It’s odd the important things we tend not to discuss. Such as when it’s necessary to have a referendum on an issue and, equally important, who decides when and if that referendum will take place. We are in the absurd position where a border referendum will be called only when the British Secretary of State believes there is a majority of people wanting constitutional change. So Mr Brokenshire, using no criteria I know of, has total power over the holding of any referendum. In addition, as he surely knows, should he call one, it is a clear signal that the British Secretary of State believes Britain will be leaving Ireland.
However, let’s park the referendum vs. votes in Stormont/the Dail/Westminster. Let’s consider the matter of constituencies. How are they decided on and by whom? In the old days in Derry, gerrymander ensured that one-third of the population elected two-thirds of the councillors on Derry Corporation/Council. The whole issue of gerrymander was a headline matter in the Civil Rights days. So has that crucial matter been sorted? To be frank, I don’t know. It’s not something you hear discussed.
But in Britain they appear to know and have been discussing. There, they plan to cut the number of seats to Westminster by 50, leaving a total of 600. This change could have an effect – negative, in Labour terms – on some 200 Labour seats. Other parties, including the SNP, will be affected, though not to the same extent as Labour. The Boundary Commission for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland will release its proposals next month.
The idea of rejigged constituency boundaries, we’re told, is to make things more fair, so that in all constituencies roughly the same number of people will elect the same number of MPs. That seems reasonable – although it would be possible to arrange constituency boundaries that contained equal numbers of voters and yet have them arranged so that one party rather than another had an unfair advantage. Ask a veteran unionist – he’ll tell you how it’s done.
Oh, and did I mention that if you’re not on the electoral register, you don’t count in this reshuffle? No good protesting you plan to register before the next election. Constituency-wise, you don’t exist.
The power to call a referendum and the power to decide what constitutes an electoral constituency are fundamental to the operation of democracy, yet we hear little talk about whether these powers are in the right hands or whether they’re being exercised fairly. Since electoral success or failure is dependent on who can be voted in or out, it’s odd that, like the size of your salary, it’s a topic so conspicuously avoided in electoral debate.
Goodness. Surprising ignorance on several levels, Jude.
The Secretary of State can call a referendum whenever he wants; and the independent Boundary Commission draws the electoral boundaries.
PS. Why have you posted an out-of-date map?
Because I’m lazy, MT. Where can I find an up-to-date?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-R0_hSfbBVj8/VUzhoopELwI/AAAAAAAADlo/Q18PXNg2L0c/s1600/0%2BNI%2BWestminster%2B2015.png
Here you go Jude, this is the current state of play.
Thanks, Scott. But MT has reminded me of the copyright thing – is this one useable then?
Ah no idea Jude. The whole copyright thing is a little beyond me.
There’s one here without them being coloured to match the parties.
http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/assembly-business/research-and-information-service-raise/constituency-profiles/
Not sure how you get round copyright, though. (Do you have permission to use the other one, which looks like it’s off Ark? Genuine question as I’m looking to use some images myself for a project and struggling with copyright questions.)
Actually, MT, I used that map (i) because as I say I’m lazy and (ii) because it’s from free.flikr, which says the photos can be used for free. If I have to choose between being dated and being in the dock, I think I’ll choose the former…
That should be ‘free flickr”
“Actually, MT, I used that map (i) because as I say I’m lazy and (ii) because it’s from free.flikr, which says the photos can be used for free. If I have to choose between being dated and being in the dock, I think I’ll choose the former”
Fair enough. Can’t argue with that, Jude. (Though you do sometimes let defamatory comments pass.)
As I’ve said before, MT, I try not to. And if I miss one, I hope you and/or others will alert me. I certainly think there’s too much abuse on this site.
“As I’ve said before, MT, I try not to. And if I miss one, I hope you and/or others will alert me. I certainly think there’s too much abuse on this site.”
I have done, Jude.
Jessica keeps saying the UUP founded the 1966 UVF. Surely that is defamatory?
I don’t think it is, MT. I think defamotry comments are those that are likely to lower you in the estimation of your peers. I wouldn’t think the UUP would consider such a claim something that lowers them in the esteem of their peers.
“I don’t think it is, MT. I think defamotry comments are those that are likely to lower you in the estimation of your peers. I wouldn’t think the UUP would consider such a claim something that lowers them in the esteem of their peers.”
I’d seriously consider removing this defamatory comment, too. Lest it come.to the attention of UUP lawyers.
It was Gusty Spence who claimed they were funded by the UUP in 1966.
The UVF were in those years seen putting up posters for the UUP and they had a close relationship with the Spence brothers.
It wasn’t until they were jailed and the police took an interest in the relationship with the UUP and political unionism that they cut the ties.
But why should that annoy you MT?
“It was Gusty Spence who claimed they were funded by the UUP in 1966.”
Do you have a reliable source or is that it? And do you have evidence that they were founded by the UUP? Plus you didn’t state this was a claim by Spence you stated it as a fact.
