"One was the unionist middle and professional class who came out to vote for the Agreement in the referendum, then retired to their leafy suburbs, denying him the support he needed to build a strong pro-Agreement assembly party."

It was this same group who came back out and voted DUP in 2005. One of the reasons can be blamed on internal squabbling and backbiting amongst UUP politicans over the good friday agreement. But this is not all. The main reason I believe was the 26 Million quid Bank robbery and other crimes carried out last year by the IRA. These crimes shocked the Protestant money orientated middle classes into voting for the DUP.

There has always been a belief in Norn Iron that the reason Dr Paisley was never shot by the IRA was because he was the best recruiting agent for both SF & the IRA.

The SF & the IRA have now rewarded big Ian and the DUP back for all those 30 years he helped recruit for them by carring out that 26 Million quid bank robbery. The frightened middle class Prods who all used to vote for the UUP came back out in droves to vote for the DUP, and make them the biggest party because they lost all respect in the UUP to defend them and their businesses.

Interesting comment George - especially on the bank raid effect. But when we talk about the 150,000 prods who voted for the Agreement but not Trimble UU, are we not talking about the people Burnside referred to as being "feriously apathetic"?

Or has the bank raid really changed the rules of the electoral game in NI so utterly?

The fact Trimble is presently viewed so kindly does not bode well for future historical treatment. Heroes or success stories rarely do so well when history re-evaluates.

When his role is reassessed I sincerely believe the followig will be highlighted
His failure to stamp his control on the UUP early with a handpicked officer team and reforms of the party structures,
His failure to develop a full negotiation agenda prior or post Belfast Agreement,
A self-reducing negotiation approach,
His failure to have a Unionist policy vision for devolution,
His failure to develop a strong relationship with the SDLP,
Entering devolution three times without reciprocity from republicanism
His failure to stand down after the Assembly defeat or at least the European result
His misassessment of the DUP post-2003 Assembly election

Forget the eulogising of Bew or Hayes, Trimble was an unmitigated disaster for unionism in particular and democracy in general. His embrace of an organisation stacked by terrorists and bankrobbers may set Maurice Hayes heart-a-flutter, it revolts most unionists - hence his well deserved exit.

I can understand why those who seek a United Ireland think Trimble was a great guy - after all, he did his utmost to advance their cause. But please guys - don't expect the rest of us to cheer on the soon to be Lord Vichy.

People always say nice things about people after they are resigned or died. The many epitaphs being written about David Trimble are so much hot air, nothing more.

David Trimble has done irreparable damage to the union and the nationalists and their cohorts are lining up to say nice things.

As far as the unionist people are concerned he sold the family silver and whats more he sold it to buy a dead horse with no legs from Gerry Adams. Worse still, he did it three times over.

I could feel sorry for him after the first but after three times I can only conclude that he is the type of person who would sell his granny in order to get the position and prestige that he so madly craved.

Now he will join the House of Lords along with all his predecessors and political "yes men"

That was the basic flaw with the GFA. A majority of the normal political voting Unionists never voted for it. The 82% turnout was seriously abnormal. Even listening to the news that day was surreal.People voted who had never voted before. I remember Danas aunt being interviewed saying that she had at last something to vote for.Why?.

The GFA also empasised sectarianism. The votes were all on sectarian lines on the Assembly. The problem with it was that Trimbles vote in the Assembly was on a knife edge. Donaldson did not help either by continually undermining Trimble and the UUP.

There should have been no assembly in 1998 until the IRA disarmed. That should have been the bottom line. Adams was right when he spoke of Labour, FF and Clinton all wanting a deal. Trimble shouuld have resisted that pressure.

Bush has a hands off approach to N.Ireland.Blair will be occupied with Europe and the G8 summit over the next year.

Trimble went down to defeat largely because he was led a merry dance by the Republicans. The DUP will have learnt from that mistake. Gerry Adams is about to get a dose of his own medicine.

"Or has the bank raid change the rules of the electoral game in NI so utterly?"

Mike,

It could do especially for this 2005 election
The problem with some UUP politicians like Burnside is they cannot get away from the old loyalty and creed rubbish to be able to read into the mindset of some of their middle class electorate. Thats why the UUP lost this one.

The bank raid has done little harm to the SF electorate, but it sure as heck changed the attitude to those middle class prods who used to vote for the good friday agreement.

These Prods vote with their bank books morgage endowments, pension plans and overdrafts to the bank, unlike the working classes who vote because of loyalty , crown, orange lodge or creed. The Good Friday agreement was a big plus for the middle class business types to start trade and create business again. thats why they jumped at it..

A lot has changed since 1998. The US 9/11 2001 terrorist attack has made a restart to war again by the IRA a nonstarter.

But a 26 Million quid bank robbery by highly professional gangsters who both police forces and governments blames on the IRA and who haven't been caught yet scares the living crap out of such business people.

These same 150,000 Prods who cant stand the sight of, or listen to Paisley's religious rantings would still be prepared to vote for him and the DUP if they believe they can stop expansion. of SF.west of the Bann. The UUP & SDLP have failed.

Much more will be written of him in the history of this period than will ever be written about the UKUP. Now THERES a Dodo.

...scares the living crap out of such business people...absolute balderdash.
No sign of the NB going out of business, is there? Businesses folding in fear across NI, are they? No?
Anyway this is a thread about David Trimble first and possibly last First Minister and Nobel Peace Prize winner. Keep on topic.

