I am surprised that Iris Robinson’s speech in Newtownards last night hasn’t hit any of the news pages. It is interesting, not because it says a lot that’s new but it may be the nearest we are likely to get to what a DUP manefesto would have been in the run up to the cancelled elections. Perhaps most importantly it lays out the parties expectations for a re-negotiated Agreement:
It must be a settlement not a process
By this I mean that any agreement must be a full and final settlement of the current difficulties. No one can predict what will happen in decades to come, but it is crucial that this process of negotiation after negotiation is ended. Constitutional instability is one of the most damaging political outcomes in Northern Ireland. Last year�s census figures have put back any debate on the constitutional status of Northern Ireland for a generation at least if it is subject to the will of the people. Now we must find a way to live together in Northern Ireland itself as part of the United Kingdom. The current process is a slippery slope to increasingly greater politically motivated harmonisation with the Republic of Ireland.
The terms of any agreement must be clear
One of the biggest problems with the Belfast Agreement is that provisions were ambiguous. Different parties had different understandings as to what they had signed up to. This meant that difficult issues were re-negotiated. As a result many concessions were made to nationalism with little in return. When a deal is done it is critical that everyone understands the rules, and to that end there are clear linkages and enforceable punishments for any breaches.
Unionists as well as nationalists must support it
There is no doubt that the Belfast Agreement has virtually the unanimous support of the nationalist community, but even at its height had little more than fifty percent of unionists supporting it. Indeed today probably as many as two thirds of unionists are opposed to the Belfast Agreement. History has taught us that such a deal will simply not work. The lessons of the old Stormont Parliament, the Power Sharing Executive and the 1982 Assembly show that without the support of both communities a deal will simply not work. We may wish it to be otherwise, but a deal which does not have the support of nationalists will flounder in the same way that the Belfast Agreement has. The lesson is that both sides must agree.
A settlement must provide stable government
One of the most destructive elements of the Belfast Agreement has been its chronic instability. Four suspensions in three years, the resignation of Seamus Mallon, the resignation of David Trimble, a host of Ministerial resignations, a host of legal challenges, one which went to the House of Lords and two cancelled elections are not a recipe for success. They are however all products of a flawed agreement. What kind of constitutional arrangements are dependant on the good behaviour of the paramilitaries and the outcome of an election? Such a situation cannot continue. Whatever form of government exists must be able to deal with hiccups along the way without crashing on every occasion.
There must be no side deals with the government
Another fundamental difficulty with the Belfast Agreement has been the ability of aggrieved parties to run off to the government to negotiate its own terms. This started on Good Friday with the Prime Minister�s letter of comfort to David Trimble on decommissioning. It proved utterly ineffective, but ever since, because of the weakness of the agreement itself, bilateral negotiations involving two or three of the parties have taken place, allowing deals to be done outside the control of the other parties. Such a position entirely undermines any agreement between the local parties which has been reached; and makes a mockery of the whole process.
Do not rely on trust
Even if and when political violence does end in Northern Ireland, I believe it will be a long time before any real trust will develop. To wait for such a situation may take generations. How could unionists be expected to take the word of Sinn Fein after the behaviour of republicans over the last five years when they claimed to be involved in a peace process � not to say anything about the behaviour of the IRA over past decades. It is ludicrous to think that whatever the next few months will bring that the IRA will change its ways overnight. This need not be a recipe for political deadlock, but should be a sign that whatever arrangements are developed do not rely on trust between the parties to succeed.
Mick is founding editor of Slugger. He has written papers on the impacts of the Internet on politics and the wider media and is a regular guest and speaking events across Ireland, the UK and Europe. Twitter: @MickFealty
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