“It wasn’t until they were jailed and the police took an interest in the relationship with the UUP and political unionism that they cut the ties.”
What’s your evidence for this?
“Jessica keeps saying the UUP founded the 1966 UVF. Surely that is defamatory?”
Alert the UUP then MT, I’m sure they will be very eager for a spotlight to be shown on their past……btw, the last time I looked there was a statue of a UVF man up at Stormont, did he have anything to do with the UUP?….
Of course, it was the Leader (or was he?…) of the UVF Gusty Spence that said he was paid to start a “sectarian war” by the Unionist Government in the 1960’s, aka the UUP. So Jessica’s comments are fair, in my opinion.
Needless to say I’m sure if it was you in charge of this blog MT, and not Jude, you would remove Jessica’s comments because you don’t like them, them being factual or not is irrelevant. Your attempt to get Jude to do the same by labelling them “defamatory” really says more about you but that’s not surprising to anyone who reads this blog. Some Unionists aren’t exactly champions of democracy…..the big statue up at Stormont alone proves that…..
“btw, the last time I looked there was a statue of a UVF man up at Stormont, did he have anything to do with the UUP?….”
What relevance does that have to the 1966 UVF?
“Of course, it was the Leader (or was he?…) of the UVF Gusty Spence that said he was paid to start a “sectarian war” by the Unionist Government in the 1960’s, aka the UUP.”
The same Spence who claimed he was innocent of murder? About as unreliable a source as you could pick.
“So Jessica’s comments are fair, in my opinion.”
You think it’s fair go state something as fact for which no evidence exists other than the unsubstantiated claims of a convicted murderer?
Are you saying the 1966 and current UVF had no connection to the 1912 original UVF?
I think many of them would disagree with you but then, you are branding them unreliable murderers.
Personally, I would take the word of a working class loyalist before I would trust a unionist politician or any so called moderates on this site.
If the UVF had been supported in politics and not handed all over to the DUP then an agreed Ireland would have been achieved.
I feel I have more in common with them than elite unionism.
You offend me with your attitude towards republicans, I would love to know how loyalists feel when you call the leaders they look up to unreliable murderers.
In a united Ireland or even now, I would support a memorial on the shankill road to someone like Gusty Spence as I can acknowledge he was a role model for many loyalists who are decent people no matter what happened in the conflict. Even a park named after him there.
It is only through tolerance that we can have lasting peace.
If he uses the old map he’ll only be liable for Ark Royalties!
Sherdy
I hate to be the one to say it, but that’s not bad!
An important observation would be that the entire border area,that Loyalist want to “harden”,with Brexit is strongly Irish nationalist.So good luck with that,should be mighty Craic.
“An important observation would be that the entire border area,that Loyalist want to “harden”,with Brexit is strongly Irish nationalist.So good luck with that,should be mighty Craic”
According to my source Gerry, the border is at least 95% Irish Nationalist, the whole border. Needless to say there cant be a “hard border” anymore. The checkpoints along the border before the troubles were manned by local Unionists. Setting up checkpoints again along the border today would be like setting up a checkpoint on the Falls Road. I would give it 24 hours before its gone again…….a “Welcome to Northern Ireland” sign didn’t last a week before it was hammered, defaced and, by the looks of it, shot……
Why are the border areas 95% nationalist Ryan perhaps the IRA intimidated Unionists from the border by targeting them and killing them oh still i am sure you will use Susan McKays book to disprove it.
Unionists have been moving east for decades Robert. You do not integrate and when catholic populations grow, you move away. This is not due to intimidation but in built prejudice that is passed on.
I have no doubt as unification draws closer, more will start moving to Britain. Again, this will not be down to intimidation but your own prejudices. 2021 will be a pivotal turning point but I am in no doubt that Ireland will be united in under 10 years from now.
It may depend on whether the Viceroy’s breakfast egg is properly cooked or whether he has had a successful bowel movement. But in reality why should he or his intrusive government/state/country have any input. Let them just go. It’s not morally right to militarily possess anybody else’s country. But then the English and their running dogs never had a strong handle on morals or rights, did they.
I agree with your point on the SoS and how they know it’s time to have a referendum on a border poll – we sometimes hear that unless there’s “appetite” for same, one won’t happen – how is appetite tested? Where’s the evidence? Surely, as things stand the SOS’s viewpoint is subjective that needs statistical evidence to back it up – Not just a “feeling” or “inclination”. Many politicians were inclined to believe the majority in the UK wanted to remain in the EU – the evidence from the EU referendum stated otherwise.
Perhaps the best way to test public appetite on the viability of a border poll / United Ireland could be achieved in the 2021 Census. There could be an option whereby people can have their say on this – the question could be: would you vote yes or no to a border poll being conducted to test the viability of Irish Unity? Or something to that degree.
“Perhaps the best way to test public appetite on the viability of a border poll / United Ireland could be achieved in the 2021 Census.”