He did his best and yet has joined O Neill and Faulkner in the ranks of those who didnt succeed.

No way are those who gloat at his demise or slate his success any more "principled democrats" or high minded strategists than any of those who brought down his predecessors.

What surprises me a little is the comparative lack of coverage that there has been of Trimble's resignation in the British press compared with the coverage of NI a few years ago. It's been more than of (say) the county council elections in Norfolk - even though Norfolk probably has a bigger population and its councillors are probably of comparable quality - but it's still very sparse. Is this lack of coverage another benefit of the Agreement for British newspaper readers?

" No sign of the NB going out of business, is there?" Businesses folding in fear across NI, are they? No?

Thats because the NB shareholders in OZ absorbed the loss of this big one. Regards other smaller robberies: Read the following:

"Mr. Ingram: The number of persons held at gunpoint during the 729 armed robberies recorded since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement could be provided only at a disproportionate cost.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmhansrd/vo000216/text/00216w07.htm

"Anyway this is a thread about David Trimble first and possibly last First Minister and Nobel Peace Prize winner. Keep on topic."

No one put your arm up your back to reply.

Much more will be written of him in the history of this period than will ever be written about the UKUP. Now THERES a Dodo.

I doubt it, Bob MaCartney is a much more interesting person, and better looking than DT and David Burnside put together.

i was never a fan, indeed I suffered a full verbal lash from him as a young undergraduate which was inexecusable and apparently typical of him. However, he took Unionism closer to accomodation with the bigger world around it, than all his predecessors. I laugh when I hear some here talking about how nationalists loved him! Confirms my belief that too many here have never actually talked with nationalists ( except when posturing here)

No, Norfolk is much, much smaller but the point remains the same. None of us could care less if the mayor of Middlesbrough or the council leader in South Yorkshire resigned but most people in Britain have heard of Trimble, Adams and Paisley, but I'm sure that news coverage in this election was low in Britain - or am I wrong about that?

By the way, any stats about the geographical location of the people who read Slugger? Presumably it would be 1 NI, 2 I, 3 GB, 4 US and 5 everywhere else, i.e. GB readers would be low on the ranking?

George: "Bob MaCartney is much better looking than DT and David Burnside put together."

That's because he wouldn't have 4 arms and 4 legs, but if you combined David Trimble's come-to-bed eyes with David Burnside's firm mouth, then Bob McCartney wouldn't stand a chance.

I agree with all Hayes comments with the exception of

"Trimble's great failure was not to restructure the party, modernise it and break the institutional link with the Orange Order."

I have heard this criticism a lot over the last few days but anyone who knew the internal workings of the Party would have realised that was simply not possible in this time. The necessary 2/3 majority and inbuilt 120+ Orange seats on the Council meant that turkeys only eventually voted for Christmas on their own terms.

Anyhow there were too many other battles to be won during the period involving Policy and indeed the leadership itself that forcing through these other changes were more than anyone could swallow.
Those particular Council Meetings were particularly divisive and energy sapping.

I agree with the two groups defined as having let him down.
George the middle class unionist he is talking about is the difference between the 82% turnouts at referendum in EB & ND for instance and the continually less than 60% ever since. Such people pushed pro agreement unionism over the edge and then waived goodbye. Perhaps we didn't give them something in the Party they could vote for ?

That I blame Republicans for the current problems - totally.
However I was often surprised they had come as far as they had and hence when they failed to deliver then Plan B should have come into play which adds three more groupings who let us down.

Tony Blair should have that chalk board rammed up his arse for not delivering on his promises.

Then I blame the SDLP for not moving forward with Constitutional unionism - and it is still insisting on propping up SF no matter how the IRA fail to live up to democratic principles.

Then I have to blame the inherent immorality within the majority of the voting nationalist electorate who or either too stupid to see/conveniently ignore/or don't care about the relationship between the IRA and SF. Unionists will never be able to smash SF - that gift is in the hand of the nationalist electorate and it doesn't have the will to do so.

You could throw in the No camp within or own party or indeed the continual attacks of the DUP, a Party with no policy other than to oppose - but as anti Agreement unionists (with the exception of those motivated by personal bitterness and animosity) they were only doing what they felt was right.

The bottom line is if the IRA had delivered DC and disbanded - or if they hadn't then others had played their role - then this would be a very different place today.

But then why would SF want to make NI stable ?

John East Belfast

"I have heard this criticism a lot over the last few days but anyone who knew the internal workings of the Party would have realised that was simply not possible in this time"

Trimble's opportunity was in the early period of his leadership. The Trimble/Taylor leadership had almost 70% support in the UUC. The plan for reform existed when he took over it just needed to be implemented but he backed off.

fair_deal

You make a fair point in that the eventual 10 year production of a new set of rules etc was a disgrace but perhaps it is an Ulster unionist trait but the picking and dissection of every dot and comma everytime it was raised meant most lost the will to live.

In terms of the OO they were too powerful and Trimble could hardly dance down Garvaghy road one week (which gave him his huge majority)and then try to argue for their diminution the next.

Come to bed eyes, are you joking Kay, surely you must mean Jeffery Donaldson.?

lady Hermon was overheard at the UUC meeting in 2005 saying 'Oh, I think Jeffery is just georgeous, he has those come to bed eyes like my sister's cocker spaniel. Its a pity he has run off and joined the DUP. Must be in his breeding you know, or he picked those naughty habits up in the UDR. Certainly he wouldn't be allowed to do that in the Navy. Myself, David and us Bangorian UUPers would'nt think of doing such a thing, like jumping ship"

Oh, I have gone off topic again, you naughty boy George.

