This is a difficult one. Given the recent events the SF vote will be down in May. A split Unionist vote is a sad reflection on the state of Unionist politics. The chance should have been seized to regain this seat.

It is not however impossible that a Unionist could yet win.The Nationalist vote will be split as well so we shall see. S.Belfast is a safe Unionist seat. The turnout will be higher because of the perceived SDLP threat. However as I have said 10000 votes which is the maximum vote the SDLP has polled will not win a Westminster seat.

God Save The Queen.

Maybe not this time around.......

The UUP put out the following statement earlier, calling for an anti-Sinn Féin electoral pact:

Ulster Unionists Propose Anti-Sinn Fein Electoral Pact

Speaking after a meeting in Schomberg House with the Orange Order and the DUP on a possible Electoral pact, Ulster Unionist Party Leader David Trimble, accompanied by Party Chairman James Cooper and Vice Chairman David Campbell said in a statement:

“We had a general discussion about seats as a whole in which we argued for an approach that would do maximum damage to Sinn Fein.

The DUP however preferred only to talk about South Belfast and Fermanagh and South Tyrone where the positions of both parties are established and well known.

At the close of the meeting we tabled proposals which the DUP and Orange Order undertook to consider."

---

UUP PROPOSALS FOR AN ANTI-SINN FEIN ELECTORAL PACT:

In view of the refusal by Sinn Fein/IRA to disarm and disband the IRA completely, and its continued involvement in extreme criminality, despite it being clear that Unionism was prepared to engage positively, it is now apparent that the Republican movement is either unwilling or unable to complete a transition from violence to democracy, and that the only way in which devolution can proceed is on the basis of the other democratic parties.

Accordingly, in the interests of wider Unionist unity, and for the greater good of democracy in Northern Ireland the Ulster Unionist Party proposes that it, together with the Democratic Unionist Party, agree an electoral pact with the objective of removing three Sinn Fein MPs from office and preventing others from being elected. This to be achieved as follows:

* Both parties agree not to contest each others existing seats but appeal for a maximum united unionist vote for the united unionist candidates on the basis of exclusion of Sinn Fein from a Northern Ireland Executive. Our target should be to achieve a province wide consensus in favour of this.

* Both parties will stand down in West Tyrone in favour of an independent candidate with the objective of unseating Pat Doherty.

* The Ulster Unionist Party will stand down in mid-Ulster and support a DUP candidate to unseat Martin McGuinness.

* The Democratic Unionist Party will stand down in Fermanagh/South Tyrone and support a UUP candidate to unseat Michelle Gildernew.

* The Ulster Unionist Party will stand down in West Belfast in favour of a DUP, or other agreed united unionist candidate.

* Both Parties to consider how best to proceed in South Down, Newry and Armagh, and Foyle to maximise damage to Sinn Fein and to reach agreement thereon.

That link again - "Ulster Unionists propose anti-SF Electoral Pact"

* The Ulster Unionist Party will stand down in mid-Ulster and support a DUP candidate to unseat Martin McGuinness.

* The Democratic Unionist Party will stand down in Fermanagh/South Tyrone and support a UUP candidate to unseat Michelle Gildernew.

* The Ulster Unionist Party will stand down in West Belfast in favour of a DUP, or other agreed united unionist candidate.

I'm naturally a UU man, but this seems a bit like the UUP taking the seats they think a united unionist vote could win, and handing the DUP a free run in seats they'll never win. Certainly West Belfast isn't going to return a unionist, and I've never seen the figures but would assume M McG is safe.

Sinn Fein polled 51% in Mid-Ulster in 2001.

DUP get a significant vote but no chance of toppling Martin Mc....

While SF is on the back foot at present both the UUP and DUP should stand down in West Belfast, Mid Tyrone & West Tyrone and all unionist voters vote SDLP. Then by tactical voting they can remove Adams, Magennis.& Doherty in one sweep.

lorre

At least the UUP have put some thought into this, I would be surprised if the DUP dismissed it out of hand, however given that Ian Paisley has not ruled out going into power with Sinn Fein given the right conditions after the elections it could be that the DUP would rather wipe the Ulster Unionists off the map as oppossed to Sinn Fein

lo_rre

Firstly there is no Mid Tyrone constituency, unfortunately those days are long gone. I assume you are referring to Mid Ulster.

Strip away all the flowery language and this is what the UUP is proposing. They get to run unopposed in FST and SB, while the DUP gets MU and (hold on to your seats!) WB.

This is very charitable of them, I don't think.

The Ulster Unionists were given a choice: South Belfast (I have to tell you I would have to swallow very hard before putting my "X" next to Mr. McGimpsey) or Fermanagh and South Tyrone. In their selfish arrogance they demand both. If these seats fall to nationalism it will be because of the selfishness of Trimble and his cronies.

As for West Tyrone: the suggestion that the Unionists of that constituency should be asked to vote for someone who is ambiguous at best on the Union is utterly digraceful. Kieran Deeney was a one-issue candidate and remains so, it is unnaccaptable that Unionists should be asked to vote for him.

The other suggestions re. Foyle, South Down and Newry and Armagh i.e. Unionists vote SDLP are despicable. The SDLP is a nationalist party, it is opposed to the Union and is committed to its destruction: no Unionist should vote for them.

That the UUP should ask the Unionist populace in these areas to vote nationalist is a damning indictment of the sort of politics Trimble represents.

Furthermore, the all important percentages game - i.e. Combined Unionist vs. Combined Nationalist percentages could be lost if we simply allow the SDLP to "borrow" circa. 65,000 Unionist votes in South Down, Newry & Armagh and Foyle.

This is a recipe for disaster.

Sorry circa 65,000 in Foyle, South Down, Newry and Armagh and West Tyrone.

Christopher

On the UU deal I agree. It is so self-serving it is unbelieveable.

"Combined Unionist vs. Combined Nationalist percentages could be lost if we simply allow the SDLP to "borrow" circa. 65,000 Unionist votes in South Down, Newry & Armagh and Foyle."

Is this fear not substantially reduced becuase the local council elelction would be on the same day?

Could such a pact not be a two-way street - Unionist votes in Westminster in return for SDLP transfers in particular local council increasing the number of Unionist councillors in nationalist dominated areas?

Does such a pact not further the chance of voluntary coalition post-May?

Would it not substantially hamper the present Sinn Fein game plan of "We won the election, forget McCartney and the robbery we want more concessions"?

Christopher, why can the DUP not take Mid-Ulster, McCrea held it in the past, also West Tyrone was held by Willie Thompson, another hard-line traditional unionist, have the DUP not got the bottle for a fight with the Shinners?

Alex Swann

The DUP will fight Mid Ulster as they always have but the decline of the SDLP vote in the area makes it difficult to see circumstances where a Unionist can win. We will also contest West Tyrone - if the UUP has its way there wont be a Unionist on the ballot at all!

Fair Deal

The SDLP has done nothing to court favour from Unionists up until now. They have no right to expect favours at election time.

Furthermore, I dont believe it is morally acceptable to ask Unionists to vote for people who want to shunt them into a United Ireland, on the basis that the SDLP vision of a United Ireland is slightly more cuddly than Gerry and Martins is!

Unionists must be able to vote for Unionists in every election, in every part of Northern Ireland, it is as simple as that!

And before any Smart Alec points it out - I am aware that Unionists dont run in Slieve Gullion DEA.

Have to agree with Christopher. You can't ask unionists to vote for a pro-unification party.

That's up there with the Alliance redesignation in Stormont in the "moves that will undermine democracy" stakes.

