When the history of the reunification of our island comes to be written, the past few days will surely not pass without comment.
What I would argue is the most trusted polling organisation in the north, Lucid Talking, continues to show support for reunification against the Union narrowing with a plurality of voters under 55 backing reunification…and that is before the southern state produces even the beginnings of a plan.
On that point, both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have moved at last to begin engaging with the practicalities of the unity question. Both parties have begun publicly exploring how they can engage with that debate, but obviously a single unified position will need to be synthesised as the approach of the Irish government. This will begin a process that should culminate with the collapse of the eight million or so united Irelands we deal with whenever the term is mentioned, the differing idea each individual has of what it would be, into a concrete singular proposal that can be contrasted with the failing status quo.
And the status quo is failing. Whilst there has been much talk of Fine Gael’s figure that it could cost up to 25 billion euros annually to fund reunification (in the worst-case scenario) few seem keen to point out that as our divided parties at Stormont unite to ask for more funding for our government on the grounds that we don’t get our fair share, the Secretary of State continually stonewalls them and says ‘there is no more money’.
Whilst some would argue that our politicians are reluctant to engage in any revenue raising measures or to see if there are any efficiencies that could be made, that does not mean we are not being underfunded as the Executive parties insist. As Seán Óg put it, leaving aside the debate over whether the south can afford us in future, what about the fact that Great Britain can’t afford us in the here and now?
You would think that this would be an opportunity for the Unionist parties to step forward and make the case that when everything is considered, we are better off in the United Kingdom. Gordon Lyons made an attempt on the 5th November episode of ‘The View’ when, in response to Chris Hazzard listing off various facts regarding the British economy, such as the fact it is currently the fifth largest in the world, Lyons argued that Hazzard was making a ‘strong case for Unionism. This of course sounds clever on the face of it but ignores the context of Hazzard’s point, which is that the British decision to underfund the north (something Lyons’ own party seems to agree with) is a deliberate choice. Hazzard’s point is that the relative strength of the British economy is immaterial, we are simply not a political priority for Westminster and never will be. Unionist citations of British wealth have all the force of an impoverished family bragging about their sound finances due to their fabulously wealthy miserly uncle who gives them enough to survive upon.
Lyons’ intervention was the only attempt I have heard recently to articulate those still mysterious ‘benefits of the union’ but that is unsurprising. Unionism cannot rise to the occasion right now as it is currently in crisis over the fallout from Drumcree.
In his ‘Culture Wars’ book, the Loyalist activist Jamie Bryson set out his reasoning for reactivating the Drumcree dispute and political Unionism rowed in behind him and the Orange Order. The problem was that Bryson’s book was and is framed around Nationalism being a curiously schizophrenic other…effective and insidious enough to manufacture the situation in which Bryson claims Unionism now finds itself yet passive enough to allow him to enact his plan to turn the tide and rectify the situation via a series of acts that would, from his perspective, restore balance. None of his proposals seemed to account for the possibility that nationalism would react…or that some nationalists would actually read his book (I have admitted I got halfway through before I gave up). Tipping everyone off it was intended as the first act of the Culture War he named his book after might just have stiffened resistance a tad though even if that were missing.
Things did not pan out the way he expected them to do so…or at least what he has claimed in public. If his goal was to instead create a situation that destabilised power-sharing he has succeeded but that is speculative, and so I shall proceed on the basis his goal was what he said, to get the march down the road as part of a plan to re-establish the pre-eminence of the right to march and to come back in future with a bigger parade.
Everyone knew the residents would if it came down to it block the road. Everyone knew the choice would then fall to the Chief Constable on whether to clear the road to facilitate the march. And most folks who thought ahead wagered, correctly, that he would calculate it simply wasn’t worth it and refuse to do so.
Jamie Bryson and the Order are therefore left with the hollow win of the Order’s legal right to march having been confirmed but the harsh reality that no march will ever go down the road again without the consent of the residents (which I will be surprised to see if it happens in my lifetime) also being confirmed. Unionism is therefore enduring the agony of the consequences everyone foresaw they would face should they go down this route.
I have no sympathy for the travails or frustration they face as a result. They had a choice not to relitigate Drumcree. Instead, they have gone all in and are now suffering the real ‘profound consequences’. For the second time in a decade (with the first being the outworkings of Brexit) Unionism attempts to process a self-inflicted defeat on a matter of enormous psychological importance and it is having tremendous difficulty doing so.
