Sinn Fein and selective hearing…

The upcoming Balmoral Review anniversary procession has been gaining some media attention lately. Primarily that attention has been via Sinn Fein, who some have accused of scaremongoring. All of the details of the event have been in the public domain for some time, however Sinn Fein have repeatedly appeared to be ‘confused’ and unable to grasp the simple facts both written and more worryingly actually told to them face to face. The Unionist Centenery Committee website tonight comments…

On two occasions prior to Christmas Sinn Fein were advised by members of the Balmoral Review organising committee that there would be no feeder parades.  The gentlemen concerned were Connor Maskey and Spike Murray.  On the 23rd January on this website (see news section) the route for the Review was made public. Recently Deirdre Hargey is claiming we haven’t published the routes whilst Jim McVeigh remains concerned about feeder parades.  Sinn Fein have been told in Council and in private about feeder parades – there ain’t any.  But they continue to play politics.  At some stage they will claim they got us not to have any feeder parades.  The UCC want to make it clear AGAIN that there has never been any intention since planning began to have any.  So please Sinn Fein, tell the people you represent the truth.

The U.C.C. have also addressed that ever present Sinn Fein complaint that ‘no-one will talk to us’…

With regard to the latest claim that we won’t meet them wrong again.  As Councillor McVeigh knows we have already arranged one meeting with representatives from Short Strand and have asked that it be expanded if necessary. We have an independent witness who can verify this.

A new website has been launched to help explain the original review and the motivation for the 2012 event. The ‘Balmoral Review’ is shaping up to be one of the largest centenary demonstrations the next 10 years will see. In fact its shaping up to be one of the largest public displays Northern Ireland has seen in decades.

  • Red Lion

    Well im looking forward to a good day out, as ive said before, i hope there is plenty of those tartan clad ulster scots pipe bands about, to add a properly gorgeous soundtrack to the occasion!

  • Neil

    http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/local/major-cultural-event-to-mark-balmoral-review-1-3696851

    If they’ve gotten the wrong idea then they’re not alone, it appears the Loyalist Newsletter expects one too, reporting The council gave permission for the park to be used for the event in December.

    On Monday, it passed proposals to use a site in the park on Friday, May 18 and Saturday, May 19 for the tented village and amusements. It also agreed that the ‘Ozone’ event entrance should be used for the arrival of the parade.

    To be honest if anyone’s talking up a storm I ain’t seen it, apart from posts like the one above, which use common tactics like using futurist statements like At some stage they will claim they got us not to have any feeder parades in order to introduce the perception of a non-existent conflict over a statement which has as yet not been made. Like sticking your own statement in quotes to lend credibility to your own argument, it’s been done to death on Slugger.

    Out of interest a browse of the PC website yields the following parade with Ormeau Road listed as destination:

    http://www.paradescommission.org/parades/?parade=38110

    Cue excuse, um that’s not an official parade, or some such no doubt.

  • dwatch

    I don’t see why all the fuss over this Balmoral Review anniversary procession to Ormeau Park today. Its only a hundred year one off event to commemorate a 1912 Unionist event that in reality became a damp squib. The campaign to prevent home rule was all turned on its head by the 1914/18 WW1 & what other events were to follow afterwards leading up to partition in 1921.

  • dwatch

    Correction: the Review anniversary procession to Ormeau Park is on the 19th May and not today.

  • sdelaneys

    Never heard a word about it until now, not exactly a hot topic of conversation.

  • ranger1640

    Dwatch, events dear boy events.

    The outcome was a victim of events, however from what I was told by elderly family and friends it was the most wonderful spectacle. So I will be there.

  • cars1912

    Red lion that weekend the pipe bands are in Scotland.

    Neil the Council did give permission in December. For some reason unexplained they decided to debate it once again and allow SF to rattle off the same stuff they did in December.

    In last nights Tele Councillor McVeigh stated yet again he has concerns over feeder parades and that the UCC won’t talk. Both statements are wrong. A bit like some of the rubbish spoken by Jackie McDonald a week or so ago.

    Also I note that the UCC have decided to drop the North Belfast starting point. As an act of good faith perhaps? I do not know.

    Should be a great day.

