Young
Unionists

Neil Wilson is the Chairman of Merseyside Conservative Future and grew up in County Down. He argues that the UUP/Conservative pact offers a credible future for Unionism.

The DUP are often keen to claim that they are ‘delivering for Ulster’ but their recent, often vehement, opposition to the recent electoral pact between the Conservatives and the UUP has given their game away.

A charge often levelled at the DUP is that of ‘little Ulsterism’. This is hardly surprising from a party whose former leader told a journalist to ‘get back to England’ when he didn’t like his line of questioning, yet manages to adorn all their literature with the Union Flag as if it is merely a symbol to be seen in a Northern Ireland context.

The worst example of little Ulsterism came in June last year when they decided to back Labour over 42 day detention, helping to prop up a government which has, for the last twelve years, been guilty of the worst type of constitutional vandalism and an erosion of liberties which the vast majority of British people find abhorrent.

People from Northern Ireland play a massive role in British society. Vast numbers of Northern Ireland’s youngsters now attend universities in England and Scotland. It is impossible to switch on any of the major news channels without hearing an Ulster accent. Soldiers from Northern Ireland excel in the ranks of the military, serving their country wherever they are required.

Northern Ireland punches above its weight in all aspects of British life. Seldom has a population of 1.75 million achieved so much, yet the lack of real representation at Westminster ensures that Northern Ireland’s voice goes unheard and that it remains at the edge of the Union, with its elected representatives content to negotiate payouts and concessions, rather than form opinions.

In his speech to the UUP conference, David Cameron told us he wants to “cement Northern Ireland’s position as a peaceful, prosperous and confident part of the United Kingdom”. DUP activists would surely argue that this is an aim all Unionists share, but why then, in the DUP’s view, is Northern Ireland not good enough to have the same input as the English, Scottish and Welsh to an all-British party of the Union?

The DUP’s vision of politics is dominated by contrasting images of hard and soft Unionism, backstabbing Englishmen and Catholics who are viewed purely through a religious prism. It’s horrendously rhetorical and counterproductive. It creates a party identification model based for the most part on religion and eschews the idea that people from different backgrounds can share common goals. Essentially, it is isolationist and far removed from the Unionism envisaged by Lord Carson on several counts. Eventually, the DUP’s particular brand of Unionism will fail.

Many Unionists complain that other British people fail to understand them. Indeed, questioning politically astute English friends about Northern Irish politics offers an insight into how little we are thought about, let alone understood. Unionism cannot be supported, if it is not understood and to be understood, it must have a presence at the heart of British politics. This is something the DUP have gone out of their way to avoid and an area where they will consistently fail to deliver. On the other hand, we Conservatives and Unionists see this as crucial.

The Conservative-UUP pact offers Northern Ireland two things. Firstly, the genuine chance of achieving the political representation it is due and secondly, of creating Unionism, based not on religion but by employing the best arguments we have – that the combined strength of the United Kingdom is far greater than the sum of all our parts.

This week has seen Northern Ireland confronting one its rawest emotions. However amongst our own problems a significant day in the remembrance of victims will have slipped by many peoples radars; Tuesday marked National Holocaust Day. It was 64 years since Soviet troops liberated the camp at Auschwitz in southern Poland and brought to an end the most awful example of human wickedness that this planet has ever seen. It was important that this camp was maintained in its more or less original state to remind us that this world can never again allow a single country to inflict such evil on human beings. I personally visited the Nazi concentration camps at Auschwitz this September with a few friends and I would definitely recommend the experience to anyone. It truly is a horrifying place and you really do need to physically stand in the gas chambers to fully understand the horror of which the camps prisoners must have felt in the moments leading up to their deaths The pictures attached to this blog are just a small number of which I took while I was there.

The reality of the camp strikes you immediately when you step in through those famous front gates. All the buildings are either original or build exactly to scale with original materials, the barbed wire is starting to rust and the steps inside the buildings have been visibly worn down by its estimated 22million visitors since its liberation.

