The prime minister's office has issued an apology after false claims by David Cameron at Prime Minister's Questions yesterday, writes Kevin Meagher.
The contrasts between David Cameron and Gerry Adams could not be more stark. While Cameron was sitting his A-Levels at Eton, Gerry Adams assumed the presidency of Sinn Fein – after spending is own youth locked in guerrilla war with the British state. In order to lead Sinn Fein’s campaign in the forthcoming general election in the Republic, Adams is standing for the Dail in the Louth constituency. Relinquishing his West Belfast Westminster seat, however, has triggered a frisson of excitement among parliamentary anoraks at the manner of his departure.
As is well known, Sinn Fein Members elect not to sit in the House of Commons due to their refusal to swear the oath of allegiance to the British Crown (and also because they regard it as a ‘foreign’ parliament).
Members retiring their seats between elections are, however, obliged, under archaic parliamentary tradition, to apply for an Office of Profit under The Crown before they can stand down.
These procedural devices see retiring MPs granted the procedural title ‘Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead’ or ‘Crown Steward and Bailiff of the three Chiltern Hundreds of Stoke, Desborough and Burnham’. Eschewing the fripperies of British parliamentary tradition, Adams signalled his intention to resign with a simple letter to Speaker Bercow.
Cue much chortling from British politics’ public schoolboy fraternity, with David Cameron telling Democratic Unionist MP Nigel Dodds at yesterday’s Prime Minister’s Questions:
“I’m not sure that Gerry Adams will be delighted to be Baron of the Manor of Northstead. But nonetheless I’m pleased that tradition has been maintained.”
But it appears that Adams – who neither sought nor accepts the antiquated title – has had the last laugh. Last night the Speaker’s office confirmed that Adams has now been disqualified as a Member of Parliament, as per his original intention. Meanwhile Adams claims that the prime minister’s private secretary apologised to him for David Cameron’s point-scoring.
A statement released by Gerry Adams last night reads:
“The only contact I have had with the British Parliament is a letter I posted to them last Thursday.
“That letter said:
‘A chara [equivalent of “Dear Sir”), I hereby resign as MP for the constituency of west Belfast. Go raibh maith agat [thank-you very much]. Gerry Adams.’
“When I was told of the British Prime Minister’s remarks today this was the first I heard of this development. I understand Mr. Cameron has claimed that ‘The Honourable Member for West Belfast has accepted an office for profit under the Crown.”
“This is untrue. I simply resigned. I was not consulted nor was I asked to accept such an office. I am an Irish republican. I have had no truck whatsoever with these antiquated and quite bizarre aspects of the British parliamentary system.
“I am proud to have represented the people of West Belfast for almost three decades and to have done so without pledging allegiance to the English Queen or accepting British parliamentary claims to jurisdiction in my country.
“Mr. Cameron’s announcement that I have become Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead, wherever that is, is a bizarre development. I am sure the burghers of that Manor are as bemused as me. I have spoken to the Prime Minister’s private secretary today and he has apologised for today’s events.”
With Sinn Fein polling strongly south of the border – tying for third place with governing party Fianna Fail – the prospect of Mr Adams’s party making an historic breakthrough and emerging as part of the government in both parts of the island of Ireland is now a real possibility.
Perhaps his sneering schoolboy critics will shortly wish he had stayed where he was.
58 Responses to “Manor of his departure sees Adams receive apology from Cameron”
Roger
To put this into proportion ‘guerilla warfare’ was indeed a badly chosen term.
But this is a blog post – not a piece of serious journalism that has passed through sub-editors and editors.
And though I know nothing of the writer it’s worth remembering that the PIRA largely abandoned its campaign of indiscriminate terrorism 16 years ago and that although old lefties like myself can remember Bloody Sunday and the Guildford pub bombings and the hunger strikes as if they were yesterday, for younger lefties this is stuff that happened long before they became politically conscious but still too recently to be taught as history.
So lets cut Kevin some slack – if he reads the comments then he probably will put a little more thought into using such terms next time.
Kevin Meagher
Dear Mr. Mouse. Quite happy to have a serious debate, but a bit pointless with people hiding behind a silly nom de plume. I’ll limit myself to a couple of observations.
One, get a dictionary for a definition of guerrilla warfare: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare
My use of the term is descriptive, as anyone can see, not a moral point. Get over yourself.
Second, “The war is over” – is a phrase that has been repeatedly employed my British ministers and politicians across the board. Check out David Trimble’s use of the term here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/2810141.stm
Anon E Mouse
Kevin Meagher – How is the validity of my argument affected by my identity… unless your intention is to attempt a personal Labour smear – ask Peter Watt or David Kelly’s window – they’ll tell you.
Whilst he was the editor of this blog, Will Straw gave the readers a specific assurance that LFF would always play the ball and not the man which is why I mentioned it earlier. Has that policy now changed Shamik?
Your link above to Wiki ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_warfare ) simply reinforces my point where it states:
“Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare and refers to conflicts in which a small group of combatants including, but not limited to, armed civilians (or “irregulars”) used military tactics, such as ambushes, sabotage, raids, the element of surprise, and extraordinary mobility to harass a larger and less-mobile traditional army, or strike a vulnerable target, and withdraw almost immediately.”
That is your link Kevin. Now would you please explain how Tim Parry and Jonathan Ball, aged 12 and 3 respectively, blown up on the UK mainland, can be considered part of an “army”?
And do you really believe that a man not responsible for his upbringing should be sneered at for humour about a man old enough to decide to chose to support groups with violent intentions?
I make no comments on Gerry Adams personally and admire his movement to democracy and being half Irish myself – (from what drunken friends once described as “The Free State” and me as a “Bog Shite”) welcome the peace.
Is it now the policy of the Labour Party to continue the failed “Tory Toffs” or New Labour smear campaigns again?
Because whilst the party is led by a tax avoiding property millionaire, who has never done a single days work in his life, it just won’t wash.
This type of article will offend decent Labour voters everywhere and why this fine blog can’t see this I do not understand…
Anon E Mouse
Roger – You say: “So lets cut Kevin some slack – if he reads the comments then he probably will put a little more thought into using such terms next time.”
But from his response it appears he won’t put any thought into it. He displays the tribal and dogmatic traits of the left that the majority of the public find unattractive.
Come back Tony Blair all is forgiven…
Sean South
Clicking Kevins name above gives you a wee bio. “[Kevin] was also special adviser to Labour Northern Ireland secretary, Shaun Woodward. He is now a freelance communications consultant.”
Hmmmmm…