One giant leap for Conservativism in North Antrim?

It may be one small step for the man from Ballymena but it could yet turn out to be a giant leap for Conservatism in North Antrim, the seat held for almost 40 years by Revd. Ian Paisley.

Irwin Armstrong

As Chekov reports, the campaign of Irwin Armstrong in North Antrim has got off to a flying start with the prospect of knocking Jim Allister into third place and giving Ian Paisley jnr. a serious run for his money.  Having met Irwin, I am not totally surprised that he is proving to be a very strong candidate. 

 TorystoryNI wishes Irwin the best of success for next week.

How the known unknowns could affect the General Election results in Northern Ireland

With 2010 around the corner, the General Election becomes ever more omnipresent. 

Voting outcomes in Northern Ireland at the General Election will be harder to predict than in any other region.  Since the Assembly Elections in 2007, so many new features have emerged (we will call them “known unknowns”) onto the political scene that the results of past elections can be viewed as nothing more than a starting point.  We may be in a new era of voting trends but until new patterns emerge, the old ones should not yet be ignored.

The tables below are the percentages achieved by the four main Northern Ireland political parties since 1992, excluding the Euro elections apart from 2004 and 2009 (because the votes for Ian Paisley and John Hume were personal votes). 

A = Assembly Elections.   C = District Council Elections   P = UK Parliamentary Elections  E = European Elections

	P 1992	C 1993	F 1996	P 1997	C 1997	A 1998	C 2001
DUP	13.10	17.00	18.80	13.60	16.00	18.14	21.40
UUP	34.50	29.00	24.17	32.70	28.00	21.25	22.90
SDLP	23.50	22.00	21.36	24.10	21.00	21.97	19.40
SF	10.00	12.00	15.47	16.10	17.00	17.63	20.70
Others	18.90	20.00	20.21	13.20	19.97	21.02	15.60

 

	P 2001	A 2003	C 2005	E 2004	P 2005	A  2007	E 2009
DUP	22.50	25.60	29.60	32.00	33.70	30.10	18.10
UUP	26.80	22.70	18.00	16.60	17.70	14.90	17.00
SDLP	21.00	17.00	17.40	15.90	17.50	15.20	16.10
SF	21.70	23.50	23.20	26.30	24.30	26.20	25.80
Others	8.70	11.20	11.80	9.10	6.70	13.20	22.00

The following graph below is a representation of these tables  (please click the graph to see it enlarged).

The graph shows that the voting strength declined for both the SDLP and the UUP before the Good Friday agreement.  The relationship between Sinn Fein’s level of support and that of the SDLP follows a much smoother trend than that of the Unionist parties.  This is due, in part, to the fact that the leading Unionist Party tended to attract a higher level of support at a General Election, where the first-past-the-post system of voting still exists, than at the Council and Assembly Elections.  However, averaging out these trends shows that between 1992 and 2007 the UUP has fallen from 35% to 17% (down 18%) In the same period, the DUP has advanced from 13% to 30% (up 17%).  In these 15 years, that would make a swing of 17.5%

The Sinn Fein advance would have began since it first entered elections in 1981.  After a brief relapse following the Enniskillen bomb in 1987, they reverted to their long term upward trend at the expense of the SDLP.  Between 1992 and 2007, Sinn Fein moved from 10% to 26% (up 16).  In the same period, the SDLP moved from 24% to 16% (down 8).  That represents a swing from SDLP to Sinn Fein of 12%.

The graph and the tables also indicate that the decline of the moderate parties seems to have been arrested at the latest European Election.  Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that Sinn Fein and the UUP are now at the head of Stormont.

The Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey has been an enigma in terms of the results of the Elections, for a number of years.   They show great inconsistency between the support of a party in terms of sympathy and allegiance and what happens at the polling booth.  In the 2007 survey, in response to the question “Which Northern Ireland political party do you feel closest to, even if you do not always vote for them?” respondents answered as follows:

	%
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)	20
Sinn Féin	14
Ulster Unionist Party (UUP)	18
Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP)	20
Alliance	8
Other party (please specify)	2
None of these	15
Other answer	1
Don’t know	1

The results for 2008 show very little difference.

