Sour

When I went on Council I wondered whether or not I should blog about Council issues or not (as well as wondering whether or not I had the time to blog but an inability to sleep has resolved both for this evening at least and BTW thanks for voting me 16th best blog when I hadn't blogged in months). 

I've known Belfast city councillors of different parties for the last twenty years or so and was always slightly disturbed by how the often every event in the building was imbued with a significance it often did not have - comments or slights at Council always predicted to have dire electoral consequences when the average voter knew nothing about them.  However, the past week of events on the Council have undoubtedly attracted the attention of the public so I will presume there is some interest on a perspective of what is going on.

The first question is have relationships soured in the Council?  Generally, yes. I was not there in the old days but it is an overstatement to say they are at those levels. 

Why has the situation came about?  It is no accident. Sinn Fein made the conscious decision to do this and for reasons to be examined below Alliance and the SDLP have indulged them.  (The consciousness of the process is made clear by the Duke of Edinburgh awards incident.  It did not come about by an individual or spur of the moment decision by the Lord Mayor but an instruction from further up the hierarchy.) 

A number of months before the election there were significant personnel changes among the Sinn Fein team.  With some discontent simmering on the ground and the growth of the likes of eirigi beginning to unnerve Sinn Fein it was decided part of the solution was to overhaul the Council group and take more strident positions.  The  then group leader, Michael Brown, with whom all groups had created a working relationship, quit as leader and councillor following internal pressure. This new intake included individuals like convicted bomber Jim McVeigh and the return of a figure from a time when relationships where poisonous on the Council, Mairtin O'Muilleoir. 

In the Council elections their growth in seats hid a drop in their vote plus eirigi came from nowhere to take over 2,000 votes in Upper Falls and the intervention of other republican candidates cost them a seat in Lower Falls.  This reinforced their earlier fears and perpetuated them on the path they had commenced.  The perspective of the West is particularly crucial as it drives the Sinn Fein group.

So Sinn Fein had decided to wander about City Hall with its little bag of stink bombs.  Little surprise there as the lessons from the first years of devolution were that without checks and balances and the willingness to use them Sinn Fein would behave in such ways.  However, City Hall has none of those checks and balances (although RPA will change that situation in the next term) but their approach could only be a success if other parties supported it and for their respective reasons they have.  Yet Alliance and the SDLP then wander around complaining about the awful smell in City Hall denying that their own actions had any role.

With the SDLP there are a range of issues symptomatic of the party's broader problems with Sinn Fein.  It has some problems of factionalism.  They have no narrative or strategy of their own, not even a basic counter-strategy, so end up generally as the rabbits in Sinn Fein's headlights.  On occasion they try to outgreen Sinn Fein and fail miserably so tend more often to fall into line.  They also have the core problem that the main means of communicating with their electorate, newspapers, are in the hands of republicanism.  So even if they do score a point of Sinn Fein it doesn't enter the public consciousness. In terms of relationship with others there is much talk but that is where it has so far ended.

With Alliance I will try to err on the side of kindness.  So far the only thing that has been consistent is their inconsistency.  They appear to approach issues with the atittude of a scoreboard - we've given one to them'uns so we'll have to give the other'uns one too.  In this pattern of behaviour there is no consistent vision.  Words may be mouthed but it is not backed up by action.

The flags issue and Christmas signs are cases in point.  In 2004 Alliance voted to retain the present practice of the Union flag flying every day.  Since then the law has not changed neither has there been a employment tribunal challenge to the practice (despite the 2004 advice warning this was a risk) and the practice has become more common in the UK not less.  Yet Alliance agreed to repeat the process and now backing a different position of designated days. 

On Christmas signage in different languages, they opposed an Irish and Ulster-Scots language signs a few months ago then voted the opposite way for a Irish language sign last Thursday.  The only rationale for it seemed to be that earlier in the night they had agreed that the Ormeau Park be used for a Covenant event so were looking to even up the books.  This flip flop also did significant damage to an all party deal.

A range of contentious issues had been drafted and agreed that a diversity panel (including all group leaders) to discuss them intensively over the next few months to see if an agreement could be reached.  Its first meeting was to be the day after the December Council meeting.  Comments in committee made clear that Sinn Fein were somewhat unwilling participants.  This seemed driven by their belief they could get more with their existing strategy rather than through an all-party approach.  Therefore it was unsurprising that  Mairtin O'Muilleior proposal, through its impact on two issues designated for the panel, broke the agreement. 

However, the Alliance and SDLP joined in.  Consciously or unconsiously they had completely undermined the integrity of the agreement for all-party focus on these issues.  It will have also reinforced SF's belief they'll get more outside such a process. 

