Modern Unionist Voice

Diane Splits the Unionist vote

2009-02-04T16:59:00.000Z

I read with dismay the decision by the DUP to nominate Dianne Dodd’s as their European candidate. The last thing Unionism needs is the DUP standing a third candidate out of nowhere and splitting the vote. The DUP claim to be in favour of unionist unity but the DUP’s decision to stand a third candidate against two sitting MEP’s makes a non-sense of this. This DUP tactic is a throwback to the days when the DUP willingly backed vote splitting candidates to hand Westminster seats to Sinn Fein and the SDLP

What is even more ridiculous are Diane Dodd’s claims that only the DUP can beat Sinn Fein thus in her words,

“Denying Sinn Fein a license to parade on the world stage claiming to be the voice of Northern Ireland.”

Under the DUP’s watch Sinn Fein has gone from 2 ministers to 5 and thanks to the DUP Martin McGuiness is the co-equal first minister. The DUP handed Sinn Fein a license to parade on the world stage as leaders of Northern Ireland. It therefore smack’s of rank hypocrisy that Diane Dodd’s claims she wants to defeat her government bed fellows and deny Sinn Fein a license that her own party handed them long ago.

I thought the Dromore by-election would have taught the DUP that they can no-longer rely on a shot up party brand to get their candidates elected. The people of Northern Ireland have woken up to the DUP’s broken promises. On the DUP’s watch parents have been left in the dark about their children’s future, the era of stop start government has returned and policing and justice is being introduced on a timetable to suit Sinn Fein. The DUP promised us they were getting it right when they were getting it wrong, they heralded a fair deal and came back with a raw one. Diane Dodds will wheel out the same hollow rhetoric and empty promises in the run up to the European election but I urge the people of Lisburn to choose experience and competence over questionable name recognition. Vote for Jim Nicholson an Ulster Unionist MEP with 19 years experience and a proven track record of representing Northern Ireland at the highest levels within the EU.

DUP fails Victims

2009-02-04T16:58:00.000Z

Many of us have been outraged by the suggestions contained within the Eames Bradley report. The suggestion that paramilitaries of any shade or opinion will enjoy equal status with innocent victims of terrorism is abhorrent to the vast majority of the population.
Also the idea that the pain and trauma of the families of victims can be given a monetary value is crude and distasteful. The sacrifice of innocent victims during the troubles must be honoured. These victims deserve to be remembered and their sacrifice honoured.
What saddens me most is that most of the mistakes of this scandalous report could have been avoided if the definition of victim had been correctly defined during the Victims and survivors debate last year. The DUP chose to dodge this crucial issue and no definition of a victim was included in the act. What is even more damning is that the DUP refused to support the Ulster Unionists Party’s repeated attempts to protect innocent victims by clearly defining who a victim was.
If the DUP had stuck to their guns during the Victims debate then the definition of victim would have been laid to rest.

Why can't google move on?

2009-01-13T11:23:00.006Z

As a compulsive trawler of the NI political parties websites I am often frustrated by the Google blurbs beneath the party sites. Your initial thought must be "flip me Alex you are sad2 that is probably true but I also have a point.

For example

DUP
I won't hazard a guess at whether or not DUP members consider their party religiously fundamentalist "Religiously Fundamentalist" but the opposed to the St Andrews agreement is a bit of a blast from the past. Or perhaps this blurb is just the last glimmer of the DUP's conscience.

And now Sinn Fein

Now if DUPer MLA's arn't allowed to call the Shinners the political Wing of the IRA then perhaps google should restrain itself in the interest of fairness. So far it looks like Google are working fro Jim Alister

Now for the UUP

Nothing wrong here. We actually update our website occasionally.

Time for the Stoops

Now I am not sure whether the SDLP would consider themselves a "catholic party" but i suggest you read the SDLP Youths policy paper on LGBT Rights that might answer that question for you.

I would mention the Alliance but no-one else does so I don;t see why I should

Conservatives 10 points ahead

2009-01-13T10:51:00.002Z

A Populus released today in the Times showed a 4 point increase in Conservative support taking them to 43%. When asked "How would you vote if there was a general election tomorrow" 33% of people replied Labour, 43% replied Conservative and 15% replied Lib Dem.

What is even more surprising is the change in what I consider to be the "big questions" Who do you trust most to deal with Britain's economic problems" Brown and Darling 38% Cameron and Osbourne 35%. On a scale of 1-10 Brown scored a 4.97 and Cameron scored a 4.94 on "How they reacted to the economic crisis". Finally on "the right leader to lead us through the recession" Cameron and Brown are tied on 37%. This is amazing as only 2 months ago brown led by 52% to Cameron's 32% on this question.

The "Brown Bounce" looks a little limp but this is unsurprising. Whenever we enter a time of uncertainty I believe that people are naturally inclined to prefer "the devil they know" however after 6 or so months of falling growth and rising unemployment I think we may have reached the point were people are prepared to take a risk and vote for the new faces. Another factor in labours falling support is undoubtably the huge cost and modest effects of their economic policy. When asked what worries you most about the downturn on a scale of 0-100 the fear of paying higher taxes to pay of browns debt was 72.7 and rising government borrowing was 4th with 72.5.

The Conservative Party obviously shares these fears. Yesterday David Cameron and George Osbourne launched a campaign to raise awareness about government borrowing. George Osbourne said,

“Britain’s debt burden will not be paid off by unspecified people at an unspecified date. It will be paid by us and by our children. It means families will have to work longer. It means, if Labour get their way, we will all pay higher taxes.”

That one certainly hit the nail of public opinion on the head.

It remains for us to watch this space and see if the conservatives can take th initiative on the economy. The real challenge the conservatives face is doing this from the opposition benches. Labours position in government will inevitably give them the initiative in the economic debate as they have the ability to act here and now. However my closing thought is that Labours past economic policy has empohasised spending and lots of it. This can only work in the short term and when the coffers are empty there will be a hell of a bill to pay

Bill of Rights is unworkable

2008-12-10T16:09:00.002Z

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.

Nick Cleggs Lib Dems shift to the right?

2008-10-03T17:33:00.001+01:00

Gladstone once stated that 'The Labour movement is but the tail of the great Liberal lion'. Over the past twenty years the reverse was the case with the Lib Dems becoming a petal on Labours rose by adopting many Labour policies and indeed at times trying to portray itself as the left alternative to Labour. Since assuming the mantle of Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg has attempted and failed to offer the Lib Dems as a viable alternative by putting some distance between themselves and their rivals. Clegg has failed mainly due to little media coverage and a lack of interest among the general public.

At the recent Lib Dem conference Clegg had an opportunity to present his alternative, now that the dust has settled from the Labour and Lib Dem conferences I would like to examine whether Clegg has been able to manouver his party out of Labour's shadow.

The conference certainly seemed to mark a shift back towards the centre with a combination of populist causes (e.g. Gurkha's) and his headline grabbing commitment to tax cuts. Clegg certainly came out of the conference looking very much the classical liberal (that some Conservatives aspire to) and quite at odds withe the left in his own party or indeed the one nation toryism of Cameron. This caused Michael Brown to quip in the Independant "If Vote Blue, Go Green was the new Tory slogan introduced by David Cameron, is Nick Clegg's Liberal Democrat party now inviting us to "Vote Lib-Dem, Go Blue"? "

How has this gone down with the public - The August survey by ICM puts the Conservatives on 41%, down three points from last month. Labour is up three on 32% with the Liberal Democrats on 18%. Being the only party to pledge tax cuts at this stage appears not to have helped and unfortunately for Clegg he finds his Lib Dem's languishing in third and quite a distance off the other two parties. Again much of this could perhaps be put down to poor media coverage, some Lib Dem's certainly don't seem happy. Clegg and his revamped Lib Dems appears not to have been able to make a breakthrough at his only real opportunity (the party conference) to get a large amount of public support for their policy. Attempting to put clear water between themselves and Labour has not helped, perhaps bad timing is at fault as many Labour voters are looking around for an alternative to the current Govt. that many view as inept.

'Better to die than be a coward'

2008-09-27T01:14:00.005+01:00

The above title is the motto of the Gurkha's. Taking a lead from Ormiston over on Redemptions Son I would like to highlight the plight of Gurkha veterans who are attempting to become citizens of the UK. Lets look at the facts-

-Gurkha's have served in the British Army since 1817
-They have received over 6,500 military decorations
-About 200,000 of them fought for the UK in both world wars, 43,000 were killed or wounded
-Gurkha's discharged before 1 July 1997 face the difficult requirement of proving 'close ties' to the UK
-Falklands and World War Two veterans have been refused citizenship
-Gurkha's who retired prior to 1 July 1997 get one quarter of the pension given to those retiring later
-There are Seventeen thousand applications to join the Gurkha's every year, only the top two hundred and thirty are accepted
-If the Gurkha's get what they are asking for it is estimated to cost only £200 million

Here is a link to the petition on the PM's website. Finally I would like to leave you with a quote from the website of this Pressure Group.

