Monday, June 26, 2006
the basis of a civilised society?
In yesterday’s Sunday Times, while reporting that Andre Shoukri had been moved from the UDA wing of Maghaberry prison, Liam Clarke made some of the same links between events I pointed to here on Wednesday, and noted some additional ones too.
From the Sunday Times report:
The UDA believes that £30m in British government funding to loyalist areas hinges on a peaceful outcome to the internal dispute.
There is also the potential of several million more being levered from Irish government and business sources by Martin McAleese, the Irish president’s husband.
This appears to be why the UDA cautiously isolated the Shoukris before removing them. The strategy was designed by Jackie McDonald, the UDA’s south Belfast brigadier, who is a friend of the McAleeses.
McDonald is known to have an astute political sense, while being a ruthless man. What sets him apart from the rest, and makes him the UDA’s effective leader, is his ability to build up favours and goodwill even among businessmen from whom he had extorted money.
“I won’t always be a brigadier, but I’ll always be Jackie McDonald,” he once said. “I’ll have to be able to live with people without looking over my shoulder. Being a hard bastard won’t get you that.”
This pragmatic approach has won him real political influence with the Irish government and the McAleese family, to the point where he is sometimes referred to as “the Irish ambassador” by fellow loyalists.
The plan that McDonald has sold to the UDA is that the British government investment can be used to employ former UDA activists and released prisoners as community workers. It would be a way out of criminality for those who want one.
It’s a sequence of events that some would no doubt suggest was a pragmatic approach, but for those who would argue, as the late Mgr Denis Faul did in this interview, on the topic of those communities and the control exerted by paramilitary groups..
“Either there is law or no law. That is the basis of a civilised society”
..there are other reasons to question the governments approach.
It reminded me of the question posed to the Secretary of State for Wales and Northern Ireland by the Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins, on the OTR Bill, before that particular Bill was withdrawn:
A political ethicist might see the “on-the-run” law as a political gesture in a higher cause. Individuals must often take second place to the collective good. Or ethics might ordain that such a law pollutes the integrity of the state. Why else were ministers so obviously queasy in the Commons. Were they nervous of reversing Eliot’s “greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason”? Were they doing the wrong deed for the right reason?
To which Peter Hain’s response was “In the cause of peace, our government has to take difficult decisions.”
Of course, subsequently the government was forced to change that particular decision..
No better time, I’d suggest, to remember those ethical questions, and to add another in light of Mick’s recent, if contested, question on who could replace the moral conscience Denis Faul represented…
Who will provide a moral conscience for the Secretary of State et al?
Pete Baker @ 03:31 PM
As well as having “an astute political sense” Jackie McDonald has had the common sense to build up around him a set of people consisting of not only the usual suspects and likely lads but strategists, thinkers and, dare I say it, progressive elements who understand the moral conundrum that the very existence of the UDA brings about. It makes for a fresh approach and achieves some startling results (in some areas at least). But the article plays too heavily on it’s assumption that any Government money will be used to “pay off” former prisoners or current members by giving them Community Worker employed status. This is not what is being sought and is not what the money would be spent on. Re-generation of areas through employment, housing renewal and community networking provision is what is required and, of course, some people would benefit by being gainfully employed. But automatic hand outs in return for the complete eradication of paramilitary criminality in a nonsense that the tabloid press want to dwell on. The cold hard facts are that the UDA will support all the positive aspects of funding initiatives because the UDA and it’s members are part and parcel of the community and, like the community it represents, genuinely wants to see our areas peaceful, devoid of the drug menace that has blighted so many of us and a future model that our young people can aspire to.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 05:32 PMloftholdingswood, would I be right in thinking that most paramilitaries have day jobs? Meaning that they personally don’t necessarily need a new job?
