Irish Political News

Rumours have been circulating for some time that the end of Ian Paisley's political career was nigh, and today we got confirmation from the horse's mouth that indeed the DUP leader is to resign from the office of First Minister and from the position of head of his party.

It's not really any surprise that the comments from some quarters have practically ignored the decades of frustration that Paisley caused for democrats in the north of this country. Indeed, Martin McGuinness led tributes to the North Antrim MP, offering such glowing references that one would almost think that Sinn Féin are to write to the Pope asking that Paisley be considered for beatification. Perhaps it suits all concerned to airbrush out the full horrors of the past.

There are also those who are congratulating Paisley for delivering powersharing- the fact is that powersharing could have been delivered many times over. It was Paisley himself and his accolytes who delayed progress in the first place and prevented powersharing from happening for so long, so it doesn't really make any sense to thank him for catching himself on and letting democracy finally embed (conveniently when he had reached the top of the greasy pole). We shouldn't give praise and thank Paisley for finally deciding that nationalists had a right to play a role in the governance of the north- he was just catching up with the rest of society, and seriously late at that.

Of course though it would be churlish to ignore Paisley's recent metanoia, but I think the Alliance Party leader David Ford summed up Paisley's career well when he said today: "History will judge whether Ian Paisley will be remembered for 40 years of saying no or one year of saying probably. Many will say his road to Damascus conversion came 35 years too late. The achievements of the executive since last May have been modest in the extreme."

If Paisley had departed politics three decades ago, would we in any worse of a state than we are now? I think not.

If the Chuckle Brother routine is indeed genuine, isn't it a damn pity that Paisley wasn't so magnanimous in the past when others attempted to build powersharing? How many innocent people have died thanks to decades of hate-filled words spurring idiots on to engage in terrorism, be they loyalist or republican?

Some ordinary folk may be shedding a tear tonight- not for the bilious oaf who did everything in his power to prevent powersharing for decades, but for the people who died in the needlessly prolonged conflict here.

The end of Paisley's political career is near. I don't do whitewashing or rewriting of history, and as such I can firmly say that for me it isn't a minute too soon.

Adios.

DUP leader Ian Paisley has announced that he is to resign his position at the head of his party and as First Minister in May.

He is to remain on as an MLA and MP for North Antrim.

More to follow...

The visit of Scotland’s First Minister, Alex Salmond, to Dublin for a meeting of the British-Irish Council produced a number of headlines about his desire to build a “Celtic lion” economy in Scotland to match the Republic’s ‘Celtic Tiger’. He certainly put much emphasis in his speech, “Shaping Scotland’s Future” on Tuesday night in Trinity College, Dublin, on economic matters, noting that there was an “Arc of Prosperity around us. Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Finland and Denmark. All small independent nations. All stable, secure and prosperous. Of all these nations, no example is more impressive and inspiring than Ireland. And none is more relevant to the decisions that Scotland faces today”.

Not surprisingly when Salmond referred to “Ireland” he was talking about the Republic and he holds them in some esteem for their achievements and regards much of what they have done – social partnership, for example – as being the sort of initiative that Scotland must follow. He warned that: “Political independence of itself does not guarantee success; it is what you do with that independence which matters.” He also said that “there are no limits to the success of a nation united by a common purpose”. (Which raises questions about what will happen in the North, given that it is neither a nation nor united by a common purpose.)

The cultural side of Salmond’s talk was less emphatic but still interesting. He spoke of the number of Americans who claim Scottish ancestry and of the number of US presidents who are of Scots-Irish descent. That in its turn could actually undermine the DUP’s notion of the Ulster-Scots, a fairly shabby notion in their hands, to be honest. Scots-Irish will have a greater appeal in the US and opens up the possibility of all kinds of economic and cultural co-operation between Edinburgh and Dublin in the United States.

Salmond also quoted CS Parnell: “And to this day, Parnell’s words resonate strongly with the movement of Scottish nationalism. “No man has the right to fix the boundary of a nation. No man has the right to say to his country: “Thus far shalt thou go and no further.” Again, this is not the sort of quote one is likely to hear from either the First or Deputy First Minister anytime soon, for very obvious reasons. They may be many things but neither Paisley nor McGuinness can claim Parnell as part of their political heritage.

So what about the North? What about the march of this corner of the Arc of Prosperity and its boundary? Are the political and economic institutions here strong enough to do for this region what Salmond expects Scottish ones to do for Scotland? Can the Assembly – as opposed to our Assembly? – respond “quickly or accurately to the needs of business”; can it provide the education and skills that Salmond identifies as being central to the Republic’s success. He boasts that free education was a Scottish invention. Can local government and business co-operate to ensure success in the global market, as Salmond expects them to do in Scotland?

