The consequence of "filling yer boots"


Following the release of the draft Withdrawal Agreement Sir Jeffrey Donaldson was asked about the impact on the Confidence and Supply Agreement between the DUP and the Conservative Party. It was noted that not all the promised funding had yet been provided and may be lost. Sir Jeffrey replied that in such a scenario the DUP could recoup the funds by negotiation with the Government on a vote by vote basis.
Since the 2007 St Andrews Agreement the DUP have reduced unionist politics in Northern Ireland to a single issue, the DUP must have more seats than Sinn Fein. Irrespective of social policy, economic policy or any other issue, political control due to this one issue is absolute. Ten years of this form of politics has delivered a party whose arrogance and complete rejection of normal politics has transformed the world’s impression of unionism.
Believing the Union is protected by the principle of consent in the Belfast Agreement, the DUP have played fast and loose with probity, governance and integrity. They have ignored the fact that the Union is a partnership built on common values and common goals. Having spent their entire political careers demanding that Northern Ireland be allowed different social rules and different financial arrangements to Great Britain, their demands to be treated exactly the same as the rest of the United Kingdom now ring rather hollow.  While we may be protected as part of the Union by the consent principle our place within that partnership is determined by all of the other constituent parts. That means Unionism must build relationships based on a common political code and a desire to take responsibility for good governance across the UK.
After many years of financial decisions designed to underpin DUP power the list of questionable activities including NAMA, Red Sky, RHI, Anaerobic Digestion and SIF shows the strategic nature of the financial mismanagement. These were not errors in process - these were deliberate attempts to subvert normal governance. In any normal democratic society any one alone would have been enough to bring down a government. In the twisted political system established in 2007 to support eternal power for the DUP, each announcement of financial mismanagement is met with a shrug of the shoulders and a reluctant acceptance that such activity now defines unionism.
Even within the corridors of Westminster it is unclear at times if the DUP are representing their narrow interests, the interests of the UK, the people of Northern Ireland or a foreign power wishing to influence Her Majesty’s Government. 
Returning to the initial issue about selling their votes, the message to the DUP from our fellow unionists in the UK is clear. While the DUP’s relationship with the UK is based on a financial model summed up in the phrase “fill yer boots” the response from many in the UK is “fill yer boots somewhere else”. The UK cannot financially afford the DUP and as a consequence unionism can no longer politically afford the DUP.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The threat to the Union

Unionism is facing its own existential crisis and must learn how to come to terms with it. Put simply the Democratic Unionist Party represent a clear threat to the very union they purport to uphold. In May 1974 then Prime Minister Harold Wilson used the term “spongers” to describe unionists involved in the UWC strike. Today it is a term that many in the rest of the UK would apply to what the DUP consider robust negotiations.   Losing the goodwill of our fellow UK citizens at a time when Northern Ireland’s position in the UK is the principle barrier to many achieving the Brexit they aspire to cannot be considered a strategic position to take. The DUP constantly refer to the principle of consent underpinned in the Belfast Agreement, an agreement they had no hand in, yet they miss the point that while people are free to make their own determination others are free to try and persuade them of one view or the other. Ignoring this point is central to the risks attached to their threa
Read more

Community Planning Theory and Practice

With the Review of Public Administration and the transformation of local government in Northern Ireland came a new power, that of Community Planning. The term taking power, rather than framing the process as taking responsibility, could allow some to argue that they are there to hold others to account. Such a view would limit a council's direct involvement in addressing issues at the same time as being flexible enough to both place blame where failures occur and take credit where positive actions happen. Community planning is intended to be transforming, not just in getting agencies and communities around the table but clearly identifying where resources can be applied to greater effect. A reduction in duplication, an increase in early detection of problems and strategic intervention to deliver a better outcome for all. Each agency has its own agenda, its own budget and targets, a thread which runs through peoples lives. If each thread runs parallel to every other thread without
Read more