Sinn Fein motions

I don’t like linking to things I’ve written in another place, so thanks to Andrew McCann for providing an intermediary link! I believe that this year is the first time that Sinn Fein have published the agenda for their conference, which is either a move away from the secrecy one must keep whilst in the shadows, or a good piece of politics. It may not do their leadership any harm to be able to show the SOS something close to evidence of their internal policing pressures. Those more cynical than I may even suggest that the tight results on the policing motions reported by UTV over the weekend were artificially constructed.

But I’m not that cynical.

  • The whole thing was articially i’d say

  • harpo

    What I’d like to know is why not one of those motions addressed things that you would think would be important to the average Provo SF member or supporter these days. Things like ‘does our illegal paramilitary wing still think it is the legal government of the Irish Republic?’. Or ‘is it time to drop the link to the PIRA?’.

    These things pop up in the news from time to time when some Provo SF talking head drops a clanger when asked a direct question – hello Mitchel M – but then are forgotten about again.

    Are those official motions just set up branch drones to a pre-determined agenda sent out by party HQ? So that nothing controversial is actually discussed at the party conference.

    Or does the odd member here and there forward controversial motions that never make it to the official list that are considered at the conference. Such motions being buried by HQ – along with the person that raised them.

    For a supposedly radical party, the list of motions shows little variety or even a spark of originality. They are mainly repeat after repeat of orthodox party doctrine. You see more shit-stirring motions at the conference of any of the main GB parties. But then of course those parties don’t have illegal paramilitary wings that can make your life a misery if you cross the leadership.

  • Sinn Féin put the Clár on-line last year as well.

    P.S. Why were you at QUB tonight? 😉

  • fair_deal

    Michael

    “It may not do their leadership any harm to be able to show the SOS something close to evidence of their internal policing pressures. Those more cynical than I may even suggest that the tight results on the policing motions reported by UTV over the weekend were artificially constructed. ”

    1. A careful reading of the motions shows that those who take a more ‘absolutionist’ position on republican engagement with the PSNI are predominately from the south supplemented by a smattering of sinn fein youth and west tyrone republicans. So if the intention was to show opposition then it had a two key flaws – no particular surprises in those opposed to the shift and opposition the leadership has had little difficulty in overcoming before.
    2. Close or not the Republican leadership was able to win almost all the votes and they will be trying to sell any shift in the context of a new package.
    3. The Republican leadership’s approach has been one shift at a time. Some of the grassroots will be smarting over the act of decommissioning and thus be awkward at the moment on policing.
    4. Is the cyncism stuff not an inherent misunderstanding of the RM’s? It is a democratic centralist organisation thus it usually allows internal debate until the decision is made.

  • fair_deal

    From fair deal

    CG

    Where can you get the results of the motions ie accepted or rejected?

  • JD

    Fair_deal,

    You will need to speak nicely to a SF delegate to the ARD Fheis who is tasked with returning with a fully marked up Clar and reporting back to his/her cumann.

  • fair_deal

    From fair_deal

    Tugs forelock, removes hat with ostentatious wave as I get on one knee, supplicate myself on the floor before any such a SF delegate who uses Sluggerotoole.com who can provide me with said information.

    Nice enough JD? 😉

  • Michael Shilliday

    Fair Deal, I think you miss my point – maybe the leadership wanted to win the motions by a thin majority.

    Gaskin, why didn’t you ask me at the time?

  • JD

    More than ample Fair_Deal, however I was not a delegate to the Ard Fheis so I do not have the information that you seek. CG may have it.

  • fair_deal

    From fair_deal to Michael

    “maybe the leadership wanted to win the motions by a thin majority.”

    I believeyour point was overly machiavellian and too superficial an analysis of the nature of internal republican politics.

  • Michael Shilliday

    You’re telling me republicans aren’t superficial?

  • fair_deal

    Republicans like us all can be superficial at times. However, in this case it was your analysis of republicanism I considered superficial.

  • DK

    I read some of it – until I got bored, but noted that there were some exciting motions: Ones both for and against Abortion and legalising Cannabis.

    Anyone know which position won?

  • DK

    There were also motions to oppose entering into coalition with all of the parties in the republic.

    Anyone know how that vote went?

  • DK

    And here’s a good one amending the constitution:

    “No member of the British army or the PSNI/RUC (including its boards) shall be eligible for membership [of SF]”

    If passed, this would mean that Sinn Fein could never sit on the policing board.