Now I know that the UUP are renowned for doing silly and stupid things (such as selecting Basil) but even they wouldn't e so foolish as to unseat Trimble only two months away from a General and Local Election.

We must remeber that the only opportunity that UUP members would have to do over Trimble is at the UUC AGM in March. They can't just wake up tomorrow and say let's knife DT.

It's my contention taht they will let Trimble lead them into May and then do him in after their next electoral disaster.

Yes, UUP members are unhappy (why wouldn't they be) but they have followed this awful man through the Agreement and all of its spin offs and failed to get rid of him after two horrible European results, a Westminster embarrassment and an Assembly disaster. Why alter their habits now? It isn't going to save East Antrim or make Upper Bann or South Antrim any less vulnerable.

an infinite number of monkeys and an infininte number of type writers will eventually produce Hamlet
An infininte number of Coulter columns will eventually produce one that is correct. And lo, it arrives.

DB,

You know the sheep of the UUC better than most who post on this site. Knowing their pencahnt for political suicide as you do, do you believe that even they would so be daft to ditch a Leader two months prior to polling day?

I think the UUP's whole selection process is highlighting two facts which in themselves show what a sorry state they are in.

Firstly, they have very little to choose from and secondly, the choice of McCrea in LV, McClarty in EL and McGimpsey in Strangford, indicates that the said constituencies, where a UUP on the up would have to make inroads, are DUP for a long time to come.

Is this the same J Coulter from Lagan Valley UUP who seconded the nomination papers of not the official UUP candidates but Independent Ivan Davis and in so doing broke the Party Rules and could still be the subject of disciplinary proceedings? If so this is a self fulfilling prophecy if you will....

"But Daphne’s defeat has further fuelled speculation the UUP will be left with two Commons seats in May – her husband in Upper Bann and Sylvia Hermon in North Down."

It could be worse than that, DT's own seat is anything but secure. In last year's assembly elections there was

As for North Down, Hermon isn't safe there either. The APNI are running (which they didn't do in 2001) and in 2003 there was only 2,600 votes betwen the UUP and the DUP, but the UKUP took 3,600. If McCarntey decides to stand then Hermon should hold on, but if he doesn't then my money would be on the DUP, especially if a new agreement is up and working.

Basically the Parlimentary future of the UUP is in McCarney's hands. Now that's what I call ironic.

I spoke to John reight after the selection meeting and explained why what he has now written is not the case. There was no "get DT" campaign, I believe that the result was on the basis of the better candidate. However I agree with Donn McConnell on Radio Ulster when he said it was a shame we had to choose between the two. They were both excellent candidates however someone has to win.

Lagan Valley was always a split Association since 1998, but it was always just about in a majority of DT supporters. Now that all but a few of the JD supporters have left it is completly unjustifiable to comment that this was a kinfe DT campaign.

Basil McCrea is a better candidate than the Leader's wife?!

No Christmas card for you this year Shilliday.

Two excellent candidates?! There is party loyalty and then there's plain stupidity.

"Is this the same J Coulter from Lagan Valley UUP who seconded the nomination papers of not the official UUP candidates but Independent Ivan Davis and in so doing broke the Party Rules"

No doubt we will see the difference in attitude in the Ulster Unionist Party towards those blind trimble loyalists and anyone who dare question his royal purpleness.

Also, has Ivan Davis been allowed back in yet?

"However I agree with Donn (sic) McConnell on Radio Ulster when he said it was a shame we had to choose between the two."

What a silly thing to say. Of course Michael it was never intended that you should have had the chance to make a choice.

Will,

He was never kicked out. Since his crime was pre-Jeffrey and arguably he was only moved to delinqency by the horrid Mr Donaldson he isn't actually responsible for his own actions. I have heard that Davis was one of the daphne knifewielders. I thought when Jeffrey left they were all meant to love each other again. The UUP are institutionally divided!

Er... brace yourself for a shock, actually you're wrong and Michael's right Christopher. But before you commit suicide in deepest shame, it's only about the spelling of Donn McConnell. Elsewhere normal service continues!

NeoCon
"He was never kicked out."

Surely a mistake! You can have a (pro-Agreement) member running against the democratically selected candidates in an election as an independent yet absolutely no action is taken against them.

I wonder would the outcome have been the same were Mr Davis opposed to the Belfast Agreement and to David Trimble. But I think we all know the answer to that.

Maybe Daphne should take note and run against Basil for Westminster. After all, looks like they couldnt really kick her out for it!

Perhaps time is running out for David Trimble as it does for all leaders, however the vote for McCrea wasn't a vote against David Trimble by proxy, rather it was for a candidate the majority felt stood the best chance of winning the election.

As for the seat being secure for Donaldson, note the following

1. the majority of unionist voters in Lagan Valley have never voted DUP

2. the unease felt by many at the timing of Donaldson's defection, only weeks after the election

3. since his election to the Assembley Donaldson's Westminster attendance has went from poor to appalling, people are aware of this, even those who admire him may feel that a full-time MP represents better value for money

4. Basil McCrea joined the UUP and after a few weeks was able to convince an audience of largely Trimble admirers that he was best placed to win the election, what will he achieve with the unionist electorate given 6 months, you can be sure this fact won't have escaped Donaldson?

Damn you Brewster!!!!!!!

A brief comment to all those waiting to 'piss' on Trimble's policital grave, "better a has-been than a never-been".

"A brief comment to all those waiting to 'piss' on Trimble's policital (sic) grave, "better a has-been than a never-been"."

Temper, temper!

admire your grammar

HA HA HA!

Christopher you obviously have a moment, regarding the Robinson's £39K (per annum) London accomadation allowance, is it for one residence or two?

I don't know. Nor frankly do I care.

What a bunch of sore loser Ulster Unionists are.

Christopher, lots of taxpayers do!

Christopher, lots of taxpayers do!

Would these be the thousands of taxpayers who Peter and Iris have helped through their many constituency advice surgeries?

I think taxpayers care more about the fact that you mate Davy Trimble has landed them with massive rises in their rates bills! Every penny that Peter and Iris get is independently audited and scrutinised - unlike some UUP Councillors I could name!

Crawl back under your stone you duplicitous little hypocrite!

temper temper

temper temper

"Would these be the thousands of taxpayers who Peter and Iris have helped through their many constituency advice surgeries?"

Christopher that's what Peter & Iris get paid £114K per year plus expenses including the £39K for! So is it one London residence or two?

"Would these be the thousands of taxpayers who Peter and Iris have helped through their many constituency advice surgeries?"