'As I write these last words, my thoughts return to you who were my comrades, the stubborn and indomitable peasants of Nepal. Once more I hear the laughter with which you greeted every hardship. Once more I see you in your bivouacs or about your fires, on forced march or in the trenches, now shivering with wet and cold, now scorched by a pitiless and burning sun. Uncomplaining you endure hunger and thirst and wounds; and at the last your unwavering lines disappear into the smoke and wrath of battle. Bravest of the brave, most generous of the generous, never had country more faithful friends than you.'

The words of Professor Sir Ralph Turner, MC, who served with the 3rd Queen Alexandra's Own Gurkha Rifles in the First World War.

Policing and Justice causes yet more trouble

2008-08-26T21:20:00.004+01:00

The issue of policing and justice has grabbed the headlines again . Sinn Fein has threatened to pull their ministers out of the executive if progress is not made. The DUP have responded by threatening that if the executive doesn't meet in September there will be serious consequences. The DUP have also stated that the failure of the executive to meet over the summer has damaged public confidence and delayed the devolution of policing and justice.

I wrote about this issue in June and my conclusion was that if Sinn Fein and the DUP cannot even talk to one another then the devolution of policing and justice would be impossible. The debacle surrounding Peter Robinson's nomination as First Minister combined with the executives repeated failure to meet have damaged public confidence to the extent that many think the collapse of the executive is imminent. The relationship between the DUP and Sinn Fein hasn't improved in the last 2 months and with key decisions about education, victims etc still in the pipeline another hiccup in the executives schedule could be devastating.

I am concerned that the eruption of violence in towns across Northern Ireland during which shots were fired at the police are linked to the Stormont stalemate. Even in Northern Ireland riots do not spring out of no-where and in the past republicans have not been above stoking up trouble to put pressure on Unionists. However this is only a personal suspicion and the events may not be linked.

This issue has undoubtedly put a spanner in the Stormont works and it will take some fairly substantial negotiations to get things back on track. It is unfortunate that Ian Paisley Junior's Remarks regarding "shoot to kill" have angered both the SDLP and Sinn Fein's any attempts by the DUP to form cross community consensus on this issue will now be less likely. It is my opinion that the situation regarding policing and justice has not altered since June when I compared it to a game of chicken. All that has changed is that the cars are racing closer and the likely hood of the DUP, Sinn Fein or both not blinking and thus causing a collapse of the exec has increased.

Thanks For This

2008-08-07T14:26:00.002+01:00

Thanks to all those who voted for MUV in The Witanagemot awards and congratulations to all those who were succesfull. Special congratulations must be extended to A Pint of Unionist Lite and Slugger O'Toole, who I'm sure will be delighted with how they did. It is something of a surprise that we have been involved in this having only been active in the blogosphere for about a year, but we are happy to have been included.

DUP prove Bertie Kerr right

2008-07-22T11:55:00.005+01:00

The DUP have come to their senses and accepted Thomas Hogg would be a poor councillor, proving Bertie Kerr correct. In an odd move news came in this morning confirming that Arlene Foster shall be the DUP candidate for the approaching Enniskillin by-election. Ms Foster the eradicater of double and triple jobbing appears to be attempting to take on her third post at a time when most MLA's are attempting to shed commitments. This could be seen as an extremely hypocritical and cynical attempt to keep an unimportant seat at any cost just to deny the Ulster Unionist Party a victory.

Undoubtedly Arlene is one of the biggest figures in the DEA and will poll well, but the people of Enniskillin must wonder whether they want to vote for a party that treats its voters with massive disrespect by selecting a candidate not seen as capable. Will the people of Enniskillin vote for a hypocritical candidate who may not remain in the Job for long and who could attempt to co-opt the candidate whom the DUP party membership clearly now see as unworthy. The voters of Enniskillin may well back those that the DUP have proved right and back the Ulster Unionists who protected the interests of Fermanagh's voters

Lets talk about petrol

2008-07-16T23:22:00.002+01:00

Earlier today during PMQ's Mark Harper (Con) asked whether the premier thought the price of petrol was to high or to low , Mr Brown replied "It is too high, which is why I am trying to get the oil price down". He then cited the work he had done in Jeddah, Nigeria and the North Sea as the evidence of his efforts. This so far seem to have been fairly unsuccesful (I do not see Oil prices falling due to Mr Browns efforts). I can't help but think (although he should continue his current efforts) there may be an easier way to get the price down, Gordon has many options.

For instance taxman Gordon could reduce the tax on petrol and make up the difference via income tax (surely replacing a sales tax with an income tax would go down well with his socialist values). The most recent figures I could find was that 77.5 % of the price of petrol comes via taxation (can this be justified?), therefore it would not be terribly difficult at all for Gordon to reduce the price of petrol. The only answers I can think of as to why he has not done so already is that the green lobby holding him to ransom and getting rid of a stealth tax is not in Brown's constiution. Recently Gordon has become the greatest proponent of stealth taxation we have ever had, but surely any green backlash would be outweighed by relief at the reduction of fuel prices. Colbert said "The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest amount of feathers with the least amount of hissing", it is possible for Brown to continue to extract money from this petrol tax elsewhere with a low level of hissing.

I am not saying he should reduce the fuel tax and raise the money elsewhere, but it is important that we all realise the power to remedy this is in Gordons hands not those he is trying to shift the blame to.

Gordon Robinson

2008-07-10T15:58:00.002+01:00

When examining Stormont and Westminsters premiers a large number of parallels can be seen. Both Brown and Robinsons leadership in their respective political parties is under threat due to a series of mishaps (Brown - Robinson), a resurgent opposition (Brown - Robinson), past and the prospect of more by election defeats (Brown - Robinson), a disheartened body of party members, a scared group of elected representatives, accusations of sleaze (Brown - Robinson), turning their back on voters wishes (Brown - Robinson), bitter factions that support the previous leader e.t.c e.t.c

Both leaders were the perenial bridemaids to charismatic and unfortunately succesful leaders, now they are in pole position they find it more difficult than they thought and their cheerless and morose manner / press portrayal does not help. With all the problems currently besetting these leaders they must be wondering whether it was worth the wait and how much longer they have in the job, will Enniskillen / Glasgow East be the straw that broke the camels back. Looking at further by-election defeats from the perspective of those in both parties the loss of a 13,500 Glasgow East majority would leave no Labour seat safe, if you were a MP who just made it into Westminster last time would you back Brown. Let's say the DUP have a disastrous by election result (as they will if the candidate is Hogg) and become the third unionist party, would a DUP member want to go into an European election without momentum, in third place and with rival parties on the rebound. How long do you think they will last?

Transport Problems Explained

2008-07-09T20:58:00.003+01:00

The Western Mail is reporting Welsh Traffic commissioner Nick Jones as blaming transport failings on the nation’s topography. The commissioner in his interview also outlined a number of ways forward for the Welsh transport system ranging from levelling the playing field for buses (no pun intended) to a crackdown on the stretch limo industry. Often while biding my time for the bus or train that was late / didn’t come / was early or was scheduled infrequently I wonder about who runs our transport system and where it all go’s wrong. After reading this interview with the kingpin of Welsh public transport (which is of a higher standard than ours) I am wondering all the more about those who control NI’s transport infrastructure.

We have all heard the headlines about the UK’s third world transport system, NI is poor even for that standard. Currently we have one of Western Europe’s few cities without a rail network (Armagh), a poor quality of overall rail coverage 21 per 1,000 km as opposed to a UK average of 67 (as of 2004), are the only EU region not included in interrail and have extremely poor bus coverage in rural areas.

This situation does not seem to be getting any better, in 2000 Prescott pledged 180 bn to improve transport services comparatively as David Ford said NI’s get’s a ‘pittance’. Common sense would dictate that the transport improvements outlined as part of the peace dividend would have vastly improved our system; all I have seen is hikes in prices. Surely some of the money NI’s great leader Mr Robinson secured following St. Andrews would have been ploughed into transport and we should see great changes soon. Oh apparently he didn’t secure enough for that. Is Ulster’s public transport doomed?

