Talk Elections

Decided to start one for NI to see how it goes. A couple of recent stories of interest to start with...

Earlier this week, Gerry McHugh MLA (Fermanagh-South Tyrone) resigned from Sinn Féin. He cited problems with the controlling nature of the leadership and his concerns as to the direction of Sinn Féin post the St. Andrew's Agreement. The leakage of members from SF because of policing issues and St. Andrew's seemed to have stopped some time ago; McHugh is the first MLA since the election to do so (all the previous one's having lost their seats). His issues with the leadership seem to be the more pressing concern, though it's almost certainly his lack of personal political progress which distresses him moreso than anything else.

McHugh is now an Independent and claims he will seek to defend his seat in the next Assembly elections. If the election was held tomorrow, McHugh would have next to no chance of retaining the seat, but if things become rocky for the DUP & SF led administration...who knows?

New Composition of the Assembly

Democratic Unionist Party	36
Sinn Féin	27	(-1)
Ulster Unionist Party	18
Social Democratic and Labour Party	16
Alliance Party	7
Independents	2	(+1)
Green Party	1
Progressive Unionist Party	1

---

Potentially a more serious party dissident is Jim Allister MEP (Ind; N. Ireland). Allister was a hardline DUP member but left after the party went into coalition with Sinn Féin. Today, he has announced the establishment of a new anti-St. Andrew's Unionist group, the "Traditional Unionist Voice". Like SF, the DUP lost a series of members earlier in the year (mostly at Councillor level). There's no doubt that there is a section of the Unionist community that will be at least sympathetic to Allister's new group. Whether or not they can be electorally successful is another matter. Only time will tell...

---

Meanwhile, today First Minister Paisley and Deputy First Minister McGuinness will continue their US tour with a trip to the White House to meet President Bush. They're also expected to meet Senator Clinton later today. The meetings complete their trip to the US which sought to project their newfound positive image and try and drum up inward investment in NI, while the image of them at ease with each other retains lustre.

Back in Belfast, the draft Budget has caused trouble in the coalition. The consternation of the UUP (and to a lesser extent the SDLP) is becoming more and more clear. Elements of the UUP support removing themselves from the executive but it seems unlikely Empey will take that course right now. The Budget must be finalised in January at which point all the cards will have to be played and we'll see whether things can be resolved.

You're misusing the word "general" in the Ulster context. Please report only on issues relating to the general community in this thread in the future. Catholic issues go into the Northern Ireland Catholic Discussion thread.

How about we call this "Stroke Province General Discussion"? Because no-one can agree on the name.

Why is the SDLP taking that position?

The laws about the Northern Ireland government formation would ensure that similar situations will continue one would assume.

Presumably this kills off any hope he might have had of following on from his dad as leader?

Depends. I wouldn't rule out a comeback, but it should take a while. Which means his dad would have to continue for quite a number of years. Which makes it unlikely. Of course, he might become his father's second successor.

Robinson's only 59? He seems to have been around forever...

An alliance with the Tories seems like the only way to save the UUP and unionism in general from the Paisleyites.

Save the UUP? You mean save "Sylvia Hermon for North Down". The UUP have absolutely no chance of winning anything else.

They don't now. But they could recover over the course of several decades.

Over the course of several decades, Ian Paisley will die, and the DUP will moderate.

The people in the lower leadership positions don't consider the Pope the Antichrist?

The DUP aren't just a bunch of fundamentalists... in any case, I don't see how hooking up with the Tories (again) will help the UUP at all. Maybe people should remember quite how well (or rather "badly") the Tories did when they stood in NI in '92.

They stood some candidates in 2005, didn't they? In just a few seats, and got something like 0.3% of the vote.

Personally it would be nice for the mainland parties to be succesful there.

I would imagine most SF & DUP voters would be pretty solidly Labour which would mean that most seats would be Labour.

DUP? Labour? I really don't see it (but I'm only somewhat familiar with NI politics). Same goes for SF. It seems well to the left of Labour. On the other hand, the SDLP essentially is Labour.

Maybe, but that's just a pipedream really (and Nationalists wouldn't vote for the British parties). Would would be nice would be for a rebirth of the NILP. Also a pipedream, I guess :(


The DUP's core electorate (both in urban and rural areas) is largely working class. And the same for Sinn Fein, obviously (and the party that Sinn Fein supporters in London vote for is not exactly a secret...).


Have you heard one of the more imaginative sendups of the SDLP's acronym? Schoolteachers, Doctor's and Lawyers Party. It's only a slight exaggeration to say that outside Derry (where it still has a working class vote) it's become (despite the name) the party of middle class Catholics and little else. The party is now close to death in working class districts in Belfast where it was once very strong. Increasingly the SDLP looks more FF-FG than anything found on the mainland (still has a "red" wing though).

I've long supported a United Kingdom of Great Ireland and Northern Britain, to encompass all parts of the British Isles except the Southeast of England. :D

Will the Southeast then become a part of France?

No, it will become an independent country with weird but endearing politics that will also attempt to revive Anglo-Saxon as a second official language. ;D

I like that. :P

Then they need a civil war. It's not a proper country until it's had a civil war.

Some mistake surely;


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/7768650.stm

Odd certainly.

Anyway, it seems clear that the only voice of the Ulster Unionists of any real relevance to Mr Cameron isn't sold on him yet.

Lady Hermon has a voting record which clearly indicates she's happy with Labour. The Belfast Telegraph (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/task-force-for-unionist-linkup-with-tories-still-not-selected-14095305.html) report rumours that she could leave the party on this issue.

I don't see what David Cameron and the Conservatives get out of this and don't see what Reg Empey and the UUP get out of it.

Report on handing legacy of troubles sparks outrage (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7855035.stm).

Why the hell are those guys not in jail and how can you sue an illegal organization?

Which isn't really a surprise.

And further to that can I simply say 'beggars can't be choosers' :P The UUP are not in the position to be able to afford to do anything different.

They get to live ;D

Do you guys think the UUP will hold their seat in the next UK elections?

I have a quick question about the NI parties, which I don't particularly feel like rooting around Wikipedia for.

I know where the five main parties (DUP, UUP, SDLP, SF and the Alliance) stand on unionism and nationalism.  But where, approximately do they stand on everything else?  Social issues, economics, foreign affairs, etc.?

I second that question. I just have a very vague idea of that my self:

DUP: right-wing populism, evangelical fundamentalism

UUP: mainstream conservatism (Tories)

SDLP: mainstream social democracy (Labour), although her voter base is less working class than those of SF

SF: left-wing nationalism, socialism, anti-imperialism

Alliance: mainstream liberalism

What I'm particularly interested about is:

1. Does Sinn Fein take a "traditional catholic" or a "leftist" stand on social issues, f.e. gay rights?
2. Does the DUP, who is to a large extend supported by protestant working class, take, at least to a degree, a social democratic stand on economic issues?

There isn't much the DUP and BNP don't agree on. Well besides that the BNP tends to be secular-based and the DUP doesn't hate blacks (well at least not Protestant blacks in the UK. They were big fans of apartheid South Africa and Ian Smith's Rhodesia.)

Of course Sinn Fein are just as fascist (hold up people who collaborated with the Nazis as heroes)

It does. All the Nationalist parties do.

NI polItics has always been a guddle to me. Voting preference would depend on where I was. So UUP over DUP in a unionist battle, SDLP over Sinn Fein in a nationalist but Sinn Fein over DUP if they are slugging it out. At Stormont, I'd plump for the Alliance where I could and again vote to freeze out the DUP.

The DUP is opportunist on economics and rarely has to make such decisions (or win/lose votes on them). The primary left-wing unionist party is the Progressive Unionist Party.

I've always found 'left wing unionist' a bit of an oxymoron given that any party that seeks to take inspiration from left wing movements/labour/socialism would be so tribal when it comes to religion. I say a bit because then I remember the Trade Union movement and Catholics on my own turf...

Basically the SDLP is a more moderate Sinn Fein, sort of like New Labour vs. Old Labour. In the past there has been a dispute within the party as to whether it should be a social democratic party or a nonviolent nationalist party. The party's founder actually left as he thought it had become more focused on the nationalism than on social democracy.

Sinn Fein is hard to nail down, as in some regards they appear socialist yet their platform is not very radical at all (and this is coming from an American!). They take a page from Fianna Fail and are quick to embrace traditional Irish values.

The two Unionist party's are pretty similar, but the DUP is more radical. Finally, the Alliance is your standard third-way/classical liberal party.

DUP: officially right-wing on constitutional issues (obviously) and what Americans call 'social issues' (from a Protestant fundamentalist standpoint of course - though though don't confuse the religious motivations of their leadership with the religious views of their voters... outside rural Antrim) and left-wing on what Americans call 'economic' issues. In practice, however, they don't have much of a position on the latter and just say whatever will win them votes and influence*, their official 'left-wing' stance is the result of the influence of Desmond Boal on the early DUP - since he left politics it hasn't mattered much. In some respects the party the DUP is most like is actually, and lol, Fianna Fail...

SF: officially a revolutionary-Marxist-cum-Irish-republican-nationalist party. In practice they offer a sort of communalist social democracy mixed with an increasingly watered-down republicanism and blatant urban machine politics notably largely for its effectiveness; they aren't nearly as radical as a lot of people think.

