In the Brian Mór Cartoon who is that supposed to be talking and what is the tie ?

Is Mór pronounced the same as Moore ?

An excellent article but I can't see what he's proposing to take place.
The DUP have too much sectarianism at the core of their party to ever contemplate such a move.
As for the UUP,they would not have the guts to make such a move as they would fear a backlash from unionists and renewed criticism from the UUP.

Political movements are either contracting or expanding. Unionism's long implosion into a religous fundamentalist rump with a paramilitary freelance fringe has been cringeworthy.

Northern Unionists in the Dáil?
As long as they pay taxes i'n the state then I don't see the problem.

"Is Mór pronounced the same as Moore ?"

Closer to "more" than "moore", but close enough.

Interesting but if Unionism is to have representation in the lower house of the Irish Parliament then it would be as associate membership or privileged visitor status only, for if the maxim of: No taxation without representation is valid then so is its close relative: i.e. No representation without taxation . It therefore follows that if Unionism is to pay tax to the Irish Exchequer, then the ideology accepts that the Irish Republic has a de facto claim over Northern Ireland.

This may not be a problem with Republican / Nationalist MPs etc but what would the Irish people think of Northern Irish MPs having a vote in their own affairs without having to pay for the privilege: e.g. The West Lothian Question but without the financial right/burden to do so. In this I mean are the Northern Irish Sinn Fein and SDLP MPs etc willing to submit themselves, and more importantly ask their electorate to support ‘double’ taxation for the privilege of sitting in two Parliaments? It is ironic that Sinn Fein does not sit in the UK Parliament but yet claims expenses from her and wants to sit in her devolved assembly from whence it gains legitimacy and wants to sit in the Dáil - a body that recognises the border and where it must recognise the one true army of the Republic, and not of its bastard partner the IRA.

Proof positive that madness doesn't always lie beside genius. This is the same old pure New Ireland speak peddled by Ken Maginnis and McGimski in the past. How can one strengthen the Union by seeking to be represented in the legislature of the country whcih aspires to end the Union? Unless John knows of a huge and hitherto concealed majority of voters who have finally recognised the wisdom of re-unification with the Kingdom who will propel Trimble (and this article is really about bolstering that wet brand of Unionism he and Coulter espouse)in as President to sign the necessary article dissolving the constitution, this is nothing more than a large white flag to nationalism.

How grateful SF must be for idiocy such as this coming out of the head of any Unionist: it allows them to brainwash their followers into the belief that the Unionists know they end is nigh, and in 1916 or whatever other nonsensical anniversary of terrorism they deem important we'll come skipping over the border to embrace our long lost fellow irishmen and women.

Newsflash for John and anyone who reading this gives it any more significance than the collected political writings of My Little Pony -it ain't gonna happen. Not now, not next year, not ever. Not even Sylvia Hermon or Ken Maginnis would take up John's offer-never mind sensible Unionists.

BTW John-check whenever you're about to write another article that your deadline doesn't coincide with the full moon

Interesting but it aint going to happen. The only circumstances I could ever see a Unionist sitting in enemy territory is to wreck it.59 Unionist Irish MPS could bring the Irish state crashing down.

Think about it you buffoons. 59 Unionist Irish MPS could mean that any sort of Irish Government was impossible to form.

God Save The Queen.

David while you are sitting in that backseat of yours barking out the window at other drivers it would pay to check with your DUP driver that you arn't heading down the A1 towards Dublin, again!
My mistake, you are. "NEVER, NEVER, NEVER!"

Ulsterman God looks after those who look after themselves. The Monarch will so whatever it takes to preserve his or her position and that includes what Parliament tells her or him to do!

Some interesting ideas. I don't think the taxation / representation argument holds. My reading of the article was that unionism should increasingly attempt to influence events down south through their involvement in the all-Ireland structure and by having a presence in Dublin. The representation he mentions wouldn't be elected in the North, it would merely be reflect unionist ideas and organise electorally to stand in southern elections. Almost certainly a bit of a pipe-dream but theoretically sound enough.

It's Vichy Unionism incarnate - should be popular in certain circles. Coulter is an entertaining fairground attraction - worth reading if only to know what to oppose.

I cannot see the value in unionists contesting Dail seats. Irish politics stopped revolving around the "national question" in the 1930's and that is not going to change. It is far better for southern unionists to work within the existing parties, neutralising any residual nationalistic tendencies. Fine Gael have long since embraced European unionism and the PDs take a similarly pragmatic stance. There is some residual nationalism left in Labour and Fianna Fail (especially in rural areas) but all the major parties now have put any idea of a "united Ireland" so far on the back-burner that it's all but irrelevant. The Dail should be reserved for those people who have a mandate from the electorate in the republic.

The Senate/Seanad, is a different matter altogether. If we are to have an upper chamber (and I have serious reservations on this) then it should work as a forum that represents all shades of Irish opinion. This was intention of the original Senate (which was wiped out by De Valera in the 1930's after a fit of pique when it dared to stand up to him). I believe that people elected in Northern Ireland should be able to sit in the Seanad. As a start I think that all Northern Ireland MPs should be allowed to sit, on condition that they also fulfill their duty to their electorate by taking their Westminster seats. Where the MPs workloads are too heavy (ie those that are MPs and MLAs), they should be able to nominate someone else to take their place in the Seanad, and that person can come from Northern Ireland or the Republic. (I'll even volunteer!) The Seanad should also have representation from the Irish emmigrant communities. For those who believe (as I do) in no representation without taxation, it should be noted that as it is, the Seanad has no power of veto on finance issues.

