Ed Jacobs looks at the aftermath of the first ever 'everyday' elction in Northern Ireland and asks what the future holds for the Stormont Assembly.
Following his election to Stormont for the North Antrim constituency, Jim Allister, leader of the anti-Good Friday agreement Traditional Unionist Voice party vowed to continue his long standing campaign to make life uncomfortable for the executive.
He explained following his election:
“I look forward to being a very active thorn in the flesh of the DUP/Sinn Fein coalition.
“I look forward to being a scourge of IRA/Sinn Fein, and I look forward to being a rebuke to the wanton daily abuse and squalor of money in this province.”
And yet, despite his long running hostility to the DUP/Sinn Fein partnership, could it instead be the Tories’ former electoral allies, the Ulster Unionists, who are about to attempt to claim the mantra of the thorn in the Executive’s side – despite being part of that same Executive?
Speaking at his count over the weekend in Omagah, Tom Elliott, the party’s leader, used the sight of Irish tricolour flags to launch a full fronted attack on Sinn Fein. He argued:
“I see many people here with flags today, some of them with flags from a foreign nation. I would expect nothing better from the scum of Sinn Féin.
“Their counterparts in the IRA have murdered the citizens of this province for years and decades and now all they want to do is shout down political representatives. That is how they want to run this province but I can tell you, as unionists, we will not allow them to do that.
“They tried to bomb and murder us out of Northern Ireland for generations and it didn’t succeed and they will not succeed now.”
Despite anger at the remarks, including from the brother of the murdered police officer, Ronan Kerr, who dubbed Elliott’s views as “prehistoric” and “prejudiced”, Elliott has told the Newsletter that he stands by the remarks.
But what lies behind his outburst, from the leader of a party that was supposedly the moderate voice of unionism in Northern Ireland?
Perhaps first and foremost is desperation. Having not all that long ago been the majority voice of the unionist community, led by David Trimble, one of the architects of the Good Friday agreement, they are a party which, as a result of the 2010 election and their misguided partnership with the Conservatives have no MPs in Westminster, and following the consolidation of the DUP’s position as the largest unionist voice following the election just been weakened still further.
Indeed, writing on his blog, the BBC’s Northern Ireland political editor, Mark Davenport, has outlined a scenario in which the UUP could lose one of the two ministerial seats it held in the last executive.
But Elliott’s comments form part of a wider trend in which the UUP have become more rebellious and prepared to rock the boat. As Left Foot Forward has previously reported, it was the UUP which, together with the SDLP, led the fight against the Executive’s budget cuts and it was the UUP health minister, Michael McGimpsey, who spent so much of his time distancing himself from his ministerial colleagues with outspoken attacks on the lack of funding for the health service being provided by finance minister, Sammy Wilson.
Such attacks are likely, in part, to be used by Elliott to boost his argument made prior to the election that it was time for changes to be made, to end the system of mandatory coalitions and to provide for a properly resourced opposition to hold the Executive to account, rather than ministers being forced to split in public when differences of opinion arise.
Whilst his tactics might be a little bizarre, Elliott’s point remains valid. Following what Peter Robinson himself dubbed Northern Ireland’s first normal “everyday” election, it remains an anomaly that voters have no opportunity to throw out unpopular governments in favour of an alternative. It also makes manifestos a waste of time since no party in Northern Ireland is ever able to fulfil everything it promises.
With the UK government having concluded that it was safe to bring to an end the policy of 50/50 recruitment in the police service, if Stormont is to look and sound like a proper Assembly and Executive then perhaps now is the time to consider if political leaders can move to a system of government and opposition without tearing chunks out of each other and dividing the community.
That would be a sign of real progress.
As I wrote recently for Nottingham University’s politics politics blog during the election:
“As the 2011 election campaign goes on, we can expect to hear yet more from all parties about the progress made in Northern Ireland, with an emphasis on the ‘normal politics’ of the economy, health or education. However, as with all things, ‘normality’ in Northern Ireland should be compared not to the rest of the UK but to the province’s past.
“Whilst the issues discussed may be similar to those debated elsewhere in the UK, the litmus test now will be whether the next Assembly and Executive are prepared to reform the way it does its politics.”
