Nesbitt; “Northern Ireland’s future within the United Kingdom will be best secured by maximising the number of people who are content and happy with their lot”

Yesterday Mike Nesbitt addressed the UUP Executive for the final time as party leader. In his speech he focused on his 5 year leadership and had a few shots at the DUP. His full speech is available on the News Letter website.

He made some points about the general attitude of Unionism arguing;

Unionism needs to engage more.

There is no point complaining the White House and the USA are biased, if the only voices they hear are Irish nationalist and republican. Senator Gary Hart was the latest US Envoy and I insisted one of our first meetings should be at Boneybefore outside Larne, at the Jackson Homestead – Jackson being the first generation American President who formed the Democratic Party, which Gary has been a member of for most of his 80 years. Of the 40 million Americans claiming ancestry back to this island, the majority are not Irish American, they are Ulster Scots. We should energise them. “When Gary Hart came to my house for dinner, I introduced him – a lifelong fan of Jameson Irish Whiskey – to Black Bush, and presented him with a book of John Hewitt’s poetry. When he heard I was stepping down as Leader, he sent me a very personal message, and quoted from a Hewitt poem. It may not add up to a hill of beans, in the short term, introducing the Jamesons and Seamus Heaney man to the merits of Bushmills and John Hewitt – but unionism has nothing to lose in putting our side of the argument. We have a proud message to promote and I believe we need to work harder to promote it.

“That includes engaging with Irish Republicanism.

“I attended a conference this time last year in Bundoran, organised by an American University. The audience was Irish Republican and Irish American to the core. My debate was with Martin McGuinness. My message was simple; in sporting terms, I am playing an away match but sometimes away goals count double. I believe unionism scored a tiny victory that night.

He also had some parting shots for the DUP that could cast doubts upon Unionist unity;

“I hope the Party builds on small victories. “My vision remains of a partnership, a partnership of the willing.

“That is not what I hear from the DUP, which is unionism whose language is intent on domination.

“They talk of “rogue” and “renegade” ministers. They can talk of the “crocodile” that needs starved. All that language achieves is further division, polarisation and the energising of voters who were previously content to put their constitutional aspirations to one side as they enjoyed the benefits of being within the UK – making money, educating their children, having access to a health service without having to pay – and all the rest. What is missing from the DUP is any sense of the values and principles of 1998: reconciliation, tolerance, trust building and the demonstration of mutual respect. It is the unionism of domination, not partnership. It is – to my mind – the politics that endangers our future.

“Northern Ireland’s future within the United Kingdom will be best secured by maximising the number of people who are content and happy with their lot, including Catholics and aspiring nationalists. When people are too busy enjoying life, the more secure the Union will be.

Partnership. Not domination.

He continued reflecting on the last election;

“Now, I could tell you our first preference vote went up 18% overall. I could talk about Alan Chambers upping our vote in North Down by well over 20%, or Robin Swann increasing his by 37% in North Antrim, or John Stewart taking a seat off Sinn Féin, just like Tom Elliott did in 2015. Or how close Michael Henderson came to reclaiming our seat in South Belfast seat – or how in a 108 seat Assembly we could have grown our MLA group – and so-on and so-forth.

“But that’s all meaningless. 16 seats in a 108 seat Assembly is the equivalent of 13.3 seats in a 90 seater. We got ten. We could not afford a single loss. Three was three too many.

“That’s not good enough. “The buck stops here.

, ,

  • smcgiff

    I’d be inclined to agree. The greatest gift to Nationalism is the political strength of the DUP.

    The union will depend more and more on those formerly of the nationalist tradition supporting the union. The greatest threat to that is the DUP and their shortsightedness. NI may retain its position in the UK, but the make up the political sphere within NI is at a tipping point.

    While a significant portion of Catholics will continue to support the union, they will see voting for Nationalist parties to their benefit locally.

    God save Arlene Foster.

  • Ciaran74

    I think this grouping of people of Catholic/ Irish background who support the union needs the curtain drawn back – because I don’t believe there are that many technically. I think the grouping everyone keeps referring to are actually shoulder shruggers, union neutral and see no cause to get angry. That said quite a number I know went to the polls this time and punted SF/SDLP so they can get emotionally engaged.

