SF’s Kathy Stanton not contesting next assembly election

The Irish News has confirmation from Sinn Féin MLA Kathy Stanton that she will not be standing[subs req] in the next assembly election [whenever that is – Ed] citing “personal, family, commitments”. The North Belfast MLA denied voicing concerns at meetings about the Sinn Féin strategy on policing, noted here previously, and emphasised that she would remain an active member of the party including campaigning for their candidates in the assembly election. Interestingly she is also quoted as saying, “I have always stated that I support the Sinn Féin ard chomhairle’s motions.” The ard chomhairle motion following St Andrews stated “We reject any role for MI5 in Ireland or in civic policing.” The Irish News reports that the Sinn Féin candidates for North Belfast are to be current MLA, Gerry Kelly, and Belfast councillor Caral Ni Chuilin.

, ,

  • Joe Romhar

    Kensei, they changed their strategy and their position after giving their word never to do any such thing. They broke their word on no more ceasefires after the 1975 one; they broke their word on going into Stormont; they broke their word on decommissioning. All political parties lie through their teeth. This one sent men to their graves on the promise that they would never, never, never break their word. The SDLP did not have to break their word to arrive at where they now are. They always called for cross border bodies and power sharing. And they sent no one to their graves or disappeared anyone or maimed anyone. They broke their word on other things like the rent and rates strike. Would you have put your coat on to go out the door knowing this would be the outcome? I know I would have sat at home. I know no IRA volunteer who ever said during the war a cross border body and power sharing were worth dying for.

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    ‘Pass me evidence and I will respond’

    I just did.

    BTW not whataboutery just an indicator of a closed mind.

    Ingram,

    Sorry, I didn’t just parrot your amalysys, but there you go i gave my own honest assessment.

  • time will tell

    The alternative to the Stormont surrender

    We propose a united Ireland free from forign occupation oppression or influence, not a Stickyist internal settlement favouring the rule of numbers, if might is right then we are proud and unrepentant about being wrong.

    We propose to have political bodies based on intellect not muscle, honesty not deception, compassion not heartlessness, and quality not quantity.

    We favour representatives being paid exactly the average wage of blue collar workers and not one penny more, and certainly not given bribes such as properties in Turkey and Bulgaria exempt from taxation and in false names as have been purchased for a number of Sinn Fein officials.

    We propose the abolishment with immediate effect the nauseas waste of public money on a political piece of fantasist garbage known as Ulster-Scots, this cretinus nonsense is an embarrassment to any person who ever picked up a book.

    We propose the financial support for areas which were financially punished by the British and their puppets in occupied Ireland, in order for the two communities to have a co-existence they must have an equal playing field, that means that garrison towns and surrounding areas which benefited for nearly 30 years of the war with military wages and purchases in the immediate location supporting further industries such as the motor trade housing and building enabling better standards of education and heavier monetary clout which give these areas extreme advantages in the long term.
    Therefore nationalist areas will have to be sponsored over and above any budgeted figure for the next 30 years to bring them back into line an example of this would be the giving of a sum approximately between 10-15 million pounds per year for the next 30 years to West Belfast alone on top of any figure budgeted for the area.

    We propose the eradication of all criminal records as the police force that brought the charges and the judicial system that bought them were equally corrupt, the only exception being those of a sexual nature.

    We propose the abolishment of water charges, the reduction of rates, and the abolishment of all quangos.

    We support the right to choose

    We support national liberation struggles throughout the world

    We support the right to inflict a financial burden on the oppressor through the use of the black market the withholding of taxation while we are imprisoned as a Nation on our own native soil

    We propose sending adults to the negotiating table to thrash out a withdrawal settlement from our oppressors, not a bunch of money hungry multi faced children from a discredited gang of liars called Sinn Fein.

  • ingram

    Pat.

    Thanks mate, no problem I believe the readers of this board can see your post for what it is.I take it then that their is little or no differnce in the SDLP and Sinn Fein policies on a united Ireland now that you are now firmly upon the British adventure of a life time.LOL

    Good night.Thank You, enjoyed it.

    Ingram.

    PS. Get on Fulham tonight.

  • kensei

    “Kensei, they changed their strategy and their position after giving their word never to do any such thing.”

    Oh Jesus.

    “They broke their word on no more ceasefires after the 1975 one;”

    Almost 20 years later, and a promise like tha can NEVER be kept. More to the point it was what people wanted, largely.