I don’t think “Northern Unionists” would attract many votes in the South!

There is a significant body of opinion which believes the mobilising organisation should have been called the Irish Unionist Movement to reflect the concerns of the Southern Protestant population, estimated to have been about 20 per cent in the geographical 26 counties in 1905.

Is there? And the Ulster Unionist Council in 1905 represented nine Ulster counties, so it is disingenuous to talk about 20% of 26 counties, when most of those 20% would have been in 3 of those counties represented on the Council.

As for this “invasion plan”, what’s he on about? Sounds like a lot of toss.

But Unionists completely missed the point that the 1985 Agreement gave them a say in the running of Southern affairs, too.

???? The guy’s off his rocker!

Interesting to note David Brewster’s totally valid dismissal of Coulter’s nonsense. Unfortunately, though, his party signed up to a (botched) deal that actually provides for the representation of NI in the Southern parliament! So the very thing that David rightly opposes is actually being facilitated as a result of his party’s “negotiating skills”.

Keith M

I believe that people elected in Northern Ireland should be able to sit in the Seanad.

Another DUP supporter advocating all-Ireland institutions outside the remit of the Belfast Agreement! When the DUP said they were going to “renegotiate” the Agreement, who would have thought they wanted to extend the north/south dimension?

"Another DUP supporter advocating all-Ireland institutions outside the remit of the Belfast Agreement! When the DUP said they were going to “renegotiate” the Agreement, who would have thought they wanted to extend the north/south dimension?".

Willowfield, firstly I'm not a DUP supporter, it is simply a case that they have done the best job in representing my feelings since 1998. I have nothing against "all-Ireland institutions", as long as they work for the benefit of the people in both countries and do not threathen the will of the majority in N.I. to remain part of the U.K. This can be done by extending in the way I have oulined as it simply replicates the current practise of having representatives from the Republic in the House Of Lords.

Unionism needs to regain the confidence it lost in the turmoil of the splits and the collapse of the 1998 agreement and the failed leadership of Trimble. Confident unionism should be able to embrace better relations with the Republic.

Keith M

Willowfield, firstly I'm not a DUP supporter, it is simply a case that they have done the best job in representing my feelings since 1998.

And your feelings were for the need to extend the north/south dimension of the Belfast Agreement?

Unionism needs to regain the confidence it lost in the turmoil of the splits and the collapse of the 1998 agreement and the failed leadership of Trimble. Confident unionism should be able to embrace better relations with the Republic.

North/south institutions were created for that purpose. No need to go outside their remit by creating all-Ireland parliaments-in-embryo.

I can honestly say this is the biggest pile of dung I have ever read.

Secret Plans for invasion to reclaim up to 18 counties? Err Evidence please?

The Ulster Clubs was founded prior to the Anglo-Irish Agreement not after it. The MSD were a tiny organisation which made no meaningful contribution if any to Unionist or Loyalist polticial thinking.

Although he is right about the two forces within the UUC betweeen those with an Ulster emphasis and those who cling to a dead pre-partition irishness. Interestingly although Trimble was of the Ulster hue most of his supporter would be of the Irish Unionist camp i.e. Empey and Nesbitt.

This article is a symbol of the disarray among that Irish Unionist section now the UUP has lost dominance - one peer has been suggesting a federal ireland while another South Down grandee has been suggesting an electoral pact with Fianna Gael.

Coming soon the John Coulter article arguing "Confound nationalists, Unionists join an United Ireland now"

Willowfield

From what I have read of Bertie Ahern's comments in the Dail the actual proposals are highly restrictive and judging by the comments of the other parties in the Dail the proposals will be watered down further.

On Northern representation in the Seanad it happened pre-agreement.

This is not the first time the suggestion has come up and the UUP did not raise vociferous objections to such a notion previously.

If speaking rights were granted I cant imagine anyone in the DUP going and the UUP are saying they won't go either so it will have little meaning.

Willowfield "And your feelings were for the need to extend the north/south dimension of the Belfast Agreement?". My feelings on the necessary reform of the Seanad have nothing to do with the Belfast Agreement.

"North/south institutions were created for that purpose. No need to go outside their remit by creating all-Ireland parliaments-in-embryo." Firstly there have been Northern Ireland representatives in the Dail for decades. You should know about the past history of Dennis Haughey, after all wasn't it the UUP that gave him a peerage (After he's served in the Seanad). Secondly, what I want is that there should be a strong unionist voice in the Seanad. I don't feel even slightly threatened by he idea of an "all Ireland Parliament) because I don't believe such a thing will ever exist. For far too long unionists have had a fortress mentality about the Republic. They have failed to see the progress made in this country. People in the Republic have little or no interest in a "united Ireland". Don't be fooled by the growth of SF support in this country. There is no return to nationalism here, quite the opposite in fact.

Willowfield

"all-Ireland parliaments-in-embryo"

You know this isn't true.