Trimble and the UUP party of this time will be remembered for their efforts to bring peace to Northern Ireland, but being let down by the government and republicans leading to anhilation at the polls by a DUP party, which was anti - catholic and racist.

This is what will be written in the text books in years to come. No doubts

Trimble and the UUP party of this time will be remembered for their efforts to bring peace to Northern Ireland, but being let down by the government and republicans leading to anhilation at the polls by a DUP party, which was anti - catholic and racist.

This is what will be written in the text books in years to come. No doubts

"the inherent immorality within the majority of the voting nationalist electorate"

...has that a genetic basis, do you think?

Or, perhaps, a reaction of frustration to their fellow citizens refusing to work with their democratically elected representatives and a section working to overturn an agreement supported by 71% of the population in the North and 90% plus across the island?

"Trimble and the UUP party of this time will be remembered for their efforts to bring peace to Northern Ireland, but being let down by the government and republicans leading to anhilation at the polls by a DUP party, which was anti - catholic and racist.

This is what will be written in the text books in years to come. No doubts"

if it is , the historians are even less capable than their Japanese counterparts.

They should record how a man who -let's not forget this- had John Major's government in his power, yet couldn't even deliver the rather modest goal of local council reform; who lost out even then on the strucuture of the Talks to a construct which shredded and weakened Unionism electorally for 7 years; who sought a common approach with Paisley and Bob, yet ratted on them within a week; who embarked on a journey with a party woefully unprepared and incapable for the compromises necessary to achieve the ultimate goal-DT First Minister- and who then spent 5 years surrounding himself by an ever smaller clique of placemen and twisters, at one step conning the UUC and Unionists generally ("No guns, no Government"), and at another trying to bully dissidents when his failure was exposed.

History will be kind to a man who transformed the UUC from a ramshackle construct of local Unionists who in their amateur way at least used to interact with their community- even ocasionally listening to it, into a modern... er ramshackle contruct of paid yes men who talked down to their own people and kept on selling a product that was clearly off?

History will laud a man who managed to lose the most talented group of young politicians Unionism had had for several generations ( OK - I'm not setting the bar very high there, I know) en masse to the DUP , whilst leaning on Sir Cecil Walker, and soon to be Sir Ray Boggs thus delivering the UUP to a parity with George Galloway in Trimble's beloved Westminster?

History will recognise that Unionism, after decades of parochialism finally engaged fully with the rest of the UK, to the extent that we are now loved by our fellow British citizens....except perhaps those of a different ethnicity, as Trimble stalwart Fred Crowe might have us believe (BTW bye bye Fred... and Raymond ... and Lord Ken... and all those other stars in the firmament of Ulster Unionism who contributed so much to breaking the shackles of that narrow inward view). Yup, Blair himself loves us so deeply that he has given us part time Peter Hain (whose surname in French best expresses his view of Unionism) to maintain the Union.

Oh yes -he shook Unionism up, and boy did it need it, but as when Willie Whitelaw was accused of having pushed Faulkner too far he admitted "Of course I did, but what a fool he was to let me", history will say of the Turtle the same IN SPADES

"Trimble and the UUP party of this time will be remembered for their efforts to bring peace to Northern Ireland, but being let down by the government and republicans leading to anhilation at the polls by a DUP party, which was anti - catholic and racist.

This is what will be written in the text books in years to come. No doubts"

if it is , the historians are even less capable than their Japanese counterparts.

They should record how a man who -let's not forget this- had John Major's government in his power, yet couldn't even deliver the rather modest goal of local council reform; who lost out even then on the strucuture of the Talks to a construct which shredded and weakened Unionism electorally for 7 years; who sought a common approach with Paisley and Bob, yet ratted on them within a week; who embarked on a journey with a party woefully unprepared and incapable for the compromises necessary to achieve the ultimate goal-DT First Minister- and who then spent 5 years surrounding himself by an ever smaller clique of placemen and twisters, at one step conning the UUC and Unionists generally ("No guns, no Government"), and at another trying to bully dissidents when his failure was exposed.

History will be kind to a man who transformed the UUC from a ramshackle construct of local Unionists who in their amateur way at least used to interact with their community- even ocasionally listening to it, into a modern... er ramshackle contruct of paid yes men who talked down to their own people and kept on selling a product that was clearly off?

History will laud a man who managed to lose the most talented group of young politicians Unionism had had for several generations ( OK - I'm not setting the bar very high there, I know) en masse to the DUP , whilst leaning on Sir Cecil Walker, and soon to be Sir Ray Boggs thus delivering the UUP to a parity with George Galloway in Trimble's beloved Westminster?

History will recognise that Unionism, after decades of parochialism finally engaged fully with the rest of the UK, to the extent that we are now loved by our fellow British citizens....except perhaps those of a different ethnicity, as Trimble stalwart Fred Crowe might have us believe (BTW bye bye Fred... and Raymond ... and Lord Ken... and all those other stars in the firmament of Ulster Unionism who contributed so much to breaking the shackles of that narrow inward view). Yup, Blair himself loves us so deeply that he has given us part time Peter Hain (whose surname in French best expresses his view of Unionism) to maintain the Union.

