Why politicians should really leave sport alone. Part2

This week's second most gratuitous grab of a sporting event for purely partisan reasons:

DUP politician, whose blushes I shall spare, jokingly messaged on Sunday "McDowell wins US Open last year. McIlroy leading the Masters this year. The DUP delivering for Ulster!"

Ah, no.

Today after young Mr McIlroy's disastrous final round he updated with "McIlroy crashes out at US Masters golf. The reason for this major setback is obvious - UUP/Tory cuts!"

What next?
Salmond claiming an affinity with the Barca midfield ("world-class,   sleek and capable of steam-rolling any opposition")?

Tom Elliott threatening to do a Shakhtar Donetsk ("with all our team playing in the same direction , correct planet alignment and a few bob in the ref's back-pocket...we can overcome the overwhelming odds and triumph")?
sleekit

So, why exactly is a Unionist running for the Irish Senate?

This is Jeff Dudgeon's platform piece, explaining why a N.Irish Unionist is running for a seat in the Republic's Senate:

When even the DUP insults have ceased... can it get any worse for the UUP?

Traditionally you could always tell that an election was in the offing in Northern Ireland by watching the pattern of the DUP's press releases- they would be balanced delicately by, on the one hand, various party luminaries calling for "Unionist Unity", whilst on the other, their colleagues would be simultaneously tripping over each other busily a-slammin' and a-blastin' the UUP.

The fact that (as of today) the last current 20 releases from the DUPes contain nary a whisper of "The Protestant People Demand Unity" (block capitals would have been invariably added for max effect), never mind the slightest hint of a "slam" or "blast" of their "partners" in Unionism is perhaps the worst  possible indictment of the "threat" now posed to their communal hegemony by the UUP under Tom Elliott.

Confidence is now apparently so high that even "Smashing Sinn Fein" is off the cards... a none too subtle message also then for both Martin McGuinness and the TUV Ultras.

"Breaking up" is not the hardest thing to do, really.

The Belfast Telegraph:

Tom Elliott has said his party’s UCUNF electoral pact with the Conservatives is now dead.

In the coming Assembly election the UUP leader will advise his voters to give their second and subsequent preferences to fellow unionists.

Actually, in typical Elliott-style, it isn't 100% clear what he is saying about the Conservative link... but if it is finally kaput, then  it really is the best thing for both parties in the short-term, although in the long-term it should be the Conservatives who will reap more benefit from the frissure.

Also, I'm not sure how on one hand you can say you regard the DUP as "tribal" and "sectarian", whilst on the other then urge Unionists to keep their vote within "the family"?

Maggie ain't gonna work on Pete and Marty's farm no more?

That seemed to be the threat in the Belfast Telegraph earlier on in the week,

we've got a head full of ideas
driving us insane
It's a shame the way they makes us scrub the floor
well, we ain't gonna work on Pete and Marty's farm no more

Go for it and drag the UUP with you, the electorate will appreciate the gesture.
Rage against the Machine version.

A Unionist voice in the Seanad?

The Seanad Éireann ("Senate of Ireland")) is the upper house of the Irish parliament, performing a similar, although more restricted, role as the UK's House of Lords.The system by which Senators are selected/elected verges on the Byzantine, although several worthy people fron Northern Ireland, including Gordon Wilson and Seamus Mallon, have been chosen by the Taoiseach over the years. None (as far as I'm aware) have been elected...so far:

A MEMBER of the Ulster Unionist Party has announced his intention to run for the Irish senate, the News Letter can reveal.

One less double-jobber....

Chekov has just made it before me:

The Ulster Unionist Party has confirmed Sir Reg Empey is to leave the assembly later this month.

Sir Reg, now Lord Empey, who has been representing east Belfast at Stormont, will not contest the assembly elections on 5 May.

The party said the decision followed his elevation to the House of Lords and was "consistent with his spearheading of the policy of an end to double-jobbing."

I thought his original decision to stand was hypocritical (here and here); he and the party have belatedly come to the right choice on this one.

Elliott and Conservative HQ in plot to finish off local party?