Democratic Unionist Party (DUP)	21
Sinn Féin	13
Ulster Unionist Party (UUP)	18
Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP)	19
Alliance Party	7
Other party	1
None of these	21
Other answer	0
Don’t know	1

At elections, a substantial number of voters opt for an extreme party.  The deviation from moderation seems to be greater on the Nationalist side.  Why is this? 

It is probably an instinct, in a sectarian voting system, that you vote for the party that you think will be strongest against the other (extreme) side.  Liam Clarke, writing in the Newsletter a couple of weeks ago, gave us this very insightful view.

Even the peace process was marked by an increase in support for the most extreme parties available, Sinn Fein and the DUP, who are now coming under pressure from yet harder line forces.

Part of the problem is that we human beings tend not to think of ourselves as extreme.

Our own views seem no more than common sense, the only response possible in the circumstances.

It is easier to spot extremism, blinkered views, perverse opinions and hypocrisy in those with whom we disagree.

And, having spotted these negative qualities, the next step is not to listen to the “self-serving nonsense” our opponents keep spouting.
We don’t have to hear them out to know they are wrong; it is easier to just stick to what we know to be right.

That leads me on to one reason why we often imagine that, as a society, we are really more moderate than the politicians we vote for in overwhelming numbers.

When Ian Paisley was still considered a hard liner, a party worker told me that many people voted for him but wouldn’t admit it to a journalist; they regarded it as a private matter like an insurance policy.

They counted on Paisley to raise the alarm if things were going wrong.
The same thing happened with Sinn Fein which for many years scored far lower in the polls than they did in elections – people didn’t like declaring themselves as Shinners, or even thinking of themselves as such, but they didn’t mind voting for them as a strong nationalist voice.

Clarke is probably right, subject to one modification. It probably does not matter if the strongest Unionist voice or the strongest Nationalist voice is extremist or moderate, so long as they are the strongest.   

This would suggest that the key to predicting the outcome of future elections lies in assessing who is the strongest party on a particular side of the sectarian divide.   However, that kind of voter mindset is liable to develop with a new set of circumstances.   It is still less than 3 years since all of the political parties accepted power sharing in Northern Ireland.   Could it be that voters will begin to assess the strength of a political party in more sophisticated ways than in the past?   Could it be that the ability of a party to negotiate, co-operate and govern in harmony with parties from the opposite designation will become a basis on which to judge a party’s strength? 

There are early signs that this may be starting to happen.  The Belfast Telegraph has began to take its own opinion polls.  In a follow up report, it published some but not all of its findings.  Its editor, Mike Gibson, made this comment:

This poll is a snapshot of course, but it is a very interesting snapshot.

“It suggests that we maybe moving into a different phase of political life here in which politicians are judged as much on their performance in the here and now as on their history.

“If so, that has to be seen as a positive step. If the message is that some people are recognising that politicians can begin the journey from conflict towards statesmanship it is to be welcomed.

“If the message is that our politicians must do more to leave their historical baggage at the door of the debating chamber that too is positive.”

This is a signal whifh neither Sinn Fein nor the DUP can afford to ignore, particularly in terms of how they handle the devlolution of policing and justice.  

The 2009 European Elections have already heralded a change in voting patterns on the Unionist side but none on the Nationalist side.  This suggests that up to June 2009, at least, the Northern Ireland electorate had not passed any judgment on the exercise of power sharing.  Rather, it was a neutral factor.

13.7% of the Northern Ireland electorate voted for Jim Allister of the TUV as a first preference vote at the Euro Elections.   Could it be that some former TUV voters are so disaffected by the fact that the DUP share power with Sinn Fein that they have decided never to vote for the DUP unless there is no unionist left? 

The fact that Nicholson was the first Unionist MEP to be elected on the 3^rd count, overtaking Diane Dodds of the DUP after the elimination of Jim Allister gives credence to that proposition.  Some of the TUV vote could also have been a personal vote for Allister or perhaps an ominous sign that amongst some of the Unionist voters, Jim Allister is now considered to be the strongest voice in Unionism.  In North Antrim, where Allister intends to stand at the General Election, he has a strong chance of establishing a new power base.

