Steep hill facing the UUP

Noel MacAdam outlines Alex Kane’s speech in South Belfast on Monday, in which he raised the question of leadership, and how his party might draw lessons from the party’s previous difficulties. Full version of the speech follows:

By Alex Kane

I know that most of you will expect me to talk about the

  • Baldrick

    Alex Kane wrote: >Is The UUP

  • Moderate Unionist

    I think Alex is saying what has to be said, but the question is, “Is anybody listening?” and if so how do they go about fixing it.

  • Butterknife

    Interesting analyse for Kane.
    The marketing department of the UUP needs a definite overall but it is the DUP that needs to rethink its strategy. It has been to smart in that their New Deal is just the Belfast Agreement but repackaged.

  • Butterknife

    This letter i saw in today’s Newsletter and thought it was worth copying and pasting to prove my theory on Pragmatism v. Paisleyism in the DUP

    Once again recent comments from the DUP leadership have created confusion for the watcher and listener.

    In late September we heard Peter Robinson state that “I thought at the very beginning we had agreed with the Government that the fundamentals of the Belfast Agreement that they outlined were consistent with the fundamentals that the Democratic Unionist Party had put forward for a way forward”.

    Today we have Nigel Dodds telling us that “Unionists will not be settling for the Belfast Agreement six years later”.

    If the case for fundamental change is not accepted, then there will be no local arrangements at Stormont.”

    They can’t both be right. Either Peter Robinson is correct and the fundamentals of the Agreement are consistent with the fundamentals put forward by the DUP, or as Nigel Dodds says, these fundamentals require fundamental change.

    One could be forgiven for thinking that the analysis of at least one of the DUP’s leading lights is, to coin a phrase, “fundamentally flawed!”