Christopher that's what Peter & Iris get paid £114K per year plus expenses including the £39K for! So is it one London residence or two?

alex.. "that's what Peter & Iris get paid £114K per year plus expenses including the £39K for! So is it one London residence or two?". So Daphne and David wouldn't have claimed their salaries and allowences in the unlikely event they were elected?

Laganvalley is a safe seat for Donaldson for how long he wants it. The DUP are going to wipe the floor with the Papist leaning UUP.

God Save The Queen.

Keith M, we will never know about the Trimbles, but the Robinsons DID, don't forget its meant to cover the expense of London accomadation, does it really cost an additional £19K to share a flat with the 'little woman'

Ulsterman, the DUPes are doing most of the leaning at the minute, watch the news!

Christopher, arent peter and iris getting paid to do that very job?

"Would these be the thousands of taxpayers who Peter and Iris have helped through their many constituency advice surgeries?"

So tell us now are they claiming for one or two properties, and who was the minister responsible for water in the last executive, oh yes Peter

and the same Peter who threatened redunancies in Castlereagh Council, too keep the rates down, the ratepayer clearly more important than the taxpayer, I wonder if the employees he had in mind for the chop earned £39K or even £19K, of course as Christopher reminds us they could always have went to his constituency surgery for advice!

We have had the westminster allowances questions posed here again and again - they are answers to which the people here obviously do not have the information to answer.

However, its very interesting to see Jonty jump on as the bandwagon rolls past. While the Robinson question is one which we cannot answer without the information required it has been interesting to see the vow of silence taken by UUP supporters when asked their opinion on other topics.

A little consistency here please. If we are going to demand answers to questions then maybe we could also try to answer those put to us.

So, Alex, Jonty, Michael etc etc etc, what do you think of your party leader offering peerages in return for a party standing aside? What do you think of the UUP trawling the 'fringe loyalist' parties as they used to be known, for new members? What is your opinion on a member of Lagan Valley UUP not being disciplined despite the fact that he ran against official candidates at the last election? What is your opinion of the fact that your leader hung onto his Nobel cash despite clear promises it would be used to establish a political foundation (for the benefit of unionism as I seem to recall).

Answers on a postcard, on the internet or anyway you please.

And before I forget - just one more question - and here's a deal for you - if you decide to answer this one I'll let you off with the others:

What's your opinion of Mr Trimble going to the Chief Constable to ask for watchtowers to be removed in South Armagh so that it would be a little easier for him to sit in Government with Sinn Fein + their guns.

Will, when did Trimble ask to have the watchtowers removed, as for the fringe loyalist parties, the UUP wouldn't be the first unionist party they have been speaking too would they? As David Ervine commented recently when the DUPes offered to meet with the 'untouchables' of loyalism, "it will be good to meet old friends again"

Alex,
Read Dean Godson's book - its all there in black and white.

I dont have the page number just at hand at the minute, but I know davidbrew has posted it on here several times. Indeed I remember the relevant quote from the book being posted.

No denial has ever come that he didnt ask for their removal. Also, Godson had access to all Trimble's papers. If you dont like the truth about the glorious Trimble then I wouldnt suggest you nip out and buy a copy.

However, now that you have facts, care to answer?

What about yet another question for good measure.

What's your opinion of Rebecca Black's (UUP member in Strangford)comments (posted on this very site) that Dermot Nesbit didnt "know or care" about the 'main issues' in Strangford, i.e. agriculture and fishing.

How do you think that reflects on his ability to represent the farming and fishing communities in South Down then?

Will, whats your'e opinion on the DUP sharing power with the shinners, this could go on and on.....

Alex,
I accept that SF can enter Government AFTER they have fully decommissioned and ended their paramilitary and criminal activity. It wont make me like SF much more really, but if they have shown a real committment to democracy, then they are entitled to that place.

That clear enough for you? You sure you dont want to comment on Trimble asking for watchtower removals? It could go on and on, or of course the alternative is that you start getting as good at answering questions as you are at asking them.

Will, I have read the book you refer to but I can't remember any reference to watchtowers specifically, however if the removal of the towers was in the context of IRA decommissioning then Trimble's position was little different from that being presently adopted by the DUP, unless of course the DUP are telling their members that the watch towers will be retained regardless of the IRA's actions

I would hope that at least one is kept as a part of our heritage. Listed Building status ?

Davros, a modern day Round Tower?

Why not ? Nobody wants to try and airbrush everything away. At least one should be preserved.

Absolutely davros, there definitely should be at least one preserved out of respect for history.

"Would these be the thousands of taxpayers who Peter and Iris have helped through their many constituency advice surgeries?"

Well, I don't know anything about Peter but Iris's advice centre, also known locally as the James street fortress is hardly the most welcoming to the average punter. But I suppose that doesn't really matter, Councillor Shannon does the work, iris just attaches her name and ghastly looking pic to it in the paper, isn't that right Christopher?

"Crawl back under your stone you duplicitous little hypocrite!"

hmm, you are sounding quite, how was it again you put it? ah yes "smug self-righteousness and imagined intellectual superiority"

Because that IS how you sound Christopher

And finally Will

"We have had the westminster allowances questions posed here again and again - they are answers to which the people here obviously do not have the information to answer. "

You lot clearly do have the answers, but you are obviously trying to gloss over them given the 30 or so questions you're just after grasping for!!

Honestly duppers, you really must start trying harder!

will said, Alex,
I accept that SF can enter Government AFTER they have fully decommissioned and ended their paramilitary and criminal activity.

so no need for the IRA to disband then, another cave in

unionist_observer
Like I said: I dont have the information - if i did then I would answer.

Of course there would be no chance that you could be dodging the questions that I put..... Lets hear your opinions on some of the things that I posted, especially on Ms Black putting her foot well and truly in it ;-)

Rebecca why don't you just post under your own name? We all know it's you!

"on Ms Black putting her foot well and truly in it"

And lets not forget the time the great Chairman of Strangford YU's (total membership 3) insulted the people who live on the Ards Penninsula!

Jonty,
And we all know that you support Sinn Fein in Government while the IRA retains all its weapons and is still actively engaged in terrorism and criminality.

I think I know which position I prefer.

"But I suppose that doesn't really matter, Councillor Shannon does the work, iris just attaches her name and ghastly looking pic to it in the paper, isn't that right Christopher?"

No it isn't Rebecca. We have three excellent MLA's and one A1 MP in Strangford. Our position in the constituency has been built on the hard work of our representatives. One of the DUP's greatest assets, in seats like Strangford and North Down has been the laziness of the Ulster Unionist Party.