So far as the UUP are concerned, it is far too early to say whether the link-up with the Conservatives has benefited them electorally.  The Euro Elections came too quickly for the parties to put forward much more than a dull, but safe, campaign to secure the election of Jim Nicholson. 

One of the objects of the joint Conservative UUP pact is to bring an end to sectarian politics.  From the trend shown by the European Elections, I do not expect many more than token numbers of Catholics to switch their allegiance from one of the Nationalist parties at the next General Election. 

However, there are other factors which could benefit UCUNF.  The first assumes that amongst the Unionists, the TUV supporters will either vote for a TUV candidate or (if none) switch to a UCUNF candidate in an anti-DUP vote. 

What the Conservatives really want, as a first major step towards dominating politics in Northern Ireland, is to be seen, together with the UUP as the strongest voice in Unionism.  David Cameron is by far and away the most charismatic figure in the Unionist camp.  As to his likely impact and that of the Conservative campaign as a whole, we are in uncharted water.  It probably all boils down to the degree of interest taken by Northern Ireland voters in national politics.  If interest in National politics starts to take off properly in Northern Ireland, the Conservative campaign will make an impact. 

One other factor which would benefit UCUNF is if the Executive is brought down.  Such an event would almost certainly cause considerable damage to the DUP.  In that scenario, UCUNF would probably emerge as the largest unionist force.  This possibility is discussed further on.

On the Nationalist side, there will be a new SDLP leader by the time of the General Election.  It had previously been thought that Margaret Ritchie would win the leadership contest.  More recent insight suggests that the race is much closer with McDonald being seen as the “tougher” looking politician.  Toughness is something which the SDLP needs in its leadership.  Perhaps the long leadership election campaign will help both of these candidates to develop as tougher leaders.

Within the media, the question rages as to the extent of the damage to Gerry Adams’ reputation over his handling of his brother’s position as a Sinn Fein worker.  Within Northern Ireland at least, Sinn Fein has Martin McGuinness as a second political talisman.  A recent opinion poll has suggested that Martin McGuinness is the most popular of all ministers.  The Adams family scandal has a long way to run but so long as McGuinness is not implicated over the decision to ignore Liam Adams’ abuse of his daughter, I would expect little damage to Sinn Fein at the General Election.  Over a longer period, the scandal is much more likely to cause it much more damage as the drip feed of constant media exposure wears down the resistance of its supporters.

There is one more “But.”  Would Sinn Fein be damaged at the General Election if it brought down the Executive over Police and Justice? 

This is probably the one issue at Stormont which could influence the General Election.  If the Executive is brought down, the combined effect of this event and the Adams family scandal could be a lethal cocktail for Sinn Fein leading to a violent swing away from their core vote.  In that scenario, 3 seats could be lost (Fermanagh / S. Tyrone to UCUNF, West Tyrone to the SDLP and Newry Armagh to the SDLP).

That is a very big “if”.  It is hard to believe that Sinn Fein will have any stomach for bringing down the Executive but they will now need the DUP (who also have an interest in keeping the present administration alive) to find them a way out of the P & J crisis without losing face. 

As we move into the New Year, we wait in eager anticipation as these known unknowns to developing and possibly alter the political map of Northern Ireland. 

My prediction for the 18 Northern Ireland seats at the General Election (which assumes that the DUP and SF reach an understanding over P & J).

DUP  6   (down 3)

SF     5    (no change)

SDLP 3   (no change)

UCUNF  3  (up 2)

TUV  1 (up 1)

Finally, a very Happy New Year to all readers of this Blog.

The Peter and Jeffrey Show

Does “P & J” only stand for Police and Justice?  Or could it mean something else?  Could it be the “Punch and Judy” show? 

For those of you not familiar with Punch and Judy, this is a traditional English puppet show dating back centuries in which the two main puppet characters, Punch and Judy continuously squabble with each other. 

PUnch and Judy

Northern Ireland now has its own version of Punch and Judy.  It is called “Peter and Jeffrey” 

OK, this is all a bit of tongue in cheek.  The serious point is that there are strains in the relationship between Peter Robinson and Jeffrey Donaldson which could have profound implications for the political fortunes of the DUP. 

