Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Rhonda’s discrimination case looms- against Papa’s party
The party has always had a somewhat fractious relationship with women- as the treatment meted out to Women’s Coalition members in the 1996 Forum illustrated. But the fact that the leading family in the party has decided to wash its dirty linen so publicly must be an embarassment to the party heirarchy, including, of course, Rhonda’s father and brother.
The full hearing is due next year, with both sides given until December 22 to finalise preparations for hearing.
Chris Donnelly @ 07:32 PM
It would be inconceivable that this sort of thing would happen in Sinn Fein, LOL!
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 08:52 PMAnyone else hear the sound of scraping
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 09:08 PMSex, not ‘gender’.
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 09:32 PMWhat has the DUP’s attitude to the Woman’s coalition got to do with their attitude to women in gereral. I know lots of women who were deeply embarassed by the WC.
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 09:39 PMBertie
Many of the comments attributed to DUP spokesperson’s during the many heated debates in the old Co-Op building were blatantly sexist. Now if you can’t see the relevancy of that point, I suggest you take the blinkers off.
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 09:53 PMTaking from what you linked to I can’t see much evidence
“Ms McWilliams muses on which was the worst insult hurled at her or her colleagues. There have been so many of them. “Whingeing”, “whining”, “silly”, “feckless” women, she and her party colleague on the Northern Forum, Pearl Sagar, have been regularly called in the Forum chamber.
“Moo,” said Ian Paisley jnr, “moo, moo, moo,” when Ms McWilliams was trying to speak about the BSE crisis. “Thank God only 7,000 idiots voted for these women,” said Iris Robinson, wife of the DUP deputy leader Peter Robinson.”
The “Whingeing”, “whining”, “silly”, “feckless” are things that many women have said of them. Iris Robinson was not being sexist either. She was speaking from a sence of shame for her gender. calling Moo to anyone during a BSE debate isn’t conclusive either. I’ll give you the Willie Mc Crea comment. Hardly evidence of widescale abuse because they were women, rather because of their party.
I’ve not doubt that they considered these women idiots, but not because they were women.
If I was a young woman starting off in politics, it wouldn’t be the DUP, I’d be most worried about mysogony.
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 10:24 PMThe most interesting thing in this post is Monica McWilliams saying in her interview that she would ‘never shed her nationalism’. She has subsequently been appointed the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commissioner and this revelation has tainted my view of her position.
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 10:53 PMWhy can’t a nationalist be trusted with the Human Rights Commissioner post James? Why should republicans/nationalists have any confidence in a unionist the post? Wise up.
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 11:26 PMJames
How many high ranking civil servants in the NIO are in the Orange Order and/or the Masons?
Blair Wallace was ACC of the RUC and now a high ranking UUP member.
Bill Lowry was a commander in RUC special branch and now speaks at DUP funcions.
Jimmy Spratt was the spokeman for the RUC members for many years and then became a DUP election candidate.
Nobody asked the Catholic community if we were happy to place our trust in these people.
Monica McWilliams may well be a nationalist but she has not been accused to my knowledge of any kind of favouritism.
If you have a problem with a Catholic/Nationalist having this position - that’s too bad.
We have equality of opportunity here now. The only issue is whether people do their jobs efficiently and impartially. If they do, then their personal political views are no-one’s business.
Posted by on Nov 14, 2006 @ 11:46 PM“How many high ranking civil servants in the NIO are in the Orange Order and/or the Masons?”
Was your messsage posted from 1966?
“We have equality of opportunity here now.”
Not if you are a protestant or ‘other’ looking to join the PSNI you don’t.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 12:23 AMThe Catholics are forever whinging. Fair Deal is right. Things were much beter when Catholics knew their place. We only have to look at the abductions in Iraq to see where the slippery slope lies. Also, the DUP did not execute women as a matter of policy.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 12:50 AMFair_Deal
The PSNI quota is there for a reason.
Because we had a 98% Protestant RUC, 98% Protestant UDR and 100% Protestant B Specials (all of which were guilty of collusion with “loyalist” terrorists).
For years Unionists were happy to live with a Protestant police force defending “a Protestant Parliament for a Protestant people”. Now, they are reaping the harvest that they sowed.
The UK govt realised that the Unionists didn’t want a police service with a fair representation of Catholics as then it would have to serve BOTH sides of the community rather than just their side.
Unionists are slow to learn. The UK govt are belatedly trying to get an equal society here. If the Unionists won’t deal with Nationalists in a constructive manner - then the UK govt will simply force these measures through - as with the PSNI quota.
Let’s face it, the UK govt foots the bill for NI.
Unionists can whinge about things but they can’t change anything. You can accept that life has changed and Catholics are no longer second class citizens or you can leave.Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 01:28 AMWhat relevance does the PSNI, Monica McWilliams etc have to the very weird fact that Ian Paisley’s daughter is taking her father’s party to court over alleged sexual discrimination? (other than deflection)
A very strange case. I have no idea why Ms Paisley feels she has more merit than the other candidates. What has she done to merit the role of policy officer? Or is she just saying they let my brother have a job with no track record so it’s discrimination if she doesn’t get one?
