What a lovely couple the undertaker and Lady Harmless will make as they become the last ever UUP MPs. There's about as much chance of a UUP revival as the Pope resuming his football career.

There's about as much chance of a UUP revival as the Pope resuming his football career

in the circumstances that's a remark in poor taste .

I hope he's right. It would be a shame if Sinn Fein and the DUP remained the majority parties for any length of time. Elected officials that polarised will mean we'll never see a return to government here. And from a Unionist point of view, the DUP seem more interested scoring points from superficial slogans than actually delivering their supposed hard line on terrorism.

I agree with Alex that things haven't actually been that bad to date- but only in comparison to what is coming.

Look at the Westminster candidates they've selected. What a tired old bunch of retreads, and freshfaced neophytes, with a distinct lack of street fighters capable of getting down and dirty in the struggle for the soul of Unionism. OK, so the UUP have never exactly had an inspiring Parliamentary slate, but they can't compare to the DUP's team- some of whom aren't top drawer either, it has to be said. The difference is that the DUP is beginning to think less in terms of an inferiority complex motivated jealousy of the UUP, and the first shoots of community leadership have begun to emerge. Admittedly this isn't easily detectable in the mouth of the elections, but it is there, and will become much more evident after May 5th. Breaking free of the need to look over their shoulders to the UUP will transform the DUP.

And as for the Councils- well it's the same old gerentocracy,many dating from the 1980s or before,possibly hoping for a big payoff after local government reorganisation, leavened with a very few fresh faces, like the admirably enthusiatic Kenny Donaldson in South Armagh. Hopefully people like him and Rodney McCune aren't too scarred in the bloodbath to leave politics. No recruits for the major rebuilding to be found here. Normally PR protects the UUP in local government elections, but a fall of another 25 seats or more would be impossible to claw back.

The trouble with the UUP is that it now has the smell of death about it, and for the less engaged voter that's enough to make him/her write it off. There has been a slight rally in the past few months- as there always is from a death bed patient- but for better or worse Unionism will be lead by the DUP for the next ten years. That won't stop the UUP frantically posturing as the true hard men of Unionism on one hand, and the party that is the home of Liberal Unionists on the other.

As W D Flackes would have wished he'd said they are now " a thing of sound and fury, signifying nothing"( sadly, it was Shakespeare )

in the circumstances that's a remark in poor taste.

Agreed entirely. There's no call for that here on Slugger.

Make your point, but show some respect.

the Ulster Unionist Party has a legacy of which it can be mostly proud.

Alex Kane is someone I respect highly, but is this some kind of sick joke?

If setting up a state and then governing it undemocratically to the specific detriment of nearly half its people is something you can be proud of, I wonder what you'd ever be ashamed of!

Some individual Ulster Unionists have shown astonishing courage and principle. But the movement as a whole has a shameful history consisting of deliberately allowing fellow country(wo)men to be deprived of rights and fairness. I'm not expecting people to pay for past misdeeds, of course standards were different decades ago, and what's done is done. But being 'proud' of it now is a disgrace.

why would any ulster unionist association ever ask alex kane to speak to a meeting, especially when you know the speach is going to posted on slugger.

So much for having a private meeting.

whoa just a minute IJP

Noone's going to seriously deny that the Unionist party exhibited all of the rottenness that goes with being permanently in power for 50 years ( you don't have to scratch the surface too deeply to find this still prevalent); nor can it be denied that there was a very small pool of political talent which rarely threw up real talent- sadly repeated in our football team for much of the past 125 years; but you're starting to sound like a Civil Rights child of the sixties after one bad trip too many in your comments.

They didn't rule undemocratically, as you put it, though undeniably they ruled in an amateur and arbitrary fashion. They governed in exactly the same way as every other part of the UK ,with no regard to the particular circumstances of the population in NI.

Where the UUP could have been proud- and all Unionists can still be proud- are in the following areas:

a) the formation of a broad political movement, regardless of class, and gender in 1905, before such ideas were routinely accepted in politics in most parts of the Western world,at the same time demanding rights from the state - the fundamentally egalitarian point made by Bonar Law when he said "There are things greater than parliamentary majorities"

b) the securing of the wishes of an indentifiable proportion of the British subjects in this portion of the UK within the state in the face of a nationalism which could not accommodate their ethos and the containment of sectarian strife in the establishment of the administration

c) insisting on the same standards for NI citizens as for the rest of the UK ( admittedly not always achieved) in social matters such as the NHS, education, and the very beautiful legal Aid scheme

I'm not sure to whom you attribute astonishing courage, but you should include Carson, Craig (certainly in his first two administrations, before he ran out of steam), and some day people are going to have to look at Brookeborough's legacy, not one throwaway remark on a 12th platform, in creating a stable, if stagnant NI in the 1950s- not visionary, but perhaps just what was needed.

I fear, however, you mean the odious O'Neill- a ludicrously vain wannabe head of state, who deliberately sought to smash the NI Labour party in the 1960s for party political ends to the detriment of the state as a whole, Faulkner(actually probably a flawed hero- like Nixon undone by his ambition and insecurities) and please Lord not the purple turtle, who may have had courage in the sense only that he had neither the patience nor the vision to build a sustainable coalition within his own community before going hell for leather for the First Minister's bauble.