SDLP: officially a social democratic party (and they are an SI member party - for now), but in practice a mild nationalist party with some social democrats (well... Eddie McGrady and much of the Party's youth wing) still but with rather a lot of Catholic establishment types of the sort that would once have voted for the old Nationalist Party; essentially its a centrist party in all respects. They have been largely eliminated in Catholic urban ghettos like the Falls and Bogside and are increasingly a party of the Catholic middle class (such as it is) - one (not entirely fair) skit on their name is the Schoolteachers Doctors and Lawyers Party. Under Gerry Fitt they were a proper social democratic party (albeit one with a communal base), but after he lost control (and then left) things rapidly moved towards their present direction.

UUP: the Unionist Party was an integral part of the Conservative Party until 1972, the party had close links to the Monday Club back in the day and a certain former party leader is now a Tory peer. That tells you almost all you need to know, though there have always been exceptions - liberal and leftish Unionists unable to commit to the Alliance and with nowhere else to go. This includes their sole remaining MP.

Alliance: officially a nonsectarian, noncommunal liberal party, in practice a party of non-bigoted Protestant public sector workers. There have been ideological shifts within the Alliance over the decades, but they're pretty boring in comparision.

The PUP was mentioned upthread - they only matter in Belfast Loyalist ghettos. They don't run anywhere else and no one would vote for them if they did. They actually seem to have inherited a decent share of the old NILP vote (hilarious given that PUP is to UVF as SF is to (P)IRA) and in terms of rhetoric are the most leftwing party in Northern Ireland with any seats. There ideology is a little weird, of course, but are now the Unionist party most committed to the peace process and the healing of society - the late David Ervine was at times the sole Unionist vote in favour of things like using Irish at Stormont and so on.

*This includes being very close to local businessmen. Thus recent scandals.

Of course, now there's TUV. I don't know if they have a stance on anything other than "No co-operation with Taigs" yet.


The non-fringe party in Northern Ireland that was closest to being genuinely fascist was Vanguard. Which was also the party that most of the present leading lights in the UUP started out in, hilariously enough.

Of course the party with actual links (of sorts) to the world of the far-right was the UDP (that is the former political wing of the UDA). Random 'fun' - have a look at how late into the troubles the UDA was banned.

Sylvia Hermon left the UUP over its effective re-merge with the Conservatives, didn't she? (or maybe she lost reselection, don't recall.) I think she's running for re-election as an independent with Alliance backing.

I'm quite sure that it's "Ulster Conservative Unionist New Truth".

Thanks for all the responses to my question.

So if I understand things correctly, the left and right ends of the traditional political spectrum correspond very roughly with the nationalists and unionists, respectively.  Is that a fair statement?

That's got to be a little sucky for right-wing nationalist and left-wing unionist voters, surely?

Iris Robinson has resigned as an MP. (http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/press_03_10.htm)

(Not sure whether to do a by-election thread, as there might not be one)

There'll only be a by-election if the DUP wants one...

And now, some news to remind everyone that the Robinsons aren't the only Northern Ireland political family under a cloud at the moment... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8461792.stm

More rape-related trouble for Sinn Fein:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8471383.stm

No TUV invited?

Clever of them. Gotta think of mainland reactions too. ;D

And now, some news on the political crisis...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8476282.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8476569.stm

Seems that the SDLP are very, very angry about the Tories hosting talks between the Unionist parties.

I think the anger is misplaced. Putting aside the SDLP's effective 'caucusing' with Labour at Westminster, the Tories held talks with the UUP as it holds an electoral pact in Westminster and European elections. Talks with the DUP were held by extension due to rumours of a DUP-UUP pact at Stormont.

My gut reaction (and I say this as somone who would fall in line behind the SDLP should I ever move to NI) is one of suprise; what did the SDLP expect? And if they now want to talk to the Tories for the purposes of a Westminster election strategy then I'd be very suprised indeed.

I would agree that they don't any right to be angry at the Tories having talks with the UUP... but I think that (at the very least) discomfort at the Tories having talks with the two main Unionist parties is entirely understandable. I suspect that some of the anger is for show though - which is in itself a good sign that the situation is now very serious.

A DUP-UUP alliance would be (from an SDLP point of view) a return to the UUUC in any case...

If it involved one party standing aside in certain seats it will have knock on effect at effectively 'disenfranchisng' nationalist voters. The SDLP and Sinn Fein would have to come to a similar arrangement which wouldn't travel well over the Irish Sea even if it was swallowed in Northern Ireland.

An alliance between UUP and DUP would ideologically be a mockery of devolution; uniting across denominational lines yet differing in left/right responses to health, housing, education (well maybe not education) etc would not make for serious devolved government. Devolution is not worth having in that case and I would argue it would be in the best interests of 'one half' of Northern Ireland for a return to direct rule.

Note to people who don't know me very well

Much of what I say on NI politics is probably biased due to religious/cultural allegiances, family in Northern Ireland and general exposure to overflowing extrement from the toilet bowl of tribalism that splashes onto Clydeside...

That is all!

Corrected.

A return to direct rule over the other half only, that is. ;D

It has emerged that the Orange Order held talks between the DUP and UUP in December. So now it's the Tories turn to be pissed off: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8487549.stm

Talks making "considerable progress" as parties take a break for Sunday. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8488839.stm)

Shocking.

In Northern Ireland "six weeks" apparently means something different to this side of the sea.

As a random question, is there any type of support or movement in NI for complete independence from both the UK and Ireland, creating a sort of Republic (or whatever) of Ulster?

This has generally been a minority idea favoured by those loyalists who thought that NI would be better off governed upon (Pre-90s) South African lines. There are I suppose a few tiny, tiny movements that presently back this (though it was popular in some unionist circles in the 70s and 80s).

And we have a deal. Apparently.

Details?

Blast from the Past.

Worst pun of the day :P

Always liked McGrady, and not just because he beat Enoch Powell.

Talking about Paisley, what do we have to expect on the Unionist side in the upcoming elections? Will there be a lot of three way races (UUP, DUP, TUV)? Or will they find some sort of agreement, at least in the constituencies that are religiously mixed?

I think the official position is that they will all run candidates against each other. But, haha, this is Northern Ireland, so... still, I think we're more likely to see co-operation at the next Stormont elections (for seriously ugly sectarian reasons). I think its quite likely that TUV doesn't run everywhere; though they'll have a serious crack at North Antrim, of course.

Belfast East could end up being a very interesting four-way melee between the UUP, DUP, TUV and Alliance. Naomi Long took nearly 20% of the vote in the 2007 election, and she's now Lord Mayor of Belfast; surely that will help her campaign. Stack that against a split in the hard unionist vote between the DUP and TUV and the departure of Reg Empey as the UUP candidate, and the winner could well have no more than 25% of the vote.

It is weird to see Big Ian fade away into history.  He really could be such an evil man at one point  and a fair representative for his community at another.  Hatred and respect at the same time.

I was thinking North Belfast, which a decent TUV showing could well turn into an SF pickup.

Is McFarland now DUP like Hermon?

I would prefer that they didn't (because I quite like Martin McGuinness and would like him to be First Minister), but the logical thing for the remains of the UUP to do is to fold into the DUP. A UUP without any seats at Westminster is utterly pointless.

Could IRV resurrect the UUP?

It already exists; and Mr O'Loan is free to join it.

To spend so much and get so little is utter folly

LOL

Gaelic football games are dens of vice. Can't figure out the other objection... does he think there might be Catholic priests in attendance?

So, yeah. What's left of the PUP has decided to commit suicide. Probably. In practice.

A little less cryptic maybe?

That's a pretty impressive work of doublethink.

Well the UVF has now decommissioned so I hardly see this as any worse than Sinn Fein today.

While I sorta agree- The problem is the much of the leadership and membership from the Loyalist paramilitaries has turned to drug dealing and outright gangsterism. Of course, the republican movement has some members who have gone down same path.  However, the PUP supporting these types isnt electorally popular.  All this is inconsequential anyway as he party died with Ervine. 

Or with Purvis leaving over this issue. Either way...

http://www.humanrights.ie/index.php/2011/04/03/why-the-dissidents-kill/

It will be interesting whether the recruitment drive will continue now that the 50/50 rule has been dropped.

I just have a discussion about NI politics that I thought I'd put here: Why is it that there are no left-wing Unionist and right-wing republican parties in NI?  Surely there must be at least some left-wing unionists and right-wingers who support a United Ireland?  Or are the communities that polarized that they both are also purely on opposite ends of the political spectrum?  (with only one centrist party that combines both of them in the middle)

The Alliance Party is in fact really the "left-wing unionist" party you're looking for - it receives few votes from Catholics.  Political cleavages based on ethnicity rather than ideology are commoner than you might think - similar stark divides occur in places like Malaysia or South Africa, and to a much lesser extent even the US.  The present ideological divide in NI is partially because Catholics are historically underprivileged and partially a relic of the old Home Rule controversy.  "Left-wing" Unionists vote DUP (the more "working class" Unionist party) or Alliance, "right-wing" nationalists vote SDLP or occasionally cross sectarian lines (Enoch Powell was elected for the UUP in what's today a safe Sinn Fein seat - NI is the only place on earth where electing Enoch Powell in a landslide is a sign of moderation!).

Enoch Powell's old constituency (South Down) is now a safe SDLP constituency, he did not receive a significant crossover vote from Catholics, and he was absolutely not any kind of moderate.

I don't think this is entirely true.  In areas where the Catholic population is low it often appears quite a few of them are voting Alliance.  See Assembly results in Strangford, for example.

I'm also not sure that Alliance is exactly "left wing" -- I've got the impression that some Alliance supporters are quite right wing in an Orange Book liberal sort of way -- and while it might be generally "unionist" with a small u it is not Unionist.  What defines Alliance is opposition to sectarianism.

