An interesting issue in this Westminster election is, what difference do we make? Or more exactly, what difference will our elected MPs make? The DUP has been emitting loud noises about how influential they will be in a hung parliament. That strikes me as a dangerous thing to say. If the parliament is hung in such a way that their votes don’t count – UKIP or the Scot Nats or Plaid Cymru become the king-makers, not the DUP – then that party’s team will look about as useful as a eunuch in a harem. The other reason it’s a dangerous/daft thing to say is because it prompts the question “What difference did you make when there wasn’t a hung parliament?” Or even an un-hung one. The answer is: sweet damn all. The record shows that MPs from here asked more than the average number of questions in the House of Commons, presumably so that their electorate will be impressed by how busy they are. But did they get answers? Is legislation passed in London done so with the welfare of this tormented corner of Ireland in mind? I think not. Are MPs from England, Scotland, Wales interested in issues that affect us here? The echo in an almost-empty chamber gives the answer. Switch on any time there’s a NI matter under discussion and the rows of green benches are free from MPs’ behinds, the voices of speakers like Sammy Wilson and Ian Paisley Jr reverberate through the emptiness.
You’ll get people who nod their heads and say “Oh, the Shinners will go into the House of Commons, of course they will, they went into the Dail and into Stormont, they’ll go in to Westminster”. No they won’t. Sinn Féin’s whole strategy has been and remains to get as much power as possible transferred to here. Wasting their energies by entering the Commons and becoming part of meaningless and frankly embarrassing debates would run counter to everything they’re currently doing. And I haven’t even mentioned the oath to Her Maj.
“But we have the SDLP there – they’ll look after nationalist interests!” They will, will they? When’s the last time you heard an SDLP candidate speak of the need for a united Ireland that rules itself? That’s what nationalism is about. And I simply don’t remember hearing those kind of words crossing the lips of an SDLP representative. Whatever about John Hume’s talk of living in a post-nationalist era, the SDLP is certainly a post-nationalist party. Maybe it’s time they came clean on all that. If they don’t care about a united, self-governing Ireland, shouldn’t they tell us?
Jude, unfortunately I think your thoughts on the direction the SDLP is going are reasonably accurate.
They seem to be placing themselves as the unionist party for Catholics, though I can’t really see that as a happy hunting ground.
But then that is the strategy under its present leader, Alasdair McDonnell, and there is no guarantee that he will be at the helm for much longer.
Their present tactic of ‘no deals’ will only benefit the unionist parties, and the party faithful, I’m sure, didn’t join up to benefit unionism. Politics should be about pragmatism rather than pig-headedness.
More bad results in the general election next month will see a justifiable upsurge in discontent and the likelihood is the new leadership will come from outside Belfast.
The previous leader Margaret Ritchie was in no way an inspiring leader, but to dump her for the mad doctor was a case of ‘the frying pan into the fire’. He needs to decide to ‘spend more time with his family’ in the interests of the survival of the once-significant SDLP before it disappears altogether.
“They [the SDLP] seem to be placing themselves as the unionist party for Catholics, though I can’t really see that as a happy hunting ground.”
The polls suggest otherwise. Over 50% of Catholics indicate that they do not want a united Ireland.
Chunks
These polls never cease to amaze me. Anybody I know has never ever been involved in these ‘polls’. Who are the people they ask? For example I could conduct a poll and I can assure you I would get a high percentage in favour of unity but it means nothing. The reality is nobody has ever been giving the chance to voice their opinion in a meaningful unification poll. If house taigs wanna reject Irish unification lets at least give them the opportunity to do it with a bit of ignominy? If anything it might at least put pay the the plastic paddy syndrome they practise at certain times of the year.
Polls are statistics, and there are lies, damned lies, and statistics!
Do you think over 50% of Catholics vote Unionist Chunks?…..
I wouldn’t put too much faith into the Belfast Telegraph or the Newsletter, they’re about as fair and balanced as the Irish Independent is on Sinn Fein or Gerry Adams lol
What you should take seriously Chunks is the results of elections, where Sinn Fein has become the largest party in terms of votes and many predict will hold more seats than the DUP in a few years time.