All irrelevant now, of course, and I suppose I can be accused of jealousy when you are kicking a party that's so obviously down - I thought I was that one trick pony!

Davros : "in the circumstances that's a remark in poor taste." What is good and bad taste is purely subjective.

IJP "Make your point, but show some respect." Anyone meritting respect gets it from me. The Pope does not and will not.

why would any ulster unionist association ever ask alex kane to speak to a meeting, especially when you know the speach is going to posted on slugger.

They didn't, it was Lisburn Branch.

Keith

You are welcome to your view, but the Pope is representative of much more than a single man to a lot of people. While you (and I) may disagree, your above comment is cheap.

David B

They governed in exactly the same way as every other part of the UK

No they didn't. Democracy has nothing to do with majorities. They governed by majority rule on behalf of a specific group in opposition to another specific group. That is not how it works elsewhere in the GB, and that is not democracy - but then, Unionist reps rarely were much in touch with either of those.

Your points a), b) and c) are not unreasonable and I think there is something vastly superior about Carson's Unionism than about any form I see today. I'm not suggesting the movement doesn't have things which it can take into the future with a degree of pride.

But to suggest it has a 'legacy of which it can be mostly proud' shows a distinct failure to recognize anything even approaching historical reality, is genuinely offensive to a lot of people, and shows most worryingly that even the most 'Liberal' of Unionists is somewhat divorced from the reality of the problem we're trying to solve.

I'll agree with Ian in respect of the Pope, and add that the Pope is important to a lot of our friends here on Slugger and for their sake as much as anything respect should be shown.

I bet I know which Robbie Coltrane film Keith M will be watching tonight...

Reference tastless remarks about the Pope, it is said that the Pope's medical condition was the subject of a joke at a recent DUP fund raiser, it seems bad taste isn't the preserve of bloggers

On the Late, Late show tonight, Fr. Brian Darcy told of how His Holiness gave free Presbyterian protesters on his visit to England a special Papal blessing, including Big Ian himself!

Keith M

'Davros : "in the circumstances that's a remark in poor taste." What is good and bad taste is purely subjective.

IJP "Make your point, but show some respect." Anyone meritting respect gets it from me. The Pope does not and will not.'

OK then, you're a cock

"Reference tastless remarks about the Pope, it is said that the Pope's medical condition was the subject of a joke at a recent DUP fund raiser, it seems bad taste isn't the preserve of bloggers"

Yawn

"On the Late, Late show tonight, Fr. Brian Darcy told of how His Holiness gave free Presbyterian protesters on his visit to England a special Papal blessing, including Big Ian himself!"

Double Yawn

It may be a big yawn that at a Drumbo DUP fund raiser the crowd were entertained to an impersonation of the Pope with 'Parkinsons' however these were the same people who following Gerry Springer The Opera were demanding that christianity be shown more respect, Jeffrey Donaldson who was at Drumbo made this point on Talkback recently, if christians can't respect each other, how can they expect to be shown it.

"No they didn't. Democracy has nothing to do with majorities. They governed by majority rule on behalf of a specific group in opposition to another specific group. That is not how it works elsewhere in the GB, and that is not democracy - but then, Unionist reps rarely were much in touch with either of those." says IJP

er,that's exactly what democracy is about. And sorry, but recent examples of Labour rotten boroughs such as Coatbridge in Scotland and parts of the Midlands with large Asian communities, never mind some of the loony left councils like Brent in the 1980s sadly show that pandering to your own electorate isn't an exclusively NI thing. And just why is the Labour party in Glasgow called the Murphia?

Gerrymandering was invented in the USA, and is still routinely practised there to disenfranchise minorities- and of course the unlovely Dame Shirley Porter tried to do it in London. Read Private Eye to see how democracy is abused throughout local government. I'm not saying the Unionists pre 1972 were saints- only that they were just as bad as any party guaranteed power by demographics/ sectarianism

BTW another Unionist achievement- in a primitive 19th century form , of course, was to focus on its role as part of a wider community- the Empire- which is of course widely derided by people who curiously are often ardent pro Europeans- the 21st century equivalent of the Empire. When I hear Irish nationalists proclaim they are proud Europeans, I wonder how they ignore the contradiction in their own position, and the tact that Unionism wrote the book on the role of a minority in a construct of many races/ states over 100 years previously.

And actually Unionism was always acutely in touch with (conservative) thinking in Britain- to the extent that it wasted a lot of time on nonsnes like the threat of the Soviets to Our Wee Country, etc- we are , as you will know, still easily able to find people (usually in North Down) for whom it is still 1950s Eastbourne. part of the problem of O'Neill was that he thought we should be like a Dominion, with him head of State(natch) in a nice hat with ostrich feathers on it.

Please stick to things which you obviously know more about- like football obviously, and Ulster Scots. :0)

I'm not saying the Unionists pre 1972 were saints- only that they were just as bad as any party guaranteed power by demographics/ sectarianism

And let's not forget abstentionism. a major factor.

I`m afraid the UUP increasingly come across as big house Tories and Tony Blair`s whipping boys.

