Dolores Kelly

Dolores Kelly is running for the SDLP in Trimble's Upper Bann constituency. Last time out she came in fourth place with 7,607 or 14.9% of the vote - some way behind Sinn Fein's Dara O'Hagan. O'Hagan is not running this time. Locally at least she sees some signs of improvement.

In previous years they couldn't get anyone from the Garvaghy Road to run for them. This year they have Elaine Sterrit, a 23 year old newly qualified nurse running. Initially she took some verbal abuse, which stopped after Dolores took it up with Gerry Adams. This accords with a lightening of attitudes, with the UUP going into hardline Loyalist areas like Mourneview estate.

But that hasn't improved Unionist chances of borrowing nationalist votes. She told Slugger:

In the last election our voters have told us that they have voted for David Trimble - well not for him, but as one woman told me during the week 'we voted for the lesser of two evils'. I don't think the same argument prevails in people's minds to vote for David Trimble to save the Good Friday Agreement.

On thing she reckons has really gotten the goat of local moderate Catholics was the It's Not Fair document Trimble's party published some time back. In particular she noted the section: It's not fair to tax people more because they are unionists. That's the section which refers to the linking of rates and water charges to the value of your home.

Dolorous: "They're saying it's not fair because protestants live in bigger houses and better areas. It seemed like the kind of piece that the DUP might have put out. They should blush at putting that out."

She reckons her party could have lost up to 2000 votes to Trimble last time out. But it's likely that that figure is also made up of defections to Sinn Fein and people who stayed at home. On the other side of the argument Trimble told Slugger today that he believed he hadn't pulled in any significant numbers of Catholics last time out.

Hmmm. Whatever about Seamus Mallon's statement the other day, it looks like Trimble is relying on getting his core vote out!

Perks writes:

Although today's webloggers are from all parts of the political spectrum, they share disdain for the political process. They may argue that politics is unrepresentative of what actually is happening on the ground - but what they are really saying is that they don't like it because it doesn't suit their needs.

Conducting virtual politics online is second best. It is far less accountable than in the real world - it is impossible to hold anyone to account in a virtual 'town hall', where politicians are free to ignore the views people express. Political argument and persuasion should be carried out in the public realm, where politicians can be properly judged.

Duncan Smith wrote:

But the blogosphere will become a force in Britain, and it could ignite many new forces of conservatism. The internet's automatic level playing field gives conservatives opportunities that mainstream media have often denied them.

Karl Rove is right. The internet could do more to change the level of political engagement than all the breast-beating of introspective politicians and commentators. A 21st century political revolution is now only a few mouse clicks away.

By Alex Kane

So, three weeks into the campaign and five days from the election itself, how has it been for you? Did the earth move for you as the various suitors plied you with literature, broadcasts, debates and doorknockers? Was your mind made up, or an existing opinion altered, by the confetti of mini manifestos and the tidal wave of promises to spend, spend, spend?

Every election here is really three separate elections: the intra-unionist election, the intra-nationalist one and the old faithful demographic headcount of Prods and Taigs. To a large extent it has always been a phoney war, but this time round it feels like the real thing. Sinn Fein and the DUP have only one mission, the destruction of the SDLP and UUP. Oddly enough, neither of their main manifestos sets out realistic proposals for what they will do if they succeed in their electoral ambition. Winning, at all costs, and at whatever long term consequence, seems to be all that matters to them.

But having been round a number of constituencies I must admit that I am not detecting a meltdown of the UUP vote. Yes, the party has huge problems, and there will be political and psychological damage if it is reduced to three seats or less; but it will still be standing on May 6, with between 110 and 130 councillors. It will still poll a considerable proportion of the pro-Union vote, and I would urge those who are preparing its obituary to put their pens down. That said, this is a watershed election for the party and real change must come after the election. But more on that subject next week.

Will the election change anything? Some pundits suggest that a consolidation around the Sinn Fein and DUP power blocs will simply produce a semi-permanent stalemate, with nothing happening for years and Northern Ireland being subjected to Direct Rule for the forseeable future. I’m not so sure. In the past few days Peter Robinson has shifted from the view that it will take a "generation" to uncouple Sinn Fein from the IRA, and has hinted that he would like another Assembly election fairly soon. If the DUP is already thinking about yet another fresh mandate, it would suggest that it is already thinking about a new deal with Sinn Fein.