Why not the number of Irish passports. Once over 50% of the population hold Irish passports that is clear evidence of acceptance of Irish citizenship.
An Irish passport is not simply a European travel document, it is registration as an Irish citizen in Dublin and must first meet the criteria of eligibility as an Irish national.
I would agree that it is not right to hold a border poll while a majority of our people travel under a british passport and accept the british nationality. I wold say we now have two reasonable options of assessment criteria for a border poll.
“We are in the absurd position where a border referendum will be called only when the British Secretary of State believes there is a majority of people wanting constitutional change.”
Oh it not absurd, it is deliberate and discriminatory.
Referendums are supposed to be democratic expressions by the people on constitutional matters which should be based on fully informed choices,
The Good Friday Agreement allows for a referendum on Irish unification which both states have agreed to respect as the principle of consent.
To any fair minded person, the principle of consent would be allowing the people to make such an informed choice and respecting the majority decision, as in the Scottish referendum.
Not to unionism though. Consent means a veto. Refuse to talk and frustrate all genuine efforts at reconciliation. Yes, it will delay the inevitable, it will frustrate nationalism and it will prolong British rule in Ireland. But it will also delay economic prosperity, it will delay planning for a proper all island economy, it will delay the rebuilding of our nation, and it will eventually make unionism an abhorrence in Ireland.
If the British Secretary of State does not wish to hold a referendum until they believe there is a majority of people wanting constitutional change, that is fine, but do not back up the unionist veto on such change, facilitate discussions on unification in the mean time and allow the people to make an informed decision based on clear understanding of constitutional change has to offer.
The people are crying out for these discussions to take place.
It cannot go beyond 2021 where the next census will show a clear and dramatic demographic change which will make a referendum unavoidable.
It would be my preference that this referendum is based on what is best for our country, our children’s future and not a sectarian head count. If unionism push this to the wire the frustration will be such we will be denied the opportunity to discuss our future on this island together sensibly.
This frustration is growing,
“The people are crying out for these discussions to take place.”
They are? I haven’t noticed. Most people are busy getting on with their lives. Have you any evidence?
“It cannot go beyond 2021 where the next census will show a clear and dramatic demographic change which will make a referendum unavoidable.”
How do you know?
“How do you know?”
Simple Addition, MT.
” Most people are busy getting on with their lives”
And?…..doesn’t mean they don’t take an interest in politics and want Irish Unity….Indeed their lives would be far better in a United Ireland than being in this failed statelet.
“Simple Addition, MT.”
Addition of what?
“And?…..doesn’t mean they don’t take an interest in politics and want Irish Unity….”
Not does it mean they’re “crying out” for discussions on “unification”. Where’s the evidence for this?
“Indeed their lives would be far better in a United Ireland than being in this failed statelet.”
How do you know?
Ryan as a resident of the most impoverished part of Northern Ireland i would be interested to know how Irish Unity would materially improve West Belfast?
“Ryan as a resident of the most impoverished part of Northern Ireland i would be interested to know how Irish Unity would materially improve West Belfast?”
Irish unity will not happen over night.
It will require the coming together of two separate economies which will happen in a staged basis with economic targets to be met each stage of the way.
I would like to see a joint fund setup by both London and Dublin to invest in capital projects to grow the economy in deprived areas such as west Belfast.
I would open more business incubation centres with subsidised rates and funding to help people start new businesses and offer separate education grants for young people who want to gain qualifications.
The money should be allocated equally between both communities so people in the shankhill and in loyalist areas also benefit immediately from the process of unification.
MT
The exit poll from the General Election in the South was interesting.
Only 36% wanted to see NI unite with the South.
32% wanted to see the North remain in the UK with strong local Government
Even amongst SF voters only 60% came out in favour of unification
Now maybe the announcement of a poll date would concentrate minds and clarify the issues,but the numbers just don’t seem to add up at the minute.
There could also be a danger that a poor result (in favour of UI) could lead to a swelling in the ranks of the remnants of physical force republicanism which would be bad news for everyone.
With the possible exception of physical force republicanism…
Jude
True. It’s an ill wind that blows nobody good.
There would be no danger whatsoever from any referendum.
If a majority voted against unification that would have to be accepted.
What is more important is that it is done fairly and people are given the opportunity to make an informed choice.
I have total confidence there will be a majority support reuniting our country. I would accept the decision would be final and would even accept that there should be no further referendums for 50 years if it fails.
Are you going to try to use dissident drug dealers to prevent democracy now?
jessica
That is bizarre even for you. You wold refuse future generations the opportunity to vote on a United Ireland if a decision now did not produce the right result?
If it doesn’t happen for you right now then everybody else can stew for the next 50 years.
I don’t know what you mean by preventing democracy
It is hardly far fetched to suppose that a very poor result in a referendum might lead some to feel that peaceful methods are not getting any where.(you have made comments of that nature yourself).
That is not a reason to not have a referendum it is merely stating the obvious.