Firstly "the all Ireland Parliament" to which you refer is actually the North-South Parliamentary Forum, a body which was set up by David Trimble under the terms of the 1998 accord and was of such massive concern to the DUP that never once did we raise it as an issue of contention during the referendum campaign or in the six years since.

If a bunch of Shinners and SDLP want to trek down South to love it up with their counterparts thats their concern, but lets not be disingenious. This body is purely consultative, attendance is optional and it has no power at all. This pathetic rambling about "All-Ireland Parliaments" really does have a touch of clutching at straws about it.

A UK-Israeli Inter Parliamentary Forum exists, does that mean that we are going to wake up one morning and find ourselves being governed from Tel Aviv? Of course not. So stop scaremongering.

Then again, the DUP could have produced a handwritten declaration from Gerry Adams stating that he renounces republicanism as an ideology and from midnight on January 1st will redisgnate himself as a Unionist and it still wouldn't have been good enough for Trimble fanatics like your good self.

fair deal

From what I have read of Bertie Ahern's comments in the Dail the actual proposals are highly restrictive and judging by the comments of the other parties in the Dail the proposals will be watered down further.

Let's hope so. But we will wait and see.

On Northern representation in the Seanad it happened pre-agreement.

It shouldn't have.

This is not the first time the suggestion has come up and the UUP did not raise vociferous objections to such a notion previously.

They should have.

If speaking rights were granted I cant imagine anyone in the DUP going and the UUP are saying they won't go either so it will have little meaning.

The Provos will go.

Keith M

There is no return to nationalism here, quite the opposite in fact.

There is. It's another tool for them to push an all-Ireland agenda rather than to work for reconciliation in NI. It will be divisive.

Christopher Stalford

Firstly "the all Ireland Parliament" to which you refer is actually the North-South Parliamentary Forum, a body which was set up by David Trimble under the terms of the 1998 accord and was of such massive concern to the DUP that never once did we raise it as an issue of contention during the referendum campaign or in the six years since.

Never heard of it. If it was of massive concern, why did the DUP not raise it? I presume this means the DUP has agreed to retain it in its bogus "new" agreement?

A UK-Israeli Inter Parliamentary Forum exists, does that mean that we are going to wake up one morning and find ourselves being governed from Tel Aviv? Of course not. So stop scaremongering.

Israel doesn't covet the UK or part of the UK's territory. The ROI covets NI. The UK-Israeli Parliamentary Forum does not involve having MPs from the UK who advocate the UK becoming part of Israel, sitting in the Israeli parliament.

So the analogy is childish and invalid.

"Amongst some sections of traditional Unionism, there is still 'bad blood' that the UUC - originally formed to mobilise Protestant and Orange opposition to the Home Rule movement - was overtly controlled by Northern Protestantism."

Aye right, 90 years after the event, I'm sure it still causes a lot of ill-feeling. Although given the average age of members of the UUP I wouldn't be surprised...

"Indeed, many Carsonites held the opinion that Collins - once he had dispensed militarily with the anti-Treaty forces in the Irish Civil War - planned a full-scale invasion of Northern Ireland."

Nowhere in any reading on the foundation of the Northern Ireland state have I ever seen this view expressed, either by Collins, Craig or any other political player of the time.

"Whilst this plan effectively died with Collins' assassination by anti-Treaty rebels in 1922, these same hardline Carsonites wanted to take advantage of the conflict in the South during the civil war and open up a second front by invading the Free State itself"

Total rubbish. This is really crazy stuff.

"Hardline Carsonites had wanted a nine-county geographical Ulster as the Northern state"

I would have thought that hardline "Carsonites" would have wanted all of Ireland to remain within the Union.

Given how badly Dr. Coulter reads history, it's little wonder that his political analysis is so off-the-wall.

Willowfield

"Israel doesn't covet the UK or part of the UK's territory. The ROI covets NI."

Funny, how I distinctly remember pro-Trimble people like yourself telling me that the Republic no longer covets NI because The Purple Turtle managed to achieve the amendment of Eire's Constitution.

The analogy is not childish. It is accurate. You ought to try accuracy sometime instead of swallowing every lie that comes out of Cunnigham House.

"If it was of massive concern, why did the DUP not raise it?"

Do try to keep up. That's exactly the point. It wasn't of massive concern. The fact that you have never heard of it demonstrates this. The drivel coming out of UUP HQ about "All-Ireland" Parliaments demonstrates just how desperate the UUP is to find fault where ther is none. As a result they clutch at straws like this.

Willowfield

One final point: it's a wee bit late in the day for Trimble, who advocated office space in Westminster being given to PSF and who supported the creation of N-S bodies with executive power to be going all red(der) in the face about North-South or PSF getting a platform.

Christopher

you clearly don't understand much about southern unionism/the pro-British minority in the republic. I recommend you pay a visit to one of the Reform Movements meetings (http://www.reform.org)

They are a Dublin based pro-British movement, and a very interesting bunch of people.

There really is no reason why we shouldn't run unionist candidates in the republic, especially in the border counties, west cork, some areas of south east Dublin and Wicklow. Southern Unionism gave us the greatest leader of unionism yet we simply turned our backs on them when they were being burned out of their houses, chased out of the country and having Irish nationality forced upon them.