I seem to recall unionists voting SDLP's Joe Hendron in 1987 to eject Gerry Adams from West Belfast and help slow down SF.

That worked a treat alright. Does Gerry not now have the largest majority of any MP elected to Westminster?

Let everyone have their say and let's see where we are at the end of it. Voting pacts are for losers.

Enda Kenny and David Trimble take a bow.

Chris.

Re. ``the all-important percentages game''. Could you elaborate? I don't follow.

Chris.

``And before any Smart Alec points it out - I am aware that Unionists dont run in Slieve Gullion DEA.''

Yep - and both unionists in Slieve Gullion are rightly pissed off at their disenfranchisement...

George

Good point about Hendron. If the SDLP is a rotten door, lent Unionist votes will only stop the Provos from kicking it in for a short period of time. The logical conclusion of this position paper is that the UUP and SDLP should merge in the hope of propping each other up around the country maybe thats what Trimble is really after?

Christopher

There is a section of the SDLP whose recent statements could have been written by a Unionist i.e. Eddie McGrady and Alasdair McDonnell would this pact bolster this section?

However, I accept most of the SDLP has made no effort.

Billy

I dont want to watch "Election '05" TV coverage and see some jazzy wee graphics showing more nationalist votes than unionist votes in Northen Ireland.

We may all know that the SDLP was being propped up by "lent" Unionist votes, but thats not the message that would be beamed around the world. It would lower Unionist morale and would be used by the government to steam roller all sorts of concessions through.

It would be a disaster. That Trimble and his cabal put their own selfish preservation above such considerations is a flaming disgrace!

The poverty of imagination is dispiriting. A UUP/SDLP pact could have real impact. The position each party takes on the union is irrelevant as the GFA takes the question out of party politics in any event. The electorate should be offered a clear alternative to shotgun marriage of IRA and protestant jihad with which they are currently saddled. They may pass on it, in which case at least it will be clear that people really do prefer to live like this.

Fair_deal

Recent comments by McGrady and McDonnell are to be welcomed, but what was their raison d'etre for entering politics? It was to bring about a United Ireland, a vote for either of the two men is an endorsement of that vision. No true Unionist could have any part in this crazy scheme!

Before you start foaming in the mouth in excitement Christopher, where does it say the UUP are recommending unionists vote for the SDLP? AND South Belfast is not mentioned in that statement so clearly agreement was not reached on that, so you could have an agreed DUP candidate running there yet.

However seeing as Fermanagh/South Tyrone was a UUP seat until the DUP messed things up last time and South Belfast is currently a UUP seat, why should the UUP bow to the DUP in these areas?

To get back to voting across the divide, I believe the only trace of that is in West Tyrone where the jist seems to be encouraging people to vote for Kieran Deeney who is not party political.

Jimmy

If you check my 5.43pm, you'll see that I hinted that a UUP-SDLP pact was what Trimble was hinting at. Not for the first time, David Trimble hopes to rely on anti-Union votes to prop up his faltering political career.

Jimmy

If you check my 5.43pm, you'll see that I hinted that a UUP-SDLP pact was what Trimble was after. Not for the first time, David Trimble hopes to rely on anti-Union votes to prop up his faltering political career.

Christopher

``I dont want to watch "Election '05" TV coverage and see some jazzy wee graphics showing more nationalist votes than unionist votes in Northen Ireland.''

Ah, I see what you mean now. The ``all-important percentages game'' - is that what you whizz kids in pinstripes are calling it now? I remember the days, way back before November '03, when we used to call it the sectarian headcount. But sure you can rest easy - no-one's in any doubt that there are more prods than fenians about the place.

Jimmy makes an excellent point: the consent principle means that the constitional issue is separate from party politics. Therefore it wouldn't matter if Sinn Fein won every seat at the next election - it'd still go to a referendum, at which point the parties would be mere advocates.

and by the way, as of the last election the strongest candidates in Fermanagh/South Tyrone and South Belfast were Tom Elliott and Michael McGimpsey, so they arguably have the best chance of taking the westminster seat and should be allowed to run.

Chris

``Recent comments by McGrady and McDonnell are to be welcomed, but what was their raison d'etre for entering politics? It was to bring about a United Ireland, a vote for either of the two men is an endorsement of that vision. No true Unionist could have any part in this crazy scheme!''

What would be so bad about a united Ireland anyway Chris?

Rebecca Black

Sitting in the safety of one of the most Unionist seats in Ulster, it must be awful easy to tell the voters of W. Tyrone to vote for a non-Unionist, but I happen to believe that is an abaandonment of those people. Unionists should be able to vote for a pro Union candidate at election time. We will make it our business to see those people in West Tyrone have a chance to vote for the Union come May 5th, I think its disgraceful that your party thinks it can simply sign over the Unionist community in that area to Kieran Deeney.

If you don't believe that Trimble is hinting at getting Unionists to vote SDLP, you are more gullible than I thought.

BTW, the UUP is also proposing that all sitting Unionist MP's or their successors should be unopposed in their seats, so that would mean the UUP running unopposed in SB. At least read the thing before commenting on it!

Rebecca

FST or SB? It wont be both.

Rebecca

How will Michael McGimpsey persuade DUP voters to cast their ballot for him? Or will the UUP with its usual mixture of snobbery and arrogance simply expect them to, whether or not they like the man.

Kieran Deeney is a respectable member of the community and has a strong concern about the NHS, I think the man would do very well in Westminster.

He is not associated with any political party so therefore you are assuming his religion and politics on the basis on his name which is pretty sad. It also reveals your true sectarianism, ie. don't vote for Deeney coz I reckon he's one of them.

Christopher, I was originally of the notion that this UUP proposal was very self serving - but if what Rebecca says is true, I'd resume the position I held when I first heard of the arguments over the pact (or lack of). If the UUP are the biggest party in these constituencies, why should they allow themselves to be blackmailled into stepping aside in either just to hand their seat to the DUP because they are threatening to split the vote? It just makes me think the DUP are more concerned with the DUP than the Union.

Well, going by the last assembly elections, most unionists in south belfast will vote for him, unless you pull someone more high profile than Mark Robinson out of the hat.

"Kieran Deeney is a respectable member of the community and has a strong concern about the NHS, I think the man would do very well in Westminster."

And what experience of Dr. Deeney do you base this statement on?

Beano

It is true, look up the last election results at

http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/asb.htm

The arrogance of which Christopher talks about is coming from the DUP.

That wasn't the question. What would he do to attract DUP voters?

Michael very nearly outpolled the DUP on his own in SB in 2003, Tom outpolled Arlene and both DUP candidates in FST. Now explain to me again why we should stand aside for the smaller party in those seats?

"That wasn't the question. What would he do to attract DUP voters?"

the same as what he would do to attract UUP voters

"And what experience of Dr. Deeney do you base this statement on"

my flatmate in college who is from that constituency and speaks very highly of him. I also think its refreshing that someone is breaking the mould and entering politics for an important issue rather than his ego.

Rebecca

Voters in Fermanagh and South Tyrone rejected the policies of David Trimble by a considerable margin. People knew Arlene's position when they voted for her.

Since then we have had a European poll in which the DUP hammered the UUP out of sight.

In Fermanagh and South Tyrone, our tallies indicate that we took 62% of the Unionist vote in FST. In South Belfast, I was at the verification count and processed the tally figure. The sample size was in excess of 2,500 and indicated that the DUP took 33% of the total vote, against 19% for the UUP.

There are no "natural Ulster Unionist areas" anymore. Get over it.

"Tom outpolled Arlene and both DUP candidates in FST"

Arlene + Maurice + Bert = Less than Tinpot Tom?