Note also that there have been a few UUP figures (including their last MP, who left because of their ill starred alliance with the Tories) not exactly on the right.

(I think Al has said enough about South Down.)

'Actually nonsectarian, but not exactly working class orientated' as one satirical work from the early 1980s put it. Increasingly mostly just public sector middle class.

On tuther thing, Two UUP MPs voted with the Callaghan government in the vote of no confidence; Harold McCusker (Armagh) and John Carson (North Belfast). Carson was promptly deselected, while McCusker ended up as a deputy leader. Make of that what thou will, etc.

And the bloc vote of NI's one not-entirely-negligible non-Irish population group. Which is Chinese.

Lord Maginnis loses UUP whip over anti-gay comments (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18476314)

The below obviously came out a few days ago.
Interesting changes to the religious demography, but also for the first time a question about national identity.


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1212/1224327773537.html

Very interesting, but the low level of Irish identity isnt good news for the Republicans. Is it decreasing or increasing with age?
Regarding the distribution of the 6,5% that hasn't been brought up in either tradition. With 5,59% growing up without a religion I assume a lot come from mixed Catholic/Protestant families?
The 0,92% non-Christian are presumably mostly Chinese.
The Polish and other Eastern European Catholics must be counted in the Catholic bracket in this census, so perhaps the Irish Catholic share is a bit lower than the 45,14%. Maybe 43-43,5%?
Its a shame they don't have an "Irish Catholic" category.

If they do a Border Poll, do you think there would be a pro-Irish majority in Derry, Omagh and Newry & Mourne? The numbers look solid.

Map:

()

Perhaps it's because I'm not from there, but seriously people, it's just a flag.

Indeed. I was ashamed of Quebec during that long debate on the presence of the Canada flag in the Assembly, but, at least, there was no violence.

Well, I suppose it's a continuation of The Troubles.

Or, rather, it is about the flag, but the flag is not actually a flag.

Something I came across recently is that for whatever reason, there are more Mormons in Northern Ireland than in the Republic. I wonder what party they tend to vote for.

UUP maybe?

Mormons tend to do well, so they probably don't lean left. They're way too socially conservative for the Alliance, and I'm sure Ian Paisley doesn't like them.

I imagine DUP given that I imagine this is connected with the rise of new forms of evangelical Protestantism in NI (of course, evangelicalism itself has a long history in the North as do denominational splits. Just look at Big Iain) and those are DUP voters (if they vote). That would also explain why there are more Mormons in NI than here, which is hardly surprising..

Mormons are not quite evangelical Protestants, though, and I'm not sure that the strident wing of the DUP, who would not consider Mormons to be Christian never mind Protestant, would have much appeal for them. I suspect sizeable numbers would go with UUP or Alliance (on the "none of the above" principle) or simply not vote.

Yes, I know, but they come from the same theological gene pool as the modern evangelical movement and certainly share more background than they do with Catholics. And I don't recall the DUP ever making comments against the Mormons (although given that I tend to ignore everything the DUP says, I can't be sure of that). Of course, if we knew where these Mormons lived, I would have a better idea.

However, the fact that there are more Mormons in NI than ROI (with c40% of the population) is revealing enough in itself.

The LDS Church counts about 2800 members in the Republic and 5300 members in the North.

As noted elsewhere, longtime South Down SDLP MP (and electoral vanquisher of Enoch Powell) Eddie McGrady has died.

Not particularly surprising, but depressing all the same:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/18/chinese-anna-lo-online-racist-abuse-northern-ireland-loyalists

British and Danish Mormons tend to be remnants of Mormon missionaring in the 19th century, as such they have not a whole lot in common with American Mormons, but more in common with European Protestant free chuches. I would suspect that almost all of them if they mix in politics at all are unionist.

Gerry Adams arrested over 1972 murder (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-27232731)

On a very important side issue I'm going to leave this (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/two-racist-attacks-every-day-in-northern-irelands-racehate-crime-surge-30202329.html) here

Anna Lo (Alliance MLA for South Belfast and Euro election candidate) leaving NI politics because of racism and sectarianism:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/29/northern-ireland-chinese-mp-might-leave-province-racist-abuse

:(

Is racism in NI mainly on the loyalist side?

No, but the worst of it is.

Not the biggest Galloway fan but bravo for him standing his ground against bigotry here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3ejZmuJlv0

Given that Northern Ireland is now plurality Catholic (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-20673534) (and in fact outnumber Protestants in Belfast (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-26875363)), does anyone see it becoming majority Catholic within the next few decades?  

It will under current demographic trends, and quite soon at that.

Not that I think that will change the constitutional situation much.

Could you elaborate for the reasons behind this? Immigration, Cultural Catholicism, Birth rates?

Ireland is crappier than the UK. Until that changes, I don't see the status of NI changing.

Immigration (rather Protestant migration to the rest of the UK) and historically higher Catholic birth rates (fears of being out-bred has been a part of loyalist rhetoric for ages).

The article says 48% Protestant or brought up Protestant vs. 45% Catholic or brought up Catholic. How is that a plurality?

;Regarding the constitutional issue the key figure is only 25% identifying as Irish only.

Not necessarily (election results are what will determine the constitutional issue). "Northern Irish" can be read as being a regional identity within Irishness, or as a way of avoiding a binary British/Irish choice, or as a more "polite" way of being British without associating yourself with the yahoos who present themselves as the local standard-bearers of Britishness. Whatever you say, say as little as possible, to bowdlerise Heaney.

Apologies (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fORc4te33HE).

When I saw this graph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Northern_Ireland), I immediately jumped to the conclusion that Catholics had gained a plurality. 

Should have looked more closely... 

...

Back in the late 80s, Iris Robinson complained to Ulsterbus on behalf of her constituents about there being Irish language signage on suburban buses.

The signage was an ad for language courses in the Alliance Française.

Along the same lines:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/478513.stm
(from 1999)

bwhahahahahahahahaha

This is my favourite.

LOL

Peter Robinson has had a heart attack.

I can't remember him ever looking well.

Being Peter Robinson might do that to a person.

Seriously, I wish him a speedy recovery, but he's still a wanker.

He's the guy who went to sleep hearing and in both ears and woke up deaf in one.

The Northern Ireland Assembly could collapse following the failure of the welfare bill - it could be down to Westminster to pass a welfare bill for Northern Ireland.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-32894371
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-32793324

Wish they'd just go back to direct rule completely #ukup

The problem is that the Northern Ireland Assembly was created as part of the Good Friday Agreement - the peace treaty for The Troubles. It would, in theory, be a breach of an international treaty - between the UK and Ireland. I don't think it can happen...

So long as the Assembly is merely suspended rather than ended then Direct Rule is technically fine. It was basically the norm before the St. Andrews Agreement.

()

Grey is the new orange.

Oh dear (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-33647867)

Surprising. I thought they had changed it long time ago.

They changed the name of the local authority which covers the city ages ago. The legally-defined city, a much smaller area, is still officially "Londonderry" and would need permission from the British Privy Council for its name, defined in a royal charter, to be changed. SF have been unwilling to go through with this step, at least until now, because of their own party theology.

The county surrounding it is another matter altogether.

Looks like the Ulster Unionists are pulling out of Government over claims the IRA may have been involved in a recent murder.

Pathetic maneuvering by UUP

Can someone explain what is going on?

The UUP was replaced by the DUP as the main Unionist party about a decade ago. Ever since, the UUP has wildly flailed between left and right, looking for a reason to exist. Right now, it's flailing right. It doesn't matter though, they are irrelevant.

That I get.

But can someone tell me why IRA front groups assuming the form of anti drug vigilantes are actually killing drug dealers? Are these all Unionist drug dealers? Is there some kind of history? Are they aiming for plausible deniability? Or so they just want an excuse to kill people?

Of course there are Prod drug dealers as well. The Loyalist groups all got into the act. Its a sign of real cross-community progress in its way.

Some of the worst 'incidents' in the past 10 years in the North have been between rival loyalist paramilitaries - related usually to their 'share' of the local drug trade.

Drug dealers shot by Republican paramilitaries are from their own side of the fence.

This current spate of killings is a feud between two groups of ex-Provisional IRA men in Belfast. The story as retailed by Henry McDonald in the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/26/unionists-may-regret-collapse-northern-ireland-power-sharing-over-mcguigan) is that McGuigan was planning to take out other ex-IRA leaders after having shot Davison and that the shooting of McGuigan was a pre-emptive strike. (McDonald is an ex-Stick and is not notably friendly to the Provisionals so has no motive to minimise any SF connection.) The Phoenix (Irish equivalent of Private Eye) has a similar story in the current issue.

The DUP have set an ultimatum to suspend Stormont or they quit as ministers.

Now I don't usually like the DUP very much, but I can kind of see why they'd be unhappy. The PIRA was meant to be history and it doesn't seem to be.

Re : The supposed continued existence of the Provvies, did anybody really expect them to just give up the stranglehold they had on their own communities, let alone the leverage that an armed organisation would have in any outbreak of violence?

The important thing is that they are no longer political, they are criminal. So lock them up and be done with them, as they won't be able to claim they are of the same political stock as Bobby Sands.

I'm still unsure as to why the UUP did what they did.

Peter Robinson has resigned.

Robinson "steps aside" but claims he hasn't actually resigned, all the DUP ministers are gone apart from Arlene Foster...?

()

Would there be elections next year by any chance?

Actually this is about ethics in sectarianism.

Assembly pass gay marriage, but DUP veto.

Anyway, Northern Irish politics are even dumber than usual at the moment so I thought we could bump this old thread,

Why?

Because SAVE ULSTER FROM SODOMY presumably.

