SDLP to lodge an amendment to the DUP’s special motion on Tuesday…

And it seems that the SDLP will be putting an amendment down when the Assembly meets for a special sitting on Tuesday. Conall McDevitt:

“On Tuesday when the Assembly meets the SDLP will seek to give parties the opportunity back an amendment to the DUP motion which condemns the violence, challenges the sectarianism displayed this 12th and supports the lawful institutions of the land including the Parades Commission.

“On Saturday at the fields we heard the language of war by another means, of active conflict with and disregard for lawfully constituted institutions from the leaders of the loyal orders. The reality those making these speeches or unfurling banners outside the Parades Commission offices to the cry of ‘no surrender’ must now accept is that a shared society will involve compromise by all and that the Good Friday Agreement, its institutions, safeguards and principles is and will remain the only show in town. While we welcome the subsequent statement suspending protests in north Belfast many will it see it as too little too late from people who should and do know better.

The loyal orders have a significant contribution to make in building a new society here. It’s a contribution that can best be made through our democratic institutions, dialogue and respect for the diversity within our society. [emphasis added]

, , ,

  • cynic2


    I thought the sham fight was in Scarva on the 13th?

  • michael-mcivor

    There will be another sham fight night in the woodvale rd in a few hours time-

  • Gopher

    Why does the relative Assembly department or Belfast city council not take over the granting of a license for 12th parades and demonstrations? Every other event has to jump through hoops with health and safety and various other restrictions on noise and time etc. It should be up to the OO to prove they can manage the events they stage. I’m sure nobody just says to the North West 200 or Tenants Vital work away lads.

  • Morpheus

    “Why does the relative Assembly department or Belfast city council not take over the granting of a license for 12th parades and demonstrations?”

    Excellent point.

    Should we scrap the Parades Commission and hand control over to the local councils? That would ensure that decisions are made by local elected officials rather than the ‘unelected quango’ the OO harp on about.

  • Morpheus,

    You may have forgotten that a joint DUP/SF commitee was set up a number of years ago to address that issue and came up with that “solution”. Of course, the wise men of the OO said “NO” and Robinson rolled over.

  • Morpheus

    So they reject the elected and unelected – what’s left?

  • I think the only solution would be the fine the Lodge(s) who cannot or refuse to control their members and followers. Refusal to pay the fine would result in jail time. I don’t know if legislation would be required and, if so, it would never pass. It would be important that an individual lodge could be penalized since there should be no collective punishment of those that behave properly.

  • Morpheus

    I have said a few times that I think every band should complete their own 11/1 so the PSNI know which doors to knock on when things go belly up.

  • Comrade Stalin

    There really are no reforms required to the current legislation around parading other than a couple of tweaks to make it a bit more robust.

    The proposals above to require groups to pay costs etc. will prevent many less contentious parading events from taking place, not least Pride. I think it’s a good thing that we do not restrict access to the roads to those with deep enough pockets.

    The legal means already exist to prosecute parades where the rules are broken. The parade organizers are legally responsible for the conduct of the bands; since it will be those organizers who have to face court they might find it appropriate to ensure they select only bands who can manage to stick to the rules.

    The complaints about the OO being an “unelected quango” are just bunk. They’re appointees of Her Majesty’s Secretary of State. If they have a problem with British rule, they might want to join Sinn Féin.

  • cynic2

    “every band should complete their own 11/1”

    Great idea. Now

    1 define a band

    2 prove who was playing that day

    3 prove that they individually broke the law

    4 stop them changing the identity of the band next week and the week after etc etc

  • cynic2

    “hand control over to the local councils”

    …..a recipe for disaster ….see flegs issue

    But there is one point. Every other public event has to have insurance before its allowed to continue – so why not the OO or other march organizers?

  • Has one of our commenters never heard of moving pictures, or even sound recordings?

  • DC

    I hope someone asks why a compromise position was OK in the morning but in the evening for the walk home this compromise was junked.

    I think the public will understand if the parades commission comes out and says they were frightened of law enforcement potentially getting shot at from ardoyne by dissidents.

