Thursday, June 22, 2006
“politically, strategically and electorally reckless”
David Ervine’s attempt to answer his critics over the UUP’s Faustian pact is still online for now [but if you want to read it for free be quick - Ed] It’s more ill-tempered fingerpointing than answers though, which is why I didn’t note it previously, but it has prompted a response from Alex Kane in today’s paper in which he raises some other questions of not just David Ervine but the UUP leader Reg Empey too
Why, Mr Ervine (Sir Reg, too, for that matter), do you think that the UUP’s grassroots would welcome an institutional link between their party and any, let alone the most vicious, of these paramilitary groups?
And with a UUP executive meeting scheduled for Friday criticises directly the chosen strategy of Reg Empey:
I would have had far fewer problems with a process which might have culminated in closer ties with the PUP and the wider loyalist community; but a process which begins by establishing a formal connection between the UUP and a still active terrorist group, strikes me as politically, strategically and electorally reckless.
Even if the UVF mounted some sort of decommissioning PR stunt on July 1, it doesn’t make the UUP’s position any stronger, for we would still have to wait for years before there was enough hard evidence to suggest that the UVF was a relic from the past.
And the longer the wait (involving the usual hiccoughs and “unsanctioned” activities), the more ongoing and knock-on damage there will be to the UUP.
So no, Mr Ervine, you haven’t answered this particular critic. I can see no benefits to your membership of the Ulster Unionist Assembly Group and - apart from the increasingly nebulous prospect of a hypothetical seat in a hypothetical Executive - you haven’t actually outlined any other benefits yourself.
Pete Baker @ 12:35 PM
The whole thing is hideous. Most hideous of all is the “bring them in from the cold” line. Hume was condemned 12 years ago for a similar line. At least with him it was a genuine rationale.
Who is being brought in from the cold? The single political representative of an organised crime outfit. Are the communities that they terrorise ever to be brought in from the cold or is their fear the acceptable price to be paid to make sure that Sinn Fein doesn’t get the ministry of arts, culture and leisure?
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 09:48 PMWhat do nationalists or republicans think about Alex and many other Slugger unionists when they state their principled opposition to Ervine’s alliance with the UUP?
Does it not demonstrate that the reason they are so hostile to the IRA is because they are hostile to paramilitarism per se? Some nationalists appear to believe that unionist opposition to the IRA is based entirely on sectarianism - and for some it is - but the attitude of Kane and other unionists here suggest other reasons, that go across the board.
Posted by on Jun 22, 2006 @ 10:21 PMGonzo: “What do nationalists or republicans think about Alex and many other Slugger unionists when they state their principled opposition to Ervine’s alliance with the UUP? “
Not a whole lot, in the sense that A) the UUP/PUP deal was somewhere between a publicity stunt and a desperate cry for attention. Opposing it—putting what was a legitimate, principled party straight into bed with the front-man of an active terrorist group—comes pretty natural. On the down side, kill off the UUP and we’re left with DUP and some also-rans for the Unionist vote, which means gridlock until either Big Ian joins the choir invisible or the ROI and UK get tired of this farce.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 02:04 AMTurbo Paul
“A true middle class, white collar, conservative, elitist, opinion if ever there was one, demonstrated by the watchman.”
Don’t be so quick to make assumptions. My family on both sides came from working class Belfast. If you think I am scathing about the loyalist paramilitaries, you should hear one of my relatives who lives 2 doors down from a UDA honcho in a loyalist estate.
My family was also been subjected to loyalist racketeering when it operated a business and provided much needed jobs in loyalist areas, so don’t you dare come on here to lecture me. There isn’t a single social problem that the paramilitary lowlife will not make worse.
“The negociations needed to convince the UDA/UVF to renounce criminality can only be achieved by someone who can speak on equal terms, rather than try a patronising approach, which would be doomed to failure.”
Exactly how do you persuade people to give up criminality if it means that their income goes through the floor? Any suggestions?
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 07:44 AMwell folks, it’s yet another opportunity for those still interested in picking over the corpse of Ulster Unionism to see the foot in mouth brigade at this afternoon’s executive, so.....
LET’S GET READY TO [G]RUMBLE!!!!!!
BTW paranoia stalks Cunningplan House like Ken Maginnis before he’s had his lunch-all grumpy and aggressive. In spite of the assurance from Alex elsewhere that he wasn’t going to jump, there’s still nervousness- and now the typing pool are being briefed that another party officer who has been hitherto atypically bashful is set to threaten to resign if the outcome of this afternoon’s meeting is another fudge over financial queries.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 08:24 AMDarth
“now the typing pool are being briefed that another party officer who has been hitherto atypically bashful is set to threaten to resign”
Basil McCrea,
Basil McCrea,
what can I say?,
It’s Basil McCrea!!!Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 08:30 AMAn outstanding article, Alex.
But as a member of the UUP I certainly don’t want the DUP’s inconsistencies and hypocrisy to be used as the yardstick against which the UUP measures its own policies and strategies.