The DUP have a veto because they posted a "petition of concern" which allows a motion to pass only if it obtains a majority of both Unionists and Nationalists in support.

The mechanism was originally designed to prevent one side forcing through legislation over the heads of the other, but it now tends to be used by both larger parties to prevent anything inconvenient to either of them getting passed.

Only four Unionists voted in favour of the motion - three independent unionists (McCrea, McCallister and Sugden) who have always voted in favour plus one newly co-opted Ulster Unionist (Allen). This doesn't represent a major shift in opinion on the Unionist side; one Unionist who voted in favour of it last year (Kinahan) has left the Assembly on his election as an MP, and the UUP leader (Nesbitt) abstained.

What made the difference is that a couple of the more socially-conservative Alliance members (Lunn and Cochrane) voted in favour this year, having voted No abstained last year.

There is a week till the Schoolteachers, Doctors and Lawyers Party chose whether to stick with McDonnell or choose a young guy whose defining characteristic is being not McDonnell. Party members seem increasingly desperate to stop the rot (they've never gained seats in the history of the Assmebly and have been bleeding votes at every election for a whole).

That's very uncharitable towards Colum Eastwood, who seems like a talented guy.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-34378363 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-34378363)

I think this will make FFs plans of entering Northern politics more realistic. There should be a (although relatively small) market for a SoCon centre-right option among Catholics. This vote could be the opening.

There's no appreciable difference on either abortion or gay marriage between the positions of FF and the SDLP, and the current FF leadership is positioning itself economically as being ever-so-slightly left-of-centre, at least in terms of rhetoric.

I realize this is facetious of course, but it got me wondering: what are the social bases of the NI political parties (other than the obvious religious divide) - as in income, educational levels, gender, etc.? I seem to recall from an earlier discussion here that the Protestant working class vote was clearly in favour of the DUP, but other than that I've read little about this issue.

McDonnell lost. Whether a new face is enough to stop the decline of the party is another thing.

I'm fairly sympathetic to the SDLP, and would generally vote for either them or Alliance if I lived there, but they have a basic problem in that a major reason why people used to vote for them rather than Sinn Féin (what the latter's mates used to get up to) is fading with time.  And I'm not sure what opportunities there are for developing new reasons to vote for them.  So I doubt that changing the leader will make much of a difference.

The DUP tends to be stronger among evangelical Protestants in general, in working-class urban areas, and among self-perceived outsiders within Unionism. The UUP is very much a deferential "old money" party and tends to be stronger among Anglicans (Arlene Foster is a prominent exception, although also a defector from the UUP to the DUP). The DUP is more explicitly socially conservative than the UUP, although the difference isn't always noticeable. There's a similarity to the FF/FG divide in the South, although DUPers tend to have none of FFers' personal charm (but given some of the rumblings about relationships with property developers, they may have all of FF's ethics problems).

Alliance tends to attract "let's get along" bourgeois types in Belfast and its surrounds who identify as being progressive (primarily ecumenical Christian more than secularist).

The "Schoolteachers, Doctors and Lawyers" jibe was originally aimed at the SDLP's leadership cadre more than at its membership. SF dominates the urban and rural working-class vote outside of Derry city and south Down, leaving the SDLP with that section of the middle-class vote that is more uncomfortable about the (fading but not yet absent) echoes of the paramilitary campaign.

Finally...: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-34850196

Boo, would have better if the country returned to direct rule. That's more democratic than mandatory coalition.

Northern Ireland isn't allowed to have democracy. Thats the whole point of the GFA: no one ever gets to implement their (inevitably horrific) platform and elections serve as a means of apportioning patronage and public money.

The problem is that Northern Ireland's "democracy" is based on voting for the party that's closest to your religious ideology - if one party ever got a majority, there would be religious tensions again. The closest NI gets to having a democratic vote is in the UK General Election - where their vote doesn't matter.

Possibly interesting news: Labour in NI have gone against Westminster orders and have declared they will stand in the next assembly elections.

Meanwhile Arlene Foster is almost certainly going to be DUP leader and therefore FM.

It's remarkable isn't it? If Northern Ireland was an African state, Western newspapers would be full of patronising editorials about 'people unready for democracy' and the like.

If it makes you feel any better, I recall a Canadian newspaper running an editorial like that :P

It's really about ethnic identity and power relations rather than religious ideology - large numbers of unionists did not become Free Presbyterians or evangelical Protestants just because they switched from the UUP towards the DUP. It's just that in Northern Ireland ethnic identity and religious background (not necessarily practice) tend to coincide.

Catholic birth rates spurred unionists into making 1998 deal, Clinton suggested

Saturday 09 January 2016


Read more: (http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/northern-ireland-news/catholic-birth-rates-spurred-unionists-into-making-1998-deal-clinton-suggested-1-7151872)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-35546399

SDLP's progressive nationalism falls at the first hurdle.

What was the party breakdown of the abortion vote?

For: Sinn Fein, Alliance (minus one abstention), Green, N121

Against: SDLP (minus one abstention), DUP, TUV, UKIP, UUP (minus three "For")

Interesting -Arlene Foster is gone:

Northern Ireland leader quits after party revolt over Brexit impact (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/northern-ireland-leader-quits-after-party-revolt-over-brexit-impact)

Projected successor

Foster was a useful placeholder. Getting rid of her gives SF the right to re-negotiate with DUP again in exchange for voting in their insane religious nutjob for First Minister. Or SF call an election.

She should have obviously gone during RHI but the celebrations should be put on hold. Remember she was considered too soft on gay rights and that she could at least be reasoned with. Any new DUP leader will be put up against Jim Allister as to who represents hardline Unionism. That can't be good.

Its a shame Peter Robinson's wife had to shag a teenager.

There's been some discussion of this in the main UK thread, perhaps because it had been forgotten that this thread existed.

The front-runner appears to be Lagan Valley MLA and Young Earth creationist Edwin Poots.  Also near the top of the list are Jeffrey Donaldson, MP for Lagan Valley who was once in the UUP, and Gavin Robinson, MP for Belfast East (nb no relation of Peter and Iris).  Poots is perceived as more hardline, Robinson as more moderate.

An MP would either have to resign their Westminster seat or nominate someone else to serve as First Minister, as the First Minister would have to be in the Assembly and double jobbing is banned.  The electorate is just the MPs, MLAs, and I think also their members of the House of Lords; unless there's a sudden rule change this is not a mass membership vote.

Given the machinations and the ideological lines, would it be right to think Poots is the frontrunner, then?

I imagine he wouldn't be popular beyond the confines of the DUP base, given his brand of social conservatism (saying Arlene Foster needs to focus on being a wife?).

Especially given what has happened with Foster, will Donaldson being ex-UUP help or hinder him?

Dumb question:

According to statistics about half of Northern Irish Protestants are Presbyterians, most of them Presbyterian Church in Ireland. The other half is mostly Church of Ireland (i.e. Anglican), with a minority of Methodists and some other small groups. Only a tiny fraction belongs to the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster (i.e. Ian Paisley's fundamentalist splinter church).
Then how would a majority of Northern Irish Protestants vote for Paisley's DUP on a regular basis, a party that puts FPCU ideology front and center? I get why a vote for the DUP may occur at some election, but wouldn't a party emerge that combines Protestant "ethnic" identity politics with a slightly more mainstream outlook on religion and social issues? It seems strange that the PUP or maybe a more moderate version of it is completely unviable.

In the period after the Good Friday Agreement the DUP absorbed a considerable element of the more hardline wing of the UUP, so they became broader based than they had been; indeed Foster herself is an ex-UUP Anglican from County Fermanagh.  So in practice the DUP is a Protestant identity party.

That said, there's definitely a "Bible Belt" vibe in parts of NI, especially in County Antrim, and that goes beyond Paisley's church and would have provided a lot of the DUP's original base.

A majority of DUP members are also members of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster.

So the voter base is significantly different demographically from the membership?

Massively. The membership is also tiny. A lot of them are also estate agents, would you believe.

What proportion of the church members are members of the party?

At least a tenth, maybe as much as a quarter.

Poots has confirmed he's standing.

It appears Foster is going to both stand down from the Assembly and leave the DUP after quitting as leader.  (BBC story (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-56938539).)  "No longer the party she joined", apparently.

I mean, it's an Irish political party so that is very believable.

If she means the DUP has become *more* backward and bigoted, that's a bit sobering.

It's probably basically a strop, but given who the favourite to take over is...

It's so tiny that in some constituencies there are actually fewer members than there are DUP councillors.

Ah, the "sorry no more members, we're full up" approach that some Labour old-timers will recall.

Jeffrey Donaldson MP enters the DUP leadership contest (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/03/sir-jeffrey-donaldson-launches-campaign-dup-leader).

As the article says, though, Poots's campaign claim he already has the votes to win.

Would Poots be acceptable as First Minister? I doubt it, as I see his camp is apparently suggesting splitting the role in two.

Next May (or earlier, as the case may be), there will be elections held to the unicameral Northern Ireland Assembly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Assembly) at Stormont.

I know it is a year out, but how is it looking?  

In the event, it was close. Poots has his work cut out in several ways.

At the moment I'd guess that Alliance will make gains at the expense of Unionists, and that Sinn Féin could well be the largest party.  The DUP's choice of leader might give the UUP an opportunity to recover some lost ground amongst more moderate (and less fundamentalist) Protestants, but I'm not sure they're in a state to take it.

A LucidTalk poll in January actually had Alliance on 18% and challenging the DUP (19%) for second place overall (with Sinn Féin ahead on 24%).  It also had the TUV (the ones who think the DUP is too moderate) on 10%, not far behind the UUP (12%) and SDLP (13%).  But polling in Northern Ireland is not easy.