  • Gopher

    Everyone knows the ruling was due to last years violence but the parades commission up held the rights of the OO to proceed down the road to the city centre albeit with sensible restrictions that the OO should have conceded themselves. That decision would have been upheld had it been put to the test by blood and treasure and the collective embarrassment of every normal person. The OO are just to thick to realise when they are on a winner. The march home is cringe worthy and the PC gave the OO a good excuse to scrap it and preserving the right to walk to the field unmolested from this day on but they are just too stupid to understand this.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Everyone knows the ruling was due to last years violence

    They do ? I don’t.


    I think the public will understand if the parades commission comes out and says they were frightened of law enforcement potentially getting shot at from ardoyne by dissidents.

    Why would they do that ? Everyone knows that loyalists are capable of shooting at police too – they did in 2005.


    DC – Have you read the PC’s determination? Which parts do you not understand?

  • Morpheus

    “1 define a band. 2 prove who was playing that day. 3 prove that they individually broke the law. 4 stop them changing the identity of the band next week and the week after etc etc”

    I would think that the definition of a band is obvious. If the bands are not covered by the OO’s 11/1 form and will be disavowed at the first sign of trouble then they obviously are not the OO’s responsibility. Therefore if they want to escort the OO then my suggestion is that they complete a 11/1 form of their own which will be presented to the police before the march begins.

    If restrictions have been placed on the band (like not playing highly provocative music outside a Church in displays of nothing more than blind bigotry and sectarianism) then the police who will be present at each of the contentious areas where there are restrictions can take note and get their leaders before the courts. In order to charge them then the police will provide the evidence in the same way they would for any other crime that has been committed.

    This will only effect a small number of bands anyway cynic – the vast majority do a great job and follow the law of the land. Hell, some of the bands on the 12th left a big gap in the procession around the Church in a great sign of respect. The only ones who need worry are those intent on breaking the law.

  • Gopher


    It’s quite simple if there was no violence there would be no need for the parades commission, marches would pass up and down roads to their hearts content. The parades commission produced a compromise that the PSNI could enforce, that is the fundamental dynamic.

  • DC

    The bit i don’t understand is shared future in the morning – roads are shared by protestants and catholics – but on the way home unshared future.


    DC, the determination is clear to me as to the reasons why the morning and evening parades were treated differently and has nothing whatsoever to do with ‘shared future’. The term ‘shared future’ is not (as far as I am aware) a policy which the PC is obliged to give consideration to and therefore it seems peculiar that you should raise it as regards the determinations of the PC.

    Perhaps you are now asking a different question?

    I have to confess that ‘shared future’ is one of those terms which I fail to understand the meaning of and therefore tend not to use it. Just like ‘dealing with the past’. However I tend to assume that those who do use it understand what they mean by it. May I therefore ask what you mean by the term ‘shared future’ and how you think it should apply as regards the issue of parading?

  • redstar2011

    The bit I don’t understand is in Derry the OO agreed no controversial feeder parades in exchange for the run of the city for their parade. Why can Belfast OO follow suit

  • DC

    ‘DC, the determination is clear to me as to the reasons why the morning and evening parades were treated differently’

    why should the same parade have two different outcomes if the raw demands are the same, so why was there a shared future in the morning but unshared coming home for instance around 20 psni landrovers called in to block off woodvale road.


    DC, have you read the determination or you need me to post the details of it here?

  • DC

    No i haven’t read it but i have watched the outworkings of it.

    walk out ok.

    walk home not ok.


    DC, you have asked at least three questions about the Parades Commission’s determination. Given that you clearly wish to understand the rationale behind the determination, do you think it would be better to :

    a) read the determination; or
    b) not read the determination

  • DC

    I’m on my holidays and i’m not reading PC determinations on my holidays – just give me a short 2 minute media clip on youtube or something that’s where it’s at for explanations these days, get your man Osborne or whatever on youtube, he’s got just under 2 minutes to lay out the case…

  • goalsboyce

    The bit i don’t understand is shared future in the morning – roads are shared by protestants and catholics – but on the way home unshared future.