As I have argued and will continue to argue, Unionism is not and never has been about the Union. It is about the maintenance of a homeland on the island of Ireland in which Ulster-British identity is privileged. It seems the Union itself is ultimately pointless if the substance of the state their forefathers built is sapped away to placate those outside of the ideology who maybe the arbiters of the north’s constitutional fate and thus when push comes to shove they will risk the future of the Union to preserve the identity of the state as much as they possibly can. Though of course, without the Union, there would be no state at all of course and hence whilst it is not the point of Unionism, it underpins Unionism.
The identitarian impulse is why they went all in on Drumcree even as some, such as the Alliance party or the signatories of the letter from within the Unionist community who begged them to bank the win of having the legal right affirmed whilst not provoking the political disaster that has now befallen Unionism at precisely the moment when the conversation regarding reunification moves onto surer footing. To have not attempted the march would have been at cross-purposes to their underlying philosophy in the first place; this is the Ulster-British homeland. There was simply no chance of them not to trying to proceed once the legal hurdles were cleared, any more than a moth will refuse to fly into a naked flame of its own volition.
And now we face the aftermath. This is a self-inflicted defeat for Unionism and there are no upsides though there has been a feeble attempt to confect some kind of moral victory. Such excuses seem to have received scant attention from those in the middle ground.
Bryson has tried to argue the legal determination that said the Order had a right to march is a victory in and of itself, something the Secretary of State attempted to affirm when he said he was leaving the original determination permitting the march in place when he ultimately banned the procession on public order grounds. To be blunt, that piece of paper is as much a victory for Unionism as Neville Chamberlain’s piece of paper from Munich was a victory for peace in our time.
Some Unionists have also attempted to argue that the idea of a new Ireland was shown to be a lie on the Garvaghy Road and then talked this up as some sort of silver lining, but the recent Lucid Talk polling discredits that assertion. The vast majority of the middle ground supported the residents in their action in blockading the road, and frankly I would argue the vast majority of folks aren’t going to judge the level of tolerance that can be expected in a united Ireland by Unionism collectively deciding to make the most totemic, ideologically loaded, controversial, tragedy-soaked route out of all of the contentious parading disputes the litmus test. You may genuinely want to live in peace with your neighbour but you may have an issue with them sleeping with your spouse in your bed…and if they called you an intolerant bigot for stopping them from doing so an unbiased observer would have to ask whether they were being serious.
Right now Unionism faces a whole host of options and none of them are good and all lead to different degrees of defeat (it really does feel like Brexit all over again).
Many Unionists are screaming for the DUP to remove Michelle O’Neill from office by resigning Emma Little-Pengelly from the Deputy First Minister role, thus forcing the First Minister out as well. Gavin Robinson and Jon Burrows clearly feel this would be a terrible idea as it would play into the nationalist narrative that the north is a failed and unworkable entity. As someone who actually believes the north is a failed and unworkable entity, a further collapse is less something I can pervert to fit my predetermined narrative and more evidence of the fundamental correctness of the diagnosis in the first place. In spite of the patient explanations of both leaders as to why this is a bad idea, the pressure continues regardless.
That’s how bad a position Unionism is in currently. They are badly split over the question of whether to remove Michelle O’Neill from office because it is the one sanction open to them, the one lever they have to pull. The DUP lost an MP over it. Jamie Bryson has split Unionism into ‘O’Neill Must Go’ and ‘O’Neill Must Stay’ wings (employing deliberate terminology to remove nuance and frame those who fear the consequences of removal upon the standing of Unionism at this time as weak and lily-livered) over it. And the worst thing is, for all the torment and agony they are putting themselves through over it, does anyone really believe Michelle O’Neill would be even slightly phased by that action?
Removing O’Neill from office would martyr Michelle O’Neill and lead to even more support flowing to Sinn Féin within nationalism. Drumcree has rescued Sinn Féin from the electoral doldrums and enhanced Michelle O’Neill’s credibility among northern nationalists in a way few events could. The moment she was interviewed on the Garvaghy Road on that morning and said she would always support the residents, she effectively won the coming election within nationalism. Removing her would only feed Sinn Féin’s support and she would be back following the election.
Unionism is tearing itself apart over whether to mildly irritate the First Minister.
Some say Gavin Robinson’s hand is being stayed because to remove her now would prevent the enaction of a budget, which would then lead to public sector workers not getting their promised pay rise and thus the blame for that falling on the DUP. The thinking here is that once – if – a budget is agreed the DUP can have Emma Little-Pengelly resign and thus limit the damage they will inevitably suffer for once again scuppering devolution.
Though I have to question the efficacy of a strategy that is so blindingly obvious it is a topic of discussion in our local media, that Sinn Féin certainly knows of it and thus you have to ask why Sinn Féin would be minded to agree a budget if the DUP plan to flounce out the door immediately afterwards?