Oh yes -he shook Unionism up, and boy did it need it, but as when Willie Whitelaw was accused of having pushed Faulkner too far he admitted "Of course I did, but what a fool he was to let me", history will say of the Turtle the same IN SPADES

Historians do tend to be a tad objective David, thats why the history won't be written for a while yet and why you won't be doing the writing.

Of course, the history will be influenced by what happens from here on in - a truly historic power sharing deal between the DUP and SF within 12 months will more than eclipse DT's efforts and consign him to footnote status. Do the DUP have the cohones to create such a history?

"A History of Ulster in the 21st century"

Following the 2005 destruction of the UUP which followed Faulkners UPNI into political oblivion, the local council shakeup provided the sole power base for the DUP and SF for the following decade.

After the Assembly was prorogued in 2006, following the collapse of political talks, Direct Rule Ministers continued to bring the taxation status of Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the United Kingdom. The introduction of water charging in 2006 and the hiking of the Regional Rate meant that by 2008, the average contribution to regional services reached £1200-1400 per household. Protests to the resident Direct Rule Ministers were received politely.

The security situation continued to be relatively stable, although a series of incendiary attacks and street protests in the summers of 2005-2007 led to a number of serious clashes, deaths and the destruction of two major shopping complexes.

A major Anglo-Irish political intiative was completed in 2008 which cemented the cross border organisations established under the Belfast Agreement and established a de facto joint sovereignty arrangement for the governance of the state. FF and SF Dail Ministers met regularly with the NI SoS to discuss matters of mutual interest. Street protests and a mass rally of Unionists and boycotting of Direct Rule Ministers proved ineffectual. Both NI communities settled down under the new arrangements by the end of the twenty first century's first decade."

Jo

Thank you for the usual historical determinist assessment of where the political process is going.

This generation of Unionists knows all about the mistakes of the anti-AIA campaign. It will not be repeated.

"Do the DUP have the cohones to create such a history?"

They must have bigger cohones than the UUP even if they are not so decent.

Lets face it one needs powerful well massaged cohones to sing like Box Car' Willie McCrea or Pauline Merry.

So, fair deal, you agree:

Further moves towards joint sovereignty arrangements in the event of failing to secure an internal settlement;

That the AIA protests will need to be re-run; and

They will be ineffectual and further alienate HM government. Oh, and possibly irritate the Catholic/Nationalist community. Now, what is the next stage? Hmmm?

Well, of course decommissioning is an important issue to Unionists and many posters here. It has been the issue that has most de-stabalised NI local government, and prevented progress.

I think David's big mistake was
1) not to get the IRA as signature to any agreement and
2) relying on a last minute private letter from Mr Blair to set the agenda for decommissioning.

For such an important issue for unionists, he should have got the IRA to publicly agree and put it (clearly) in the GFA. Consensus, timescales, verification, quantities etc.

I think the 'fudge' was - all signing parties to use their influence to bring about decommissioning by 2000.

This 'fudge' was used to beat Trimble over the head for 7 years and has finally dealt the knock-out blow last Thursday.

Of course he was probably under much pressure at the time of signing. Perhaps the DUP could have given support had they ........

George, youll excuse the o/t I know but LOL! at "powerful well massaged cohones "

Abucs: Of course the DUP wouldn't......back in 1998. In 2005, they have finally got what they wanted then. Power. Now, what do they do with it?

Protest at the ongoing moves to joint-sovereignty if they cant cut a deal? If thats all they can do, then my history above will come to pass.
Up to them, isnt it?

Jo

No I don't agree Jo if I agree I will tell you. I believe we are in for some tough but successful negotiating. Simply pointing out that nationalists seem to be under the misapprehension that Unionists don't learn lessons from past mistakes, this generation does.

Just to test your great foresight Jo, who is going to win the 2.30 at York, the BBC is tipping Mona Lisa?

Jo, i'm for joint-sovereignty too. I'm sure joint soverignty isn't on the DUP's list of possibilities although i think it would be best for everyone. It's just that it is seen as a loss for unionism and a rampant DUP are out to 'smash Sinn Fein/IRA' whatever that means.

Will be interesting to see what net affect the DUP will have on proceedings.

George, youll excuse the o/t I know but LOL! at "powerful well massaged cohones "

Jo, one must look upon this quotation from a symbolic literal poetic artistic viewpoint. Only DUP supporters would read it like you do.
Did you not mention the word cohones first.?
From a Free-pee viewpoint Box car Wille McCrea will be well remembered much so historically than David Trimble.

While I'm not necessarily an advocate of joint sovereignty (and I doubt that any non-devolved arrangement will ever be called that!), I mention it because it would clearly be a weakening of the Union. Of course its ironic that those most vociferous in support of the Union are in fact the biggest threat to it.

I think "Secret History" in the 2-30 to be honest! ;-) Appropriate huh? Here's to successful betting - and successful negotiating!

George, I am indeed flattered (I think) that you see me as having sufficient empathy to view things as would a DUP supporter!

Yeah, it won't be called joint sovereignty. Something like the Anglo-Irish agreement.
The point i'm trying to make is that in a way JS may be seen to weaken the union, but in another way it would strengthen it. There's no impossible reason why people can't be part of both juristictions. Is the union stronger by having less influence from Dublin, from preventing it's citizens from taking part in Irish mainstream life or is it stronger if it is more stable and accepted by a larger percentage of the population ?