This line in particular strikes me as obvious, but seems to have been missed by too many of your party colleagues.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 09:00 AMGonzo
Care to name these “other Unionists”?
I can’t think of a single one that has come out as principled as Mr Kane and remained in the party.
(For all Sylvia’s rantings, what has she actually done and said as the party’s most senior elected representative to end this nonsense? As she herself would say, she’s had five weeks and nothing’s happened...!)
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 09:03 AMAlex
Say it again and keep saying it there is no room in the UUP for terrorists or anyone who supports them.
Reg Empey must go for this disastrous error of judgement.
The UUP is being run by amateurs who seem to have little idea about finances, policies or even what their electorate (or what is left of it) thinks. Surely within their councillors or grassroot ranks there is better available.
There may not be much to chose from in this group of elected MLA’s few of whom can carry on a reasoned debate, but RE is not the one to go forward with.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 09:08 AMIJP
“Care to name these “other Unionists”?”
Loyalist, The Watchman, Karl Rove.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 10:15 AM“Basil McCrea,
Basil McCrea,
what can I say?,
It’s Basil McCrea”Well it ain’t Reg, that’s for sure!
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 10:47 AMAh yes, the urgent and pressing matter of Basil McCrea and scansion. Last properly addressed here, I think.
Whatever did become of so many of those well loved Slugger ‘characters’ (’the Tools’, as they’re affectionately known) who used to populate UU threads before the fall, er flood, er, general election? Did I really imagine them all? Was David Archer only a dream? Has this last year merely been the UUP’s ‘Bobby steps out of the shower’ moment after all? So many questions, so few beers, er, tears.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 02:21 PMCorrection to my post addressed to IJP. Apologies, I didn’t realise you were asking for examples of UUP members who have behaved with as much principle as Alex Kane - like looking for hen’s teeth I’m afraid.
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 02:37 PMWatchman, I am not saying give up criminality, I am saying if those criminals want to continue to committ crime, they do so as other conventional criminals do, no hiding behind a political affiliation.
If they refuse to leave the UDA/UVF etc, then the organisations are disbanded or those who are not involved in crime must take back their organisations.
If you are right and the UDA/UVF have only criminals as members, then they must be refered to as other criminal gangs, such as the mafia in America.
So lets never refer to the UDA/UVF/ as political parties, rather as criminal gangsters.
Then if David Ervine wants to still be accociated with them, he will be exposed for being a Gangster in a suit.
However, I must add that just because David Ervine has not yet achieved a peace deal and end to criminality, it does not mean we should not keep trying.
If this was the attitude then the PIRA would not have been coaxed into taking the actions it has.
Surely the motto has to be: if at first you don’t succeed then try try try again.
As for the UUP/DUP not wanting anyone accociated with terrorism allowed into the peace process, I find this a bit like “Those who lived in Glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”
I am certain that all the leaderships of UUP/DUP during the conflict knew of terror acts and murders, its just they did not get caught.
The scene of Ian Paisley and David Trimble parading down the streets of Belfast arm in arm some years ago, in a colonial, triumphant manner was an incitement to to cause terror if ever there was one.
The blood of those killed are on the hands of all involved, including the current leaders of UUP/DUP/UDA/UVF/Sinn Fein, PIRA/RIRA/CIRA, Brit govt, Irish Govt,
So enough of this “holier than thou” attitude from current mainstream leaders on all sides, you are all as bad as each other , and you all enjoy a privilaged lifestyle to the detrement of the people.
I say sack the whole bloody lot, all of them are rotten to the core, and start again with new younger leaders for all the parties.
While we are on the subject, has anyone ever wondered if the English want the Unionists as fellow countrymen??
Rather than waiting for the Unionists to vote to leave the Union, why can’t the English have a vote on whether they want the Unionists to remain???
The vast majority of English people regard Northern Ireland as a £1.5 Billion a year “Stone in their shoe”
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 06:06 PMExcuse my ignorance. Who is Basil McCrea?
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 06:11 PMany word on how the UUP meeting went today?
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 07:36 PMWhat the ....! Unionists have supported every dirty trick by a succession of rogue British governments including torture, murder and extortion of their own fellow citizens and elected at least twice the most bigoted rightwing leader with the shadowiest past available to them, and now they want to pretend that they have clean hands.
No wonder the Brits are in the process of disowning you. They have destroyed their own legal system and any respect there was in Europe for the Common Law in order to defend you and still you hide behind a veneer of Victorian hypocrisy while demanding a return to the failed oppression of the past.
Embrace the GFA, beg Sinn Fein to give you one more chance at powersharing, and pray that the rest of the world continues to give you a fool’s pardon. One more parliament and your show’s over!
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 07:57 PMHi Loyalist,
No apology necessary - you basically made my point very effectively for me!
Posted by on Jun 23, 2006 @ 10:27 PM