 The story broke out approximately 10 days ago when it became apparent that Mr. Robinson was prepared to accept the recommendation of the Chief constable of the PSNI that the full-time police reserve could be disbanded but on the basis that it could be harnessed in a civilian capacity.  Mr. Donaldson’s position was that the maintenance of a full-time police reserve was not only necessary to maintain acceptable levels of security.  He boxed himself into a corner after declaring that this position was a “deal breaker.”  Not surprisingly, Jim Allister, the TUV leader, milked the rift for all it is worth.

On 12^th November, Donaldson appeared on the BBC’s “Hearts and Minds” show, interviewed by Noel Thompson.  He tried to argue that there was no difference in his position and that of Peter Robinson.  It was like listening to a politician try to argue that black equals red.  When he appeared in the Politics show last week (15^th) Donaldson was unable to hide the strain after a mauling from Jim Fitzpatrick.

Just when one thought that Donaldson might be on the road to political obscurity, it has been observed that Peter Robinson is in a position of significant weakness.  Last week, Brian Feeney of the Irish News pointedly observed

“Whatever he would like, his weakness in face of Donaldson’s indiscipline last week has shown he’s a paper tiger.

At the very minimum he should have removed the whip from Donaldson, a Johnny-come-lately who’s well down the pecking order in the DUP.

The fact that Donaldson got away with his impertinence flags up a danger signal for Robinson which he ignores at his peril.

If he doesn’t deal with Donaldson at this early stage Donaldson will split the DUP.

He’s got form.”

On Friday, the DUP met for its annual conference.  The issue between Robinson and Donaldson did not surface in the news.  Indeed, relations between Robinson and Donaldson were polite and jovial (sorry – another P & J pun).  However, the issue of Police and Justice was conspicuous by the absence of any direct reference to it in Mr. Robinson’s keynote speech.

Jeffrey Donaldson, meanwhile, is in a position of humiliation and things could get worse.  A general election looms in which he will have to fight “tooth and nail” to hold on to his seat (possibly against our Sheila Davidson).  Mr. Donaldson will be hoping desperately that no deal is reached on P & J before the election.

Paisley’s praise for McGuinness – Is this a response to Jim Allister?

Last night, I received an interesting comment from Horseman on the post entitled “Allister sets a nasty trap for Peter Robinson“

He has identified a possible scenario where the DUP does indeed lose 9 more MLAs than McGuinness and suggests that some UUP MLAs could defect to the DUP in order to keep them as the largest political party. 

The last  UUP MLAs to defect  to the DUP were Jeffrey Donaldson, Arlene Foster and Nora Beare just after the Assembly elections in November 2003.   Much water has passed under the bridge since then.  The UUP’s decline was arrested during the Euro Elections.  However, any kind of disaffection can drive a politician to defect.   For example, there is no telling whether some left-wing Ulster Unionists, who are already upset about the electoral pact with the Conservatives, might be tempted to go that way.  

I think it is unlikely that any UUP MLA would defect for that reason.   Most UUP supporters see the DUP as having peaked and begin a long-term decline into obscurity.   The loss of 9 or more MLAs will add credence to that – the more so if the UUP then becomes the largest party at Stormont.   It is also possible that DUP MLAs could defect to the UUP to make them the largest party in protest at Peter Robinson failing to nominate the deputy FM.  Perhaps we should not get too carried away.   Politicians do have a responsibility to re-assure the voters that they will play by the rules and not seek to de-stabilise the Assembly, the Good Friday agreement and the St. Andrews Agreement for sectarian motives.   

Meanwhile, this morning, supporters of Jim Allister’s TUV could be choking in the corn flakes as they read the report in the Belfast Telegraph entitled “Ian Paisley praises Sinn Fein over Northern Ireland power sharing”

Or will they not be delighted?  Maybe they will think ‘We were right to form our own movement. This man really has lost it’

Politicians rarely make remarks which they know will upset and annoy some of their own followers without making some sort of political calculation.  So is there anything significant about Paisley’s remarks?