Tom Elliott, 8th December 2010:

After a meeting yesterday, it has been agreed that the Conservative Party and the Ulster Unionist Party will continue to engage in a serious and constructive dialogue about an on-going political and electoral relationship between the two parties as we look ahead to the next European and General Elections.

The UUP intend to put forward proposals for approval by their Executive committee in January 2011 which will then be considered by the Board of the Conservative Party. These proposals will include the understanding that any future UUP MP's and current and future MEP's will take the Conservative Party Whip.

In the meantime, both parties are conscious of the forthcoming District Council and Assembly elections in May 2011. In this regard, it has been agreed that:

1. Both parties will put up candidates in the District Council Elections, with a view to elected councillors co-operating in Local Government, as rules currently permit this to happen.

2. In the Assembly elections only the UUP will put up candidates. This is because under the current rules parties are unable to fight elections in coalition and once the elections have taken place are unable to enter a post election coalition within the Assembly."

Elliott had spoken the night before at a meeting in Westminster and, according to a Conservative who was there, expressed his belief that:

◦A franchise model is his view of the way forward. This means the UUP brand remains, elected UUP members would take the Conservative whip at Westminster

◦As a franchise, local Conservative competition is counterproductive – this presents a challenge for symbiosis with established local Conservative associations

That last point was in Steve Nimmons' own words but whatever Elliott said, it was interpreted by some (an interpretation which the UUP told me directly by email was wrong) that he wanted the Conservatives to close down their NI Branch as he felt they were “very detrimental to the relationship that we (the UUP and the Conservative leadership) can build”.

But however he may have put it, it was clear that he wanted the Conservatives locally out of the way.

Between 8th of December and Baroness Warsi's press-release last week, we had the N/W Belfast "Solidarity" pact between the DUP and UUP, we had Lord Empey finally confirming that he was a UUP not Conservative Lord and we had Mike Nesbitt backtracking on the agreement of 8th December re the taking of the Conservative whip. at Westminster.

Bear those three events in mind and remember what Baroness Warsi was promising last week:

1. The Conservative Party in Northern Ireland has committed itself to an ongoing programme of campaigning and development
2. New campaign headquarters in Bangor, Co. Down.
3. A full time member of staff will be based at the headquarters
4.One of the Party’s most senior campaign directors has been appointed to liaise with the Party in Northern Ireland.
5. The Party is committed to the development of progressive centre right politics which offer the electorate of Northern Ireland the opportunity to cast their votes for and participate directly with the national Government of the United Kingdom.
6.The Party will continue to review how Conservatives in Northern Ireland can play a full part in the Conservative Party as in every other part of the United Kingdom
7.Senior Conservatives in Northern Ireland will work with the Board of the Party to develop that relationship.
8. They desire to see Conservative Associations formed in every Northern Ireland constituency and an active programme of membership recruitment.

Points 5,6,7 could certainly equally apply in the scenario Elliott was envisaging (ie the gradual demise of a N.Irish Conservative Party).

Points 1,2,3,4 and 8 point towards a commitment from the "centre" towards the local party that certainly doesn't fit in with the UUP leader's expressed vision or hope.

And it's because of the last sentence I have problems with both Alex Kane's and Jeff Peel's conclusion (here and here)- they both believe that this proposal is, in effect, another stitch-up of the local party.

Now, it may well be (and Messrs Kane and Peel have got a much deeper insight into the workings and thinking of the Conservative Party than I ever will have) that it is indeed part of a longer term HQ plot to finish off the local branch here; Cameron and Paterson might be anticipating that the UUP will ride its slump and become a "profitable" (ie delivering MPs), self-supporting, centre-right "franchise" in the near future thus removing the need for a duplicate Conservative Party.

If true, then that latter assumption, less than three months before the Assembly Elections, is based on very shaky indeed foundations at this moment in time. With regards the former belief- as I commented on Jeff's blog, if Conservative HQ wanted to finish off the NI Conservatives, then a simple silence would have sufficed- why waste the money and time connected with, for example, appointing a full-time member of staff?

