• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

The current state of politics in Northern Ireland

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
5,381
My view is that there needs to be a proper truth and reconciliation process, rather than using the legal system to try and settle scores, which is what is still happening. The problem with that, though, is that I also believe that the government and the intelligence services will use that process to hide what exactly that it was that they were getting up to.

And it’s not just the obvious stuff, in my opinion it is pretty obvious at this stage that the Dublin/Monaghan bombings and the Miami Showband murders were committed by and on the orders of the British Army. The extent of the infiltration into the IRA and what that looked like in the 90s would be interesting, I think the likes of Stakeknife are just the tip of the iceberg. I’ve long thought that the authorities knew about the Omagh bombing weeks in advance and, at the very least, allowed it to happen.
Regardless of who knew what, I think part of the problem is that the end of the Troubles did not mean that the Republicans stopped trying to win. The use of the legal process is as much a weapon for them as a shield for the Government to hide its dirty washing behind.

Ultimately, no truth and reconciliation or legal process can work unless the factions and communities are genuinely committed to making society work in the new dispensation. South Africa is held up as an exemplar, but the underlying issues of fear and mistrust remain deeply embedded, still contaminating politics over 30 years later.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,275
Location
LBK
Regardless of who knew what, I think part of the problem is that the end of the Troubles did not mean that the Republicans stopped trying to win. The use of the legal process is as much a weapon for them as a shield for the Government to hide its dirty washing behind.
Which cases are you thinking of?
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
17,474
Location
Isle of Man
I think part of the problem is that the end of the Troubles did not mean that the Republicans stopped trying to win
Which cases are you thinking of in particular?

Soldier F being acquitted was celebrated as a massive loss in one community and as a massive win in the other community. The fact that acquittal was a direct result of the security services' heel-dragging is still a sore point in one community but seen as behaviour worth celebrating in the other.

South Africa is held up as an exemplar, but the underlying issues of fear and mistrust remain deeply embedded, still contaminating politics over 30 years later.
South Africa shouldn't be held up as an example of best practice, really.

It does indicate the issues with any such scheme, though: the victims felt ignored and the perpetrators, by and large, admitted just enough to get amnesty but without ever disclosing the full truth. The perpetrators didn't engage in the process in good faith, at least in my opinion, and the victims who complained about this were told that they didn't understand the process. It's more an example of how not to do it.

It might actually be easier in Northern Ireland in that both communities were both perpetrators and victims at different times, which could mean there can actually be an equitable share of information and admission. Both sides have awful things to admit to and both sides had awful things done to them.

In South Africa the white government were largely the perpetrators and the black majority were largely the victims, which makes that process a lot harder.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

They have never been the largest party and they did not exactly perform brilliantly in the two recent by-elections either.
You're quite right, I'd misremembered the 2020 result because Sinn Fein didn't stand in every seat, but I think they were the biggest party in the Dail for a period after a couple of people resigned from Fianna Fail? Yeah, in 2024 they dropped back a bit on vote share, but to have gone from 1 TD in 1997 to 39 in 2024 is impressive. It probably also says quite a lot about how useless Simon Harris and Leo Varadkar both were/are, but that's a different argument.

They're certainly influential enough that Fianna Fail and Fine Gael ended up in a coalition with each other just to keep Sinn Fein out.
 
Last edited:

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
5,381
Which cases are you thinking of in particular?

Soldier F being acquitted was celebrated as a massive loss in one community and as a massive win in the other community. The fact that acquittal was a direct result of the security services' heel-dragging is still a sore point in one community but seen as behaviour worth celebrating in the other.
It's that and similar cases that I have in mind. And specifically that the result of a prosecution is seen as a community win/loss that makes me uncomfortable.
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,414
Location
Taunton or Kent
In Year 11 for GCSE English Literature, my year studied the poem Belfast Confetti, as part of a series of poems on the theme of conflict. This included being given a background on The Troubles, but this was the only school education I received. However, I never did GCSE History so it's possible those who did this learnt more about it.
 

berneyarms

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2013
Messages
3,111
Location
Dublin
You're quite right, I'd misremembered the 2020 result because Sinn Fein didn't stand in every seat, but I think they were the biggest party in the Dail for a period after a couple of people resigned from Fianna Fail? Yeah, in 2024 they dropped back a bit on vote share, but to have gone from 1 TD in 1997 to 39 in 2024 is impressive. It probably also says quite a lot about how useless Simon Harris and Leo Varadkar both were/are, but that's a different argument.

They're certainly influential enough that Fianna Fail and Fine Gael ended up in a coalition with each other just to keep Sinn Fein out.
While SF have indeed grown in size since 1997, mainly as a result of the abandoning of the terrorist campaign in Northern Ireland in favour of democracy, there is a massive policy difference between them and both FF and FG.

The notion, as your final sentence implies, that the single motivation for forming a coalition was to keep SF out is really stretching things. Both leading coalition parties have far more in common with one another than they would with SF, who let us not forget not too long ago wanted to create a socialist state in Ireland, and whose economic policies frankly were a basket case.

If you are trying to suggest that they had a realistic prospect of forming a government after the results were declared of the 2020 or 2024 general elections then I would suggest that you are wrong. There was not a hope of that happening given that both FF and FG had ruled out entering government with SF in advance of both elections on policy grounds alone.