    “they broke their word on going into Stormont;”

    After receiving the support of their party and the electorate.

    “they broke their word on decommissioning.”

    Actually, it was in the GFA and almost everyone knew it would happen i the end. 9/11 certainly helped change attitudes of everyone.

    “All political parties lie through their teeth. This one sent men to their graves on the promise that they would never, never, never break their word.”

    Actually, they sent men to their graves on the promise of a United Ireland and they’d do anything necessary to get there.

    “The SDLP did not have to break their word to arrive at where they now are. They always called for cross border bodies and power sharing.”

    Actually, SF are calling for a United Ireland. the cross border bodies are just a stop gap. And the SDLP would have stopped well, well short of where we are.

    “And they sent no one to their graves or disappeared anyone or maimed anyone.”

    The leadership could not have done what they did in 1994 in 1975. If the Provos had have stood down then another group would have stood in their place in seconds. The situation vis Unionism and the British Government was different. What the Armed Struggle achieved, if you want something, is to burn out the flames of Republican violence at least for a generation.

    “They broke their word on other things like the rent and rates strike. Would you have put your coat on to go out the door knowing this would be the outcome? I know I would have sat at home. I know no IRA volunteer who ever said during the war a cross border body and power sharing were worth dying for.”

    No, which is why it’s a means and not a end in itself.

    Also, I was twelve in 1994. The SF I deal with is the one that I could vote for in 2000. That one had already been on ceasefire, helped negotiate the Agreement and were offering the best course for Nationalism. What they stood for in 1975 was and is of little concern to me. Any more than Labour’s policies of 1975 would be. I am merely concerned about their current policies and the direction they are headed.

  • Henry94

    Ingram

    I’m not sure if you are trying to misuse what I’m saying or simply don’t get it but either way I’m sure most people will understand the difference between the AIA being an event of importance and a decisive event. Political possibilities opened up and it was the job of leaders to explore them. Electoral success was a factor, Fr Alex Reid’s initiative Hume-Adams was a factor. There was a process.

    There is not much point is asking questions if you are going to distort the answers for bovine sloganeering.

  • ingram

    Henry94.

    It was you when asked cited the Anglo Irish Agreement , the AIA pre dates all the other notable points in time that you mention.Clearly it was at that time as you say you FIRST became conscious of the futility of the armed campaign.That point in time was the 85/86 period.

    It is clear what you said so let us not waste time doing a Sinn Fein Backslide.

    The other events you mentioned are many, many years in the future and many, many hundreds of deaths later.

    Thanks mate.

    PS. Pat hope you got some of the Fulham I recommended 1/0 31 mins gone.

  • mickhall

    “What they stood for in 1975 was and is of little concern to me. Any more than Labour’s policies of 1975 would be. I am merely concerned about their current policies and the direction they are headed.”

    kensie,

    With respect the above is no way to come at politics, and your example does not hold water, for the LP of today does not have the same leadership as that it had in 1975, whereas SF by and large does and certainly the same leadership at the very top that was in place by the post hunger strike 1980s, give or take one or two individuals who were otherwise engaged. Thus it would be negating ones responsibility not to closely analyze what they said and did back then.

    Young people if they are engaged in politics, no matter what their politics, or at what level, should be passionate about their beliefs, as you appear to be, but the only way to move forward is analyze carefully what the previous generation did, right or wrong, otherwise you are likely to make the same mistakes.

    Regards.

    Best regards

  • Pat-

    “BTW not whataboutery just an indicator of a closed mind.”

    So your tapdance around the subjects is not a case of whataboutery but ‘an indicator of a closed mind’?! Fair enough!

    Kensei-

    “And the SDLP would have stopped well, well short of where we are.”

    Hmm, bizarre how you seem to be able to fathom what direction SDLP policy would have taken in a theoretical world in which provo violence didn’t exist. You are a clever fellow. What next- mind reading? Bending spoons? Sticking to the facts? Stranger things have happened, but I won’t hold my breath 😉

  • Joe Romhar

    Kensei, people always wanted a ceasefire. At no point did the majority of nationalists in the north support an armed campaign. The majority of vols did not want a ceasefire in 1994.

    Promises that can never be kept should never be made. Evidence that they break their word when you seemed stuck for evidence.