Davis Resigns

2008-06-15T13:41:00.004+01:00

We will probably all have heard of David Davis' resignation over the 42 detention issue. What surprises me about the whole issue is that he is getting more criticism from his own party than he is from Labour and the Lib Dems. Mr Clegg the lib dem leader said it was "pretty rich" to brief against the architect of Tory policy on civil liberties issues.

Even labour are giving him an easy time. Labour rebel Bob Marshall-Andrews says he will support Mr Davis - and says his party should join the contest. Mr Brown may have dismissed the issue as a stunt but the lack of a labour candadate shows that even a stupid by-election challenge scares Gordon Brown

Among critics is the Conservative former defence minister Nicholas Soames who told the Sunday Times it was "a disaster" for Mr Davis and "foolish".
Asked whether it was selfish, shadow defence secretary Liam Fox told the Sunday Telegraph: "It's clearly a decision he made for himself."

One the whole it seems therefore that Mr Davis is getting more flak from his friends than his supposed enemies I wonder why. One argument i read in todays Sunday times was that he wants the limelight to keep his leadership dreams alive. What do you think

Personally I think it was a bit of a risk. He holds a safe seat and the tories could get a broom handle elected at the minute but if the public react against a by-election that could be called frivilous then it might not look good. Also if labour even run it close it looks bad for the cons

More money to be wasted

2008-06-11T18:48:00.002+01:00

While we wait apprehensively for an Irish / Irish and Ulster Scot language act to go through the NI assembly (if it does) others are at a more progressed stage in finding similar ways to waste money extracted from us via taxation. With the Welsh assembly pushing for the use of its own nostalgic waste of money in the EU, you have to wonder, is this stuff really more important than education, healthcare and the cost of living. Providing Welsh is accepted it will be the EU's twenty fourth official language, joining other major languages such as Irish and Maltese. Unfortunately for Wales the Senedd will have to shoulder the burden of paying for this translation (perhaps a useful precedent).,Time will tell as to whether the people of Wales will be happy putting money towards this (which lets be honest will have miniscule to non-existant benefits) as opposed to education e.t.c.

Looking again at NI where recently Ruane (who has been criticised for not telling Parents her plans) delayed the release of information so that it may be translated into Irish. The question has to be asked for how long can SF sustain disregarding bread and butter issues before their vote abandonds them. Propoganda no matter how much will not be able to stop a build up of dissatisfaction in their Politicians, if all they hear about is the diversion of funds to SF's pet projects. The question must be asked what is more important, receiving Govt. notices and reading Street signs in a language which you probably won't understand or a hospital when your sick, a school for your child and a decent cost of living.

We're just not ready for Policing and Justice

2008-06-09T16:25:00.002+01:00

It is my belief tht Northern Ireland simply isn't ready for the devolution of policing and justice. Last weeks crisis regarding the nomination of the FM and DFM shows that Northern Ireland lacks the political stability to deal with further devolution. When you think about it it is simply baffling. When the world is watching and billions of pounds of foreign investment are at stake the ruling parties play a agme of chicken with the highest stakes imaginable.

What last week boiled down too was an attempt by Sinn Fein to flex their muscles and bully concessions from the DUP. I think Sir Reg summed it up well by saying "Sinn Fein could not resist engaging in this narrow brinkmanship to advance their narrow and outdated agenda."

In my opinion Sinn Fein having sacrificed the holy grail of a united Ireland in 1998 have substituted it with a multitude of other objectives designed to undermine the union and the British identity of the people of Northern Ireland. These include an Irish language act and devolution of policing. I also believe that the DUP failed in this instance by not engaging with the other parties in advamnce of their handover. Not since devolution day have the leaders of the main parties sat round the same table and discussed the way foward, this is just asking for trouble. The DUP have treated the nomination of the First minister as an internal party matter and then they are shocked to find that Sinn Fein will not be compliant even though they were never consulted.

This lack of dialogue and these top level stand offs just go to illustrate that the carve up of power at stormont doesn't work. Without trust and cooperation we will never be in a place where we can devolve sensitive issues like policing and justice

Whose got the worst preacher?

2008-06-06T19:21:00.005+01:00

Following Obama's pastor problems it has emerged that McCain may have an equally unusual yet less publicised preacher . It seems possible the next stage of the presidential race might involve the trading of insults regarding who endorses them and where they worship. The US has a history of dirty presidential races, this clash seems likely to follow suite. There have been some particularly below the belt comments made by candidates in the primaries, ranging from allegations of being a closet Muslim to racism, sexism and lying. The general impression you get off American politics is that you can't be a success without in some way slurring your opponent and that policy trails in importance to image and the amount of bad press accumulated. Lets hope our politics does not go down this road.

Do we want a green watchdog

2008-06-06T14:42:00.005+01:00

I read on the BBC website http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7420920.stm that Arlene Foster has ruled out the possibility of a green watchdog for Northern Ireland. Instead, the Environmental Heritage Service (EHS) will be rebranded, she told the Assembly on Tuesday.

The main objection to this seems to be that the body will not be independant but will remain a body within the department of the environment. This has lead to concerns that the body won;t pursue an impartil policy but will become a tool of departmental policy.

Tom Burke, who chaired the Government-appointed panel which last year recommended the creation of an independent environmental protection agency. Has claimed that the ministers decision is a cave in to the UFU who were the main opponents of the scheme. Mr Burke said: “I think this is a victory for the UFU. I think that it’s a great shame for the people of Northern Ireland that the Minister and the DUP have caved in to the UFU. The clear message we had in the review team, from across the board, was the importance of a high quality environment to Northern Ireland’s economic future. This has been sacrificed essentially on the altar of the UFU.”

The UFU have welcomed the decision. There arguments centre around the fact that Environmental licenses and inspection charges on farmers are much higher in other parts of the UK to meet the same legislation. The UFU also claims that a EPA is unneccesary saying

"The argument that an EPA would make us more effective at meeting our environmental obligations is also flawed. For example Northern Ireland farmers working together with Government have delivered a comprehensive water improvement programme through our Nitrates Action Programme, while the rest of the UK faces legal proceedings from Brussels for failing to address the issue. Northern Ireland farmers have also planted over 500,000 native trees in our countryside through agri-environment schemes. Another example of the current system working positively. We also had concern about the accountability of an independent EPA. Retaining and improving existing Government Departments which are accountable to elected Ministers and Stormont Committees is a much better option than giving away environmental governance responsibility to an unaccountable NDPB."

The arguments on both side are reasonably clear. The UFU believe that an independant EPA would cost them more money adding to already considerable pressure on farmers. Environmentalists on the otherhand believe that the EPA has to be independant to carry out its duties effectively. Mr Burke said, “It would remove the conflict of interest for the officials between carrying out their statutory duties and not embarrassing Ministers."

My own opinion is that an independant EPA is a well established principle. England, Scotland, Wales and the republic of Ireland all have independant environmental protection agencies. The case for Northern Ireland having one would thereofre be well established. A second argument in favour of the agency would be the fact that green campaigners will take the decision to europe regardless. Friends of the earth are threatening an appeal which seems to have solid groundings so the decision could well result in a costly legal battle and yet more embarrisment for Northern Ireland over our environment. The arguments to the contrary seem to be that the EPA will put a greater pressure on farmers and that a revision of the the environment and Heritage service would be more cost effective. I believe the balance of the argument lies with the environmentalists I would agree with Mr Burke that this is a cave in, I understand that the famring community of Northern Ireland is under serious pressure and I would agree that we need to minimise the amount they pay but it is my belief that the longterm economic future of Northern Ireland lies with a clean environment. At the very leat it would stop more euro-fines which will be passed on in higer taxes

References
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/environment/article3745238.ece
http://www.ufuni.org/PortalNewsDetail.aspx?id=d1fca744-6035-4b3a-915c-b580e05716ba&mid=419
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7420920.stm

A fatwa against terrorism

2008-06-04T18:05:00.002+01:00

I recently came across an article regarding a fatwa issued against terrorism by a Muslim Indian seminary (the Darul Uloom Deoband). Initial thoughts were that this is an important, commendable and encouraging move, however for me the article raised a number of questions and challenged some perceptions. The major surprise was not that an Islamic body had issued this fatwa but rather the influence that this seminary has.

Fuelled mainly by ‘statistics’ (normally originating from the tabloid press) proclaiming the radicalisation of the UK’s Islamic population, I was of the opinion that this fatwa would be opposed by a significant minority of the nation’s Muslim citizens. Interestingly, despite looking, I have not seen a murmur of disagreement, the real importance of this edict stems from the influence of this body in the UK. Six hundred of one thousand four hundred Mosques in Britain are run by clerics following Deobandi teachings, this influence is increasing with 80% of all domestically trained clerics also being affiliated to the seminary.