Will this hurt the TUV?

What would happen if Alliance were to win the most votes in next year's elections? I guess it's not that improbable is the distribution is 24 SF, 19 DUP and 18 Alliance.

How would that effect the power sharing agreement? would it throw a wrench into the already difficult process of forming a government?

If Alliance were to be the largest party, then that complicates things, because they'd get to appoint the First Minister.  (The legislation is quite confusing, but I think that's right.)  Then the Deputy First Minister would be appointed by the largest party of the largest designation, which might well mean Sinn Féin (if Alliance's gains were mostly from Unionism, meaning that there were more Nationalists than Unionists overall).  I'm not sure Unionists would stand being frozen out of those two posts altogether.


"This" as in Poots winning the DUP leadership?  You'd think so, as he would be more in tune with the sort of voter who might defect in that direction than Foster is.

Ironically, the antecedent of the modern DUP got its feet wet in Terence O'Neill's old Stormont constituency, Bannside, which Paisley won after 1969.  Around then it was a mix of new middle class and partially rural working class, but mostly all Protestant.  Just by Paisley's vote share there in 1969 and after, he drew across class lines, which speaks to the malleable cultural/identarian appeal of the DUP--their most successful (and most depressing, imo) campaign tool ever since.  So, for now, I won't underestimate Poots, especially if he does leave the FM job to another.

Are alliance de facto unionists though? Also how to uk labour supporters in Northern Ireland who are unionist vote?

Alliance are not Unionists with a big U, and do not designate as such in the Assembly.  (They're "Other", together with the Greens and People Before Profit.)  There is a range of views on the constitutional issue within the party, though it's usually been the case, and probably still is, that their supporters would mostly vote for the status quo.

(For those who don't already know this, all MLAs have to "designate" as either "Unionist", "Nationalist", or "Other".  The rules for choosing which party gets to nominate the First Minister and Deputy First Minister refer to the collective strengths of these designations as well as to the parties.)

As for the second question, left-right politics isn't really a thing in Northern Ireland so it's hard to tell.  There have been left of centre Unionist (big U) politicians, including some, like former North Down MP Robert McCartney, who were quite hardline.  (He applied for the Labour whip after being elected in 1995.)  His UUP successor Sylvia Hermon left the party rather than join the alliance with the Tories in 2010.  I'd guess that the more strongly left of centre Protestant voters tend towards Alliance, though.  (Or the Greens.)

if the labour party in the uk started to contest the in northern ireland would that be electly viable?

I doubt it.  They might win the odd council seat -- IIRC some Labourish independents sometimes have -- but note that the NI Tories don't even have that at the moment.

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1395997752916643843?s=19

Assembly elections are next year. The aggregated major unionist vote here is 41% compared to 37% for the Republicans, but last time a good chunk of SDLP and UUP voters put each other or Alliance as their second preference, partly at the urging of Mike Nesbitt.

Did they? My understanding was that ‘vote Mike get Colum’ went down like a bucket of cold sick amongst the UUP faithful (who still remain broadly conservative - when polled in a study of the party done in 2019 a majority were well disposed to Jim Allister of all people).

It went down badly among the base and nobody took it seriously but it did happen to a significant enough degree to make a difference - have a look at Lagan Valley for example where the SDLP gained the seat. 

Yes, who are the UUP supporters nowadays?

That's an almost existentially bad poll for Poots.

WTF did the DUP grandees think they were doing picking him ahead of Donaldson?

Poots is already being compared to Jeremy Corbyn.

I will believe the mass rallies in his support when I see them :)

Those DUP higher-ups really don't seem like sharp political minds.

Paul Givan has been nominated to be the new First Minister. (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-57399375)

A Father Ted reference in Arlene Foster's farwell speech (https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/nzmofc/a_father_ted_reference_in_arlene_fosters_farwell/)

This is what she's referring to btw:

Will Poots get promoted in the NI Cabinet for being party leader, or is that completely separate from the cabinet process (If I understand it correctly each party in the power sharing can pick their people for a specified number of cabinet posts, right?)

That was fast:

Leader of Northern Ireland’s DUP resigns after 3 weeks (https://www.politico.eu/article/northern-ireland-democratic-unionist-party-dup-edwin-poots-resigns-uk/)
Edwin Poots faced an overwhelming no-confidence vote among the party’s lawmakers.

Lasted a couple of days longer than Diane James did as UKIP leader.

Jim Allister made me spit my drink out when he called Sinn Fein "West Brits" for relying on the UK government to pass the Irish Language Act. It shows you that the state of Loyalism is like a real life version of an internet conspiracy rabbit hole. Let's hope they keep digging for Ireland's, and all our sanity's sake!

I took a look at Jim Allister's social media just for the lolz and on his Facebook he linked to this article (https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/opinion/columnists/republicans-use-irish-language-weapon-their-long-war-strategy-1342913).


This isn't a dog whistle, this is a dog megaphone.

(Also, I hate being a grammar nazi, but if you want to extoll the virtues of English over dirty peasant Gaelic, you should perhaps know that it's "a highly", not "an highly")

So will Jeffrey Donaldson be next?

Jeffrey Donaldson will be the new DUP leader; there were no other candidates.  So it's back to an ex-UUP figure after the Poots interlude.

Assuming he does indeed move to Stormont, that'll mean a potentially interesting by-election for his Lagan Valley Westminster seat.

Latest on the Donaldson succession: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jun/26/sir-jeffrey-donaldson-endorsed-to-lead-dup

No clear timescale for him taking over from Poots's nominee Paul Givan as First Minister and a Lagan Valley by-election.

Jeffrey Donaldson says he intends to stand in Lagan Valley in the forthcoming Assembly election unless a vacancy occurs first.  (Irish Times article (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/donaldson-to-run-for-assembly-in-lagan-valley-constituency-1.4654890?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter))

It'd be interesting if Donaldson, Poots and Givan all stand for the DUP in a constituency where they currently only hold two seats.  Also this would mean a Westminster by-election unless double-jobbing somehow gets unbanned.

One of the other DUPers standing for the Westminster vacancy is of course an obvious next step.

https://twitter.com/NextIrishGE/status/1431508490791657473?s=19

The figures are not the important thing - but the broader trend of the unionists splintering or the divides within unionism widening might be worth noting. The other argument and perhaps the greater cause of these figures is that it's just the ramifications of the DUP's internal woes. Of course the figures are actually not bad for unionists.

Why are TUV polling so high? Weren’t they a single issue party for paramilitary prisoners?

I think you are actually referring to the (now defunct) Ulster Democratic Party there.

TUV is more a vehicle for those who see the modern DUP as betraying the "true flame" of Paisleyism.

As Cumbrian Leftie described above, despite being the status quo, as with any extreme there is opportunity for a unionists protest vote.

Big opportunity for the UUP, were it not for the fact that the UUP is so bad at politics.

So Sinn Fein and the SDLP are the only nationalist parties in this poll, with everyone else being unionists?  

People Before Profit is in favor of "a 32 county socialist Ireland".

Where do the TUV and ALL parties fall on the unionist-nationalist spectrum?

"ALL" is Alliance, so neither Unionist with a big U nor Nationalist with a big N, but their voters would presumably break for the status quo in a border poll.  The Greens are also neither Unionist nor Nationalist.

"TUV" is Traditional Unionist Voice: people who think the DUP have gone soft.

In case anyone is wondering, results from the 2021 census are coming out in stages, with the first coming in June:

Release plans for Census 2021 statistics (https://www.nisra.gov.uk/statistics/2021-census/outputs-prospectus/release-plans)

I am happy for Sinn Fein, though the Democratic Unionist Party will ensure their victory is bitter-sweet as they choose to become the Northern Irish equivalent of the U.S. Republican Party by picking the path of sour grapes and obstructionism rather than allow Sinn Fein to pick the First Minister for the first time ever:

Sinn Fein hails 'new era' as it wins Northern Ireland vote (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/sinn-fein-hails-new-era-as-it-wins-northern-ireland-vote/ar-AAX12zz?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=0c1a0865cec54a1b9f7171b1c2935ab6)

Obstructionism will only continue the DUP's long term decline, though.

With Prime Minister Boris Johnson gone, what does this mean for Northern Ireland?  I know that he intended to rip up the Northern Ireland Protocol so the DUP will finally agree to serve under a Sinn Fein-led government.   

It means every Tory leader bar a few that want to sell themselves on their moderate image will use the Northern Ireland issue to throw red meat to the blustering, flag-waving boomer base because not a single Westminster-based Tory (bar Theresa May weirdly enough) doesn't actually care about strict outcomes in NI. its a tool to be politically useful for them , presenting their Thatcher tribute act credentials without having to commit to unrealistic tax cuts or what not.

There will be that rhetoric during the leadership contest, yes.

The question is if they are actually prepared to be more pragmatic in office.

Lord Trimble (David Trimble) former leader of the UUP (1995-2005), former First Minister (1998-2002) and one of the architects of the Good Friday Agreement (for which he won the Nobel Peace Prize jointly with the late John Hume) has died. He was seventy seven.

King Charles III (assuming he has a similar lifespan as his late mother) could be the last British monarch to visit Northern Ireland while it is still part of the United Kingdom:

Charles lll makes maiden visit to Northern Ireland as English king (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/charles-lll-makes-maiden-visit-082715239.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmluZy5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANdyz2662_JJX1ZUa-FIrR_npWUtL9T5oSzt2LUSTtzkZH7EZ9ctNDBbxzlyWRnycs4xnAIffPPgp07eF9pUxxBH6lB7W5JaBzZjZIuKye0gT0qvLgocVmTY3F4ikI929xlJ_lC3YjyZ1PB30HlDYcB9-baLdaTKX6TD4iXRFKBA)

Have to say that Sinn Fein have acquitted themselves notably well this past week.