Willowfield
Not wishing to argue Christopher Stalford's point for him, but you seem to have singularly failed to grasp the point he was making about the Parliamentary Forum.

It was set up in 1998 - and it wasnt of any great concern - that's why there has never been an issue made of it by the DUP or otherwise. It is no more or less important now than it was then.

BTW, as far as I know there is a Commonwealth Parliamentary Forum. Whose soverignty does that forum undermine? The RoI may 'covet' Northern Ireland, but they cant do one thing about 'getting' NI through a Parliamentary Forum. Its a non-issue which has to be dragged up by the UUP because they have nothing else to harp on about.

How can one strengthen the Union by seeking to be represented in the legislature of the country whcih aspires to end the Union?

See to me this is the point of Johns article - by diffusing the threat from within!

So stop scaremongering. - says Chris Stalford.

Anyone else find that amusing?

"Southern Unionism gave us the greatest leader of unionism"

James Craig was born in the South?

Edward Carson you dimwit! He was the greatest leader of unionism

Unionist Observer/Rebecca Black (funny how U_o always seems to be on with Shilliday?)

I was being sarcastic, you dimwit! And James Craig was the greatest leader of Unionism.

I see the merits of having members of the Unionist community in the Senate of Ireland - after all Lord Glenavy was a former chairman. It still comes down to how the senator is appointed, and what legitimacy he or she has to be there. I think we can all deduce how the DUP are trying to our pragmatise the UUP but unfortunately, and as I have asked of Keith in an other thread, they seem to be moving us more quickly along the path of re-unification. As for Christopher Stalford it is now impossible to take this guy as anything but a joke. The News letter should remove his column from the paper as he is reducing the paper to a mere farce.

Craig wasn't, he was the military man, always second in command to Carson who was the political man.

I'd be careful as a dupper saying that Craig was the greatest leader of unionism, didn't your own party leader once try to duplicate Carons famous trail??

butterknife

ah but its entertaining though, seeing who Stalford has it in for each week, I'm sure having so much material from him will be useful if the boy ever gets elected to anything!

Butterknife

Always nice to be appreciated.

Rebecca Black

Right enough, I'm sure I'll be in real trouble for thinking Craig was the greatest Unionist. Get a life.

And there i thought Christopher Stalford was going to say Trimble - drat:0(

Butterknife

"I see the merits of having members of the Unionist community in the Senate of Ireland - after all Lord Glenavy was a former chairman."

Lets not forget multi-millionaire Eddie Haughey aka Lord Ballyedmond, appointed by Fianna Fail, now a UUP Peer. Yes BK, I'm the joke!

Greatest Unionist is of course a title that's jointly held!

jointly held between Carson and Craig I hope you mean christopher

You are appreciated Christopher, if ever i go camping and in need of a crap and a smile and toilet paper i have your article - double the use!

Guess again Rebecca!

LOL @ Butterknife!!!!

Always happy to be of some use!

craig and paisley? er, yes, I was afraid thats what you were going to say.

delusional kid, carson will be remembered long after Paisley is forgotten

"delusional kid, carson will be remembered long after Paisley is forgotten"

Paisley will be remebered long long after the bold DT shuffles of this mortal coil, be sure about that!

I always wondered why during the recent negotiations the British Government did not try and get SF to sign up to attending Westminster.

I dunno Christopher, I do not claim to be able to see all ends, who knows what may happen next.

And even if Paisley is remembered, in what way will he be remembered, I have a feeling it'll be for saying no to everything - not a great legacy.

In fact, not since Craig has the Ulster Unionist Party produced a leader worthy of remeberance, with one possible exception.

enlighten me, who is the possible exception?

"I have a feeling it'll be for saying no to everything"

Or alternatively he may well be remembered as the Leader who delivered a final, durable, stickable deal.

Pat

I'd say Blair would feel safer in his bed at night if the shinners weren't at westminster everyday!

"enlighten me, who is the possible exception?"

James Molyneaux.

Lets not forget Ian Paisley the saviour of Unionism who destroyed power-sharing Parliament deals and scuppered Lamass' visit to the Stormont Parliament with O'Neil on 'Principle' only to swallow his principles decades later and God knows how many deaths, and other financial losses later and all but for a wee cup of tea with the Irish PM - Daniel O’Donell’s doubleganger taught him well on being a conniving worm.

Although ultimately Molyneaux's leadership produced the Downing Street Declaration and the AIA. But at least he held fast to his beliefs and principles, even if the government did take him for a ride!

"Or alternatively he may well be remembered as the Leader who delivered a final, durable, stickable deal. "

Is that what you think Christopher?

I will be genuinely delighted if Paisley does manage to deliver a watertight deal that will bring the assembly back and sort out the shinners. I just have grave doubts that its physically possible.

For the second time LOL @ Butterknife! Is this what passes for a sensible contribution in the UUP nowadays?

But Paisley called his a Judas. So now i know you are being sarcastic! Only Paisley is suitable to wear the crown of thorns.

Rebecca

"Is that what you think Christopher?"

I wouldn't have said it otherwise.

I'm not UUP.

Molyneaux? hmmm nah, I wouldn't put him down as one of the great leaders.