The above picture on the left is just a small amount of the artificial limbs which the Nazis confiscated from the prisoners as they arrived at the camps. They were then often forced to hobble into the gas chambers while their limbs were sent away to be used by German soldiers injured in the war. On the left is a picture of a typical toilet block where 100s of prisoners would have been crammed in at a time therefore it was a constant struggle for the most primitave utilities.

Of course when the Nazis realised that death camps were a rather effective tool in their aim of wiping out a entire religion- the demand for space rose significantly. Therefore the original site at Auschwitz was expanded in 1941, with a new camp built just a short distance away at Birkenau; this was genocide on an industrial scale. Jews were now being purged throughout all the occupied territories and brought to this new camp shipped like cattle in trains. Hungary in particular suffered under the Nazis with an estimated 600,000 Hungarian Jews being killed in Birkenau.

The above building has to be on one of the most tragic sites that one could possibly visit. Although it may seem nothing more than a old unassuming shed, it is instead the first gas chamber on the Aushwitch original camp. You go inside the dark building and through a few rooms in which people were forced to undress, you then go into the next long room which although there is nothing to suggest it, is the gas chamber. The only feature it has is a small square hole in the roof in which the chemical pellets were poured in, these pellets would then produce a cyanide gas which would ultimately kill all those who came into contact with it. The bodies were then carried into the next room where the would be incinerated. On the Birkeneau camp the gas chambers were many times bigger and the bodies were often burned in piles in the open air.

It is estimated that 1.1million people were killed in the Auschwitz Camps, hundreds of thousands more died due to forced labour and malnourishment.  The Auschwitz Nazi commander, Rudolf Höss, was hanged only yards from the gas chamber where he ordered the death of thousands, the gallows still stand today in their original state as a constant reminder of the evil of which the human race is capable of undertaking.

Therefore whilst Northern Ireland has had its own problems with ethnic cleansing, we should remember the lives of the millions which were murdered in the German death camps- their only crime being their religious faith.

Over the last few days there have been many statements from all of the sectors, the politicians, the community partnerships and the victims groups. By far the majority have said it was morally wrong  for Lord Eames and Dennis Bradley to offer a payment of £12,000 to each of the families who have seen one of their relatives killed. It shouldn’t all be about money, instead the truth and recognition would be worth far more to the families.

Whilst I accept that £12,000 may seem desirable to some, I see it as nothing but an attempt to close a chapter and forget part of Northern Ireland’s tragic past where so many innocent people lost their lives. Twelve thousand pounds may buy a car, may even pay off a few debts but it doesn’t come close to putting a value on someone’s life.

However there is an even more sinister plot to this unfortunate story, for while there may be some worthy recipients it has been revealed that the terrorists who caused the grief throughout Northern Ireland will also be remunerated for their crimes. When they were putting on their balaclavas and murdering innocent people- many just because of their religion- they were not doing it for any great cause; it was simply out of raw hatred and bigotry. Therefore to think that the families of these terrorists who died will get the £12,000 payment on par with the real victims is disgusting and ultimately unacceptable.

The Shankhill bomber- Thomas Begley, the IRA terrorists killed during their failed raid in Loughgall, and the LVF leader Billy Wright are just a few of the people whose immediate family stand to receive quite a tidy financial payment thanks to their ‘victim’ status. This is like Barak Obama getting on a plane to the Middle East and giving out money to the families of the suicide bombers of 9/11, of course we know this would never happen, but then why should it happen here? Those terrorists who participated in campaigns of violence here knew what they were getting into, and it is not for me to speak ill of the dead but I can only assume they are paying for their crimes in another world.

The DUP should be more worried about what’s in their constituent’s best interests than they are about constantly worrying about rocking the boat with their partners in Sinn Fein. Ian Paisley was swept to power by playing on Unionism’s most raw emotions, he bled every vote he could out of that card and when the DUP eventually came to power he treated victims as an unnecessary burden. The Ulster Unionists attempted to raise the issue in the Assembly without turning it into some kind of political football, but thanks to the DUP/SF domination game up at Stormont any attempts that the UUP made of regulating of who could and could not be called a victim were quickly thrown out.