Indeed a successful vote could lead some in the loyalist community to think about violent reactions. That is also not a reason to avoid a referendum.
How you can say there would be no danger from a referendum is baffling to me.
Given our history I would say it is fraught with danger.
So you have no problem refusing the current generation who need it most by supporting unionist intransigence but object to denying it to future generations.
First of all, my suggestion highlights this blatant hypocrisy.
Secondly, it is not bizarre.
Why should the unionist population not be given a choice of a one Ireland country or a permanent two without the threat of a referendum at any point hanging over them?
As I say, I am confident that unification is the only sensible or viable option and I would love to see England squirming over how to make sure they are not permanently burdened with an unviable 6 county UK province stuck in Ireland.
In relation to the potential for loyalist violence, would such an option not reduce the risk of such violence from that quarter?
The only danger I see is the continued denial of democracy.
jessica
How am I refusing the current generation anything? I am in favour of a referendum at some point in the near future.I just don’t expect Unionists to be in favour of it any more than I expect turkeys to look forward to Christmas.
I don’t understand your 50 year suggestion at all.
The GFA allows for a further referendum after 7 years,which might be a bit soon (or not depending on events) but I can see no justification for waiting 50 years, unless the nationalist vote somehow collapses totally.
Either a united Ireland is in all of our best interests or it isn’t gio.
The only reason for the every 7 years rule is so England can make sure to get rid of us at some point.
I only want one chance in my lifetime, only one democratic expression as to whether Ireland should be one single independent nation or not.
If the decision is not, it should be respected and there should be no whinging over it afterwards.
As with brexit, the referendum is to leave a complex union and it is not like a general election which can be undone later.
It must be crystal clear that this is a once in a generation decision and there will be no undoing it afterwards
Scotland bottled it, they don’t deserve a second chance and would probably bottle it again if they got one.
I agree with you about the absurdity of the border referendum situation – but what were Sinn Fein thinking when they agreed to that clause?
Sherdy
For once i agree. I don’t know hoe they allowed such a vague arrangement to slip through.
I mean ‘perfidious albion’ and all that! Come on guys!
I am in two minds over it.
Yes it allows unionism to delay and frustrate and lord knows I just don’t have the patience that Sinn Fein have.
On the other hand, it allowed unionism to rubber stamp the queens approval of the release of the last remaining part of Ireland from her kingdom and at a time of their choosing was the best we were ever going to get for such a commitment.
All red tape has been removed and it is in the destiny of the Irish people to achieve peacefully. Time is running out for unionism and that is what we need to focus on
Sinn Féin MEP Matt Carthy, made valid points when he stated:
“For English and Welsh votes to drag the North of Ireland out of the EU against the will of its people would, like Partition itself, be yet another travesty of democracy”
It was also interesting to hear Mr Varadkar warn rival politicians that the Brexit vote will only result in a united Ireland if people respect diversity instead of seeking a “land grab” through a “crude” border referendum. We seldom hear the issue of gerrymandering discussed in the context of a crude land grab these days.
I think we have been over this one before and while I agree with the premise that the system to trigger a border poll is not perfect, all I hear is complaining without an alternative system being proposed.
Perhaps the alternative trigger should be when parties that declare themselves Nationalist get a majority in the assembly and get 50%+1 of the popular vote.
This would give a clearly defined trigger.
Some Nationalists on here seem to think there should be a Referendum just because SF feels like it.
Another point is while the system to trigger the poll is not perfect it is the only system that currently has a democratic mandate as it was voted for in the GFA.
Any proposed change to the system would require a referendum in order to give it credibility.
Hi Scott. Interesting but how’s this for a proposal as I constantly hear that it is the make up and number of seats in Stormont that matters. Maybe so, but a referendum is the total amount of votes cast across the whole demographic area, irrespective of its constituent parts. See, Northern Ireland in the recent Brexit results. If it’s total votes cast in a referendum then should this trigger the SoS uses be a crude headcount in any given local election, such as the European Parliament.
I mostly agree with Twinbrook lad, but even if you take the amount of seats out of it and look at the popular vote only from either the last assembly elections or the general election then Nationalist parties still don’t have the 50%+1 needed to win the border poll.
I admit that there is many that don’t bother voting, but it’s impossible to guess what way they would vote. We can only use the evidence we have.
There should be a clearly defined trigger for a border poll. It should not be left up to a whim the SoS or whenever Nationalist parties decide they fancy it.
I also liked another commentators idea on here that there should be a question on the 2021 census that will gauge support for a Border poll.
Ah the popular vote. I can’t argue with the numbers of votes cast but it is used by unionist commentators that the need for a referendum isn’t required. I suspect the outreach to Christian, Catholic voters on matters of conscience such as abortion and same sex marriage are now being used as indicators of the continued link with Britian with the aDUP in particular. We are told to vote on issues at each election and I know many Nationalists that voted DUP on the issues above, but come a referendum on RI then the house is surely built on sand. I suspect it’s a false sense of security
I hear what your saying about people vote on policies not just the border issue Twinbrook lad. That’s surely a healthy thing also as elections are more than one issue sectarian head counts.
