Accountablity: Farren replies to Dodds

Elsewhere the conversation between the DUP and Nationalists has been characterised as the dialogue of the deaf. But over the last few weeks there has been an interesting batting back and forth of ideas between Nigel Dodds and Sean Farren of the SDLP. In his latest reponse, Sean Farren moves away from addressing the DUP’s concerns around accountablity, and calls upon it to lend it’s support to the institutions under the current Agreement.

Response to Nigel Dodds from Sean Farren

It is extremely revealing of how insubstantial DUP criticisms of the Good Friday Agreement really are that Nigel Dodds can only focus on what are essentially procedural matters relating to accountability in his reply to my piece of 11 July.
None of the key principles of the agreement (exclusively democratic; consent; partnership within the North, between North and South and West-East; inclusivity; parity of esteem; equality; human rights etc.) are challenged. So I assume they are all now accepted as essential by the DUP.

As to accountability, it is an essential characteristic of all democratic institutions. In some, accountability is exercised in more open and more transparent ways than in others, but it is present in all. And so it is within the institutions established under the Good Friday Agreement. Its institutions are accountable to the Assembly, and to the Irish and British governments.

As elsewhere, experience may demonstrate that the forms of accountability agreed initially need modification, amendment etc. But that is a matter which the review provisions of the agreement can address. So while not necessarily agreeing with the aspects of accountability which Nigel identifies as problematic, he and party would be quite entitled to table their concerns and amendments in the course of any review of the operation of the agreement. These can extend to any operational matter that the Assembly parties wish to see reviewed. Planning for a review is anticipated in the Joint Declaration.

Is it not time, therefore, for the DUP to stop fooling its supporters into believing that it has fundamental objections to the Good Friday Agreement and that it has some magic alternative, as yet not revealed, up its sleeve?

Secondly, since its concerns are essentially procedural, should it not now join with the pro-agreement parties, work for its full implementation and have those concerns addressed in accordance with the review provisions of the agreement?

Mick Fealty

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