Whatever their UK leaders' motives, however, the ball has moved very firmly into the NI Conservatives' court now. If they sit back and wait for that promised central support to magically produce votes at the ballot-box, then Kane's and Peel's prophecy will be fulfilled before very long. 

Despite the dependency and entitlist mentality engendered by most of the its poltical elite, in Northern Ireland there is also an underlying, though at present rather dormant, underlying entrepreneurial strand. There is quite a strong tradition of self-help on the wider societal basis. In other words, there is an ideological potential for a modern Conservative Party to tap into but it is a medium/long term project which depends on a local party being clear what it stands for and also being capable of communicating that message to the electorate. It also needs a firmer on-the-ground involvement (eg joining the educational debate, getting involved in planning inquiries etc) than has previously been evident.

But  I believe, at this present moment in time, the space to at least think about those points has been given by the strategy announced last week- it's now up to the local party to make the most of the opportunity.

Oops, there goes another nail into the coffin...

On last night's Hearts and Minds, Owen Paterson, when asked about the prospect of Martin McGuinness getting the First Minister job:

"I think it would be an extraordinary endorsement of the progress that has been made here . and I think we should celebrate that fact that everyone wants to vote...but how that election turns out , as Secretary of State, is not for me to comment on. It's down to local people to go to the polling booths and vote."

Not sure that was an intentional "oops" or not...
But I think it (along with Baroness Warsi's announcement yesterday) gives the UUP now the excuse now to walk completely from their "on-off-kinda" relationship with the Conservatives; something which would be the best thing for both parties at this juncture.

Result!

Jeff and Chekov have beaten me to it…but it looks like we have got our answer from Conservative HQ this morning from Baroness Warsi (to whom Mr Paterson obviously passed on our email;)):

The Conservative Party in Northern Ireland has committed itself to an ongoing programme of campaigning and development and will shortly move into a new campaign headquarters in Bangor, Co. Down. A full time member of staff will be based at the headquarters and one of the Party’s most senior campaign directors has been appointed to liaise with the Party in Northern Ireland.

The Party is committed to the development of progressive centre right politics which offer the electorate of Northern Ireland the opportunity to cast their votes for and participate directly with the national Government of the United Kingdom. The Party will continue to review how Conservatives in Northern Ireland can play a full part in the Conservative Party as in every other part of the United Kingdom and senior Conservatives in Northern Ireland will work with the Board of the Party to develop that relationship.

Central to that development will be the Party’s desire to see Conservative Associations formed in every Northern Ireland constituency and an active programme of membership recruitment at a local level.

Conservative Party co-chairman Baroness Warsi said: “The Conservative Party in Northern Ireland has the unequivocal support of the Party nationally. Politics in Northern Ireland continues to evolve and we are determined to be at the heart of that evolution. Our approach will be one of active engagement – starting with the fielding of candidates in the Local Council elections in May.”

ENDS

Busy at the moment, there will be a longer post following later on.

Update:
Another result!

Armstrong returns as Chairman of the local Conservatives

The Conservative Party in Northern Ireland today announced that Irwin Armstrong had resumed his position as Chairman of the local party.
Irwin Armstrong commented.

“When I tendered my resignation in December I said it was untenable for me to remain as Chairman since it appeared that the party in Northern Ireland would no longer be able to contest elections and that I did not have the support of the leadership.

Today’s announcement from our joint Chairman Baroness Warsi confirms the unequivocal support of our leadership and board for Conservatives in Northern Ireland, their wish to have a close relationship with local Conservatives, to be at the heart of politics here, and that we will be contesting elections in future. This demonstrates that the reasons for tendering my resignation have been addressed and I have therefore consented to the request of the Executive and local membership that I withdraw my resignation.”

The party also commented on their future plans in Northern Ireland.

Members of our Executive have agreed that we would not now be able to properly contest the Assembly elections as we will not have the necessary infrastructure in place due to the events of recent months. We can however confirm that we will have that infrastructure in place for all future elections including an office and full time staff to support the local Executive and candidates.