    The odd Catholic union supporters (not Unionist) I’ve met are upper middle earners, who live in well heeled areas and/or unionist population dominated areas like north Down and have self-conditioned to blend in, think McIlroy.

  • johnny lately

    Mikes got it all wrong, the future of the Union itself is dependant upon the majority of people in Northern Ireland being contented with the link and so far neither the British or Unionism has even attempted to convince nationalists that their best interests lie within that Union. Corporate Britain depends on its survival by embracing the interests of its constituent parts which Brexit clearly does not do and its logo which is the Union flag. If Northern Ireland or Scotland leave the union its logo goes too and that would also be the final nail in the coffin of the Crown.

  • 1729torus

    The Ulster Unionists are evolving into a Carsonite party as a result of being presented with a similar situation to the Southern Unionists back in the early 1900s. A natural question to ask is why not go the full mile and try to get the rest of Ireland into the UK?

    It seems like the inevitable conclusion of Mike Nesbitt’s logic since it doesn’t contradict his position, and it would greatly strengthen the UK. It’s an obvious way of engaging with Nationalist views on partition in in good faith without compromising your own position now that everyone as given up on Fortress Ulster.

    Might Unionist parties cross the border at some point?

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Yes. The unionists would have to spend a fortune painting all those red white and blue kerbstones red and white only. And that, of course, is the least of it.

  • mickfealty

    My experience is that there’s never 100% of any community who will join the broader consensus (on any subject). It may feel like it on CNR majority communities but even there I suspect it’s short of 100%.

    What we can fairly safely say about Scotland is that more than 50% would like independence but not necessarily at the price it’s currently being offered. In NI the largest growing segment is the religiously agnostic (this was probably the most significant change in the last census).

    Brian wrote a blog before Xmas arguing that Arlene’s class of bellicosity was fading fast. Maybe so, if only in the sense that they should learn to pocket their victories (Brexit, for example) with better grace.

  • Croiteir

    I said on another thread the only hope for unionism is to go back to what unionism was until the firebrands of Belfast got their hands on it in the mid 19th Century AD. Although mostly Anglican they had no problem with being culturally Irish, they were not as British as Finchley but as British as Fingal. They had no problem with speaking Irish, they had no problem with Irish cultural pursuits. They just wanted to be part of the union. They would have difficulty with the unionism that tries to diminish Irish culture and replace it with some sort of imagined Englishness. They would not have seen that as being what the union was about. In fact they would have seen that as demeaning. The problem we have is that we have unionism in the north east of Ireland that sees itself a somehow lesser than the English but, on the other hand superior to their fellow compatriots. So they cannot escape from their cleft stick and so will end up losing what they say they treasure.

    In fact what unionism today is is nothing more than a mirage. It will fail.

  • johnny lately

    Its got nothing to do with money Bona, its like Nike losing its tick or Man Utd losing its red devil.

  • Nevin

    “The problem we have is that we have unionism in the north east of Antrim”

    Croiteir, there are few unionist voters in the north east of Antrim and even the SDLP presence is in steep decline.

  • Croiteir

    Your right – that is a Freudian slip of monumental proportions, I will amend that.

  • Croiteir

    Amended – thanks

  • Croiteir

    Incidently, and off the topic, the move from the Defenderism of the north east of Antrim to Republicanism in the last number of years is a subject worthy of analysis.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    He’s shown brave leadership and has real vision for the future – spot on. He has won the arguments. He was defeated really by the arithmetical logic of our SF-DUP mutually reinforcing axis of crapness. Nesbitt himself has done little wrong – impossible situation really the UUP and SDLP are in.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    I suspect they are just people who want to get on with their lives and perhaps whose personal experience of political Republicans has been negative. I think if Republicans want there to be fewer of these people, they really need to just avoid all contact with other Catholics 🙂

  • Nevin

    “the unionism that tries to diminish Irish culture and replace it with some sort of imagined Englishness.”

    Croiteur, I’m very familiar with the exchange of ‘pleasantries’ that take place in the district formerly known as Moyle; something that the Parades Commission is in denial about [I’ve yet to compile a blog on this topic].

    I’d say that unionists still wish to be part of the UK and that their so called British identity is a reflection of that wish and it contains a blend of traditional elements from across these islands. As I suggested in an earlier conversation it’s probably better to detach political labelling from cultural expression in this contested space.

