Not renowned for public discourse on internal thinking or admitting to failings, it is a positive development that both Peter Robinson, former First Minister and key strategist within the DUP and Reverend Mervyn Gibson, Leader of the Orange Order are hinting at a need for fresh thinking within Unionism on the part of Peter Robinson and Orangeism in the case of Reverend Gibson.
Both however are tentative in their critique, especially so in the case of the Orange leader. He refers in his interview in the Newsletter to the Orange Order as being like an ‘oil tanker’, implying that it is only able to embrace change slowly.
The point it could be more beneficial for him to note is that as a result of contributing events like Drumcree and Twaddell and the perceived narrow cultural, social and religious stance of the movement, many of the public in Northern Ireland are on a journey which has already started towards a rendezvous with a different future.
The Reverend Gibson may not be of the view but some of his remarks, perhaps unintentionally, seem to imply that there has to be an Orange or unionist answer to every problem, a solution to every issue but that is no longer the case.
Stronger conviction rather than the inferred pragmatism would make the position clearer.
Mr Robinson, now a columnist in the Newsletter, in warning of a looming border poll, calls for a think tank for Unionism to aid politicians in making the case for the Union. It begs the obvious question of political unionism: ‘What have you been doing up to now?’ It also raises pivotal issues that should be addressed in tandem, if not first of all.
Since the Good Friday Agreement, we have had St Andrews, Hillsborough and A Fresh Start all of which were lauded as advancing the maintenance of the Union through mainly DUP electoral success. Now it seems, it is less secure. Were these just pyrrhic victories or false dawns? If so, there must be merit in a think tank looking at where the strategic or policy flaws lie.
No well-made case for the Union will work if the strategies and policies are not in place to deliver their end goal. It will be akin to building a house for an arsonist to burn it down. A softer analogy maybe is to suggest that there is little point in plotting an evidence-based course for the vessel, if the crew, even when it is turned around, insist on sailing in the same direction propelled by bio-mass boilers, with curried yoghurt on the menu and heading for the red sky of the Maldives supplied with a good store of crocodile propellent. At least if the ship goes down, they are familiar with the words of ‘O God Our Help in Ages Past.’
Put starkly, the case for the union relies not just on the message but the values, integrity and humility of those who advocate for the cause. Arrogant disdain for diversity and emphasis on the dark world of blind party loyalty and cronyism needs to be consigned to the past. The ‘safe hands’ to which the former leader refers are perhaps not as safe as is presumed.
Mr Robinson refers to those who are pro-union but who do not vote for Unionist parties or do not vote. It is not hard to work out why. That they are already pro-Union points to the fact that they are well acquainted with and understand the evidence and the merits of the argument. Perhaps this suggests the remedy to strengthening that case lies beyond the provision of a think-tank – albeit that the idea has merit?
Underpinned by a strong sense of ethics and principles allied to putting aside rage politics to foster relationships would go some way to strengthening the case further. The electorate prefers to be persuaded rather than coerced through fear-mongering and prejudice: to be led rather than commanded. It is the latter which has produced a democratic deficit within unionism where ever-growing pro-union or civic unionist electors feel disenfranchised.
Young people, especially, have no interest or feel so inclined as to engage in the gender, religious and social status labelling which de-humanises those with whom they work, socialise and study. Within communities, which are culturally hybrid and self-confident in their identity, pro-Union groups and individuals of all ages work inclusively on issues of common interest to build positive relationships and transform society.
Mostly social-democrat in outlook and with a global perspective, they are interested in wealth creation and fair distribution rather than wealth accumulation, welfare, education, environment and employment. It is living in this type of home and its sustainability, not proselytising slogans, that will make the case for the Union. Politicians who rely on symbols, tub-thumping, and demonising the opposition, need to catch up.
At one level it beggars belief that gathering and using evidence-based research to deliver in practice a case for the Union is not already in place. This lends weight to the oft-cited charge that Unionism is more comfortable with what it is against than what it is for, in which case it will be difficult for a think-tank to augment what is built on a foundation of saying NO be it to political review or social reform.
Maybe it is that politicians have been, as suggested, mainly in crisis-mode. This, however, seems a somewhat lame explanation especially when many of the crises, not least Brexit, have been instigated from within and returns us to considering that it is not the fuel that is at fault but the dysfunctional engine it is expected to propel, to say nothing of the backfiring that results from conflicted relationships.
In the past, it was Peter Robinson who attempted to lead unionism into fresh thinking. Speaking in October 2010, as reported in the Belfast Telegraph, he called for an integrated schooling system. In 2011, buoyed by the result of a Life and Times survey showing a majority of Catholics in support of the Union, the DUP leader spoke of the need to persuade Catholic voters to support his party.
Believing that electors no longer thought in terms of ‘orange and green’ the DUP would become ‘a centre-right pro-business cross-community party.’ As it turned out the bridge he was attempting to build never reached the other side. The tangled thinking and limited expectations of political unionism remained largely within the traditional boundaries and pigeon-holes that Peter Robinson claimed were being abandoned.
Demographic change, Brexit and the erratic success of political unionism in elections now point to a belated expedient to find answers to pressing issues. The conundrum to which Mr Robinson refers and the need to articulate more fully the case for maintenance of the Union can be addressed by a think tank but one that is geared to serving the community, not politicians.
As people change, the Union will change. Brexit is testing loyalties and the regional and social inequality apparent in the Covid-pandemic crisis added to pressure on devolution is creating fluidity and openness in thinking to say the least.
Support for the Union remains strong but this can alter. There are challenges to be faced and not just in Northern Ireland. It will come back to the lives of individuals and how the political arrangements deliver the quality of life and opportunities available. Political Unionism needs to address this through fresh rather than re-cycled thinking now, more than ever before.
A good place to start is to consider what it can do, rather than cannot; to abandon the historical comfort zone of mediocrity and confines of narrow rituals and culture. Act in the right way and with the right motives; have an honest look at itself in the mirror. The GFA was designed to build consensus for the common good but default political unionism has been too involved in power retention through a carved-up government which has not served the community well.
In his writing, Mr Robinson, not to put words into his mouth, seems to infer that unionism is ‘sleepwalking into a future border poll.’ If this is the case, it needs to wake up sooner rather than later. A think tank can plot a new route ahead but as Mr Robinson seems to have experienced from 2010 onwards, too many prefer the traditional one.
Photo by MabelAmber is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA
Terry Wright is a former member of the UUP who, in addition to inter- and intra-community activities works independently to promote Civic Unionism.
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
