Monday, December 03, 2007
Sinn Féin MLA resigns from party
Sinn Féin MLA for Fermanagh & South Tyrone, Gerry McHugh, has resigned from the party although from what I can gather he intends to remain in the Assembly as an independent MLA. I’ll add his own statement on his reasons for resigning when available but, for now, here’s the party’s version of events from Sinn Féin Assembly Group Leader John O’Dowd. Adds From the Irish News [subs req]
Update The Assembly biog of Gerry McHugh now notes his Independent status.“I have been increasingly disillusioned with the totally undemocratic nature of the party and the wholly top-down dictation within it,” Mr McHugh said. “I feel the direction Sinn Féin is taking is more about appeasement of the British government and administrating British rule in Ireland rather than working towards the end of British occupation. Assembly structures support this - at both committee and plenary level unionists have majority control. What was agreed at St Andrews cannot be delivered without unionist approval.”
Also from the Irish News report
“In the new year I will hold a series of public meetings to give people the chance to discuss the issues which are a priority for them and I will be inviting like-minded people to join me,” he said.
“I want to assure the electorate that I will continue to work hard for them both nationally and locally.”
Mr McHugh said Sinn Féin’s decision to endorse policing in the north was a “factor” in his decision.
“I have no difficulties with the idea of civil policing but I have a difficulty with the excessive amounts of MI5 and military spooks operating in the six counties,” he said.
......
“The fact that the PSNI is being used by MI5 for political policing here should be a major concern for everybody here,” he said.
Mr McHugh said he could use his independent status to further republicanism.
“I think I can bring forward the political republican agenda and fellow republicans as an independent and not be constrained by difficulties we have in the assembly with parties trying to appease each other, he said.
Pete Baker @ 11:07 AM
Kensei,
What’s the alternative? How can there be an alternative to a plan when there doesn’t seem to be any plan in the first place? Don’t let dogma get in the way of strategy they were told and now there doesn’t appear to be either.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 02:39 PMundemocratic nature of the party
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 02:40 PMcrisis,
you said sf signed up to an indefinate (again a word a detest) northern ireland. which is untrue. sf under the gfa are in constant pursuit of a 32 republic. and fyi i used to be a supporter of sf, but not anymore.the way you worded that statement it came acoss as sinn fein had accepted the foreign rule in the north.
yes they accepted policing, by the ruc/psni, but its called compromise to get things moving forward. the same way the free staters compromised over the partition, in order to achieve their republic and a republic for all irish people they needed a foothold. and by god, we are nearly there.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 02:46 PMFrames DC, by the word ‘indefinite’, I mean ‘no definite timeframe.’ Northern Ireland will remain part of the UK until a majority of it’s population decide otherwise through a ‘border poll.’ The fact that SF aren’t even suggesting, never mind demanding a border poll, is proof that the UI option would be heavily rejected. Therefore the period of future partition is indefinite.
‘in order to achieve their republic and a republic for all irish people they needed a foothold. and by god, we are nearly there.’
Frames you may no longer be a SF supporter, but you could certainly merit a place in their spin department.
The original goals of PIRA were British withdrawal, a United Ireland and a 32 County Socialist Republic. In all three of these aims they have, by any standards, failed miserably.
A UI may or may not happen sometime in the future, but to say we are ‘nearly there’ is mere self-delusion.Incidentally if you no longer support SF, which strategy do you advocate to achieve your goal of a UI?
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:01 PMIntegrity demanded that McHugh resign from Sinn Féin if he felt that the party now conflicted with his principles and we must applaud him for so exercising his integrity.
He was elected, however, on the basis of his former adherence to Sinn Féin and it’s programme and if he has now abandoned that programme and loyalty to that party integrity now demands that he resign his seat and offer his newfound principles to the electorate. His failure to so do calls that integrity into question.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:11 PMok firstly.
we are not nearly there? is that what you said?ok lets look at that for amoment shall we,
since 1916 lets look at the timeline shall we
we went from 32 county british rule ireland, to a free state of 26 counties that “pledged allegience to the crown” to a 26 county republic. now we are looking at a self ruling government for the 6 counties.more or less like a free state.
you see i like patterns, cause they always repeat themselves.
in regards to my policy to achieve a 32 county republic, i would take it back county by county if i had to. but im not a politician or a soldier, so what i would do is irrelevent.
i am from the republic, but i had the good fortune to grow up in derry, and i know that if it was put to a vote in the “south” ui would be a foregone conclusion.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:14 PMFrank Sinistra,
You are correct and I, at least, am confident that a start has been made by this group in particular, what do you think?