Apparently thousands of students ‘ held placards saying Islam means peace while others chanted “The religion of Islam has come to wipe out all kinds of terrorism and to spread the message of global peace”. This is not the normal impression the mass media gives me of the worlds of the worshipers of the worlds second largest religion. This set me thinking are western people or indeed Christian clergymen (Protestant and Catholic) much better at rejecting and condemning terrorism. Look for instance at our own nation I did not see Papal decrees issued against IRA terrorism and some Protestant clerics have differ dramatically from these Islamic worshipers on their views concerning world peace. Some self examination may be beneficial before we scapegoat the worlds Islamic population for the worlds security problems.

How Dromore would apply across NI

2008-05-16T09:16:00.002+01:00

The Dromore by-election marked one of the biggest electoral shifts in Northern Irish history and I am going to try and apply the same statistics to other unionist seats in Parliament. The results of the Dromore by-election were

Black (UUP) 912
Corry (Green) 59
Drake (SDLP) 290
Gribben (SinnFein) 350
Griffin (Alliance) 357
Harbinson (TUV) 739
Stewart (DUP) 1069

In the previous election the greens and Alliance didn;t stand I am going to assume that they won;t stand in the next one. The TUV however almost certainly will but we can eliminate 416. Looking at the preferences cast in Dromore I can say that the Alliance and Green Votes will be divided at a ratio of 3:1:1 to the UUP:DUP:TUV (SDLP would pick up about 70). I worked this out by analysing the transfers from Dromore Corry and Drake were initially eliminated and their votes went primarily to Sinn Fein and alliance by-inlarge the number of SDLP votes corresponds roughly to the Sinn Fein and Alliance transfers and the transfers going to Alliance from the SDLP can also be roughly equated to the Transfers SF got off Alliance.

Therefore the Dromore result which I estimate minus Green and Alliance is

DUP 1152 (30.6%) -19.2%
UUP 1162 ( 30.9%) -0.4%
TUV 739 (19.6%) + 19.6%
SDLP 360 (9.6%) -2.2%
Sinn Fein 350 (9.3%) +2.2%

total 3763

Overall the DUP lost 38.6% of their vote the UUP lost 1.3% the TUV's can't be compared and there was a swing in nationalism.
If we Compare this with Unionist constituancies like Upper Bann, Lagan Valley and South Antrim then it tells an interesting story

Lagan Valley (DUP hold)

Jeffrey Donaldson 14299
Basil McCrea 9053
TUV 8813

Upper Bann (UUP gain)

David Simpson 10240
UUP candadate 11089
TUV candadate 7591

South Antrim

William McCrea 8907
David Burnside 11204
TUV 6941

Interesting results to say the least but we'll have to wait and see

Execution in stages- New Sinn Fein Policy

2008-05-15T14:37:00.002+01:00

The new education proposals put foward by Caitriona Ruane can only be described as pro-longing the agony for Grammar Schools. Ruanes new policy is to keep a "transitional" test for 3 years after which selection will be abolished. However over the 3 years selection will be executed in stages with only 1/2 of places being allocated on academic selection in the first year falling to 30% on the second year. Mark Devenport describes it as

"The minister envisages that in 2011 grammar schools will be allowed to select only 30% of their pupils on an academic basis. She wants academic selection phased out altogether by 2013."

There have also been suggestions that since a form of selection is being kept then the mythical "safeguards" negotiated by the DUP at St Andrews won't apply.

Those of you who read the Ulster Star might have noticed that the Rt Hon Alderman Jeffrey Donaldson MLA MP Junior minister and defense committee member say fit to write me a letter inbetween his many duties. This letter can only be described as 3 paragraphs of abuse intertwined with some rubbish about the St Andrews agreement guaranteeing selection. In this letter Mr Donaldson assured the people of Lagan Valley that Ms Ruane couldn;t destroy education and that her report today would vindicate the DUP. Few things surprise me about the DUP nowdays but tha fact that Mr Donaldson could write all that crap about the DUP protecting selection and then this report showing up really takes the biscuit.

In summary the situation stands as follows. The DUPs are still posturing about saving grammar schools and Ruane is still doing her best to wreck it. More or less the same situation we have had for a while but with new methods being used.

Jeffrey is pushing the victims bill but why?

2008-05-13T20:17:00.001+01:00

Those of us who were optimistic about the start of our new government have doubtless had that optimism smashed by the recent debacle surrounding the appointment of the victim’s commissioners. The question I want to ask is why does a job previously done by one person for £65,000 now need 4 people at a cost of £260,000. The only answer I can find is that 4 commissioners were needed to facilitate a carve up between Sinn Fein and the DUP. What worries me even more is that our own MLA Jeffrey Donaldson supports this shocking waste of resources. Mr Donaldson seems to be a lone voice advocating that “the arrangement would be good for victims and their families.”
Danny Kennedy UUP MLA said, "This is a bad start to their term of appointment. The fact that there are four commissioners also indicates a clear carve-up between the DUP and Sinn Fein." He was supported by Alliance MLA Naomi Long who claimed the appointment of four commissioners showed the First and Deputy First Ministers were unable to make important decisions.
Finally Mark Durcan SDLP leader expressed his concerns about the appointments saying, “"Will these commissioners have different remits and specialisms? Will they be operating on different issues and will they have different victim constituencies?"
I believe that the appointment of 4 commissioners is a waste of money and will only increase the likely hood that this crucial issue will become deadlocked. I think that the DUP are foolishly carving ahead with a solution that is opposed by 3 of the major parties and the question I must ask Jeffrey Donaldson is do the DUP listen to anyone else but Sinn Fein? Maybe the £195,000 saved from appointing 3 more commissioners could go towards saving the maternity unit at the Lagan Valley.

English Local Elections

2008-05-02T00:40:00.001+01:00

It is a quarter to 1 in the morning and the results are as follows

Councillors

Cons + 32
Labour -27

Looks like a pounding I will be updating and commenting throughout the night

And we think our politicians have it good

2008-04-30T20:41:00.003+01:00

Kenya has recently formed a power sharing government, this was done voluntarily and without the use of a mechanism such as D'hondt. Many see the voluntary coalition as a path the governance of NI must go down. If you look at Kenya (another conflict zone) you can see it has caused some disturbing side affects along with allegations of corruption.

Amid protests from tax payers and other groups Odinga (PM) and Kibaki (Pres) announced their new forty two member cabinet (with fifty two deputies). Accusations were made that new ministeries were created just to accomodate party notaries and it seems ridiculous to many that untop of a huge Mp's wage of £8,550 a month they now get £9,000 monthly for a cabinet post and £7,500 monthly as a deputy minister. This contrasts greatly with the 23% of their citizens who live on less than a dollar a day but at least close to forty percent of parliament is now in government so they will be able to live fairly well. Over $1Bn a year is supposedly already wasted by the government due to corruption and it has recently been announced that the 69 local government districts will be increased to 106 (at least job creation is a priority). Although it is of course commendable that these two men came together soon after violence (in which 800 died and 600,000 were displaced) erupted and helped to resolve the situation it has to be wondered if this is just an extreme example of jobs for the boys.

Maybe we don't have it so bad in NI............

The Price of a Pint

2008-04-22T23:26:00.004+01:00

I felt it was time this blog examined a lighter issue, one that causes me immense irritation. I came across an interesting statistic on the spectator website namely that the price of a pint will rise to 6.47 by 2012 if current trends in excise duty continue, on the same day I chanced upon the British Beer and Pub Associations response to the recent budget. It's key postion was 'the Chancellor's decision is bad for beer, bad for the public and bad for the Treasury'. The Governments main argument seems to be that increases in the excise duty on beer could help curb anti-social behaviour and underage drinking. As far as I can see this is a fallacy, portrays the governments naivity on the issue and is a postition that should be challenged. By increasing the price of a pint you are unlikely to have a major impact on those who perpetrate anti-social behaviour due to alcohol, as to put it quite simple those people are going to get drunk and disorderly by other means. The graph to the right shows an interesting phenomenon, as tax has increased on alcohol the sales of Beer have decreased while in contrast sales of drinks with higher alcoholic content have increased, this surely is not healthy.. Tom Clougherty also has a useful argument 'A group of kids sharing a bottle of vodka are hardly going to be deterred by having to split an extra 55p between them'. The real reason for these creeping taxes is as Jean Baptist Colbert put it "The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest amount of feathers with the least amount of hissing." In other words the government are extracting as much as they can from the silent majority who are extremely unlikely to protest on an issue like this, it is in effect a stealth text.