It is clearly not in the political or electoral interests of either the DUP or Sinn Fein to encourage stalemate. For entirely different, albeit mutually contradictory reasons, both parties need the Assembly up and running as soon as possible. Neither can risk the closing down of the presently redundant Stormont, for that would involve returning to the drawing board for a very long haul. That being the case, it seems inevitable that both parties will quickly pick up from where they left off last December.

On the national scene I expect Mr Blair to be returned with a comfortable enough majority to keep Labour securely in office for another four or five years. The Conservatives, of course, will immediately start skinning each other again in the search for a leader who can snatch the keys to Number 10. The abysmal position they find themselves in is summed up by the fact that although the opinion polls are recording record lows on the issue of Blair’s honesty, the electorate still prefers him to Michael Howard.

Some people wonder if Mr Blair, weakened, tired and preoccupied with other matters, will choose to put Northern Ireland on the back burner in the run-up to his retirement. I doubt it. On the same principle that a dog returns to its own vomit, Prime Ministers return to the one thing that they had hoped would be the crowning glory of their tenure. Blair wants a deal here, a deal that is stable and sustainable. And to that end he will continue to flatter and indulge the various leaders of Northern Ireland’s rival communities.

Let me suggest a more radical approach for the Prime Minister. Don’t return any of their calls. Don’t facilitate negotiations or act as a go-between for people who are willing to share power but who won’t actually talk to each other. Tell them to get on with it themselves, work out something that they are all willing to buy into and then agree to establish the necessary structures for them when they have signed on the dotted line.

The nature of politics here is that our local leaders, all of whom represent a very tiny fraction of the UK electorate, are pampered and indulged as though they were world statesmen. They are not. They are parish-pump politicians with a very poor track record of doing deals or delivering the goods. And they get away with their obstructionist and pompous approach because successive Prime Ministers have allowed them to get away with it. It really is time they grew up and behaved like political adults.

First published in the Newsletter on Saturday 30th April 2005

Fitzgerald points out the first regional estimates for Northern Ireland, made by Prof. Charles Carter for the year 1953, showed that output in Northern Ireland was 27% higher than the Irish Republic and due to financial transfers from Britain (social welfare etc.) living standards were 33% higher.

In the 1960s both regions grew at the same pace of around 4% (70% faster than the British economy).

However, after the subsequent three decades of the troubles, the Republic had come within 3% of the British figure while growth in NI halved to an average of 2% a year. He continues:

"As a result the area became hugely financially dependent on Britain. I am not aware of any study that attempts to explain this development. But it is difficult to believe that the IRA's campaign of violence had nothing to do with it...

He points out that "much of the manpower and human energy of the area had to be channelled into what became a grossly swollen security industry. And as the public sector grew, the private sector languished.

The more the IRA sought to wreck the infrastructure of Northern Ireland, the more the region lost any chance of being able to gain freedom from the financial dependence that bound it ever more tightly to Britain. Of course, we cannot know how rapidly the Northern economy might have grown under conditions of peace and stability....

...But what is quite certain is that the IRA campaign pushed Northern Ireland further into the British embrace. For any thinking nationalist this was clear lunacy."

Most interestingly, he says UUP leader David Trimble missed a great opportunity because of what he calls unionism's "determination to reject non-political links with the Republic" that might in time have helped to restore the North's economy.

"If I had been David Trimble at the Belfast negotiations in 1998, I would have refused to sign unless the British agreed to ask the EU to permit Northern Ireland to apply corporate tax rates nearer to the low Irish than to the high British level - a request that would have been politically very difficult for other EU governments to refuse.

Another would have been that the Irish government permit Northern Ireland to share fully in and benefit from the highly skilled efforts of the Industrial Development Authority, which is probably the world's most effective industrial promotion body.

Instead, Trimble's narrowly political view seems to have led him to seek to avoid any economic differentiation from Britain, however, valuable that might have been for Northern Ireland, and to choose less economically valuable sectors for the North-South co-operation process."

