think they’re not from the UK or in any way British or even Northern Irish? there also seems to be some that think that you cant be Irish and British, its one or the other. daft really.
the confusion over the term Irish occurs because its a nationality (for people from the ROI) but also the name for people from this island thats not specifying their nationality. its also the name for people from a region of the UK (whos nationality is British).
would you agree with all that?
ive found that in these conversations everyone gets it when its explained step by step. even then its still the source for many cringe worthy exchanges on this site. you know the ‘im not irish im british, or the im not british im irish’ stuff. twice the laugh over one issue :)
how do we reconcile the 2 extreme one sided views over this quite big issue? how do we get some people in NI comfortable with their Irishness and others comfortable with their Britishness? its just lucky we have all those politicians that are great social thinkers, leaders of the people, intellectual colossuses like ..... erm....umm...oh dear…
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:42 PMGordie has been brushing up on his Kipling obviously :)
East is East and West is West and ne’er the twain shall etc etc -well not unless they’re forced to because the tail keeps wanting to wag the dog to remind itself of it’s indispensable role .
We know a dog can survive without a tail but the reverse appears not to be the case
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:54 PMEranu, perhaps the two labels could be morphed into Briarish, the people of Briar, a right prickly lot.
“Though honey is sweet, do not lick it off a Briar”
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 03:59 PMBWMD,
Seriously you can have them back we won’t mind. They’re not that bad!! Seriously, take them back.
They’re good at many things - building ships, weaving linen......
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 04:02 PM“As an Englishman I find unionists from Northern Ireland quiet strange and certainly an embarrasment. Not allowing Catholic school children access to school is something that I certainly would never want to see here in Britain. Stay on your own island please. “
In England they were putting pedophies into primary schools quite deliberately. They are still stuffing schools with sex offenders.
In England the schools ban Sikhs by banning their bangle, and ban Poles by banning crucifixes, it is resource management,
cheap and horrid, but there you have it. Once confined to anglo-saxon schools with pretensions, now used by a more democratic constituency.
It is that immigration thing, howevre some have added Sikhs, and whay have you.
Catronia Ruane is a Blairite, she is up to the same kind of thing. However, the Holy Cross thing may bite her in the ass before she is in post very much longer.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 04:27 PM‘what do you think of all those people from Northern Ireland that think they’re from the Republic of Ireland? you know, the ones that think they’re not from the UK or in any way British or even Northern Irish? there also seems to be some that think that you cant be Irish and British, its one or the other. daft really.
the confusion over the term Irish occurs because its a nationality (for people from the ROI) but also the name for people from this island thats not specifying their nationality. its also the name for people from a region of the UK (whos nationality is British).
would you agree with all that?
I never got the impression that anyone from Northern Ireland thought they were from the Republic of Ireland. As far as I can see people there can appreciate that NI is part of the UK duristiction. When northern nationalists say they are Irish not British they are probably alluding to the fact that they are from Ireland and not from Britain as one island apart from another (hard to argue with this).
They would say and people from the south would generally concur that although their (political) circumstance is at variance, their identity, something completely seperate from their political status is identical to those in the south. That identity is known widely as Irishness.
Unionists prefer to regard the Republic as foreign (like Hungary or Bulgaria) while insisting that northern nationalists along with unionists, are really more accurately described as British even if they were not born in Britain or possibly in some cases had never even been there.
There are two borders in Ireland, one is the physical one that represents political boundaries and seperates northern unionists and northern nationalists from southern nationalists. The other border is the psychological one seperating northern unionists from northern nationalists and southern nationalists.
N. nats may find it difficult to persuade unionists to join them in rubbing out the former border but I must say I don’t envy you in your task of persuading them to cross into your side of the latter one, especially as they will be vigourously reminded to leave the Bulgarians on the opposite bank following a tearful goodbye.