Besides you need a bit of time and hindsight before you can pronounce anyone to have been a great leader. History is only history after a least a hundred years.

"But Paisley called his a Judas. So now i know you are being sarcastic! Only Paisley is suitable to wear the crown of thorns."

?????

"I wouldn't have said it otherwise"

Well, fair enough, good luck to yous. I genuinely hope you acheive what you are aiming for.

History is only history after a least a hundred years.

Exactly what I'd expect from a Medieval scholar like yourself! I wouldn't call the fall of the Berlin Wall non-history, would you?

well medieval is best.

The fall of the Berlin Wall, the same as all thing that happened last century I would class as politics. If people are still alive and can remember these things then they are not history. And if society is similar, then also it is politics not history.

"And if society is similar, then also it is politics not history."

Society is not similar to the East of the wall.

"well medieval is best"

Wrong. The French Revolution and the Unification of Germany is best!

David Brew :
country whcih aspires to end the Union

eh? Who in their right minds in the Dáil would seek the end of the Union? Get real - there is no big bogey man waiting to gooble you up down south. Ignore the rhetoric from the shinners and and give me one example of how a mainsteam political party expressed ANY desire to unify the island in recent times. The only thing that the general public in the Republic want is that the north sorts itself out and gets on with it - it couldn't have been much clearer in 1998.

Keith -
neutralising any residual nationalistic tendencies
Much closer to the mark.

society was more similar east and west of the world than to society in the fourteenth century. In relative terms they are fairly similar.

You need to study a bit of medieval, honestly, you don't know what you're missing, its great. French revolution and unification of Germany was interesting, I did that for my a-level course but you can't beat medieval studies - they had castles and big sieges. It was pretty cool.

Anyhow, as interesting as this discussion is, I must depart, christmas shopping needs to be started.

ooops, I meant to write

society was more similar east and west of the WALL

Christopher Stalford

The analogy is not childish. It is accurate.

It’s not accurate. On the contrary, it is inaccurate. Israel doesn't covet the UK or part of the UK's territory. The ROI covets NI. The UK-Israeli Parliamentary Forum does not involve having MPs from the UK who advocate the UK becoming part of Israel, sitting in the Israeli parliament.

Do try to keep up. That's exactly the point. It wasn't of massive concern. The fact that you have never heard of it demonstrates this. The drivel coming out of UUP HQ about "All-Ireland" Parliaments demonstrates just how desperate the UUP is to find fault where ther is none. As a result they clutch at straws like this.

Your comments are irrelevant. We’re talking about NI MPs going to the Southern parliament, not this inter-parliamentary forum, which presumably is a joint meeting of elected representatives from two sovereign states; not the inclusion of representatives from one state in the sovereign parliament of another. If you cannot comprehend the distinction, then you must be a bit stupid.

One final point: it's a wee bit late in the day for Trimble, who advocated office space in Westminster being given to PSF and who supported the creation of N-S bodies with executive power to be going all red(der) in the face about North-South or PSF getting a platform.

I don’t think so. An irredentist Southern parliament is a major step beyond the mutual north-south institutions agreed by Trimble, and subsequently confirmed by the DUP.

Will

Not wishing to argue Christopher Stalford's point for him, but you seem to have singularly failed to grasp the point he was making about the Parliamentary Forum. It was set up in 1998 - and it wasnt of any great concern - that's why there has never been an issue made of it by the DUP or otherwise. It is no more or less important now than it was then.

We’re not discussing inter-parliamentary forums: we’re discussing the moves towards an irredentist Southern parliament negotiated by the DUP.

BTW, as far as I know there is a Commonwealth Parliamentary Forum. Whose soverignty does that forum undermine?

No-one’s. Why are you mentioning it?

The RoI may 'covet' Northern Ireland, but they cant do one thing about 'getting' NI through a Parliamentary Forum.

Why do you keep going on about a parliamentary forum? Trying to change the subject because you’re embarrassed by this DUP concession to nationalism?

Christopher Stalford: i meant to say Paisley called Jim a Judas.

And are we referring to the House of Commons Northern Ireland Grand Committee?

Now can we please get back to the question in hand, and that is mocking Christopher Stalford ... thank you! So why did you leave the UUP Christopher? And are you in the pragmatist wing of the party or the Paisleyite wing?

I don't think there is any problem in establishing an Irish Unionist party and it being consituted of ROI citisens who would be standing on a ticket of a new UK of GB & Ireland. It would oviously be a sister party of the UUP. For that matter the DUP could have one.

Irish nationalists from NI stand in UK elections with the aim of gaining electoral support for an independent UI.

The key issue is that electoral boundaries are respected.

There would be no place for Ulster unionist politicians (elected in NI) having rights in a Southern Irish Parliamnet - this is why I would be totally opposed to the dangerous idea slipped in recently by nationalists while the DUP have been asleep on the watch.

However if there was a demand for an Irish Unionist Party made up of 26 County citisens and constituted there then why not ?

Of course, John, the idea of unionists being elected to the Southern parliament from constituencies in Southern Ireland is perfectly fine.

What is of concern is the opening up of the Southern parliament to elected representatives from NI - that would be an irredentist move; an insult to the integrity of NI; and divisive. ... And the DUP endorses it.