He finished by saying: “The story of Ireland - one of the greatest success stories of the last century, and of this century - is a testament to what the people of Scotland can achieve. If we are prepared to learn your lessons. If we are prepared to trust ourselves. If we doubt ourselves we cannot succeed. If we trust ourselves we cannot fail.”

And in the North? Do we trust or doubt ourselves? The latter, I think.

Salmond’s full speech is at www.scotland.gov.uk

In a shock result, the Ulster Unionist Party has retained its seat on Banbridge District Council after a bye-election in the Dromore area. The DUP, which had forced the bye-election following the resignation of UUP councillor and former rugby player Tyrone Howe, thought it would be a walk in the park. But they hadn't budgeted for the arrival of Jim Allister's Traditional Unionists on the scene.

I was on the ground in the area last night during polling. A lot of people were of the opinion that TUV transfers would go back to the DUP and see them over the finishing post in first place. However, the animosity between the DUP and the two smaller Unionist parties was palpable, and I must admit I had a strong suspicion that the TUV would extract enough support from erstwhile DUP voters for the Ulster Unionists to slip up the middle and win. And that's what happened, with the TUV dislike of the DUP being reflected in their transfers, which benefited the UUP more than many would have assumed.

Although bye-elections aren't the most important in the electoral calendar, they are interesting for the purposes of giving a snapshot at a given time. Given that not a lot was at stake in Dromore, it's clear that many of those who would have traditionally supported the DUP opted to support the TUV in this election to send out a message to Paisley over his Chuckle Brothers routine. It may not be a bloody nose, but it'll certainly sting.

The question now is whether Jim Allister can build momentum for his movement. Certainly there were reports last night of DUP election workers being barracked at polling stations over their decision to abandon everything they had stood for for decades to go into government with Sinn Féin. Certainly this result, which saw the TUV put in a respectable showing, has leant some credibility to Allister's new party. If the Dromore results are reflected in future Assembly elections in other DUP strongholds, then the Paisleyites will be in trouble.

Perhaps this threat to the DUP will come to nothing, but it'll certainly be interesting to watch.

The SDLP, having weighed up what was on offer in the budget against its serious shortcomings, voted against it- fair play to them. Margaret Ritchie stood firm in the face of the DUP/ SF axis bullying tactics and managed to squeeze extra money from them for much-needed social housing. However, it remains an essentially right-wing, anti-community budget. There is of course the lack of detail on water reform and education, and by the recent performance of Nigel Dodds with regard to the abolition of relief for the installation of energy efficient measures, the two big parties cannot be trusted to deliver unless they spell out exactly what they are intending to do.

Some people don't seem to be able to get their heads around the concept that the SDLP are in the Executive as a right, not because they have agreed on a way forward with the DUP and Sinn Féin. This isn't like the situation in the Republic where parties coalesce voluntarily because they agree on a way forward. The SDLP has a democratic mandate to oppose anything they wish to oppose in the Executive.

Technically Margaret Ritchie had to vote in favour of the budget, but the wider party is not bound by these rules and has every right to oppose the budget. That does not undermine its right to be in the Executive- they have a mandate and right to use any Executive seat they have in any way they see fit, as the other parties also can do. Likewise with their party vote in the Assembly. There is nothing morally or legally to say they have to dance to the tune of the DUP/ Sinn Féin axis.

There are some, including the perennially self-righteous Alliance Party, who say the SDLP should quit the Executive. Quitting would be contravening the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement which the SDLP framed. This is about powersharing and scrutiny, not leaving the lunatics in charge of the asylum unchecked.

And then there are those who say that the SDLP should back the budget and every other DUP/ SF point-of-view because they share Executive membership with them. This would essentially mean that the SDLP would have to support the budget even if they disagreed with it. That would be anti-democratic.

There are also those who argue that the SDLP should quit the Executive and form an opposition (a position not provided for in the GFA and which is anti-powersharing and has no legal basis). That would be tantamount to the Westminster-style set-up of the old Stormont regime.

No, the SDLP should remain in the Executive as the guardian of the rights and needs of the people. So what if it has to vote against Executive decisions? If it means standing up for what is right, then so be it.

I don't often bring up the issue of religion on this blog as it's not something I care to speak of much- live and let live, I say. However it is hard to ignore the blatant intolerance displayed by a DUP apparatchik on RTÉ radio this week.