  • Nevin

    “Brian wrote a blog before Xmas arguing that Arlene’s class of bellicosity was fading fast.”

    Mick, the voters seem to quite like DUP/SF bellicosity; it’s their occasional efforts at ‘reaching out’ which are so insincere. The growth in the DUP/SF vote this time round dwarfs the performance of the UUP/SDLP one. I’d partly put that down to the incendiary nature of the BBC Spotlight broadcast on December 6.

  • Karl

    He’s dead right but he was undone by the electorate, his own party and the DUP.

    He wasnt helped by going on a solo run with regard to crossing the transfer line but i suspect there would have been a right old set to and no announcement if he had discussed it.

    His brand of politics is on the wane within unionism and for that Sinn Fein will be thankful.

  • Ciaran74

    To be fair, some are intellectual snobs, some are embarrassed by the complaining (usually because they are doing alright), some are not socialists but most as you say just want to get on with it, and may have political desirables that can wait to the right moment.

    I did chuckle though at the last point. I thought of a friends favourite saying, ‘change your wife, change your life’.

  • Nevin

    MU, I’ve looked at some UUP voting figures for the Assembly from 1998 onwards:

    North Antrim: 11,064, 9,538, 6,328, 4,707, 4,406 and 6,022.

    East Londonderry: 9,954, 7,769, 6,267, 2,930, 2,856 and 2814.

    Those three final figures for East Londonderry were affected by the independent Unionists: David McClarty 3,003 and Claire Sugden 3,270 and 4,918.

    I’d say that the UUP sharp decline post-1998 was arrested in Mike’s era as a consequence of greater discipline at local council level but that its continued decline in East Londonderry may well be due to the absence of a constituency office for most of the time that it was in competition with those two independents who provided such a service. Robin Swann’s turnaround is undoubtedly due to the development of an enhanced constituency service but he couldn’t have got over the line without SDLP and APNI transfers.

  • Nevin

    If you compose a blog, Croiteir, and Slugger posts it, I’ll respond to it.

  • Ciaran74

    I am thankful that we can in general have varying degrees of opinion even to the point of outright disagreement within the CNR population. And I accept you can be Irish and believe the union offers you an acceptable and satisfying lifestyle. I personally reject it as the best option for us all.

    Whilst I see parallels in Scotland on a more secure road map to independence and the salient risks, it’s hard to accept it’s entirely the same. Scotland’s question is sovereign and lifestyle. Our fault lines are broader and deeper.

    The glee of the Brexit win was nauseating, but it’s not the pantomime of winning or participating that needs grace, it’s meaningful reciprocity. With Tom and Arlene’s Fermanagh Ford Cortina dusted off, it appears unlikely.

    Even where the CNR & Irish unity doubters have a number, they will probably never refer to themselves as British. Will that nonchalance be challenged in the next few years by Brexit?

  • George

    Andrew Jackson who fought in a revolution against the British and then subsequently defeated them again in 1812? Does Nesbitt not see the irony of in a roundabout way almost claiming him for the Ulster Unionist cause?

    As regards what he says, it makes total sense but for almost 100 years unionism has failed to move to this place and if truth be told the ideology has never truly engaged with the principles of which he speaks.

    For example, mutual respect would involve a whole new relationship with the Republic, an acknowledgement that they too are kith and kin. Nesbitt speaks of mutual respect but only looks at it within a partitionist prism. I’m not speaking of unification or “southern interference”, merely of the consequences of showing true respect to the other “tradition” on this island because the other tradition does not stop at the border.

    What Nesbitt speaks of would be a true departure but I think even he hasn’t fully thought out what this actually entails.

  • Gopher

    I see a different irony, and one that demonstrably shows up poor Mikes limitations. The fundamental problem with Mike is he never succeded in putting daylight between him and the DUP. The statement that he was “minded to vote for equal marriage” displays a lack off self efficacy and just about every other leadership quality as defined by the historian Michael Howard and by common sense. For Mike the singular lack of action in politics put him as someone for whom politics gets in the way of being a politicain.