"her name and ghastly looking pic to it in the paper"

Your no oil painting yourself!

so no need for the IRA to disband then, another cave in

Wasn't it once UUP policy that they should dismantle disarm and stop the beatings - Assembly election '98 literature - so 0 out of 3 hardly leaves a UUP supporter in a position to point the finger!

"No it isn't Rebecca. We have three excellent MLA's and one A1 MP in Strangford. Our position in the constituency has been built on the hard work of our representatives. One of the DUP's greatest assets, in seats like Strangford and North Down has been the laziness of the Ulster Unionist Party."

ah yes, I always forget you have three MLAs in Strangford, George Ennis does a great job doesn't he, so great you never hear anything about him doing anything!!

Come on Christopher, don't live in your little north down bubble of denial, Iris has done very little recently in Strangford, on the other hand Jim Shannon works extremelly hard, yet it always seems to be Iris smirking out from the local paper, its not hard to put two and two together. Maybe Jim Shannon will get another stern letter from Peter if he tried to get himself in the headlines more!

"Rebecca why don't you just post under your own name? We all know it's you!"

do you really? there's more than one outspoken UUP supporter in Strangford.

"Your no oil painting yourself!"

hehe, that coming from Stalford, pot, kettle, black?

Unionist_observer / Rebecca
"hehe, that coming from Stalford, pot, kettle, black?"

As I read this thread, it wasnt Christopher who brought physical appearance into the discussion.

Dont suppose you want to answer any of the questions put? NO, thought not.

Maybe I don't have the information..

If you are really so concerned Will, then why not put them on the back of a postcard and send them to Cunningham House.

Will, I have read the book you refer to but I can't remember any reference to watchtowers specifically-Alex s

It's page 542 Alex. Don't bother looking up the index under "mistakes" as they are thousands. It was in the context of giving the provos something when the GOC was resistant to it.Even hardliner Ken Maginnis, who appears to have been the source or at leasst corroboration for the story, was opposed to the suggestion.

How can you equivocate about a Unionist leader going against security force advice to placate the provos? Bet Danny Kennedy has kittensevery time he reads it-and if he didn't, he will when the quote is featuring on Paul Berry's election leaflets in May as it surely must. What consultation did Kennedy have before this madcap idea fromed in trimble's head? None, I'm sure, just like all then other times policy was born on the hoof.

Honestly, if Trimble drive a bus full of explosives into a school playground some people would make excuses. You can't see the evidence staring you in the face. Who do you think you are-the godlike Arsene Wenger?( none of the foregoing should be taken as criticism of the mighty gooners who never cheat of course)

The answer to the interminable squeaks of baby UUs is to pose this question- if and when a deal is done: "if Trimble had produced this settlement would you have accepted it?" , and since it will be better than the Turtle's best efforts to date, they must concur. Which clearly shows that the UUP carping is down to simple embarassment that they didn't measure up. Game, Set, and Match. Check mate. Some people are on the pitch they think it's all over.. it is now.

"Which clearly shows that the UUP carping is down to simple embarassment that they didn't measure up. Game, Set, and Match. Check mate. Some people are on the pitch they think it's all over.. it is now."

And you think that this most recent outpour of bile is going to make all the "baby UUs" suddenly turn round and go "Oh wow, I've been wrong all the time" and go crawling over to you????

And you think that this most recent outpour of bile is going to make all the "baby UUs" suddenly turn round and go "Oh wow, I've been wrong all the time" and go crawling over to you????

No-but the voters will!

I wouldn't be so sure, voters aren't stupid.

voters aren't stupid.

They are in the USA...

only a substantial minority your Lordship

"They are in the USA..."

hmm, I blame Michael Moore!

Mick Fealty came out with an interesting comment about Michael Moore - in that while he got people out to vote against Bush, he also got alot of pro-Bush people out to vote.

Did you ever read what Moore wrote about Northern Ireland? I think it was in "Stupid white men" he basically wrote that Ireland should be unified and unionists should be put up and shut up. Great believer in democracy all right!

so no need for the IRA to disband then, another cave in

Wasn't it once UUP policy that they should dismantle disarm and stop the beatings - Assembly election '98 literature - so 0 out of 3 hardly leaves a UUP supporter in a position to point the finger!

Nobody going to answer this one....

Being a UUP mandated councillor and therefore presumably a supporter, why don't you comment Peter?

Here's another one that the UUPers won't answer-already posed, but again for slow learners with no big words-is the DUP "deal" as described in the press better than the deals David Trimble sold as the best he could get?.....

Well?....

Anyone?....

Visions of Cunningham House with tumbleweed and sandstorms blowing through empty rooms as they run away from that one.

Stop Press Next year's UUP conference will be held on the Marie Celeste

What you can get at one time and what you can get 6/7 years later are by defination going to be entirely different things if a week is a long time in politics. Therefore the two aren't comparable.

What about the promise too smash the GFA, not much talk of it now, in fact a cynic could conclude that the DUPes were only playing politics with the peace process until they got the upper hand over the UUP.

Cynical Alex? You? I won't have it!

Rebecca/U_O
"Maybe I don't have the information.."

Which is precisely why in every question I asked for your opinion. Or maybe you have to find out what David Trimble's opinion is every time so that you can agree exactly with what he says.

"If you are really so concerned Will, then why not put them on the back of a postcard and send them to Cunningham House."

Firstly, I doubt very much whether I would get a reply, and secondly, there are more than enough Ulster Unionists represented on this board for me to question.

"I wouldn't be so sure, voters aren't stupid."

So you would agree that it was the intelligence of the Ulster electorate who led the DUP to win the last Assembly election and pushed 1 in every 3 voters to support Jim Allister back in June compared to 1 in every 6 who voted for Jim Nicholson?

Quite right Michael, what was I thinking

Strange, but in the years following the GFA Trimble was lambasted by his critics both within and without the Ulster Unionists for what he was trying to do, now it appears from these same people the problem is he didn't do it well enough and that the DUPes are doing it better, its a funny old world

What a silly thing to say. Of course Michael it was never intended that you should have had the chance to make a choice.

Do tell the boys and girls the last time you had a real choise over candidates Chris. Euro election aside, I understand three or four stood for that one. A real shame Willie McCrea didn't win that really....

I think we'll take Michael's coy sidestepping of the question as an admission that the terms reported in the press would indeed be a better deal than Trimble's best. You're entitled to argue that it's less than the DUP wanted, but if there is agreement the credit will be given to Paisley by international opinion and by the local G* types etc etc. People who wouldn't have spoken to the DUP will be falling over themselves to ingratiatate themselves with the Big Man. UUP complaints will be ignored just like Durkan's whining about not having been shown the papers-not a concern fore the SDLP when they were part of the Big Two

And it's not 6 or 7 years since the Turtle flunked decommissioning -it's 12 months; while he never even mentioned ministerial accountability (did he even care?).