Kensei asks the question ‘whats the alternative?’ but I suspect its not a genuine request. I don’t think you are looking for an alternative ken, just merely using that line to swat down opposition.
But a start has been made by a group. Albeit a humble one, a statement which they would wholeheartedly agree with, but it has been made.
They are attmepting to build an alternative from the bottom up in a more democratic and transparent fashion. They are calling on anyone who can help them to bring this about to do so now.
This is good enough for me and may indeed may be good enough for others, but no doubt anything which can’t be wheeled out having been pre-drafted by leaderships (without grass roots input)will not be good enough for you.
Just you stay where you are aul son.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:19 PMA UI is probably inevitable, although it will likely be in the context of a more inclusive Europe.
The only question is “When?”.
If you had asked me 10 years ago, I would have said “In 30 years time”.
If you ask me today, I will probably say “In 30 years time”.
If you ask me in 10 years time, I will probably say “In 30 years time”.Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:20 PMNow, I don’t want to intrude on private grief but some thing cannot be let slip-
“...we are looking at a self ruling government for the 6 counties. More or less like a free state”
Devolution is nothing like a “free state”. Westminster remains sovereign in all matters even those currently devolved. What you have is less a free state more an old style Stormont with nationalist collaboration.
Enjoy.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:23 PMyes bonarlaw i agree, but the free state was stll answerable to london.
cheers buddy
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:25 PMFrames: ‘now we are looking at a self ruling government for the 6 counties.more or less like a free state.’
Frames we are actually looking at a regional assembly, which is actually nothing like a free state.
‘i would take it back county by county if i had to.’
There is not and never has been a mechanism to put such a scenario into place. From it’s outset, NI was a six-county entity—either all of it voted itself out or none of it did.
‘I know that if it was put to a vote in the “south” ui would be a foregone conclusion.’
I would fully agree Frames, and would go even further—a similar vote in mainland Britain would produce a similar result. But the reality is that the people of NI are the ones who will decide, a principle which is upheld by both the British and Irish govts.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:28 PMBL
how very true.
And just like Stormont mk 1 the lack of political talent, guarantee of power for certain parties and the absence of effective opposition are forcefully reminding us why we were well rid of it first time roundPosted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:29 PMnow crisis, have you got your jam jars on?
what i said, was that it was “more or less the same”
also i said i would take it back county by county.
but i also said that i am not a politician or a soldier so what i thinkdoes not matter.Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:31 PMa guy i know from the north, he is a cop, and he once told me that if a ui happened he would move to scotland. is that the general feeling among unionists?
curious…
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:36 PM6 months into the DUP/SF lead assembly and already we see wide spread splintering of the republican movement.
Every year that goes by, with the dream of a UI becoming further and further away, the republican movement will splinter even more.
In 5, 10 or even 20 years time, NI will still be part of the UK, and SF will have moved on to become some sort of middle ground - Ulster/Nationalist party, happy to be in government in a NI, within the UK.
Remember, 85 years on from the setting up of the Irish Free State, none of the modern ROI parties are talking about a UI, they are very happy to run their own little country, within the greater EU.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:40 PMFor what’s its worth my great theory is that increasing republican involvement in Goverment will lead to a widespread re-evaluation amongst the Unionist community of the relevant merits of a UI cf.the real potential of a Sinn Fein led Assembly.
On topic interesting that democratic centralism (very well suited to warlike conditions) perhaps not the best structure in peace.Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:42 PMframes dc
“but the free state was stll answerable to london”
no, not after the Statute of Westminster.
Try Google, buddy.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:42 PMthe fs had control of economy customs etc, but it still pledged allegience to london/uk. you try google mo chara!
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:44 PMFrames: And what both BL and myself replied, entirely independently was that it was ‘nothing like a Free State’, which it isn’t. If you were expecting otherwise, you’ve been sold a pup.
‘he once told me that if a ui happened he would move to scotland. is that the general feeling among unionists?’