    The preamble of the US constitution which apparently half of which was written by Ulster Scots goes something like “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. Thats the irony of claiming Andrew Jackson et al and doing zero about it. If I was Mike I would be claiming when in the world did the reformed protestent religion be a force of regression? I would have been hitting the DUP with that fact evert day and night from dinosaurs to equal marriage. By about 30 minutes into to his duty he should have siezed the devine ground that all men are created equal therefore deserve equal rights rather than worrying about election pacts. He should have claimed god in his full rights of man majesty and kicked that crutch from clean under the DUP. A leader has the right to be out-thought and surprised he does not have the right to be outfought.

    We have all these mice peeping over the parapet, Paisley jnr, Mike, Gavin Robinson etc all on comfortable wages.. None are prepared to lead the charge, Voters arnt going to vote for suggestions or someone who is “minded” to do something, they are going to vote for someone who is going to actually lead. Are people “minded” about “unalienable rights”? That is the irony of Showing people where Andrew Jackson lived or where Grants anscestors lived.

  • Croiteir

    Not clever enough

  • Granni Trixie

    But all along he has lacked authenticity – his actions betrayed his words. And doubt if even his own supporters will forget that odd behaviour in resigning whilst the votes of colleagues were still being counted.

    You know, I think he had potential but just took on a leadership role before he had sufficient political experience – a lesson when UUP looking for a replacement.

  • ted hagan

    ‘Boneybefore, outside Larne.’
    Well sort of, Mike. Boneybefore in Carrickfergus would be more accurate.
    Also it’s rather dangerous to becoming too associated with Andrew Jackson, who, like the Democratic party of the time, propped up slavery, and was responsible for despicable treatment and annihilation of native American tribes.

  • ted hagan

    Agreed. The election came to early for Nesbitt to formulate and hone credible policies.

  • grumpy oul man

    Well taking victory with grace is as important as taking defeat with grace and both are basic requirments for any politician or party wanting or needing to work with there opponents.
    Unionsts may not want to work ith SF but they need to.

  • chrisjones2

    …and who wasnt?

  • woodkerne

    The most noteworthy feature of Nesbitt’s peroration to the party executive is the same as marked his resignation speech and tenure as leader – solipsism. The small victories he speaks of (for Ulster unionism) are due only and entirely to him, it seems.

  • Annie Breensson

    The Spotlight programme was just one highlight in a series of DUP ‘mismanagement’ events (Redsky etc.), and as such, had little individual impact. Nationalist voters were more motivated by Givan’s blatant sectarianism and Foster’s belligerence.

  • Mark Petticrew

    I think – like most things – there will always be the naysayers that, for their different reasons, simply go against the grain of perceptions.

    In this case, it’s a minority of northern Catholics who vary from indifference to straight up opposition to Irish unity. I was speaking with Hotdogx on Slugger the other day about this same issue:

    There’s a sizeable section of Catholics who identify as British only (10.3%), so I doubt they’d favour Irish unity. After all, why would you want to break the connection with a state which you yourself actually identify with? The other side of that coin are Irish only-identifying Catholics (53.2%) of which we can assume are all basically in the bag.

    Where it gets interesting is with the Northern Irish only-identifying Catholic electorate (26.9%). They’re a largely pro-unity bunch, but some will probably take a bit of convincing; a bad Brexit might just do it. The coming years ahead will soon answer that one for us Hotdog.

  • mickfealty

    They have and they will again. I’m in no doubt of that. But this high wire politics in which Republicans periodically ditch the whole shooting match because their partners won’t agree to whatever it is they want is neither sustainable nor indeed, within the weirdly narrowly defined terms of the institutions we have, democratic.

  • mickfealty

    I’d go no deeper than the thran nature of some individuals to be entirely defined by the group. The flaw doesn’t lie with them, but the proposition that 50+ is a sustainable goal if you only pursue it along the lines of religious lines (which is exactly the kind of anti Republican thinking that’s dominated nationalist thought since the onset of the Peace Process™.

  • Karl

    Does this have echoes of an earlier unionist leader saying that if Catholics had jobs and houses, they’d be more like protestants?

    How badly am I mangling the historical reference?

  • woodkerne

    Generosity is a vital currency in post-conflict circumstances. But it is the profound absence of what you’ve called grace (what my mother would have called good-grace or more simply manners) that defines Arlene’s species of trenchant Ulster unionism. It is the allegory of the scorpion hitching a ride across water on the back of a frog: by disposition vituperative, polarising, domineering, prone to irrational hate-speech, bellicosity is the scorpion’s true nature, existentially speaking. A narrow and neurotic mentality, this rump-unionism can’t readily be reformed because it was/is formed in loathing of its Other. This is what is meant by a zero-sum, the only number these ultras understand. And it is for that reason that they will be outnumbered and undone.