So there you have it folks. If Paisley can get a better deal in 5 months of negotiation than Trimble got in 6 years, what does that say about the UUP negotiators? Res Ipsa Loquitur.

davidbrew

If the DUP get a "deal" it will be the GFA with some improvements i.r.o. accountability. The accountability arrangements will, by definition, be an improvement, but improvements were provided for in the original GFA, and the DUP wouldn't have got any improvements without swallowing the rest of the GFA which they originally opposed. There wouldn't be an Assembly in which to improve accountability were it not for the GFA: that is the basis on which the DUP has been negotiating.

So, yes, the DUP will have achieved an improvement, but at as a result of one of the biggest U-turns in history. And the very fact that the DUP has negotiated this improvement with the representatives of terrorists is itself a massive U-turn.

DUP 1996- opposes negotiating with PSF
UUP 2003- supports negotiating with PSF

DUP 1998- opposes GFA (especially policing changes, cross-border bodies, early releases)
DUP 2004- set to sign up to the GFA (policing changes, cross-border bodies, early releases still in place) with a change to accountability arrangements

"So, yes, the DUP will have achieved an improvement"

So just to be clear then Willow-after we cut through the mountain of coal there's the diamond: you concede it would be a better deal, and logically that has to make the DUP better negotiators, given that Trimble never managed to obtain these improvements of which you are so dismissive, despite years of tea and buns in No 10.

You have a valid point as to why Unionism is negotiating from its current position but only if you equally recognise that the DUP had absolutely nothing to do with the earlier negotiations from which they were which effectively excluded (i.e. everything post GFA). All Unionists have to accept that on trimble's watch concessions were made that should not have been. Let's stop pretending he didn't make multiple errors.Let's accept that the DUP, or a new UUP leader for that matter, would have been hamstrung by those errors.

Noone would seriously want to have picked up the baton from him in June, given the mess we were in (right Reg?)Silly debating points such as how are you going to get the prisoners back inside?" - unsurprisingly a jonty speciality-avoid the need for a judgment of the reality on the ground.

You have now achieved level 1 on the journey more Unionist voters are taking each week. Understanding why a better deal is possibly within reach is your next mission.

Is it because:
a) Tony Blair's granda's Orange blood has finally kicked in?
b) Gerry Adams is stakeknife No 2, and is trying to shatter republicanism?
c)nationalism has finally achieved the ability to recognise another identity on the island? or
d) there aren't any pushover Unionists left to kick sand in their faces?

And have the DUP got decommissioning yet?

No, of course they haven't, the shinners will play the same games and cook up the same fudge over it. Don't start claiming to be better than the UUP until you actually have a deal.

U_O / Rebecca
"And have the DUP got decommissioning yet?

No, of course they haven't, the shinners will play the same games and cook up the same fudge over it. Don't start claiming to be better than the UUP until you actually have a deal."

And that's exactly the point - the shinners may well play the same games as before, but this time the unionists wont fall for them as they did on three occasions before. The old saying goes 'fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me' - usually no-one's stupid enough to hang around to get kneed in the proverbials for a third time!

Unionists (and possibly more importantly, also republicans) now are under absolutely no illusion - if you dont come up with the goods, and that means all of the goods, then you dont get into Government. Its as plain and simple as that. Not only that, but there has to be a fair deal. One which both communities can sign up to and can keep signed up to.

You are absolutely correct in saying that no deal has been done yet, but we are able to speculate (on the areas we have information) about what is on the table. The bones of the decommissioning seems to be outlined well enough in the media - its a better deal than before, not only in terms of actually getting it this time and getting it completed, but in terms of the visiblity and verification. Obviously it isnt all done and dusted yet, but at this stage it certainly seems to be heading in the right direction.

However, there are other issues out there - that is what I feel is really important - its that unionists this time aren't focussing solely on decommissioning or to such an extent that everything else is forgotten about. The accountability issues within the Assembly etc will also have to be dealt with along with the sort of issues we have heard something about such as a financial package etc etc.

Willowfield
"DUP wouldn't have got any improvements without swallowing the rest of the GFA which they originally opposed."

Things which the DUP supposedly have "swallowed" in your opinion most likely are things which aren't fundamentally linked to the Belfast Agreement more than any other. They have accepted that nationalists will be in Government - yes, at one time all unionist parties were opposed to power sharing. That's a long time ago and the DUP wouldnt have entered talks in 1996 if they hadnt been prepared to accept an outcome which didnt have power sharing within it.

Before anyone comes out with this 'smash Sinn Fein' tripe - let us not forget, I remember walking up the stairs in Glengall St not all that many years ago and there was a lovely poster framed on the wall with "The IRA Army Council, or your next District Council: Lets put Sinn Fein out of business" emblazened across it.

You cannot claim that the DUP has changed its position to co-operation with the Republic of Ireland since the Belfast Agreement was signed. Again, the talks started in 1996 (which the DUP entered initially and so obviously agreed with the structure) were based on a three stranded approach, one of which was Northern Ireland's relationship with the Republic. Ensuring that co-operation is not harmonisation should be the goal and that the co-operation is under the control of the Assembly.

Your point about supposedly 'accepting' the Belfast Agreement goes back to what the Secretary of State told us the 'fundamentals' of the Agreement were:
A devolved Assembly
Relationship with the Republic of Ireland
Power Sharing

All 'fundamentals' which are so wide that no serious party can have a problem in rejecting them.

Also, as has long been pointed out, these negotiations are not being carried out with SF, in the same way that the UUP negotiated the Belfast Agreement without negotiations between them and SF. Are you saying that the UUP lied in 1998 when they told us they didnt negotiate with them then? If you negotiate with the Government and then they talk to others then it may be a form of negotiations by proxy, but we cannot control who the Government talks to.

I think David has nicely summed up the position regarding prisoner releases. You really do yourself a disservice if you suggest in any seriousness that you think prisoners can be rounded up en masse and herded back into the H-blocks.

davidbrew

you concede it would be a better deal, and logically that has to make the DUP better negotiators, given that Trimble never managed to obtain these improvements of which you are so dismissive, despite years of tea and buns in No 10.

I don't "concede" anything. I have never claimed that the DUP couldn't get improvements to the GFA!

My point is, and always has been, to highlight the DUP's hypocrisy, dishonesty and its U-turn in respect of the GFA, which they seem ready to endorse after spending six years vehemently opposing it. Their opposition was clearly for party political gain only: now they have beaten the UUP they're quite happy to support it.