Be advised however that the compulsary Britishness that is firmly attatched (and I wonder indicative of?) Northern Irishness may not be conducive to success.Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 04:35 PM>>“48. The Government will consult on the proposed Civil Service legislation with the Scottish Executive and Welsh Assembly Government. The Northern Ireland Civil Service is a separate service.”<<
Lol Nevin! A classic case of in theory not in practice. I know for a fact that the London picked Scottish civil service has had to eat keek on more than one occasion by not being consulted or even informed politely regarding UK wide legislation that would come into effect in Scotland. With London Nu-Labour now no longer running Scotland I’d reckon things have changed somewhat. Although for the time being the Scottish civil service is still recruited by a commissioner appointed in London.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 05:20 PMEnough already.
We have had this silly argument too many times.
I consider myself to be Irish. That’s enough for me.
If I wanted to be churlish and pedantic, I could insist that everyone on this part of the island is Irish, or, at least, Northern Irish. And what would that gain me? Some sort of perverse pleasure that I irritated some of my fellow citizens who consider themselves to be British?
Bah humbug.Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 05:58 PMeranu - “there is alot of work for unionist leaders to correct some unionists idea that they arent Irish.”
There is also a lot of work that needs to be done by Pan-Nationalists. According to some of the racist people who post on Slugger, Unionists are foreigners who need to go back to the mainland!
Sinn Fein Oath: “these Protestant robbers and brutes, these unbelievers of our faith, will be driven into the sea, by fire, the knife or by poison cup until we of the Catholic faith and avowed defenders of the Sinn Fein action and Principles, clear these Heretics from our lands.”
AOH Oath: “I will aid and assist with all my might and strength when called upon to massacre Protestants and cut away heretics, burn British churches, abolish Protestant Kings and Princes, and all others except the Church of Rome and this system. And by virtue of this oath I have taken, I will think it no sin to kill a Protestant whenever the opportunity serves”
Charming stuff. When Sinn Fein PIRA talk about cherishing all the children of the nation ... they mean ... except those ‘heretics’.
eranu - “Northern Irish would be best because its most accurate and avoids any confusion with the Republic.”
The problem is the ownership of the term “Irish”. The Republic of Ireland styles itself as ‘Ireland’ as if it owns the whole island. That’s where the problem lies. Otherwise Unionists wouldn’t have a problem with the Irish tag in a British context. You only have to look at organisations such as the Irish Football Association to see that. You’re right that Northern Irish avoids confusion with the Republic.
eranu - “what do you think of all those people from Northern Ireland that think they’re from the Republic of Ireland?”
It’s the politics of denial. Just because some people choose to have a Republic of Ireland passport, they believe that must mean they live there! Sinn Fein PIRA doesn’t help the situation with their game of ... don’t mention the country i.e. Northern Ireland. In the world of Sinn Fein PIRA speak, apparently if you don’t mention it, it means that it doesn’t exist.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 06:06 PMI’m an “ex-pat” Northern Ireland RC now living in England. Couple of quick thoughts (there is a limit to how much time I can spend on Slugger without getting a headache):
1. To NI unionists who have exclusively described themselves as British - everyone from NI is regarded as Irish over here (no surprise there). However, I think it has been a mistake for NI unionists to underplay their “Irishness” or “Northern Irishness” or “Ulsterness” - British as an identify is of limited use, particularly in these days of rising nationalism (English, Scots, etc) - and NI is distinct from England and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
2. To “Bored with my day” - I’ve lived in England for many years, married an English girl and have English kids - I love my new home country but I have experienced/seen racism from English people that is embarrassing for a so-called civilised country. As far your “stay on your own island” comment - there are a lot of people who attribute the problems in NI to the fact that the English didn’t stay on their own island.
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 06:20 PMBorn and bred in Northern Ireland, I’m happy to be regarded as an Irishman. I also have a British passport. I’m happy with that too. What does that make me? (You can be rude if you like)
Posted by on Mar 25, 2008 @ 06:32 PM