"Drumbo DUP fund raiser the crowd were entertained to an impersonation of the Pope with 'Parkinsons' however these were the same people who following Gerry Springer The Opera were demanding that christianity be shown more respect,"

How do you know they were the same people? There are Christians in the DUP but DUP most certainly does not mean they are all Christian (exept perhaps in the nominal term of the word).

I have also seen Paisley jokes told at such events. ....Woman goes to buy a bra...do you want a Catholic bra, a Salvation Army bra or a Paisley bra
I can`t remember the exact wording but basically
Catholic bra holds masses
Salvation bra is uplifting
Paisley bra makes mountains out of mole hills.

David B

You're supporting my position, for goodness' sake!

I said the Unionist Party did not have a 'legacy of which it can be mostly proud'. None of the other parties guaranteed power (e.g. those lovely lads in Zanu-PF of the late great Ba'ath Party) have legacies of which they can be mostly proud either, and none of them is/was operating in a democracy. I'd already said that circumstances at the time to some extent explained why what happened happened, but just because 'lots of other people do it' does not make it a proud legacy!

The word 'majority' appears in no definition of 'democracy'. The British electoral system depends on majorities, yes, but this is part of a democratic process where tradition and the guaranteed swing between governing parties dictate that everyone will be represented and no single majority group will consistently overrule and oppose a minority. That is not and was never the case in NI, any more than in Hussain's 'democratic' Iraq or Mugabe's 'democratic' Zimbabwe.

Democracy works. Majority rule doesn't.

Please stick to things which you obviously know more about- like football obviously, and Ulster Scots.

Right back at you... if you weren't a Gooner I'd demand a yellow card...! :)

those lovely lads in Zanu-PF of the late great Ba'ath Party

those lovely lads in Zanu-PF [or] the late great Ba'ath Party

[sarcasm off!]

Sorry Alex (Kane), you just don't get it. Anyone can see there is something
seriously wrong with the UUP but your diagnosis and thus the remedies aren't
accurate. At some point, you and others are really going to have to stop
putting variable amounts of blame on Wee Jeffrey for political manure deep
in which you find yourselves. ("A lobotomised patsy"? Anyone else thinking
of Tom Elliot?) You all blamed Jeffrey for the travails, but now that he's
gone, along with his big Lagan Valley vote, on your logic, shouldn't the UUP be
sailing to success? Why not put the lion share's blame where it deserves to
be: the wretched Trimble-Gimp-Cooper-Rogan leadership.

It's the leadership, stoopid. The idea of testing the IRA made sense only if it could
be done at a proportionate cost. That testing had consequences: (1) the UUP
had to break clear manifesto commitments which confirmed Trimble as
essentially expedient and untrustworthy, (2) it made internal party
management even more difficult, (3) the process of testing constrained the
UUP on other issues - Godson's verdicts of "constitutional minimalism" and
"ideological passivity" spring to mind - and, most importantly, (4) Trimble
himself gambled the future of his leadership and thus his party on his flyer
on the Provos coming off. More sceptical unionists looked at Trimble and
his increasingly desperate efforts to "test" the Provos when he kept getting
fleeced by them on every occasion and wondered if Papa Doc would do a better
job and occasionally keep his eye on the ball. All that
has fuelled the DUP's rise and Trimble further obliges them by
clinging on to his leadership and forcing those out who might have been able
to dig the UUP out of the hole in which the wretched Purple Turtle has put
you all. That's the argument about the leadership you should be making,
Alex, not blaming those awful fish and chip adverts and other inherently peripheral matters.

You give 3 "We Must Have a Message" bullet points. But why is there none
for the thousands of unionists who have defected to the DUP since 1998?
(Some of them are in my own family as I discovered during an impromptu focus
group session over Christmas.) How are you going to win them back? You see, I suspect that you have no real interest in doing so and you would rather
the party turned itself into an Alliance Mark 2 to hunt down those nice
garden centre people and thus drive up the overall unionist vote. Nice in
theory but that's a recipe for further UUP decline. Parties exist to win
elections and the people most likely to vote are those the UUP needs to go
after (and recover) in the first instance, i.e. the people who defected to the DUP over
Trimble. Once you have done so, then and only then, turn your attention to the garden centres.
To abandon the broad church idea leaves your party at the mercy of people who habitually
don't vote whilst the DUP hoovers up those centre right unionists who do.

Recently I read Graham Walker's book on the UUP (good at the start, rubbish
by the end). It was striking the efforts made by UUP leaders of the past to
manage their party in such a way as to keep it in the unionist mainstream
with an instinct for the electorally popular. But Trimble's strategically
flawed, ineptly executed leadership has turned a broad church into a narrow
unionist sect, with scant appeal outside middle class Greater Belfast and even more incredibly transformed the DUP into a mainstream
outfit.

To give you an example very close to home, your Association has
blundered big time in choosing a charmless anti-DUP attack dog whose
prospects of holding your last seat in the capital city rest upon getting
habitual DUP voters to support him. I suspect it won't happen and it
remains to be seen if you haven't parcel-wrapped the seat for Alasdair as a result. I know for a fact that there have been more resignations from your Association following the Gimp's selection, which isn't what should be happening in a healthy party. And to think that you would have had an unconditional free run from the DUP if you had chosen Christopher Montgomery.

