“In her position I think it would be more helpful if Ms McAleese built bridges rather than build bigger walls between herself and the pro-Union community. In her comments last night she refuses to recognise the important role Irishmen played throughout both world wars and within British military history generally.”

“However, once again her comments seem to reflect her odd and backward approach to Northern Ireland. I think it important that she remembers the overwhelming majority of unionists and republicans in NI and the vast majority of her own citizens in the South endorsed an internal pro-UK settlement in the 1998 referendum. Now that her country has withdrawn its territorial claims on NI it might be a good idea if Mrs McAleese kept her mouth shut and her nose south of the border.”

It is often portrayed in the media of unionists being stuck in the past and lacking the ability to take progressive moves forward, and although this can be the case at times the Irish President has demonstrated her own backwards facing logic that cannot see beyond the politicised history of the Republic of Ireland.

Mary McAleese in recent years has been dogged with negative press in Northern Ireland, from her labeling of unionists as Nazis, trying to equate devolution of Policing & Justice with a Royal visit to the RoI and now her recent treatment of those who fought for democracy. These are not just some spur of the moment incidents, they are premeditated and should be rebutted.

In what other country would an a rocket attack from a neighboring country not result in a military response? If another country wished yours to be eradicated from the face of the earth, would you not retaliate after a ceasefire had been broken? A lot of this comes down to human nature: if Israel had sat back and allowed itself to be the continuing target the democratic nature of its state have have resulted in either lost confidence in the government or a push for a hardliner response. When dealing with terrorists there is no simple solution and Israel has taken many different journeys over the years in dealing with their threat. From suicide terrorism, the Oslo Accord through to the withdrawal from the Gaza strip there have been a variety of different approaches taken. Many would talk of having ‘good faith’ when entering into negotiations, but where was the good faith from Hamas? A negotiated ceasefire that they alone broke to continue their offensive against Israel.

The usual liberal left will condemn Israel’s actions without reservation, without mentioning the terrorist onsluaght they have faced and continue to face. Everyone wants peace, don’t they? From the Conservative Friends of Israel: (H/T Mr Dale)

Under cover of the truce, Hamas engaged in a major campaign to upgrade its terrorist capabilities, manufacturing and smuggling massive quantities of weapons into Gaza – including rockets, explosive charges and machine guns – and constructing a network of underground tunnels for combat purposes. Israel cannot acquiesce to the presence of a Hizbullah-like organization on its southern border.

I doubt very much that Hamas were preparing for peace.

The most pressing and reoccurring of issues is that of legacies of the past. Currently we have the Eames-Bradley consultative group on the past, an Historical Enquiries Team, high profile cases over the deaths of Pat Finucane, Rosemary Nelson, Robert Hamill and Billy Wright and a Police Ombudsman that has ruled over allegations of collusion within the police service. The Bloody Sunday enquiry alone has cost £182 million to date with no results and delay after delay. It is a delicate operation in dealing with atrocities than have happened during the ‘troubles’ due to the human cost and also considering we have convicted terrorists at the heart of the government of Northern Ireland who directed and participated in the death-dealing. The issue of the ‘disappeared’ has long been a shadow over Sinn Fein’s commitment to truth and reconciliation.

2009 will be a year where I think the Eames-Bradley consultative group on the past will be the one to watch. Their remit and their conclusions may well shape how the British and Irish governments wish to deal with the legacies of the past. Nationalist politicians from John Hume to Gerry Adams have attempted to construct a narrative in which to compare Northern Ireland to South Africa, and portray the nationalist community as the ever-suffering underclass. But it is the South African Truth Recovery Commission that has been focused on as some kind of existing model of which to base one specific to Northern Ireland on. The media hyperbole over the concept of perpetrators meeting the victims of their action was spun as some great participatory success. The South African model was flawed as it did not deliver the truth and it did not deliver justice. In a hypothetical situation a model for the troubles would have to have complete buy-in by not just the two governments (British and Irish) but by all the paramilitaries groups involved. I do not foresee any honesty from the paramilitary groups, and Gerry Adams’ continuing denial that he was ever even a member of the Provisional IRA should be treated with the contempt it deserves (although it does demonstrate the two-faces of Sinn Fein).