Why is Mrs Paisley a member of the Lords? On what grounds? Have the female Paisley’s like the female Dodds’ and Robinson’s not been given enough opportunity over substance or track record already? Is Rhonda complaining she hasn’t had the same unfair advantage as other female relative’s of DUP leadership or saying she merits the role?
I look forward to her proving her worth.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 02:34 AMBilly
“The PSNI quota is there for a reason. “
There is no excuse for discrimination on the basis of religon in a police force.
“For years Unionists were happy to live with a Protestant police force defending “a Protestant Parliament for a Protestant people”. Now, they are reaping the harvest that they sowed. “
When was this? There are very few unionits that I know of, i.e. none, who considered that the police were there for just them or who did not want more RCs in the RUC, (based on merit alone) and were not full of admiration for thoise who did join, knowing what additional risks they faced.
“The UK govt realised that the Unionists didn’t want a police service with a fair representation of Catholics as then it would have to serve BOTH sides of the community rather than just their side. “
A very ugly dispay of prejudice and untrue.
“The UK govt are belatedly trying to get an equal society here”
You don’t do that with discrimination. Between the two of us, one is quite happy with religious dicrimination and it ain’t the unionist.
m
“A very strange case. I have no idea why Ms Paisley feels she has more merit than the other candidates. What has she done to merit the role of policy officer?”
Well if you’ve no idea why are you infering that she hasn’t more merit?
“Why is Mrs Paisley a member of the Lords?”
Because she was her Party’s nomination. That is how most of the Party Peers got there.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 04:26 AMBilly get yer stats right, RUC 98% Prod, no sirree. 92% maybe.......stats matter in this country, we are forever going on about them.
Chris Donnelly..well you tried your best with this thread, god loves someone who tries. I wish you well in your next venture.
Its just a way of shifting money around the Paisley clan......
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 09:39 AMHopefully Ms Paisleys case will be through out swiftly. She didn’t get the job simply because she was not the best candidate for the job, she was up against formidable competition.
Cases like this just make women look ridiculous, if you are not the best candidate for a job you shouldn’t get it regardless of whether you are male or female.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 10:02 AMBilly
A reason for removing equality of opportunity still means your claim of equality of opportunity is incorrect
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 10:06 AMThere is no excuse for discrimination on the basis of religon in a police force.
How do you get to the point where you have an overwhelmingly protestant force in that case? Discrimination on the basis of religion was fine when it favoured Unionists applying for jobs. Now that things have changed and the damage is slowly being undone discrimination is a problem.
The Catholics are forever whinging. Fair Deal is right. Things were much beter when Catholics knew their place.
A wee bit of news for you, those days are long gone, so in your feeble attempt at a wind up I would like for you to realise that you have only served to make me feel happy and smug about the fact that for you things are worse than they were, and are set to get worse still.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 10:45 AMWhy is Willie McCrea missing from the new sour-faces banner on the DUP website? That’s the real discrimination issue?
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 01:56 PMfair_deal: “A reason for removing equality of opprtunity still means your claim of eqaultiy of opportunity is incorrect “
Ah, but to correct past inequality, it appears to be a necessary tool. Equality of opportunity did not exist in NI, with an institutional favoritism toward Protestants. One cannot have a fair race after giving one party a headstart, f_d.
Funny how the shoe pinches when its on the other foot, eh?
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 02:37 PMDavid Simpson is also notably missing
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 03:26 PMPith
He wanted to pose with his guitar and the hierarchy said no…
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 04:25 PM“Cases like this just make women look ridiculous”
“I know lots of women who were deeply embarassed by the WC. “
Comments like the above would make a cat, irrespective of gender, laugh.
I read recently of fears that the popularity of blogging and quality of the comments therein were in danger of supplanting newspapers.
Erm...I don’t think so.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 04:28 PMYokel,
It is surely a victorious day for those fabled “enemies of Ulster” when the DUP won’t run a picture of Willie and his banjo. It’s time we had a breakaway Free DUP.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 04:50 PMFeel we are moving ever so slightly from the Rhonda debate.
Nevertheless I´ll put my two pennies worth.
Billy do you not think that more Catholics would of joined the RUC if it hadn´t been for Sinn Fein / IRA intimidation. Seems a trite unfair while Protestants where being murdered on a daily basis for carry out policing duties. Perhaps you think most Nationalists called their local community officer instead of the RUC.
I myself have always had trouble in respecting a POlice Force for other reasons...a nationalist work colleague once said to me that I hated the police because of what they represented, he said he was against them because they hated him for his religion. Two weeks after this conversation the same person noticed from the office window two people attempting to steal his car....well i´ve never seen anyone call the police as quick.
Anyway Rhonda, fair play to her.
Posted by on Nov 15, 2006 @ 05:10 PM