Fitzgerald argues that as a result "Northern Ireland has a very weak econonmy, which in some important aspects it is akin to the East German basket case; above all in the debilitating scale of its economic and financial dependence on the larger neighbour to which it is politically linked.

In 1953, the North, with 31% of the island's population, was responsible for 38% of its output. Today, with only a slightly smaller share of population, it accounts for barely 23% of what this island produces."

He concludes:
"Surely it is more than time for its politicians to turn their attentions to reversing the relative decline of their part of this island."

Kate Hoey's endorsement

Pete Baker has used his scanner to bring us the news that Labour backbencher Kate Hoey has endorsed the DUP challenger in Fermanagh South Tyrone.

Picking up two way traffic

Lamp posts here are festooned with an array of posters of all shapes and sizes. And they are having an effect, even on the very young. One proud grandmother told Slugger about three year old Lucy who calls out the candidates names as she passes them: Naomi Long, Gerry Kelly, Reg Empey, and David Olderdice. "And there's Peter Robinson - sure he's everywhere!"

We're starting our own collection of posters. If you have a digital camera and have spotted some of your own, send us them with a short description to me at: mick[at]gmail[dot]com! And we'll add yours to our growing collection!!

I began to get a sense of what mileage the Unionist candidates are having to put in to this constituency which is really a stitching together of the northern part of County Armagh, including the urban centres of Lurgan and Portadown, and the more rural and countriside of the western portion of County Down. For the nationalists there are large estates in the constituency it pays not to visit for security reasons. Though according to the DUP group, all the parties have visited pretty much all of the mostly middle class Banbridge.

More later.

Ananova quotes Gerry Adams on the manifesto, Sinn Fein launches manifesto,

"We're interested in persuading people on the basis of this.

"If others have a better idea, if Ian Paisley or David Trimble think the Union is better, then let them argue. We'll debate them with nothing more than those arguments and whatever mandate we get in this election."

Noel McAdam writes in the Belfast Telegraph, Sinn Fein manifesto calls for truth over collusion,

" the manifesto sought to touch all the right buttons of its support base. Sinn Fein said it would challenge unionism to reject sectarianism, accept equality and inclusivity.

In advancing the Irish unity agenda, the province's 18 MPs should be automatically accorded membership of the Dail, with both consultative and speaking rights, Sinn Fein argued."

O’Muilleoir argues that the Government discriminates against republicans by not advertising in it. Dunseith countered by saying that new Local Press publication Daily View doesn't get Government advertising either, the reason being that it hasn't been going long enough to be certified by the Audit Bureau of Circulations.

O’Muilleoir noted that a local Newry newspaper is not audited, yet receives Government advertising. He demanded that the Government publishes its criteria for advertising.

However, the ABC figures are out shortly, and - contrary to much speculation - O’Muilleoir said they would reveal sales of more than 10,000.

You expect an anti-establishment paper like Daily Ireland to come out fighting. But to find its strategy was so heavily dependent upon British Government support must surely cause eyebrows to be raised.

The main point in all this, though, is that the potential problem of the government, i.e. the public, being charged for the use of the water was identified in 2003 by the NI Water Council. The BBC reports that the Water Council recommended that the lough be purchased on behalf of the public then, only for the various Departments concerned to ignore the warnings -

Indeed, just days after the Water Council sounded its warning in 2003, the Department of Agriculture played the matter down, saying "we have no evidence that a change of ownership is imminent".

But now, with the discovery of the earl's body in France and the circumstances that surround his death, the possibility that the lough could go on the open market increases.

The DoE have admitted to the BBC that although they were advised by the Water Council in October 2003 to buy the lough, they have still made no approach to the earl or his estate 18 months later.[my emphasis]

At the minute who will be the new owner isn't clear, nor whether they will force the issue of cahrging for the rights to the lough, but it should be evident that it is only a matter of time until that does happen - and then we will know how much we will have to pay for the incompetence of those responsible for ignoring the Water Council's advice.... Not to mention the failure of all of the public representatives around at the time to even notice.

The BBC reported:

The SDLP say they have come across cases of people who have given what they believed was a postal application form to a political party, but have then found the form switched to an application for a proxy vote, to be cast by another person.

