“The secret of change is to focus all of your energy on the new; not on fighting the old but ib building the new” – SOCRATES
It was quiet in the leader’s office as we awaited the arrival of the party officers. Just the Director of Communications and me. “What we need is a swap Unionist day.” I explained:
“If everyone in the UUP who could fit into the DUP and those in the DUP who could fit into the UUP changed parties, we could begin to develop distinct policies and strategies which would be more inclusive of different views within Unionism to provide choice.”
The Director told me I was an idealist. Those who favoured pacts and Unionist unity, of which there were more than a few, would have deployed different language
The UUP continued through the UCUNF era, pacts in Mid-Ulster, East and South Belfast, a DUP-lite stage, the hiatus and subsequent loss of MPs and an MEP.
Policies and strategy presented as confused and confusing; illustrated by unclear messaging on social justice issues, Brexit and more recently ambivalence over a democratically-elected Nationalist First Minister.
Many who would have been described as being on the moderate wing (these things are relative) left the party over time.
The most prominent were the two UUP MLAs, Basil McCrea and John McCallister, a former UUP Deputy leader.
To those who attended the launch of NI21 and its first and only Conference in the Europa Hotel which attracted significant numbers of enthusiastic young people never before involved in politics, it was evident that there was an opportunity to tap into and develop a desire for non-binary pro-Union politics.
The full story of what went wrong is still to be understood. The legacy of NI21 is surely that its demise, welcomed by a hostile unionist establishment, left unionism to stagnate, ideologically and eventually, electorally.
Any attempts within the UUP and now also, within the DUP, to offer strategies and policies which might depart from binary, essentialist and identity politics have faltered under challenge from a broad constituency within both parties, resistant to change and exhibiting old insecurities.
In the case of the DUP these are clearly impeding decisive decision-making and leadership.
A significant proportion of views have been passed down from generation to generation. Inter-generational loyalty to forefathers frames the context for any attempted change of policy or strategy.
Ghosts of the past exert a ‘pied piper’ effect in holding unionism to traditional routes where any proposed change of direction may be viewed as surrender.
Failing to widen the angle to see the bigger picture, unionist politics remains largely socially conservative and veers towards Protestant Unionism and culture through connections to loyal orders, church membership and associated symbols and traditions.
A sense of the past as unfinished business remains strong. Support for the Good Friday Agreement wavers. The preference for devolution is rooted in distrust of Westminster, Dublin, Washington and Brussels. Any spectre of a ‘progressive’ Lundy in the ranks fires old cautions.
Factions are energised to defend their world view; impenetrable to critical thinking or new realities. It makes for restless parties, muscular and unstable Unionism.
That this continues to have influence across the broad church of political Unionism is not working and electorally damaging to the point where the DUP is no longer the biggest party and Unionism in electoral terms no longer enjoys a majority.
Is this to continue? It is clearly exercising Unionist thinking.
Prior to the Covid pandemic, the late Chris Stalford MLA in a brief conversation at Queen’s University took the view that there was a need for two distinct Unionist parties – traditional and liberal.
It was a topic of discussion within the DUP at the time; prompted by electoral trends as analysed by a special adviser.
When suggested that the DUP should become the liberal wing of Unionism, comment was reserved.
Elements of my conversation with the UUP Director of Communications some 8 years before echoed.
Political Unionism remains in the same place – arguably worse- and the old remedies are trotted out.
Unionism needs to unite as one party. Electoral pacts are a must.
It is a forlorn hope. If there was one Unionist party today, there would be at least two tomorrow. The letters PUL are not deployed without reason; and they do not include groups who now identify as pro-Union but are politically unaligned.
The problem for any Unionist leader who wants to break out of the traditional mould and at present this appears to be Doug Beattie MLA of the UUP, is that unionist parties contain across and within, to a greater or lesser extent, a spectrum of views some of which are diametrically opposed in terms of values and allegiances; hermetically sealed within an historically orthodox ideological framework.
It is acknowledged within the UUP that there are those who are at one with the DUP and in some cases, the TUV; who seek to influence party strategy in ways which they believe will preserve electoral success.
Solo runs by individuals and groups happen with regularity and add to the confusion. They are either poorly briefed or weak at self-discipline. Support for the leader is conditional.
This has been the case for some time as evidenced in the fact that the 9 UUP MLAs include the current leader and 4 former leaders.
Some seeking to deliver change have talked of getting smaller to grow differently. No one, as yet, has managed to ‘break down to build up.’
Any semblance of a strategic harmonization to achieve this is largely hidden; if it exists. Muddling through is more apparent. Resilience is reduced.
Without an open display of party consensus around a clearly understood strategy with clear delivery focused outcomes, talk of wanting to make NI work for all and inclusivity appears tactical rather than principled; a hollow pretence not endorsed or promoted by all sections of the party.
The divide within Unionism is sometimes characterised as East and West of the Bann but this is simplistic.
Within those areas there is diversity as to how individuals identify, their social values and socio-economic outlook in terms of neo-liberalism, conservatism, social-democracy and the implementation of the 3 strands of the Good Friday Agreement.
This has been reflected in regard to Brexit, immigration and welfare. Even today, old denominational rivalries surface. These differences have always been masked by constitutional and electoral priorities underpinned by numerical strength.
This no longer works where the latter is subject to demographic change and a desire within swathes of the electorate for stability, issue-based politics and economic growth
It is clear from recent events relating to the UUP and the DUP, that political Unionism is having difficulty adjusting. It cannot shake its habit of either allowing militant republicanism to shape its agenda or the old toxicity of narrow identity and zero-sum politics which too many in each party continue to think will deliver electoral success.
The appeal is wearing thin and Sir Jeffrey Donaldson’s recent assertion in the House of Commons that his party is ‘the custodian of the Union’ has a hollow ring in current circumstances
Individuals including many former Unionist voters, across all age and social profiles will not vote for a Unionist party.
They abstain or give their vote to another party-usually Alliance; ironic given the all-Ireland focus of Deputy Leader, Stephen Farry, MP and the strength of the ‘green tinged wing ‘of his party.
The responsibility for this lies with political Unionism. The onus for addressing the growing trend is similarly sited.
Beyond the prevailing noise surrounding Unionism’s current difficulties and a deal pertaining to the Windsor Framework being done, as it must, there is likely to be a legacy of fragmented political Unionism and acrimony exacerbated by a looming General Election.
The language of ‘traitors’ is already filling the media.
It will be interesting to see if a new future-focused Unionism emerges or if the past is repeated wherein attempts to turn the wheels of change become trapped in the rutted tracks of previous failings.
Will the compromises made in the interests of avoiding party splits hand any initiative back to those who view any departure from the past as ground lost.?
Will Stormont once again become the site of carve-ups and proxy constitutional battles?
NI 21 is long gone but it maybe wasn’t the worst of ideas. After all the UUP seems to be veering towards NI 21 MARK II
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.
