Today, yesterday or the day before?

Seeing as Mick was described my contributions as “regular“, I suppose I should at least attempt to make his comments close to accurate (it is a sign of the decline of my enjoyment of student life that I am now in need of a pocket diary)!

The UUP’s regular talks report today was published at midday and covers yesterdays talks. Probably the most contemporary of the issues covered is what DUP Assembly Party strength will be measured at. No doubt the huge legitimacy issues of the DUP being allowed to claim that d’Hondt should be run at their high water mark rather than the election result or current numbers will have been raised.

  • alfredo

    it would help if you could write in english….

  • It alludes to the fact that a couple of DUPers have jumped shipped since the election, bumping up their number of MLAs. The UUP would want d’hondt based on the post-election figures, but the DUP would want it based on the situation as it now stands.

  • BTW, by saying DUPers have jumped ship, I mean they were previously UUP but have jumped to the DUP, so in effect the number of UUP MLAs has dropped, and the number of DUP MLAs has correspondingly increased after the erstwhile UUP MLAs have transferred their allegiance to the Paisleyites, thus increasing the latter’s number of seats without their being an election.

  • Pat

    Does this all sound like Gerrymandering or what?

  • Uhhh, Shillers – let me (a UUP supporter) try and get this straight . . . you want the DUP total to be counted at the lowest level possible, menaing that the total number of UNIONIST ministers will be reduced by one? Just tell me if there’s soemthing I misunderstand about your position.

  • Michael Shilliday

    It won’t be reduced by one if the numbers are counted on the election result will it?

  • Dave

    Perhaps, Mr Shilliday you should take a course in English, or at least buy a dictionary.