You have a valid point as to why Unionism is negotiating from its current position but only if you equally recognise that the DUP had absolutely nothing to do with the earlier negotiations from which they were which effectively excluded (i.e. everything post GFA). All Unionists have to accept that on trimble's watch concessions were made that should not have been. Let's stop pretending he didn't make multiple errors.Let's accept that the DUP, or a new UUP leader for that matter, would have been hamstrung by those errors.

Let's accept that the DUP is now a pro-Agreement party.

If the DUP were such brilliant negotiators, they did the unionist community a disservice by walking out on negotiations in 1997. Inevitably, they've ended up having to accept what was negotiated then anyway, so they should have put their brilliant negotiating skills to good use at the outset when all the important negotiations were taking place, rather than coming in at the last minute to tie up the loose ends.

Will

Things which the DUP supposedly have "swallowed" in your opinion most likely are things which aren't fundamentally linked to the Belfast Agreement more than any other.

Like police reform? Like prisoner releases? Like cross-border bodies?

They have accepted that nationalists will be in Government - yes, at one time all unionist parties were opposed to power sharing. That's a long time ago and the DUP wouldnt have entered talks in 1996 if they hadnt been prepared to accept an outcome which didnt have power sharing within it.

They're going to accept Provos in government while the PIRA remains intact, and on the basis of decommissioning, the importance of which they previously dismissed.

You cannot claim that the DUP has changed its position to co-operation with the Republic of Ireland since the Belfast Agreement was signed.

Really? So this "fair deal" will include an overhaul of the cross-border bodies?

Your point about supposedly 'accepting' the Belfast Agreement goes back to what the Secretary of State told us the 'fundamentals' of the Agreement were: A devolved Assembly; Relationship with the Republic of Ireland; Power Sharing. All 'fundamentals' which are so wide that no serious party can have a problem in rejecting them.

So the "fair deal" WILL involve returning prisoners to jail and restoring the RUC? And there will be an explicit clause put into this Agreement linking decommissioning and the absence of criminality with participation in government?

Also, as has long been pointed out, these negotiations are not being carried out with SF, in the same way that the UUP negotiated the Belfast Agreement without negotiations between them and SF.

Who cares whether the DUP are negotiating with the Provos directly, or through intermediaries? They're still negotiating with them!

And the DUP condemned the UUP for negotiating the GFA "indirectly" with the Provos. Now they're quite happy to do just that! Hypocrites!

I think David has nicely summed up the position regarding prisoner releases. You really do yourself a disservice if you suggest in any seriousness that you think prisoners can be rounded up en masse and herded back into the H-blocks.

Of course they can! Prisoner releases were part of the GFA. THey were part of the GFA that the DUP most strongly opposed. Presumably the DUP considered them unfair. So a "fair deal" should remove the sections on prisoner releases from the Agreement.

Any improvements the DUP negotiates will be on the basis of what was previously agreed, i.e. the GFA. The DUP could not achieve any negotiations without the early release scheme in place. It was a necessary prerequisite to the recent negotiations. The DUP is not negotiating in a vacuum: they have accepted the GFA.

DUP 1996- opposes negotiating with PSF
UUP 2003- supports negotiating with PSF

DUP 1998- opposes GFA (especially policing changes, cross-border bodies, early releases)
DUP 2004- set to sign up to the GFA (policing changes, cross-border bodies, early releases still in place) with a change to accountability arrangements

Will, on the other hand why not just admit that DUP policy over the past 8 years was claim to be anti-agreement without doing enough to bring it down, i.e walk out of the asembley, benifit from the trappings of ministerial office while pretending not to be 'in' the Executive and generally to play politics with the peace process.

The DUPes promised us a new deal, they said they would bury the GFA/ This hasnt and wont happen

If the DUP were so tough they would insist on all prisoners going back to jail and the name of the RUC being reinstated.

Funny how the DUPes never mentioned the new articles 2 and 3 in the Republic which they are supposedly still against. Why didnt they get the Republic to completely drop these.

These guys are a joke and just want the cash. Are the robinsons still claiming 2 london allowances?

Hindsight always provides 20:20 vision.
We spend too much time on the blame game. We can't change the past but the future is in our hands. If SF and the DUP manage to negoitate a deal that they are both happy with, that is a good thing and it does not detract from the significant contribution made by others in the past.

Agreement is not an end in itself. If a deal is reached, the question is not, "Who did what?", the question is "What do we do next?" The following quote might be apposite.

"This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

If we do get agreement, we are moving into a completely new set of circumstances. This will require new skills and the past may not be a reliable guide to the future.

It is worth noting (keeping to the Churchillian theme), that despite his war time record, the choice of the electorate was not Churchill.

'Before anyone comes out with this 'smash Sinn Fein' tripe - let us not forget, I remember walking up the stairs in Glengall St not all that many years ago and there was a lovely poster framed on the wall with "The IRA Army Council, or your next District Council: Lets put Sinn Fein out of business" emblazened across it.'

I do believe that it was wee Jeffrey who commissioned the printing of the aforementioned poster when he was chairman of the young unionists around 1985/86.

Not true - I remember it and specifically J. Hunter removing it from the wall and bringing it to a YU meeting in c.2000 to use as an illustration in a speech. It was actually a campaign poster for the local government elections, possibly c.1989, presumably not the personal responsibility of J Donaldson. Surprisingly it has never resurfaced in Cunningham House on the Holywood Road but never let the truth get in the way of some spin and misinformation though Little Timmy....maybe in the light of your "exposure" as a fraud you'll reveal your identity.

"I do believe that it was wee Jeffrey who commissioned the printing of the aforementioned poster when he was chairman of the young unionists around 1985/86."-Little Timmy

then you believe wrong-it was Tootsie Millar's idea

"If the DUP were such brilliant negotiators, they did the unionist community a disservice by walking out on negotiations in 1997"-Willow

A valid point, but no less valid than the point that Trimble should have walked out too to preserve Unionist unity on key principles-he didn't because of his desperation to be James Craig Mk 2. He knew Unionism was negotiating without a full team. Remember he Paisley and Bob met before the talks to thrash out a joint approach which was unilaterally broken by the Turtle without any advance notice to his erstwhile partners in Unionism. He , and he alone, broke the Unionist consensus, which was as Will says, based on an acceptance of the fundamentals of the 3 Strand approach. He broke on the choice of Chairman, and other areas. Unionism was left in the hands of Cecil Walker, Dermot Nesbitt and others. He allowed his community and his party to be irrevocably split with a bitterness which persists to this day , and afflicts his apologists here with appalling blindness

"They're going to accept Provos in government while the PIRA remains intact, and on the basis of decommissioning, the importance of which they previously dismissed."