But that's the problem with refocusing a party in an
entirely speculative direction, as you advocate. It is likely to get the
UUP nowhere except the wilderness. Still, if you want to bury a party, who
better than an undertaker to do it? Michael, your hour is at hand.

keeping with the thread

How can the the Ulster "unionist" Party be taken seriously as representing mainstream unionists when they advocate inflating the nationalist/republican vote at an election.

Also the UUP leadership didn't try and sell the 1998 agreement to unionists because it couldn't be done. When they did make an attempt at "selling" it they lied.

Alan2, name another british political party that holds a Gospel Concert to raise funds, also I don't believe you can compare a 'Paisley joke' about a bra with an impersonation of a dying man's medicial condition, even if he is Pope.

Where the UUP could have been proud- and all Unionists can still be proud- are in the following areas: a) the formation of a broad political movement, regardless of class, and gender in 1905, before such ideas were routinely accepted in politics in most parts of the Western world,at the same time demanding rights from the state - the fundamentally egalitarian point made by Bonar Law when he said "There are things greater than parliamentary majorities" b) the securing of the wishes of an indentifiable proportion of the British subjects in this portion of the UK within the state in the face of a nationalism which could not accommodate their ethos and the containment of sectarian strife in the establishment of the administration c) insisting on the same standards for NI citizens as for the rest of the UK ( admittedly not always achieved) in social matters such as the NHS, education, and the very beautiful legal Aid scheme Interetsing analysis as ever from David...seriously wide of the mark The formation of the Ulster Unionist party in 1905 had everything to do with facing a perceived common enemy and nothing to do with enlightened political prescience. You find the same script the world over. What would have happened if Irish Home Rule had succeeded. Would we be in a very diffrent place to the present arrangements.? There were always three stands and the temporary arrangement that was one party government in the North was never built on a solid foundation. As for credit for receiving the same standards as UK citizens..None of these mounumtnatla schievements such as the NHS ot the 1948 Education Act had the slightest genesis in Northern Ireland. It was mere happenstance David. There is indeeed a compelling Unionist case but it can never have any efficacy unless it is built on the widest possibler civic basis and not on the narrowness of the loyal orders and the latest common enemy. That is why the DUP is doomed to failure no matter what election mandate they achieve. You will not gain ground in Briatin following a narrow sectarian agenda no mattter how bright Dodds and Robinson are.Trimble understood that. One final thought...you still dont strike me as a "una duce una voce" DUPer

"also I don't believe you can compare a 'Paisley joke' about a bra with an impersonation of a dying man's medicial condition, even if he is Pope."

Is it not surprising that none of the DUP supporters have ridiculed the very suggestion that the Pope's condition was the subject of a joke and impersonation at a DUP 'do'

It has been announced, read on Balrog, that the Pope has died, may he Rest In Peace.

As a mark of respect I shall not be posting for 24 hours. My condolences to all the Roman Catholic contributors on the board.

Davros

See relevant thread.

RU

Excellent points in your 0720PM.

Davros:

As a mark of respect I shall not be posting for 24 hours. My condolences to all the Roman Catholic contributors on the board.

Davros, while I'm sure we all appreciate your gesture, I doubt if anyone here believes it necessary.

While I would disagree with your political views, you always express them civilly and display respect for the opinions of others. Thank you.

No-one who has experience of the "past form" of that particular poster on soc.culture.irish could be surprised by his remarks. Being regarded with contempt by him is no shame. He himself deserves no respect.

alex swan:

It may be a big yawn that at a Drumbo DUP fund raiser the crowd were entertained to an impersonation of the Pope with 'Parkinsons' however these were the same people who following Gerry Springer The Opera were demanding that christianity be shown more respect, Jeffrey Donaldson who was at Drumbo made this point on Talkback recently, if christians can't respect each other, how can they expect to be shown it.

I imagine the rationalisation would be that Roman Catholics are not Christian. The Pope is regarded as the anti-Christ by these people, isn't he?

Paul P,
Obviously you'd rather see pira/sf elected in as many seats as possible. Whats more important to you, total unionist vote or ensuring that the provisional republican movement are beaten in the areas that it's possible it can happen?

The point is not what is the UUP's past but what is its future.

Its future depends on many factors such as:-

1. Can it find a new role for itself as its old role as 'defender of the union' and 'no surrender' has been eclipsed by the DUP?

2. Can it find a new leadership that is willing to embrace the future and not the past and one which is not cast in the mould of David Trimble who mismanaged the party for the last 8 years?

3. Can it widen its voter base into the golf clubs and rugby clubs and bring back those who decided they did not want any part of sectarian politics or of a non descript Alliance party that can have little effect on anything?

It almost needs to do a 'New Labour' and convert itself into a 'New Unionism' which completely removes itself from the old Orange Order connections such as having meeting in Orange halls and recreate itself as a secular party and concentrates on selling the United Kingdom as being the only viable economic option for Northern Ireland and on the normal day to day politics that matter to people.

In other words it should forget its past and concentrate only on the future.

There seems to be no forward thinking on this thread. Will the DUP do a deal with SF after the election? If so will such a coalition survive?
Will the UUP Never, Never, Never recover it's position?