  • woodkerne

    That’s absolutely true

  • woodkerne

    The DUP will deal with SF of course (they want the wee-six to work). The irony of it is though that their default to begrudgery and parochialism are very much absolutely dyed-in-the-wool traits of Irish politics per se and the political life-force of the island: innate characteristics indeed of which the DUP live in a state of hysterical denial rather in the way that they fail to note that the vast majority of place-names, including throughout the county of Fermanagh, derive from native-Irish!

  • grumpy oul man

    Mick show us where Uniobisn has either taken defeat ir victory with grace.

  • woodkerne

    It does, and you’re not. From the CAIN website, in the words of the last liberal-unionist leader:

    “It is frightfully hard to explain to Protestants that if you give Roman Catholics a good job and a good house. they will live like Protestants because they will see neighbours with cars and television sets; they will refuse to have eighteen children. But if a Roman Catholic is jobless, and lives in the most ghastly hovel, he will rear eighteen children on National Assistance. If you treat Roman Catholics with due consider and kindness, they will live like Protestants in spite of the authoritative nature of their Church … ”

    Captain Terence O’Neill, Unionist Party, Northern Ireland Prime Minister, May 1969

    Reported in: Belfast Telegraph, 10 May 1969

  • Nevin

    Annie, panic only set in on December 6.

    Ministers are supposed to chair their Departmental Boards but they’re not even at the table to be advised and challenged by Independent members. If you browse my NALIL blog you’ll note loads of mismanagement at regional and local council level, irrespective of which party held the ministry.

    I don’t recall any threats to our institutions when Caral Ní Chuilín signed off on this:

    Foras na Gaeilge was set up in the wake of the Good Friday Agreement to promote the language. It is funded by the Irish government and the Northern Ireland Executive. Its own budget has been significantly reduced in recent years.

    The rationalisation plan was approved at a meeting of the language body of the North South Ministerial Council in July last year.

    The meeting was attended by Culture Minister Caral Ní Chuilín and her counterpart from the Republic of Ireland, Jimmy Deenihan TD, Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. .. source.

    followed by Ultach: Cross-community Irish language trust to close

  • MainlandUlsterman

    GT, I think my one criticism of Alliance is that it’s been too cynical about and unencouraging of moderates within the UUP. I can understand electorally why it seeks to fight that battle but actually I think dissing other moderate voices quite so much should not be what Alliance is about. The hardliners (DUP and SF) should be our target and we should be relentless about that. Our hope should be in time an SDLP-Alliance-UUP partnership. OK to be critical of these partners but important to prioritise clearly and not discourage liberalisation in those parties.

  • Ciaran74

    I think filters are broadening, yes, and it’s a positive thing, as well as appearing relentlessly pitched at Irish/ nationalists to ‘think’ again. Unionists, possibly rightly, are being broadly left to find their own way. Irish people in the norm do seem more shovel ready to blur the liberal lines, now that the religious control has either been dumped or substantially framed in its own corner. Militant republicanism can take the recent blame for not allowing unionist or Protestant door’s to open, but it did not inhibit the door from opening before militancy. The residues of the militancy and suspicions have held that in check until this election. Entrenchment begs the question, how deep are you down there, and patience/ interest in d’entente’s ebb.

    Whatever the long term value of Brexit to Britain, the disturbance to this island will be profound in the short to mid-term. Sturgeon’s high stakes are being neutered by May, until at least an emotional nuance can be found to expand the voting weight. Or not. Sturgeon and the SNP are stronger in will than the English credit them. Whereas Scots may not want to risk it, the broad population in NI may have more to gain outside of the UK, economically and emotionally.

  • ted hagan

    . I think it was a genuine, generous effort to appeal to both communities in the spirit of the Belfast Agreement. Other though, thrive on the perception of being slighted in one form another. It’s one of the curses of this country.

  • ted hagan

    And you’ve chewed on that one for nearly fifty years, I suppose?

