Nationalists have reacted angrily to the Parades Commission decision on the Whiterock. Sean “Spike” Murray of the Springfield Residents Group said the decision was “immoral” outlined what the residents viewed as victories and compromises:
“There is the West Circular route which we would see as a victory for the nationalists over the unionists; Workman gates which we would see as a victory for unionists over the nationalists. Now our position is and has been for the past six years that the parade should be put through the Mackies (site). We would see it as a win/win situation for both communities.”This position contains some revisionism as the parade route has changed before, moving further up the Springfield Road, so do these past nationalist “victories” not make Workman Avenue a “compromise”? The Parade Commission determination has merged two of the options with the vast bulk of the parade (93%) following the nationalist perceived “compromise”, is 93% not enough?
In broader terms on the use of rhetoric is defining particular outcomes as victory and implicitly a defeat for someone else wise? The selling of the last Agreement fell apart as each side claimed victory and as another deal edges closer is there a need to examine what language can be used to sell it without a process of upmanship?
The DUP meanwhile have embraced the terminology of sharing. The Orange Order has not yet given any formal response.