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 05:37 PMI could not put a percentage on it I’m afraid (it’s the type of statistic that even the Social Security Office would be hard pressed to work out) but I would imagine that employment levels are now quite high. Yet again it is press delusion to picture the typical member of any organisation as a BMW driving, coke snorting, gold chain wearing neanderthal. Though they do exist. The reality tends to be far more mundane and boring.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 05:45 PM“because the UDA and it’s members are part and parcel of the community and, like the community it represents, genuinely wants to see our areas peaceful, devoid of the drug menace that has blighted so many of us and a future model that our young people can aspire to”
Well done, the UDA has caught up with the rest of civilised society - about 35 years too late. In the meantime we’ve had to suffer violence, crime, intimidation and murder. So they’ll not be getting much praise from me for stopping what they shouldn’t have been doing in the first place.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 06:31 PMI don’t recall asking for praise. the article made some pertinent points and I clarified what is happening. As part of the civilised society you so love you will at least be glad that we are catching up, albeit not to your satisfaction.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 06:35 PMloftsholdingwood: “I don’t recall asking for praise. the article made some pertinent points and I clarified what is happening. As part of the civilised society you so love you will at least be glad that we are catching up, albeit not to your satisfaction. “
Assumes facts not *yet* in evidence, as there is many a slip between the cup and the lip. Mayhaps McDonald has the strength, endurance and vision to bring the UDA in off the ledge and maybe he doesn’t. That remains to be seen. Likewise, there are many other things that can go wrong between now and whenever he achieves this miracle. Just off the top of my head, the UVF / LVF feud heats up and, in the course of that stupidity, matters get put on hold. A worse scenario is that as Mr. McDonald is out there teaching his fellows a better way, one of the other Loyalist alphabet-soup gangs decides its a sign of weakness and violent stupidity ensues. Lastly, the Shoukri Bros. could still have some fight in them.
Just because McDonald is the pick of the little doesn’t make him a champion… leastwise not yet.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 06:52 PM“But the article plays too heavily on it’s assumption that any Government money will be used to “pay off” former prisoners or current members by giving them Community Worker employed status.”
Remind me, lofty, what’s the employed status of Jackie McDonald?
For a less partisan assessment of the moves within the UDA I’d recommend this article, it’s included in the links in the original post, but worth highlighting again.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 06:57 PMI wish Jackie McDonald the very best of luck in convincing those wishing to continue with their criminality to leave the stage gracefully, without any further bloodshed.
I sincerely hope that if Mr McDonald can achieve this then the UDA will be welcomed into the politcal mainstream.
Furthermore, I hope the £30 million is forthcoming as soon as possible.
I do wonder if £30 million had been offered to Republicans then there would not have been the need for the Northern Bank raid????
The British govt works in mysterious ways.
Perhaps Martin Ingram will enlighten us as to whether the Brit govt allowed the Northern Bank raid to happen.
A potential paradox, the Brits paying off the Republicans by allowing the Northern Bank raid, the Irish govt paying off the Loyalists by giving funding, roughly the same figures ????
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 07:36 PM...and not a word about the obvious hand the British security services are playing in all this. We’re living in some kind of wonderland where it pays to disregard and deny the obvious. The loyal Orders have no connection to the loyalist paramilitaries and the British didn’t set up, arm and organise the loyalist deathsquads, the GFA wasn’t backed by a huge majority and the moon is made of green cheese.
How long can this farce go on? In two years there may well be a Democrat in the White House. Does Brown really think he can explain British inaction away or is that why we have this sudden dash for a decision by November?
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 07:40 PM“but I would imagine that employment levels are now quite high.”
Many are now involved in private banking initiatives, providing loans to disadvantaged members of their community and sometimes the interest is as low as fifty percent.
Others are gainfully employed in the security industry in our local pubs ensuring that there is no trouble as long as their organisation is providing the personnel, of course this also ensures that any illicit substances that are available only come from one source, therefore eliminating any possibility of a ‘gangland turfwar’.
Then there is the insurance agents who provide various policies to the local business community enabling them to operate without interferance from any of the local thugs and or the possibility of something like unexplained arson for example.
Then of course you need the collectors who collect the money from all the ‘willing’ local business men.