This is also a dangerous time to target our Beer industry when you consider the hardships it currently faces-
- The smoking bill- 1,409 pubs closed down in 2007
-Poor weather has increased the price of hops among other things.
-Tax amounts to 73 pence a pint while the total profits of Britain’s four biggest brewers fell to just 0.7 pence per pint.
-36 British breweries have closed in recent years, with the loss of around 2,000 jobs
-A further 44,000 beer supply chain jobs were lost between 2000 and 2005; all due to falling beer sales.
-Per unit alcohol Beer is on average the most expensive beverage- this is hardly fair as it is probably the least dangerous and is the most important to our economy
-British brewers have seen profits fall by 78%

Finally before I leave this open to our readers, i would like to state a few facts (taken from BBPA)-
-Beer is a homegrown product - 90% of beer drunk in the UK is made in the UK. In contrast, nearly all wine is imported, yet gets better tax treatment from the Treasury.
- The brewing and pub industry contributes over £28 billion to the UK economy
-Pubs employ over 600,000 people

THE 'REAL REASON' DUP DIDN'T WIN DROMORE SEAT

2008-04-17T23:06:00.002+01:00

This is an articlewritten by the dromore leader about a letter I co-submitted with Adam Tinson. I think the tone of the letter could be better and some of the sentences I believe misrepresent what I said but it is a fairish article if you want to cast your eye over it. I particularly love the way that it conveys the general messae "these two nutcases believe that"

THE recent Dromore by-election didn't so much see the DUP lose as it saw the UUP win, it has been claimed.
The claim comes in response to the recent insistence by a Dromore DUP voter that the party would likely have won had it chosen a "stronger" candidate.In a joint letter to The Leader, Alexander Redpath and Adam Tinson said that to suggest the election result was solely due to choice of candidate was to grossly underestimate the growing change of opinion within Unionism and they predicted Dromore marked only the start of a wider DUP decline."Admittedly," they said, "the Ulster Unionist Party ran an excellent candidate, Carol Black, a former bank official with a degree in business and finance and mother of two, who has a wealth of experience helping people throughout the Dromore electoral area from working daily in Basil McCrea MLA's office."She won despite the fact that the Ulster Unionist Party was repeatedly ignored throughout the campaign, with the media assuming that it was a straight-up clash between the DUP and the TUV and the Ulster Unionists were ignored even after the seat was won."The pair said the "real reason" the DUP did not win the seat was that increasingly it was being seen as a party of power rather than a party of principle."This was evident when Paisley accepted the Saint Andrews Agreement," they said, "an almost identical document to the Good Friday Agreement, after 40 years of saying 'never'."It was clear that this by-election was pushed so that the DUP could crush the Ulster Unionists and the TUV to demonstrate that they still ha
d the blind support of the Unionist community; this backfired spectacularly and hopefully the DUP will have learnt that no-one can count upon the unerring support of the Unionist people."The two men insisted that while the DUP was successful as an "unconstructive" opposition party, the challenges of government were revealing its lack of resolve and an inability to make decisions, while party in-fighting and "the vicious coup against Ian Paisley by men who owe their careers to him" were taking their toll on the DUP's credibility in government."We think that Dromore is only the start," they said, "and the DUP will find themselves threatened again and again at election time, regardless of the candidate they choose."This decline will be accelerated by the reorganisation of the Ulster Unionist party, who remain the only Unionist party capable of making the hard decisions of government."

Peter Robinson as DUP leader why?

2008-04-17T22:51:00.003+01:00

I will be completely honest with you I am utterly shocked by the events by the last few weeks. Ian Paisley the "Big man" is going and Ulster politics will never be the same. His replacement is Peter Robinson the iron fisted deputy leader of the DUP. The Question we must surely ask is why has this happened.
The first factor is that Mr Paisley is very old (82) and it is perfectly understandable that Mr Paisley wants to stand down. However I can;t believe this I believe that the scandals that have rocked the DUP, the backlash of the chuckle brothers and the effects of an election defeat have forced the old man out.
The first factor that could have forced the old man out is the scandals involving Seymour Sweeney. Paisley Jnr arguably resigned de to the controversy over this and todays headline on the belfast telegraph http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/article3617579.ece suggests that the father could have stood down before he was forced out.
The second factor is the backlash of the chuckle brothers. The Metamorphosis of the DUP from the party of Never, Never, Never to the orange half of Sinn Fein has left a bad tste in the mouth of the DUP's grass roots (many of whom now follow Jim Allaister) this loss of the grass roots is really showing especially during elections where the DUP have become top heavy.
This leads me nicely on to the dromore By-Election. I canvassed during the dromore by-election and one of the most striking things I noticed was the big guns the DUP wheeled out. Ian Paisley personally canvassed and Jeffery Donaldson and Edwin Poots were in their up to their necks. Every counsellor and MLA within 50 miles was brought in and the DUP still lost. I think this humiliated the DUP and scared the assembly group. All opver northern Ireland I think MLA's and MP's started thinking if dromore repeats itself will I keep my seat. I admit this is pure conjecture but I will let you make our own mind up . I personally think that the DUP knifed Mr Paisley because Big men in the party who owe their careers to mr Paisley got scared that is my personal opinion I'll let you decide.
I think that after the paryty smelyt blood Peter Robinson the man who is forever the bridesmaid and never the bride saw his chance and moved in to rule the party he has aspired to lead for many years

Our "wee" Jeffery Expert in Hypocrisy

2008-03-31T20:16:00.007+01:00

In a recent Stormont debate Jeffrey Donaldson MP for Lagan Valley was called an Expert in hypocrisy by Ulster Unionist MLA Basil McCrea. I could not agree with Mr McCrea more, In 2 recent articles to the Lisburn star 28/3/08 Donaldson proved that he shows one face to his constituants and another to his party.

(awaiting a fact check)

The second article focusses around Jeffrey's trip to washington to talk to victims groups. Jeffrey has often been outspoken about his support for victims and yet today he supported the plans to introduce 4 victims commissioners. The DUP again boasts on its website that it secured a victim's commissioner. The DUP have been brow-beaten by republicans into accepting 4 commissioners instead of one and only one of the commissioners was brought up in the protestant community. Jeffery and the DUP have sold out the victims with this plan.
Further examples of effery's hypocrisy can be found outside these articles. First and foremost we must deal with Jeffery's defection to the DUP. Jeffery Donaldson started his career as an Ulster Unionist and he inherited his seat from the unionist leader Molyneaux. He resigned from the UUP because he wouldn;t go into government and joined the DUP without resigning his seat in westminister and letting the people decide whether or not to approve his move. Then Mr Donaldson sits with Sinn Fein on the executive and his opposite number Gerry Kelly is a convicted murderer and IRA volunteer.
Jeffrey Donaldson has shown time and time again that he is guilty of the most breathtaking hypiocrisy and I find it hard to believe that even the DUP's speaker of the house could rule him being called a hypocrite unparliamentary.

Ruanes vision for schools

2008-03-07T17:12:00.001Z

The Newsletter has recently revieled Ms Ruanes Plans for our education system.

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/politics/Ruane-reveals-vision-for-schools.3843424.jp

The Sinn Fein minister said that six independent bodies are to be set up reconstruct (that means wreck and rebuild) our education system. Selection at 14 seems to be the plan with non-academic selection. My major concern is what kind of selection will non-academic mean will it be post code lottery, having relatives at the school or just blind luck.
Another major concern is that the 6 independent bodies could have 6 different plans so all the confusion about getting into school will remain. The Boards will be made up of teachers and trade unionists it seems, now I understand the teachers but why should trade unionists be involved in education selection or is this another fob to SF’s Marxist agenda. Another Republican treat in the scheme is to give educational experts from the republic a say.
Another aspect of the scheme is more vocational courses. Now vocational courses are an essential part of education but why in hells name are we forcing top academic grammer schools to teach 1/3rd vocational courses. Now I have nothing against media studies travel and tourism and other vocational courses but if they are introduced at the expense of history or economics then I get concerned
My final criticism is the whole thing won’t be up and running for 5 years so that is 5 years of confusion and limbo

Ian Paisley Jr Speaks out

2008-03-05T17:25:00.005Z

In a recent address to a school current affairs society Ian Paisley Jr made a number of interesting statements. Most of his statements revolved around rubbishing the TUV but he briefly visited such topics as the Irish language act, education and his fathers ilustrius past.