Only one poll matters and that’s a border poll. If Unionists are so confident in what people want then why fear a border poll? Why not actively support Sinn Fein’s call for a referendum?
Wolfe tone, Sherdy, Ryan for simplicity I’ll issue a blanket response to your comments.
No one has a good word for opinion polls but they are reliable especially when numerous polls show the same thing. The annual NILT survey consistently shows that support of a united Ireland is about 20% (though it did rise as high as 30% in 2006).
I admit that does not seem to square with the nominally nationalist parties of SF and the SDLP receiving 42-ish% of the vote.
There are two possible reasons for this difference,
1) the polls are wrong, or
2) non-nationalists Catholics are voting for SF and the SDLP.
The polls are wrong
There are plausible reasons for the nationalist sentiment being suppressed in polls. There could be a shy nationalist effect, the poll used an unrepresentative sample or asked leading questions. I think that could explain a few points difference but no more that that. Bear in mind this is not an isolated poll that the News Letter produced but a consistent trend. No matter who asks the question, polls show support for a united Ireland remains between 20-30%.
Non-nationalists Catholics are voting for SF and the SDLP
To be honest, it’s hard to see anyone voting SF and not supporting a united Ireland but I cannot say the same for SDLP voters. Indeed the comments of this very blog debate the SDLP’s lack of nationalist credentials.
As I have argued, Catholics are indifferent, or outright hostile, to the traditional strands that made up unionism. That is support for the Orange Order, Protestant Ascendancy and anti-Irishness. That rules out Catholics voting for the champions of these beliefs the UUP, DUP, TUV, UKIP and PUP.
Seeing as there is slim chance of a united Ireland any time soon, I do not think voting Catholics treat elections as mini-referenda on the border. Rather I think about 50% of Catholics are happy enough with the union and vote SF/SDLP/(Alliance and NI21?) to counter the worst aspects of traditional unionism and to promote an equality agenda.
As for a calling a border poll, I’ve no idea why Unionist parties are so opposed to one. The campaign would have thrills and spills but I’d have no doubt they would win it comfortably. Ask Arlene Foster, she’s the one that said there would never be a border poll despite there being one already in 1973!
Many years ago I met Alex Maskey and asked him about how he saw it playing out. His believe (which may or may not be SF dogma, too) is that demographics will not produce a united Ireland. What would be needed would be to persuade a sizeable portion of Protestants to come over to the nationalist side. To me that is the canary in the mine.
Last poll I saw had Protestant support for a united Ireland at 2%.
That is the best post on here for ages well done Chunks good work!
Chunks,
No matter about the reliability of other mundane polls, I am sure you will agree nobody but nobody can honestly predict how a referendum on unification will fare out as nobody has ever been asked to contemplate it properly?
It has never been seriously debated. Prominent ‘irish people’ have never been asked to show their true colours, ie do they want unification. I can just picture the faces of all the irish diaspora around the world when enda kenny is heard rejecting unity. This plastic paddy fawns after whoever is in the white house every paddys day but eventually his true belief seeps through.
A lot of irish people will give lip service to unity but you would imagine they would have to fully back any campaign that promotes unity? Otherwise their silence would tell a tale would it not? A lot of Irish people are doing quite nicely with the border while paying lip service to unification. Alas they will have to truly show their hand if a campaign was initiated. It will be same as the scottish referendum debate only different ie do you want to be ruled by the Irish or the British? Any nationalist who dodges that question isn’t a nationalist a far as I am concerned.
Win,lose or draw republicans should relish a referendum. If only to see where we are at and where we need to go. The scots will learn from their mistakes for the next poll, the Irish havnt even caught a glimpse of the genie yet.
Hi Wolfe Tone,
There are of course no certainties in life and I take your point that that a referendum could go either way. All the same, I’d be surprised if there was a referendum tomorrow if the united Ireland side got more than a third of votes. I could be way off but that’s the way I see it.