You also have the men working in the many local carwash establishments who keep our cars in pristine condition. Sometimes I worry about the jobs in this industry as some of them don’t seem to be very busy but they manage to stay afloat.These are but a few of the ‘day jobs ‘ I know some members of the UDA do, although there is varying levels of competition coming from companies such as the UVF, RHC and LVF.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 07:51 PMTurbo Paul: “I do wonder if £30 million had been offered to Republicans then there would not have been the need for the Northern Bank raid????
*SNIP*A potential paradox, the Brits paying off the Republicans by allowing the Northern Bank raid, the Irish govt paying off the Loyalists by giving funding, roughly the same figures ???? “
Assumes a slew of facts not in evidence re: the Northern Bank robbery. Given the lack of convictions, it would be hard to say who did the job with much in the way of support. Isn’t it interesting that its always “innocent until proven guilty” until you suspect its “themmuns” what committed the crime.
Likewise, were it truly a quid pro quo, there would have been 30 million in untraceable / uncancellable specie, as opposed to millions in new bills that would be readily tracked, neh?
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 08:22 PM“The plan that McDonald has sold to the UDA is that the British government investment can be used to employ former UDA activists and released prisoners as community workers. It would be a way out of criminality for those who want one.”
Its hard to believe these hard working entrepreneurs will suddenly become social workers.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 08:30 PMEveryone must agree that Loyalist and Republican criminality must be addressed.
Do we allow those engaged in criminality to leave the stage in a hail of bullets or do we offer an incentive, pay off??
If the ultimate answer is an incentive, lets bypass the hail of bullets.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 08:41 PM“I don’t recall asking for praise. the article made some pertinent points and I clarified what is happening.”
Please also note that I specifically chose not to use the word ‘you’ in my post so as not to single you out. I was refering to the UDA as a body.
“As part of the civilised society you so love you will at least be glad that we are catching up, albeit not to your satisfaction.”
I am very tired of the terrorist tail wagging the dog. It annoys me that that particular tail is going to get a great deal of the Winalot for finally doing what the rest of us have been doing for a very long time, i.e. abiding by the law as assented to by Her Majesty.
However, out of goodwill I would welcome an end to UDA criminality, but it would need to as definitive as that demanded of the IRA by the DUP. As a unionist I think it’s only fair.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 08:46 PMTurbo Paul: “Everyone must agree that Loyalist and Republican criminality must be addressed. “
Agreed.
Turbo Paul: “Do we allow those engaged in criminality to leave the stage in a hail of bullets or do we offer an incentive, pay off?? “
What, pray tell, is wrong with shackles and a coat over their heads? Is this not the standard method of shuffling felons off the stage?
Turbo Paul: “If the ultimate answer is an incentive, lets bypass the hail of bullets.”
Agreed, but we should not reward anti-social behavior.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 08:53 PMDread Cthulhu
What, pray tell, is wrong with shackles and a coat over their heads? Is this not the standard method of shuffling felons off the stage?In society that has not had to endure the troubles like Northern Ireland yes, treat them like any other criminals.
Therefore, Goodwill indeed is the order of the day.
Dread Cthulhu
Agreed, but we should not reward anti-social behavior.Again, because of the previous close relationships between criminal paramilitaries and the mainstream politcal parties, goodwill is needed for a clean break.
The reward, incentive, is not for previous anti-social behavior, but for future lawful behavior.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 09:05 PMI was in Maghaberry today and Shoukri had not been moved.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 09:23 PMTurbo Paul: “In society that has not had to endure the troubles like Northern Ireland yes, treat them like any other criminals. “
That is something of a cop out. Paying criminals not to commit crimes smacks of extortion / protection rackets expanded to the national level. So long as you make criminals a protected class, they will remain criminals, if only to garner additional largesse from the public purse.
Turbo Paul: “Again, because of the previous close relationships between criminal paramilitaries and the mainstream politcal parties, goodwill is needed for a clean break.”
So, we bribe the criminals into “community workers,” even before their swords have been turned into plowshares, or at least turned in, because it might embaress some politicians?