In terms of gaining some truth, knowledge and understanding of the ordeal the people of Northern Ireland went through we have been dependent on the British government going through the motions in terms of the Saville Inquiry and opening up its archives - and as they are the only active participants they are the ones under intense scrutiny.

The old clichés about a shared future and reconciliation are indeed the goal to which we should all be aiming towards, but frankly we are not there yet. There has been no movement from the loyalist paramilitaries to decommission their weapons; we have witnessed RPG attacks on the PSNI where old stocks of PIRA semtex has been used; and we have a system of government that, at it’s heart, lacks the ability to be held to account. No-one should be getting ahead of themselves, we are still peace-processing and have a long way to go for “normal” politics to prevail.

Monica McWilliams had two choices when drafting this bill. Either she could make a sensible and moderate suggestion to cater the principles of the Human Rights Act to our special local situation or she could propose a ridiculously radical document in a feeble attempt to advance the human rights agenda in a way that would be utterly rejected at the ballot box.

For me there are 2 tests that the Bill of Rights has to satisfy before I can even consider supporting it. The First test is whether or not the Bill of Rights will move power away from democratically elected politicians to unelected judges. The second is whether or not proposals like this would be accepted in the UK.

The first test is failed in a style so monumental and grand that it brings to mind images of a lead titanic. Judges will be given a range of overarching powers including the ability to decide what constitutes a fair wage, they can strike down assembly or Westminster legislation. They can force the Assembly or Westminster to legislate on demand. In effect this Bill of Rights grants the Judiciary such vast legislative power that the NI Judiciary would effectively be the legislature. A Judicial dictatorship.

This would also undoubtably rewrite Northern Irelands constitutional position. With this acts passage the Act of Union becomes a legal fiction. Northern Ireland would become a place apart in the UK. The Bill of Rights grants Judges the power to rule whether or not a raft of UK legislation can apply to Northern Ireland. This is so disgraceful it is simply mindboggling.

There is also the issue of the effective devolution of social policy from ministers to the courts. Under the new bill (p33) ridiculously extends the grounds on which people cannot be discriminated on. These grounds are now (deep breath)

“race, membership of Irish traveller community, colour, ethnicity, descent, sex, pregnancy, maternity, civil, family, or carer status, language, religion or belief,political or other opinion, birth, national or social origin, nationality, economic status, association wit a minority, sexual orientation, gender, identity, age, disability health status , genetic or other pre-disposition toward illness. Irrelevant criminal record, property or a combination of any of these grounds, on the basis of characteristics associated with any of these grounds, or any other status (So judges can add to this list as they like).

It would be easier (and shorter) to just name the 1.7 million odd people in Northern Ireland.

Page 108 legislation must be enacted to recognise all the victims of the NI conflict and to ensure that their rights are protected”. Erm bill of wrongs anyone

p. 116 - “everyone has the right to an adequate standard of living sufficient for that person and their dependents”. Who decides oh yeah the judges. What is an adequate standard of living, what is sufficient.

P.121 - “everyone has the right to work, which includes the right to the opportunity to gain their living by work which they freely choose or accept”. What does this mean for welfare reform? Will the government have to create a job for everyone who wants one?

P. 124 - “workers have the right to strike and the right to engage in collective bargaining”. There is later clause which allows Judges to pick and choose which UK labours laws apply here. This would undo the trade=2 0union reforms of the 1980s which were maintained by Blair.

p. 128 - “everyone has the right to social security …” Do we really want judges deciding on the balance that needs to be struck on social security issues? Have they any idea of budgetary constraints or the need for extra tax to be raised for it

I think the first test of whether it will de-democracise the exercise of power has been answered. My answer to the second test can also be easily found

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/nov/04/rights-bill-jack-straw
0A
Labour ministers have seen something not a million miles away from this to be introduced to Britain and they told Jack Straw to stuff it because it was undemocratic and gave vast powers to Judges. Case closed for me I’m afraid.