  • woodkerne

    Accessed this morning on CAIN website. The similarity in the structure of the pronouncement wasn’t mine, it was Karl’s. So happens, he’s quite right in identifying an essential leitmotif of liberal-unionist thought. (Which for the record, was deluded then, and is deluded now.)

  • Ciaran74

    I’m aware of that data, but I’m just not sure. And not because its stuck in my optic. I’d generally be interested in understanding more about that demographic response.

    I’ve met some Britain friendly Irish/ Catholics/ Nationalists (all over Ireland) but they have never referred to themselves as ‘British’. It’s curious. Are they British in private? Does the officialdom of a census drive a self-analysis on what’s best to record, or has Crimewatch and the BBC been as influential on identity as some brainwaves have put forward? Quips aside, there are enough ICN’s that have been puked to the point of taking a pro-union view by aggressive militancy, and that’s understandable, but I still think your point on fluidity on what you believe you are or more loosely identify with is important. Historically (through family), these people will probably not have been unionist, and will not have the fundamental outlook of the PUL. I’d proffer its partially social, expedient, less complicated & self-challenging, economic, and a rejection of their brethren’s harder position. That too points to a malleable potential. A harder one to overturn, but there’s an opportunity to appeal to a pragmatic position, with the resonance of cultural understanding, without them having to challenge a conscious betrayal of anyone or anything.

    I’ve a wide circle friends, who in the norm come from a Catholic background, some nationalist, some republican, some not political, some agnostic and so on. There’s no pressure to be anything for anyone else after 25 years of friendship. All are doing really well, whose parents were either working class, or whose grandparents were, and are professionals and business owners. Some have British passports, but openly express they are Irish, and treat it like a bus-pass, and some again are happy to let things be until the arrangements of the GFA demand a unity question. One or two certainly have echoes of the above, and again they would be very comfortable in life and would have expressed a distaste for the republican and socialist manifesto’s, yet they are the ones with 3rd family homes in south Dublin! Putting them in the identity tick box mentioned, still pushes a round peg in a square hole.

    Agree that Brexit’s complex threat will challenge allot of mental architecture, especially when there is absolutely no bargaining scenario/empowerment for anyone here.

  • mickfealty

    Grace in the religious sense is much more than manners WK. A more Catholic ‘offer your pain and hurt up as a sacrifice to God’.

  • hollandia

    To be fair, Mike is stating the bleedin’ obvious. One of the big causes of recent nationalist apathy at the ballot box has been contentment (or, more accurately, reasonable contentment) with the Stormont set up. Cue crocodiles, liofa, etc etc etc. Magnanimity is the key to securing the union (or more appropriately – pushing unity down the line for a generation or two), not winding people up. However, it’s less than two years since Mike wielded the unionist unity ticket, so either he doesn’t actually believe what he’s saying or he’s had a Damascene conversion. Either way, it’s possibly too little, too late for him.

  • woodkerne

    While aware of that, my preference is for the secular meaning, of civility in social exchanges, even or especially in argument

  • Mark Petticrew

    I would accept that – possibly excluding the British-identifying ones – the Catholics who do support the union generally wouldn’t possess that “fundamental outlook” that characterises many unionists, but this illustrates what I consider to be the wider pro-union coalition out there.

    Whilst political unionism’s loss of majority representation in the Assembly was an historically significant event, support for the union itself is still at a level whereby a border poll would be lost, and probably by quite a bit.

    Flegger unionism may be on the wain in light of it being locked within a demographic cul-de-sac, but there remains a sizeable amount of ‘small u’ unionists – including said Catholics – who provide a kind of silent majority for the status quo.

    As I said, however, Brexit might just change that. Identity isn’t an issue for ‘small u’ unionists, or at least isn’t as pertinent an issue as it is for “red, white and blue” unionists, and, to quote Nicola Sturgeon, a “material change in circumstances” may well alter their opinion.

  • grumpy oul man

    There partners wont agree to keeping the deal they made you mean.
    The Shinners asked for nothing beyond what was agreed in the St Andrews agreement. And how are you going to pin Arlene refusal to take gardening leave while RHI was investigated or the DUP throwing money at OO halls but claiming they had none for kids to go to the gealteacht.
    Sorry mick but no matter hpw much you dislike the Shinners and support the DUP you cant blame this one on the shinners.
    They were the winners out of it but they aren’t the cause.