Wallace Thompson, who is an advisor to DUP enterprise minister Nigel Dodds, said on air yesterday that the "Pope is the Antichrist." He also told the radio phone-in that he would oppose any visit to the north by the Pontiff.

If a senior official of a governing party anywhere else in Europe spouted this verbal detritus, there would be public outrage. Yet here in good ol' Northern Ireland, we're just supposed to accept this kind of anachronistic nonsense as if it were somehow normal. Not only that, but if we dare to criticise Paisley's party and its clearly unreformed views on the religious beliefs of a large section of the community here, we're accused of being stuck in the past and for looking for excuses to criticise the 'All New' DUP. With blindingly obvious idiocy such as that displayed by Thompson, added to the intolerance of Ian Paisley Jr displayed upon the pages of Hot Press magazine a few months ago, one doesn't exactly have to look far to find reason to censure the DUP.

And God forbid that people would criticise Sinn Féin for so jovially involving themselves in a sordid little love-in with a party which clearly despises the beliefs of a great many people whom the provisional party purport to represent. That would just be jealousy at the fact that they are now the largest nationalist party in the north, wouldn't it? Clearly we should turn a blind eye to the vicious background of Ian Paisley, the sectarian intolerance displayed down the years by the DUP, and underlying belief that all that went before was completely justified, eh? But I suppose that would come easy to the DUP/ Sinn Féin axis given that they both have a heritage which, from their point of view electorally, is safer forgotten.

However, smiles and suits don't hide the truth.

I must apologise for my irregular appearances on the blog of late- a new computer is winging its way to Áras an Bhlogador so with any luck my contributions will resume a somewhat more orderly rate of publication. As it transpires, Pól has been keeping a steady hand at the helm, guiding El Blogador safely away from being dashed on the iceberg of irrelevance.

Today saw the current Assembly's first budget. After all the wrangling of recent months over who was getting what from the proverbial purse, Margaret Ritchie's department emerged as the 'victor', which in effect means that the people in our society who need help to get a headstart in life are the victors.

Despite being bullied and harrangued by the DUP/ Sinn Féin axis, Margaret has stood firm on a range of issues such as the withdrawing of funding to loyalist-linked projects and protesting against the meagre offerings presented to her by the laughably right-wing draft budget.

They attempted to force her to back down. They attempted to corner her into accepting a budget which would have meant an unfair deal for the people in society who need the most help. They failed.

Today, Margaret Ritchie has been vindicated.

Two-hundred million pounds will be directed into the Department of Social Development bank account to enable it to meet housing targets over the next three years. The result will be the construction of 1,500 new abodes in year one, following by 1,750 in year two and a further 2,000 homes in year three.

Margaret said she was pleased with the money being allocated for social housing: "In respect of social and affordable housing, I think this has been a good day for the people of Northern Ireland and a good budget deal for housing."

Meanwhile, Ulster Unionist Minister Michael McGimpsey has been given more flexibility over his health budget. His financial allocation also includes a much-needed injection of £10m a year for mental health provision.

It just goes to prove- standing up for what you believe in, even in the face of dictatorial opposition, can deliver results. Keep up the good work!

Jim Fitzpatrick has an amusing article which highlights how Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness have more in common than a shared inane propensity to giggle like schoolgirls when they come within a mile of a TV camera- it seems they may both have a rather embarrassing time as they lord it up in first class on their trip to America.

The visa waiver form, which visitors from the UK and Ireland complete to avoid having to apply for a visa, has a number of questions about the applicant's past that most of us could answer 'No' to. That's not the case with the Chuckle Brothers though.

One of the questions asks: "Have you ever been or are you now involved in espionage or sabotage; or in terrorist activities?" Given Martin McGuinness' involvement in the IRA, his conviction in 1973 after being caught with a car containing 250lb of explosives and nearly 5,000 rounds of ammunition, and his declaration at his trial that: "'We have fought against the killing of our people... I am a member of Óglaigh na hÉireann and very, very proud of it," I guess his answer on the form will have to be a big, fat 'Yes'.

But Big Ian doesn't get off the hook either. Another part of the form proffers the poser: "Have you ever been denied a US visa or entry into the US or had a US visa cancelled?" Well, Paisley indeed had a US visa cancelled in 1981 because of what the US State Department called his "divisive" rhetoric. It seems he will have to put a tick in the 'Yes' column too.

Let's just hope Jeeves isn't looking over their shoulder when he's serving up the tea and hot crumpets, lest it may provoke outrage amongst their fellow luxury travellers when they realise the pedigree of their fellow passengers from Stormont...