For many years, we have listened to “smash Sinn Fein” rhetoric from Mr. Paisley and his disciples.  This rhetoric did not stop when the DUP finally went into power sharing with Sinn Fein following the St. Andrews Agreement.  Only a few months ago, it still formed part of Diane Dodd’s European Election campaign.

Could it be that the DUP have finally recognised that the contradiction is working against them and that a new approach is needed?  Mr. Paisley could easily have said that his hard-line has been the reason why Sinn Fein have “danced to the DUP tune”  in Government.  However, actually praising Sinn Fein goes one step beyond that. 

Could it be that the DUP have seen Allister’s trap and have began to pave the way towards accepting Martin McGuinness as First Minister in 2011?

Jim Allister sets a nasty trap for Peter Robinson

In his post yesterday, Horseman has set out to put flesh on the bones of Jim Allister’s article on his website in which he sets out his plans to wreck the mechanism of power sharing in its present form.  

Horseman rightly highlights the amendment to the Good Friday Agreement brought about under the St. Andrews Agreement whereby the party with the largest number of MLAs gets to nominate the First Minister.  

According to Horseman, Allister’s plan depends for its success on

(a) The DUP losing 9 more seats than Sinn Fein

(b) Sinn Fein having the largest number of MLAs at Stormont

(c) the DUP refusing to nominate for Deputy First Minister.  

Is (c) really likely to happen?  The reality is that the offices of First Minister and Deputy First Minister hold equal power.  The Assumption seems to be that the DUP leadership is incapable of swallowing its own pride.   

There is one further possible scenario.  That is that the UUP becomes the largest party.  Would Sir Reg refuse to nominate the Deputy First Minister?  I don’t think so.   

Peter Robinson has to be asked what his party would do, given that scenario.  The voters of Northern Ireland (particularly those who currently support the DUP) have the right to know that.  Robinson would then be in rather a dilemma.  

If he says he would not nominate for DFM, he leaves his party is open to accusations of (a) reneging on a constitutional arrangement which his own party negotiated (b) failing on their own promise to “control” Sinn Fein through power sharing.   If he says that he will nominate, he will upset a large section of his own supporters who would find that too difficult to stomach and more likely vote for the TUV.

Jim Allister has set a nasty trap for Peter Robinson.  He and the DUP will have great difficulty avoiding it.

The DUP’s North Antrim dilemma

On the day that he lost his European seat, Jim Allister announced that he would contest Ian Paisley’s North Antrim Parliamentary seat at the next General Election.    

This is the ultimate throwing down of the gauntlet.  The people of North Antrim who supported Ian Paisley in 2004 are now being given the opportunity to have their say on the St. Andrews Agreement.   

It was a bold move.  Ian Paisley announced in 2007 that he would stand at the next general election.  He defends a majority of 17,965.  On the face of it, it is one of the safest seats in the UK.   

In spite of that, Allister could prove to be Paisley’s nemisis.  Much of Allister’s support in the European election came from North Antrim.  There is a substantial group in that constituency who feel genuinely “betrayed” by the DUP’s change of policy towards power sharing.   

Ian Paisley has another problem.  His age.  At the age of 83, he is the oldest member the Westminster Parliament.   

The DUP have a massive dilemma.  They know that Paisley could “see off” Allister.  On the other hand, there would be a terrible cost to them if he loses.   With their founding father having lost, they will look like a party which has come to the end of its useful life and could suffer collateral damage in the next assembly elections.  Allister certainly does have a significant chance of winning.  How will the DUP respond?   

They could retire Paisley and thus protect his legacy.  Perhaps illness or the recent announcement by the DUP to end double jobbing will enable the DUP to bring this about without losing face.   

There was speculation that Ian Paisley junior was set to take over the seat from his father.  Paisley junior is already tainted by a Land Deal scandal.  The DUP will not like that prospect.  If Paisley senior is withdrawn from the contest, Allister will almost certainly have been handed the seat “on a plate”.    

Since Allister made his announcement, Ian Paisley has risen to the bait and is sounding as colourful as ever.  Commenting on the Euro election result, Paisley said  

“He stole the seat from me, Jim Allister had no political breath except for what he took from me”

This is Paisley being his old vain self.  The DUP will contemplate their position.  Meanwhile, the fight seems to be on.  It looks set to be an enthralling and fascinating contest.