Catch yourself on!

I didn't use the term "natural Ulster Unionist seat" I dislike that term too.

However, the European elections cannot be compared to Westminster election where personalities come into it much more and you must be crazy if you think that Arlene Foster could take Fermanagh/South Tyrone!

Rebecca

I said that I wouldn't vote for Deeney because he was ambigous on the Union, not because of his religion. Don't put words in my mouth.

The UUP can abandon the voters of W. Tyrone if they wish, but we will not.

Arlene is better placed to maximise the Unionist vote in FST than McGimpski is in SB!

Quite frankly, I'm happy to let the voters decide - we will beat you in both seats.

so you would prefer to see a shinner in west tyrone instead of Kieran Deeney? Because thats what will happen if the DUP run in West Tyrone. If neither of us run, there is a chance of Deeney taking that seat and I think that would be much better for Northern Ireland.

Think in terms of Northern Ireland, not your party.

"Quite frankly, I'm happy to let the voters decide - we will beat you in both seats"

and beating an Ulster Unionist makes two more Sinn Fein MPs in South Belfast and Fermanagh/South Tyrone worth it??

Don't you ever dare call the UUP arrogant again after saying that.

European elections are hardly comparable to Westminster since, firstly, there is only one big constituency and AFAIK no offical poll result for the Westminster constituencies.

You ask what Michael McGimpsey would do to attract DUP voters.. what would you, as a DUP voter, like to see?

You talk about refusing to vote for Dr Deeney because Unionists should be able to vote for the Union - we did that with the GFA and will do so again in a referendum. Surely we don't need to pander to our insecurities at every election.

What if the UUP promised to accept a deal that could potentially see a SF justice minister for NI (based on the IRA response to the McCartney ordeal, presumably bringing back capital punishment)- would that help? I understand that was the DUP's position in its "Fair Deal".

I'm thinking in terms of maximising the pro-Union vote. Unionists must fight every election in every part of Northern Ireland. You might want to sound a retreat from the field, but I do not. I happen to think the Unionist case sells itself sufficiently that we don't need to hide behind proxies.

"I'm thinking in terms of maximising the pro-Union vote"

I would prefer to see as many unionist MPs as it is possible to get. I dislike the DUP intensely but in this case I would much rather see a DUP MP than a Sinn Fein MP. But each to their own.

"in this case I would much rather see a DUP MP than a Sinn Fein MP."

Then we are agreed. I look forward to hearing that Derek Hussey will be withdrawing from W. Tyrone and urging his voters to vote for Tommy Buchanan!

Chris

``I said that I wouldn't vote for Deeney because he was ambigous on the Union, not because of his religion. Don't put words in my mouth.''

He's not ambiguoous on the union. He has never made any statements on the union. He has scrupulously refused to be drawn beyond the hospitals issue - very wisely, if you ask me. The result has been that both Catholics and Protestants in west Tyrone support him. (Thereby screwing up your ``all-important percentages'').

I don't know, perhaps Dr Deeny has very strong views on the union. I'm sure he has an opinion. But he is not a sectarian candidate - which, I suspect, is why you have such difficulty with him.

Seriously Christopher, and I say this without admonition: your contributions to this thread thus far have been the most sectarian I have yet seen on Slugger.

I say sectarian in the strict sense - ie informed purely by the interests of one sect vis a vis another sect. (I'm avoiding accusing you of bigotry.) So fair play for being completely honest and standing on your most naked principles. I suspect your views are very much of the unionist mainstream (otherwise why would there even be talk of pacts to keep the fenians out?)

What do we think? Christopher's wild-eyed fanaticism may be a turn-off, but are his principles so different from those of any other unionist?

Christopher, you are bouncing back and forward, you started off this debate by saying you wanted electoral pacts which was great to hear.

Then you said
"Quite frankly, I'm happy to let the voters decide - we will beat you in both seats"

now you are back to wanting electoral pacts. What is going on?

Hopefully this all get ironed out in your mind and we can all look forward to an election where the maximum possible number of unionist seats are won. Gotta run now, dinner time.

Billy, I can accept your view that you find Christopher's views posted here very sectarian, but the idea that a pact is to "Keep the fenians out" is, quite frankly, ballocks. It's to keep the sinners out. There is a difference. Unionists should do what they can to prevent the IRA from having representatives in a democratic government as long as they continue to operate as a criminal gang and private army.

Billy

If you are accusing me of adapting a Unionists first approach to electoral politics - I make no apology for it. I am a Unionist. I will only vote for a Unionist. I believe that everyone must be given that chance. I also think it is extremely poor form for the Ulster Unionists to think they can simply hand over the Unionist voters of W. Tyrone to Dr. Deeney, whom I predict will poll less than he did in 2003.

Rebecca

The position is very clear. Pick one and we will take the other, or run and be beaten in both.

"He has scrupulously refused to be drawn beyond the hospitals issue"

So he's got a good all-round knowledge then?

"wild-eyed fanaticism"

LOL!

Whats so fanatic about wanting Unionists to run in elections all accross Northern Ireland?

"Whats so fanatic about wanting Unionists to run in elections all accross Northern Ireland?"

Err... refusing to vote for anyone, no matter their principles, unless they tell you first that they are vehemently in favour of the Union above all else (a decision which, like I have said, has been made and is largely irrelevant to this election) and will adopt a confrontational attitude to anyone who disagrees with them.

... even if it means watching the seat go to an apologist for armed gangsters, criminals, and militant opponents to the Union you profess to love.

Beano

``but the idea that a pact is to "Keep the fenians out" is, quite frankly, ballocks. It's to keep the sinners out. There is a difference.''

I've heard this argument before re. power-sharing with Sinn Fein. It's the same line: ``we've got nothing against nationalists generally, it's just those particular ones who are morally diseased''.
I don't accept the argument for the simple reason that on both issues, unionism has form. For decades, the SDLP was nationalism's standard-bearer, and the DUP and UUP cooked up plots to keep such dangerous sociopaths as Seamus Mallon, Eddie McGrady and Austin Currie out of office. Similarly unionism passed up the decades-long opportunity of power-sharing with the SDLP-led nationalist community, so forgive me if I don't believe this current manifestation of the same old unionist incest is primarily about Sinn Fein.

So I say again: fair play to Christopher Stalford for telling the truth.

``If you are accusing me of adapting a Unionists first approach to electoral politics - I make no apology for it. I am a Unionist. I will only vote for a Unionist.''

Fair play Chris. And I say again - he's only declaring what many others are too respectable to admit. Or too busy pompously dressing up as something other than a tribal sectarianism.

But can I just ask you Chris: are you prepared to acknowledge what this means - that your politics are fundamentally, a dictionary definition of sectarianism?

Re. wild-eyed fanaticism.

Thought you'd like that.

``What's so fanatic about wanting Unionists to run in elections all across Northern Ireland?''

Why should it matter? NI is one referendum away from dissolution - that's a reality independent of party politics. When the time comes, everyone will have their chance to vote for or against the union. On that issue there is no question of unionists being deprived of the opportunity to vote for the union when the union is at stake. In the mean time, it's pure gesture politics.

Your fanaticism lies in your elevation to primacy of the sectarian headcount. It's more important to you than any other issue, even though it's not even at stake. For you, unionism's ability to trumpet its majority from the rooftops is more important than whether people in rural Tyrone will die in ambulances because the nearest acute hospital in over an hour away.

The fact that you refer to the sectarian headcount in anodyne tones as ``the all-important percentages game'' is at least a kind of recognition that such a base philosophy needs a bit of spinning.