Peter Robinson and Jeffrey Donaldson should not be standing up in front of the media denouncing the recommendations in the Eames/Bradley Report when they know in their heart of hearts that they had a perfect chance to exclude terrorists from ever benefiting from a victim status again. To their shame they didn’t do that, they know they let the real victims down, and they should realise that they haven’t forgotten that.

As Brian Walker has said at Slugger, well done Dennis. Former UUP President Lord Rogan was approached by Sunday Times journalists and asked to lay down amendments to legislation in return for payment. He told them to sling their hook.

Iain Dale has pointed out that all parties have had their instances to sleaze. The cash for questions scandal was without doubt a sign than the Conservative Party had lost some moral authority to govern, and helped cause the 1997 landslide. First, as Ken Clarke has said this morning, these men have only been accused at this stage and may be innocent of what they are accused of. If they are not however it is a scandal much worse than cash for questions. Altering the law to suit the interests of groups who are paying you is unforgivable, particularly for a former minister. If true, it can demonstrate nothing less than the worse abuse of the privilege that comes with being a legislator.

I have said before on the antecedent to this blog, as well as other blogs, that the House of Lords is not a legitimate legislative body in a modern democracy. An MP could be punished at the ballot box for things like this, as could their party should they stand down in shame. Lords with less integrity than our own Lord Rogan can continue to legislate until a positive action is taken against them. That cannot be right.

I am sad, but not shocked, at the leaked details of what is being proposed by the Eames-Bradley Consultative Group on the past. It has been reported by the BBC and covered by Pete Baker on Slugger O’Toole that the group is pushing for £12,000 to be paid to the family of anyone killed during the troubles; whether they were part of a terrorist organisation perpetrating murderous acts does not appear to matter to those serving in this consultative group. Eames-Bradley are forwarding the policy that there is “no hierarchy of victims” that has some common threads with the Sinn Fein policy that attempts to equate the Provisional IRA with the victims of it’s 30+ years of terror. Not only is this a complete and utter reprehensible position, but it disgraces the memory of those who lost their lives during the the course of the troubles. Obviously my position on Eames-Bradley, at the minute, is pretty clear. I am sceptical of what their agenda is and cynical of what positive outcomes they foresee from taking this course of action.

There are unionist groups out there whose own recommendations come close to Eames-Bradley in terms of the need and benefit such truth recovery mechanisms can provide to Northern Ireland. Mainstream unionist parties (DUP, UUP and TUV) would not touch this with the proverbial 40ft barge pole. There is not a uniform category of victims, they are diverse and wide ranging and should be treated as individuals. I have been watching the Eames-Bradley group with much interest and I fear there will be some headline grabbing and positioning going on, not by the group itself, but by the ones pulling the strings. This is unsavory and unwelcome. Jim Nicholson MEP has had this to say:

“The suggestion from Eames-Bradley that £12,000 compensation is given to all those killed in the Troubles – including terrorists – is a highly damaging, immoral proposal, that will undermine both community relations and political confidence.

“The proposal endorses the morally flawed notion that a terrorist killed while undertaking a mission of murder has the same status as an innocent civilian murdered in a bomb attack or a member of the security forces murdered in front of their family. People across our entire community will find this suggestion repugnant.

“The Government must understand in the clearest possible terms that this proposal is totally unacceptable”.

Imagine if it was suggested that the Al Quaeda suicide bombers who crashed the abducted planes into the World Trade Center in New York on September 11th 2001 were to be classified as victims on an equal footing with those 2,974 people whom they murdered? There would be outrage, and rightly so.

Northern Ireland has moved along way from the pre-ceasfire days, through the negotiations that cumulated on the Belfast Agreement, the incomplete decommissioning, St. Andrew’s Agreement and the restoration of devolution in 2007. There is still a long way to go, and still a lot of heavy lifting to be done.