Having anywhere from 30 to 40% of Westminster MP's refusing to acknowledge the Parlament, as well as local government in limbo, and it's inhabitants constantly at eachothers throats is no strong Union.

Abucs, no it won't of itself weaken the union but would be SEEN as weakening the union if you have a joint secretariat etc in the absence of any form of devolution (even of the scrutineering kind like the 82-86 Assembly) Despite what peeps think, this place will never be run as is Finchley! I remember getting into a lot of both some time ago by mentioning that this state "wasn't fuly legitimate". Unionists took great offence at this when all I meant was the technical definition which simply stated as a fact that not all residents accepted the full legitimacy of the state as part of the UK. They didn't then and they don't now. Giving those people some say in the running of the state, through devolution, is the best way to preserve the Union, express the identity of those who do and do not have a British identity, protect the human rights of all citizens and have accountability for taxation such as water charges!

"George, I am indeed flattered (I think) that you see me as having sufficient empathy to view things as would a DUP supporter!"

Indeed Jo, many scarlett pimpernel DUP supporters in the recent election have turned out to be staunch UUP supporters until the last minute. One has only to take the actions of one UUP member of the House of Lords and another retiring UUP MP to wonder who has or hasn't UUP or DUP cohones at all.

To get back O/T poor David Trimble was too boringly honest a politician to be remembered in history. Its the colourful charlatans and devious twisters like Adams & Magennis who will be republican heroes or Unionist arch enemies remembered in the 20 century Norn Iron political history books.

David Trimble will be remembered only as the guy the UK & Irish governments tricked into signing the GFA. Like Michael Collins who signed the partition document in 1921 ending another violent period in Irish history and was later stabbed in the back by a cute hoor of an Irish Yank called De Valera. Paisley is just a Prod mirror image of De Valera, its a pity he had to wait to he was near 80 to nearly achieve his megalomanic goal.

Ironically, Paisley has put that many chains and locks on the doors of Stormont to help keep SF out he is keeping himself outside. also. Maybe the Secretary of State will open Stormont when the big guy passes on to his free pee heaven/hell so his body can lie in state for two /three days. Then all his followers can parade past and pay their last respects to their DUP hero. We as citizens of Norn iron can be ever so thankful the Free-pees dont believe in reincarnation.

Jo

Spot on with your 10.24 am post.

You could also have added growing disillusionment within moderate unionism with their apparent inability to influence and control the increasing taxes they are paying. They start to buy into the argument that a New and economically vibrant Ireland with alliances with Fine Gael and more moderate Irish parties is where their future lies. Then when the second decade Referendums come .....

If the future of unionism is to be led by the DUP then we are definitely ****ed.

Leaving no place for moderate unionism is a serious mistake by the DUP and a master stroke (if they had pre - planned it)by Republicans

davidbrew

Anyhow what is the great strategy of the DUP to nurture and protect the Union ? - I hope it is more than keeping SF out of Govt based on an "Ulster will Fight and Ulster will be Right" approach ?

How are you going to broaden the Unionist family even among moderate unionists while you gloat over the demise of the Party who's culture and inclinations they supported. You honestly don't think that such people are going to become DUP voters ? Some yes but a sizeable section will be lost

Another big mistake would be to expect that such people will prop up moderate unionism and be content with eternal opposition to the DUP. Pro Agreement Unionism is by its nature constructive and won't fancy years of passive opposition. We like to build things, and take risks - I know Paisleyism was a serial protester but taht doesn't come naturally to us - waste of energy and all that.
More such people will get on with their careers and business and cease to give a damn.

How are you going to appeal to even a slither of catholic unionists - indeed how is the hardening of unionism going to stop the opposite effect on the other side ?

How is the DUP going to earn the respect of our fellow UK citisens when so many in it are so alien to current popular GB culture ?

Are you njust going to sit and hope that forever and a day 50+% keep voting for the Union ?

John, Excellent post. I would like to think that behind the bullying and bluster of the rejectionists on this and other bbs there is what Paisley (and I) would call "a titter of wit."

I have seen arrogance and gloating in pretty hefty helpings since contributing here and very little in the way of constructive thinking. Taxation without accountability is one of the very real "costs" of stalemate here.

I welcome the views of anyone who sees that in fact there is something positive to be made of the victory other than schadenfreude - but that they also have to see that most of the dirty work has already been accomplished by a man they despise.

John East Belfast

Act as if you have faith and faith will be given to you
Act as if you are defeated and defeat will be given to you

John EB
I have been saying for months on this site-let the UUP go out and cultivate Garden centre Prod-forget about the traditional Unionists- we're not going back to you. Do whatever it takes to bring out the moderate vote. But instead they/you pretend that the DUP blocks that growth. it doesn't.
Trimble & Co huffed and puffed about the demise of the RUC. for instance. True pro-Agreement Unionists wouldn't have cared about symbols, because their Unionism is a watery mush- yes like Alliance. many liberal Unionists have voted DUP for the first time because the UUP has proved itself shambolic arrogant and ineffective. Until a viable liberal Unionist party arrives, we should all rejoice that such ineptitude has been punished by the electorate, and support those who are professional and efficient, i.e. the DUP.
Don't believe me? two words of conclusive proof-Allister & Nicholson. QED
.

'within moderate unionism with their apparent inability to influence and control the increasing taxes they are paying.'
Seems like you want the UK parties to organise in NI?

Elvis (great email btw) I think NI has had enough New Labour ideologues to do us a while.