I am pro-unity. To you, there is nothing more about me that you need to know.

Perhaps I'm wrong?

"And before any Smart Alec points it out - I am aware that Unionists dont run in Slieve Gullion DEA"

Why don’t YOU run in that bastion of Unionism Christopher, after all you want Unionists to be able to vote for Unionist candidates across the 6 counties. ;)

Unionists must really be afraid when they have to start talking about electoral pacts, can’t beat us on their own so they decide to gang up and try and do it together.

Give it your best shot boys and girls and we will wait and see the results in May

The last thing that the SDLP want atthis stage is an anti SF pacy between the Garvaghy Road Dancers. As John Hume was heard to say at the Assembly Elections when he heard the Stop The DUP Slogan we all know are the only people who can stop the DUP and it wasn't Alex Attwood and Co.

If this election is turned into the world against SF the nationalist republican elctorate will give its answer.

So let me get this straight. It's not that the two main unionist parties don't want to engage in a squalid, sectarian stitch-up. On the contrary, they both desperately want to. It's just that they can't agree on precisely how to structure this sectarian stitch-up.

How peculiar that when many nationalists, having recently converted to SF, are wondering whether that party needs an electoral rap on the nuckles to get it moving again, unionists go and remind us why we converted.

MCT my point exactly but I would encourage you to see through this onslaught and give Adams and co the opportunity to deliver the agreement after the election.

Consider this SF get a rap on the knuckles and when the negotiations reopen the nationalist republican side is being represented by two weakened parties. The only party with the capacity to deliver for nationalist, even with your doubts, I believe you will agree is Sinn Fein.

In Fermanagh and South Tyrone, our tallies indicate that we took 62% of the Unionist vote in FST. In South Belfast, I was at the verification count and processed the tally figure. The sample size was in excess of 2,500 and indicated that the DUP took 33% of the total vote, against 19% for the UUP.

Ah right, so we believe your guesswork?

Don't like so laughing boy.

"I don't accept the argument for the simple reason that on both issues, unionism has form. For decades, the SDLP was nationalism's standard-bearer, and the DUP and UUP cooked up plots to keep such dangerous sociopaths as Seamus Mallon, Eddie McGrady and Austin Currie out of office."

And people say republicans live in the past. How can they say that when it's so obviously not true? I can only speak for my point of view, here and now, and that's that I would see no problem with Unionists sharing power with nationalists politicians who are not involved in criminal activities. Or to look at it another way, if I had an issue which required the attention of my MP, and I lived in an SDLP constituency, I might feel like I could approach him/her over my problem and deal with it in a normal MP-voter way. If I lived in a Sinn Fein constituency, I wouldn't waste my breath and in fact would feel safer not, lest someone find out who or what I am.

"I also think it is extremely poor form for the Ulster Unionists to think they can simply hand over the Unionist voters of W. Tyrone to Dr. Deeney, whom I predict will poll less than he did in 2003."

You really lack perspective christopher, Kieran deeney will do better than mc intyre or whoever else you have in west tyrone. You pick whomever is most likely to unseat the vile Pat Doherty in this case, which is not a unionist!

Rebecca

Was that you on Q&A a few weeks ago?

Why would it be poor form for the UUP to think thay can "hand over" votes to Dr. Deeney, but perfectly acceptable to presume to deliver them to the paisleyites?

Thank you for your response JK

This is currently a dilemma for many. The most likely response is a reduced nationalist turnout. However, in the event of a unionist pact, that turnout would sky-rocket.

The onslaught is of no consequence to northern nationalists, even soft wet squishy ones like me. Few nationalists out there give much credence to the fevered ramblings of Micky McDowell, Malachi O'Docherty, John McCain, and whoever else got their face on TV recently criticising Adams and McGuinness. We know our local shinners well enough not to recognise them in the more florid descriptions we've been force-fed. Meath demonstrated that. But there's no blank cheque. We want delivery. We want the Assembly, we want nationalist (and, frankly, unionist) ministers dealing with our local problems, not eejits from Chipping Sudbury and Carmarthenshire, we want rolling progress to de facto joint authority and we want a police service which people from our areas can join. The current difficulties, fairly or otherwise, are getting in the way of that. The negative drip feed demonising our communities needs to be arrested urgently.

Whether Northern nationalism re-endorses SF will depend on how SF responds to these concerns. Specifically, what can SF do to help secure for our communities a future (reasonably) free from violence? Is there a role for the forces of the State in the Republic in this as a kind of proxy for those not yet able to accept the PSNI? I was wondering whether the McCartney killers could be tried in the Republic, or whether SF could encourage information to be provided to the gardai.

In any event, this pact stuff is hot air. The advent of Assembly elections (the real trial of political strength in the North) has made a unionist pact to be untenable in the long term. Both unionist parties need to protect their core vote in the hope of keeping within spitting distance of the 14% and 28% magic figures. The UUP can ill afford any (more) haemhorraging in South Belfast and Fermanagh-South Tyrone (two assembly seats apiece if we disregard Arlene Foster's crossing the floor), especially in light of the general decline in the overall unionist vote in both constituencies. If they leave the field now, in 2008 it'll be 2 DUP 1 UUP. In South Belfast they must stay ahead of DUP to secure the third unionist seat. They must know they'd be the long-term losers in a Faustian pact of this nature. I think that's why they proposed a deal to which the DUP couldn't agree.

I must say, though, I nearly choked on my latte when I saw "Both parties agree not to contest each others existing seats" as one of the UUP's conditions for a pact. Is this really the only way Mr Trimble thinks he can hold Upper Bann? As for South and East Antrim, I can't think of them without the theme tune to Jaws playing in my mind. I think Lady Hendron might just scrape home thanks to the self-sacrificingly heroic Bob throwing himself into the maw of the onrushing DUP leviathan.

(I would like to clarify that nothing in the previous paragraph was intended to liken the DUP to the great white shark . The great white shark is neither evil nor ruthless. Nor is it mindlessly aggressive. It must kill to survive. It does not attack the weak for pleasure.)

cg

you asked me that before and I said yes!! Did you enjoy my question?

middle class taig

its lady hermon not hendron

MCT I agree with what you are saying and would argue that all this was ready to roll until Baby Doc qrote daddy bears speech in Kells And all of this is more than doable after the elections as I said on another thread an agreement is very close without victors, losers or humiliation.

The negative drip feed demonising our communities needs to be arrested urgently.
This will only intensify if Mc Dowell and company get a sniff of blood at the elections. I am sure that you have noticed that McDowell has been missing since Meath.

Whoops - silly me. Switched from the latte to the Bombay Sapphire a little early I fear.

The question is will she be, like Dr Joe, a one term wonder of negligible political impact whose lasting achievement is to invigorate the vote of her opponents?

Christopher,

I am amazed by the arrogance of the DUP!

It's time the DUP stopped taking the Electorate for granted.

The UUP are the major, dominant and indeed most popular party in Fermanagh & South Tyrone and in South Belfast. Accept it!

It is time for the DUP to stop playing political chicken and do what is right, stand down. It is incumbent upon the DUP to do what is right and that is not to risk handing seats to Nationists and Republicans.

It has been done before, not to long ago in fact, and it has led to the disinfranchisement of Unionists in key areas of our province.

Don't let it happen again DUP - wind your necks in and let the UUP win both the seats for the betterment of all in those 2 particular constituencies and in Northern Ireland as a whole

JK

Fair play. I'd love to have seen McDowell's face when they announced Meath.