There is more to life than this inter necine war, and IJP you cannot build consensus if you continually hammer home negative issues from the past. They aren't relevant, we should be moving forward.

Antrim, you ask some good questions and while the answers have to be guesswork, here's my thoughts.

"Will the DUP do a deal with SF after the election?". This is down to to SF/IRA. If the IRA goes out of existance then I say "yes".

"If so will such a coalition survive?". There is no doubt that this would be a shakey coalition, but as long as both parties are interested in holding power and are willing to put their difference behind then, I would be optimistic.

"Will the UUP Never, Never, Never recover it's position." I never say never, however under Trimble the downward trajectory will continue and its very hard to see another leader in the nodding donkeys left in the UUP. All in all I think they will stuggle on for another decade becoming increasinly irrelevant, and probably merge with the APNI, if that's still around by then.

Vespasian and Antrim

We cannot build a future if we do not learn the lessons from the past.

The 1912 Covenant, for example, while understandable in its historical context, is just that - a historical document. It needs binned. Yet it is Unionists, not I, who harp back to it (see current Ulster Unionist web site), and if they choose to do so as if the document has some kind of relevance while also claiming to be democrats, I will point out that it is not a democratic document and has no relevance. Likewise it is false to claim the NHS or Social Security are anything to do with the Ulster Unionist legacy, indeed many aspects outrageous post-dated their introduction in GB, often by decades (e.g. legal aid).

It is not unreasonable to point out to Unionists, just as to Nationalists, that if we seek to build a future on a false historical foundation, we have no future. Since neither Unionists nor Nationalists are capable of presenting a true historical foundation, it stands to reason that neither can deliver a future.

The election may not be the disaster for the UUP people think. Firstly they may well gain Fermanagh and hold S.Belfast. Secondly Catholics may well vote for them in no hope seats like E.Antrim.

We shall see.

Paddy, can you imagine the outcry if the Pope's illness was mocked at a Tory fundraiser, it demonstrates how far the DUP is from being a normal political party and why ultimately they have no long term future should the Province get it's act together.

Have to say I agree with a lot of what Alex had to say. The few months after the election which will see a very necessary change in leadership will be interesting.
While many around Trimble were responsible for Jeffery leaving, Jeffery himself never had the courage for the leadership challenge.

I'm no particular fan of Jeffrey Donaldson, but I cannot imagine he would be at all comfortable in a gathering of Free Presbyterian fundamentalists making sick jokes about the Pope.

Where are there details of what was actually said?

Jonathan McCullough

Unfortunately it seems likely that SF-IRA will not lose any votes despite being exposed as non democrats.

A lament from some UUP commentators is that the unionist vote is in decline, voting for nationalists will hardly reverse the decline.

The suggestion that unionists vote for eager "united irelanders" is exactly why the UUP should be written off.

It has been claimed by a couple who attended the DUP fundraiser in Drumbo Presbyterian Church Hall that one of the 'performers', a Presbyterian Minister and a member of the Grand Lodge of Ireland impersonated the Pope with particular emphasis on his Parkinson's condition, my sources were disgusted and have written to the person involved expressing their disgust. It seems they attended the event believing it to be a Gospel Concert; apparently Drumbo Presbyterian Church didn’t want it billed as a DUP event.

If that is the general idea of what happened, it sounds tasteless and degrading.

I wouldnt worry too much about the comments from Alex Kane

Did no-one notice what day they were printed in the Newsletter? Clearly Alex was helping the Newsletter with their traditional April 1st story.

That is the only concievable reason I can think of how any relatively sensible person could sign their name to a document predicting UUP success at the General Election.

The reason the UUP will survive is that the DUP for reasons I have outlined above will only ever appeal to a section of the unionist community, while they might be in front at the moment I doubt they will be able to maintain this position in the longer term, a good proportion of the unionist people who voted DUP at the last election are at heart uncomfortable with supporting Paisley and what he stands for.

Alex
What timescale is 'the longer term' exactly - a generation perhaps? The DUP are becoming a wider party by the day - Ian Paisley isnt going to be around for ever and everyone knows it. The DUP is already much bigger than the one-man peronality cult that it may well have been and which many UUP people like to think it still is.

The uncomfortable reality for you is that most unionsists cannot sit comfortably with David Trimble and what he has stood for. With all of Ian Paisley's faults its even sadder testament for the likes of you that the DUP has clearly surpassed the UUP with him still around - warts and all!

No Fool, you shouldn't over state the gains made by the DUP recently, as Alex Kane has already pointed out the UUP isn't dead in the water although I will admit we are in trouble, as to Trimble I doubt if he will be around much longer, then it will be for the students of history to asess his contribution to life in the province. As for the DUP not being a one man personalty cult, Robinson will forever being haunted by the popular image of him with 'red beret' in one hand and 'expenses form' in the other, as for the rest, again their mixture of religion and lack of grace when under pressure makes them even less attractive to the unionist in the street than the big man himself.

Alex Swann

Aye right enough, ordinary Unionists are repelled by people like Nigel Dodds, Peter Robinson, Sammy Wilson and Iris - that's why they keep voting for them!

Honestly, if this trite, petty personality-bashing is what passing for credible analysis in the UUP it's no wonder you lot are getting stuffed!