For nationalists you have identified the central problem with a united Ireland when you say “It has never been seriously debated”.
Does that not seem odd to you? The North has been in an existence almost a century, we have had the Troubles and 20 years since the ceasefires, and nationalist debate has not advanced beyond “Brits out”. It is literally that vacuous. That might play well with a certain group in the North but I assure you that group represents less that 50% of the population.
There’s a shocking lack of intellectual engagement with the concept of a united Ireland. In Jude’s interview with Gerry Kelly on Periscope and in a letter that Conor Murphy had in the Irish News on Thursday the (I presume) best argument Sinn Féin could offer was the banality of “an Ireland of equals”.
It’s not like nationalist are starting with a blank piece of paper. Already several sports predate partition and exist on an all Ireland basis. Why not use that as a vehicle to promote a united Ireland identity? What happens in reality? To take one example, all Ireland amateur boxing is now facing a split as clubs from protestant areas of Belfast want to form their own North Ireland Boxing Association. The reason being a Dublin centric governing body and a perception that there was an intimidatory and overly nationalist atmosphere at events. It’s going backwards, we’re getting more partition!
Now I’m not one of the ones who think you should be ashamed to be Irish and should fawn on the queen. But I think that there should have been a bit of cop on there that having lads from the Sandy Row fighting in Dublin in an all Ireland context should have been accommodated and respected – two flags or no flags.
In my more optimistic moments one hope I see for nationalism is the rise of Sinn Féin in the South. Though to be clear I do not think for a moment that the current leadership of Sinn Féin have the wherewithal to advance a united Ireland agenda. For if they did they already would be. Plus the current leadership of Sinn Féin is poorly placed to persuade those of a unionist bent that their future lies South.
Rather the existence of a major all Ireland party challenges partition in a new way. The exercise of raw political power with no respect for the border. People will finally get to see what the fuss was about.
Chunks – thanks for detailed thoughts. We don’t get enough like yours. I agree that a united Ireland and its nature and what might take us towards it hasn’t been properly explored – particularly the economic argument. But as to two-flags-or-none: there’s only one circumstance where I’d agree to that and that would be when two flags or none flew over public buildings in the north. I was talking to a man yesterday from the south and he made the point that northern soccer clubs know an all-Ireland league makes sense but continue to cut off their noses to spite their faces. Getting rid of olders SF leaders? Why – because they haven’t been successful in growing the party? I think not. I don’t quite understand your last paragraph. But then I’m still a bit sleepy…
Hi Neill,
Thank you. I think that there are lots of good comments on Jude’s blog, I’ve no monopoly.
Chunks,
I agree entirely with what you say. As I have said already I believe a lot of prominent people and bodies are quite contented to have the border. The Catholic church,GAA and political parties are doing quite nicely getting funded by the irish state and by London. These institutions need a light shone on them, perhaps then people will realise why unification isn’t seriously debated, especially from quarters where you would expect it to be?
Sports bodies again perhaps prefer to be partitionist as they can play the hard done by syndrome and exploit it for money as well? Other sports bodies are perhaps contented to be big fish in a wee less competitive pond rather than pushing themselves by entering a bigger pond? The GAA no doubt to their shame are quite happy to obtain funding from the British exchequer to build stadia etc in the interests of the ‘peace process’ and all that? If the British continue to throw money at the GAA in the North would the organisation seriously hold their hands up and declare we don’t want your money if it means we can’t have Irish unification?
I have no doubt other citizens in the north from the protestant community experience sectarianism and this puts them off embracing an all ireland body. This should seriously be tackled and hard home truths need to be told by those who claim they are irish involved in this activity. But as I have alluded to there are influential bodies who pay lip service to equality etc but secretly know that if it was any other way their financial benefits and influence would be seriously at risk eg Catholic church.
Sinn Fein it seems are the only political party that pays lip service to a United ireland but even they will have careerists within its ranks who will secretly be contented to be paid at both ends so to speak. These people will also know that to maintain that then sectarianism must continue. The good Friday agreement set up in stormont is a sectarian factory and I have never seen the Northern politicians happier which says it all.