OK we are getting silly. An Irish Unionist Party would advocate a united Ireland. It would have to be an associate of the UUP or something like that: - Friends of the UUP etc.

"So why did you leave the UUP Christopher?"

I was never a member of the UUP.

Friends of the UUP etc...

Funny you should mention it - there is a Friends of the DUP which has been recently established for non-NI residents who support our party aims and objectives.

Why do you keep going on about a parliamentary forum? Trying to change the subject because you’re embarrassed by this DUP concession to nationalism?

No because that is what the UUP are talking about when referring to an embryo All-Ireland Parliament. Good grief, you can't even churn out lies from Cunnigham House properly!

Christopher Stalford said:

You know this isn't true.

Firstly "the all Ireland Parliament" to which you refer is actually the North-South Parliamentary Forum, a body which was set up by David Trimble under the terms of the 1998 accord and was of such massive concern to the DUP that never once did we raise it as an issue of contention during the referendum campaign or in the six years since.

Sadly, this isn't true either. The N-S Parliamentary Forum doesn't exist yet. It hasn't been "set up" by anyone, let alone Trimble. This is why its establishment is part of the recent 'comprehensive agreement' - negotiated by the DUP!

It is perhaps unfortunate for the DUP that they did not raise it in the most recent talks, because it was something that both the SDLP and Sinn Fein had almost forgotten about, as evidenced by the fact that it was Alliance who proposed a motion to set it up during the last Assembly. Unionists voted against that, naturally, so obviously it was "an issue of contention", also contrary to Mr Stalford's statement.

However, for the DUP to admit that it basically never bothered raising an all-Ireland issue in which it could quite have gained concessions reasonably easily is, I find, remarkable.

This was one part of the original GFA with all-Ireland symbolism that nationalists could possibly have let go of (as they were clearly unconcerned about the Body's implementation), but for the DUP... "never once did we raise it as an issue of contention"!!!

Eye off the ball there, lads. A startling admission of a serious tactical error, if I am reading the situation right. I'll put it down to lack of negotiating experience.

Christopher Stalford

No because that is what the UUP are talking about when referring to an embryo All-Ireland Parliament.

I'll take your word for what the UUP is talking about.

But deal with what I am talking about, and that is NI representation in the Southern parliament: a terrible concession by the DUP.

God you are a novelty then Christopher: An original young (sic) DUPer. Have you noticed how power corrupts the idealistic?

Gonzo

Wrong on all counts. While the Forum may not have been convened it was established under the terms of the Belfast Agreement and this was of course negotiated by the bold Mr. Trimble. That our dear friend Willowfield (not nice, but dim) had never heard of the body is an admission of how minor an issue it is to the Unionist community.

The N-S Parliamentary Forum is an irrelevance and nothing more than a side issue. You and I both know the only reason that UUP supporters are on here raising it is because Cunningham House is desperately clutching at straws.

And if the issue was of such symbolic importance to Nationalism, why has nobody from SF/IRA or the SDLP hailed it as such over the course of the last six years?

Have you noticed how power corrupts the idealistic?

Power corrupts the easily bought, nobody else. Ref. one D. Trimble.

"But deal with what I am talking about, and that is NI representation in the Southern parliament: a terrible concession by the DUP."

Where is that mentioned in the Comprehensive Agreement? Read the document. It isn't there, so the DUP didn't in fact make this "terrible concession".

I faintly remember about eighteen months ago Bertie Ahern gave a promise to set up a committee of the Dail that would meet twice a year and which would co-opt Northern Ireland MP's or MEP's to have speaking rights.

Obviously the organisation of the Dail is a matter for the Eire Prime Minister and his party, but I hardly think the DUP should be held accountable for the actions of Fianna Fail, following through on some private promise.

What I can say now, without any hesitation is that the DUP will never take up an invite to attend such a meeting. Now dry up.

Interesting to note David Brewster’s totally valid dismissal of Coulter’s nonsense. Unfortunately, though, his party signed up to a (botched) deal that actually provides for the representation of NI in the Southern parliament! So the very thing that David rightly opposes is actually being facilitated as a result of his party’s “negotiating skills”.

Posted by: willowfield at December 22, 2004

not even remotely similar willow as you know- The Coulter nonsense involves Unionists contesting seats and sitting as members of the Dail; the Irish proposal is for 2 days speaking rights a year with no voting rights-for those who want it, thereby ensuring no Unionist worth his salt will ever take up the offer.

Dress it up as much as you want Willow -it's not remotely similar. Of course the constipated rage of the UUP on this one might be less hypocritcal if you and they condemned the truly barmy suggestion of Lord Dumass that the UUP should form a pact with Fine Gael to contest seats in the RoI . And of course if you're so concerned with the infringement of sovereignty you will condemn the importation of a Fianna Fail senator who has spoken against the Union into your party. As Mrs Merton would say-" Just what did you see in the multi-millionaire anti-Union FF Lord Haughey, Mr Trimble?"

Gosh, what an active thread :) And I missed all the fun because I was in Antrim and Ballymena. Anybody thinking of going shopping ? Good luck, you'll need it. Something nasty had happened to the Harry Corry Shop in Ballymena - Police and photographers were there- Easons - surprising range of Gerry Adams books within shouting range of the new Mr and Mrs paisley coffee-table book.