Mr Paisley had a lot to say about the TUV he says that the TUV "are a fraud" and that they are "opposed to people being happy". These are fairly sweeping comments but what Mr Paisley meant was that the TUV's policies tend to be we are opposed to rather than we are for and that a return to direct rule would be a return to the unhappiness that resulted from direct rule. I would very much appreciate it if a TUV supporter would care to rect to this. Mr Paisley also commented that "Jim Alaistair's policies are a fraud" and that his electoral strategy was to "split the unionist vote to the extent that Sinn Fein would be the biggest party and therefore entitled to the post of FM" What Mr Paisley failed to point out the assembled boys and girls was that it was his party who negotiated this clause possibly to blackmail the unionist people in this way but maybe he was distracted from the negotiations by his private lobbying

Mr Paisley also assured the assembled crowd that safeguards won by the DUP at St Andrews meant that Caitriona Ruane couldn't act with a free hand. I find this to be misleading as all Ms Ruane has to do is propose a ministerial directive to change our education system (it can be brought to the assembly to block it but this requires cross community support). But donlt worry Mr Paisley assured me personally that the worst case scenario would be grammer schools having their own tests (which he opposes by the way)

The Irish language act was another area touched upon by Mr Paisley. Mr Paisley assured us that the DUP hadn't agreed to the language act and that the DUP had stopped it. He also assured me that the westminister parliament couldn't introduce it over our heads (this is utter utter crap).

Finally mr Paisley had a chance to reflect upon his fathers legacy when a pupil said that his father had brought down the 1922-1972 parliament. Mr Paisley assured us that his father would be flattered at the remark. Now I know Mr Paisley wasn't responsible for the parliaments collapse but the idea that he would be proud to have brought down a unionist parliament with a unionist government and replace it with the Belfast agreement is strange but not beyond the realms 0f imagination in light of the DUP's reent actions

Overall I am sure that Mr Paisley's speech was well received my only suggestions for improvements are 1. read the relevant legistlation 2. Don't try and spin crap to school kids 3. Don;t bellittle the TUV you may not like then but they polled 75% of the DUP's vote in dromore.

Are the DUP promoting Donaldson?

2008-03-02T02:54:00.003Z

After watching the news in recent days I felt compelled to blog on Jeffrey Donaldsons latest activities. While finally getting his hands on a ministerial portfolio and promoting a SAS celebration he has also been trying hard to justify the DUP’s recent election defeat and has been resolutely pushing the issue of education. All in all he has been very prominent recently and it almost seems like the DUP are promoting him and trying to raise his profile, which certainly would be new and unprecedented. However if you examine this in more detail it seems the issues he has been tasked with promoting all appear to be poisoned chalice’s. Take the SAS celebration for instance, many people (including myself) will be disgusted at this move. This idea started as a reaction to a SF event commemorating an IRA terrorist, this provoked Donaldson to organise a similar event for the SAS and thereby seems to equate the two and drags the latter’s name through the dirt. Next his appointment as a minister, lets be honest this post will not have been highly sought after by the DUP MLA's, after all who would want to be associated with the sinking Paisley ship and endanger their political career. Although he did say upon taking this post that he looks forward to providing ‘positive leadership’ you have to wonder whether he will sit comfortably and be able to do this from his new job. I mean can you imagine Jeffrey Donaldson that famous symbol of unionist ire promoting equality, good community relations and victims issues (Will his SAS actions do that). Can you imagine Donaldson excelling in a job where he will have to work very closely with SF. Finally Donaldson originally seemed tasked with winning the Dromore election, after defeat he was naturally tasked with explaining the upset, not a job he has been able to do.

Leave us alone

2008-03-01T16:25:00.002Z

In NI and indeed across the UK the many politicians we elect (CLLR’S, MLA’S, MP’S, AM’S, MSP’S and MEP’S) are legislating and acting on every part of our life. It is of course to be expected that at least the vast vast majority of this legislation is well intentioned and aimed at bettering our lives, however is it to much to ask that our public representatives show a little restraint? If this volume of legislation continues we will be overwhelmed with a multitude of unenforceable, unreasonable and at times dangerous laws. It is high time that our elected representatives examined legislation from the standing point of whether it was required not whether the sentiment behind it is praiseworthy. Take ID cards for instance the government tried to sell them to the people partly on the premise of reducing illegal immigration, but many experts believe they would have no such impact. If they do not benefit us in that area the question must be asked what benefits are we getting for £93 a card (6bn over 10 years). On a more local level look at the civil rights bill, do we really need to be told our rights and have them written down on a piece of paper, who will this benefit? We are beset on all sides by such meddling, elected representatives are attempting to / have introduced the following-
end the use of plastic bags, end salt at the dinner table (if kids are present), curfews for fifteen year olds, heavily censor violent movies, an embargo against ‘inconsiderately burnt/smoky’ bonfires, outlaw hatred of homosexuality and some people want petrol stations to be legally obliged to sell fuel that is at least ten percent renewable. Some of these laws are simple a nuisance others prey on the rights of minorities. John Stuart Mill
- If we ‘issue wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which we ought not to meddle, we practice a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression’

Future of the Union

2008-02-16T06:50:00.003Z

This blog seems to be succeeding in my view we have representatives from all the unionist camps and we have some constructuve disscussions. In light of this I want to ask you what you think will be the future of the union.

1. Does the future of the union depend on powersharing
2. Does the Future of the Union require devolution
3. Does the future of the union require the removal of the protestant Catholic divide

How do you think the union will develope and what do you think needs to happen to secure the union

Back with Black

2008-02-14T13:15:00.002Z

Black is back in front. UUP yours DUP

The writers of this blog have been pounding the streets for 4 weeks in support of Ulster unionist candadate Carol Black and we are proud to say that we have won a stunning victory.

Carol Black won the vote and defeated DUP candadate Paul Stewart by 66 votes overturning a DUP majority of nearly 1200 votes. We can debate the significance of this result all we want but the fact remains that the ulster unionist party is "Back in Business". This campaign was one through the efforts of Carols campaign team who were made up largely of youth members and young women. Adam Tinson of Lagan Valley YU was undoubtably the most active youth and deserves our congradulations as does Carol King who was active at all stages of the campaign. The media ignored us the pundits dissmissed us and the DUP brought out every big hitter they had to try and destroy us, but despite this the grassroots prevailed.

Our thanks also go to Basil McCrea who really boosted the campaign with his leadership and dedication. Basil risked frequent lynchings with his shouts of lets canvass another half hour but with the thinness of the margin it made the difference.

This is a new day for northern Ireland politics the goalposts are moved and the rules are changed we don;t know what the effect of the TUV will be or whether the DUP will self-destruct but one thing we can say is that the UUP will never give in, it will never stand down and we will continue to represent the Modern unionists of this province. Congratulations Councillor Black

Our New Executive

2008-02-12T01:53:00.000Z

Our executive has been in place for close to nine months now and this seems like a good time to evaluate its performance. In this relatively short time the executive has generated a substantial amount of negative publicity there have been allegations of sleaze, public disagreements, accusations of substandard performance and claims of corruption. While the majority of our ministers have remained fairly innocuous some have attracted a high degree of publicity both positive and negative. Minister Ritchie is the executive member who stands out in terms of having gained a positive media image, the importance of ministerial performance to voters will most likely be exposed by the next Westminster contest in her constituency (where the battle will in all likelihood be between herself and the beleaguered Minister Ruane). Ruane is not a minister who has covered herself in glory, she has been roundly criticised by both unionist parties and indeed the media for failing to seek consensus or show a path forward for education reform (which at the end of the day she will need the assemblies consent for). After reading today’s Belfast Telegraph where she rejected a possible way forward she appears likely to leave the education of NI’s children in limbo for her political advantage, this surely will not go down well with voters.

While Ruane may have become an electoral liability for SF, fellow coalition members the DUP have a similar problem with Junior Minister Ian Paisley Jnr. Many of the charges I listed at the beginning of this article have been levelled at Paisley Jnr. In recent months he has floundered from scandal to scandal, with allegations of sleaze and corruption eminating from his ‘very bizzare’ employment as a MP’s researcher and the Seymour Sweeney / causeway / St. Andrews letter fiasco to the potential conflict of interest that may arise due to a minister tasked with fostering equality being ‘repulsed’ by homosexuality.

Most other members of the executive have not come in for major criticism, Foster has faced some difficulties over Seymour Sweeney and Poots is likely to have problems over the Maze in the future. McGimpsey came out of the budget row with a fairly positive image after managing to attract more funding from Robinson. From canvassing in Dromore however it seems to me that it is not Junior or Ruane that have exasperated the public but rather our much transformed First Minister and Deputy First Minister. This remarkable transformation easiest seen in our First Minister has left some people wondering why these two were so influential in propagating much of the political strife and disagreement in recent years.