I think SF will be given the benefit of the (not inconsiderable) doubt this time round. But it's get-the-finger-out time afterwards. SF were put in to make things happen. Delivery needed soon.

"cg

you asked me that before and I said yes!! Did you enjoy my question?"

My apologies, I didn't see it ;)

As for your question, it was amusing

I thought Conor spoke very well and I particularly liked his reference to Fianna Fail's republic stopping at the border.

I was beginning to despair of ever seeing another thread where Unionists tore strips off each other.
Muchos Gracias, Rebecca and Christopher.

And thank you especially Christopher for being so frank. Tell me, would you vote for a chimpanzee if it had a red white and blue rosette slapped on it?

Lets cut right to the chase on this one. What was the motivation behind the UUP putting forward this document?

It was solely and unambiguosly aimed at letting them hang onto Westminster seats that they are undoubtedly going to lose come the election. How exactly does a split unionist vote allow the spectre of Sinn Fein winning East Antrim, or Upper Bann for that matter. What is important here is that the UUP are scared ****less of losing the election and losing badly. (privately the members in East Antrim are conceding that victory isnt really possible and the members in Upper Bann are getting very shaky - that doesnt even look at South Antrim).

What possible justification is there for having a single unionist candidate in places like North Down, East Belfast, North Antrim, Strangford or East/South Antrim etc? Notice I included DUP held seats there!!... In constituencies like those we should welcome the challenge of a no-doubt hard fought election, but in the knowledge they will be unionist seats. This was about saving the skins of people like Roy Beggs and indeed David Trimble himself who are facing down the barrel of the electoral gun!!!

Lets move on then, and look at the figures in other constituencies. No matter how you argue it the only constituencies that a reasonable argument can be put up for are F&ST and S Belfast. So of course the UUP in their arrogance declare that they are the only people who can be allowed to run in those areas. DUP voters should know their place and doff the cap to their betters like James Cooper and loyally trot out to the polling booth to support who they are told to. However, dont think that they know no generosity - DUP people can have the crumbs off the table with Mid Ulster and West Belfast. Well whoopty doo!!

Alex S = I hate to burst your Trimble bubble, but the Mid-Ulster held by Willie McCrea was a completely different constituency to the Mid-Ulster of today. To argue that it is a possible unionist gain really only insults not onyl your own intelligence but that of the people reading this site.

Also, Kieran Deeney for West Tyrone. This is the man who in the past promised he would speak on health and health only - nothing else. So what representation are we to expect he would give the people of West Tyrone, unionist OR nationalist on issues like Policing etc should he manage to find his backside parked on the green benches? The UUP have been doing the hokey-cokey in West Tyrone for about a month now. First Derek Hussey indicated he would pull out, but then the next week he was definate that he was the only man for the job (despite the UUP being clearly the weaker unionist party in the area). Now he thinks all unionists should pull out and vote for a man who advocates an all-Ireland healthcare system. What exactly do the UUP stand for these days?

If I were the UUP i would frankly have been too damn embarassed to have posted those proposals on their website. They are nothing other than a thinly veiled attempt at electoral self preservation in constituencies with a healty unionist majority. Does anyone seriously think that the UUP could return with a minimum of 5MPs in any other scenario than their sitting MPs being given a free run?????

Yes Will

The Ulster Unionist Party will be returned with 5 seats if not more, possibly even 6 or 7

The greatest challenge is not UUP vs DUP and who comes out on top, the challenge to us all is encouraging people to use their democratic right to vote

What would nationalist reaction be to such a pact? Clearly, given Sinn Fein's current predicament, it would be unconscionable for the SDLP to agree to a counter pact, not to mention the whole Westminster abstention issue.

However might Sinn Fein retaliate by acting as a spoiler in some unionist constituencies? What if they were to withdraw from say Upper Bann or potentially East Londonderry and encourage their supporters to back the SDLP? Or maybe they would withdraw in tight races between the DUP and UUP in say South Antrim or East Antrim and instruct their supporters to punish one unionist party by voting for the other.

Unlikely stuff, perhaps but an interesting dimension.

If the sdlp entered into a pact with Unionists it would be the last nail in the coffin for them.

This pact could provoke the exact backlash in favour of Sinn Féin that these parties claim they wish to avoid.

How did the idea get about that SF had a good result in Meath (to say nothing of the no-show in Kildare)? Back in December they confidently desribed it as winnable, hardly fanciful in a by-election scenario, after all an independent ex-stickie took the other seat. Instead they fell from third to fourth place, meaning Labour are now more likely to take the extra seat at the general. T%he north has a different dynamic I concede, but in the Republic they seem to have stalled.

Stephen,
Away and lie down, or of course, as I cant tell what emphasis you are putting on that I will assume you are having a laugh.

Lets remember, your glorious leader predicted in 2001 that the UUP would win 10 seats (with Cecil Walker sweeping to victory amongst that throng - read Godson's book as his Walker prediction is in there along with his prediction that the SDLP would win South Belfast at that time and his 10 seat prediction was a public comment). Also, was it not James Cooper at that stunningly poorly attended UUP Conference in Londonderry who predicted that the UUP would win 30 seats in the 2003 Assembly Election - me thinks he got the wrong party there. So pardon me if I take UUP electoral predictions with a rather large pinch of the old gound sea-salt.

What is the motivation, other than UUP self-preservation, for an electoral pact in somewhere like East Antrim? Answers from UUP supporters on a postcard.... I'll happily give a cash prize for the one who can most stretch credibility in justifying that one!!!!

Jimmy
We already had nationalist (and more openly Alliance) tactical voting in 2001. It wasnt unionist votes who elected either Roy Beggs, David Burnside or David Trimble back then, and what exactly is the motivation for nationalists now to vote for David Trimble, the man who made his views on Rosemary Nelson crystal clear, or for David Burnside? As for Roy Beggs, well that retirement home he's been causing scandal over building recently.... enough said.

Jimmy

Sorry to burst your bubble but you are completely incorrect.

We always knew the possibility of winning a seat in Meath in a by election was nil but we are in a good position to take a seat next time around.

BTW we didn't fall to fourth place, I suggest you look over your figures again and learn to count.

Labour got 11.2%, we got 12.25%

Jimmy Sands

The Labour party vote was split in Meath in the last general election. Between the official party canditate Peter ward and the disgruntled former member Brian Fitzgerald they got 6444 first preferences which was more than the Sinn fein total of 6042.

In the by-election a united Labour organisattion with a single canditate finished behind the sinn fein canditate on first preferences.

That is an indication of a good trend for Sinn Fein.

if the constituency was to remain a five seater Joe O'Reilly would certainly win one of them.

It will be much harder in a three seater of course but it could happen.

Will,

you're clearly out of touch with reality.

The facts are in the public domain for all to see. The Ulster Unionist Party will be up for the fight, if the DUP choose to jeopardise seats in some vainglorious attempt to do more damage to the Unionist community then so be it.

They are a protest party brimming with negativity and the people arent stupid, they are beginning to see through the empty rhetoric.

East Londonderry isnt safe - not by a long shot.

East Belfast aint safe either.

Perhaps one should consider that it will be the DUP and not the UUP being weakened at the upcoming elections...

After all 18 months on from Nov 2003, full of promises which turned into pipe dreams and so on and what have the DUP achieved - NOTHING.

The DUP record for the past 18 months is one of complete and utter failure.

The DUP is the Party at war with itself and the internal battles between the pragmatist wing and the religious wing are evident for all to see.