Paralysed over the fate of the First Minister and only able so far to cancel photo opportunities as part of their promised punishment of the party, the DUP has turned its ire on another enemy of Ulster-British culture…school-children learning through the medium of Irish. As the BBC reports…
The Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) has tabled a petition of concern in a bid to block proposed legislation on Irish-medium education.
The private member’s bill, brought forward by Sinn Féin assembly member Pat Sheehan, would require Stormont’s Department of Education to prepare a workforce plan on schools in the sector.
And in case anyone thinks this is being opposed on its own merits rather than being petty revenge over Drumcree…
DUP leader Gavin Robinson said the petition was the latest outworking of their response to Sinn Féin’s “arrogance” over the Drumcree parading dispute.
Whilst the BBC cites Alliance deputy leader Eóin Tennyson as saying it was
“yet another petulant swipe and petty stunt intended to walk these institutions to the brink”.
The assembly member said it “punishes no one except the children and young people in Irish-medium schools”.
Everyone recognises this as an outcome of the Drumcree dispute with the exception of UUP leader Jon Burrows, whose party was required to sign on to the petition to enable it to proceed. Burrows as recently as Monday made a pitch for institutionally minded Unionists…the ‘O’Neill must stay’ grouping as Bryson would put it…to coalesce within the UUP. He is quoted in the Newsletter as saying
“This is a defining moment in unionism. I don’t think unionism has been particularly well led over the last two decades. There have been strategic gaffes and crocodile moments that have galvanised Sinn Féin, who I’m afraid are laughing at some of the errors unionism has made. We now need change.
“The Ulster Unionist Party is already showing what that change looks like in government. Robbie Butler is doing tremendous work as Health Minister. He is lowering the bowel cancer screening age towards 50, has delivered a 24/7 thrombectomy service for stroke patients and has invested £1.95 million in endometriosis services.
“I want to see more cooperation across unionism. But I believe a revitalised Ulster Unionist Party can provide the sure-footed leadership unionism needs: making Northern Ireland a success, outsmarting Sinn Féin and securing the Union for the long term.
“I’m building a team to serve the people of Northern Ireland, and I would encourage anyone who shares that ambition to join us.”
At the time of writing though it appears Burrows plans to ‘outsmart’ Sinn Féin by having a hand in repeating the legendary Unionist ‘victory’ of Arlene Foster’s ‘crocodile’ comments (themselves delivered in the wake of Paul Givan’s decision to remove the Líofa bursary). That would be the election which saw Sinn Féin’s vote share and seat total leap upwards.
Burrows has done this by signing the DUP’s petition of concern. His fig-leaf justification is that the bill will prioritise the Irish language sector over other educational sectors. As reported in the BBC…
Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) leader Jon Burrows said Sinn Féin’s conduct over the Drumcree dispute was “reprehensible” but it was not the reason his party had supported the DUP’s petition of concern.
He expressed concern that the private member’s bill gives “preferential treatment to one sector over others”.
“It is an unnecessary bill – it duplicates work that is already taking place.
“It has administrative and financial costs that we don’t need to have,” he told the Nolan Show.
That excuse doesn’t really fly when everyone else is framing it in the context of the Drumcree dispute. I would wager electoral considerations (particularly in his hardline constituency of North Antrim) and the Unionist desire for some form of retribution over Drumcree is the real motive. After all, he publicly undermined his own health minister for electoral reasons a few short months ago, to the point that minister actually resigned.
To do so again would not only be unsurprising, but would also be in keeping with his expressed character if we judge him by his actions rather than his words. And by his actions I once again draw the conclusion that liberal unionism is an oxymoron, though I must admit I have never seen Burrows as a liberal unionist of any sort. In complete fairness to this man this is a term he has never used himself. This is more for the benefit of those who believe him to be such a thing as a ‘liberal’ or ‘moderate’ unionist in comparison to other Unionists. If I see him so described in future, I will be happy to bring up what he has done on this occasion.
It is my belief that there are two forms of Unionism, those who wish to participate in the structures of the Good Friday Agreement to be as obstructive in the shared governance of the north as possible…and the TUV types who don’t wish to participate at all and would much prefer direct rule so as not to sully themselves with having to compromise with nationalists and ‘the others’. The crisis in Unionism is because the fault line between those two groups runs right through the DUP.
That is where we stand in the aftermath of Drumcree. The reunification discussions are picking up, the southern state is becoming engaged, the middle ground is increasingly curious, the young are looking towards the future of a new Ireland…and Unionism is once again mired in a mess of its own making and determined to make everyone else suffer as a result as it thrashes about, desperate to find a pain free off-ramp that doesn’t exist.
I’m a firm believer in Irish unity and I live in the border regions of Tyrone.
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