Even the people who champion changing demographics as the vehicle for unity are missing the elephant in the room ie irish republicans must include all religions on this island. To simply take the easy option and rely on just one section of the community to get a vote over the line is just lazy. It is imperative that we get to know and bond with the other side side sort of speak. If I came from the protestant community I would understand their reluctance to unity not necessarily because of the troubles but from the inception of the free state. It was patently obvious it was a catholic state were the church was heavily involved in every aspect of society. A blind man could see it looked like a cold house for Protestantism. The Catholic church should not be allowed to wash its hands of what occurred after that ie the troubles etc.
Although another elephant in the room will be a certain section of our community will never embrace unity, no matter how hard you try. No matter how much it may benefit them. Be that as it may they should not be allowed to hold the nation to ransom. I suspect that’s another reason why it isn’t seriously debated especially down south. The irish people down south would vote for unification in the morning but it isn’t ‘we couldn’t afford the 6 counties’ narrative that’s bandied around that puts them off but rather the threat of violence that some allude to. The financial aspect is used by lots of naysayers to mask their true feelings and fringe benefits of the border I suspect.
How can you represent everybody when you wont attend and play an active part in the House of Commons?
You vote for SF or even you don’t in a constituency which they represent then you have no say that’s fantastic representation isn’t it?
Neill, did you not read Judes blog? NI MP’s have next to no influence at Westminster. Standing up and speaking to a near empty chamber to other MP’s who really couldn’t give a toss about NI is hardly going to change the lives of people here. Its basically waste of time. In fact, its actually fair to say SF MP’s, by NOT attending Westminster, might do more for their voters than those MP’s that do attend Westminster because the Shinner MP’s could be on the ground and in the streets working instead of, in the SDLP leaders case, having a nice sleep on the Green Seats of the House of Commons….
So Jude’s word is now gospel interesting.You say your party represents everybody yet doesn’t take it’s seats which leaves the voters without a voice some representation indeed
Whether our MPs at Westminster make a difference by attending is not the issue.
The unavoidable issue is that it is in the ‘mother of parliaments’ that many crucial issues affecting Northern Ireland will be made. Like it or not.
Unfortunately NI is now so marginalised from British politics that we are unlikely to be listened to & will have to suck on the hind tit as ever.
Of course we are also marginalised from Irish politics. So we’re f****d no matter what way you look at it.
The SDLP are a six county party pure and simple.
If and when partition ends they have no future so it follows they have no interest in changing the status quo.
I fully understand SF reasoning for not taking their seat in Westminister. What I don’t understand is why stand for election? It’s a bit like accepting a job and not turning up for work, but expecting to get paid just the same.
As for making a difference, what difference have SF mde in Dail Eireann? or Stormont for that matter.
There is a difference between representing your constituents and sitting in the UK Parliament.
British officials talk to SF representatives on a regular basis, respond to issues raised on behalf of constituents just the same as they do with those representatives from parties that take part in the theatre that is Westminster.
As to making a difference; if you resolve one person’s problem you have made a difference.
Standing for MP isn’t all about attending Westminster Theresa. There’s much more to the job role. You seem to be under the impression if your an elected Sinn Fein MP then you get paid for….nothing? just because Sinn Fein don’t take their seats doesn’t mean their MP’s sit around all day and watch Jeremy Kyle and This Morning. They would be in their offices and helping the people in their area with various issues, just like any other MP, with one obvious exception, they don’t sit at Westminster and strive to remain awake during debates….
Ryan, obviously in your mind there is no need to take a seat when elected. So why do SF take their seat in The Dail or NI Assembly?
I remember reading somewhere that if all 18 of the North’s MP’s sat in Westminster their overall influence would be just 2%. Now at the minute only 13 MP’s here take their seats so that means they have an overall influence of around the 1% mark. Hardly a massive power block, is it? And Unionists wonder why the Commons Chamber is almost always empty when the topic is Northern Ireland…..