Anyone remember the term 'Sackcloth and Ashes'

cg,

Simply nonsense. A by-election in a target seat should have been meat and drink to SF. Winning was a realistic goal. A strong third was an absolute minimum expectation. You give the 1st pref figures which show SF started ahead of Labour, nevertheless they finished behind. In terms of how close each party came to the seat this is more relevant. The constituency split also suits Labour better. The position as things stand is that if the big two drop a seat in Meath, it will be to Labour, not SF unless there is an improvement in SF's fortunes.

Stephen,
Exactly what colour is the sky on your planet.

"East Belfast aint safe either."

Exactly how do you see a nationalist winning East Belfast. Lets remember here, I dont advocate Peter Robinson being given a free run by the UUP. This isnt about the DUP protecting the seats they hold from the UUP - although it seems that that is precisely the case in the reverse!

East Londonderry is safe. It would require an extremely even split between the unionist candidates and a very clear outright winner amongst nationalists for the seat to be lost to a nationalist. I see neither of those things happening. Like him or not, John Dallat is still a strong SDLP candidate against an admittedly increasing Sinn Fein/IRA vote.

Stephen, you've gone off on the indoctrinated Trimble rant about how rotten the DUP are and how they've sold out and broken every promise they made. Well i'm more than happy for your party to put that to the electoral test precisely in places such as East Belfast, Strangford, Lagan Valley, and in East Antrim, South Antrim, Upper Bann etc. I dont want Peter Robinson or any other DUP MP winning their seat only for Ulster Unionists to try and claim that he would have lost it but for the fact that they stood aside.

In strong unionist constituencies let the parties fight it out and let the best man or woman win. This is about places where there is a clear and definate danger of a current unionist seat being lost to a nationalist (South Belfast) or where there is a real and clear chance of a seat being won back (Fermanagh & South Tyrone). Pacts in other seats like Mid Ulster are nice, but they wont really achieve anything meaningful.

Please answer a few questions.
What good does giving the DUP a free run in West Belfast do?

How does supporting a man who promotes an all-Ireland health agenda help the Union?

What is the rationale behind giving Roy Beggs a free run in East Antrim? Unfortunately, a terrible decision (in my opinion) by the DUP to stand aside here back in 1986 prevented Jim Allister from being the Member of Parliament for that constituency - something which meant that a politician whose talent and intelligence cannot be argued with was lost to ulster politics for nearly 20 years.

These are all very relevant questions to this debate. They cut right to the heart of the issue about electoral pacts.

The DUP have a superiority complex. You don't know what to do with the leadership of unionism, thats why you have to keep reminding yourself by talking about larger and smaller unionist parties, regardless of the situation in different localities.

You base your assertion that you are larger in FST and SB on guesswork, nothing more. Electoral fact shows that the most popular Unionist in FST is Tom Elliot and in SB Michael McGimpsey.

something which meant that a politician whose talent and intelligence cannot be argued with was lost to ulster politics for nearly 20 years.

You mean he had a strop and quit. Back in favour with the great patriotic leader now is he?

Michael,
By your own comments I sense a little superiority complex of your own. Of course those nasty Duppers couldnt handle the responsibility that the 'natural party of Government' held. What has happened of course is that people have now realised that the DUP are well able to do a far better job of Governing than the UUP. Most able Ministers anyone? It certainly wasnt Sam Foster!

Michael,
Why are you advocating that Roy Beggs be given a free run?
If the UUP are so confident in places like East Belfast then why are they afraid of fighting Peter Robinson?
Is an all-Ireland health agenda now UUP policy?

This thread isnt about the DUP's performance in the recent talks process, although I'd be more than happy to discuss that. It was supposedly about the possibility of defeating Sinn Fein &/or retaining a seat for unionism against a nationalist threat. Lets stick to the issue for once. How does an electoral pact in somewhere like Strangford ensure that the people wont have to face a Sinn Fein MP?

Lets have a debate on the real issue of this thread.

Your party have made the issue around two seats. Lets talk about those, why should Tom and Michael stand aside on the basis of your guesswork?

Michael,
I think its fair to say that Jim Allister and other members of the DUP had a difference of views back then - and I happen to agree with Jim Allister on that one. Everyone has been grown ups on that one though - Jim came back, and lets not forget he got twice as many votes as the wonderful Jim Nicholson - so much for the 'Paisley factor' being the only think that kept the DUP at the top in Europe then.

Now, we've had that little spat over. Can we continue the debate on this topic then???

Sam Foster has done more for Unionism and this country than you or your party will ever do. I spent time with Sam when he was at DOE, I know he was an excellent Minister, just as he was an excellent Soldier and B Special.

So you openly disagree with Paisley? I'd keep my annonyminity if I were you.

Will, you wrote this:

"How does supporting a man who promotes an all-Ireland health agenda help the Union?"

Is this really a bad thing? Can you explain how promoting an all-Ireland health agenda would threaten the union?
Might it not help the health and well-being of border area residents in particular?
Would that be so bad?

Will,

If a unionist area of West Tyrone experienced a major emergency, and help was available from Donegal much more quickly, would you like the southern emergency services to come to your assistance? Of course you would.

Why does Deeny's advocation of streamlining cross-border health services make him a nationalist? Why does cross-border always equal 'fenian'? A bit harsh for a prinicipled man who has very publicly kept his head above the sectarian tide.

"The DUP is the Party at war with itself and the internal battles between the pragmatist wing and the religious wing are evident for all to see."

There's a pragmatist wing?

The Unionist community is now so polarised that a significant majority of DUP and UUP voters will not vote tactically for the other if their first choice was forced to stand aside.

The electorate is turned off by electoral pacts. Only, if a candidate emerges that can genuinely draw support from several camps should a consensus candidate be put forward.

In my view, the UUP have put forward a reasonable candidate in Tom Elliot which could and should receive cross party support.

All other constituencies should be contested. If the result is not to the parties liking then they should consider the candidates they put forward in the future.

J Kelly

According to your fellow poster PmL, it was not sack cloth and ashes or photographs that stopped 'the deal' it was that SF would never have approved 'the deal' at a full meeting of members anyway.

Having read the inreasingly hysterical postings ofthe Young Unionists on this thread makes me actually warm to the idea of no electoral pact.

Politics is about the real world. The real world now looks like this: the DUP are in the ascendancy and clearly speak for the majority of Unionists; they seek to increase their representation at Westminster and deliver a potentially fatal blow to a demoralised and tired UUP which selects deadbeats like Beggs and ambitious nonentities like Basil Mccrea ( who I see believes "decent" people only vote UUP); there is no seat in which the DUP is at serious risk from the DUP, but there are two or three in which the converse is true.

How to deal with these facts?

A) batten down the hatches and try to ride out the next few years until (or more likely, not) new talent emerges- take whatever you can- in this case the guearentee of a seat in S Belfast for your next leader
B) risk your next leader's seat, in return for... nothing- except the opportunity to throw mud at the DUP for the next four years as they disappear into the sunset ahead of you. And which Unionists really regard internecine abuse as a substitute for proper constituency service, and able representatives?

Now the heretical bit...
The failure of the odious Gildernew to do anything at all except squander British monies on offices ( now ceased- and which she was doing courtesy of her Assembly seat anyway) shows , frankly, that holding of Westminster seats has little impact on realpolitiik. When Unionists held a minority ( of one) of Westminster seats in Ulster (in 1905 I think-Nick Whyte, help!) it didn't matter one jot- we couldn't be pushed into something we didn't want. Our MPs have no discernible power or influence- our votes do. If a contest in these seats increases the Unionist turnout and means more Unionists vote in the local government elections on the same day, that is actually of more significance.