A better plan would be to set a “drop dead” date for coddling criminality by both sides. A carrot without a stick is naught more than a bribe. If they want the benefits of working within the politics of a polite society, let them disarm and end criminality first.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 09:25 PMThis thread is titled:
“the basis of a civilised society?
How about if the Gates Foundation donates $1 billion, of the $20 billion given by Warren Buffet, to fund a world class International Peace Center in Belfast, that researches methods to prevent conflict within societies????
This would help the job situation.
There is an overwhelming abundance of experience to draw from and both sides can use their collective experiencies to offer solutions to conflicts before they get out of control.
Also this centre, some time in the future, could be used as the vennue for “Truth and reconciliation” hearings.
If applied to Northern Ireland, the “basis of a civilised society” is massive investment and a dramatic rise in the standard of living for everyone, not top down, but bottom up.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 09:31 PMDread Cthulhu
A better plan would be to set a “drop dead” date for coddling criminality by both sides. A carrot without a stick is naught more than a bribe. If they want the benefits of working within the politics of a polite society, let them disarm and end criminality first.I agree with you entirely.
I do hope this is included in the current talks and is part of the November deadline.I would rather relay it to those engaged in criminality as a:
“come in from the cold, or take your chance as other criminals date”
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 09:39 PMTP
It wasn’t an open question, it refers to the apparent ‘pay off’ strategy of the NIO which had, eventually, become the topic under discussion.
Although, I’d also point out that the wait-and-see approach is also covered by the same consequences implied in the question.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 09:45 PMHow about if the Gates Foundation donates $1 billion, of the $20 billion given by Warren Buffet, to fund a world class International Peace Center in Belfast, that researches methods to prevent conflict within societies????
Frankly, the thoughts that the money donated to help people with problems incalculably more difficult than ours being diverted to this petty little squabble makes me feel physically sick.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 09:56 PMMmm interesting.
1. What makes anyone think that former or current paramilitaries are qualified and experienced , skilled and resourceful enough to grapple with the complex issues of education, housing, urban regeneration, under and unemployment that afflict many communities here?
2. Why would any community want to see someone walk into a well paid job without regard to any principle of employment on merit
3. There is plenty of evidence I feel to suggest that loyalist communities that are successfully engaging in regeneration are doing so not because they have employed the boys but because they have engaged a wide range of people, have an effective strategy and employ the right people as volunteers and staff. The existence of the UDA and their malign influence is holding many communities back.
4. Does anyone remember the Lower Shankill/ Now there’s a good example of what happens when UDA men are employed as community workers. There are plenty more of when the UDA and their associates get their hands on the dough. I recall suspected mising funds by North belfast Prisoners Aid reported in the Irish news recently ( no link)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/3009580.stm
My recollection is that two community workers in the Lower Shankill were exposed and convicted as members of the UFF. A wee bird tells me that Mr Cunningham did sweet FA in the Lower Shankill except sit on his ample arse in an office drawing a salary and that as a result one of the most deprived areas in NI were unable to spend a government grant allocated to them
5. Wise up. Many of us who have been engaged in helping our communities to develop are neither members of any paramilitary organisation nor are we in it for the money. Loyalist communities may need money , they may need workers and people may need jobs. The last thing they need is a gang of incompetent ex UDA men landed into plum jobs as community workers. This simply would be extortion by another name.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 10:06 PMAll the proddie paramilitaries have to do for their deprived communities is go out of business and let legit small businesses in.
But little chance of that when they make barrowloads of money from extorting building sites, whether public or private housing, churches, or whatever.
The police seem to be claiming that every time witnesses to extortion have co-operated with the police they have secured a conviction.
I you don’t want to be the last sucker paying protection money to drug addled murder gangs ring 028 9092 2267 – staffed by officers from the PSNI Extortion Unit Monday-Friday 8am-4pm
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 10:20 PM“All the proddie paramilitaries have to do for their deprived communities is go out of business and let legit small businesses in.”
That would have been the most sensible thing I read all day, if you had simply said ALL paramiltaries.
Posted by on Jun 26, 2006 @ 10:46 PM