CUs must not be distracted by prospect of a Sinn Fein First Minister

Peter Robinson said that it would be a disaster if Sinn Fein topped the poll in Northern Ireland for the European Election. As the implications of the new order of politics in Northern Ireland unfold, another consequence of Robinson’s outburst has now become apparent.

In his post on Slugger, Michael Shilliday, chairman of the Young Ulster Unionists, highlighted the fact that under the Northern Ireland (St. Andrews Agreement) Act 2006, the Northern Ireland Act 1998 has been amended so that right to the appointment of First Minister belongs to the party with the largest number of MLAs. Previously, that right belonged to the party with the largest number of MLAs within a designation. The precise wording of the new section 16C(6) is as follows

“(6) If at any time the party which is the largest political party of the largest political designation is not the largest political party—

 (a)  any nomination to be made at that time under section 16A(4) or 16B(4) shall instead be made by the nominating officer of the largest political party; and
(b)  any nomination to be made at that time under section 16A(5) or 16B(5) shall instead be made by the nominating officer of the largest political party of the largest political designation”

Had the legislation not been amended then in two years time,  the First Minister would still be a Unionist even if the TUV was successful in getting a sizeable proportion of unionists elected to the Assembly.  In all likelihood, the next first Minister will now be from Sinn Fein.

Clearly, we now know what Peter Robinson meant by a “disaster.” I cannot say that I like the idea of Martin McGuinness becoming First Minister. At the same time, I would not mind seeing it happen so that political advantage can be gained from it in the longer run. From all that I have observed, I do not believe that McGuinness has what it takes to be a successful administrator in high political office.

It is important that the CUs do not use this situation to try and score political points against the DUP by continuously highlighting it.  To do otherwise would send the wrong signal to the Northern Ireland electorate.  It would impair their ability to project their progressive message and leave an impression that they are still wedded to the era of sectarian politics. 

There will be plenty of others, including Jim Alllister and the media, who will be highlighting section 16C(6). It is also possible that the DUP will try their “topping the poll” tactic just one last time.   Some arrogance from the CUs would not go amiss.   If the message coming out of their camp is that St. Andrews does not matter because the CUs are set to become the largest party, this might become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

What the CUs must do is concentrate on promoting their own political agenda. If they can get that strategy right, they will give themselves every chance of taking large chunks out of the DUP vote in two years time. Indeed, if they only retake two thirds of the vote that they lost to the DUP since 2001, they will become the largest party at Stormont.

The UUP have helped to create a monster. Now they will have terrible trouble destroying it

The European election seems to have gone very well for Jim Allister and the TUV. It has gone so well that as of now, he holds prospects of retaining his seat in the European Parliament.

Even if he does not, the consensus on Slugger and elsewhere is that so much damage has been done that the TUV is now likely to replace the DUP as the champions of “Shinnerphobia.” 

Jim Allister has had some luck. Luck does play its part in politics. The Expenses scandal was a godsend. Without it, I suspect that his campaign would not have been as effective. He may still have damaged Dodds and the DUP but nothing like enough to become a significant force in Northern Ireland politics. Nevertheless, Allister has played the cards he was dealt with very well. One of those cards was an ace handed to him by the Ulster Unionist Party. 

It goes back to September 2008. At the time, Sir Reg Empey was still in negotiations with the Conservatives to create a new political force. Then, something happened which very nearly scuppered the negotiations with the Conservatives. Sir Reg was negotiating an anti-DUP pact with Jim Allister. For me, as a conservative, this was horrifying. The one thing we wanted for the new alliance was an opportunity to break away from the tribal headcount. 

After the agreement was made between the UUP and the Conservatives, I was still concerned that the “deal” between Sir Reg and the TUV still held. I did not broadcast my suspicions. I did notice was a lack of any attacks from the UUP against the TUV and vice versa. Indeed, the UUP’s attacks on the DUP were actually mirroring what the TUV were saying. This included repeating promises made by the DUP that they would never go into government with Sinn Fein. 