If I had founded Sinn Fein, I, personally, would’ve opted to take seats in Westminster because it does yield some influence, however small but there again when all of Ireland was in the UK the Irish MP’s did form a big power block which did have influence. But since Sinn Fein has made it a corner stone policy to NOT take their seats for over a century then I would advise Sinn Fein not to change it now. Why? because I think it would be more damaging than beneficial now and would turn off a lot of SF voters and play into dissident republicans accusations of “Sinn Fein Sell Out’s”.
On the subject of the SDLP, I honestly cant remember them even talking about or encouraging Irish unification. There was a story a while back where one of their new members proclaimed that he was a Unionist. The SDLP does need to come clean on where they stand on Irish unity, are they for or against? or are they neutral? The SDLP really need to get a grip because if they continue the way they are going they will go the same way as the UUP.
“There was a story a while back where one of their [the SDLP’s] new members proclaimed that he was a Unionist”.
The man you are referring to is Justin Cartwright, SDLP candidate in the Balmoral ward in the local election last year.
He is Australian and his background is in the trade unions. He styles himself as “an economic unionist”.
In case you are wondering, he got 589 first preference votes (6.5%) and was not elected. So that is probably the last we will hear of him.
“On the subject of the SDLP, I honestly cant remember them even talking about or encouraging Irish unification”.
i agree Ryan – on one of my posts about the election in South belfast I commented that
” SDLP appears to adhere more to its policy of achieving further devolution of powers while Northern Ireland remains part of the UK rather than its avowed aim of Irish unification”
The devil take the stoop down low party, these politically impotent careerists need consigned to a museum in the abstract Art section.
An Argument could be made for SF to pragmatically take a Parnel approach and philibuster and in everyway sabotage Westminster decorum til the Brits get really weary on Ireland altogether. This would not be a swllout, and zi disagree that they would be doing so Jude. Politics is a pragmatic field, and will the cuts are decimating our communities here, Gregory “curry boy” Campbell talked at length a couple of months ago about the unreasonable cost of Razor blades. I say to hell with some of the dissidents and their intractable commitment to fuel the uber right wing of the Unionist Tories. Outside of the miscarraige of Justice with the Craigavon two, internment by remand, and brutalisation of their prisoners, their regressive agendas need revised. These issues however are cigent ones that anyone who wishes human rights should contest. Alas the Brits seem to want to stoke the flames if discontent. SF should shout about these conflictual policies during PM question time, which would hughtlight the issues, and maybe bring the dissidents on board the good ship peace process, and weary the Parliminet down in England, and undermine their Tory pro-consuls here. People here don’t want war. But people here need the Political fight taken by SF to Westminster Parnell style. As for the oath to the pensioner mrs Windsor….they should sing it. Who would believe it meant in sincerity Jude?!
On a personal note, may join SF, stand for a Seat and Philibuster myself! Anything positive from Perkin my friend, and I’ll be at Connolly house post haste, and request a membership form. Methinks not cooking up for Oxygen sometimes, would see my statue in the Capital beside Parnell a hundred years hence, ha ha. Any thoughts on my ploy Jude? I could maybe infiltrate the Stoops and then bring a referential wrecking ball into Westminster through the back door. Couldn’t be fired for five mace dropping years lol!!!
One would-be political colossal, Esteemed Blogmeister, would surely dissent heatedly from your somewhat lukewarm enthusiasm for the dubious benefit of a Taig taking a seat in Westminster.
That is the too-famous former MP for NaA (Newly and Armagh). The Dail Ceantar of Westminister where the NaA is pre-eminently put into the NyaAhh of Anglo-Irish balladry.
In a recent radio report on RTE by Tomm.ie Gorman delivered in his warm soft-centred chocolate dessert cake tones, he described a recent public event in which a moving tribute was paid to Seamus Mallon (for it is he !) on the teary-eyed nostalgic occasion of the latter’s 50th anniversary of his entry into politics.