BTW, "ordinary Unionists" find the leading figures in the UUP to be a bunch of condascending toffs, but don't let that get in the way!

Alex Swan,

Thankyou for the early morning chuckle, just what i needed.
Its good to see that the UUP bases it's hope for returning as Unionisms leading party on the basis that Robinson has an image stigma attached to him and that the others are, from your analysis, just a little too Protestant for Protestants to like them. With experts like you involved the UUP will thankfully continue to decay.
You see while the UUP seems to do everything possible to distance itself from Protestantism in it's true meaning, the majority of Unionists still do hold dear to basic Protestant principles, and as such this belief you have that the DUP drives people away because of religion may be true to a small minority, but election results show that it doesnt bother the vast majority.

As for lack of grace under pressure, i must point out that under the DUP unionism has stood firm in the face of pressure, unlike under Trimble & co who just caved in when the going got tough. With the DUP as unionisms leading party it is now SF/IRA which is under pressure and long may that continue.

Lack of grace under pressure Alex....in many UUC meetings i saw your esteemed party leader pop under pressure from a few minor heckles. Surely not a charactheristic befitting of a leader of a poltiical party to his own members?

BTW, are you predicting a win for David Simpson when you say DT may not be about much longer?

‘Indeed’ in reply to your thoughts, “while the UUP seems to do everything possible to distance itself from Protestantism in it's true meaning, the majority of Unionists still do hold dear to basic Protestant principles,” this claim perfectly illustrates my point in that like your political masters you have identified Unionism with Protestantism and who can blame you, after all in the DUP fundamental Protestantism and Unionism are two sides of the one coin, but is that the mainstream view? As I have asked previously, what other mainstream british political party would hold a gospel concert as a means of raising money, let alone as claimed, mock a dying Pope?

Go to Forrestside or Sprucefield any Sunday and the car park will be full of cars, are you suggesting these people are all Catholics, of course not. The problem is that by identifying Unionism with fundamental Protestantism of the sort exhibited in the DUP even greater numbers of unionists will simply choose to remain in front of the television come Election Day.

You refer to the "vast majority", the vast majority have never supported the DUP except at Europe, even then it was accepted that the UUP was the leading party, after all Ian Paisley himself only claimed the 'crown' of Unionist leadership following the assembly elections despite have topped the poll in the European elections for years.

“Lack of grace under pressure Alex....in many UUC meetings I saw your esteemed party leader pop under pressure from a few minor heckles” when I referred to 'lack of grace' I was thinking more of the scenes outside the election count in Upper Bann when David Trimble and his wife were subjected to the sort of physical abuse handed out to political opponents in Zimbabwe, nor was this violence an isolated case, what about the scenes in Fivemiletown when a DUP Councilor was filmed kicking an opponent?

You claim that the DUP has held firm in negotiations. This is the package of concessions the DUP agreed to in the talks before Christmas, talks that to quote Ian Paisley on the 8th Dec “have resolved issues in relation to all aspects of the comprehensive agreement”.

British MEPs and MPs being allowed to sit in the Irish Parliament with speaking rights, and no doubt voting rights in the future. Agreement to devolve Policing and Justice and opening the way for a Sinn Fein Minister to take charge.

The acceptance of two new all Ireland bodies, with the possibility of even more, and finally not one change in any of the Good Friday Agreements thirty pages, so much for the DUP’s ‘Fair Deal’!

This is what Gerry Adams had to say on the 7th December, “I believe that Sinn Fein can say yes to the political package…In addition to defending the Good Friday Agreement, we have made significant progress across a range of other important issues,”

As to the future, I have no doubt that the Ulster Unionist Party will be around in another hundred years, as for the DUP and their heady mix of fundamental religion and politics time will tell.

Oh dear, another UUP spinner ignoring the cold facts. But in any event, ther electorate will soon decide whether the future of Unionism rests with Beggs or Dodds,Cooper or Donaldson, Nesbitt or Allister.

BTW, the UUP seem to have landed another coup- Tyrone Howe as council candidate in Banbridge - but surely the forwards are supposed to be the stupid ones? ( Yes I was one)

Davidbrew,
"insisting on the same standards for NI citizens as for the rest of the UK ( admittedly not always achieved) in social matters such as the NHS, education, and the very beautiful legal Aid scheme"

Actually, the UUP voted against the NHS and the Education Bill.

Unionism insisted on the opposite, namely retaining the status quo of no decent health care or education for the working class. It was the post-war Labour government that pushed it through regardless of unionist objections.

I love the way today's unionism claims credit for liberal policies it despised back in the day.

David, is it not a fact that ever greater numbers of unionist voters are staying at home, after all in the recent Assembly elections the DUP over all vote changed very little, in other words while many voters were turned off by the UUP they were not attracted to the DUP, is this not why total unionist votes in recent elections have scarcely exceeded the total recieved by nationalist/republican parties despite unionists being in a healthy majority over-all

Paul P

"The suggestion that unionists vote for eager "united irelanders" is exactly why the UUP should be written off."

As long as people are in the UUP and people vote for and support the UUP, it will not be written off. Its called democracy.