Aside from a single punt of £2500 for the UUP (to take more than three seats), there's no substantial money backing David Trimble's party. And in Strabane a Derry punter put £5000 on Mark Durkan to bring his price down to 11/10 is the biggest sign of anyone backing the SDLP.

There's no way of knowing if the money comes from within the party - but suspicion must be strong. Brian Feeney confessed at Slugger Live! the other night to once having bropught down his odds to 8/1, just by walking into a small bookie's shop and flashing the money at the window!

Adrian Eastwood is a little coy about the idea that bookies know better than polls or punters. "I get a bit of advice here and there, and of course you have a few ideas of your own". In Foyle he thinks it's almost too close to call: "it was a take your pick year, but I've gone with Sinn Fein partly because they are so good at getting their people out".

But, unusually for Sinn Fein supporters, they are not backing their party down at the bookies this year. Adrian thinks there could be several reasons. "Maybe it's because they've recognised the controversy over the last few months, and are just keeping things quiet. Or maybe they are just too busy out on the doorsteps, concentrating on getting their people out". And of course, with all Sinn Fein MPs expected to be returned, and Conor Murphy clear favourite in Newry and Armagh, there's just no margin in it for them.

Eastwoods probably had their best PR year (and worst in terms of payouts) in 1983, the year Gerry Adams won West Belfast for the first time. Adrian: "All the people in the black taxis were coming in and putting money on him. We took tens of thousands just on that one bet. There was so much money that the whole of west Belfast must have backed him".

In his victory speech at City Hall acknowledged that support: "On behalf of all the people of West Belfast, thank you Mr Eastwood".

Will the DUP punters have cause to be so grateful this time out? Or will the man with the £2500, be that much better off? We'll only know when the count is complete this day next week.

Gerry Moriarty in his election diary today (subs needed) notes a speech from Seamus Mallon, one time Deputy First Minister:

He seemed to offer a coded endorsement for Upper Bann nationalists to support Trimble. "We have a very excellent (SDLP) candidate in Upper Bann in Dolores Kelly," said Mallon, but then added, "I have no doubt that there will be people in Upper Bann who will make their judgments as they see the best way of using their vote."

Mallon couldn't personally go against Kelly but the latter portion of his statement hinted that nationalists might perhaps vote tactically for Trimble against the DUP's David Simpson, who is favourite to unseat the UUP leader. But galvanising moderate Catholics for Trimble would need a stronger exhortation than the muted message offered by Mallon.

The leaflet (front and back) purports to have been produced by 'Concerned Citizens for a Shared Future' which uses a PO Box as its contact address.

However, suspicion arises because the PO Box used by the group happens to have been registed by a company called Circle Creative Communications, the same company which has produced many recent Ulster Unionist Party leaflets including 'Its Not Fair' and 'Fair Deal'.

After an outright denial of any UUP involvement in the leaflet's production or distribution, any proof of involvement will be very damaging to the Ulster Unionists, particularly in light of the UUP's 'decent people' campaign.

No doubt the comparisons of the Tory 'Back to Basics' campaign will yet again be raised.

"The government had offered the Falls Community Council £10,000 for production of the welcome pack, subject to certain conditions.

The department also objected to the use of its name and logo on the booklet."

A spokesman for the FCC has expressed shock and disappointment, and
Flair Campbell of WARN has said they are "outraged".

Quick question; if members of the PIRA can get membership charges dropped because PIRA is on a recognised ceasefire, isn't the State leaving itself rather open here?

Paisley seems to agree, which might confirm to some what they always suspected - for the DUP, this election is about destroying the UUP, and reducing nationalist representation isn't the priority for them. No wonder there was no electoral pact. For the DUP, it's probably worth letting the SDLP or Sinn Fein pick up a couple of Westminster seats now, as it may be easier to take them back with no UUP to split the unionist vote in 2009.

Adams said:

“The DUP accepted the fundamentals of the Good Friday Agreement and then tripped the whole process up around some of these unachievable demands,” he said.

“In other words if Ian Paisley wants to be the First Minister he can't be the First Minister without sharing power with the rest of us. If he refuses all of that, and I would be very surprised if he did, then that is the challenge for the British Prime Minister and the Taoiseach.

Robinson said:

"After the election, the challenge facing the DUP as the dominant unionist party will be to further the cause of unionist unity," he said.

