Election 2003: uncertainty is unhelpful

Brian Feeney argues that the need to have accurate representation in an Assembly, outweighs concerns over the future of a ‘liberal’ Unionist agenda:

“Who comes out on top in each community is an understandable anxiety in the main parties, but there are other reasons for holding elections here. Elections are snapshots. They show the state of play at a precise moment in political history. A family photo of the current assembly members, if you could get them all together for one, would be a record of the state of politics five years ago, not today. If elections are not held, assembly members will quickly cease to represent their voters.”

However he goes on to argue that knowing one way or the other can only help individual parties clarify their own attitudes towards current negotiations.


Discover more from Slugger O'Toole

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

We are reader supported. Donate to keep Slugger lit!

For over 20 years, Slugger has been an independent place for debate and new ideas. We have published over 40,000 posts and over one and a half million comments on the site. Each month we have over 70,000 readers. All this we have accomplished with only volunteers we have never had any paid staff.

Slugger does not receive any funding, and we respect our readers, so we will never run intrusive ads or sponsored posts. Instead, we are reader-supported. Help us keep Slugger independent by becoming a friend of Slugger. While we run a tight ship and no one gets paid to write, we need money to help us cover our costs.

If you like what we do, we are asking you to consider giving a monthly donation of any amount, or you can give a one-off donation. Any amount is appreciated.