Wrong on all counts. While the Forum may not have been convened it was established under the terms of the Belfast Agreement and this was of course negotiated by the bold Mr. Trimble. That our dear friend Willowfield (not nice, but dim) had never heard of the body is an admission of how minor an issue it is to the Unionist community.

You said "a body which was set up by David Trimble" - your words, not mine. It was never "set up" in any sense I understand.

The N-S Parliamentary Forum is an irrelevance and nothing more than a side issue. You and I both know the only reason that UUP supporters are on here raising it is because Cunningham House is desperately clutching at straws.

The are plenty of North-South irrelevances that the DUP has focused on that are arguably less important. Yet, this one was somehow missed by the DUP?! Bizarre at the least.

And if the issue was of such symbolic importance to Nationalism, why has nobody from SF/IRA or the SDLP hailed it as such over the course of the last six years?

Errr... they haven't, as I indicated when I wrote that they "were clearly unconcerned about the Body's implementation". It SHOULD have been important to the DUP, as much of their concerns focus on symbolic issues, and this is an all-Ireland symbolic issue.

(I also find it strange that when the DUP insist upon words rather than actions in terms of the IRA, that they put Paragraph 13 of the Joint Dec to one side in favour of a photo. It may be worth 1,000 words, but is no substitute for an end to IRA activity.)

Whether important or not, it would have definitely been worth exploring in the talks. If getting rid of it was proving easy, it could easily have been spun into a DUP victory in the negotiations.

And since the DUP spend quite a bit of time doing this on other matters, I find it hard to believe this issue was deliberately left to the side - especially as it has now been included in the 'comprehensive agreement' and will used by the UUP to demonstrate how the DUP was prepared to shift its bottom line.

At the very LEAST, it puts the DUP and UUP into the same position on the Body, since both have now negotiated agreements that agree to a N-S Parliamentary Body.

From a solely negotiating viewpoint, a serious tactical mistake and an opportunity missed.

Oh and the Spar in Cullybackey is giving away free 2005 diaries and nifty Spar (Cullybackey) pens ! They'll be collectors items in 50 years time.

David

I raised Lord Ballyedmond a while back and for some strange reason everyone went awfully silent....

Cool - Leonard (the owner) must be making a mint these days. Always liked the way someone could convert a really old building into a quality store without wrecking the appearance of the place.

If you come out and look across the road, you'll see the Orange Hall and note that, contrary to popular belief, it is not LOL 101 ("yin nought yin")...

More completely useless trivia tomorrow.

Leonard Wiseman. An astute businessman without a doubt. Famed for sponsoring church wheelchairs and thus insinuating the Spar logo into places of wroship.

Gonzo - I was fascinated by the Orange Hall. There's a most unusual King Billy - looks like a metal Billy on Horse, enallelled and set into concrete in what was a round window. Another thing - There's a sign for Slemish Credit Union in their window which I take it is one of the "Orange" Credit Unions ? The masonic hall is a lovely old buiding. Something modern (Grrrr! I'll bet they knocked down some old building ) is being built in between.

enamelled even.

Back to business. Why should Unionists be bothered about the chance of participating in the 26 - Isn't it worth giving the politicians of the 26 some decent feedback from the civilised six ?

They signed up to cross-border institutions. Why should the input only be one-way ?

The only worry I would have is that the temptation would be to send the dead-wood South to keep them form causing trouble up here.

Christopher

Did you see my 02:54 PM post or are you deliberately ignoreing it?! ;o)

Davros

Yes, that is one of the 'Orange' credit unions.

There's a bit of waste ground opposite the Spar entrance with a shed at the back. I know the guy that lives in the house beside the Orange Hall, and I think he mentioned something was happening there a while ago. Dunno anything more.

They signed up to cross-border institutions. Why should the input only be one-way ?

Cross-border bodies aren't one-way. They're about mutual co-operation. The whole point of them is that they're not one-way.

In that case why are people complaining about the possibility of Unionists having input into the Dáil and Seanad ?

Davros - any idea when the free 2005 diary and pen offer ends? my folks live outside Cullybackey, and I'm flying home tomorrow, wouldn't mind signing some docs with a "Spar Cullybackey" pen on my return to London..

Tea-totallers can also take the opportunity to stock up on Shloer for 99p a bottle. I'm told that's a good price. Doesn't really give the nice bite on the tongue of a New World chardonnay though.

BTW the UUP seem to have enough problems getting candidates to stand in NI. I hear the only candidate for the S Down nomination has had to withdraw his candidacy because his employer won't let him stand. Unionist_observer care to confirm the end of a political career before it has begun?

Ziz- I have 5 boxes Of 6 X 330 ml Lucozade, a steal at £1.69. Goes well with gin.

lucozade goes tolerably well with vodka but I'm not sure about gin - it sounds fairly nasty!

David Brew

I'm flattered by your confidence in my sources of intelligence inside the UUP, but I have no idea what you are talking about. I think I could make a shrewd guess at whom your having a dig, but I don't think he was ever supposed to be the candidate for south down - go and clutch at straws elsewhere!!

Davros

In that case why are people complaining about the possibility of Unionists having input into the Dáil and Seanad ?