Perhaps this is a sign of a deeper malaise within Alliance.  IJP has noted a sense of drift in Alliance since the election.  Recent events have also demonstrated a general lack of nerve in Alliance.  The first sign of this was when the First Minister made his Castlereagh speech on integrated education.  When the fall-out began Alliance were notable for their lack of full throated support for something which was supposed to be a central policy.  Lately, the issue of teaching colleges has shown it again.  They say they believe in one college but baulk when it comes to actually moving it forward.

Add in Ford's attempts to remove Prison Service symbols to the Alliance council group's attitude to the Union flag and other memorabilia in City Hall and a picture begins to be painted more fitting of Irish republicanism than Ulster liberalism. So perhaps as with the SDLP these issues are a sign of deeper problems in the wider party.

As regards the immediate future of relationships the core issue will be whether the integrity of the all-party agreement to work together on contentious issues can be restored.

(So there is a backgrounder to the current issues on Belfast City Council.  This is no doubt where you tell me that despite my attempts otherwise I have been sucked into this mini-universe.)

Travers

The appointment of Mary McArdle, a member of the PIRA murder gang that murdered Mary Travers (and attempted to kill her mother and father), has raised a number of issues which are already being discussed around the unsuitability of the appointment, a review of the process of appointment already underway and the predictable Stalinist line from Sinn Fein where keeping the old comrades sweet takes its usual high priority over basic political sense.  However, there are three side issues that have not been particularly touched on.

First, there is media treatment of victims.  The three families of victims have managed to gain and maintain significant media attention for their particular cases.  These are the McCartney family, Raymond McCord and now the Travers family. Beyond the persistence of the families and articulacy in the media there is a consistency in their experience. Namely that the perpetrators and victims were drawn from the same nominal community.  Is this consistency a coincidence or does the media draw a conscious or unconscious distinction between murders within and murders between the communities here?

Second, is the easy ride that the SDLP have been given on the issue.  They have been vocal in their support for the Travers family.  However, this is the SDLP that supported the release of terrorists early from prison.  This is the SDLP, as IJP points out, that backed an IRA bomber being appointed a Mayor within days of objecting to McArdle's appointment. This is the SDLP that refuses to support reform to the definition of an victim. Ponder this for a moment if the police had shot the armed McArdle in the follow-up operation rather than arrested her then the SDLP position is that Mary McCardle and Mary Travers would have the exact same status of victimhood.

Third, some have been surprised by the reaction to this appointment.  They shouldn't.  The selective nature of the examination of our past so far was going to cause a build-up of anger which would attach itself to a particualr issue.  However something more significant could be happening.  The decisions of dubious morality that are taken to end a conflict are not always validated by time. Hence, the lack of furore about Leo Green's appointment but the anger about Mary McArdle's.  Sometimes past decisions are rejected by those who come after because the recognise the dangers they hold for a better society.  Perhaps Northern Ireland will prove to be one of those places.

Blank

Now that the electorate has sent me back to spend more time with my blog here goes. The issue of the number of spoils came up with the three elections being blamed.  However there may be a further issue not being discussed.

At the North Belfast tallies there was an interesting new phenomenon among the spoils from nationalist areas. There was a noticeable growth in the number of blank ballots.  In subsequent conversations with members of other tally teams the same issue was spotted in other republican areas.

What is a likely explanation of this?  No dissident grouping was advocating this approach (AFAIK). Sinn Fein have a reputation for being able to identify who hasn't voted during election day and getting them along to the polling station.  It would appear some may be going along at their encouragement, taking their papers but not casting their vote.  We are dealing with dozens possibly creeping over a into the low 100's in a single constituency but possibly worth adding into the discussion on spoils.    

Legend

In his latest column Alex Kane examines the issue of Sinn Fein's growth in the recent Irish elections.  In it he argues that whatever Sinn Fein will try to make of it, it is a largely meaningless development. He makes clear that:

"Sinn Fein has been sucked in, screwed over and spat back out by the Brits."

He concludes that:

"Sinn Fein is just arrogant, absurd, deluded and trapped. The balaclavas have been swapped for suits, P O’Neill replaced by a senior civil servant and anti-British rhetoric drowned out by talk of budgets and the need to implement Tory cuts. So yep, Gerry, your day has come: and Northern Ireland remains firmly anchored in the United Kingdom."

I have found Alex's columns tend to have a cyclical feel to them with periods of positivity and negativity.  He has been in a rather over-despondent mood of late and I hope this column is a sign his writing will be heading in a more positive direction again.

Question

This began as a facebook exchange which I throught I'd throw out a bit wider.  Someone highlighted Gerry's latest gaffes in a 20 minute RTE interview and I asked the question:

"How come it has taken the RoI media a few weeks to highlight this basic ignorance and ineptitude yet the NI media was incapable of it for decades?"