It would depend entirely on individual circumstances Frames. Personally I don’t expect to see it happen.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:45 PMRedhaze,
I’m biased. I threw my lot in with éirígí a while back. The participative, considered and honest approach to where Republicanism is, where we want it and how we go about getting there is a breath of fresh air. Success isn’t guaranteed and it may be a long time before there is anything substantial to show for the effort put in (if ever) but it’s a growing and honestly Republican and Socialist project, it beats sitting by the fireside moaning and for all the shouts of ‘what’s your alternative’ its a simple answer of; we’re working on creating it, don’t have all the answers and probably never will but we are working on it.So what’s the alternative? The alternative is building the alternative, from the bottom up, brick by brick with likeminded committed and capable comrades.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:46 PMKen, fair enough comment on the issue of the seat and I take no umbrage at that, on the issue of an alternative I fully agree with you that there presently is no alternative strategy to delivering the Republic, note I do not use the term UI, than the current SF one. However, and it gives me no pleasure to say this, I do not believe the current SF strategy will bring us any closer to the Republic than the current/previous strategy adopted by Fianna Fail. My problem is that there is no longer any sense of open debate or discussion on this within SF and indeed those who express any views contrary to the line are sidelined and eventually end up leaving. The party is now being run and administered in much the same way the army was and this is further damaging the ability of the movement as a whole to deliver. In many ways, I believe this in itself, probably means that it will not be SF that bring us to the republic, but some other social, revolutionary or political movement. I believe there are many republicans out there searching for an alternative (in no way do I mean or advocate armed struggle) and all republicans should be exploring alternatives and driving them on where the opportunity arises. I wish SF would become the catalyst for this, but I sense that after 30 years the die is cast, they have given it their best shot but unfortunately their day is done.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:50 PMlook at the similarities, is what i was saying! what i said was that the fs held sway with customs exise economy etc. but still pledged allegience to the throne, are we agreed?
the present ni gov, has sway in most of the above with the exception of customs i think. and i emphasise i think!! and yet allegience to london is there. are we agreed?
in both scenarios they are similar. are we agreed?
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:50 PMSounds good Frank.
You are in eirigi? Are from the North or South?
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:52 PM“Remember this — that somewhere and somehow, and by somebody, a beginning must be made.
Alternatives take time and effort but a start has been made. “
So, to add to the fact that 30 years of complete failure of violence isn’t enough to disprove anything, 80 years of the complete failure of state socialism to outstrip Capitalist economies followed by collapse is also another huge blind spot.
I would be quite left wing but it is fairly clear that 1. Communism has never been desired by a mass of the Irish people 2. Communists parties in Ireland have never got near power 3. This one won’t either and will basically, get nothing done. Meaning it’s a complete waste of time.
Ireland badly, badly needs a modern left wing alternative, but that is one that needs to espouse policies closer to that of Scandinavia - social democratic, mixed economy, rather than pissing effort up the wall arguing for Communism. My problem with SF isn’t they’ve abandoned such rhetoric, just they haven’t put a modern alternative in place and wind up with ad hoc and incoherent policy.
This isn’t an alternative, because there is nothing there in the first instance. Even if they manage to stitch something together, it still won’t be an alternative. It’s a dead end.
Red
“Kensei asks the question ‘whats the alternative?’ but I suspect its not a genuine request. I don’t think you are looking for an alternative ken, just merely using that line to swat down opposition.”
Nope, I would like an alternative. I have no ties to SF whatsoever. It would help if that alternative is achievable and reality based.
Bonar
Westminster overruling any of the devolved administrations in devolved matter would provoke a Constitutional crisis that would engulf the Union fairly rapidly; not even Unionism would be pleased about it. So let’s leave that one out.
Of course, Westminster still rules in a number of other ways and the North is in no way equal to the South. But then, praising the fact your tax rate is set for the South of England is a somewhat pyrrhic victory, no?
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:53 PMWell said saveus.
Some encouraging posts here. Far from being labelled as backward the alternative republican opinion on here is quite measured and mature.
Watch out Ken, this alternative may come quicker than you thought, then you’ll have to think up a new question.
Come on smile Kensei for gods sake.
Posted by on Dec 03, 2007 @ 03:56 PM