    They’re not prevented from using the roads they could always catch a bus or take a different route. If I were to walk up the Cliftonville into Ballysillan to make use of the leisure centre carrying a tricolour and sword I would expect problems.The fact that all three leisure centres in north Belfast are located in loyalist areas, Ballysillin, Shankill and shore road is an example of unionists idea of a shared future when they held power at BCC.

  • cynic2

    ” the definition of a band is obvious.”

    Ever spend much time around lawyers?

    ” playing highly provocative music ”

    how do you prove that it is provocative and that each bandsman charged knew it was provocative

    ” the police……. can take note and get their leaders before the courts.”

    Who are their leaders? You have to prove they each committed a crime not just that someone did

    Lawyers in the PPS Office will shred any case before it gets near court

  • cynic2

    ” they could always catch a bus”

    …..sorry not permitted by PC

  • Knucklehead Smiff

    One supposes it would be asking a bit much to expect the OO to have indicated any intention to assist in the identification and prosecution of its own members involved in acts of violence at the weekend, yes ?

  • ArdoyneUnionist

    Just a couple of points.

    After the parades commission gave the determination for the Crumlin road, that there was to be no return parade. Did they work on the premise that if there is no home parade no one would want to use the Crumlin road to access the greater Ardoyne or Ballysillan???

    Gerry Kelly described the area as a 100% catholic in a TV interview, and said (I Para phrase) “that they will not be walking up this road”. All fine and dandy Gerry, the implication being that men, women and children from the PUL who live locally can’t use this road or do they need Gerry’s or the shinners permission to use or make their way home along the Crumlin road???

    If there is no parade the psni need to give assurances that those who wish to use or go to their homes in the greater Ardoyne and Ballysillan areas along the Crumlin road, who are on foot will be facilitated.

    The parades commission and psni can’t demand that they all return home by 8pm, as they are private individuals going about their lawful business.

    As for Kelly, I would suggest that Gerry Kelly’s rhetoric needs to be challenged as he stated that, that part of the Crumlin road is now the de facto, “independent Irish catholic republic of Ardoyne”.

    All this has come as news to me as I use this area on an almost daily basis. Is this the shared space and future Kelly and the shinners keep telling me about??? I get the impression that when there is a catholic or nationalist/republican majority the shinners and local populous turn into a mirror image of the things they are charging Unionists and the Orange Order off. Strange how things go around.

    Do I now need to ask Gerry’s or the shinners permission to access the area???

    I find what Kelly said offensive as I’m sure will those from the PUL community who live and work around this area, and those who want to go home via the Crumlin road on the 12th night or any other time of the year for that matter.

    Maybe I should put in a Gerry or shinner 11/1916 to get a determination to see if I can use the Crumlin road???

    For Gerry in his, independent Irish catholic republic of Ardoyne. Here is an insight into my use of the now, independent Irish catholic republic of Ardoyne, I go to the car wash, I go to the Credit Union, I go to the library, I go to the chemist and shops, and go up and down the Ardoyne and Crumlin road on an almost daily basis.

    Memo to self must Gerry says I must find new car wash, credit union, library, chemist and shops. Must now carry passport to check in at border control when wishing to enter the, independent Irish catholic republic of Ardoyne, on my way to and from home. As this new statelet is not part of the EU yet and as such there is no open border policy yet.

    Lastly and more importantly, Gerry is playing to another gallery, he has an electorate to win back and to play up to. GARC have been giving the shinners a hard time in the “independent Irish catholic republic of Ardoyne” and Gerry and the shinners need to win back some credibility.

  • Knucklehead Smiff


    So just to be clear; is it your view that this is simply cheap demagogy and politicking on Kelly’s part or are you saying that he and/or SF really does genuinely buy into it ?

    I do think you are entitled to an answer to the shared space point; I’d go slightly further and ask Kelly whether in his new Ireland which would be based on universal civil and human rights, what does his position on parading mean for a SF-sponsored constitution governed by rights, specifically those rights which relate to freedom of assembly, freedom of association and freedom of speech. If we are to judge his position on Ardoyne etc, those are rights which we are entitled to know the limits of before deciding whether we think that his party have a vision of a future which is worth subscribing to in ANY key respect.