Penned by party member Aleks

In the 1880 General Election, each of the nine counties of Ulster returned 2 MP’s. Of those 18, Liberals took 8, Conservatives took 8, and Home Rulers/Nationalists took 2. Those 2 were both in Cavan, where the Liberals did not bother standing, and the only Conservative was over 1000 votes behind the second Home Ruler.

Liberal County Seats in Ulster
The Liberals took: -
1 of the 2 County Seats in Armagh
Both of the 2 County Seats in Donegal
Both of the 2 County Seats in Londonderry
Both of the 2 County Seats in Monaghan
1 of the 2 County Seats in Tyrone
In those days, there were 2 seats in each County Constituency, and each elector had 2 votes. So it made sense for a party to run 2 candidates, if they thought that they had more voters in the Constituency than any other party. The Liberals ran 2 candidates in Co Antrim, one of whom came within 147 votes of being elected. So if they had been a bit less ambitious, they might have taken a seat there. They also ran a candidate in County Down, who came within 20 votes of being elected.

Conservative County Seats in Ulster
The Conservatives took: -
Both of the 2 County Seats in Antrim
1 of the 2 County Seats in Armagh
Both of the 2 County Seats in Down
Both of the 2 County Seats in Fermanagh
1 of the 2 County Seats in Tyrone

BOROUGH SEATS IN ULSTER
In those days, various towns also had the right to return MP’s. The electorate there was much smaller. For example, in 1880 Co Tyrone had approximately 8,800 electors, out of a population of 193,152 in 1881. On the other hand, Dungannon Borough had 300 electors in 1884, out of a population of 4081 in 1881. There were 11 Boroughs seats in Ulster, of which the Liberals took 1 and the Conservatives 10.

Liberal Borough Seat in Ulster
The Liberals took the Borough of Dungannon in 1880, beating the Conservatives by 2 votes, 128 to 126. So they took 8 County seats and one Borough seat in Ulster, making a total of 9 seats in Ulster.

Conservative Borough Seats in Ulster
The Conservatives took all the other boroughs in Ulster, namely Armagh, Belfast (2 seats), Carrickfergus, Coleraine, Downpatrick, Enniskillen, Lisburn, Londonderry City, Newry. So they took 8 County seats and 10 Borough seats in Ulster, making a total of 18 seats in Ulster.

SEATS OUTSIDE ULSTER

Conservative seats outside Ulster
Their other 7 seats in Ireland were one of the 2 County Seats in Leitrim (where the Home Rulers ran 3 candidates for 2 seats, for reasons best known to themselves), both of the 2 County Seats in County Dublin, both of the 2 seats for Dublin University (Trinity College) and the Boroughs of Bandon and Portarlington. They took a total of 25 seats in Ireland (one less than they were to take as late as 1918).

Liberal seats outside Ulster
Their other 6 seats in Ireland were the boroughs of Athlone, Drogheda, Dundalk, Mallow and New Ross, and one of the two seats in Dublin City. They took a total of 15 seats in Ireland.

CHANGES IN 1885
Prior to the 1885 election, the franchise was widened. Up to that time, only those holding land worth at least £10 per year could vote in the County Constituencies. The franchise in the County Constituencies was also very limited. From 1885 on, all male householders could vote.

Most of the Borough Constituencies were abolished, and their representation transferred to County Constituencies. For example, County Down went up to 4 members (N, S, E and W). So did Co Antrim (N, Mid, E and S). Belfast also increased from 2 members to 4.

In the 1885 election in Ireland, the Irish Nationalist Party took 85 seats (and one in Liverpool), the Conservatives 18 and the Liberals none.

From then on, outside Ulster and Trinity College, the Conservatives could win only intermittent seats in South Dublin and Dublin City (Stephen’s Green). The Liberals held the occasional seat, e.g. North Tyrone from 1895-1918.