What they have done is stuck to a highly politicised agenda which doesn’t address issues specific to Northern Ireland. This Bill amounts to nothing more than a wish list by McWilliams for a “wouldn’t it be lovely NI” were everyone has a job and a reasonable standard of living but no provision has been given how this will be achieved or who will pay for it. Another result will be that a decade on Northern Ireland is no closer to a reasonable Bill of Rights that will be accepted by all sides. All this will do is increase political division in and already fragile assembly and result in the binning of 10 years of work.

UYUC Treasurer and Queen’s Young Unionists Chairman Stephen Goss speech to Party Conference.

(Apologies, cannot for some reason embed the video)

Here is the the speech in full at the UUP website.

These comments by Gerry Adams are a true expression of Sinn Fein’s attitude. Sinn Fein goes to great lengths to portray them as an inclusive and constructive ideology. Sinn Feins [London]Derry website says
“Creating the conditions for establishing an equal society means recognising that many diverse groups and sections of Irish society need enhanced protection from the State. We must tackle the trend to blame a person or group for their exclusion from society.”
These comments sit ill at ease alongside Mr Adams’ sectarian outburst.
However what concerns me particularly about this particular incident is its timing. Sinn Fein usually engages in this pathetic posturing when Stormont isn’t running. Sinn Fein has nothing to lose in this situation and can talk tough all they like. The latest instance however took place in the middle of crucial negotiations by all parties to get the executive back on track. This outburst shows how detached Mr Adam’s is from real politics in Northern Ireland and I think that the announcement by the BBC today that a deal might have been worked out despite Mr Adam’s insult shows that he has become an irrelevance in Northern Ireland.
I am glad that we are in a situation in Northern Ireland were these tirades ARE unacceptable to constitutional politicians. I thank the SDLP and Mark Durkan for condemning this statement and I think that his willingness to do so is the surest sign that the SDLP respects the different but shared traditions of Northern Ireland.

We have to tackle carbon emissions, and it is therefore important that there is an appropriate Bill to do that. Although I have a very sceptical colleague sitting beside me, our party’s policy is that the Bill is necessary.

Now McCrea is quite obviously stating that Sammy Wilson’s vision of the Environment is at odds with his parties own policy. This surely raises the question as to why Robinson saw it fit to appoint such an open cynic to represent Northern Irelands Environmental interests. Of course this is not the only controversy Sammy has found himself in. Only a few weeks ago the he was caught riding his motorcycle on a public road without MOT and Road Tax- even though he is the Minister in charge of MOT and Road Tax. Then there are the increasing fears amongst his own departmental officials about the direct role he is taking in dealing with constituency planning applications- even though he is the Minister in charge of Planning. And to add to that, he has continually refused to step down as a Member of Belfast City Council- even though he is the Minister in charge of reforming the councils across Northern Ireland. Can anyone see the pattern forming yet? So I must ask, when will this bumbling Minister leave the stage for once and for all and return to the backbenches where he and his views belong?

Solemn the drums thrill: Death august and royal
Sings sorrow up into immortal spheres.
There is music in the midst of desolation
And a glory that shines upon our tears.

They went with songs to the battle, they were young,
Straight of limb, true of eye, steady and aglow.
They were staunch to the end against odds uncounted,
They fell with their faces to the foe.

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old;
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them.

They mingle not with laughing comrades again;
They sit no more at familiar tables of home;
They have no lot in our labour of the day-time;
They sleep beyond England’s foam.

But where our desires are and our hopes profound,
Felt as a well-spring that is hidden from sight,
To the innermost heart of their own land they are known
As the stars are known to the Night;

As the stars that shall be bright when we are dust,
Moving in marches upon the heavenly plain,
As the stars that are starry in the time of our darkness,
To the end, to the end, they remain.