I just hear people complaining that the trigger to call a referendum is left to the SoS and what I would like to see is a clear trigger that could be applied.
Election results are imperfect I admit but what other hard figures could we use to gauge support for a UI?
“Election results are imperfect I admit but what other hard figures could we use to gauge support for a UI?”
Either the question on the census questionnaire as suggested by TheHist or simply count the number of Irish citizens registered through the southern passport office.
I like the census idea Jessica, but see problems with the passport idea.
Many people use it just as a travel document and it has little bearing on there views of a UI.
The upsurge in Irish passport applications after BREXIT was probably due to pragmatism rather than a huge change in opinions on UI.
I agree, Scott. I’d rather it was otherwise but I agree.
“The upsurge in Irish passport applications after BREXIT was probably due to pragmatism rather than a huge change in opinions on UI.”
You cant have your cake and eat it Scott. It is not simply a travel document, you are entitled to it for a reason and only after providing sufficient evidence that you qualify and are eligible as an Irish citizen.
“You cant have your cake and eat it Scott. It is not simply a travel document, you are entitled to it for a reason and only after providing sufficient evidence that you qualify and are eligible as an Irish citizen”
It’s still merely a travel document, and the reason people obtain them is to travel. Just because it’s only available to citizens doesn’t change its purpose.
“It’s still merely a travel document, and the reason people obtain them is to travel. Just because it’s only available to citizens doesn’t change its purpose.”
A passport is proof of ones identity and nationality and nothing more.
It is only required to travel where you have to provide evidence of our identity and country of origin. Hence, its primary purpose is not to travel but as an identity document which can be used for other verification purposes such as voting which may not require travel.
You cannot obtain an Irish passport without providing sufficient evidence that you have the entitlement of an Irish citizen and you cant do that without accepting you have such entitlement and are therefore accepting your Irish citizenship.
“A passport is proof of ones identity and nationality and nothing more.”
To be accurate it’s proof of one’s citizenship, but are you suggesting it’s much more than that if you now accept it’s only an identity document?
“It is only required to travel where you have to provide evidence of our identity and country of origin. Hence, its primary purpose is not to travel but as an identity document which can be used for other verification purposes such as voting which may not require travel.”
And?
“You cannot obtain an Irish passport without providing sufficient evidence that you have the entitlement of an Irish citizen and you cant do that without accepting you have such entitlement and are therefore accepting your Irish citizenship.”
Obviously.
What point are you making?
I understand that it’s more than a travel document and that it grants Irish citizenship, but I don’t believe that gaining Irish citizenship was the motivation for many including myself seeking a Irish passport after BREXIT.
It’s not the Irish citizenship that I or ( I think) many other people were after it was the EU citizenship we desired because of the benefits around the ability to live/travel/work freely throughout the EU. The Irish passport was just a conduit to get that EU citizenship.
It’s probably wrong to treat the Irish citizenship/passport like that, but as it was an option, I feel many people took it.
If there’s one thing about us “northerners” we are throughly practical people.
That hasn’t been denied under a British passport as yet Scott, but I accept that was the true motivation even if I also feel it is wrong.
I missed 5 days of my holiday trying to get an updated passport for my son which I failed to notice had expired before reaching the airport.
I was meant to fly on Saturday but ended up in Dublin in Monday morning and didn’t get the emergency passport until Wednesday as you cannot get a same day passport in Dublin for a child but can in Belfast for a British passport apparently.
I chose to lose the extra 3 days of my holiday and the expense of two nights in a Dublin hotel rather than accept a British passport.
Not everyone would consider it practical but my conscience is clear.
I have no respect for any republican who travels on a British passport.
“I understand that it’s more than a travel document and that it grants Irish citizenship, but I don’t believe that gaining Irish citizenship was the motivation for many including myself seeking a Irish passport after BREXIT.”
A passport doesn’t “grant” citizenship. You have to already be a citizen or be entitled to citizenship to qualify for one. And you don’t need to have a passport to be a citizen.
There may well be other means of achieving citizenship, but surely this would be the easiest route. It is the only one I am aware off for starters.
“There may well be other means of achieving citizenship, but surely this would be the easiest route. It is the only one I am aware off for starters.”
It’s not a means of “achieving citizenship”. You have to be a citizen already to be entitled to one.
I think you know what I mean by now MT.
I am usually in the middle of other things when I am replying to these comments.
You get the gist im sure
“I chose to lose the extra 3 days of my holiday and the expense of two nights in a Dublin hotel rather than accept a British passport.”
That’s your choice Jessica of course, but I would have just got the fastest passport be it a British or Irish one and simply enjoyed as much of my holiday as I could.
“That’s your choice Jessica of course, but I would have just got the fastest passport be it a British or Irish one and simply enjoyed as much of my holiday as I could.”