We will therefore watch with interest the results of the Assembly elections in May and then decide on a detailed long term strategy that will enable us to make a real difference as we pursue our One Northern Ireland, One Community, One Future politics, and put up credible candidates with the experience that can provide the leadership Northern Ireland requires.

We look forward to building our party across Northern Ireland and attracting members and future candidates from all sections of the community who believe in our vision of a positive future for everyone

Logic starts unravelling the UUP-Conservative deal?

On the day we sent him our open letter, Mr Paterson appears to have been otherwise engaged:

The party's (UUP) link with the Conservatives — the confirmation of which has probably been the biggest achievement of Tom Elliott's tenure to date — appears increasingly shaky.

A source outside both parties has told the News Letter that Mr Elliott walked out of a meeting with secretary of state Owen Paterson last Monday after a heated debate about the Conservatives' refusal to change the rules on selecting the first and deputy first ministers.

Mr Elliott, who earlier in the week was scathing of some UUP members for publicly talking down the party, politely declines to discuss the incident.

But, coming as Conservative Central Office appears to be reconsidering the nature of the Tories' link to the UUP, it hardly augers well for the future of that relationship.

On Monday Strangford UUP candidate Mike Nesbitt appeared to suggest that the UUP's link with the Tories had weakened, saying that it merely meant that the UUP "will look favourably on taking the Tory whip" in Europe or Westminster, but only "on issues that do not pertain specifically to Northern Ireland".

I did refer to that "clear as mud" clarification from Mike Nesbitt last week- in the confusion of Devolved UK 2011, how do you now differentiate between what "pertains specifically to Northern Ireland" and what doesn't?

Lord Empey, shouldn't he be concentrating on the Lords?

I have a follow-up post on Open Unionism about whether Lord Empey should be even putting himself for the Stormont dog-fight in May.

Curiouser and Curiouser...

Speaking on BBC Radio Ulster's Nolan show yesterday, UUP candidate Mike Nesbitt with regards to the party's relationship with the Conservatives adapted a quote from Alice in Wonderland:

"If we had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see? That's our relationship with the Conservatives”

No, of course, he didn't really; what he did say was:

... the UUP's relationship with the Tories now meant that in Europe and Westminster the party "will look favourably at taking the Tory whip on issues that do not pertain specifically to Northern Ireland".

Now, that is not exactly what the agreement reached in December by the two parties actually declared:

"These proposals will include the understanding that any future UUP MP’s and current and future MEP’s will take the Conservative Party Whip. "

No qualification or equivocation there.
So... which is it?

And in the meantime, Lord Empey, is he still a Conservative Peer or not?
(I have a horrible feeling on this one that an announcement was made which only I've missed; an alternative explanation that the DUP are mischief-making is also not beyond the realms of credibility)

An open letter to Owen Paterson: Where now for a *UK* Conservative Party?

Three weeks ago, myself and another pro-Union blogger contacted Owen Paterson’s office. To date, we have had no reply from Mr. Paterson or his staff to our email and we are sending it this morning in the form of an open letter in hope of some kind of response:

Dear Mr. Paterson,

We are writing to you concerning the position of the Conservative Party vis-à-vis its activity in Northern Ireland. As Conservative and Unionist bloggers we have been firm supporters of Mr. Cameron's policy of political engagement in the province, and we hope to be able to continue to facilitate in our small way the efforts of the party there. In recent weeks there has been some confusion about the future of the party in Northern Ireland, and if you were able to clarify that position for us, we would then be able to pass it to our readership.

Kind Regards,

Dilettante
oneill

In interests of transparency: Dilettante is a full member of the Conservative party; whilst I have been a member of both the Friends of the Conservatives and the UUP previously, I no longer have any official connection with either party.

Our real, "off-line names" have been used in the communication to Owen Paterson.

Why did we write it?

As enthusiastic supporters of the original premise behind the Conservative and UUP link-up three years ago, we had been bemused at the turn of events pre-Christmas when the backroom deal between officials of the two parties effectively isolated Northern Ireland once again from the mainstream of United Kingdom politics.