Once Peter Robinson announced the end to double jobbing, I could see that they knew their campaign was going badly wrong. Liam Clarke of the Sunday Times also picked this up. Even then, I did not think even that was leaving Allister in such a strong position. What seems to have compounded the DUP’s disaster was the appearance of Diane Dodds and Jim Allister on the Politics Show. It was only at that point that I foresaw another earthquake under Stormont and realised that Allister would not be stopped. UUP officials, meanwhile, continued to work for him. They were hailing to their supporters to vote “2 & 3” for another unionist candidate. By that stage, they did not need to say vote No 2 for Allister. It was implicit in their statements.  

I had been assured by senior members of my own party that Jim Nicholson would not be telling people where to put their No. 2 vote.  Jim Nicholson, in fairness, may have kept his promise. As readers will imagine, the UUP’s public call in relation to transferable votes did upset Conservatives.  The UUP had fallen back into “little Ulsterism” again.  In the future, the UUP will not be allowed to tell their supporters that they should give their No. 2 vote to another unionist. Allister, meanwhile, will keep this campaign up his sleave. In the future, the UUP and the Conservatives will have to face Allister as a political enemy. Allister will enjoy calling on the UUP to do another deal with him for the sake of unionism. The UUP will find it very difficult to wash the dirt off their hands. 

The DUP may now be irrevocably damaged. Is this such a good thing? A monster has now been created to replace it and the UUP will know that it helped to create it. In the short term, provided Nicholson retains his seat, most UUP activists will be pleased. I will not be. The TUV may now prove much harder to destroy than the DUP would have been going into the Assembly elections.

Nicholson is No. 1. This is how I have decided upon my No. 2 vote

Tomorrow is polling day.  It is decision time for Northern Ireland people, including me.  My mind was made up, a long time ago, to vote for Jim Nicholson No. 1. What about second and further preference votes? 

At the outset, I want to make it clear that I am not interested in a party’s constitutional preference for Northern Ireland.  As a Conservative, I preach normal politics.  As far as I possibly can, I want to practice it too.   

When looking at a party’s policy, it is worth bearing in mind that what they say on certain things, has got nothing to do with the job of the euro MP.  For example, keeping the pound is a matter for the Westminster Government.  So also is whether or not to have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.  When our MP is elected, they will all be expected to bat for Northern Ireland.  In practice and in most respects, that is what our existing three MPs have done.  Most of the policies which are concerned with looking after Northern Ireland’s interest are similar across all the parties.  That said, heads of policy are worth looking at to get a sense of the political direction of those parties.   

It is also worth bearing in mind that in terms of influencing politics in Europe, individual parties do not get seats on committees.  It is voting blocks which do.  The conservatives are cutting themselves off from the centre-right group (the EPP) after many years.  The reason for this is simple and it has to do with history.  The UK has no memory of being invaded.  Nearly all of the rest of Europe has.  Those countries are therefore emotionally driven towards greater union.  That is why the Conservatives are keen to form a new block – to act as a counterweight against federalism.    

The two parties with the nearest policies to the Conservatives are the DUP and the TUV.  The DUP say “Oppose the Lisbon Treaty, keep the pound.”  Similar things are said by Jim Allister, which I totally agree with.  As parties of the centre right, the DUP and the TUV would join the new group being formed by the Conservatives.    

The other parties are much further away from the Conservatives.  The starting point of both Sinn Fein and the SDLP is that they are both socialist with left-leaning politics.  The SDLP support the Lisbon treaty.  Sinn Fein, for reasons which I will not discuss here, opposes it.  Both of those parties would like to see the UK give up sterling for the euro.  So also would the Alliance Party.    

I have looked at the Green Party manifesto.  There are a couple of “whacky” things in their manifesto such as lowering the voting age.  I would also be concerned about some of the cost aspects in their policies but overall, their manifesto is reasonably pleasant and not inconsistent with many conservative policies.  The Northern Ireland Green manifesto says nothing about the Lisbon treaty.  I have looked at the manifesto of their British Counterparts and they do oppose the current Lisbon treaty.  They are silent on the question of sterling.    

The Alliance parties and the Green party preach vociferously against sectarianism.  That is obvious both from their manifestoes and what their candidates have said.   