  • Comrade Stalin


    Personally, I am up for finding a solution that results in Orangemen marching down the Crumlin Road again.

    Part of getting to that solution involves people recognising what the problem is. GARC have an agenda, but it is an agenda backed up by ideas that resonate with many of the general public ie that Orangemen and their hangers-on are not very nice. This is being reinforced right now by riots and attacks on the police, burning of religious imagery, death threats to moderate Catholic politicians etc. All of this plays into the hands of the sinister people who run GARC.

    For there to be a solution the Orange Order need to play the game and play it smarter than GARC. That means genuine negotiations, genuine compromise and a toning down of the inflammatory rhetoric. If people believe they are reasonable then they are more likely to see the unreasonable intransigence of GARC’s position. Then you might get somewhere.

  • ArdoyneUnionist


    I take on board with what you say however GARC are only a recent aberration. As for talks there has been talks for years over this issue. The North and West Belfast Parades and Cultural Forum, have been meeting with the shinner backed and supported CARA. There has been no music limited flags ect ect, now apart from not walking along the Crumlin road what more can they do. And yes they have breached the determination this year but I would guess that, that is borne out of pure frustration at the parades commission and in my opinion republican intransigence.

    And there were riots and the parade attacked so this is not a new development even when the parade followers have been denied access to the Crumlin road to get home. But “so what” they are only PUL who live in the greater Ardoyne or Ballysillan.

    I think Gerry let the mask slip with his wee rant, we now have a “independent Irish catholic republic of Ardoyne”. A shared area and shared future is only a reality in the tiny sectarian minds of the shinners. so I now know where I stand with the shinners and as a result I am now going to find another car wash, I am going to change Credit Union to the one on the Ballysillan and I will not be going back to the shops I have been using for years. I have no option but to travel along the Crumlin road, so Gerry has got 90% of his squalid sectarian victory.

    Oh and going passed the shops tonight as I turned onto the Crumlin road two of Ardoyne’s finest women give me and my wife the fingers and shouted bastards, so I know for sure that Gerry’s rhetoric is now taking root.

  • cynic2

    I see the OO say that PSNI have ‘questions to answer’. I assume these are questions like

    “Why is your uniform on fire Constable?”

    “Why are you bleeding?”

    “How did you sustain those injuries?”

    “How many of those attacking you were wearing band uniform or sashes?”

  • cynic2

    I” find what Kelly said offensive”

    ….then complain to PSNI and the Standards Commissioner that it was a hate crime. I am sure you will get a full and detailed response

  • I agree with AU that the authorities had a responsibility to ensure safe individual passage for those people who wanted to/needed to return home.. Kelly’s assertion that the area is now 100% Catholic and no one else will pass, if true, is totally unacceptable.
    On a related matter, the OO are now facing a huge challenge in responding to the PSNI request for assisting in identifying those in Orange regalia filmed rioting.

  • SK

    “the OO are now facing a huge challenge in responding to the PSNI request for assisting in identifying those in Orange regalia filmed rioting.”


    This, I think, might be a watershed moment for the Order. There were some Derry brethren openly criticising the Belfast lodges on the news this evening. Between that and the potential for internal disagreement over whether to hand those Orangemen who rioted over, I reckon there might be a split on the horizon.

  • Comrade Stalin


    Sorry in advance for the long post. I hope it doesn’t sound too preachy.

    I am not so familiar with the history up at Ardoyne, but I do know what happened in other places where there are no marches such as at Garvaghy and Lower Ormeau. At Garvaghy, a last-minute agreement to allow a parade after about a week of serious violence and threats (rewarding violence anyone?) the residents grouping agreed to lift their objections to the parade subject to certain conditions. Those conditions were broken and instead of celebrating the compromise the Orange order basically in so many words went around declaring that the taigs had been put in their place.

    At Lower Ormeau there were various disputes and talks, and then one 12th some of the people in their parade held up their fingers in front of the bookies where the UFF murdered a bunch of civilians in the recent past.