You have the benefit of youth and have not been subjected to the same experiences some had during the conflict. Lets just make sure future generations don’t end up as messed up as I am. 🙂
“I also liked another commentators idea on here that there should be a question on the 2021 census that will gauge support for a Border poll.”
Yes, that sounds perfectly reasonable to me also.
The maps of Westminster constituencies prompts me to comment on Britain’s most obvious democratic deficit, the ‘straight’ winner-takes-all system of voting.
They don’t need to gerrymander under the existing voting system. Until the UK introduces PR, minority governments, representing corporate elites, will continue to govern, against the wishes of the majority of voters.
UK is the least democratic country in the western hemisphere.
There are pros and cons of both PR and FPTP voting systems
Proportional representation
Pros-it’s in the name the elected representatives are proportional to the votes.
Cons- you end up with inevitable hung parliaments and coalition governments, which can leave unstable governments.
First-past-the-post
Pros- You tend to end up with majority governments which are more stable and tend to get things done.
Cons- disproportionate amount of MP’s to votes.
Hard to know which is the best but the UK electorate voted to keep FPTP against a AV system, so FPTP has a democratic mandate.
Time was, Esteemed Blogmeister, when one of the great music hall jokes of the Free Southern Stateen was the one which involved Dev looking into his heart whenever he wished to divine what was or was not good for the FSS.
Hardly a season went by without the resident comedians who trod the pages in that Alhambra of Anglicised Angles, The Unionist Times revving up their baggy pant repertoire of Dev gags.
Each gag as mischievous as it was negative, ranging over such diverse topics as the romping of sturdy children, the contesting of athletic youths and, of course, the sine qua non itself, the dancing of comely maidens at the crossroads.
Even though Dev never actually mentioned either of the c-words – comely or crossroads – in his famously ‘fatuous’ radio address of St. Patrick’s Days, 1943. No more than The Great Shakes ever wrote about ‘gilding the lily’. (It was ‘to gild refined gold and paint the lily’, Lily )
Of course, due to the correspondence course forces of which The Unionist Times was /still is the mouthpiece, the Free Southern Stateen which Dev envisaged never materialized. Thus, what we have today is less the Gaelic Utopia of Dev’s myopia but rather more akin to a plain, blunt, erm, Devonshire.
Devonshire West, as soulless as it is heartless, is now such a fait accompli, a shire in its own unbroken right, and that is why we rarely or ever get to hear any more about Dev’s unique ability to perform an auto-scope of his own cardiovascular system.
Which is odd, rather.
One would have thought the Dev joke might have been devolved and so, the vaudevillian vacuum filled. By, say, the current Norneverland Nabob’s stated admission of being a devotee of the Dev School of auto-cardiac examination. So far, alas, not even a murmur, far less the cracking wise of the Anglicised Boys / Gall Gals..
He is far from being a household name in The Free Southern Stateen , as one would have automatically assumed, with an unmade up moniker like his, the way, say, Brokenarrow is in the Cree Tribe.
Brokenshire in point of fact hasn’t even made it as far as the Intercom at the security gates at the bottom of the long and winding driveway to Castle Catholic on Liffeyside.
Bendedknee obviously considers poking jokes at Brokenshire as being just not cricket.
Of course the whole irony about the Iron Man of Ireland Past is that he, erm, lacked a heart. A tall figure of a man, he had a great head for figures. A Professor of Algebra, he was rum hand at the sums.
Dev of course was also a devout RC and so, could rattle off the Third Secret of Fatima with all the panache with which he could declaim the Fourth Law of Thermodynamics. As adept at Mathematics as he was at, erm, Fatemtatics it was whispered in polite circles in the Roaring Twenties that he was one of only a handful on Planet Earth who could get his head around Einstein’s Theory of Distant Relations, that sort of thingy.
A native born New Yawker, in 1884 he immigrated to Limerick at a young age of two summers, swopping the Bowery for Bruree , where there were no sidewalks, there being no First Avenue to start with.
Still, he did exchange the Big Apple for a field of innumerable small potatoes. Historians trace his interest in mathematics to this early introduction to mulitplication.
A LAD FIT OR A LIMERICK, or, vice versa.
E. Dev divided each and every Free Stater
He was a hero, he was a tater-eating traitor
With regard to his ‘ heart’
He’d no hand, act or part
Inside his chest was the best pocket calculator .
PS Does Brokenshire have any Limerick connections ?
“Devonshire West, as soulless as it is heartless, is now such a fait accompli, a shire in its own unbroken right, and that is why we rarely or ever get to hear any more about Dev’s unique ability to perform an auto-scope of his own cardiovascular system.” There is no correspondent with this site but yourself, Perkin, who could begin to forge such a sentence but yourself. Again I say it: we are not worthy…
GRMMA, mar is gnath, a Mhaistir Ionuin Blog.
Sadly, and it gives one no stately pleasure dome to decree, but the blame, alas, lies elsewhere.
