Tuesday, August 12, 2008
While waiting for the working group
The UUP and Tories are keeping their new relationship in the news by drip feeding the results of their YouGov poll. In response to the new developments the DUP seems to be adopting a little bit of everything response. Today Edwin Poots challenged Sir Reg Empey about an attack on Orange Order and UUP MLA David McNarry placed on the local Conservatives website (now removed). Despite its removal it was defended by the local Conservative responsible for policy (pdf file) complaining about:
“the tribal swamp that masquerades as Ulster/Protestant Culture”
UUP MLA Tom Elliott issued a firm denial of any break in the relationship:
“the DUP was relentlessly trying to interfere in the UUP-Tory talks and would not be ditching its support and links with the Order.”
Previously Nelson McCausland asked about the impact on left-leaning UUP members and voters. Fred Cobain welcomed the moves in the interests of the Union but added the caveat that:
He has reserved judgement on what talks could mean for policy, until they are concluded.
Alastair Ross queried the UUP stance on academic selection. The local Conservatives undermined the ‘national politics’ narrative when they responded:
“Party policy for the rest of the UK has to reflect different situations in other regions. Unlike Northern Ireland most parts of GB do not have a selection based post-primary system. Therefore Party policy has to reflect different local circumstances.”
They have also shone a spotlight on the re-emergence of Lord Trimble, under whom’s leadership the electoral damage was done to the UUP. Also the issue of abortion could be brought into the mix if the NI amendment is accepted when Parliament meets again.
While the big idea may be attractive to both the Conservatives and Ulster Unionists, the detail of policy and organisational relationship will make for some tough decisions. Will the UUP opt for a wholesale alliance and the policy shifts that will involve or a looser relationship to allow for some key differences, which weakens the national politics narrative? Will the local Conservatives be willing to be silent to suit UUP needs? While these questions are being mulled the DUP is attempting to make hay and the Conservative and UUP public responses seem to be narrowing their options towards a looser relationship.
UPDATE Recently Peter Robinson has attacked Tory plans on the Union but left the door open for a deal in a hung parliament (H/T Oneill).
Fair Deal @ 12:35 PM
Very good article F_D. Slowly but surely, the DUP are exposing the inherent foolishness of this idea. Might look good on paper, but unworkable and damaging in practice. The fact that Poots source was a UUP member is revealing also - clearly not everyone is on board for the idea.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 01:44 PMBlackmouth: ‘The fact that Poots source was a UUP member’
How do you know this? Any online links?
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 01:49 PMRead the press statement on DUP website.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 01:51 PMBlackmouth:
This statement? http://www.dup.org.uk/articles.asp?Article_ID=3631
Maybe I am misreading the statement or your post. Where is it said that the story was sourced from a UUP member? The only hint at source I can see is ‘I have in my possession e-mails’...
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:01 PM“Slowly but surely, the DUP are exposing the inherent foolishness of this idea.”
What the DUP are actually doing is thrashing around attempting to find an angle on this, any angle, that they can attack. They are of course hamstrung because they know the Tories know they badly wanted a deal. It is actually rather pathetic.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:04 PMThe UUP have forgotten the words of Edward Carson .
Tory pawns they were in the 1920’s until 1972 when they were ‘cast out’ . So in 2008 they now are aspiring to be ‘pawns ’ once again . The Tories will of course use them and abuse them as it suits their election comeback agenda.
The political reality in NI is such that there is nowhere else for the UUP to run to, except to their former ‘abusers’ . If that is’nt evidence of the moral , political and finacial bankruptcy of UUP unionism what else could be ?
The nuptials for the upcoming marriage of the unionist mouse bride to the tory groom elephant may be exciting for the relatives and the supporters of the ‘mouse’ . The ‘grooms’ relatives are already focused on how they will ‘dispose’ of the ‘UUP mouse’ if they should need the support of 9 DUP votes at Westminster .
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:05 PMChekov
It’s not pathetic at all. The DUP never sought any sort of formal relationship with the Conservative Party. That is UUP spin and you know it.
The central point is that the UUP is a sort of coalition - Labour, Liberal, Conservatives, Urban, Rural, Orange etc. By becoming tied in to one political creed that coalition will be shattered. The fact that the DUP has been trying to tease out how the various constituent parts that make up that coalition feel is perfectly legitimate political discourse. No thrashing at all.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:09 PMAnd what were Jeffrey Donaldson and Simpson up to again trying to charm Owen Paterson to merge the DUP with the Conservatives?
There’s even a picture of David Simpson in Friday’s Portadown Times getting out his best china for Owen Paterson at Dan Winters cottage in Loughgall.
What a bunch of jokers.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:12 PM“It’s not pathetic at all. The DUP never sought any sort of formal relationship with the Conservative Party. That is UUP spin and you know it.”
Plausible deniability and all that. The DUP wished to be courted by the Conservatives. The DUP made approaches to the Conservatives.
“The central point is that the UUP is a sort of coalition - Labour, Liberal, Conservatives, Urban, Rural, Orange etc. By becoming tied in to one political creed that coalition will be shattered. The fact that the DUP has been trying to tease out how the various constituent parts that make up that coalition feel is perfectly legitimate political discourse. No thrashing at all.”
The central point is that the DUP have no coherent argument to make against the UUP / Tory talks. They are worried, but can’t decide on a tack to assume. Every political party is a coalition of interests. That the UUP wish to enter a bigger coalition, a pan-UK coalition is quite normal. The DUP must fall back on their ‘ourselves alone’ politics, and meanwhile they are desperately trying to find an effective riposte to the UUP move.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:20 PMRobet
They weren’t trying to charm Owen Paterson into merging with the Tories. They were participating in regular contact with the Tories which they also do with Labour - perfectly sensible.