At the time the Conservative leadership gave no public explanation for this retreat; it was also unclear as to whether they saw any future for the Conservative Party in Northern Ireland or indeed for the concept of a genuinely UK-wide pro-Union party.

They shouldn't be that difficult questions to address but they are ones Owen Paterson and others remain reluctant, well over a month later, to publicly answer.

And with the news of an *arrangement* being reached between the DUP and UUP in North and West Belfast, can we now also assume that the UK Conservative party is an integral part of what is obviously an ongoing "Unionist Unity" project?


Cross-posted at: Dilettante, Open Unionism, Slugger O'Toole

Unionist "Unity". Slowly but surely, it comes to pass...

Not that big a surprise:

THE DUP and UUP have struck a deal to work together in North and West Belfast ahead of May's council and assembly elections.

Despite UUP leader Tom Elliott ruling out any form of province-wide agreement with the DUP, the local deal shows that there is still considerable support in parts of the UUP for an arrangement with the party's larger unionist rival.

In a joint UUP-DUP statement to the News Letter and the Shankill Mirror, the two parties said that they would work together and set up joint working groups to discuss issues of mutual concern.

One wonders how Paterson and the Conservative Party on the mainland are viewing their indirect(?) involvement in the link-up. Or am I being naive and they're also fully up to date and comfortable with the implications of the *deal*?

Also is there a significance in the non-appearance in the group-photo of Bill Manwaring, the Conservative and UUP's candidate in the last West Belfast General Election and supposedly the UUP's candidate in the Assembly election?

Is his Unionism too inclusive to be included in the "new arrangement"?

Hussey surprises at the hustings.

When I was thinking over Christmas about where I wanted the blog to go this year, I must say that the approaching nightmare of this year's NI Assembly Elections and all the attendant intra-communal hot-air and inconsequential baiting and "slamming" (the only synonym apparently in the local politician lexicon for "criticise strongly") didn't exactly motivate me to bother continuing the thing full-stop.

As it stands at the minute, I'm mildly interested in the results. No longer being a member of a participating party at this present stage I couldn't give a fiddlers about the campaign.

Having said that, this early election press-release from the UUP's candidate for the West Tyrone Constituency, Ross Hussey, has surprised me in a positive way:

Jim Nicholson- the UK's Number 1!

Surprised this hasn't had wider publicity locally, especially from the usual attack-hounds;)

The Sunday Telegraph yesterday published a league table (not yet online) exposing "wide variations in the "value" provided by the UK's MEPs

Whilst James Elles, a Conservative MEP for the South East was at the very bottom of the table (£113,000 claimed on travel, office and living allowances in a year, took part in less than 80 per cent of the parliament's plenary sessions and delivered only three speeches in 18 months) his fellow Conservative Charles Tannock, a representative for London, emerged as the best-value MEP (near-perfect attendance record, posed 189 questions to the European Commission and giving 96 speeches, his travel and office expenses claims were below-average).

And the UK's most "expensive" MEP?

None other than James Nicholson of the (*ahem*) Ulster Conservatives and Unionists at £215,610.

The UUP are *not* a Bavarian McDonalds

Seemingly two models for any continuing Conservative/UUP relationship are now being suggested by the UUP:

UUP leader Tom Elliott wants his party's controversial Conservative Party link to continue in a new form — with the Ulster Unionists becoming the “franchise” for the Tories in Northern Ireland.

To become a Comservative party franchisee, however, is not the automatic process Tom may think it is:

Are we right for each other?

Like we said, a career as a Conservative Party franchisee is not by any means for everyone. Equally, we don't accept just anyone either. Ideally, you'll already have a successful party and will have demonstrated significant team leadership.

There's more to running a Conservative Party franchise than taking our money and stopping our local candidates from running - much more. You'll need a remarkable aptitude for connecting and communicating with people. You'll be completely committed for at least 20 years, with no other conflicting interests.

Or maybe that's if you want to become a McDonalds' franchisee? Whatever, same difference; with those conditions, I can't see Tom coming anywhere near meeting the mark.
Model Two then...

There has been some talk about a "Bavarian" model in which the UUP would be the local "franchise" for the Conservatives, along the lines of the German CDU and CSU.