On the 1st of January 1604 the Court of the Queen’s Bench heard  Semayne’s case. From this case the common law principle of a citizen’s right to refuse entry to their property derived. It was this principle that has for centuries allowed us to deny access to our homes to Bailiffs. However as part of Labours apparent policy of assaulting our traditional freedoms the Tribunal and Courts enforcement act 2007 and the 2004 Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 removed this ancient common law right and handed over shocking new powers to Bailiffs.

These powers include the right to forcibly enter a house and astonishingly the power to use reasonable force to restrain householders. This is one of the grossest violations of our fundamental freedoms that I have ever witnessed. Once upon a time an “Englishman’s home was his castle” In 1760 William Pitt famously declared

“The Poorest may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the crown. It may be frail, its roof may shake, the wind may blow through it. The rain may enter. The storms may enter but the King of England may not enter. All his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.”

However today non-uniformed individuals who haven’t a shred of authority from the state. May legally “Break open the Door”- Her Majesty’s Court Service Guidelines to Bailiffs and any home owner who resists can be legally assaulted.

Thankfully this terrible crime did not go completely unnoticed. Dominic Grieve Conservative Shadow Home Secretary remarked,

” We are about to give considerable powers to non-uniformed individuals…We are allowing them to enter private premises, which will not necessarily be the premises of the person whom they are seeking to carry out searches… I am a little surprised that we are apparently introducing such potentially draconian legislation without paying real regard to the consequences on the ground on a day-to-day basis”

What Labour has done to our civil liberties is utterly unforgivable. Hopefully Dominic Grieves comments are a sign that the conservative party values our liberties as I do.

(I would like to say thank you to Philip Johnston whose article made me aware of this issue)

On the soundtrack of Monty Python and the Holy Grail is a John Cleese sketch about logic.

…given the premise, ‘all fish live underwater’ and ‘all mackerel are fish’, my wife will conclude, not that ‘all mackerel live underwater’, but that ‘if she buys kippers it will not rain’, or that ‘trout live in trees’, or even that ‘I do not love her any more.’ This she calls ‘using her intuition’. I call it ‘crap’, and it gets me very irritated because it is not logical.

On Facebook at the moment there is a photograph entitled “ISRAEL DOESN’T TARGET CHILDREN?? 2″ which depicts two very badly injured, if not dead, children. The caption reads:

PLS TAG AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN SO THAT PEOPLE CAN WAKE UP TO THE TRUTH OF THE BABY KILLING ISRAEL.. GO TO THE MAIN ALBUM THERE ARE MULTIPLE COPIES OF THE PICTURES

Israel takes action to defend it’s citizens from terrorist attack by Hamas. As a result of this, innocent people are injured and die. This does not mean that Israel targets children. It does not mean that Israel is a bloodthirsty regime of terror. It means that the Israeli state is exercising it’s duty to protect it’s citizens and restore the state monopoly on the use of force.

It should not really surprise me anymore when the President of the Republic of Ireland demonstrates her complete revisionist history of not only Irish history, but of the politics of understanding and compassion towards her fellow countrymen/women. Mary McAleese in her recent outburst has labelled all those Irish men, irrespective of their religion of political outlook, who fought and died in the Great War only did so to put food on the table. For Mary McAleese it was not about patriotism, it was not about standing together in the face of tyranny and it certainly was not because young Irish men were proud to be part of the British Army and its Irish regiments. Tom Elliott MLA has had this to say to the Irish President:

“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.

The recent offensive by Israel on Hamas targets within the Palestinian Gaza strip have resulted in many labeling the actions by the Israelis as blatant, unprovoked and unnecessary murders of a civilian population. Iain Dale has already pointed out the precarious position Israel has found itself in, namely that of seeking ceasefire and peace agreement while the terrorist Hamas have sent rockets from Gaza into Israeli settlements. Of course the timing of the assault on Hamas was not good, and international opinion will always to be to avoid confrontation, but the actions of the Hamas leadership have forced Israel’s hand.

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.