Gerry Adams lodges a cheap “10p Each Way Double” on Arlene bringing home the DUP bacon…

There’s some serious guff coming out of London journalism at the moment with, surprisingly to me Matthew D’Acona being one of the worst offenders. But Stephen Bush has seen what most of his colleagues have blatantly missed:

Thanks to the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, “confidence votes” have been explicitly drawn to exclude votes on the Budget or the Queen’s Speech. A government only falls if it loses a vote of no confidence.

It no longer falls if it loses a major vote, a Budget vote or even the Queen’s Speech.

This obviously increases the leverage of the DUP – and Labour’s ability to harry the government day-to-day. The DUP can hold the government up, by backing them in confidence votes. But they can also let them down by deserting them on essentially everything else to secure bigger concessions from the Conservative Party.

Far from being trapped by the Conservatives, the DUP have more leverage over them than a minor party has ever enjoyed in a hung parliament before.

This is the strongest position any Irish party has had since the election of 1885. I’m not saying that to build the DUP up, I’m saying it because it’s true. Those critics of the DUP who are talking them down into stereotypes are ironically doing them a favour.

The damper the expectations, the easier it will be for the DUP to exceed them. Even, as Pete has noted, Gerry Adams has understood this is a swinging door and is doing his speaking from both corners of the mouth now even in the one statement.

First…

“We don’t believe that any deal between the DUP here and the English Tories will be good for the people here.”

Then, later in the same statement:

“We never turn up our nose at good deals. Let’s wait until we see what sort of deal is done.”

It’s very typical of Adams to lodge a 10p each way double on the DUP delivering a rescue package without than spending a penny of his own political capital. But any bacon to come home will have the DUP’s name and brand stamped on it.

Meanwhile Arlene uses SF’s main slogan from last year’s Assembly election to pose a serious question to the Sinn Fein leader:

“If others decide that they are not coming back into the devolved administration here in Northern Ireland then those issues will have to be dealt with at Westminster,” she said. It is really for Sinn Féin to decide where they want those powers to lie.”

The time surely for cheap each way bets are over?

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    Yes. Any grouping that excludes those two.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa
  • BonaparteOCoonassa
  • SeaanUiNeill

    Hey, I saw that this morning! Excellent link.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    If equality, respect and good faith can be “weaponised” it is because they have been made so by the DUPs contempt for such things as the property of the whole community.

  • Redstar

    Cheers Bonaparte

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Asquith’s government was dong “side deals” as you put it in a situation where the general public who voted them in recognised the long term intent of Liberalism to bring Home Rule about, and with the support, in the IPP, of a very significant part of the British/Irish electorate of the day. A hundred MPs representing three quarters of well articulated, thought out Irish opinion in 1910 is rather different in nature to ten MPs representing just over a quarter of the NI electorate, who have been driven into the voting booths with the project fear that a vote for any other party would bring a UI down on them with the implications of “fire and sword.” If you imagine the Liberal/IPP alliance of 1910 was the tail wagging the dog, our present situation is the hairs on the tail end wagging everything. As Ian Paisley JR told us all yesterday “The future’s Orange”:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservative-dup-talks-ian-paisley-jr-future-orange-joke-theresa-may-arlene-foster-a7787931.html

    The British press thought he was joking, but we over here with more experience know better…..

  • The worm!

    Excellent balanced post!

    99% of the tripe that’s been posted here in the last 5 days should be replaced with this few lines.

    Oh, and EVERYTHING on “social media”!

  • The worm!

    No, she needs to stay.

    She’s doing a cracking job! 😉

  • lizmcneill

    How does that happen without staying in the customs union?

  • The worm!

    Maybe they’re just being actually being respectful of a tragic situation unfolding around them.

    In fact I think what you said there was actually very judgemental and quite unpleasant.

  • Nevin

    A neat piece of waffle, Seaan, but my comment stands. The Liberals did no side-deal in 1906 as no such deal was required.

  • Reader

    John Turley: However, if Britain leaves the Customs Union, the only way that a border on the Island could be avoided would be a border between the North and Britain.
    Actually, the British government could just not bother putting restrictions in place on our side of the border, and anything built on the other side of the border will be blamed on Ireland/EU.

