McKay a victim of demonisation

Don McKay tells Clare Regan his version of how he came to resign from the Parades Commission: “…the story broke and I was made a pawn in a wider political game. I have been battling on three fronts. The SDLP and Sinn Fein were both demonising me. It’s been made out that I told a complete bundle of lies, like I didn’t even know Dolores or David. That’s not the case,”

, ,

  • Pete Baker

    The problem with Don MacKay’s version is that his claim that he could have expected a good reference from both the SDLP’s Dolores Kelly and the DUP’s David Simpson places even more emphasis on the fact that both have stated that they would not have done so.

    In any event the High Court ruling today shows that the real culprit is not Don MacKay – after all, he took the decision to apply knowing that there would be severe criticism from some quarters.

    But you can bet that the Secretary of State is perfectly content to allow him to run around all the media outlets he can.. drawing flak away from the NIO as he does so.

  • He claimed he had the full support of the Democratic Unionist Party yet Simpson turned his back on him.

    I thought it was a strange thing for Simpson to do, whether McKay lied or not…

  • Dread Cthulhu

    FYU: “He claimed he had the full support of the Democratic Unionist Party yet Simpson turned his back on him. ”

    Which would suggest that Mr. McKay was not being dreadfully straight-forward, now wouldn’t it?

    FYU: “I thought it was a strange thing for Simpson to do, whether McKay lied or not…”

    Y’know, I suspect that was McKay’s line of reasoning as well…

  • Then does this all mean there will be no longer a Loyal Order representation on the commission?

    So any guesses on what this years ‘whiterock’ will be?

  • malo

    I think now its about time the whole P/C went as the republician res. groups seem determined that they do not want anything to do with anyone connected with the Loyal Orders, so i dread to think what determination will be put on parades such as the Whiterock and maybe even the parades in the East of the city.

  • missfitz

    There is no need for the PC to ‘go’, as there is an on going need for an independent and fair body to make decisions on contentious parades, and this is the function of the PC.

    On the other hand, what needs to be done now in the name of fairness is that all of the Commissioners need to have their selection process reviewed.

    Was McKay the only one whose references were not taken up?

    I doubt this strongly, so it cannot be fair that he is the only one to fall on his sword.

    He stated that his application represented cross community support in the High Court as far as I know, and not on the application. Indeed, there was no room on the application form for that kind of information.

    That makes it sound like I applied for a commission post and this is sour grapes on my part, so I should say that I got an application form for the craic, but didnt proceed with an application.

    (I couldnt get Mick Fealty to agree to be my referee)

  • Pete Baker
  • Chris Donnelly

    Don McKay’s ‘rattle from the pram’ tantrum continues…this morning he declared that the whole episode “says more about Dolores [Kelly] than me” and, incredibly, on tonight’s BBC Newsline, he is stating that he now believes Grand Lodge’s position of not talking to nationalist groups nor the Parades Commission to be vindicated.

    Pathetic stuff.