-One’s fondest memories of one’s political career are of one’s time spent in the corridors of power at Westminster.
Was how the RTE reporter tenderly paraphrased the putative political Godzilla, God bless us all and save us.Just imagine: there are still some slow-learning Sunningdalers out there who are deluded enough to imagine that T.G. is some kind of SD (Spin Doctor) for the SDLP.
Tomm.ie Gorman is far too professional a broadcaster for that: a true Nestle professional.
Thump ! Thump ! Thump !
Clarification being sought peremptorily once again by Schrodinger, Perkie’s pernickety pet pussy cat. Pussikins is puzzled by the ‘too-famous’ label (see above). Noblesse oblige.
In the Sixties of the last century, Andrew Warbeck, the bellwether of the pop art moment, famously uttered the most infamous remark of the century:’in the future everybody will have his fifteen minutes of fame’
Andrew Warbeck, Perkies’ eccentric American cousin, was always instantly recognisable due to the fond de teint he insisted on daubing his face with, leaving it with a deathly white pancake look. Btw, while he is more generally known as Andy, it is a Warbeckian in-house law laid down by the Dowager Dame that within the family he would only be known by his formal, full first name: Andrew.
Women is odd like that.
The quote of the century was uttered not long before the too-famous Seamus Mallon entered politics. This was no coincidence. Alas, he seems to have somehow misheard the quote and mistaken ‘fifteen minutes’ for ‘fifty years’.
‘Fifteen seconds’, some backwoods begrudgers reckon would have been the perfect time-line in public life for the too-famous Seamus: this is too cruel a judgement, in Perkie’s magnanimous op. Fifteen days, perhaps. Max.
Of course, too-famous Seamus is not the only North-West Brit to go woozy at the knees at the merest mench of a Westminster bench and who also came under the influence of Andrew Warbeck.
Greagoir Mac An Bheil Chaim, MP (mar is e ata ann !) brought the Campbell’s Soup Can concept to a higher lever entirely with his Campbell’s Can of Curried Yogurt.
Nor is too-famous Seamus the only MP who would be down on you, Esteemed Blogmeister, for your rather (gulp) impertinent casting of asparagus on the Step-Mother of Parliaments.
Eist le seo/Get an earful of this:: ‘Margaret Ritchie, MP, is highly critical of Sinn Fein’s refusal to sit in Westminster’. (i.e to sit after standing).
‘And she adds witheringly: ‘A lot of voters may not realise but Sinn Fein do go to Westminister. They go there to collect their expenses and to attend the wine receptions’.
Witheringly is a daarling word, Joxer, a daarling word.Though not the one which would spring first to Perkie’s inner rhymster. A word beginning with b perhaps, but which eludes him at the moment.
While he tries to recall the b-rhyming word, a little, erm, Housekeeping might not be out of order, Can of Curried Yogurt.
These quotes come from the disinterested and unbiased reports on the Norneverland elections by Gerry Moriarty of The Unionist Times. Again, those same bad-minded begrudgers(see above) claim that these reports are filtered through the prism of the SDLP.
Perkie’s inner media ombudsman would remind them that high paywalls do not a prism make. And leave it at that.Apart from wearisomely adding (yawn) that the detached professional Gerry Moriarty is not, repeat NOT, a SP (Spin Doctor) for the SDLP.
in the imperishable words of Robinson Carson (no relation, on both counts):
– Life gits teejous, don’t it?
M. P.Rithchie’s comment on the ‘wine reception’ (see above) also falls a tad flat. Such attendance being in the long tradition of ‘burn everything English except their coal’. Sadly, the MP for South Down (SD) might do worse than travel south to Dublin, the birthplace of the first utterer of that political principle. Otherwise she might well be in jeopardy of being classified, erm, ‘as a slow-learner of Swift’s writings’.
And besides, who is to say the wine of the afore-mentioned reception might not have been harvested and bottled by the legendary Irish wine-merchant: TC O’Vino. Or, to give him his full baptismal name, Tony Cask O’Vino.