The Louth soil cannot be blamed for transforming Adams' feet into clay certainly not in the few weeks he's lived there.  News Letter journo, Sam McBride offered this answer:

"one of the reasons is that when SF get into trouble up here, their natural line of defence is to turn it into a sectarian row (eg. Murphy attempting to introduce Irish road signs while facing calls to resign over the water crisis). It's pretty hard to do that in a country where 98% of people are nationalist..."

What do you think?

Bond

Apparently a man who can't manage something as simple as the procedures for leaving the House of Commons is promising that he can negotiate the intricacies of the international bond market and scare Merkel and Sarkozy into getting Ireland a better deal - we'll bring down the euro you know.  A Fine Gael spokesperson points out that despite the pain of the EU/IMF package it is actually cheaper than what the bond markets would demand.  Yet no doubt some will continue to fall for the quiet master strategist routine he cultivates.

Profiling

Over the week-end was talking to a relative who informed me that when one of their children turned 18 they had received a bundle of information about Sinn Fein (not unusual as parties do various things to target new voters coming on to the rolls with a birthday card a common approach).  However, none of this child's friends had received such a pack despite them reaching 18 and being on the register.  Only one thing distinguished the child from their friends - a first name of Gaelic origin.  A case of profiling?

Creek

With the pressure continuing on Conor Murphy over NI Water and Lawrence Mackenzie, he has opted for a distraction strategy certainly his invoking of the European Charter does not stand up to scrutiny.  Will it be a Gaelic straw or is he trying to fashion a paddle?

Who's afraid of the big bad church?

Martin McGuinness apparently.  Following Peter Robinson's speech on Friday (the main point of which has been missed in the kerfuffle - the proposal of a long-term strategy to transform our school system), the Deputy First Minister who has repeatedly called for leadership, bravery (insert your peace process cliche) over the past decade or so is fearful of 'taking on' certain interest groups:

"If Peter thinks taking on the Catholic Church, the Catholic bishops and indeed the Protestant churches for that matter and other interest groups is a sensible route to go, I think that is a big mistake,"

One for the fridge

I've been re-reading Sinn Fein's economic proposals to get us through the budget crisis again.  The crash and burn of Sinn Fein on this topic in the Republic of Ireland should be appreciated so they have at least tried.  Therefore, like a child's drawing we should be kind in our treatment of it.  Let us congratulate them on their effort, stick it to the metaphorical fridge, send them happily on their way while the real conversations get going.

Money and politics

Conor Murphy's calls for Northern Ireland Water to be re-nationalised will probably do more to feed the NIW story than quell it.  The conspiracy theory from the beginning was that this was a contrived hit job to facilitate the minister's preference of bringing it back within the public sector.  His actions will be viewed as confirmation that the theory has legs and encourage more digging.  However, the evidence that has entered the public domain remains circumstantial.  Also Murphy has two significant barriers to implement this proposal that are very good at killing off any idea - money and politics.

Shrine

Feeling the heat about the Claudy bombing and bad memory?  On the back foot by trying to continue with the fantasy economics that led to a electoral rejection in the Republic?   Simple use the shrine word about the Maze and that'll keep Nolan et al distracted for a few days.

Laughing in Paterson's face

Mark Devenport highlights two problems with Owen Paterson's super whizzo idea that he raised at the Northern Ireland Select Committee.  First he contradicted the Deputy Speaker of the House, David Heath MP, who had denied in a written answer that there were any plans to change the oath:

"The Government have no plans to change these requirements."

Second when asked about the idea Gerry Adams curled up in laughter, somewhat predictably considering previous comments.  Perhaps now Paterson will see the sense of simply getting on with cutting their allowances and ending these pointless games.

Political Self-harm

Earlier in the week I was having some fun at the expense of Sinn Fein and NIPSA on the issue of cuts.  However, their respective positions are not so much funny rather they are harmful in a number of respects.

Sinn Fein's primary argument is that we don't know the cuts that Northern Ireland will be subject to and until we are we should fight the case for special status.  This is a half-truth. We do not know the exact figures. However, we do know they will come, they will be significant and a fair idea of what range they are within. 

Their proposed approach of trying to protect the entire Northern Ireland block grant as a special case is a weak one.  The more protection you seek the more money you are seeking at the worst possible time.  Hence if you attempt the special case argument it is better to be limited and focused but with a Treasury seeking not to set a precedent this is a hard sell. 

Also the Con Dem Coalition has a partial answer to that.  Northern Ireland is getting special treatment. A paper on special measures to help boost the Northern Ireland economy is to be produced. Granted it's a thin answer and when it is produced will probably be even thinner but it still provides them with an answer now.  Perhaps the political focus should shift to this to try and make it something genuinely meaningful?