Dromore By-election

2008-02-09T15:26:00.001Z

On February the 13th there will be a by-election in Dromore after the resignation of Tyrone Howe. There are 7 candidates running for the seat including a candidate from the newly founded TUV. Our candidate is Carol Black who has worked for Lagan Valley MLA Basil McCrea for 3 years. Carol has lived in dromore for 15 years and is the only candidate from Dromore running in this election.However this is no mere council election it has far-reaching political consequences on a national scale. This election has turned into a referendum on whether or not you approve of the DUP's actions in regards to the assembly. The DUP have therefore reacted strongly. It is rumored that Peter Robinson himself has delegated responsibility for winning this election to Jeffrey Donaldson and has tasked him with winning a convincing victory so that the DUP can claim a mandate for their actions.In the last election the DUP polled exactly 3,000 votes the UUP polled 1,884 turnout was 64%. Since this is a by-election we expect turnout to fall to about 48% this means that a projected poll is DUP 2,250 UUP 1,413 the DUP have a majority of 837. In normal circumstances this would be an almost impossible figure to overcome, however with the emergence of the TUV we have a hope. I have heard estimates of the TUV polling between 500-1000 votes these votes will almost exclusively come of the DUP. Even if we take the low figure and deduct about 100 for disillusioned unionists voting again then the DUP's majority falls to 400. Carol is an excellent candidate and has the full support of the MLA. Paul Stewart on the other hand has spent his life working for Jeffrey, lives in Dromara and comes across as a DUP puppet candidate. I have every confidence that this election will be damn close and a UUP victory could be on the cards. I have been on the ground and heard the response and I would put our chances at about 40/60 which is a lot better than you would get of any bookie.Canvassing has been an interesting experience and the response on the ground is as good as I have ever got. The newer estates are hard going as a lot of people are detached from local issues however in the more established areas we are very strong. I went to one estate of 18 houses. Of these people 10 where in and 8 were solid Ulster unionists. One 89 year old man told me how he had voted DUP for years but now he was so disgusted with how they had acted that he would be voting UUP at the next election. In Another estate I met two elderly ladies who were completely disillusioned with the whole process they blamed the DUP for lying to them and jumping into bed with their so called enemies, these ladies were impressed that Carol was a local candidate for local issues and have pledged their support to the UUP. We were even fortunate enough to pick up a new member along the way who would be perfectly happy to canvass. However it was not all good going. One very elderly gentleman told me he would sooner vote for Sinn Fein than a UUP candidate so evidently the TUV have a vote to catch.Another positive thing that is coming out of this election is that we are getting experienced canvassing teams who know what we're doing. During the assembly election Basil laid out the idea of having teams of 4 people working semi-independently. This allows us to cover an immense amount of ground and as long as we have one person who has good experience of canvassing we do well. I am not going to make any predictions on this election but I think it is the best chance we have had in a good while we are about 50:50 so we need people out canvassing

Does the EU weaken the Union?

2008-01-24T19:28:00.000Z

The traditional view within the Unionist community in regard to the European Union is one of apprehension and opposition. There are many reasons for this but largely it seems to be propagated by centre-right roots, links with the Conservative Party and a view (not held by me) that it is dominated by Roman Catholic nations. The EU itself may also have contributed to this atmosphere as many member countries have at times appeared hostile to unionism. The SDLP and nationalists on the whole have always held much hope for the EU, indeed J. Donaldson said the SDLP ‘see it as the solution to every problem’ (link 1). It seems to me that the unionist view on this may in many ways be a reaction to this ‘hope’ held by their electoral opponents. If Unionists were to elevate their vision I believe they would see ways in which the EU could benefit and strengthen the union. According to a 2003 NILT survey 7% of Roman Catholics and 12% of those with ‘No religion’ believe the EU should have the most influence over NI, these are people instantly turned off Unionism by our current stance. If we were seen as not opposing the EU it is less likely that nationalists would be so ready to agitate for constitutional change, as they would be more inclined to believe they get a fair deal in our current society. The current strength of the EU seems to have helped curb nationalism in other areas of the UK, indeed it seems to have gone some way to placate Scottish and Welsh nationalism. Unionism in NI is seen by some as a relic of the past yet with the EU we can show ourselves as a fairly progressive force, rather than opposing something we have little power to change. I am not saying we should adopt the Euro or support the creation of unified EU armed forces but I do believe we should tell EU leaders what we want from a constitution rather than blanket opposition as Donaldson suggests.

Link
http://www.brugesgroup.com/mediacentre/speeches.live?article=204

Religion and Politics??

2008-01-20T17:03:00.000Z

When most of us think of religion and politics mixed we think of the special relationship between the DUP and the Free Presbyterian church. We see religion and politics as seperate entities which should under no circumstances mix. However I hold a different view.

I believe that politics cannot and should not be seperate from someones beliefs. Let me justify this. I see a clear definition between Religion and faith. Religion is a set of practices, rules, beliefs and traditions identified wioth a specific church. Faith on the other hand is a set of beliefs and prionciples specific to you and based upon your personal experience of your diety. Religion when mixed with politics can be undesirable but I believe that faith is inseperable from everything a person does including their politics.

Here is an example. I believe that everyone is equal in the eyes of God and that it is wrong to treat people differently because of their social position or wealth. This is a view widely held by politicians and is considered to be admirable. My faith dictates that I act in such a way and so it's a good thing. Another example is my stance on abortion. I believe that abortion is murder. A lot of people will disagree with me. However the fact that I hold a view sincerely and personally believe in it means i can represent others more effectively than someone who doesn't care. The case about Faith and politics boils down to whether you want leaders with principles or not. Your Faith is your guiding moral compass and there are no striong principles than the ones based in your faith.

However something I profoundly disagree with is your politics mixing with your faith and this is what i believe has happened with the free Presbyterian Church. The Politics of most members of the free P's is unionist as you would imagine. Their unionism has bred in them a hatred for nationalism which has spilled over into a dislike for catholocism. I believe that the Free Presbyterian church can in some cases be sectarian and I think this is a result of their politics mixing with their religion.

I want to know what you think. Do you think that religion and politics should ever mix or do you think that as politicians we have a duty to represent our own views as well as the views of our constituants. Also when do the lines blur

Making the Union relevant

2008-01-15T18:00:00.000Z

At my branches AGM we all talked about the need to make Unionism "relevant" but what exactly does this mean. For me it means making unionism something people care about. Not something they care about because they have been brought up a certain way or because they are a certain religion but because it makes sound sense and they understand the arguments behind it. I want to ask the readers of this blog is unionism relevant and if not how can we make it relevant.
The problem we face is that the majority of people blame the troubles on tribalism. This turns people off politcs and off parties on each "side". What we need to do is show that it wasn;t the tribes that caused the trouble but the inability of each side to agree. Reasonable people abandoning their tribe just weakens the moderate parties. I am utterly convinced that if alliance didn;t exist the UUP and SDLP would have 3 seats more a piece and I think Northern ireland would be better off as a result.

What I think we need to do is present unionism as a valid argument. There are a number of sound economic reasons to stay in the union e.g. the republic can't afford us, we have too big a public sector and our economy is too reliant on Britain. I was told on Monday that 63% of the workers in greater Belfast work in the public sector and a great deal of them administer duties regarding the UK e.g managing London benefits. There are also cultural and other political reasons.

We need to braodcast these reasons and other reasons to the people of Northern Ireland. The Union is a critical political issue and if we show people the benefits of the union then maybe we can convince more people to support our cause. However one thing we need to be wary of is crying wolf about unionism. Both unionist parties are guilty of this. Policing was never a unionist matter but unionist politicians marketed it as a threat to the union. The Irish language act is not a unionist issue but the DUP market themselves as the champions of the union for defeating it. Hoewever proposed plans to make flyers from Belfast to London show passports on arrival is a unionist issues. While the MLA's huf and puff about issues which they don't like a serious threat to our equal status in the union is going unnoticed. What do you think. How can we make people care about unionism. How can we make it more popular and how can we dispell the images of sectarians in Bowler hats that comne to mind when we think of unionists

Exactly who are the TUV?

2008-01-14T16:52:00.000Z

The TUV have recently announced that they will be standing a candidate in the forthcoming Dromore by-election (one Mr Harbison). Now that the party is preparing to launch a foray into electoral politics for the first time, it seems appropriate to analyse who they are, how many they are and what kind of views they hold.