Look no further than The Unionist Times. It is the g.g. machine which just continues to give, and g.. (See far below). On cue, even as one sat down to tap out this GRMMA the death was sadly announced of the genial Gene Wilder.
At first sight, TUT and GW might seem irrelevant, one to the other, but that would be a gravely mistaken and open conclusion into which to jump.
In 1970 the comical Gene W. made a movie/fillum on Liffeyside called ‘Quackser Fortune has a cousin in the Bronx’ (Quackser is a daaaarlin’ name, Joxer !). He played the eponymous role of – whisper it ! – a gatherer up of horse dung from the dirty streets of Dublin.
Remarkably (or not) this more or less coincided with the commencement of the Dirty Thirty Years War AND the launch of the new (yet still blue ) all inclusive TUT. Up to this The Unionist Times had occupied a niche spot as a toney toilet roll designed to fulfill the dual role of wiping the eye of the pedestrian Papist maj while simultaneously performing what had been its wholesome role of wiping a different orifice of the horse Prod min.
At the sit-down end of each day of fruitful, Fate-ordained dominance. A case of a prolonged glance before the unavoidable but necessary look-away askance in a vertical if slightly tilted forward stance.
Almost overnight it morphed into an organ of record which might appeal as much to turf-burning Murphy as – ahoy there ! – the Commodore Surphys of the Kingstown Yacht Club.
This may have been possibly even done for – and may St. Patrick himself forgive one for harbouring a base thought of such crassness ! – for (horse-whisper it !)……com. mercial. pur. pos. es. To survive, its in-house counters mused, it must dive (gulp) downmarket.
Thus, it modeled itself on the work practices of Quackser Fortune (which , of course, it has always been about) by continuing to remove the manure of the maj from the soiled streets (‘Git yer sh-t ! as Gene Wilder intoned in the movie/ fillum ) but in a modified way of course: by the introduction of such Raj camouflages as allowing a lahanock in Leprechaun, like the Times of India condescending, fingers on nose, to publish a page in Hindi.
While at the same time, busily going about its essential core biz: of cattle-prodding the Papes into conformity with the Established order. Which begs the question, sor, almost half a century on: has it succeeded ?
The Unionist Times does not, f’rinstance, anymore commandeer a special northward bound train , retitle it ’The Orange Blossom Special’ and pack it with its full complement of hacks and hackettes on the Twaflth,
From which locomotive the sane minded cargo, on arrival in B’fast, would immediately decamp , descend upon Sandy Row, brandishing buckets and spades. For the messianic purposes of bringing back south of the Black Sow’s Dyke sufficient
quantities of the grainy stuff so that the misguided maj could get some sand between their culturally deprived toes.
That they don’t do this anymore is a sign that The Unionist Times has won the day /go bfhuil a la chomh maith lena Law, tagtha.?
Indubitably. One has but to glance at its ragship column called Rite and Reason. This of course is a soapbox thrown open to every opinion and none, none, that is, but the orthodox, the anti-Red Sox and to the right of John Knox.
Hark ! does one hear ?
-Och, I dunno.
One understands, for The Perkin was, strangely enough, in the same frame at one stage. Till one day he stumbled on the following. When he accidentally happened to look through the bottom end of the now empty bottle of Mi-Wadi which he always makes a point of sipping from while sight-biting Rite and Reason.
At first he did not believe what he was reading, till he tried it the following week, and the week after that, and so on, going forward, week on week. And here’s what he found on each and every occasion:
-Here’s to the glorious pious and immortal memory of the great and good King William 3, Prince of Orange, who saved us from rogues and roguery, slaves and slavery, knaves and knavery, Popes and Popery, brass money and wooden shoes, satraps and Christian Brothers’ leather straps.
And whosoever denies this toast may he be slammed, crammed and jammed into the muzzle of the great gun of Athlone, and the gun fired at the Pope’s belly and the Pope into the Devil’s belly and the Devil into Hell, and the door locked and the key in an Orangeman’s pocket and may we never lack a brisk Protestant boy to kick the arse of a Papist and here’s a trouser cough for the Bishop of Ballybough’.
(Cautionary note: well it worked with Mi-Wadi ).
So self-important in its own skin has The Unionist Times once again become that as soon as the Eighth Amendment has been safely, erm, put to bed, their next crusade will be (creeakkkkk ! that’s the sound of an embargo breaking) to rename the cathedral of St. Patrick’s Cathedral with a more Thames-sounding, (gulp) St. Clements.
So, on Liffeyside the sounds will merrily ring:
-Oranges and Lemons etc.
Does one still hear:
-Ach, I dunno ?
Consider then, the following.
One started with a Wilder, Gene, and so, in the interests of some symmetry, will conclude with another Wilder, Billy. Whereas Gene was genial, Billy was a genius. As was shown in The Apartment, starring (gasp) Jack Lemmon.
Which was made in 1960, ten years to the year, before Quackser Fortune. If QF had a cousin in the outer reaches of uptown Bronx, then The Apartment was set in the more toney surrounds of Downtoun Manhattan.