Wrong again. They dismissed the manner proscribed for decommissioning, as much much later Trimble, also did. So who was right? And don't pretend that the UUP has made any serious effort to lean on the provos. They even tried to nick the policy of the Alliance party-the Alderdice Commission-and pass it off as their own. And let's not forget the instructions from trimble not to try too hard to save the RUC in case it proved they were a Unionist force!! A brilliant success.

The fact is that the government always knew Ulster Unionists would turn turtle-now they need Paisley precisely because they know he isn't a guaranteed pushover. And the UUP venom is grounded in the fear that the people will see thew diference.Look at Alex s, totally adopting the language of the Shinners accusing DUP policy of "generally ... play[ing] politics with the peace process" for proof of how much the UUP are in the pockets of the governments.

"I don't "concede" anything. I have never claimed that the DUP couldn't get improvements to the GFA!"

...so Willow, you will obviously be supporting them as the representatives of Unionism instead of criticising from the sidelines, and siding with a demoralised and weakened party which has had no suggestions other than "same again". Don't be embarassed-if trimble could have improved things I would have had to admit that he did, but really, name me one victory since the GFA? Even one occasion when he threatened to walk away if concessions weren't made. Remember Weston Park?-"We're only here to talk about proper decommissioning. Oh, you mean there's a big wishlist for the Provos too? Fair enough, let's stay anyway". Some hardball that.

"Don't start claiming to be better than the UUP until you actually have a deal". I don't. I merely ask all the UUP defenders to accept that the DUP appear to be able to get improvements that all Trimble's supposed special relationship with Tony couldn't get.

If there is no deal it also is a first in that Unionism has successfully stood up to presure, and thatwill change the nature of the next negotiations in 6 months, or 10 years. Cos let's face it, noone on this thread seriously believes that the givernment is scared by trimble throwing his toys out of the pram. Remember February " If the PM doesn't face up to his responsibilites I and my colleagues will take steps to bring this process to an end"(I paraphrase slightly) Oh how they quaked.

"I do believe that it was wee Jeffrey who commissioned the printing of the aforementioned poster when he was chairman of the young unionists around 1985/86."-Little Timmy

then you believe wrong-it was Tootsie Millar's idea

"If the DUP were such brilliant negotiators, they did the unionist community a disservice by walking out on negotiations in 1997"-Willow

A valid point, but no less valid than the point that Trimble should have walked out too to preserve Unionist unity on key principles-he didn't because of his desperation to be James Craig Mk 2. He knew Unionism was negotiating without a full team. Remember he Paisley and Bob met before the talks to thrash out a joint approach which was unilaterally broken by the Turtle without any advance notice to his erstwhile partners in Unionism. He , and he alone, broke the Unionist consensus, which was as Will says, based on an acceptance of the fundamentals of the 3 Strand approach. He broke on the choice of Chairman, and other areas. Unionism was left in the hands of Cecil Walker, Dermot Nesbitt and others. He allowed his community and his party to be irrevocably split with a bitterness which persists to this day , and afflicts his apologists here with appalling blindness

"They're going to accept Provos in government while the PIRA remains intact, and on the basis of decommissioning, the importance of which they previously dismissed."

Wrong again. They dismissed the manner proscribed for decommissioning, as much much later Trimble, also did. So who was right? And don't pretend that the UUP has made any serious effort to lean on the provos. They even tried to nick the policy of the Alliance party-the Alderdice Commission-and pass it off as their own. And let's not forget the instructions from trimble not to try too hard to save the RUC in case it proved they were a Unionist force!! A brilliant success.

The fact is that the government always knew Ulster Unionists would turn turtle-now they need Paisley precisely because they know he isn't a guaranteed pushover. And the UUP venom is grounded in the fear that the people will see thew diference.Look at Alex s, totally adopting the language of the Shinners accusing DUP policy of "generally ... play[ing] politics with the peace process" for proof of how much the UUP are in the pockets of the governments.

"I don't "concede" anything. I have never claimed that the DUP couldn't get improvements to the GFA!"

...so Willow, you will obviously be supporting them as the representatives of Unionism instead of criticising from the sidelines, and siding with a demoralised and weakened party which has had no suggestions other than "same again". Don't be embarassed-if trimble could have improved things I would have had to admit that he did, but really, name me one victory since the GFA? Even one occasion when he threatened to walk away if concessions weren't made. Remember Weston Park?-"We're only here to talk about proper decommissioning. Oh, you mean there's a big wishlist for the Provos too? Fair enough, let's stay anyway". Some hardball that.

"Don't start claiming to be better than the UUP until you actually have a deal". I don't. I merely ask all the UUP defenders to accept that the DUP appear to be able to get improvements that all Trimble's supposed special relationship with Tony couldn't get.

If there is no deal it also is a first in that Unionism has successfully stood up to presure, and thatwill change the nature of the next negotiations in 6 months, or 10 years. Cos let's face it, noone on this thread seriously believes that the givernment is scared by trimble throwing his toys out of the pram. Remember February " If the PM doesn't face up to his responsibilites I and my colleagues will take steps to bring this process to an end"(I paraphrase slightly) Oh how they quaked.

But it did end David I saw Paisley on the news last night and he looked as if he was waning for a good mark in history books – lets see if the bringer of war can be the bringer of peace, or words to that effect.

Well he got the first bit right!

DB

"If the DUP were such brilliant negotiators, they did the unionist community a disservice by walking out on negotiations in 1997"-Willow

A valid point

Thank you.

but no less valid than the point that Trimble should have walked out too to preserve Unionist unity on key principles-he didn't because of his desperation to be James Craig Mk 2. He knew Unionism was negotiating without a full team. Remember he Paisley and Bob met before the talks to thrash out a joint approach which was unilaterally broken by the Turtle without any advance notice to his erstwhile partners in Unionism. He , and he alone, broke the Unionist consensus, which was as Will says, based on an acceptance of the fundamentals of the 3 Strand approach. He broke on the choice of Chairman, and other areas. Unionism was left in the hands of Cecil Walker, Dermot Nesbitt and others. He allowed his community and his party to be irrevocably split with a bitterness which persists to this day , and afflicts his apologists here with appalling blindness

Still think it was wrong to walk out, and right to negotiate. If the Dupes were opposed to negotiation, Trimble shouldn't have agreed anything with them beforehand.

"They're going to accept Provos in government while the PIRA remains intact, and on the basis of decommissioning, the importance of which they previously dismissed."