  • Reader

    Quincey, two quotes from the USS Website:
    “On two occasions prior to Christmas Sinn Fein were advised by members of the Balmoral Review organising committee that there would be no feeder parades.”
    “The Committee has decided the parades will leave from Clifton Street, Shankill Road and Sandy Row only.”
    Those two statements seem to be to be directly contradictory. Can you explain why the 3 parades listed should *not* be called feeder parades? For the moment, I will regard poor communications from the UCC as being responsible for a lot of the confusion surrounding the event.

  • dwatch

    ranger1640, wonderful spectacle it may have been for some but try and ask the loyal protestant relatives of the 40,000 who signed the 1912 covenant from Cavan Monaghan & Donegal what good it done them? They became the victims of events like Partition in 1921 who were sold out into a ROI.

  • Reader

    Oops – UCC website, not USS website – sorry.

  • Drumlins Rock

    dwatch, I’m one of those, my grandmother was from the Protestant East Donegal area, she had an uncle killed at the Somme, plus im only 3 miles from the border, many of my friends are from”refugee” families, i’m still discovering more have similar stories, have friends who live in North Monaghan and other who retain strong ties. I’m sure mine and their ancestors were deeply hurt, but obviously Ulster as a whole would not have survived with a Nationalsit majority, probably the border redraw as agreed by the boundary commission would have helped some, although it still hasn’t been made public!

    Border prods in the modern era live in a dual world they might not like being on the wrong side of the border but its certainly better than the wrong side of the Irish Sea.

  • Rory Carr

    “There is an attempt to talk this event out,” claimed the DUP’s Christopher Stalford.

    “It is quite sad. There is scaremongering going on.”

    There most certainly is. And the source of that scaremongering plainly lies within the camp of the event organisers. And Quincey is doing an admirable job in furthering such scaremongering by this very thread the whole thrust of which plainly is, ” The Balmoral Centenary Event may very well turn out to be a damp squib but it will all be the Shinners’ fault – so don’t go blaming the organising committee.”

    Right, Quincy, whatever you say.

  • Jim McVeigh seems to be confusing ‘feeder parade’ and ‘main parade’:

    Sinn Fein’s leader on Belfast City Council, Jim McVeigh, said: “Our primary concern is feeder parades.

    “We are not opposed to the rally in Ormeau Park. But we have great concerns about contentious feeder parades and the impact on host communities.

    “So far the organisers have refused to meet us, but we want to meet with them to resolve issues.” BelTel source

    Here is a use of both terms on the CAIN website:

    The Ormeau Road is a main road in South Belfast and due to demographical changes over the years the lower part of it has become predominantly Nationalist. The main reason for contention in this area is that each year Ballynafeigh Orange Lodge uses the road for feeder marches to main parades.

    So called feeder parades can also be in different villages, towns and cities as described in this Parades Commission determination in 2008:

    4. The Commission notes the purpose of this [Dunloy RBP] parade is ‘Feeder parade for Black demonstration in Ballyclare.’

    To add to the confusion:

    On the 23rd January on this website (see news section) the route for the Review was made public.

    Ballymacarrett is one of the assembly points for the main parade but I see no mention of it on the PC website. Have all of these elements of the ‘main parade’ been submitted to the PC?

  • cars1912

    Reader

    You stated;

    “On two occasions prior to Christmas Sinn Fein were advised by members of the Balmoral Review organising committee that there would be no feeder parades.”

    “The Committee has decided the parades will leave from Clifton Street, Shankill Road and Sandy Row only.”

    Those two statements seem to be to be directly contradictory. Can you explain why the 3 parades listed should *not* be called feeder parades? For the moment, I will regard poor communications from the UCC as being responsible for a lot of the confusion surrounding the event.”

    You should note that the parade is leaving these 3 points and therefore they are not feeder parades. That’s my assumption anyway. No confusion at all.

  • Drumlins Rock

    Almost all large parades start and disperse at several points, it eases congestion and convenience, these do not count as feeder parades, ( an ugly term, local parades is more fitting ) There currently 4 parades listed on the PC website, two of them are for single bands going just a few streets to join the main parade, and the other two are for the main branches of the parade.