So some of us see the DUP offer of a pact as ill judged in party political terms, for giving the UUP a lifeline so as not to be seen to prejudice the election of one of two uninspiring UUP candidates. We recall that when Jim Allister was stamped on at the behest of Jim Molyneaux to protect the useless Beggs ( and Kilfedder was saved at the expense of Bob Mccartney)Unionist Unity was invoked to justify the protection of two lumps of wood whose backsides on green benches did not noticably strengthen the Union.The stitch up of the various Unionist seats in the 1980s presaged the decline in Unionist turnout in many of those safe seats which has never been reversed. And if stopping the provos is paramount, then there should indeed be a pact with the SDLP in Newry and Armagh, South Down, Mid Ulster and Foyle- but even Trimble isn't stupid enough to try selling that one to his own party.

It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if there was no pact. Let the electorate decide which is the better Unionist candidate in all 18 seats ( if the UUP can get round to selecting in 4 constituencies)The UUP is too stupid to even save one seat, so why should the DUP do it for them? On May 6th the post mortem will say "suicide- but too stupid to realise it"

"The Ulster Unionist Party will be returned with 5 seats if not more, possibly even 6 or 7"

Dorothy: Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.

"Anyone remember the term 'Sackcloth and Ashes'"
Yeah. Paisley uses the term all the time in his Church. It`s a fundamental part of Calvinism.

I would say to Christopher...as a Mid-Ulster voter...there is absolutely NO CHANCE of any Unionist candidate getting elected UUP or DUP despite the DUP get a very sizeable vote it doesn`t come close to McGuiness`s 50%+ The only realistic chance would be a United DUP, UUP, SDLP, Green, Alliance, Independent candidate....

Christopher, the reason the DUP see Mid-ulster as unwinnable is because Willie McCrea ran from the field.

As for F&ST, 'Lord Ken' was able to hold the seat because while nationalists may have disagreed with him he was liked and respected, they are unlikely to feel the same about Arlene who despite the new hairdo is regarded by many as beneath contempt for her behaviour following the assembley elections!

Not so. The boundaries changed. Mid-Ulster is very much a natural Nationalist constituency. Cookstown, Dungannon, Magherafelt all with majority Nationalist populations and Unionist populations of between 30 and 40% which includes the small pockets of outlying villages that would be class as largely Loyalist such as Coagh, Newmills, Knockcloghrim, Castledawson etc. Mid-Ulster is only winnable with either a 50 /50 Nationalist (SDLP / SF) split or a Unified candidate with all...bar SF

"It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if there was no pact"

Of couse you don't David because similar to most of the DUP your priority is destroying the UUP, not ensuring that unionists get as many seats as possible. It has come across very clearly from this debate.

So what is being proposed is that despite the (supposed) differences between the UUP and DUP they should bury their difference and keep the Catholic out. That is a new one for unionism. What next a new law to restore gerrymandering?

Its to keep republicans out, not catholics, don't twist it to suit your own propaganda.

Rebecca, the DUPES only exist to win elections, afterall despite being MPs for decades what politicial achievments can Paisley and Robinson point to except re-election?

Thats the difference between the DUP and serious politicians, to the likes of Blair and Brown election to parliament is a means to an end, for Paisley and Robinson it's the end in itself, although in Peter's case there is always the allowances.

I'd agree with you entirely on your last post, Rebecca, but that same Pat McLarnon School of Logic says that would make me a bigoted unionist lunatic...

On the thread, not wishing to throw stones in the greenhouse, but the UU plan is outrageously arrogant...

Its to keep republicans out, not catholics, don't twist it to suit your own propaganda.

Oh, that's alright then.

I really do not understand exclusionist logic.

To "keep republicans out" assumes that all republicans are of the PIRA variety. They are not. (It is also worth noting that there are members of SF who have never used or wielded a weapon in anger, never mind used one.) But, sure they're all the same.

In the past, the policy of exclusion has always created a perception of victimhood: how could it not? It will do so again.

And what incentive has PIRA to dump arms and disband if republicans are excluded? It was/ is political pressure from republicans that stopped and has kept the PIRA from blowing people and things to smithereens. If anything, the recent events have shown the possibility that the "older" top-down political dynamic can change. It can run both up and down. Exclusion might kill a new political dynamic within the republican movement before it has a chance to be born.

Jimmy makes an excellent point: the consent principle means that the constitional issue is separate from party politics. Therefore it wouldn't matter if Sinn Fein won every seat at the next election - it'd still go to a referendum, at which point the parties would be mere advocates.

I truly want to believe this. But a working Assembly rests on party politics. The referendum depends on a working Assembly. And if the GFA is dead, as so many seem to be suggesting, well...

IJP

I know the idea of plotting to keep republicans out is quite nasty but then so is what PIRA get up to, at least unionist plotting isn't to do with killing people and robbing banks.

JD

There may well be republicans in Sinn Fein who have never lifted a weapon but by being in Sinn Fein they are supporting the IRA and representing them which makes them just as bad as members of Sinn Fein who are also members of the IRA, The unionist community voted in a poll in the Belfast Newsletter in favour of a unionist pact, something like 80% agreed a unionist pact should be sorted out. Therefore its safe to say that the majority of the unionist community agree with my sentiments.

There's nothing more enjoyable than watching the unionists destroy themselves over silly internal bickering. If they could just set aside this silly nonsense and set their eyes in the prize - ie the complete defeat of Sinn Fein in every seat other than West Belfast - they would be able to construct a long term future for their case. However they would much rather try to snipe at and undermine each other and allow Sinn Fein to gain prominence.

What we really need is a coalition of the centre involving the SDLP, Alliance Party and UUP working together to secure the objectives of the GFA at least in spirit, with SF and the DUP in opposition. I can't accept that Ian Paisley - the man who told police officers "don't come running to me if they burn you out of your houses" is the man who most pro-union people want to represent them. Likewise I don't believe nationalists want side-street stabbings and bank robberies reflected in their government.

IJP

Also, how is the UUP plan arrogant, as I and other pointed out yesterday, the strongest candidates for both Fermanagh/South Tyrone and South Belfast are from the UUP. Giving up Mid Ulster is quite significant as our current MLA there Billy Armstrong does a great job and really deserves to be given the chance at Westminster but we didn''t insist on that. Furthermore South Belfast has not been decided yet, it may still go to the DUP to run Robin Newton or some such.

Its clear though in the media that the DUP got their press releases out before the UUP. They don't seem to want an electoral pact and despite the fact there were agreements at Orange HQ, they are insisting nothing is going ahead and pacts are dead in the water. The DUP would prefer to hand constituencies like Fermanagh/South Tyrone to Sinn Fein and concentrate on slinging mud at and fighting UUP candidates for second and third place rather than acting in the best interests of the unionist community who do want electoral pacts.

Its sickening, especially to someone like me who initially hated the idea of electoral pacts in the first place but who since came round to the idea when it was argued to me by others for the interests of unionism as a whole.

Alex s
You seem to be suggesting that the DUP could take mid-Ulster if Willie McCrea was in the field. McGuinness got 51% of the vote in 2001. Now tell me exactly how a different candidate could have managed to get less people to vote for Sinn Fein?

No unionist can win that seat at the present time unfortunately. The SDLP have weakened so badly there that even if McGuinness was to go off and fight Foyle for example it is unlikely that even someone like Willie McCrea could re-take the seat.

This thread has rumbled on for some time and I have still to see a single post from one Ulster Unionist supporter who can justify an electoral pact in constituencies like East Antrim, South Antrim, East Belfast et al. Come on then Michael Shilliday, Stephen Warke, Alex s and the rest of you. Lets hear why Roy Beggs so badly needs to be protected from the electorate.