On the other hand if you know someone who thought Mr Spellar was a perfect gentleman, that Mr Gardiner valued and championed local education and that Mr Pearson had respect for our local public servants, just post away.

"Seems like you want the UK parties to organise in NI?"

The conseratives already have. It might not be a bad idea if all the UUP 115 NI councillors and 25 MLA's transfered to the Tories.

They would then have 198 MP's at west minister to the DUP's 9 MP's and financial support to keep cunningham house going.

Jo
New Labour can do what it wants in NI as far as I'm concerned - when they stop discriminating and started standing.
George - Slyvia is the problem the Tories at Westminster hate her. Watch this space though for interesting developments in coming months

I really do have to wonder at people like JohnEastBelfast and their supposed logic.

How on earth has the DUP 'left no room for moderate unionism'? If, as the UUP constantly told us, they are the moderate voice of the centre-ground then why aren't those people flocking in their droves to the UUP? John, you like most of your party colleagues are so wrapped up in your own self-loathing/grief at the loss of the once mighty monolith of the Ulster Unionist Party, that you cannot even see the first chinks of reality which should be starting to shine through.

"Pro Agreement Unionism is by its nature constructive and won't fancy years of passive opposition. We like to build things, and take risks -"

Well get off your a*se and do it then - however taking risks is not always something to be praised. Calculated risks are one thing, but simply praising risk taking as a virtue is nothing short of stupidity. It was a risk for the DUP to have taken Ministerial posts in the last Assembly as it could well have alienated the core DUP vote, however it was a calculated risk as what (seemlingly miniscule) effect it might have had was far outweighed by the benefits.

Your, and the UUP's other problem is, also quite ironic in its own way, is that you are the people living in the past. You fought an election campaign against the DUP which might have had some resonance with people in the 1980's when swings were being tied up - but just face facts, the DUP were recognised to have put positive proposals forward for negotiations and, despite the drivel poured out over the campaign, were seen to have done well in negotiations.

The DUP have been the side which in reality amongst the unionist community, are seen to be more positive. That might seem like a paradox to you but unionists out there happen to think that the DUP has more to offer. Its like an uncle of mine said to me during the election (and this is someone who I always considered to be so on the 'left' of the UUP that he wouldnt have been far off an Alliance voter) "why would you listen to the UUP any more, they've got nothing left to say".

I nearly fell off my seat when he said it - and not just because he was right. It was the kind of comment you could have heard 15 years ago about the DUP : - "they've got nothing to say/offer". Its being said now about the UUP. What exactly do they have to offer, even to the moderate garden centre prod out there?

George - Slyvia is the problem the Tories at Westminster hate her. Watch this space though for interesting developments in coming months"

Why do they hate her?

Even if they dont like her she is only one MP with no power over all the UUC. They will decide what is best.eventually. But if they dont act quickly many more UUP MLA's and councillors will be jumping ship to the DUP.
All politicians are self seeking and when many UUP councillors & MLA's see their seats going down the tubes at the next election like the 4 MP's and 40 council seats disappeared this 2005 election, they will jump accordingly.

All decisions regards what happens to NI will take place at westminister. So its better to have the Tories on the moderate Unionist side than against it otherwise Paisley's OTT type Unionism is going to sell us down the river into joint British & Irish government control .

George, there are none so blind....

Interesting that so many helpful peeps point out what the UUP's problems are/were - when it is the DUP who are facing the biggest problem ever - how to be constructive, negotiating a successful settlement. If they do it, hats off.

yerman

"John, you like most of your party colleagues are so wrapped up in your own self-loathing/grief at the loss of the once mighty monolith of the Ulster Unionist Party,"

wrong - we demonstrably put our Policy before our Party and our electorate.

Any grief and despair I have is that 'wet' unionism doesn't give a damn and centre right unionism has moved to the DUP. The DUP is more Church than broad church meaning wet unionism is in danger of becoming passive nationalist and will be joined increasingly by more moderate unionists.

Overall a decisive shift to the DUP will ultimately result in a reduced unionist vote.

Personally I only think there is material room for two unionist parties if they are both "extreme" - ie very differentiated.
This was apparently the case - however the perception now, as you have pointed out, is that the DUP has put its foot (maybe a toe or two) on the centre ground. This has given comfort to some and so weakened the UUP moderate raison detre.

However the UUP is not the Alliance Party in that it thinks it needs to be there because people want it.
If it moves towards the DUP it might as well join them (I won't)

If it moves further to the left then it will have more internal strife and hobble. It will spend 15 years in the wilderness until people wake up to the fact that the DUP's 'policy' of protecting, nurturing and broadening the Union (davidbrew didn't tell me what that is)is leading to a United Ireland.
By that time it will be too late or passive unionism won't care.

davidbrew

"I have been saying for months on this site-let the UUP go out and cultivate Garden centre Prod-forget about the traditional Unionists- we're not going back to you. Do whatever it takes to bring out the moderate vote"

If you value the Union go out and get them yourself as your Party now represents the leadership of Unionism here.

Any attempt by the DUP to move towards these people will lead to strife and division within it. You may get the odd one but believe me in ND, EB and Strangford you don't appear to realise the contempt and derision 'unionism' is generally held in.

Elvis Parker

"Seems like you want the UK parties to organise in NI? "

I was always of the opinion that Unionism had ultimately won or failed when there was no need for a Party with such a name.
I also believed that the existence of any unionist Party meant we were failing.