You seem to be singing from the same hymn book as Christopher Stalford who in saturdays newspaper commented that the only way to maximise the number of unionist seats acheived in Northern Ireland was to run the DUP in every constituency. This is typical of the arrogance we see from the DUP, I am not disputing they are the largest unionist party and the largest party. They attract alot of unionist support but they do not monopolise the support of every single unionist in the province.

This plan of avoiding electoral pacts and running DUP candidates in every single constituency probably will give the DUP more seats but it will also boost the number of seats gained by Sinn Fein. Northern Ireland is sliding towards extremism on both sides and scarily nobody seems all that bothered about it.

Rebecca

You clearly weren't reading terribly well - what I actually said was that Sinn Fein's ambition to top the pan-NI poll can be thwarted by Unionists in rock-solid Unionist areas voting DUP.

I also don't happen to think that Unionism is best served by abandoning the field in a quarter of the country!

Furthermore, the DUP position was never to run in every seat in the province. An agreement could have been reached whereby the two Unionist party's shred a seat each in the case of FST and SB - you supported that position - it's a pity those arrogant sods at Cunningham House refused to.

shared, not shred. Ooops!

Stalford (as you appear to have lost ur first name)

Pity I threw the newsletter out after I read it because I am fairly sure that in your cackling arrogance you talked about the DUP being the only party for unionist voters. I'm surprised Mick didn't do a thread on it, I remember having quite a few things to say about it.

It seems that you are unsure about where unionists should run and where they shouldn't.

"I also don't happen to think that Unionism is best served by abandoning the field in a quarter of the country!

Furthermore, the DUP position was never to run in every seat in the province"

Which is it then? Abandoning parts of the country? not running in every seat? Make it slightly clearer for us please.

*by the way, give up with the word arrogant...any dupper calling anyone else arrogant at the min seems faintly ridiculous.

Rebecca,

Why should unionists have no other option than to vote for David Trimble in Upper Bann and Dominic Bradley in Newry and Armagh and how would this increase the pro union vote?

Put it this way, the DUP are not helping Unionism when their threating to split the unionist vote in 2 key constituencies. If they had any sense then they would stand down in SB and FST and let unionism succeed but since the DUP leadership can only be described as group of power hungry leeches and their egos exceed actual reality then I personally cannot see N.I moving on productivly.

FYU,
The DUP are threatening to split the unionist vote in those two constituencies, but only in exactly the same manner that your party is threatening to.

Read what Christopher Stalford posted - the DUP offered the UUP to have its pick of the two and they'd take the other - a fair and honourable compromise.

However, Jas Cooper (just while we're doing arrogance) and Micky McGimpskey preferred endangering seats to doing deals with other unionists (much as they quite like deals, but only with terrorists).

Rebecca,
The way to maximise the unionist vote (In my very humble opinion) is that in safe unionist seats both parties should slug it out for support - how does it appeal to unionists to come out in vote in somewhere like North Down if its a single unionist v alliance contest (hardly a knife edge one that!).

In seats where there is no chance of a unionist MP (the Foyle, West Belfast, Mid Ulster type seats) then both parties can again fight it out - they dont affect any possible outcome of the election and unionists should be encouraged to increase the overall number of votes cast throughout the country.

However, in seats where a split unionist vote can definately affect the outcome (note i said definately - i.e. we need this based on election results) then there should be an agreed unionist candidate. This motivates the people in those areas to come out because their vote can result in a unionist MP. This is the case in just 2 constituencies, S Belfast and Fermanagh S Tyrone.

You most certainly do not motivate unionists by either
A) telling them to vote for the SDLP
or
B) giving them no choice of who to vote for in an area which is never going to be lost from unionism.

I'm not known for my sympathy for the DUP but I have to say that if the SDLP came to SF with a deal similar to what the UUP are offering the DUP, I'd expect them to be laughed at.

Interesting to see the UUP trying to sell their "save our skins" policy as a "Stop Sinn Fein" policy. Logically they should then be meeting with the SDLP and openly advocating a voting pact- after all, if they stood down in South Down, and SDLP stood down in Upper Bann, they could maximise the pro-Agreement, anti-SF vote in each. They could win E Londonderry, and Foylewould be saved for Durkan. They might even sign up the Alliance for a pact to dump the Robinsons and Nigel Dodds , in favour of two UUs and Alban respectively.

But of course the UUP daren't be so open, as they must still pretend they believe in Unionist unity, and that it's more important than their wretched Agreement, proving they were never committed to it in the first place. BTW Who thinks they wouldn't be lacerating the DUP just the same in F & ST if the seat was held by Tommy Gallagher on a split Unionist vote? it's not about SF at all- its about their own dreams of faded grandeur returning. it's not the Shinners
stoopid
The UUP are quite content with abstentionist SF MPs at Westminster, as they don't affect the arithmetic (good when once every twenty years they have influence), and they can use them as convenient whipping boys when the Tories or Blinkertt/Clarke feel the urge to get tough on law and order- "Why not crack down in Ulster, too?" they whine, after confering legitimacy on the Shinners in 1996, and conrinuiong to do so to this day, notwithstanding Michael McGimski's John Wayne impressions

"after confering legitimacy on the Shinners in 1996"

Can't remember UUP Forum member and Talks member D Brewster saying that in 1996.