Perhaps, but reunification is not a certainty, not even now. The fallout of Brexit and the death of a popular shared monarch makes it a lot more likely than it was before 2016, for sure. But it would be a long, drawn out and ugly process that may not even be in the Republic's interest (at least in the short-term).

Will be fascinating to follow over the next few years, though.

The main, original justification for the partition of the island and the establishment of Northern Ireland as a member of the United Kingdom is now gone:

Northern Ireland census shows more Catholics than Protestants for the first time ever (https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2022/09/23/northern-ireland-catholic-243837)

"English King"
"Reunification"
"Justification for partition"

Americans (especially the plastic paddies) are a cancer on this board.

I mean, you're the one whose signature shouts out Cromwell, so don't be such a glass cannon.

Seven years ago that would have been true but Brexit has undermined a lot of previous assumptions. One of the defining features of Alliance support is being pro-EU and what polling we've seen suggests that a plurality of Alliance voters are now small-n nationalist.


TUV is Ulster Scots for Herstigte Nasionale Party.

Indeed, things have changed; I'm still a bit sceptical that if it actually came to a border poll Alliance voters would break for re-unification, but it's no longer a crazy thought.

It is worth remembering that under the GFA a border poll can only be called if it is clear that the result would almost certainly be a change in the status quo. Of course exactly what the threshold is in terms of presumed public opinion is not really clear - it's unlikely that consistent leads would be enough, which then means a matter of gauging how large and how secure, and that would be a judgement call on the part of the Secretary of State. The point, though, is that this really isn't like an ordinary hypothetical referendum, even if it often suits people to pretend otherwise (e.g. the DUPs rather pathetic attempts to claim, during this year's elections, that if they fell behind Sinn Fein in seats then a border poll would follow swiftly).

Yeah, Brexit has upended things so much that we've moved from a situation where, frankly, even a Northern Ireland with a substantial but not overwhelming Catholic absolute majority would probably not actually vote for unification, to one where the longterm future is genuinely unclear. Backing it has been a spectacular own-goal even by the standards of the Unionist parties.

Having a series of governments in London who have been at best obsessed with a blinkered ideological nationalism over any attempt at competence and at worst actively malevolent has served to shift the balance as well. Apart from the brief interregnum of Julian Smith there have been a series of NI secretaries since at least 2010 who have been incompetent, dishonest, or both.

I would say that the long-term future is actually pretty clear because of the above factors as well as the fact that the demographic profile of the median voter in NI has changed and will continue to change. EU membership meant that the precise status of NI didn't matter that much for ordinary life; Brexit and the seemingly desperate attempt on the part of Westminster to maximize the differences between the UK and the EU 27 (and domestically having Frost and Truss playing footsie with the DUP and - even more poisonously - "Loyalist community leaders" who everyone knows are paramilitaries and drug-gangs) has made that impossible. Labour in power may stop aggravating the situation but they're unlikely to be able to undo the damage.

The new Prime Minister Liz Truss is trying to undo the damage her predecessor, Boris Johnson, left behind with regard to Northern Ireland:

Britain still seeking negotiated solution with EU on Northern Ireland - PM Truss (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/britain-still-seeking-negotiated-solution-with-eu-on-northern-ireland-pm-truss/ar-AA12dZEf)

Truss was briefing before becoming PM that she would invoke Article 16 "within days".

I suppose other, uh, events have intervened there.

The census figures are somewhat misleading, because it's the proportion from a Catholic or Protestant community background - i.e. which community they were brought up in. It doesn't tell you who actually strongly identifies with that community, and who is distrustful of the other side due to a lack of interaction with them but doesn't trust the leaders of their community either. The neithers are almost certainly a plurality and are certainly increasing rapidly. The fact that it is very difficult to openly renounce your community identity means that the salience of that has been limited, but if that changes then a lot is likely to change quite quickly.

Northern Ireland is starting to resemble Israel in its dysfunctional politics:

Northern Ireland likely headed for election (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/northern-ireland-likely-headed-for-election/ar-AA13tOSe)

Starting to?

Israel is a model of functionality by comparison to Northern Ireland.

They really ought to change the rules so that one party can't block the operation of the Assembly like this.  It wouldn't be that big a change to say that if one of the two biggest parties takes their ball away then their role in government formation passes to the next biggest party of their designation.

Unfortunately it's hard to see an election changing very much, and what sort of turnout are we going to get if the voters think that, especially if it's held on 15 December?

Yes, you do wonder what on earth the point is of another election right now.

Funnily enough I was using Northern Ireland as an example the other day of why a one state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict would be unworkable. It's been a generation since the end of major sectarian violence and powersharing is still routinely collapsed by one aggrieved party or another, even with the existence of major patron states (UK + ROI) as a backstop to the peace process.

Yes, it has at least been possible for Israeli governments to pass legislation at various points over the past few years.

From a few weeks ago, but I haven't seen this story posted yet:

https://twitter.com/Kilsally/status/1600551628301647907

The DUP acting like sore losers after coming in second place in the last election can't be helping them, let alone Northern Ireland as a whole.

When it comes to a "united Ireland":

The paedophilia scandals have destroyed the Roman Catholic Church's moral authority across the world and unionists can always remind Ulster voters that the Irish republican leadership were close adherents to said protectors of perverts for many decades.

Will be "interesting times", in the Chinese sense.

That's not how Ulster politics works.

brtd

21% of Catholics in Northern Ireland support unionism. Guess you want to alienate them I suppose.

I'm not a Tory. I'm an anti-socialist centrist.

Some might argue "same difference" there ;)

Potentially voting to maintain the status quo on 'just want to grill' grounds is not the same as 'supporting Unionism'.

Historically the UUP at least did have a few Catholic members, but its fair to say they were generally regarded (by both sides) as somewhat eccentric.

‘Experts’ and other ‘men of peace’ have been engaged in wishful thinking along these lines for the last six years and nothing significant has eventuated. The same will be the case now.

Famed Tory BRTD.

Well, the status quo is unionism, so if the unionists decided to attack nationalists for being close to the Catholic Church like Jolly Slugg suggested, I'm sure that many soft unionist  Catholics would reconsider their positions.

The Alliance is to a large extent unionist, yes? I consider the Alliance to be a unionist party even if there are some members who support reunification.

does a google - https://twitter.com/brtd1989 ?

(by the way, a male ancestor on my late Mum's side was transported from Ireland to Australia for stealing a coat).

I don't think even BRTD thinks the situation in Northern Ireland is "really about" religion to quite this extent.

No, the status quo is (frequently suspended) compulsory power-sharing within the framework of the United Kingdom. Unionism is something else and isn't a term that can be used loosely.

Eh, Sinead O'Connor was vindicated about the Catholic Church, though.

Noted Ulster Unionist [checks smudged writing on hand] Siobhan McConnell

Alliance is not a Unionist party.  It is fundamentally an anti-sectarianism party and its members and supporters hold a range of views on the constitutional issue; I suspect that pragmatic support for the status quo, combined with irritation at the disruption to the status quo caused by Brexit, is the median position in the party, but that is not what is meant by "Unionism" in a Northern Ireland context.

Mentioned by me in the elections section because I couldn't find this thread at the time - the local polls scheduled for next May have been moved back to the 18th of that month, to avoid clashing with the new monarch's coronation a fortnight earlier.

Which does also maybe increase the possibility of the mainland doing the same in that regard.

I've lived close to the border. In fact I crossed over it only a few days ago - absolutely empty as usual. Closing it is just not possible without some form of military intervention.

The 200+ crossings are too many and the border cuts through private property which cannot be seized outside of martial law, which for obvious reasons would not serve the purpose of either unionists or conservatives.

This is all saber rattling to gain leverage over the UE, and should be ignored like the tantrum it is.

Closing it with military intervention wouldn't work for anything either, except letting people check whether they calculated their mortar trajectories correctly.

I find Alliance to be an interesting party because of what you're describing. Is it fair to says that its supporters are younger than those of SF/DUP etc, or does it cut across the age divides?

Yes for the DUP/UUP. No for SF. In general, the younger generation recognizes that life in Northern Ireland at present sucks, and really want to move on. Currently those who came from (formerly) Unionist families are more likely to look towards the Alliance for a non-sectarian answer to the regions stagnation.

 SF has been good as seeing the same problems as Alliance - just more intense given historical economic imbalances between communities - and promising the larger Catholic youth population that joining the Republic will solve all the problems. Which makes one wonder if a reckoning is going to take place this decade. SF appears poised to form a future Dublin government off a similar youth-driven desire for reform, this time boosting a party perceived to be a comparably left alternative to the political establishment. It also helps SF that a large chunk of the Dail electorate don't remember the Troubles and perceive a change caused by  both geographic and temporal separation from those events. Actual government power means electoral expectations that likely won't be met if the government spends all their capital on the border question, and the polling lead could be blown in SF campaign on said legacy nationalism and not the reforms and modernizations desired. However,  focusing attention of the Republics problems will betray their Northern compatriots who would expect support and rewards from a SF led coalition, especially since Northerners have an oversized presence within the party thanks to historical developments. 

This I can corroborate with some anecdotal experience. Family and many of their friends are from longstanding Unionist families, who stuck with the UUP until recently (too moderate for DUP), but largely defected to Alliance around 2019.