I recall remarking at our centenary dinner that I hoped to God there wouldn't be the need for another one. Perhaps I am going to get my wish but for the wrong reasons.

George
Not sure why they hate her so much. Okay she votes with Labour alot of the time and has failed the observe the 'friends with everyone' of other unionist MPs by cuddling up to Labour. This would justify suspicion or even dislike but they really have no time for her whatsoever.
So if Trimble takes the Tory Whip (oops) he might be on his own. Must go and enjoy the London evening sun

George, there are none so blind....

I think there are many still very blind. Have to agree with Alex kane here who has attacked suggestions that a team of several leading figures could run the party.

'Battered Ulster Unionists Consider 'Corporate Leadership'

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4538873

When will they ever learn. The only way is throw their lot in with the Tories.to save themselves anymore embarrassment

Listening to the news there the UUP is not even recognised as a party anymore at westminister. Poor Syliva has been sent into the wilderness to sit were the DUP used to sit and Paisley and his 8 sycophant MP's have triumphantly taken over David Trimble's and the UUP MP's old seats with glee.

..

Itll take more than a couple of toes to convince Catholics that the DUP has become anything more than it has always seemed to them - right wing, bible-bashing, power hungry, flirtacious with Loyalist paramilitaries.

Furthermore, if it wants to do a deal, it had better do so while the Big Man is still around and compos mentis to give it his seal of approval, otherwise the "true faith" will be interpreted many ways and the party dissolve into its disparate factions. Despising Trimble may mask the differences for now, but there are at least 2 DUPs, neither of which at present would convince any Catholic that they shouldn't vote for Gerry Martin et al...

"In ND, EB and Strangford you don't appear to realise the contempt and derision 'unionism' is generally held in."

I'll second that comment.

I would agree with people who said the Northern Bank raid was a big factor. How can you trust people linked to an organisation behind such an event?

F***, I'd probably vote DUP myself if I had a vote up North even though I am a Dubliner and was raised Catholic.

The sceptics regarding the GFA have unfortunately been largely vindicated. I always had reservations about it particularly when I saw the TV footage of all those psychos being let out of prison early.

No surrender to IRA thuggery.

Posted by: Jo at May 11, 2005 06:47 PM:

Itll take more than a couple of toes to convince Catholics that the DUP has become anything more than it has always seemed to them - right wing, bible-bashing, power hungry, flirtacious with Loyalist paramilitaries.

It's getting more and more difficult for Unionists to care too much about what Catholics-who-happen-to-be-Nationalists (not all of them are you know) think when most of them now vote Sinn fein. And in case you haven't noticed, they don't "flirt" with paramilitaries. Mote. Beam. Eye.

"In ND, EB and Strangford you don't appear to realise the contempt and derision 'unionism' is generally held in."

Westminster results
North Down - Unionist candidates took 88% of the votes
East Belfast - Unionist candidates took 85% of the vote
Strangford - Unionist candidates took 81% of the vote.

Its hard to see how these poor Unionist parties survive with such levels of contempt.

With the exception of the UUP in North Down, the votes in Westminster in roughly corresponded with their Council vote so when the voters had as broad a choice as you can get they stayed with the same parties.

In North Down you had about the broadest choice in NI and there was no mass of contemptuous voters rushing out to endorse them.

No doubt the next claim will be that the contempt is among those who don't vote. Never mind any research among non-voters has always shown the same attitudes among non-voters as voters.

However, don't let hard facts and research get in the way of self-serving claims to try and back up their own opinions on the future direction of Unionism.

fair_deal

"No doubt the next claim will be that the contempt is among those who don't vote"

Dead right.

% Electorate not voting

EB - 42%
Strangford - 46.4%
ND - 46%

We are talking about almost half the popoulation

"any research among non-voters has always shown the same attitudes among non-voters as voters."

Wise up

not sure how history will view him, but to me he bears a big responsibility for letting murderers out of jail and I will never forgive him for that, especially as he is unlikely to apologise for it. I remember a quote from him at the time of the referendum "unionists opposed to the agreement are wraping themselves in the comfort blanket of past troubles". It was a despicable thing to say, I find little comfort in the murders and mainings of the past or indeed of the present.

John East Belfast

"Wise up"

Nice to see such a rational response when faced with evidence.

Please offer some independent evidence on the views that those who did not vote hold? (Please try and do better than me and my mates think this)
Please explain why none of these non-voters who are sooooo fuelled by contempt don't go and vote for other parties?
The three constituencies you list are among the safest Unionist seats - could that not offer some of the explanation? Most of the safe Labour party seats in the North of England have turnouts beneath 50%.

The DUP vote in all three held or grew in each of these constituencies. In Strangford and North Down the UUP vote fell in physical and percentage terms. Maybe its more a case of contempt for the UUP?

"We are talking about almost half the popoulation"

No half the electorate actually.

fair_deal

"Nice to see such a rational response when faced with evidence"

what evidence was that.
I think it was you who raised evidence so I think it is your job to produce it otherwise - wise up.

These three safe unionist seats have a different type of unionist - the garden centre prod who exists everywhere but is in major concentration in these areas.
The very fact that the DUP could not win ND and the UUP vote went up in EB despite the trends elsewhere should give you an indication of the type of unionist you are dealing with.
Infact that you could not turn these particular unionist voters shows how 'wet' the ones who voted for nobody are.

"Please explain why none of these non-voters who are sooooo fuelled by contempt don't go and vote for other parties?"