The mention of that previously unheard of "franchise" concept again, one day before the conference hints at a UUP spinner at work... but OK, why the CDU/CSU suggestion also doesn't cut the mustard:

1. Although they may differ somewhat on philosophy, there are very few tangible policy differences between the Christian Social Union of Bavaria (CSU)and its big brother, the Christian Democratic Union. It's only the slightest of exaggerations to say there are more political and personal differences existing within the UUP than exist between the two separate parties of the CDU and CSU!

2. Until very recently the CSU *was* Bavaria, so all encompassing was its hegemony there; the "disastrous" turning point of 2008 still left it with 42% of the vote! Even if greater policy differences existed, it wouldn't have been practical for the CDU to set up any kind of opposition to that sort of conservative power structure. That is quite patently no longer the case with the UUP in N.Ireland. At this juncture, then such a relationship would not be likely to bring the Conservatives anything tangible to the table .

And actually, I don't think it would do a lot of good for the UUP either, at least not in helping them in next year's Assembly Elections- the NI Conservatives would be the least of their worries on polling day and any kind of link with the Coalition government (given the populist anti/London "MOPE" mentality likely to be roused up their opponents) would be definitely counterproductive.

Time, in both their interests, for the UUP and the Conservatives to cut loose, amicably.

Update:http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1208/1224285027608.html

Is Tom fly enough?

Mary Howitt: The Spider and the Fly:

Will you walk into my parlour?" said the Spider to the Fly,
'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy;
The way into my parlour is up a winding stair,
And I've a many curious things to shew when you are there."
Oh no, no," said the little Fly, "to ask me is in vain,
For who goes up your winding stair can ne'er come down again."

Tom Elliott in yesterday's Belfast Telegraph:

“Let us be clear, Peter Robinson wants to destroy the Ulster Unionist Party, that is what he has always been out to achieve.”

"And....?" is becoming my standard response to such statements.

Larger political parties, of whatever stripe, generally want to *destroy* their smaller opponents at the ballot box and to complain about that fact is a bit like the fly complaining about the fact that the spider's out to get him. It's the natural order, in other words, and there is not a great deal of point moaning about it; how you plan to avoid ending up as the hors d'oeuvre on your aggressor's menu is of much more importance.

He (Tom, not the fly) continues:

“But if he thinks he can move further onto our ground, the centre ground, which we have defended and represented for years, we are up for the challenge of that battle — and a battle it will be.”

Ah right, the fight back. Simply because the fly has been able to fly around the living-room for years (ok, hours) with impunity, it's highly unlikely the spider will respect "tradition" and leave him alone.

So, then on what grounds does Tom think he can win that battle?
Policy? Personality? Philosophy?

Better sorting out the first and last factor (not a great deal you can do about the middle one in the space of six months) there before offering down silly challenges; if there isn't a big enough difference in policy or philosophy between the two parties then the UUP is (and deserves to be)  finished as an independent political force.

The spider hasn't gobbled up the fly- yet- but there isn't that much time left:

Up jumped the cunning Spider, and fiercely held her fast.
He dragged her up his winding stair, into his dismal den,
Within his little parlour -- but she ne'er came out again!

Lord Empey on the double?

The UUP has issued its list of Assembly candidates for next year's elections; I would be comfortable voting for twelve out of the twenty-nine so far announced.

I would not on principle, however, be voting for Lord Empey.
Here's what he said not that long ago:

Double-jobbing and kick-backs are not what this Party is about.

We are about public service - putting the people of Northern Ireland first.

During 2009 the Ulster Unionist Party fought and won the battle over double jobbing.

We set the pace, exposed the unjustifiable behaviour of those trying to be in two or three places at once, munching their way through £400 of food every month.

I don't know how many Tescos' vouchers the Lords are able to claim but I do know that it meets for 140 days every year. Which means if Lord Empey does retain his Assembly seat, then he will be trying to be in two places at once if he hopes to do the two jobs he has been elected and selected for. Or is there another interpretation that I'm missing out on here?