  • Granni Trixie

    I do apologise if I caused offence. Fortunately, I never claim to be perfect.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    “Waffle”, Nevin? I’ve already answered the point you raise in an earlier posting on this self same issue. In 1906 the Lords could block any such legislation, and accordingly no-one wished to repeat the embarrassment of 1893 and the Lords’ rejection of The Second Home Rule Bill, passed in the Commons with a clear majority of 43 votes and arrogantly rejected by the Tory Lords in the face of this clear popular vote, and the popular mandate to enact Home Rule. In 1910 the election had been primarily about Lloyd George’s People’s Budget, and the need to curtail the power of the House of Lords to veto legislation. The massive Tory dominance of the Lords gave them the power of blocking both that Budget and earlier Home Rule Bills, and t was only when this was lifted that the Third Home Rule Bill could go onto the statute books, not in some shady side deal, but as the legislation of a political alliance of thirty years who had never dissembled their wish to enact Home Rule.

    Side-deal has always been a very odd way to describe something which had been public policy for Liberalism for about three decades at this time, and which every voter understood at the time was a sister issue to the Budget itself. You appear to be ignoring this simple and easily understood situation in your re-iteration of the term. But now you now have no possible excuse to describe this perfectly clear situation as a “side-deal,” considering that both the Liberals and their allies of some decades, the IPP, had entered the 1910 election with the policy open knowledge to their entire electorate.

  • Nevin

    I see you’re still in denial!

  • grumpy oul man

    this is the forth time i have asked you, i’m beginning to think that you have nothing but a slogan,
    How do you weaponise equality?
    when has weaponised equality been used?

  • grumpy oul man

    Its going to be interesting over the 12th, i’m willing to bet a lot of Bandsmen and OO members think that the DUP/UDA,Tory deal means that they will walk were they want.

  • grumpy oul man

    “SF stooges wearing scary big black coats”
    that’s going straight into the top ten, mopish quotes

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    That’s a dapper jacket Gerry’s sporting.

  • grumpy oul man

    yeah i can see that happening, no custom checks on a border.
    cue international crime and all smugglers big and small singing,
    https://youtu.be/dN9llteBFMo

  • grumpy oul man

    I look forward to a lot of politicians explaining things to the Judge.

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    I think what he means is that SF will use every and any buzzword, political fashion, topic of the moment or such like to make the unionists look bad whenever possible.

    But as political rivals to unionists, ‘why wouldn’t they?’

  • grumpy oul man

    And i don’t think he realizes how bad it look’s to the civilized world when you complain that somebody is using “Equality” against you!
    the equality bomb is well known for being a very easy device to defuse all you need to do to make it safe is treat other people the way you would like to be treated.
    do that and Gerry is disarmed.
    but unionists chose instead to let it go off in their faces.

  • grumpy oul man

    “So we may see – no return to the Assembly and the end of all that expenses cash”
    yea Chris, i can see those DUP MLAs giving up their cash and expenses.

  • grumpy oul man

    That’s rather silly. Using your logic one could randomly choose any ten constituencies on the UK mainland,
    Except no ten constituencies in the bigger island are like the north of Ireland.
    here in the wee Six we are different, i’m sure i don’t have to explain to you why the north is different from Newcastle or Sussex

  • grumpy oul man

    But i has disproved the Lie that unionists don’t vote for terrorists. and the British seem to be noticing this.

  • james

    Go on then, for old times sake, explain why a vote in this part of the UK is different from a vote in another part of the UK. I’m all ears.

  • ted hagan

    Along with you banging the same old drum.

  • ted hagan

    Oh no, surely they’re not terrorists, they’re ‘freedom fighters’, or even victims?

  • ted hagan

    Decent article by O’Toole but whereas he highlights Theresa May’s fleetfooted and opportunistic shift from Remain to Brexit (‘I’m reflecting the will of the people’ blah, blah, blah) he omits to mention that Corbyn has performed the same trick, and like the Tories, is struggling to explain what his Brexit negotiating stance actually is. A benefit, surely, of the election result is that both parties might cobble together a softer Brexit stance that reflects the aspirations of the vast majority of UK citizens, although a revolt by the Tory hardliners will never be far away.. Whatever happens, May is doomed

  • William Kinmont

    If they hadn’t shown some willingness to restart things would they be in Downing street today? They will have to swallow Arlene as 1st minister a major bargenning chip they have created out of very little. If they can cash that in for another meaning full step towards UI they have achieved progress without any great costs at all.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    “Denial”, Nevin? I think you’re talking to the reflection in the screen as you type!

