Young
Unionists

Reflecting back on the year that was 2008 there have been many historic moments that will impact on the international stage: from Morgan Tsvangirai’s victory in Zimbabwe to Barack Obama’s in the USA; from Russian intervention in South Ossetia to the humanitarian crisis now in Zimbabwe; and of course the global economic meltdown. Closer to home the political situation in Northern Ireland has taken a back burner in terms of international headlines, with the Northern Ireland Assembly having to actually demonstrate its competence in governing this region of the UK. It is debatable as to the extent of success it has had, but there are certainly issues that need to be resolved that fall with the remit of “peace processing” as opposed to devolved institutions.

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.

On the 60th anniversary of the announcement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights it is a pity that the rights agenda has been so feebly and ridiculously hijacked by Monica McWilliams and her Bill of Rights. The commission is split over the issue with Daphne Trimble and Jonathan Bell vocally dissenting against the bill and its easy to see why. If the assembly adopts this it would simply become the longest suicide note in history

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.

On Saturday December 6th Conservative Party Leader David Cameron addressed the Ulster Unionist Party conference at the Ramada Hotel in Belfast. There is a lot I could say, but I think it would be better if you watch and listen to David himself. Enjoy.

(Apologies, cannot for some reason embed the video)

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

Afrikaner- Noun- An Afrikaans-speaking South African of European ancestry, especially one descended from 17th-century Dutch settlers.
Wiki- Some liberal Afrikaans-speaking South Africans and Namibians have rejected the label ‘Afrikaner’, because of its negative connotations of racial and religious intolerance.

As a Unionist I am growing used to being labelled like this whether it is Father Alec Reid likening me to a Nazi. Mary McAleese saying I was brought up with an irrational hatred of Catholics and now Gerry Adams suggesting that I am racially and religiously intolerant. I am at the point now where I am neither surprised nor particularly angered by these statements they have become part and partial of my political life. The persecution of unionists- and let us be under no illusions about what this is- is wide spread as nationalists of varying shades seek to portray unionism as an oppressive and intolerant ideology to the world at large.

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.

It appears the blog is experiencing some problems with Internet Explorer, apologies for any inconvenience we will sort these out soon. The site works fine on Firefox.

Northern Irelands in a peculiar situation, for not only do we have the most Enviro-secptic Minister in the UK, but he even goes as far as actively voting against the Climate Change Bill when it comes before Parliament. I’m talking of course about last week’s vote in the House of Commons, where our Sammy was a teller for the Noes, they ‘narrowly’ lost the vote; 5 against to 475 votes for. Now that alone is more than enough to raise a few eyebrows about the Ministers suitability for the job, but perhaps even more interestingly is the evident divisions within the DUP over the issue. Out of the 6 DUP MPs present they all, apart from Sammy Wilson, voted for a new clause in the Climate Change Bill. Later in the same day, Sammy spoke against the proposal to move the Bill to its crucial next stage; however he was conveniently absent when it came to the vote. Willie McCrea couldn’t have said it any better:

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?

With proud thanksgiving, a mother for her children,
England mourns for her dead across the sea.
Flesh of her flesh they were, spirit of spirit,
Fallen in the cause of the free.

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.

Today we have recievied the sad news of the death of former RUC Chief Constable, Sir Jack Hermon.

All our thoughts and prayers are with his wife, our friend and colleague Lady Hermon, and the rest of the Hermon family at this sad time.

Our second guest blog contains the thoughts of O’Neill of the Unionist Lite blog.

Cards on the table first of all, I’m not a member of the Ulster Unionist Party (nor unfortunately that young any more), so I will understand if the end of this rather over-long short post you all tell me to go away and mind my own business!

I’m a non-aligned Unionist; for a number of reasons I believe in the continuing Union of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. There’s four parts to the United Kingdom and when we (or more often the DUP) speak of safe-guarding N.Ireland’s place in the Union, we must never forget that there are two parts to that statement, there’s no point safeguarding N.Ireland’s status in the Union, if that Union itself no longer exists.

Our first priority, as Unionists of whatever description, should therefore be ensuring that the United Kingdom as a political entity remains in existence. We should be pushing our representatives to have a much closer involvement in United Kingdom politics, fighting with like-minded allies “the politics of the Union”, looking to strengthen east-west ties, looking to directly influence the decisions being taken at the centre of our nation. The second priority is to ensure that any future Border Poll provides a healthy majority for Northern Ireland’s continuing future within the United Kingdom. At the minute, if surveys are to be believed, there is a large majority (ranging from 20-30%) of Northern Ireland’s population that wishes our constitutional status to remain unchanged. Yet, at the last election the difference in total % votes cast between Unionism and nationalism was less than 5%. You should be all asking yourselves the question, “Why?”

It’s actually an easy one to answer. The UUP and DUP presently do not offer a comfortable home for all those who would be in favour of the Union continuing, simple as that. The DUP make no bones about what market they’re concentrating on and that’s the communal Ulster protestant one; look at their website, the articles stress their defence of the Orange Order, social conservatism (e.g. the abortion question) and the constant never-ending fight (as they would define it) against the “encroachment of Irish culture” (be it the Irish language or the GAA). And in terms of that narrow focus they do the job well…but it will not reduce that difference between the number of unionists (with a small “u”) and actual Unionist voters at the ballot box- look at again those election results over the last ten years; as the DUP have gained in strength vis-à-vis the UUP, the total % voting Unionist has remained static or, in some cases, even dropped. They may well be maximising their share of the existing Unionist vote, they are not, however, increasing the total Unionist vote.

And the UUP? What have you done…or are doing… or are planning to do, to mobilise that potential for Unionism? Are you concentrating too much on fighting the “politics of Unionism” and forgetting the wider picture? A hard, but true fact is that you have lost the battle for the cultural wing of Unionism to the DUP- the mythical “Unionist People” (in reality those who primarily believe themselves to be British because of their birthplace, religion and attitude on matters of social conscience) are never coming back to your party. That certainly is of little consequence towards the overall fight for the Union, but more specifically, is that really such a bad thing for the UUP?

I believe not, but only if you maximise the opportunities that are at the moment presenting themselves to you. You have the chance to build up firm links (be it as a merger or as an alliance) with a secular, modern and well-resourced (financially and intellectually) party that operates throughout the United Kingdom. By doing so, you will be strengthening the east-west links which hold us to the mainland and also gaining the opportunity to influence the politics that affect all of our nation, not just our own, small corner. You will be showing to those passive unionists I’ve spoken of earlier, that you are no longer interested in fighting on the sectarian battlefield, presently dominated by the DUP and Sinn Fein, but are, at least, trying to push politics here towards what would be considered as normal in the rest of our nation; those passive unionists are unionists because of economic and social, not cultural reasons and those are the arenas in which we should be choosing to fight Irish nationalism.

For the more pragmatic amongst you, the question probably will be; “All very well, but it will increase our vote at the next European/ local government, Westminster election”? And the answer is a simple “Who knows?” But I’m not quite sure what your alternative is; continue to fight the DUP on their terms, whilst the overall vote for Unionism continues to stagnate? At the very least, by building a stronger link with the Conservative Party you’re going to shake politics here out of its present sectarian stalemate, you’re going to push many people beyond their normal comfort-zone and you’re going to contribute towards a genuine United Kingdom form of Unionism.

And yes, I think, as a rather handy side-effect, it will bring greater success for you at the ballot-box.