Because there aren't any parties they feel they can vote for and because they live in unionist areas then it is a fair assumption that they hold all brands of unionism with varying degrees of derision and contempt.

Put it another way why do nationalists consistently get 70% + of their electorate out - safe seat or not ?

as for me and my mates well I do live in EB and socialise a lot in ND so I do meet a lot of such people. I don't know which part of the country you live in. Do you live in any of these constituencies ?

JEB

You have reached a particular opinion on what every non-voter thinks. Fine. Just don't expect the rest of us to swallow it without some supporting evidence other than your repetition especially when there is independent evidence to support alternative theories. Also to effectively claim every non-voter holds the same opinion is nonsense.

Garden centre prod - Lagan Valley, Upper Bann, South Antrim don't have garden centre prods?

On nationalist votes - Sinn Fein's vote was static from 2001 at 175,000 voters and AFAIK turnout was down in each nationalist held seat. The contempt must be contagious and spread to West Belfast. The constituencies you refer to have a history of higher turnouts and both Unionists and nationalists turn out better in those constituencies.

Also a key contributor to turnout can be political machinery. Compare turnout in Labour safe seats and Conservative safe seats. The Tories work harder to keep turnout up while Labour doesn't. Sinn fein has a highly developed machine that works on turnout. Now the DUP has won the game of dominance it can turn to improving turnout.

Again the physical vote of the DUP grew. The physical vote of the UUP dropped by more than the DUP's. Maybe contempt for the UUP not Unionism?

Nice try on east belfast but it doesn't wash. In 2001 the UUP ran a lower profile candidate and their vote suffered. In 1997 when Reg Empey last ran he received a very similar physical vote (that was pre-agreement too).

Here's the evidence to back up my claims about non-voters that shows it is not a simple as you choose to claim. If I allude to research it exists.

Mori research on non-voters in UK

"The overall conclusion drawn from the research into non-voters is that most are not less interested in politics - just less well-informed and less connected to the established political process;"

Bannon, D. (2001) ‘Political Marketing as Social Marketing: if the cap fits'. In
Proceedings of the 4th annual conference of the Political Marketing Group of the UK
Academy of Marketing, Dublin City University, 6-8th September

"Non-participation may be caused by a variety of factors:
1. The electorate is relatively content and therefore is not motivated by the need for
change.
2. The electorate is relatively content and does not see the need to defend the status
quo.
3. The products on offer are perceived as being similar and a rational choice is not
need as all outcomes are acceptable. If a choice is not made, a product is still
received.
4. None of the products on offer match the requirement of the vote, so the exchange
of the vote is withheld (disillusionment, lack of trust).
5. Transaction costs are too high.
6. Non-voting occurs not by choice but by circumstance.
7. The vote may genuinely not be interested.
8. Literacy difficulties will obstruct participation.
9. Voting is perceived as not being able to influence the outcome i.e. same party
always wins or one vote doesn't matter.
10. Systemic failure prevents voting."

JEB

Forgot another bit. You seem to imply these non-voters are more liberal the average Unionist voters. Can you explain why a recent independent survey of attitudes could barely find a Protestant or unionist with a positve view of the Belfast Agreement? These 40% should surely have shown up?

fair_deal

Thnks for taking the trouble to respond with a comprehensive answer.

However unless this survey was carried out in the NI constituencies we are talking about then it isn't reliable as typical.
Perhaps you think otherwise but our politics are very different than anywhere in the British Isles.

Give me a survey on why unionist voters don't vote and we can talk about it.

All I can say that for the people i meet/know in ND & EB who don't vote and who, because i am involved in politics discuss it with me, give me 4,1 and 9 in that order of importance.

What unionism has to do is develop a strategy that can nullify these effects.
What I am telling you is that the DUP has too much baggage to deal with this.

If there is no alternative unionist strategy then factor 1 will replace 4 and they may start looking elsewhere - espcially if they become discontented with their lot

As for the Belfast Agreement if it had being implemented properly then I think you would see very different results

The survey was a representative sample across Northern ireland so some impact would have been expected if not at the 40% level.

"Give me a survey of why unionist voters don't vote and we can talk about it."

Agreed. This has been my central theme. No such survey yet exists. So one reason can not be claimed as the definitive answer. Also some partially relevant evidence casts some doubt on your view.

"Perhaps you think otherwise but our politics are very different than anywhere in the British Isles."

An interesting similarity for you, turnout in NI is now the same as the rest of the UK. NI ranked fifth out of 12 regions in the UK for turnout.

fair_deal

"An interesting similarity for you, turnout in NI is now the same as the rest of the UK. NI ranked fifth out of 12 regions in the UK for turnout."

I wasn't talking about the turn out %.

I was talking about the sectarian/national question of our elections and the economic/social question in the rest of almost all the Free World.

ie because things are so different here then UK wide surveys on why people don't vote cannot be directly extrapolated here.

Someone should do such a survey though

Toner, Thanks for that, I wasnt aware that SF had increased their support in the last couple of elections....
If you don't think that the DUP has ever had a flirtation with Loyalist paramiltaries I suggest you speak with Davy Ervine. The fact that no Unionist cares about how any Catholic/nationalist votes confirms what I think other moderate posters have made here - that you don't see any need to persuade them of the value of the Union and that therefore unionism will become ever more focused on its own navel, ignoring even its own left wing and centre. Is that a strategy for success?