30 Responses to “Time for normal politics in Northern Ireland?”
Rory Gallivan
I don’t see direct rule as a ‘winner takes all’ solution, especially if it were implemented in such a way that there was no discrimination in housing allocation etc, which seems to me entirely plausible. I don’t think it would be morally wrong. And when Northern Ireland was ruled directly, I seem to remember that the SDLP, not Sinn Fein, was the largest nationalist party.
I didn’t say that direct rule would ‘lead to nationalists just abandoning their aspirations’ but I think it would have been quite likely that it would eventually happen over time if it had been made clear that Northern Ireland would remain part of the United Kingdom as long as the majority of its inhabitants were in favour of it.
Obviously if Scotland does become independent there will be a large alienated minority, but I don’t see how there could be any kind of “negotiated solution”.
I accept that Roman Catholics in Northern Ireland don’t feel British (just as NI Protestants would not initially feel any affinity to a united Ireland), but I think that living as a minority in a state you don’t feel loyal to is not exactly the nightmare you seem to think it is and that feelings of resentment would eventually fade away. The Irish Catholics did not feel British when they arrived in England and Scotland in the 19th century, but such divisions have substantially faded. I think the same thing is possible in Northern Ireland.
Modicum
I wouldn’t describe direct rule as a nightmare; that doesn’t make it fair or desirable though. The fact is that both communities want devolution, and it shouldn’t be denied to them due to a distaste for the representatives they choose to elect.
The heavy handed approach you’re advocating has been tried before and found wanting. In fact it’s counterproductive. From 1800 onwards British politicians eventually addressed every Irish grievance except the one that really mattered, hoping the demand for self-government would whither away. That was called “constructive unionism”. What it eventually achieved was to radicalize a peaceful struggle for devolution, seeking an honourable compromise within the union, into a militant secessionist movement.
But I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this one.
Rory Gallivan
Well, the set-up that exists in Northern Ireland now, as I think I have shown, does not devolve power to anyone. It is a fudge that suits a few politicians very nicely, but doesn’t provide any kind of long-term solution to Northern Ireland’s problems and doesn’t meet anybody’s aspirations. The dispute over the province’s fate has been temporarily halted, but in my view prolonged ,when it could have been settled once and for all.
In what way are the lives of Roman Catholics better under this system than they would be under direct rule – with the IRA’s campaign of violence over and a United Kingdom government in power that was determined to end discrimination in the province? The answer in my view is that they are not, and sooner or later Sinn Fein will start to push for more moves towards a united Ireland, backing up their demands with the veiled threat of violence.
Modicum
I don’t think you’ve shown that devolution hasn’t devolved power to anyone. Power-sharing is functioning reasonably well and can be made to work better.
You assume that it would have been possible to achieve three ideals simultaneously: “direct rule – with the IRA’s campaign of violence over and a UK government in power that was determined to end discrimination”. We will never know. But I think a better approach to peacemaking is to talk to both communities and encourage them to find agreement, rather than to unilaterally impose a top-down solution.
There’s now agreement by all parties, including Sinn Fein and the Republic of Ireland, that there will be no change to the status of Northern Ireland without the consent of the majority there. There’s already evidence that the constitutional question has been parked and politicians are moving on to arguing about ordinary issues. Sinn Fein still pay lipservice to a united Ireland, but their proposals are about making the case to unionists and winning a referendum at some future date. They haven’t advocated reneging on the “principle of consent”.
I also see no evidence that ‘Provisional’ Sinn Fein are interested in a return to violence or the threat thereof. The future of the party seems to be the likes of Pearse Doherty and Mary Lou McDonald, a new generation who were never involved in the PIRA and are only interested in peaceful politics. I see them following the same path as the original Sinn Fein in the South, which evolved from militancy into mainstream respectability. I hope that’s not too optimistic.
There’s one point on which I agree with you. In a normal society I think the important thing is to live in a liberal democracy. Ordinarily I don’t think that where lines happen to lie on a map has very much importance for people’s quality of life. So it would be much better if people focused their energies on more practical political issues. The history of these two isles would certainly have been less bloody. But unfortunately people do feel very passionately about questions of national identity, and when that is the case those questions can’t just be ignored.
UUP renew calls for opposition at Stormont | Left Foot Forward
[…] also: • Time for normal politics in Northern Ireland? – Ed Jacobs, May 10th […]