Thump ! Thump ! Thump !
Ah, yes, Schrodinger: the b-rhyming word prompted by Margaret Ritchie.
It is, of course, Barbara Fritchie.
As in: ‘She leaned far out of the window sill
And shook it forth with a royal will.
‘Shoot, if you must, this old grey head
But spare your country’s flag !’ she said’
Any dispassionate lover of poetry would just adore the ‘with a royal will’ phrase. Though Perkie’s inner poetaster, being the curmudgeon in constant hunt of a headline that he is, would like to tamper with the last line:
‘But spare the Union Jill, ‘ she said.
Rhyming as it does with window sill and royal will. So it does.
Class Perkin. Far from simply, but purely, class!
GRMA, Francis.
Truth is, anyone who ever attended a class in The Lure of English Letters, Literature and Lore with particular emphasis on Lear, both King and Edward by a lecturer name of , J. Collins, Esq. would find it well nigh impossible to emerge without having something cling to him like a stickleback (vegetation not fish).
Some might be versed in English letters, others in literature and more again in the lore and lure of either King Lear or Edward Lear or both. Some slow-learners, sadly, might not be able to get past first base and graduate with nothing more to show that the c-word, class.
But such is the unsportsmanlike element of life.
Beir bua !
Taking a browse through Irish history, was more achieved by Nationalists attending Westminster or by not attending?
Parnell and Redmond both attendees brought Home Rule to the heart of British Politics although did not achieve it. On the other hand O’Connell mass agitated outside of Parliament, as a Catholic unable to take his seat, and achieved Catholic Emancipation, something that during the reign of Goerge III looked impossible. Working within Westminster he achieved very little apart from a few reforms during the Lichfield House Compact! The War of Independence brought the British to offering Eire dominion status in 1921 – this was achieved outside of Westminster! Dáil Éireann, established after SF’s landslide victory in 1918 became the recognised legitimate Parliament of the Free State, achieved outside of Westminster.
Does History illustrate that through agitation outside Westminster, Nationalists can achieve more?
I believe SF taking their seats at Westminster would be a political step backwards! Not sitting in the HOC has not and will not prevent SF MPs representing their electorate. Although, ive always been a fan of the Irish Parliamenary Party tactic of obstructionism – obstructing domestic debate by long, arduous statements on the state of Ireland …
Furthermore – what have the SDLP achieved in their years attending Westminster? When is the last time they have propositioned their “United Ireland” objective in the HOC? As i mentioned before in posts, the SDLP are on a “political life support machine.” It’s coming near to the machine being turned off – without this they will not survive and function – the SDLP have become the political minnows and as long as the Doc remains at the helm the party is doomed!
Sinn Féin will never take their seats in the British parliament, watching reports from that place and hearing a Unionist MP giving off about the IRA and to witness the sheer disinterest of the British members is excruciating in the extreme. Seeing the Stoops all sitting like good little boys and girl is even more embarrassing. They go purely for the wages and the `esteem` it conveys upon them. I vote for Sinn Féin precisely because they are an abstentionist party. As for the DUP and their pathetic begging to be accepted as true Brits, they should have taken the hint when they were shot down over the tv debates. Their colonial masters are not interested. British as Finchley? British as Hong Kong more like.
An interesting piece from David McWilliams
http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2015/04/20/english-nationalism-could-result-in-a-united-ireland
Hope this is a timely reminder that today’s the last day to get registered to vote. So get registered and get voting.
But why stand in the first place?
Theresa ,they stand in the first place so that unrepresentative uncle Toms like the SDLP will be prevented from misrepresenting the views of the Nationalist people.
Michael, surely that all the more reason to take their seat and put their point of view across.
Bernie Devlin had no problem taking her seat and she was no less a great Irish woman and republican for doing so, and she was remembered a long time after many others were forgotten.
Very good article from Vice on why we’re seeing the right wing UK establishment in utter, pant shitting meltdown of late
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/queen-palace-coup-miliband-snp-cameron-huitson-345