On the other side of the equation, you can see the Alliance's lack of appeal to the Nationalist community as a non-tactical vote in their weak presence west of the Bann. In the 2019 locals, they won one seat in Omagh (where the SDLP incumbents ran as independents, splitting the vote and keeping the Alliance in long enough to pick up transfers); two seats in Derry (both east of the Foyle, where the Protestant population is much higher and where there were Nationalist transfers up for grabs) and one seat in Coleraine (mostly east of the Bann anyway, and with an overwhelmingly unionist electorate.)

I don't know if this was covered elsewhere, but Sinn Feinn is continuing to make gains at the local level:

Sinn Fein wins in Northern Ireland local elections, urges return of government (https://www.aol.com/news/brittney-griner-mercury-teammates-confronted-202555986.html)

The local election results in NI (including a few possible glitches in counting) are covered in the 2023 UK Local Elections thread in the International Elections section.

These are mainly ceremonial prizes with no real power, but they are highly visible reminders of the strides Sinn Fein has made in recent years in Northern Ireland:

Sinn Fein take most top positions on Northern Ireland councils after historic election (https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2023-06-13/who-are-the-new-first-citizens-for-ni-councils)

Bumping this since NI has a pretty eventful Thursday coming up: a massive public service strike and the deadline for some sort of power sharing agreement at Stormont (though my understanding is that this deadline can be pushed back).

Genuinely curious to hear more on these from our NI posters.

The strike is the bigger news, as realistically there isn't any reason for the DUP to cave now when they haven't already, and Heaton-Harris has made it fairly clear he's not going to call a new election.

We've also got snow this week, so if it gets heavier towards the end of the week then the fact the gritting lorries won't be operating could cause a fair amount of additional disruption. Forecast doesn't suggest that at the moment, but it's a possibility.

I think it is now a fairly safe prediction that nothing will happen as far as restoring Stormont rule goes until the next Westminster election, which could still be nearly a year away.

As predicted, the talks yesterday seem to have been unproductive: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-67957520

Somewhat more surprisingly, the head of the NI Civil Service has gone public with a call for Heaton-Harris to release the funds for wage increases without conditions.

Current predictions are that about 170,000 workers will be out on strike on Thursday, which is very nearly 10% of the total population and more than 20% of adults with a job.

Wow - I knew civil service comprises an unusually high % of Northern Irish workers, but 20% is something.

Is there a sense that this could be a long and ugly strike? Or is it seen as more of a shorter expression of exasperation from the NI people?

It's not just the civil servants, it's also bus and train drivers, teachers, most NHS workers and plenty of others besides - very nearly the entirety of the public sector. There's some more detail here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-67980892

This particular strike is only (for most unions) a 24-hour action, what's significant about it is that whereas previously different unions have taken action on different days, here they've co-ordinated it. Certainly given that there's no likelihood of Stormont returning imminently and the Westminster government shows no sign of willingness to take action itself, it's liable there will be further strikes over this issue, at least until such time that the union movement decides that Heaton-Harris definitely isn't budging and it's not worth their members' while to give up any more pay to send a signal that will be ignored.

The DUP is now under particular pressure to return to power sharing - personally I doubt that will happen until the Westminster elections, but who knows.

It also seems (to my outsider, not-from-"Norn Iron" eyes) that the DUP base doesn't want them to return to power sharing because they don't want or like power sharing, period.

The historical majority doesn’t like sharing power and compromising with the political minority that they’ve suppressed for a century? You don’t say! The Unionists still haven’t left the mindset of the absolute assembly majority they lost in 2017.

They should maybe be thinking about what happens when they become a definite minority instead.

In fairness every time the UUP has tried thinking about a minority future they’ve lost support going all the way back to Terence O'Neill.

By this point, I view the Democratic Unionist Party (and other unionist hardliners) with the same scorn and contempt I have for the Republican Party here at home.  Sore losers the lot of them:

N.Ireland to miss deadline to break political impasse (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/n-ireland-to-miss-deadline-to-break-political-impasse/ar-AA1n823s?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=dff71acf9a79449e8aa88ee53066dbb1&ei=11)

Now that they are losing their grip on power, is the DUP deliberately trying to shred the Good Friday Agreement? 

The DUP never liked the GFA in the first place - that's the problem. And their mentality has only hardened as Brexit created the Irish Sea Border (or whatever name Sunak is calling it now) and as SF became the largest party in the last Assembly election.

They represent a bloc of voters who aren't happy with the GFA and are scared about their future and their communities.

Which is ironic, since the DUP supported Brexit (https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/dup-position-brexit-71505) in the first place, fueling the rise of Sinn Fein (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-18/brexit-strengthens-sinn-fein-and-the-political-push-toward-a-united-ireland) in the process.  


It is a good thing then that most of those voters are aging hardline Protestants.  Time is their enemy, and once they pass on, it is only a matter of time before reunification with Ireland becomes feasible.  

If they are hoping that by creating chaos and making Northern Ireland ungovernable they bring in the direct intervention of the UK government to rule over them (like it has in the past, to be fair), it will be an unpleasant surprise to them if they find out that Westminster no longer has the desire to do so.    

Let's be honest here. Their voters are not scared about the future, they are upset and furious that Catholics are not second-class citizens anymore.

To say the DUP “never liked” the Good Friday Agreement is a touch of understatement.
()

There was the brief "Chuckle Brothers" phase after Paisley went into government, though of course some of the DUP base didn't like that either.

The rules need to be changed so that if a party with the right to nominate the FM/DFM refuses to do so the right is passed on to another party. That could be done so that it goes to the next largest party of their designation (thus giving the UUP the chance to show that there is a point to their continued existence) or it could be done so that the calculations are completely re-done ignoring the boycotting party, which I think would give the DFM position to Alliance.

But that fundamentally defeats the purpose of power sharing. You wouldn’t have a government supported by both Unionists and Nationalists. Like it or not the UUP hasn’t represented the views of most Protestants for 20 years now. And we know from history what unionists do when they feel “unrepresented” in government.

That is what led to the formation of Traditional Unionist Voice in 2007.

I would argue that the purpose of power sharing is to ensure that NI can have devolved government without going back to the 1921-72 situation of it being completely dominated by one community. And you can do that without giving the DUP and Sinn Féin effective vetos on the formation of any executive at all. I don't mind giving the largest party in each community the right to be in an executive if it wants to be, but if they wish to say no to that then I don't think they should be able to stop anyone else doing the job.

There is an argument that with Unionism having lost its majority and Nationalism not particularly likely to gain one in the near future it might be possible to try having no rules at all other than requiring majority support in the Assembly. I'm not sure that NI is really ready for that, though.

I think it's important to note that the actual size of the nationalist camp of voters hasn't exactly changed. From 2011 -> 2016 -> 2017 -> 2022, the vote for Nationalist parties is ~42% -> ~38.5% -> ~42% -> ~41%. For just SF and the SDLP, we see 41% -> 36% -> 40% -> 38%.

What has changed is that the fragmentation of the former Unionist block, and a very small growth of SF at the expense of SDLP. The growing Alliance has mainly pulled in voters who once might have been characterized as those with Unionist backgrounds post-Brexit. There are many reasons for this but they all stem from the unavoidable recognition that London doesn't give a F about Northern Irelands problems, in this case caused by Brexit. At the same time we have parties further to the right of the DUP gaining votes, leading to further fragmentation and the DUP taking their present hardline stance, something that appears to have been successful given their vote share in the locals.

And that's the seeming long-term direction we are heading in, towards increasing fragmentation and a expanding Alliance. What has happened for the Unionists just now eventually will happen for the Nationalists, since they nominally at the moment occupy first place. IMO that's coming soon when SF forms a government in Dublin and proceeds to care about their voters and 21st century issues in their country rather than reunification. SF in the Republic hasn't gained votes cause of nationalism, it's in spite of it, since they are the only party perceived by some to have answers to questions like housing and welfare. Dublin hasn't given F about Northern Ireland's problems for just as long as London hasn't, but they are the less visible of the two. But that's just my hypothesis.

I agree with this. The point of a power-sharing government is to govern, after all.

The DUP doesn't want to govern. We can't let a place with 1.9 million people just exist without a meaningful government and administration.

Let UUP represent the Unionist bloc - the fault is on the DUP here.

It’s worth noting that the DUP historically disliked direct rule, and would certainly do so in the current situation (the small amount we’ve had recently, the imposition of abortion and gay marriage rights, really pissed them off). If direct rule was properly imposed, then they would have a load of policies ‘forced’ on NI that they don’t like and wouldn’t be able to bring home the bacon to their voters, and frankly Westminster would probably run NI better than the civil service, or dare I say, Sinn Fein and the DUP.

The fundamental problem is that the Westminster government is shielding the DUP from the consequences of its decisions. There are lots of possible ways forward from here (some less terrible than others) but the only ones that actually change anything are the ones where decisions and consequences are linked.

Apart from the UUP not being that popular anymore, they try to mini-me the DUP rather too much.

Given the likely resignation of the Sinn Fein MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (she’s standing for the EU Parliament in Ireland), we could have quite an interesting race on our hands.

An NI by-election, in a Sinn Fein-UUP marginal? Could be fascinating, and a focal point for parties to lay out their case vis-a-vis Stormont.

Though some of that is encouraged by the way Holyrood functions. If it was possible to form an administration with the DUP boycotting, there would be a market for a unionist party that wants to keep things running (albeit not necessarily one larger than they now have, and certainly it wouldn't include some current UUP voters.) But as it isn't, they don't gain much from talking about compromise whilst not being able to show the benefits of it.