    They agreed to go into Stormont before receiving the endorsement of the electorate but after they won it from their ard fheis. And then they floated the promise that there would be no decommissioning as part of getting it through.

    Almost everyone with a brain knew decommissioning would happen in the end. But why were they all swearing right up to the end that it would never? Even today some can be heard saying it didn’t happen. The GFA had little bearing on the decision. McGuinness told the Irish goivernment ‘we know the guns are banjaxed.’

    They sent men and women to their graves in opposition to everything they stand for today. The SDLP got a better deal than SF under Sunningdale. Even Brian Feeney admits that much. Calling for a UI means exactly what SF used to say it meant – verbal republicanism. Stopgap? Where did we hear that before? Collins, Dev, Goulding etc etc.

    Being 12 in 94 explains your position somewhat. I was older and don’t share it. Seen too much lost to think this charade is a success.

  • Henry94

    Ingram

    it was at that time as you say you FIRST became conscious of the futility of the armed campaign.

    That is not what I said at all.

    At the time of the AIA I would not have seen the significance of it. It is in retrospect that I speculated as to its importance to the republican debate.

    To quote my full answer

    I assume you mean at what point did people form the view that the struggle could better be advanced by other means. I think a number of factors contributed to that. The Anglo-Irish agreement was important as it tied Dublin into the question in a way that was unprecedented. Of course the visibility of political support for Sinn Fein at the ballot box increased the range of available options. It would be a gross over-simplifiction to suggest there was an immediate conversation to anything. There was a dynamic. Positions developed and people thought and discussed.

    If you are willing to so blatantly misrepresent what people post here then why would anyone believe a word out of you on any subject?

  • kensei

    El Mat

    “Hmm, bizarre how you seem to be able to fathom what direction SDLP policy would have taken in a theoretical world in which provo violence didn’t exist. You are a clever fellow. What next- mind reading?”

    I can only give you my sincere belief. The SDLP always gave me the impression as willing to sign up to almost anything, including most of the nonsense and meaningless talks that preceded the GFA. maybe I am wrong. If so, you have a perception problem. Being sarcastic at me and insulting me for who I voted for won’t change my opinion or my vote.

    mickhall

    “With respect the above is no way to come at politics, and your example does not hold water, for the LP of today does not have the same leadership as that it had in 1975, whereas SF by and large does and certainly the same leadership at the very top that was in place by the post hunger strike 1980s, give or take one or two individuals who were otherwise engaged. Thus it would be negating ones responsibility not to closely analyze what they said and did back then.”

    So not the same leadership as 1975, then? Anyway, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were Labour front bench in the 80’s. I respect people more that can react to events and change their position in light of new events. It is a hard thing to do. My problem with Blair wouldn’t be New Labour, but what they did once they got in power. I’m interested in what parties can do for me now and where they are going. What they said in 1975 is of minimal importance if they can demonstrate clearly they’ve moved form that position. SF clearly can.

    “But why were they all swearing right up to the end that it would never?”

    Ah. The SDLP school of negotiation.

    Don’t have time for the rest right now.

  • outofinterest

    “I don’t think the leadership of the SDLP has any knighthoods or MBEs”

    Gerry Fitt? Wasn’t he a lord?

  • hmmm

    check out talk back, another sf councillor deselected. hes talking now to david. dunseath

  • hmmm

    they dirty joe’d davey last year when he was away for a week on holiday. can you believe these people? He sounds very angry.

  • the real Paddy Fox

    I see that someone is using my name to wind upo the whole Sinn Fein policing debate. Whilst I have no problem with most of what is being written in my name I have to ask why this person has not the courage to use thier own name. I can only suspect that they are trying to stir the pot with me and the shinners but alas that pot has been stirred a long time ago. I have wonder though what state agency this person represents and how much they are getting paid for it??? Anyway I have no opinion on Davy Hyland, Cathy Staunton or anyone in Sinn Fein for that matter they can do what they want as long as they have the decency to allow the rest of us to do the same.
    To the person who is using my name (and John Kellys as well i suspect) get a life, grow a pair and start using your own name – thats if your handlers allow you to that is..
    Nollaig Shona daoibhe a chairde
    Paddy Fox E/Tyrone

  • Durkan’s ouija board

    >>”I don’t think the leadership of the SDLP has any knighthoods or MBEs”

    Gerry Fitt? Wasn’t he a lord? <