Adams: we will wait and see…

Mark Devenport interviews Gerry Adams, and kicks through some of the key issues facing the parties going into 24th November. On Paisley and the Executive, “…that’s the only thing he can veto, everything else he can’t veto”. . Interestingly he does concede that it is Sinn Fein’s job to try to pursuade Unionism of its own bona fides. But given a busted November deadline, he states that, “Sensible unionism may then engage, but we can’t wait for them”. And on whether his party would then switch its energy and focus to the Republic, “It’s not an either/or situation. Although the Assembly is sited in Stormont it is locked into an all Ireland structure. If the DUP want to wait until 2010, this place with be a very changed place”. He noted that on council level the DUP has already conceded major issues like powersharing.

  • Rubicon

    Does trying “to persuade Unionism” include accepting the PSNI?

    Perhaps Adams believes it wouldn’t persuade unionism but without unionism being given the challenge others will remain unconvinced about SF’s bona fides.

  • mickhall

    SF have all the bona fides they need in a democratic system, that is the mandate given to them by those who voted for them at the last election. All that has come since has been designed to belittle this mandate.

  • Keith M

    At least Adams is not trotting out the “The don’t want a Catholic about the place” nonsense anymore. For that we should be grateful. If it is the precursor to the end of N.I. nationalist & Republican MOPEary, then better again.

    SF/IRA still have a long way to go, to be seen as a fully democratic party. The botched job on decommissioning hasn’t helped, and nor has the continued criminality.

    Accepting the PSNI would be a step in the right direction, but it is actions (or perhaps the lack of them) rather than words, that will finally decide if SF/IRA are suitable partners for democrats.

  • T.Ruth

    Most Unionists are uncertain about Sinn Fein attitudes to an Assembly. Unionists have choices, and as the majority in Northern Ireland, would not be unhappy with direct rule from Westminster especially since that they could well have twelve represntatives in the commons and a not inconsiderable, if less powerful, support in the Lords.
    All the protective legislation enshrined in UK and European law gives them added security.It is unlikely that there will be a Labour government after the next election and in that context Direct Rule is not a frightening option.

    Those in the Nationalist /Republican community who want a restored Assembly with devolved power/responsibility must recognise that the Unionist community has every right to reject as partners those who are not prepared to engage on entirely equal terms and support democratic politics.
    It is not enough for Republicans to passively support the institutions like the PSNI. To embrace the future it will be necessary to be proactive in their support for the PSNI as the legitimate authority in relation to law and order. That will involve providing information that will protect both sides of the community against crime and in particular organised crime.
    There is a huge responsibility on SF to move into the future with all links to crime and paramilitarism clearly dismantled.
    In the time available Sinn Fein must outline clearly for Unionists the kind of Northern Ireland they envisage us all living in over the next twenty years.They must convince Unionists, in a very short time frame, that devolved politics can work to their advantage,security and peace of mind.
    T.Ruth

  • Prince Eoghan

    Adams lips surely must be the size of sly Stallone’s Maw’s. Does Unionism has a spare bit of arse left to be kissed. “Let Unionism miss the bus” I say, they will not get another opportunity to get as good a resolution. Ignorant people, who put their hatred of others over genuine concerns should be molly-coddled no longer.

    Regarding Kieth M’s comments above. Maybe you are better sticking to picking targets for your Loyalist chums, as the analysis is straight out of cloud cuckoo land. The democrats bit should be nominated for it’s comedic value alone.

  • mickhall

    If republicans need an example of how the goal posts will once again be moved if they bow to pressure to recognize/whatever the PSNI, then Ruth’s post is it.

    It will not be enough for the shinners to support the police by sitting on these committees and abiding by the rule of law, they will have to become touts to.

  • Michael H’

    SF/DUP are at the heart of our problems here.

    They have each supported death and violence in their time. Each will say the other continues to do so. While these two extremes play politics with each other, I’m still weighed down with a ridiculous rates bill, the threat of of water bills to come, no job and the seemingly never ending wait to see a specialist on the NHS.

    IMO, it’s wrong to blame the politicians. I place the blame firmly at the door of those who chose not to vote and at the door of those who placed us in this position by voting DUP/SF. Will you ever wise up?

  • Yokel

    Sure Mickhall half of them have done some touting anyway..

  • Garibaldy

    Michael H,

    You’re totally right to blame the voters, not the politicians. Although I would widen that complaint to include anyone who votes for parties that define themselves in sectarian terms. Which is about 9 people out of 10.

  • Interposition & Nulification

    Michael H,

    I share your frustration. The only way to get to a situation where normalissues are being dealt with, is for the electorate to vote the SF/DUP muppets back in their back box.