  • Reader

    cars1912: You should note that the parade is leaving these 3 points and therefore they are not feeder parades.
    I would have thought that a feeder parade was defined based on how it ended (i.e. in the main parade or procession) rather than on how it started. Can you tell me what a feeder parade actually is, instead of just denying that these are feeders?
    (DR – I understand the logic of multiple start points, and I’m not against feeder and/or local and/or these parades. I just think that if the UCC and friends can’t make themselves clear they can’t blame everyone else for the confusion)

  • cars1912

    Reader

    This is one parade merging in the City Centre before making it’s way to Ormeau Park. That in my opinion is very clear.

    The expression “feeder parade” has been used before to describe one or two lodges making their way to the start of the 12th parade i.e. lodges from Ligoniel to the West Belfast Orange Hall before joining the main parade. This will not be happening.

  • cars1912

    Just checked the PC website and see that people are holding feeder parades. This should not be happening so I apologise for my arguing a point which is balls.

  • dwatch

    DR, I am only reading your post now. My father (who came from Fintona Co Tyrone) used to tell me stories in the 1950’s how with his father, uncle & two brothers used to go with the local LOL every year to the parade in Rossnowlagh Co Donegal in the 1930’s. Partition and covenant signing by angry members of the OO from the three border counties mentioned was a hot subject then.

  • lamhdearg2

    car1912, very honest of you, for most folk on slugger, to realise there point is balls, is the time to go missing, or even worse just switch threads and ignore what they typed.
    dr, dwatch, lets call for a thread,(we cant just hijack this one) that would discuss the hypothetical, of Donegal having been part of Free Ulster (N.I.).

  • Drumlins Rock

    lamhdearg, we have a decade to discuss it, over and over again, but might as well start here as the next thread has duplicated the main subject of this one, the commission is supposed to have reccomended part of East Donegal going to NI, which lead to its abandonment, although I believe the map has never been published?

  • cynic2

    There’s nothing really like Slugger for a weekend of whataboutery and manufactured outrage

  • lamhdearg2

    finn valley?, a little thought i play around in my head, would have had all of Donegal, offset by a constitution that would require a waited majority for change, ie to enter into union with Eire.

  • Zig70
  • Reader

    Drumlins Rock: the commission is supposed to have reccomended part of East Donegal going to NI, which lead to its abandonment, although I believe the map has never been published?
    The map was leaked at the time, hence the row in the Dail. There’s a poor quality copy of the map in Jonathan Bardon’s “History of Ulster” (between the text and the index, with the rest of the maps)

  • lamhdearg2

    your a tease Reader, link, anyone.

  • lamhdearg2

    “Bardon closes on a note of restrained hope; one tempting conclusion might be to declare a plague on both political fantasies and concentrate on the uniqueness of Ulster’s own cultural traditions, and the chances of cooperation on that level. If so, this book will take its place as an important part of the process.”

    I have to get my self a copy of that book for my hols come july.

  • Reader

    lamhdearg2: your a tease Reader, link, anyone.
    Sorry – still no link, There were quite small border adjustments in Donegal in favour of NI – maybe 50 square miles – but we would have had to sacrifice Forkhill and Crossmaglen. There was a net transfer of land and people to the Free State.

  • lamhdearg2

    “but we would have had to sacrifice Forkhill and Crossmaglen” now you are taking the piss.

    “There was a net transfer of land and people to the Free State.”
    i have not looked into the bounderies com enough, but still i never knew that.

  • lamhdearg2

    boundary, not plural.

  • Drumlins Rock

    The map that you can get is a crude guestimation I believe, there is a probably a detailed one right down to townland boundaries (aren’t they useful?) deep in the achives somewhere. There was talk once that bits on Monaghan would go North too, although the main Prod area around Drum is a bit isolated, possibly it could be Clontibret? There were other proposals to “tidy up” the Tyrone & Fermanagh Borders, it would have been sisnsible to transfer a wee bit to the North round Beleek too! but most would have went south. Saying that 10 acres of East Donegal would grow as much as 50 acres of South Armagh lol

  • lamhdearg2

    Not being too hung up on the differing christian religions myself maybe i am looking at this wrong, but surely the uup of the time would have been better to engage with the boundery com, and do a bit of horse trading, south armagh for north monaghan, and land swapping the prods of monaghan swaping lands in the south of the county with caths to the north.what was the fixation with county bounderies, becoming country ones, they must have seen a shorter border would have put them on a stronger footing.

  • “what was the fixation with county bounderies”

    Probably convenience more than fixation, lamhdearg2; the three leaders signed up to an agreement in 1925.