From a UK wide perspective Northern Ireland's budget is not far off loose change.  The net cost of NI would barely cover 25% of our loan payments let alone reduce the deficit and the government spends more on IT that it does on us.   Add a Prime Minister with a generous approach to the issue of Northern Ireland those making the case had a receptive audience e.g. the extra £1billion given when devolution returned.  A £150 billion deficit means the concept of loose change no longer exists and the primary concern of a new Prime Minister is having to deal with it.  UK politics has moved on. 

There is also the practical. The more thorough that you are in analysing your budgets the more strategic you can be about cuts. The longer you wait the more likely bad decisions will result.  The longer we delay discussions the longer we delay talking about asset sales and when the returns from those could be received.  Also it is a mistake to present the two as necessarily choices you can be preparing for the cuts while fighting for exemption.

As regards NIPSA it seems to prefer irrelevancy.  Nearly every argument it produces has nothing to do with the Stormont Assembly.  Its revenue proposals are all within the purview of the national parliament.  Furthermore,  it is NIPSA's membership that could provide many of the answers to effective savings.  Those within it are well placed to identify the waste - one relative said he knew enough off the top of his head to save the equivalent of two salaries with no harm to service in the section within which he works.  The more that is found and the sooner it is found the better with more jobs and front line services the result. 

Also NIPSA should have the sense to realise the power of middle and senior civil service management in budgeting proposals that go to ministers.  It is easier for them to try to protect themselves from the cuts and pass them down the line.  NIPSA, the voice of the lower grades, should be working with its members to prevent such a scenario from developing.  They could provide ministers with alternatives that achieve the cuts but in less harmful form. 

There are also very tough conversation to be had with civil servants namely pay freezes.  The nature of civil service pay agreements means much of this will be driven from the national government unless NIPSA is prepared to step outside national pay agreements.  As a policy tool it has its advantages.  It reduces the budgetary pressures.  It reduces jobs cuts and the associated costs of job cuts. If their mantra of maintaining jobs is what they genuinely believe then this is the tool that will enable it the most.

Super whizzo idea

Instead of simply acting on their promise to cut Sinn Fein allowances the latest Coalition delaying tactic is the super whizzo idea of letting Sinn Fein write their own oath.  The Mail's temparture has been suitably raised by Owen Paterson's comments at the Northern Ireland Select Committee over the parliamentary oath and Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy:

"I have said if the oath is an obstacle, come to me with an alternative text, we already do it for people who are not Christians. So far they have not..."

Perhaps Paterson missed such statements as this:

"There are a lot of things which there can be no certainty of and there are some things of which we can be certain. There will never, ever, be Sinn Fein MPs sitting in the British Houses of Parliament."

"even if the Commons oath was removed, Sinn Fein would refuse to take their seats in a parliament whose legitimacy they did not accept."

In the related expenses issue it has been risen and fallen with the tide.  First, they were going to be untouched.  Second it was going to be reviewed with a partial cut hinted at.  However, some are now asking whatever happened to the review?

Economics and Nolan

The Sinn Fein economic policy as explained on the Nolan show this morning.

Wrong day to ask

John O'Dowd tweeted this afternoon that:

"Well done to all Year 10s who passed their GCSE Irish, 13 &14 year olds passing a GCSE many with A & A* where is the BBC & other media now!"

They're here.

Sometimes...

...you just don't know where to begin.

The bigger point

Mark Devenport is having some fun at Martina Anderson's comments in response to criticism of the CSI strategy.  The source of her headline figure is dubious.  However, this misses the bigger point.  Among the comments were the following:

"...how much of that is genuine or how much of it is about protecting their own positions and funding. There are a raft of good relations quangos out there which, quite frankly, are unelected, unnecessary and ineffective...Sinn Féin is committed to reducing this kind of waste and to cutting the number of quangos."

Is this not the real story?  Namely Sinn Fein is moving away from the pro-public sector/more spending response that has been its stock message until now.  Perhaps a few years in government is having an impact or the reality of the budget pressures coming our way has made them reflect.

A useful saving

According to Newsnight's Michael Crick Sinn Fein parliamentary allowances and expenses are to get cut.  Although it appears that the cuts will not be total rather partial:

"One possible outcome is that Sinn Fein MPs will still be allowed to claim allowances which enable them to look after their constituents. But it looks likely that they will be deprived of travel allowances for trips between Northern Ireland and London. It is also probable that they will now be barred from receiving Short Money, the state funds given to Opposition parties for research and policy work."

A full cut would save between £3-4m in a full parliamentary term but these level of cuts would place it more in the region of £1-2m.  These moves follow a Westminster Hall debate in June which re-focused attention on the issue in the new parliament.  The SoS had given private indications of no action following the election but it now appears that it is seen as a means to assuage the Tory backbenchers.