I have more than a little sympathy with davidbrew's comments. Let the people decide. If as some of you suggest the DUP have been so treacherous and arrogant then let the people have their say, and that includes in East Belfast, Strangford and the rest. How exactly do you inspire higher unionist turnout in places where we all know the problems of 'stay at home' voters when with a rock-solidly unionist constituency you dont give them any choice.

Rebecca,
The UUP plan is arrogant because they are more or less telling the (not unsubstantial number of) DUP voters in those constituencies that they have to trot out and vote for UUP candidates no matter what. The very point of a 'unity' candidate in those constituencies is that they must be agreeable to everyone in the constituency - surely that is the whole point. What was so bad about the DUP compromise where the UUP picked the one they wanted to run in and the DUP went for the other. That plan surely put the UUP in the stronger position and then DUP were prepared to take on the other seat.

Rebecca, also, the UUP plan included South Belfast as a UUP seat so your point there doesnt hold much water. I'll make no much comment on Billy Armstrong - it would take the whole thread much too off topic.

I would also check your facts on who put their press release out first. From what I can see the UUP posted their 'proposals' on their website before any DUP comment was made on the specifics of the deal.

Rebecca Black,

'Its to keep republicans out, not catholics, don't twist it to suit your own propaganda.'

Dress it up any way you like, to call for a sectarian head count in some constituencies says it all really.

IJP

'I'd agree with you entirely on your last post, Rebecca, but that same Pat McLarnon School of Logic says that would make me a bigoted unionist lunatic...'

Any pretence of the Alliance Party being anything other than a unionist party vanished quite some time ago. You merely reinforce that fact.

Rebecca

I know the idea of plotting to keep republicans out is quite nasty but then so is what PIRA get up to, at least unionist plotting isn't to do with killing people and robbing banks.

I have no difficulty in principle with plans to keep out SF, given its opposition to inclusive representative democracy and an independent justice system and its support for ongoing mafia-led violence.

But let's not pretend Unionists are entirely clean either. We still get excuses for sharing platforms with convicted terrorists, for inviting Loyalist thugs to Burns Suppers, and so on. We still lack a clear position from Unionist Parties in clear opposition to any form of majority rule and to the notion that they have the right to defend the Union 'by any means' (as per Ulster covenant; the inference being that the consent principle will not be accepted). Individual Unionists may not agree with these, but the parties as a whole are at best ambivalent, which constitutes two fingers to your average Nationalist and is hardly the means to create trust and an 'inclusive NI'. If Unionism wishes to be taken seriously, it's time its leadership apologized for majority rule and to rip up the Ulster Covenant as a political document. Somehow, I don't expect to see that happen...

I and other pointed out yesterday, the strongest candidates for both Fermanagh/South Tyrone and South Belfast are from the UUP.

I can understand the UUs starting the negotiations with that, but they can't expect them to be taken seriously. The DUP has 2 MLAs to the UUs' 1 in FST and outpolled the UUs in both in June. 1 for 1 would be 'fair'.

Giving up Mid Ulster is quite significant

This is the arrogant bit. It's totally insignificant. Reference to Mid Ulster and West Belfast is just outrageous. SF will hold both, no matter what, and everyone knows it.

They [the DUP] don't seem to want an electoral pact

Of course they don't. They seek annihilation of the UUs, even if that risks handing seats to SF. That's why the UUs would be better removing the irrelevance and going 1-for-1 in South and FST.

Roger is entirely right that a UU/SDLP pact would be far more like it, but we all know that won't happen and we all know why...

Rebecca Black said :

'Its to keep republicans out, not catholics, don't twist it to suit your own propaganda.'

However this exchange with Stalford shows that is not the case :

"Rebecca Black

Sitting in the safety of one of the most Unionist seats in Ulster, it must be awful easy to tell the voters of W. Tyrone to vote for a non-Unionist, but I happen to believe that is an abaandonment of those people. Unionists should be able to vote for a pro Union candidate at election time. We will make it our business to see those people in West Tyrone have a chance to vote for the Union come May 5th, I think its disgraceful that your party thinks it can simply sign over the Unionist community in that area to Kieran Deeney.

If you don't believe that Trimble is hinting at getting Unionists to vote SDLP, you are more gullible than I thought.

BTW, the UUP is also proposing that all sitting Unionist MP's or their successors should be unopposed in their seats, so that would mean the UUP running unopposed in SB. At least read the thing before commenting on it!

Posted by: Christopher Stalford at March 18, 2005 06:02 PM"

He even accuses the Turtle of arch treason in slipping the hint to vote for the papists.

Now Rebecca may not be keen on such an idea herself, but we all know that it is the reality behind the electoral plot sorry pact, at least for half of the plotters sorry pacters .

Rebecca,
Further to the point you made to Davidbrew.

It wont be the DUP who wipe the UUP out - it will be the electorate. You should never forget that.....

Roger/IJP,

I've been thinking about the idea of a centrist voting pact and I think the fatalistic view is based on the flawed assumption that it requires the co-operation of the parties themselves to bring it about. It doesn't. There was a national organisation in Britain before 97 set up with a view to removing the tories and provided a list of how people should vote in each constituency in order to achieve it. The parties themselves at least affected to be opposed to the initiative but there is some evidence that it produced results. What would prevent a similarly minded initiative for May?

How about "brains"

I think that's an excellent suggestion Shay.

Hi Jimmy,

You are entirely correct that it doesn't take the parties to be involved.

However, the nature of NI is that:
a) cross-over between Nationalist and Unionist is unusual;
b) people tend to work such things out themselves; and
c) most importantly, it is extremely questionable whether 'pro-Agreement' really means (or indeed ever really meant) anything.

After all, I had always voted Alliance-1 and Alliance-X prior to 2001, yet when Alliance stood down and told me to vote UU I still didn't on principle.

I believe, and have always believed, that the real battle is between single-community parties and multi-community parties.

Get real Rebecca- if the DUP really wanted to actively destroy your party they wouldn't be offering your next leader a guarenteed safe seat in South Belfast.

And as for Billy the potato being a credible candidate LOL LOL LOL - students obviously still over indulge in hallucinogenic substances to publicly express such views.

Others have said it here who are not DUP supporters- your party could try to deal in a pro-Agreement pact, but Trimble hasn't the courage or the vision to formally abandon Unionism and become a mushy cross community hugfest which makes the Women's Coalition look like Johnny Adair- embarassing to look at, but possibly able to appeal to garden centre prods, who may not believe in much but at least won't vote for a donkey just because he has a red white and blue rosette pinned to him.

When did the UUP ever concede a winnable seat in negotiations in all previous pact dicussions ( and remember- unlike you I've taken part in these discussions) ? Answer: never.

Whenever the UUP stood down it was because they hadn't the money, organisation, or votes. As in East Antrim when Allister was sacrifiecd to preserve the dullard Beggs, now the DUP is prepared to sacrifice Arlene Foster for the latest in a long line of )Orange grandees who have no discernable political talent.

In terms of the value of the respective candidates to their parties that's a major gesture which could stunt the DUP's growth in area where they have been hoping to make major inroads.

UUP arogance is the only reason this will never come about, and mark my words- when the DUP outpoll the UUP in any seat we'll never hear that argument being raised next time what's left of the UUP wants a pact. But they'll still insist it's a "traditional" UUP seat like east Belfast, East Londonderry, North Belfast and all the rest.

For pity's sake, learn something while you still can!

IJP,

I understand that, but the multi-community parties are just not competitive. Effectively the best choice on of