Wrong again. They dismissed the manner proscribed [sic] for decommissioning, as much much later Trimble, also did. So who was right?

Wrong again? So the Dupes AREN'T going to accept Provos in government while the PIRA remains intact?

And did the DUP merely dismiss the manner prescribed for decommissioning? My recollection is that they dismissed it outright as a stunt.

Trimble had to ask for more "transparent" decommissioning because its value had been devalued by the Provos dragging it out for so long and the Dupes saying it wasn't worth anything. If the Provos had decommissioned straight away, completed by May 2000, Trimble, nor the Dupes, would not have needed to change the prescribed manner.

...so Willow, you will obviously be supporting them as the representatives of Unionism instead of criticising from the sidelines

No. I have no respect for such a deceitful party.

Don't be embarassed-if trimble could have improved things I would have had to admit that he did, but really, name me one victory since the GFA? Even one occasion when he threatened to walk away if concessions weren't made. Remember Weston Park?-"We're only here to talk about proper decommissioning. Oh, you mean there's a big wishlist for the Provos too? Fair enough, let's stay anyway". Some hardball that.

You need to look at the bigger picture. The big victory was won when the Provos threw away all their core principles and bought the GFA for the price of early release prisoners. That was Trimble's success: the DUP contributed nothing towards it.

All the DUP has done is tie up the loose ends that Trimble left.

"No. I have no respect for such a deceitful party"

Don't make me laugh! You traipse out and happily vote for a bunch of liars at election after election. Grow up.

The DUP's deceit has been far greater than any "lies" you claim the UUP has told.

Enjoying your new status as pro-Agreement?

"Enjoying your new status as pro-Agreement?"

Pro-a new agreement. Absolutely.

Chris - I'm in a discussion elsewhere and would value the opinions of DUP members. It has been claimed that the UUP is the Unionist party and that the DUP and PUP are Loyalist parties.
Would you consider the DUP to be a Unionist Party or a Loyalist party?

Stalford

So you're all for prisoner releases, cross-border bodies, Provos-in-government while PIRA remains intact, police reform, provisions to support Gaelic, etc.?

When did you change your mind?

It is only fitting that militant unionism, which introduced private armies to the Irish democratic process, should play such an intricate part in removing them nearly a century later.

Roll on the implementation of Home Rule somewhere in Ireland by the British some 93 years after the bill was passed. There'll be no singing and no dancing but lots of celebrating in the unionist redoubts at this glorious news.

Tax raising powers should be in by 2111 at this rate.

George

Home Rule was introduced to NI in 1921 - that was only 7 years after the bill you refer to was passed.

Whenever i did my A level many moons ago in politics i was always told to described the DUP as a Loyalist party - put faith before country, and the UUP as a Unionist party - put country before faith.

We obviously have different understandings of the meaning of Home Rule and democracy Willowfield.

I believe NI is still waiting for representative local government.

In 1914, Home Rule meant devolution to a locally-elected parliament. That is what happened in NI in 1921. There was nothing in the 1914 act about compulsory power-sharing, if that is what you are trying to imply.

Willowfield,
Home Rule for Ireland was to be implemented with the agreement of both the Unionist opposition and the Irish Nationalist Party.

Hence the Amending Bill, introduced by the British Government on June 23, 1914, embodied the proposal that any Ulster county should be entitled to vote itself out of Home Rule for six years.

Stormont, which only had the support of one side was not Home Rule per se so I believe it perfectly reasonable to conclude that the remaining piece of Ireland still in the union is finally getting Home Rule 93 years after the third Home Rule Bill and 123 after the first one.

You can always trust the British to deliver on Irish issues.

one for the dup's

if it is a new agreement when is the referendum.

if there isn't one then same old agreement.

DUP forget why they were against the agreement in the first place namely that it was not a settlement but a process.

Valid point Stephen,
something tells me there won't be a referendum as it obviously isn't a new agreement.

It is only fitting that militant unionism, which introduced private armies to the Irish democratic process

Oh aye George ? "militant unionism" was responsible for the 1848 rebellion ?

Thanks BK ... was this in NI ?

"Look at Alex s, totally adopting the language of the Shinners accusing DUP policy of "generally ... play[ing] politics with the peace process" for proof of how much the UUP are in the pockets of the governments"

What exactly is 'Davidbrew' suggesting, you can't agree with the shinners on anything? Get real David, the fact that the DUPes played politics with the peace process is apparent to all and sundry, open your eyes, you and a lot of anti-aggreement Ulster Unionists have been sold a pup by the DUP

"Would you consider the DUP to be a Unionist Party or a Loyalist party?"

I would classify the DUP as a Unionist Party, attempts by UUP supporters to classify the party as "loyalist" are to tar the DUP with the same brush as the so-called fringe parties.

The fundamental hypocrisy of the position of UUP members in relation to the issue lies of course in the fact that the UUP has been more willing to work with paramilitaries, both green and orange than the DUP ever has.

But then again, they wear nice pine-stripe suits, live in lovely semi-detached houses, drive Volvo's and eat their salad out of a wooden bowl, so that makes them more "British" and therefore more "Unionist" than petulant upstarts like the DUP.

Thanks Chris. I'd be interested to hear from any other DUP members.

"Would you consider the DUP to be a Unionist Party or a Loyalist party?"

The above reminds me of a conversation I had with an English in-law about what type of party the DUP are, he maintained they were a Northern Irish nationalist party in much the same way as the BNP?

Alex s

"The above reminds me of a conversation I had with an English in-law about what type of party the DUP are, he maintained they were a Northern Irish nationalist party in much the same way as the BNP?"

Your in-law is clearly a moron.

Stephen Nicholl

"if there isn't one then same old agreement"

So things only change if there is a referendum? A spurious argument and you know it.

The fundamental hypocrisy of the position of UUP members in relation to the issue lies of course in the fact that the UUP has been more willing to work with paramilitaries, both green and orange than the DUP ever has.

Oh right, I was under the impression the DUP were only too willing to work with the UDA during the UWC strike. And I believe some MP called Barnes has information to the contrary. Pity he won't share really.

Christopher, the reason my in-law gave was that from his perspective the DUP were inward looking and had a very narrow view on their place within the UK, it was his opinion, does having a different opinion to you make him a "moroon", perhaps that attitude helps explain the disgraceful scenes following the count in Upper Bann!

Michael

What is your view on the prospect of David Ervine and Gary McMichael joining the same party as yourself? Perhaps you would also care to offer an opinion on why your party leader used his power as First Minister (he'll never have that again) to elevate McMichael to the Civic Forum when the good people of Lagan Valley sent him packing?