If she doesn't actually give up the Westminster seat before being elected as an MEP, it must be pretty likely that it would remain vacant until a GE even if that is delayed to the end of 2024.

Now they have a new deadline -February 8:

UK gives Northern Ireland a new deadline to revive its collapsed government as cost of living soars (https://apnews.com/article/northern-ireland-politics-dup-deadline-8a620966aaff38b44820cfb76788441f)

There is talk that "this time, it might be different" - but I will believe it when I see it.

Especially as they said that the last, what, three times? Or four?

Catholics running the country Brexit border issues are a huge stumbling block. The only solution is to have elections where Unionists win resolve this. Then power-sharing can be reestablished until Irish language polices are a convenient excuse to suspend it

Zeno's Paradox, power sharing edition!

DUP executive is meeting at 7pm tonight, to decide whether to approve the latest iteration of the Stormont deal. Notable because Donaldson had briefed that they wouldn’t convene a meeting like this until there was essentially a finalised deal.

DUP meeting descending into farce:
https://twitter.com/SJAMcBride/status/1752055898971779372

Postmodern clown-car stuff, just surreal.

It's fun to be old enough to find vicious irony in 'Jeffrey Donaldson suffers through hellish late-night meeting due to hardliners who will not compromise'.

This is the first time I've heard of Jamie Bryson.

I was better off not knowing Jamie Bryson.

Kudos where it’s due - if Donaldson gets this through, he’ll get a modicum of respect from me, despite the chaos and wilful carelessness of the past few years.

Long way still to go, though…

Donaldson is claiming that this deal  "will remove checks for goods moving within the UK and remaining in Northern Ireland, and guarantee unfettered access for Northern Ireland businesses to the UK market"

How would this work, if NI is part of the single market/has no hard border? Is this lip service? Is the hard border back on?

Will hold my hands up and admit my scepticism about this happening now may have been in error ;)

Given that Sinn Féin say that they, the Irish government and the EU are all happy, I doubt there's a hard border in there, but I guess we'll have to wait until tomorrow for more information.

To my knowledge it's a case of the UK government pledging to not engage in any regulatory divergence with the EU

Hopefully this is just Wilson moaning (which is his default), and not the start of something coordinated from the hardliners:
https://twitter.com/eastantrimmp/status/1752745805256052937

In better news, it sounds like the louder brexiteers will wave it through (https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/key-tory-brexiteers-set-to-back-new-northern-ireland-deal-despite-johnson-warning-2882907?ito=twitter_share_article-top) if there's a Commons vote held on the deal - Rees-Mogg and even Bill Cash seem to be making positive noises, which suggests any rebellion would mirror the Windsor Framework vote, with a dozen Tories against, at most.

Now they are providing a bit more detail as to what exactly this deal entails:

DUP deal aimed at restoring power sharing in Northern Ireland is published (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-68153601?at_campaign=KARANGA&at_medium=RSS)

Wilson is going out of his way to say nice things about Donaldson, which wasn't a given. Taking a shot at Sunak is a free hit without much political significance, so he's taking as conciliatory a stance as could be expected.

We'll wait and see if Nigel Dodds is similarly forgiving.

Stormont will be back in session by Saturday:

DUP gives green light for restoration of Stormont devolution on Saturday (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/dup-gives-green-light-for-restoration-of-stormont-devolution-on-saturday/ar-BB1hCCjw?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=05146879629345bf833d49b707142a2e&ei=13)

For the first time, with a nationalist First Minister.

Whatever else happens, that is a very significant historical moment.

Couple of notes as Stormont reforms.

The ministerial briefs are appointed in a sort of round robin (vaguely reminiscent of an NFL with Belfast accents), and while the shared positions are supposed to be worked out in advance, Sinn Fein have alleged that the DUP blindsided them with one pick on the day - which the DUP deny.

DUP took the education brief, leaving Sinn Fein to pick up Finance, which appears to be a move to take a more active role in the Irish language schools culture war, while letting SF take more of the blame for the imminent cuts expected.

Also - swirling speculation that Jeffrey Donaldson may stand down at this years general election, and take a Lords seat, knackered after the intraparty drama and wrangling he’s had to do, along with threats from loyalists that he’s spoken quite emotionally about in the Commons.

This would let the Deputy First Minister, who’s essentially his protege, seek election to his safe Commons seat. Particularly beneficial for her, given she was essentially handpicked by him for the seat, and ’co-opted’ rather than directly elected, which has triggered some grumbling about an ‘unelected’ politician co-running the executive.

Also somewhat noteworthy, given NI’s approach to social issues - Andrew Muir (Alliance) has been appointed Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, becoming the first openly-LGBT minister in the history of the Northern Ireland Executive.

Though if Little-Pengelly does run for Westminster, then the DUP will need to find a new DFM.

Well yes, does she really want to give up the role that soon?

Doesn't sound too dissimilar from the experiences of American colonialists when they visited the mother country prior to the war for independence:

The most effective cure for Northern Irish unionism? Attitudes in England (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-most-effective-cure-for-northern-irish-unionism-attitudes-in-england/ar-BB1i4w1b?ocid=msedgntp&pc=U531&cvid=54be1b738df64991ab8d667c42147df1&ei=12)

This is the saddest part (or most pitiful part) of Unionism for me; the NI unionist community are so deeply loyal to a people that by and large do not care about them. At all.

Though admittedly, you could also say that the ROI doesn't particularly care about them, either.

Irish republicans definitely care about them

That is probably for the best for them. I doubt the intense protestantism, anti-catholism and the presbyterian antics would be liked at all by the average British person.

They are deeply loyal to a caricature of a certain type of sectarian Scottish Protestant that lived 70 years ago.

This is the perpetual paradox of Northern Ireland. Everyone's identity is so tied to somewhere else but very few people in somewhere else care about Northern Ireland. Obviously there are small constituencies in both the UK, Ireland, and the diaspora that care about them, but that's what they are, numerously small.

The UK has never cared about Northern Ireland beyond the times it dominated national news through things like attacks in England or major policies like Good Friday. though they have always had a voice in Westminster, which means there have always been a handful of receptive others.

The same has always been true about the ROI, though this isn't well understood given the present narratives in effect. But the historical record doesn't lie. An easy way to see this without reading a bunch of books is the election results: The modern IRA only won seats in 1 election between the depression and the Good Friday negotiations. And never more then five seats until the Euro crisis transformed SF from the nationalist party into the party advocating serious changes to housing and welfare (and the way SF loses a future election is caring about the later and not the former).

The diaspora has never understood the peculiarities of the region. Those that did/do care are send money to a side care about it only in a simplistic superficial "good vs evil" way, not about the people or the economy  - same as the other two. Just about their conscience and their own ancestry.


Which is why there is no future for Northern Ireland that stays in this mindset. It doesn't matter who controls the land if the people are still going to not identify with it. Right now only really the Alliance is telling the truth of this lack of care beyond the Superficial, and how the only long term solution is building something different. Only time can tell if that works out. 

There are now arguments about the financial details of the deal negotiated to bring Stormont back: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-68285797

On one level, it's certainly true that an across the board rise in rates wouldn't have good distributional consequences. But there's also an element to which local politicians are using that as a fig leaf because none of them want to take responsibility for raising taxes even from people who can comfortably afford it - the assumption is that there is a huge pot of money somewhere else and it would be unfair to make locals contribute to the cost of their public services.

This was pretty true even back in the 1970s and 80s.

Campaigning is different from governance, and SF is the most relevant social democratic force on the island poised to take power.

SF definitely cares a lot about Irish Catholics in NI or else they wouldn’t be doing so well with them as a group. A united island would also avoid harmful hard borders and make commercial activity easier as well as separating NI from England.

Alliance’s housing policy, among other policies, is not good compared to SF’s policies.

Neither Alliance nor SF in Northern Ireland really have a housing policy worth the name, so I'm not sure where you've got that from.

Mind you, housing is less of an issue here than it is elsewhere in the British Isles - although high compared to the historical norm, the multiple of house prices to earnings is lower than in either Ireland or GB and because the population is relatively stagnant, you don't need to build as many houses to stand still. Arguably the biggest housing issue* is the quality of a lot of the housing stock, especially in poorer districts of Belfast and Derry.

*As opposed to issues around housing schemes, which are generally not about housing per se but about either antisocial behaviour or not wanting to live near themmuns.

My understanding has been that housing is a much more salient issue in the Republic right now than in the North or in the UK - is that true?

It seems that the centrality of Dublin to the economy coupled with short supply is doing a number on housing and cost of living for the ROI. Reinforces my belief that in a hypothetical united Ireland (which again I'm not fully sold on), hopefully the island can have more poles of economic activity for Cork, Belfast, Limerick, Derry etc rather than just one megalopolis of Dublin.

This is correct. The issue of Housing demand he is referring to is a ROI issue and not a NI issue. A small example of why SF trying to pursue one policy via one party for two very different regions has it's issues

It's a massive issue in Dublin, which has a London-style housing crisis with much lower levels of construction and an increasing problem in places like Cork and Galway. Still plenty of cheap housing out in rural areas and small out of the way towns, but that's for the same reason that housing is cheap in southern West Virginia.

In the north Belfast has the ingredients for a housing crisis, but its ecnomy isn't yet strong enough to really turbocharge it. Elsewhere there isn't really an issue with housing costs - even where the multiple is high, the problem isn't high prices but rather very low local wages.

I know the Donaldson news is on the UK general thread, but I'm curious to hear from the NI posters about the ramifications for Stormont/NI here.