This analysis is more difficult than it at first seems as they have seen little press coverage, do not currently have a website and have not really become common knowledge. According to the Belfast Telegraph (link 1) sixteen councillors have declared their support for the party along side such notaries as William Ross (Former UUP East Londonderry MP) and Rev. Steven Dixon (Orange Order Chaplain). Although hardly a powerful enough grouping to become the driving force of unionism it could be thought of as a fairly good haul for a grouping that was immediately written of as 'no threat' and a relic of the past.It does however remain to be seen how many (if any) of these councillors secure another term. The support of a former UUP leadership candidate is indeed useful, the fact that he is probably their second best known supporter reinforces the view that the party is composed of septagenerian extremists who have had their day in the sun. The inability to attract other fringe unionists like Willie Frazer and to entice back Bob McCartney is a potential problem.

In terms of the size of the organisation at the TUV's disposal and its potential core vote Jim Allister certainly seems confident, he has repeatedly spoken of thousands of supporters and the tens of thousands that are sickened by the way events have unfolded. It would perhaps be a better idea to look at the reactions of the other unionist parties and the fact of the matter is little reaction can be seen, they have continued unfazed. Allisters party has been consistantly broadsided by the media, the UUP and the DUP. Although 12 TUV branches have reportedly been formed it remains to be seen how succesful these branches will be in delivering elected representatives, as I write any major groundswell of support for the TUV seems unlikely.

Jim Allister iterated this message to 'sickened' unionists 'you are not alone, ours is an honourable and legitimate view and together we can make it count'. As far as I can make out Jim you may well soon be alone however I will leave it up to the voters and readers of this blog to make up their own opinion.

The Right to Choose

2008-01-13T13:07:00.000Z

I have read with interest the reports from the assembly concerning the future of education in Northern Ireland. Saving selection is a priority for the two main unionist parties in the assembly, but the question I am asking is what can we do about it.

East Antrim MLA Sammy Wilson Chairman of the education committee tasked with scrutinising the department of education and it's Sinn Fein minister recently said on his website
"Mr Wilson vigourously opposed the reckless abolition of the selection system by the previous Sinn Fein education minister, and was instrumental in ensuring that academic selection was safeguarded during the talks at St Andrews"

However it seems to me that another Sinn Fein minister has gone rogue and the committee is powerless to stop them. All the assurances given by the DUP have come to naught. The situation basically boils down to the fact that Sinn Fein can blackmail the unionist community to accept whatever they propose. The DUP talk about the safeguards they secured at St Andrews but all that does is lull unionists into a sense of false security. If the unionist MLA's in the Assembly vote down Ruane's proposals then there will be nothing to replace the abolished eleven plus and primary school children will be left in limbo. It seems to me that Sinn Fein and the DUP are playing political chicken and the first side to blink will lose. If neither side back down we could end up with a car wreck of a system where there is no way of transfering children from primary to secondary education.

For me therefore there are 4 options for unioism

1. To be dictated to by Sinn Fein over education
2. To propose our own legistlation and hope like hell it passes
3. To "not blink" and face the consequences
4. To let westminister sort it out
5. Do a deal

Option 1 is simply unacceptable to me. Education is close to my heart and our grammar schools provide a uniquely high standard of education at a low cost. Not only do Grammer schools out perform their english conterparts, but they outperform them when the figures are fiddled and they do it for less expenditure per pupil. We cannot allow a post code lottery or similar scheme because it will disadvantage those in rural areas and those too poor to afford inflated house prices in school catchment areas. Sinn Feins plans are discrimitory and make a mockery of their supposed Marxist principles

Option 2 is again unlikely to succeed. Sinn Fein will ensure their MLA's vote the right way and the SDLP have policies of All-ability education which seem to be a bit of unconstructive ambiguity to keep us guessing.

Option 3 would be neglecting our duty. I think something is better than nothing and failure to agree on this issue could seriously damage the assembly and possible cause it's collapse. We have a duty to provide the best education we have to ALL of the people of Northern Ireland and allowing our education system to fall down around us would be a betrayal of the electorate. However i wouldn't rule out this option as I don;t think the DUP is capable of swallowing a bitter pill for the greater good.

Option 4 is more or less impossible. Most of us would agree that Brown will keep us waiting until atleast 2010. Whilst their is a labour government selection will always get a cold reception in parliament. Even the conservatives has abandoned their traditional support of grammer schools. I had the privelege of talking to Graham Brady this week. For those of you who don;t know Mr Brady resigned from the shadow cabinet over thegrammer school issue and huzzah to him for the effort. Mr Brady said
"Grammar schools in selective areas are exactly the motor that does drive social mobility more effectively than comprehensive areas."
However when I put Mr Brady on the spot about this and asked him if a conservative government would protect academic selection he assured me that devolution was the only way this could be achieved. I wonder if the Labour government who plan to introduce an irish language act through westminister got the memo.

Option 5 seems to me to be very likely as it allows both parties to save face which is always the primary objective of political parties. If the Sinn Fein/DUP "coalition" is to survive then there has to be give and take. In reality this means unionists give and the Shinners take. The DUP wil make a concession or two over things like the irish language and Ruane might consent to a compromise with selection at 14. I'll let you decide how "Fair" this deal is.

Compulsory Voting

2008-01-12T22:22:00.000Z

I think it is appropriate that the first piece on this blog seeks to address one of the most pressing dangers to unionism. This danger is low turnout and it means that although unionists represent a clear majority in the province of Ulster we are not maximising our representation in the Assembly. My solution is clear even if it is controvershal I suggest we make voting compulsory.
Compulsory voting is defined as a requirement for electors to vote in elections or attend a polling place on voting day. With a secret voters can only be compelled to cast ballots but remain free to spoil their ballot papers. I think this represents a credible alternative to the present system and one that would present clear advantages to Unionism. Many may disagree with me and I welcome their disagreement I hope that we can cooperate on this blog to reason our way to a sensible decision.

My arguments for compulsory voting are simple

1. I think a higher turnout gies the government more legitimacy

2. Voting is a civil responsibility not a civil right

3. Some minority groups and demographic groups don't vote

4. Political parties need to be encouraged to appeal outside their traditional interest groups

5. Protection from extremists

In a democracy a government's legitimacy comes from it's mandate. If the government doesn't have the support of the majority of the people then it isn't legitimate. Labour received 35.3% of the popular vote, equating to approximately 22% of the electorate on a 61.3% turnout. How can a government that has the support of only a quarter of the population claim legitimacy. The only way to secure the unquestionable legitimacy of the government is to ensure a 100% turnout so there can be no question as to who has the support of the population.

Another reason I think voting should be comopulsory is because I believe that voting is a civic duty. We have a number of civic duties to ensure that society runs smoothly. We have a duty to pay taxes so the government can govern effectively. We have a duty to obey the law so that the government can rule and we have a duty to vote so that the government is the choice of the population. If we neglect this duty society will not function as effectlively in the same way that not paying our taxes and not obeying the law damages society. Compelling people to vote in the same way we compel them to pay taxes and obey the law is the only way to ensure that this duty is carried out

A further reason compulsory voting would be beneficial is that it would encourage marginal groups to vote. After every election we hear how young people, ethinic minorities and some religions have falling turnouts. Young people are especially effected with only 1/3 young people 18-21 voting. The Institutute for public policy research were tasked by the government to find a solution and their conclusion was that making voting compulsory was the only viable option to ensure that young people and other marginalised groups voted. No-one would advocate a society run only by white middle class voters but by opposing compulsory voting you are giving your de-facto approval to these groups being over-represented.

Another reason why compulsory voting should be law is that it wold force parties to look beyond their key voters and allow them to spend time serving the public rather than trying to ensure turnout. I am a political campaigner and I spend 80% of my time trying to convince people to vote and 20% of the time trying to convince them to vote for us. For this reason parties often really on their core voters and so only serve them. If everyone voted political parties would have to formulate policy that appealed to the largest section of the population making our democracy more representative and so more effective.

My last reason is the standard one if we allow the moderates in society to submit to apathy then we pave the way for extremist government. The reason why Sinn Fein/DUP run Northern Ireland is because decent people didn't vote ulster unionist but didn't vote at all. The parallels with Nazi Germany are frightening. When decent moderate people lose faith in the system and give extremists a chance you pave the way for dictatorship. "All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing" Never has this been truer than in our democracy. If the "decent" people of ulster stop voting then we leave the governance of this country to bigots and fools. I cannot stress this enough the biggest danger democracy faces in apathy. All it takes for evil to succeed is for the footy to be on the night of the election. All it takes for evil to succeed is a spot of rain. Lets make it illegal for evil to succeed lets make voting compulsory.