As for Owen Paterson at Dand Winter’s Cottage, it merely goes to show just how devoted to the UUP the Tories truly are. Do you seriously believe that if the Conservatives need the votes of DUP MPs in the future, their over-riding love of Reg will rule out overtures?
Wise up.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:21 PMChekov
“That the UUP wish to enter a bigger coalition, a pan-UK coalition is quite normal.”
Michael Shilliday has already acknowledged that this will lead to people leaving the UUP, so it’s not quite correct to say that “the UUP” wish to do anything at this moment.
The DUP are absolutely right to highlight the fact that there are a multiplicity of UUP members, who for a multiplicity of reasons be uncomfortable with the suggestion of a merger with the Tories.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:23 PMBlackmouth is obviously one of those people who believes in ‘unionist unity’ ie rally all the Prods - disasterous nonsense
At least UUP and Conservatives are trying to look at the bigger picture.DUP hay looks rather like hay in the fields - a sodden mess.
The basic premise of those attacking the idea is actually that NI should not be a full part of the UK - and they call themselves ‘unionists’
Move over George OrwellTruth is DUP are anti British
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:24 PMelvis
That’s not true at all. The fundamental argument of those against this move is that Unionism should make friends in all parties, not align ourselves openly with one. Politics is cyclical and whilst Cameron may be at the top of the tree at the minute, he’ll be out one day and how will us clinging desperately to Tory apron strings actually strengthen our position if Labour win an election?
Don’t be so short-sighted.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:30 PMChekov
Do you think Ulster/Protestant culture is a “tribal swamp”?
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:32 PM“The central point is that the DUP have no coherent argument to make against the UUP / Tory talks. They are worried, but can’t decide on a tack to assume. Every political party is a coalition of interests. That the UUP wish to enter a bigger coalition, a pan-UK coalition is quite normal. The DUP must fall back on their ‘ourselves alone’ politics, and meanwhile they are desperately trying to find an effective riposte to the UUP move.”
One would feel that the fact the DUP are a larger entity at Westminster should be sustenance enough… without over excersion on the UUP/Tory issue.
regarding ‘ourselves alone’ the DUP have played the short ball to the UUP on greater unionist unity (no matter how hollow/genuine it is considered to be) so i say let the UUP/Tory courting continue but it’s hardly surprising that the odd tiff won’t be highlighted by the DUP…
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:32 PM“Do you think Ulster/Protestant culture is a “tribal swamp”?”
No. Why do you ask?
It is one of the many different cultures / identities within the UK which is entitled to be expressed.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:36 PM“Unionism should make friends in all parties, not align ourselves openly with one.”
Freeze ourselves out of UK politics!
You are not really a unionist.True unionists would join the UK party they fell closest too and truly ‘make friends’ within those parties.
Your definition is to ‘make friends’ - while remaining aloof and unintelligble to the UK political mainstream. A friendship that by definition is skin deep because you would willingly switch that allegiance if you felt the desire.
Conservatives and Labour people in GB despise such tactics.
Unfortunately they form the very centre of what passes for DUP strategic thinking
Thank God for Empey (never thought I’d say that) and the local Tories!
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:37 PM“Unionism should make friends in all parties, not align ourselves openly with one.”
Lol. The DUP making friends with all parties. Basic irony, but still very funny!
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:42 PMElvis Parker
“You are not really a unionist.”
Is it really necessary to reduce any debate about Unionism to this? Since when did a believe in the Union require support for particular parties (whether regional or UK wide)? Is it impossible for people to share a belief and commitment to something but diagree on the best means and mechanism to achieve it?
By all means debate the merits but please avoid this guff.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:45 PM“regarding ‘ourselves alone’ the DUP have played the short ball to the UUP on greater unionist unity (no matter how hollow/genuine it is considered to be) so i say let the UUP/Tory courting continue but it’s hardly surprising that the odd tiff won’t be highlighted by the DUP…”
Declining to strike a deal with a party whose politics are inimical to the UK mainstream and present a ‘little Ulster’ front and instead actually forging an alliance with that mainstream is actually to reject ‘ourselves alone’ politics.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:47 PMelvis
So the only way to build good relations is to consent to being totally consumed by the larger entity? Interesting thinking.
Chekov
Perhaps you should tell your new best-mates in the Ulster Tories that you disagree with their Vice Chairman’s assesment of one the Unionist community’s largest cultural identity and traditions.
Here’s another one:
do you think Orangemen should remain confined to Orange Halls so that they won’t have to meet Roman Catholics?
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:48 PMChekov
I am a British Ulsterman - I want whats best for Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom - the notion that in order to achieve that I need to support a party which amongst other things is opposed to grammar schools, wants to scrap the Barnett Formula and believes in the creation of 2 categories of MPs in the Sovereign Parliament is not only untrue, it is foolish.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:52 PMsorry, that last post was directed at elvis
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:52 PMStrange silence from Chekov….very swift in attacking Unionists, but somehwat shy in condemning Jeffrey Peel’s comments regarding a key Unionist constituency….still maybe all those beastly Orangemen can be denied a vote under a Dave government?
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 02:59 PMJeffrey Peel’s comments were stupid, but they are neither here nor there. The UUP is doing a deal with the Conservative Party at large.
Posted by on Aug 12, 2008 @ 03:05 PM