  • Reader

    lamhdearg2: but surely the uup of the time would have been better to engage with the boundery com, and do a bit of horse trading, south armagh for north monaghan, and land swapping the prods of monaghan swaping lands in the south of the county with caths to the north.what was the fixation with county bounderies, becoming country ones,
    The possible land exchanges ran into the Not an Inch brigade. The initial county boundaries were convenient in an emergency, then no-one would make a deal subsequently.

  • lamhdearg2

    i also read that the free state side thought any changes would be one way (to their liking) only. dastardly brits and their cleverly written agreements. still if could have be handled in a number of differant ways, with a better outcome.

  • tacapall

    Lamhdearg. Perfidious albion at its best.

    http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/othelem/fox.htm

    The Making of a Minority

    “Lord Carson, venting his disappointment to the Upper House, maintained that Ulster had been betrayed, and that England had been made ‘to scuttle out of Ireland’ The signatories of the Treaty had been led to believe Boundary Commission would enact frontier changes excluding large Catholic majorities, “according to the wishes of the inhabitants” like Tyrone, South Armagh, and South Down and even Derry City. The effect of this, the signatories believed, would leave the remaining area no longer economically or politically viable, and so it would virtually drop into the lap of the Southern Government. (Significantly neither the Nationalists or Unionists paid attention to the amended version of the original Treaty relating to border changes arising “from the wishes of the inhabitants”. The amendment added” so far as may be compatible with economic and geographic conditions”.

    The Commission made a number of visits to Derry with full hearings on Derry’s position taking place in the city from 14 May 1925 to 5 June. Evidence from both Nationalist and Unionist sides was presented. The claims that the city should become part of the Irish Free State were opposed on the grounds that the greater part of the trade of the city and its port was with Northern Ireland and that the city was linked economically with the Protestant districts of the East. [72] These last points were decisive for Judge Feetham, who invoked the “so far as may be compatible with economic and geographic conditions” clause of Article 12, maintaining that those conditions would take precedence over the “wishes of the inhabitants”. This clause was used to the same effect in all parts of Ireland.

    In the resultant furore Eoin McNeill resigned from the Commission on 20 November and from the Southern Government a few days later. Eventually after much bargaining and threats, Cosgrave was out-manoeuvred over spurious tax claims and finally on 3 December 1925 signed the Tripartite Agreement amending the 1921 Treaty. This accepted the Northern Ireland border, the six counties, without qualification, and the virtual abolition of the Council of Ireland, for Dublin’s release from the concocted tax claims.”

  • lamhdearg2

    “Cosgrave was out-manoeuvred over spurious tax claims”, or did he accept that Eire could not pay its part of the empires dept?.

  • tacapall

    Lamhdearg if the minority in Ireland could opt out claiming they were a majority in some counties why could those Nationalist who were the majority in 3 possibly 4 of the eventual six counties not give the same choice? Maybe you should read the article again.

  • lamhdearg2

    tacapall, this brings me back to “why county lines”, large parts of your “3 possibly 4 “where unionist in make up, so a safer bet for the uup would have been to draw their new border to put thousands of irish nats out.
    The state missing south armagh southwest of the lakes and west of the foyle @ derry coupled with land swaps elsewhere, would not have led not to the remaining area no longer being economically or politically viable,but would have been the end of any dreams of an all island union.
    ps this is not what i would haved liked to have happened.

  • lamhdearg2

    pps, the minority of ythe island did not opt out, it was the majority the opted out, when they left the U.K..

    ppps, (is there such a thing as ppps) at the risk of whatabout, i will assume you have no probs with the minority of the island of Britain (should they choose to)ie, Scots and Scotland opting out.

  • antamadan

    Lámh Dearg 2 said ‘pps, the minority of ythe island did not opt out, it was the majority the opted out, when they left the U.K..’

    But
    All of Ireland was put into the ‘United Kingdom’, and surely in more enlightened times when things such as democracy were supposed to matter -at least a little-, all of Ireland could vote to come out of the UK. Again if ‘NI’ is entitled to opt out, surely Derry city was entitled to ‘opt out’ of NI.
    Unionists have a case of course nothing is black and white, but unionist ‘High horse & democracy’ talk doesn’t impress me