    Even though MD is on the BBC payroll, he does not reflect the voice of an objective independent journalist. He continues to earn good money out of the Gerry Adams brand and this is reflected in his poor level of reporting.

    Gerry Adam’s sickeningly smug grin, coupled with his patronising tones will do nothing to reassure Unionism. I am of the firm opinion that Gerry fails to see that he personally is part of the problem for a significant number of Unionists. If he really cared for the Peace Process, he would say nothing and stay off side. But no, he is blind to his own failings. Of course, all of this could equally apply to Ian P’.

  • Mick Fealty

    Mick,

    “…they will have to become touts too”.

    Not sure what you mean by this. Could you elucidate?

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    ”Ignorant people, who put their hatred of others over genuine concerns should be molly-coddled no longer.”

    I couldn’t agree more Prince — the sooner the British & Irish Govts stop molly-coddling SF the better. A party who refuse to recognise the police, don’t regard the pre-meditated murder of a mother as a crime and reckon that they’re the rightful govt of all-Ireland certainly shouldn’t be pandered to by anyone.

  • Proud

    Moderate unionism did a deal with SF et al and was mucked around to the point were it lost all credibility. Now we have the fundamentalists representing us. Perhaps a bit of good faith when dealing with Trimble would have gone a long way, and we wouldn’t be faced with this mess now.

    As it is, SF support for policing would put pressure on the DUP to either do a deal, or admit that they will never share power with SF.

  • mickhall

    Mick

    Ruth wrote,

    “That will involve providing information that will protect both sides of the community against crime and in particular organised crime”

  • Rubicon

    “SF have all the bona fides they need in a democratic system, that is the mandate given to them by those who voted for them at the last election.” (Mickhall)

    In itself that’s a fair point Mickhall – but so too is the point Gerry Adams makes about Paisley’s veto , “…that’s the only thing he can veto, everything else he can’t veto”. It carries both ways – getting a mandate empowers public representatives to represent and lead – it doesn’t guarantee they must win all negotiations and it certainly doesn’t allow them to undermine the larger mandate of others.

    Skills in negotiation and delivery on promises have been delayed and confidence eroded as a result. In the former the unionists are catching up for weaknesses in the past but the later is most certainly the responsibility of republicans. It took 7 years from the agreement to delivery for republicans. When you recall the excuses – don’t be too surprised if you hear them echoed by the DUP this year – and, perhaps, in years to come.

    I hope unionism doesn’t feel that need – but, when it comes to casting seeds of doubt, SF have been excellent planters.

    Your later comment, ”It will not be enough for the shinners to support the police by sitting on these committees and abiding by the rule of law, they will have to become touts to”(sic) is a more eloquent damnation of CRJ schemes than I could have thought of:

    a. Victims and accused asked to agree to CRJ intervention.
    b. Accused refuses.
    c. Accused is a tout.

    Simple logic – and from your mouth!

  • Reader

    mickhall: they will have to become touts too
    They need to get out of that mindset. After all – does passing information onto kneecappers and/or the CRJ also count as touting? Is protecting criminals from the law meant to be the right thing to do? Maybe it depends on the criminal and/or the crime? And is every shinner that ever gives evidence in court a tout?

  • Kenny

    I have seen quite a few comments like T Ruth’s on various sites and they are based on speculation and wishful thinking.

    1. Where are these 12 Unionist representatives going to come from? – I can see Unionists possibly winning back South Belfast but where else are they going to gain a seat (please don’t say Fermanagh/South Tyrone – no chance!).

    2. There is not going to be an imminent change of govt – there is no chance of Labour losing a no confidence vote so they’ll be in power until sometime in 2009 – could well be 2010.

    By that stage, we’ll have had 2.5 – 3.5 years of “joint stewardship”. I don ‘t normally agree with Gerry Adams but he got 1 thing right – this will be a changed place in 2010.

    T Ruth seems to be pretty certain that Labour won’t be returned to power – they wouldn’t if the election were today but who knows what the situation will be in 2 – 3 years?

    Even if today’s polls became reality, the Tories would be 20 seats shy of an overall majority – the power brokers would be the Lib Dems – not parties from NI.

    Even if the Tories win, they’ll certainly be more sympathetic to Unionists but I seriously doubt that they’ll even contemplate reversing any of the changes that Labout have made in NI (frankly it’s just NOT an issue of any importance to the average UK voter).

    Frankly, as a Catholic, I hope that direct rule continues. The DUP will not be able to utilise their time wasting tactics and, if they won’t participate, the govt can move on without them.

    I’m not claiming that it’s joint authority – however, neither is it like the “good old days” of direct rule for Unionists. This govt has and will take notice of the (45-46% in 2010) nationalist population and involve the RoI govt more and more in the running of NI.