One final question - given subsequent events, wouldn't you agree that it was utterly revolting of David Trimble and the UUP to walk into the multi-party talks flanked by the loyalist fringe parties?

Alex s

"perhaps that attitude helps explain the disgraceful scenes following the count in Upper Bann!"

Most of the people that jostled Trimble that day were members of his own party!

And your party forming terrorist groups makes you squeeky clean!

Ervine renouced terrorism (in an articulate and progressive manner) many years ago and McMichael was never a terrorist, therefore I have no problem with the idea of either or both joining.

What do you think about Ulster Resistance, Protestant Volunteers, Third Force (I apologise if I have ommitted any)? Has Ian Paisley apologised for the deaths these groups caused?

George

Home Rule for Ireland was to be implemented with the agreement of both the Unionist opposition and the Irish Nationalist Party. Hence the Amending Bill, introduced by the British Government on June 23, 1914, embodied the proposal that any Ulster county should be entitled to vote itself out of Home Rule for six years.

And?

Stormont, which only had the support of one side was not Home Rule per se so I believe it perfectly reasonable to conclude that the remaining piece of Ireland still in the union is finally getting Home Rule 93 years after the third Home Rule Bill and 123 after the first one.

It was Home Rule per se, i.e. a devolved parliament!

Christopher Stalford

So things only change if there is a referendum? A spurious argument and you know it.

No-one's denying the Agreement will change. But it'll only be a minor change to the same Agreement.

The DUP demanded a referendum in the past. Why do they not want one now?

I see you failed to answer my earlier question.

Since you claim that you are a supporter of this "new Agreement", perhaps you could tell us when you changed your mind about prisoner releases, cross-border bodies, Provos-in-government while PIRA remains intact, police reform, provisions to support Gaelic, etc.?

"Since you claim that you are a supporter of this "new Agreement", perhaps you could tell us when you changed your mind about prisoner releases, cross-border bodies, Provos-in-government while PIRA remains intact, police reform, provisions to support Gaelic, etc.?"

I think you'll find that's your position not mine groupie!

But all that is in your agreement!

"Ervine renouced terrorism (in an articulate and progressive manner) many years ago and McMichael was never a terrorist, therefore I have no problem with the idea of either or both joining."

Interesting. Does everyone in the UUP think this way?

Willowfield.

If you'd bothered your head to read the thread in question you'd see I had.

Michael

I shall remember well that you were the first Ulster Unionist to break cover and say you were happy with the prospect of Davy Ervine and Gary McMichael in your party. What a shame for you, lots of your own councillors in Lisburn disagree.

As much as I've enjoyed embarrassing you Shillers, I must depart.

Au revoir!

Untrue. I haven't heard a raised voice about it. So no comment on your own private armies?

Christopher

You said you'd support the "new Agreement". The "new Agreement" includes all those things you claim to oppose. How do you explain your support?

Most of the people that jostled Trimble that day were members of his own party!

Really Christopher, is that why the DUP candadate called for a recount despite being 2000 votes behind, to give time for a UUP mob to gather?

I want to know what Chris thinks of his leaders private armies, do tell!

Oh right, I was under the impression the DUP were only too willing to work with the UDA during the UWC strike. And I believe some MP called Barnes has information to the contrary. Pity he won't share really.

ahem I think anyone who studies the UWC strike needs to bear in mind that if there is guilt to be apportioned all unionist parties share it - after all Michael where did DT come to prominence?

Peter

chris stalford are you tellingus that the DUP will NOT go into a coalitoin with SInn Fein while the IRA still exists?

"I would classify the DUP as a Unionist Party, attempts by UUP supporters to classify the party as "loyalist" are to tar the DUP with the same brush as the so-called fringe parties."

I think you could be misunderstanding the term loyalist. Loyalist means loyal to the queen and state. I don't see how being known as a loyalist would "tar" anyone.

"But then again, they wear nice pine-stripe suits, live in lovely semi-detached houses, drive Volvo's and eat their salad out of a wooden bowl, so that makes them more "British" and therefore more "Unionist" than petulant upstarts like the DUP."

Spewing your own insecurities I see? You working class hero you.

Its more interested to compare the young dupes to the young unionists in this regard, which group wanders round the place in suits, smoking cigars....it ain't the young unionists!!

Davros
Re the DUP being Unionist/Loyalist. The DUP in my opinion is very clearly a Unionist party in that its prime fundamental purpose is the maintenance of the Union. If being a 'loyalist' party means putting faith before country then I dont believe it can fit that description.

U_O - Christopher was using the description given earlier as the basis for his answer.
I personally would question what a lot of so-called 'loyalists' are actually loyal to.

The objectives of the DUP state very clearly its purpose - and they make no reference to faith.

AlexS
Your English in-law may well have had an opinion about the DUP - but that is what it was, their opinion. Unfortunately they dont obviously follow the situation closely enough, or have read DUP policy enough to have gotten a true grasp of what the DUP is really like. I admit that maybe there is a problem that some people form the wrong opinion but that is a seperate issue.

"I personally would question what a lot of so-called 'loyalists' are actually loyal to. "

so would I, but the term loyalist in itself is nothing to be ashamed of.

"The objectives of the DUP state very clearly its purpose - and they make no reference to faith"

woooott? are we talking about the same party? Then why does it say this on the website:

"The most religiously fundamentalist of all the Unionist parties"

not just religious but fundamentalist! I would advise given some of the current troubles in the world you might consider removing the term fundamentalist from your party description.

U_O
"The most religiously fundamentalist of all the Unionist parties"

It actually says nothing of the sort on the DUP website and shows you know little of how Google works.

Google includes descriptions added by people who cover a section of similar websites. These descriptions are added by those people - not taken from the websites. The person who has added that description happens to have a particularly jaundiced view of the DUP - dont mistake that for fact.

Go and actually have a look at the DUP website - please give me the url of the page where it places faith before country.

BTW
I emailed google before on this point and asked for the description to be changed - but unsurprisingly I heard nothing back.

you need more to do with your time.

Thanks Will. One thing I noticed that would also place the DUP in the Unionist camp - their website
header features the Union Flag. The PUP emblem on their website is a Map of the British Isles with each constituent of the UK having a different flag.
The "Ulster " flag tends to imply Loyalism.

hmm, well done, yous have clearly vetted the site carefully recently. I could have swore there used to be a section all about religious stuff.

ah well, fairplay to yous. Yous are very careful.

"The "Ulster " flag tends to imply Loyalism."

but technically, is loyalism not loyalty the queen and country? Its not loyalty