"After years of division, unionist unity is finally coming about not between the UUP and DUP but within the Democratic Unionist Party. This is good for unionism and after years of unionist decline offers hope for the future."

This is something that might please under-threat UUP MP (and potential post-election party leader?) David Burnside, who recently said:

"Unionists should be working together to defeat the criminal empire of Sinn Fein/IRA and indeed the loyalist organisations.

"I firmly believe that there will be united unionism post-Paisley and post-Trimble. There will be a realignment and I would prefer a merger."

Realignment, anyone?

Emily Bell thinks the BBC may even have landed itself in hot water over its handling of the matter. She's clearly in combative mood, as she lams into the tardy old British (Pooterish?) blogosphere. Needless to say, some of them are fighting back!

Kennedy referred to official police figures which show there had been more than 3000 punishments shootings and 2250 punishment beatings since the beginning of the troubles. He also noted a culture change in the course of the troubles, arguing that this kind of treatment would not have been tolerated in the West Belfast of the 1960's but have come to be looked on as entirely acceptable in the community at large.

John Lowry argued that punishment beatings is "a question of social control over working class areas by paramilitaries". He was highly critically community restorative justice, arguing that although the theory is fine, but that in West Belfast "it's being used in some instances to establish an alternative police force". He talked of people having summonses delivered at 1 o'clock in the morning to restorative meetings at 10 o'clock in the morning", sometimes along with warnings of the dire consequences should they not attend.

Alex Attwood claimed that "...on the ground people are crying out for lawful authority. They can see their communities under stress because of the absence of the law and due process of the law". He argued that paramilitaries had too much to lose when it came to accepting this lawful authority of the state and that they don't show many signs of accepting this anytime soon.

However, he does see a changing attitude amongst Nationalists in West Belfast towards the PSNI. He asserted that despite pressures from the hard men and their distrust of the police people in West Belfast are beginning to turn to the PSNI for community are beginning to test the police, and "in turn the police more times than not are beginning to pass that test".

Chris McGimpsey (the only Unionist on the platform) reported from the other side of the peace line. Where nationalists don't accept the legitimacy of the PSNI, Unionists do. But that doesn't seem to make any difference on the Shankill. He questioned the paramilitary’s c the vigorous recruitment of youngsters into organisations like the Young Citizen Volunteers and the Ulster Young Militants (youth wings of the UVF and the UDA respectively) -"it's because the paramilitaries want to have a continuing stake in our society".

He pointed out that the paramilitaries are part of the community: "When you ask people in the community about paramilitaries, you are talking about the fellah who used to date your sister, the guy who sat beside you in Sunday School, your brother-in- law or the guy you used to kick football with in the Boys Brigade". In tight knit communities many families will contain people who are both victims of punishment shootings, and members of the paramilitaries. This makes it difficult to galvanise unified community action against paramilitary activity.

SF's Mitchel McLaughlin said: “Given our two parties espoused position in favour of Irish unity, I would expect that the SDLP would back an immediate call for a referendum on partition.

“After the elections are over, we intend to engage the SDLP on how we can best prosecute the united Ireland agenda with the parties and the two governments.

“Both parties – Sinn Féin and the SDLP – are saying the same thing: we wish for a united Ireland. Both parties should therefore push for a referendum on the border immediately following the elections.”

Mick addressing the mob
Originally uploaded by cinbel.

Here's the first of several photgraph's taken at last night's Slugger goes Live!

The DUP's stance on the euro and the EU Constitutional Treaty (and, indeed, membership of the EU) was expressed by their MEP Jim Allister last January:

"It is not, nor is it an end in itself, rather for the Euro fanatics who drive the project the constitution is but a start towards the ultimate subjugation of all national powers. The question for each nation is whether they are prepared to go down that road. The choice is between a Europe of co-operating sovereign nation states or a Europe that is itself a superstate."

SF passed a motion at their recent ard fheis pledging them to campaign
against the Constitutional Treaty. Their Dublin MEP, Mary Lou McDonald, told the ard fheis:

"Make no mistake, the EU Constitution will provide for the single biggest advance towards the creation of a European super-state since the beginnings of the European project. It will lay the legal foundations for a federal Europe and deepen the divide between citizens and those who hold power."