The DUP, the TUV and Sinn Fein all fall down heavily in relation to sectarianism.  The DUP and Sinn Fein thrive upon the “sectarian headcount.”  Neither of these parties show a desire to tackle sectarianism.  The TUV and DUP differ over the St. Andrews agreement but are no different in nature from each other.  During the campaign, I have noticed from the remarks made both Jim Allister and Diane Dodds that their sectarian mindset is obvious and gross.    

The SDLP’s website pays “lip service” to being a party which is against sectarianism.  If you go back to some of the things John Hume used to say about Northern Ireland, he passionately wanted the two communities to be brought together.  When I have listened to other SDLP leaders like Mallon and Durkan I could not hear this being said from the heart.  During the campaign, Alban Maginnis has said that he wants to bring the two communities together.  It is hard for me to explain this but I felt that he did say it from the heart.   He said enough to convince me that he regards tackling sectarianism as more important than a united Ireland.    

Of the other candidates seeking election as Northern Ireland’s Euro MPs, only the DUP, TUV, Sinn Fein and the SDLP have any chance of being elected.  With respect to the Greens and the Alliance, their potential to attract No. 1 votes is not great enough this time around to influence me into giving them my second preference vote.  I will look at these parties again in future PR elections.   

That leaves me with a choice of 4 candidates for my No. 2 vote.  Sinn Fein has nothing to offer, as far as I am concerned.  I am therefore left with a choice between two sectarian candidates who are conservatives and a socialist candidate who is not.   

On the matter of sectarianism, I wish to say this.  It is Northern Ireland’s biggest political and social problem.  It is such a big problem that if you asked me what my choice would be – keep Northern Ireland in the union or eliminate sectarianism from Northern Ireland, I would chose the latter.  Unless politicians start making effective efforts to tackle sectarianism, it will be a perpetual curse on our society. 

Given all the circumstances, Alban McGinnis gets my No. 2 vote.

The Conservatives and the UUP should extend their agreement as early as possible

What’s really the definition of a disaster at next week’s polls from the point of view of the DUP?

If you believe what the DUP are saying, Sinn Fein topping the poll will be a disaster.  Is that really it?

If one assumes that Jim Nicholson does not take votes from the DUP, a topping of the poll by Sinn Fein means that Jim Allister has won at least 35,000 votes.  If it was just that number, perhaps the DUP could live with that.  What if Allister gets at least 50,000?  

A figure this high would mean that the TUV are established as a political force.  Almost certainly, it means that Allister will march into Stormont with other TUV MLAs after the next Assembly elections.  

Any kind of result which gives Allister strong survival prospects changes the course of Northern Ireland politics.  That is the real “disaster” that the DUP fears.  Whichever way you look at it, it means that the DUP’s days as the ascendant unionist political force will be on the way to being numbered. 

It will then leave them in a dilemma as to which direction to take.  They will find it hard to take ground from the UUP without giving Allister more attacking opportunities.  They could be facing two directions forever.  They will be like a vehicle on a roundabout continuing to go around without being able to turn.  It could result in even more paralysis within the Executive over the next two years.    

The UUP, meanwhile, will be moving forward, consolidating its position as a partner with the Conservatives and preparing for a general election.  In the short term, a strong showing by Allister will benefit the CUs, particularly at the next general election in which, no matter what happens with North Down, perception of DUP instability is more likely to yield MPs in other Northern Ireland constituencies.

However, this scenario comes with a health warning.  If Allister survives and prospers, this will almost certainly be at the expense of the DUP.  If the DUP is very substantially weakened, it will put stress on the St. Andrews Agreement and could set Northern Ireland on a potentially backward course.    

Some strategic planning may be needed by the Conservatives and UUP counter this.  I would suggest that the key to this strategy is to set about convincing the unionist electorate that within the Conservative/UUP alliance, unionists have a stable political home to come to.   

The Conservatives and the UUP have a partnership which technically ends, in terms of future elections, after the next general election.  I would suggest that this agreement should be extended to include the Assembly elections at the earliest opportunity.  That will send a strong message to the Northern Ireland electorate that this is a stable alliance and one which can only become stronger.