I'm complaining about the offensive and irredentist step of opening up the Southern parliament to representation from NI, and the DUP's acquiescence.

Is it representation or merely feedback ? I would be in favour of some form of Parliament of the Isles.

I'm complaining about the offensive and irredentist step of opening up the Southern parliament to representation from NI, and the DUP's acquiescence.

one little "s" makes all the difference willow-the Dail will receive representationS from NI, not representation i.e. members. It's even less of a pooling of sovereignty than the existing British -Irish Parliamentary Committee, which can jointly endorse reports.

Yes it's irritating, like much of official Ireland's constitution and ethos, but you obviously know that it's not remotely significant in constitutional terms. Time to put this one to bed don't you think? No one really cares about it within Unionism except of course the desperate Sir Reg and pals trying to play catch up.

Rebecca-perhaps your friend-let's call him "Peter" will confirm that the supposed selection meeting scheduled to be held at the weekend was postponed because there was no brave man/woman prepared to bear the standard of Ulster Unionism in Enoch's old constituency, even though it had been expected by some that a prominent
Young Unionist was prepared to submit his name.

Hey-this might be Dermot's chance for a comeback. I mean, if he can only explain to his association and voters why he went on a failed chicken run to Strangford, he's a shoo in for the honour of coming 4th on home ground!

Davros
I am appalled sir. You posture as a professional gentleman on this blog-albeit one prone to inserting his arm up cow's behinds (possibly you wnet to Portora?), yet now you boast of adulterating gin with lucozade!!!! Shame on you sir. What next- irn bru and Bruichladdich?

David Brew -
Yes it's irritating, like much of official Ireland's constitution and ethos, but you obviously know that it's not remotely significant in constitutional terms

You think it is irritating? Imagine how irritating it is to us down south to have to invite your representatives - who obviously share your distain and contempt for our 'constitution and ethos' and parliment no doubt. It is like having to invite some boorish stuck-up relative for Christmas dinner - the only upside is knowing that they are too far up their own arse to even contemplate accepting.

Unfortuantely, no such luck with Gerry and his mates - who'll be down to do a bit of pontificating and give some free and rather dubious history lessons as part of a party political broadcast, no doubt.

This was a sop to republicans in the same way as the release of the McCabe killers was - and it was done to grease the wheels for a deal between yourselves and Sinn Fein. The Republic has absolutely nothing to gain politically from this - the DUP does.

As fair_deal says above - and it is accurate from my understanding too
From what I have read of Bertie Ahern's comments in the Dail the actual proposals are highly restrictive and judging by the comments of the other parties in the Dail the proposals will be watered down further.

Why exactly would the proposals be restricted and watered down by the Dáil if it was seen as beneficial to us?

And Willowfield - I've made this point before - it is not an irredentist move- this move undermines our sovereignty more than that of your country - and it was never brought to the table by Bertie, but by Sinn Fein. As I said before - it is one thing having Mary McAleese in the Aras because we elected her, it is completely different having Gerry in the Dáil.

If the deal involved TD's having speaking rights in the Assembly I think you'd also call that as an irredentist move. And that is the situation we are in.

I know that this line of thought won't carry much weight in a UUP/DUP skirmish - getting the DUP to think of the poor people down south who are being undermined isn't really going to go very far, but thats much closer to the facts.

David you msy mock, but there are advantages at this time of the year! Anyhow, modern vets are cissies. They use rubber gloves. Way back you could always spot the vet in Springtime when the cows first went out - one hand was green. Portora ? How dare you!
Portadown College followed by the Old Grey Mother.
Let me guess - you went to Campbell ?

I've argued, and I've noted other Unionists argue the same point, that it is as logical to argue for a United British Isles as it is to argue for a UI. Therefore, I'm a bit confused as to why we're not all agreeing with the main thrust of the article.

We should be arguing for the reunification of Ireland within the UK as we have so many shared interests. The RoI is very Pro Euro with nowhere near the same links to Europe. A British UI is going to happen eventually. Maybe not tomorrow or next year. But eventually it will happen. Or to put it another way "Our day will come".

Dav-

Limavady Grammar School where men were men and sheep were frightened. Speak not of Campbell or such effete places to me-pah!

Would anybody own up to having attended Campbell ? LOL. My abiding memory of RSD was waiting for school buses beside the lads of St Pat's- Fr Faul out red-faced and smiting!

"perhaps your friend-let's call him "Peter" will confirm that the supposed selection meeting scheduled to be held at the weekend was postponed because there was no brave man/woman prepared to bear the standard of Ulster Unionism in Enoch's old constituency, even though it had been expected by some that a prominent
Young Unionist was prepared to submit his name.

Hey-this might be Dermot's chance for a comeback. I mean, if he can only explain to his association and voters why he went on a failed chicken run to Strangford, he's a shoo in for the honour of coming 4th on home ground! "

in all seriousness David, you do know a hell of alot more about this than me. I'm out of the loop due to spending most of my time in Dublin and a few other factors, and I hadn't given the matter of south down much thought, I had just assumed Dermot would run, ah well, we shall see what happens next?

Besides the young unionist to whom you are referring wouldn't have the time to run, he already barely has time to scratch his arse as it is.