    The situation I am most familiar with is the one a year ago at St Patrick’s. Talking to unionists and Orange supporters here and elsewhere, the right answer was to apologize for causing offence to the church and to say that those bandsmen were not acting in the name of the organization and that they would face disciplinary hearings (we know the Orange Order have disciplinary procedures and they are not afraid to use them – they tend to get invoked whenever a unionist politician who is an Orangeman makes the mistake of attending a Catholic funeral).

    Instead what came back was every excuse in the book, sometimes from senior politicians. There was nobody in the building. You can’t offend a building anyway. The song was a Beach Boy’s song. The video footage was shot by a Sinn Féin member and therefore had no credibility (?!?!). They’re going out of their way to be offended. All the usual stuff. A smaller-scale, but similar, transgression was committed this summer. It hasn’t been picked up on mainly because of Ardoyne but some will have noticed it.

    I can assure you that you do not have to be a republican or a Sinn Féiner to take exception both to this conduct, and the patronizing responses to the complaints against it as if people are stupid. It creates incredible frustration when people witness someone committing a misdeed and then denying it to their very faces. People who are non-republicans tend to become republicans very quickly when they are faced with this kind of intransigent denial.

    What I am getting at here is that the OO and their supporters had a hand in the problems in these hotspots. Not only that, but they are in the business of actively trying to create more trouble spots (Clifton St). It is very difficult for moderate voices who know and understand that we are all better off with an accomodation which tolerates marching to make that case, when marching bands are busy spitting in the faces of residents and their churches without any kind of censure.

    So it’s not accurate to say that one day Sinn Féin turned up and turned the residents against the marching bodies. It is certainly the case that they rallied people behind a cause for political purposes. But it is necessary to accept and acknowledge that marchers, bands and indeed communities have treated each other disrespectfully and that this is still happening.

  • ArdoyneUnionist


    It is my understand that the band did apologise to the priest of St Patrick’s and there was contact made to the priest and the bishop by the Orange Order on the issue, so far the priest and the bishop have not taken up the offer of a meeting.

    It’s interesting that that JJ Magee the shinner election candidate who took the clip of the band last year posted on his twitter Ha, Ha about Nigel Dodds’ injury on the 12th night.

    Magee removed the Ha Ha from his tweet. Should we take this as his apology, and take it at face value???

    Has he been suspended from the party or is he being sanctioned on what is a clear sectarian tweet???

    Should the PUL community not take offence at this sectarian tweet??? Or was he just playing to the gallery and it is not that important??? Or do we just move on and get over it???

    Can I ask a simple question on offence, should I or the wider Protestant Unionist Loyalist community not take offence when there are sectarian paramilitary memorials depicting Protestant child killers on Roman Catholic property?

    Should I not take offence at paramilitary displays on Roman Catholic property?
    Should I not take offence at republican bands playing at or in Roman Catholic property? And to say that it is only property is as defensive as saying the chapel was closed.

    I see a one way street here on the issue of offence and to be honest the Roman Catholic hierarchy are doing what the Orange Order are doing and running away from the issue? And the shinners are very quiet on this issue, strange as they are the main participants at these events at Roman Catholic property, so the stench of hypocrisy from the shinners here is a bit off.

    I would agree that there should be no parade up at night, as I mentioned in another post. However the psni need to ensure those who are returning from the Shankill get free and safe access to the upper Crumlin, Glenbryn and Ballysillan passed the shops..

    Greater Ardoyne and Twaddell is a place apart; No one and I mean no one, wants to listen to the residents of Twaddell and Glenbryn, on the thousands of incidents of aggression and intimidation that come from the republican part of Ardoyne. You can poo poo that fact all you like, however I have been given many first-hand accounts from residents who are on the front line at Twaddell and Glenbryn on how their homes have been attack tens of 1,000’s of times through the years. The psni don’t want to know, the shinners don’t want to know, the SDLP don’t want to know and the media don’t want to know.

    Therefore the parade to them is an important issue as it reaffirms their existence and their importance, because all they see from republicans and from the republican part of Ardoyne is aggression and intimidation and official irrelevance from the psni and media.

  • Kevsterino

    Is Glenbryn the community where the Holy Cross school is situated?

  • ArdoyneUnionist

    Kevsterino: yes it is and there is Our Lady of Mercy secondary school on the Ballysillan, do you have a point???