Yerman

I don't recall saying that I think there ought to be a unionist pact in every constituency in Northern Ireland. That would be a trifle un necessary, a unionist pact should be made in Fermanagh/South Tyrone, South Belfast, Newry and Armagh, West Tyrone, Mid Ulster and any other area where it is a nonsense to run two unionist candidates. For example in my home constituency of Strangford I think both unionist candidates should fight it out because I believe voters ought to be given an alternative to Lady Robinson and her Harrods bags, but then thats just my personal feelings about that particular constituency.

"In seats where there is no chance of a unionist MP (the Foyle, West Belfast, Mid Ulster type seats) then both parties can again fight it out - they dont affect any possible outcome of the election and unionists should be encouraged to increase the overall number of votes cast throughout the country."

I disagree with that, only one unionist candidate should be run in those areas, they won't win but they'll give the republicans a damned good scare and provide a united unionist voice and morale boost for the unionists living there.

Rebecca,
Maybe you dont agree with a unionist pact in every constituency - but on that issue you seem to be at direct odds with your party leadership who proposed exactly that!

For some strange reason David Trimble et al felt it necessary to protect Lady Hermon and her Harrods bags, as well as Boggs and his dump/retirement home. The DUP have always been more than happy for all their MPs to face whatever challenge the UUP can muster (even if it ends up only being baby McGimpski - would have been real fun watching Dermot Nesbitt getting the electoral clobbering he deserves - but will just have to watch that in South Down instead).

How exactly is a united Unionist candidate going to give nationalists/republicans a 'good scare' in Foyle, or Mid Ulster for that matter - remember McGuinness got 51% of the vote there last time, and that isnt to count the SDLP vote! West Tyrone cannot be won either - Wille Thompson's victory was a fluke, and it will never, ever be repeated - unionist parties in those circumstances give no-one a scare and again reduce choice to the electorate when there is no opportunity of it actually bearing fruit through the election of an MP. In areas where there is no chance of the seat being won, the aim of both parties should be to maximise their respective totals, and in doing that, increasing the overall unionist turnout across the Province.

"Can't remember UUP Forum member and Talks member D Brewster saying that in 1996."

Then you weren't listening, teaboy! As the record shows (McDonald, Godson, just about every UUC, UUP Eexec and Officers Minute etc) I was one of a few who urged Trimble not to continue in the talks when the Government agreed to admit the Shinners. What about addressing the fundamental points in my post instead of cheap shots behind a rubbish alias? Oh, and milk, no sugar, pronto please.

A good result in South Belfast will be that obnoxious swine McGimp, being kept off the green benches!

Alasdair McDonnell or the DUP - for goodness sake even Gerry Rice, but not that plonker!

Yerman

To be honest I don't think anything would scare Gerry and co more than unionists co-operating. A united unionist candidate who in areas like Newry and Armagh could pull all the unionist voters and attract all unionists from orange man to catholic unionists would be very powerful. They wouldn't beat Sinn Fein but they would get a respectable vote.

I don't think you need to be a genius to work out that unionist bickering works to keep the heat off Sinn Fein. What about a determined, united anti violence stand?

brewster said "was one of a few who urged Trimble not to continue in the talks when the Government agreed to admit the Shinners. What about addressing the fundamental points in my post instead of cheap shots behind a rubbish alias? Oh, and milk, no sugar, pronto please. - "

So why the chance now brewster , why you not against your party december talks that inculded the ira?

Rebecca

Dificulty is that your party only wants to make this determined anti-violence stand in areas where it will materially benefit, leaving the major Unionist party to sweep up votes in unwinnable seats (i.e. WB and MU).

It is self-interest and self-interest alone that is motivating Trimble et al. Your motives may indeed be genuine, but I don't believe their's are one jot.

Rebecca

Dificulty is that your party only wants to make this determined anti-violence stand in areas where it will materially benefit THEMSELVES, leaving the major Unionist party to sweep up votes in unwinnable seats (i.e. WB and MU).

It is self-interest and self-interest alone that is motivating Trimble et al. Your motives may indeed be genuine, but I don't believe their's are one jot.

Stalford

negotiations are still going on with both sides mistrusting the other. To be honest I don't believe the DUPs intentions are genuine, you yourself may be wearing this liberal facade now but last time this was dicussed you reverted back to type and came out with some jibe along the lines of just wait til 5th May. It looks very much to me like the DUP are far more concerned with smashing the UUP than smashing Sinn Fein.

Under such climate of course the UUP are on the defensive. Negotiations can hardly be easy given the amount of very personalised slander all the senior UUP politicans face on a daily basis from the DUP. Compromise under such circumstances must be desparately hard. Pity people in both parties can't see the wood for the trees.

*by the way, buy yourself a dictionary.

As a Dupper MLA from south down told me about a month ago.

"the enemy isn't Sinn Fein, its weak unionism"

Call me cynical but I reckon thats still the informal party line in the DUP.

I've just seen Tom Elliott's piece in today's News Letter.

Can anyone tell me where he means by 'beyond' when he says 'west of the Bann and beyond'?

Surely the boul Tom's not thinking of becoming a T.D...........................(Tractor Driver?) :-)