Fast forward now to 1965 when the same Jack Lemmon acted in a similar type downtown apartment comedy set in Manhattan, called:
-How to murder your wife.
While not directed by Billy Wilder on this occasion, it might well have been: call it sub-Billy Wilder in genre . Jack Lemmon plays the part of a (gasp) cartoonist who happens to marry in alcohol and haste a buxom ragazza from Roma (!), same town as Il Papab and who cannot (gulp) speaka word of da Q’s English.
Jack L, sets about concocting a plan to rid himself of the unwanted Mrs. Lemmon: ‘by drugging her with goofballs and burying her in the goop of the gloppitta-gloppita machine at the construction site next to their apartment’.
For gloppita-gloppita machine read a cement-mixer, for cement-mixer read The Unionist Times and for building site, read New Ireland in Progress.
This is the g.g. machine, EB, which continues to give and g. (see far above).
PS While the Wilders, Billy and Gene were not related (Gene borrowed his surname from Thornton Wilder) , both nonetheless were winners/ nominees of the Oscarers.
“In the old days in Derry, gerrymander ensured that one-third of the population elected two-thirds of the councillors on Derry Corporation/Council”
A fact DUP politicians still refuse to accept but a fact is a fact, the DUP’s sectarian views doesn’t alter that. When this was mentioned to Gregory Campbell (by, I think, Danny Morrison) he laughed. Of course I always remember the time Stephen Nolan asked Gregory if Unionism should apologize to Catholics for the past and Gregory was outraged and replied: “Apologize for what?!”. They also refused to apologize for Ulster Resistance and the 100 Catholics murdered by UR weapons.
If you are one of those people who are holding out for a more progressive, new generation of Unionist politicians coming from Unionist political youth movements then your hope is already in vain. One look at DUP Dale Pankhurst’s twitter feed will tell you all you need to know. Dale is around the same age as me but yet he has the mind set and political outlook of a 90 year old, Paisleyite Orange man. Words such as “Compromise”, “Differing perspectives” and “Equality” are as foreign to poor Dale as Mandarin Chinese. Then there’s Wayne Gilmour. Wayne is around 24 and was heavily involved in the Fleg protests. He appeared on TV and was seen talking to crowds about how “Ulster is Back!” and how the clock was going to go back to the 1950’s where the Catholics knew their place. Wayne is decked out in Loyalist tattoo’s and on his facebook he is seen in numerous pictures holding and pointing guns (replica or real, I don’t know) surrounded by Unionist flags.
So no, the mind sets of Gregory Campbell and Nelson McCausland wont be going away with their retirement.
Some quotes on Unionist gerrymandering:
“”The Nationalist majority in the county, i.e., Fermanagh, notwithstanding a reduction of 336 in the year, stands at 3,684. We must ultimately reduce and liquidate that majority. This county, I think it can be safely said, is a Unionist county. The atmosphere is Unionist. The Boards and properties are nearly all controlled by Unionists. But there is still this millstone [the Nationalist majority] around our necks.”
E.C. Ferguson, Unionist Party, then Stormont MP, April 1948
Later resigned from Parliament in October 1949 to become Crown Solicitor for County Fermanagh.
Reported in: Irish News, 13 April 1948″
“‘At a meeting in Derry to select candidates for the Corporation Mr. H. McLaughlin said that for the past forty-eight years since the foundation of his firm there had been only one Roman Catholic employed – and that was a case of mistaken identity.’
Mr. H. McLaughlin, Unionist Party, September 1946
Reported in: Derry People, 26 September 1946
Quoted in: Gallagher, Frank. (1957), The Indivisible Island: The History of the Partition of Ireland. London: Gollancz. Page 216.”
“”We are satisfied that all these Unionist controlled councils have used and use their power to make appointments in a way which benefited Protestants. In the figures available for October 1968 only thirty per cent of Londonderry Corporations administrative, clerical and technical employees were Catholics. Out of the ten best-paid posts only one was held by a Catholic. In Dungannon Urban District none of the Council’s administrative, clerical and technical employees was a Catholic. In County Fermanagh no senior council posts (and relatively few others) were held by Catholics: this was rationalised by reference to ‘proven loyalty’ as a necessary test for local authority appointments. In that County, among about seventy-five drivers of school buses, at most seven were Catholics. This would appear to be a very clear case of sectarian and political discrimination. Armagh Urban District employed very few Catholics in its salaried posts, but did not appear to discriminate at lower levels. Omagh Urban District showed no clearcut pattern of discrimination, though we have seen what would appear to be undoubted evidence of employment discrimination by Tyrone County Council.
Cameron Report, Paragraph 138, 1969
Northern Ireland. Parliament. (1969) Disturbances in Northern Ireland [Cameron Report], (Cmd. 532), (September 1969). Belfast: HMSO”
At least you didnt quote Susan McKay this time…