  • Nevin

    Nope. Just smiling at your customary anti-unionist bile – and pseudo-history.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    You’ll have to substantiate that “pseudo-history” claim Nevin, to be taken seriously. My having clearly offered all the actual facts, after all. Of course my Jungian training ensures that I recognise this as just another psychological projection of your own motivations unto someone you consider an opponent (a very common reaction). I sincerely wish I could help……..

  • Nevin

    I don’t think you can help yourself, Seaan. The ‘facts’ you’ve selected merely reflect you own deep-seated prejudices. You seem to be a slow learner; your efforts at condescension cut no ice with me.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Nevin, you are still avoiding actually displaying WHY what I’m saying is incorrect in your estimation. I hate to tell you, but “Yah, boo, sucks” is not actually an acceptable response. You need to describe why you are calling me “prejudiced” instead of producing a reasoned argument and how the explanation I’m offering is at fault. It would help if you could explain why Unionism is not culpable for destroying a perfectly reasonable constitutionalist resolution with the Third Home Rule Bill. Talking about “side deals” does not address the simple fact that Unionism’s recourse to arms was the inceptive act of a century of quite unnecessary violence.

  • BonaparteOCoonassa

    And seldom did anyone more deserve to be doomed. Dim, incompetent and crassly opportunistically right-wing.

  • Nevin

    I don’t have a cure for your anti-unionist zealotry.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Nevin, I am not looking for a “cure” for a clear and unblinkered perception of what are perfectly obvious historical culpabilities to any objective observer. But it is only respectful to offer arguments rather than the sort of insults which display the simple fact that there seems to be no other response available. If Unionism had stuck to this golden rule from the 1880s rather than building a political system relying on fear and insult, we’d all be living in a prosperous Ireland today, looking back on a century of peaceful development and an established national friendship with a Britain in which all the old historical rancour of ages was a thing a century past.

  • Nevin

    But you’re an anti-unionist zealot, not an objective observer.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    You’re not getting this Nevin, The good people reading these threads would need some genuine facts if they are to take you seriously, not simply expressions of your personal opinion. I’m occasionally being accused by a few other posters on other threads here as being “a Unionist stooge”, and even once as a fully fledged “Unionist” (for speaking well of Sir Norman Stronge as a Unionist speaker at Stormont). Woe to the objective, as they will inevitably attract accusations of bias when they inevitably ruffle feathers. Your endless reiteration of this characterisation speaks of your own political stance far more eloquently, than it says anything about mine.

  • grumpy oul man

    Counter terrorists, peter said when he refused to condemn them.
    I wonder did he call them comrades at Clontribet.
    Or partners when they are useful,
    Community workers when there getting money.

  • grumpy oul man

    Oh I’m sorry ted, ill just shut up about the DUPapproved hate fest over the 12th,
    The cheek of us taigs imagine getting annoyed with people who go out of there way to annoy us.
    And imagine one of us having the cheek to point out the internal problems that Arlene going to have if she makes a deal with the Tories,

  • grumpy oul man

    Certainly, as Arlene said the election here was a border poll.
    Was it a border poll in England?

  • grumpy oul man

    Nevin, just for once i would love to see you prove your cryptic answers.
    Seann has produced evidence to support his argument, you claim hes wrong but offer no evidence instead you resort tio insults.
    Nothing new, but please someday surprise us.

  • james

    England doesn’t share a land border with Ireland, as we do in this part of the UK – so, yes, that’s a different local circumstance right enough.

    It is interesting, however, that SF were trumpeting long and loud the idea that the election was a de facto border poll, a referendum on a referendum. If that were the case, then SF lost – and by a margin – thus putting that issue safely back to bed again.

    No wonder the Shinners are so upset – and that Adams is talking about a return to Stormont.

  • ted hagan

    And ‘grumpy oul Prod’ will just for fire the same old sectarian whataboutery back at you. Can’t you see how pointless and boring it gets?

  • grumpy oul man

    A few years ago a younk man in Ballymena was kicked to death by a mob in a vicious secterian attack,
    The next bonfire erected in Galgorm had a tricolor with F#*k Micky bo ( his name) several DUP councillors attended the lighting of it.
    Now you suggest that i should ignore that level of hatred levelled at my community.
    I don’t think ignoring it is the way to deal with it.

  • grumpy oul man

    I don’t think the idea has went back to bed.
    The Shinners had there best westminister election ever and seem pretty cock a hoop at the moment.