SF may well indeed end up in government in Ireland at some point, but right now they are still massively at variance policy wise with the two leading parties in government, and seem to be currently having something of a falling out with various left wing parties who supposedly ought to be their natural bedfellows.

Regarding your first point, FF lost one seat so that Seán Ó Fearghaíl become the Ceann Comhairle (speaker), and there was a brief period of 5 months from September 2021 where SF had one more seat than FF after Marc McSharry resigned from FF to become an independent - but given that the government had a large majority in the Dáil that frankly is really irrelevant. It's the election results that count as that is when the public have their say, and so far they have not given SF a mandate to form a government.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,074
Location
Redcar
I have to say that I'm glad to hear so many people say that they did at least something on Northern Ireland in their GCSEs. That's countered at least one misapprehension I was labouring under!
 

Broucek

Member
Joined
13 Aug 2020
Messages
931
Location
UK
As most people living in Britain outside of Ireland have never been there, let alone tried to understand any of the history of the island, the gradual shift in balance is beyond their comprehension. With Ulster roots proven back over 200 years I can't help noting that active church participation has dropped off enormously within my lifetime. Yet the old divide lines continue despite that.

I don't claim the level of knowledge that others have on the troubles. But my impression was always that this was always more about "tribe" and politics than a passionate belief in the best way to follow and worship Christ....
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
5,381
I don't claim the level of knowledge that others have on the troubles. But my impression was always that this was always more about "tribe" and politics than a passionate belief in the best way to follow and worship Christ....
The two are not as far apart as this practicing Christian might wish. Neither Roman Catholics nor Baptists are historically known for their tolerance of each other
 

THC

Member
Joined
21 Sep 2009
Messages
718
Location
Stuck on the GEML
I have an Irish first name and went to an English public school in the mid-1970s. The result was that I regularly had the shish kicked out of me for being one of Paisley’s IRA murderers, this with the tacit approval of quite a few masters and the active encouragement of a few. There was a simple lack of understanding of what was going on and a feeling that ‘our brave boys’ were being murdered by the Irish as they tried to protect the Unionists, who were really British patriots with a funny accent (don’t they wave Union Jacks). The whole of society was anti-Irish (remember all those jokes about the stupid Irish) and almost nobody had any understanding of the deep seated roots of the problem and the actions on both sides that just kept it going. Any attempt to try and understand had you branded as an appeaser of terrorists.

Bloodstains take a long time to be washed out of the soul in Ireland. (I read that years ago and it stuck.)

Edited to correct date.
Very similar happened to me on the Hertfordshire street where I lived from age 6 until I left for university. Regular kickings ensued from other kids for being an Irish terrorist ******* - when they weren't blanking me totally. All it did was strengthen the Irish element of my identity in later life. By age 8 I knew all the words to "Men Behind the Wire" and by 10 pretty much every rebel song going. Still remember all the words.

I took my GCSEs in the late 1980s and studied the "Troubles". I too recall a balanced take. Finally it felt like someone English took my community seriously, while understanding and explaining the complexity underneath to everyone. My history teacher, a Greenham Common veteran, lit a fire (metaphorically) that led me to a Master's in Irish history and politics, and a lifelong interest in the subject.

When I worked at the City of London Corporation a decade ago, I remember the corporate welcome from the Town Clerk that took place with 400 other colleagues in the Guildhall. His stock question was to ask newbies what the red hand above the green door in the courtyard meant. I replied, describing the Red Hand for the funders of the 1609 Plantation of Ulster. Later he told me I was the first person ever to answer it properly, although my offer that The Honourable The Irish Society created the only city with six silent letters in its name was apparently a smartarse move too far.

So I understand the issue deeply.

Big House unionism died when Paisleyism came along (I met him on the way - found him very charming despite being diametrically opposed to him on almost every measure) and I don't think political unionism has ever recovered. It fails its young people on every measure, which is why the twin appeals of Loyalism and violence are so potent every summer. Anyone who's ever witnessed a Belfast Orange march and its aftermath will know what I mean.

No one, not one, of the Unionist leaders of any stripe elected since the days of David Trimble at the turn of the century have been able to transcend the accusations of selling out by the hardliners of the DUP and TUV. As long as inequality persists, the easy (but wrong) answers will remain attractive to their constituency. Blame the immigrants, the asylum seekers, the others. At least it makes a change from blaming the Catholics.

But nationalism has yet to make its case clearly, even in the rubble of Brexit. How will a unified polity address public service breakdown and the absence of opportunity in the North? What will be different? How will people benefit from a change in flag over Belfast City Hall? Hearts and minds is one thing, a solid plan is another. And the taint of Sínn Féin's association with the Provisional IRA lingers. Yet leaders in the Republic seem unwilling to step forward. Perhaps Leo Varadkar can be persuaded?

My own hope is for Irish unification. I think it is the only way to move beyond the division. The wound needs to heal - socially, culturally, economically. Until then, this summer, like every one since partition and probably like every one to come, will be ruined by hollow triumphalism, continued division and violence.

THC
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
6,448
Location
Sheffield
The two are not as far apart as this practicing Christian might wish. Neither Roman Catholics nor Baptists are historically known for their tolerance of each other
From what I can make out from my family history of 100 years ago the Presbyterians had a few dissenting congregations within themselves.
 

35B

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2011
Messages
5,381
From what I can make out from my family history of 100 years ago the Presbyterians had a few dissenting congregations within themselves.
Indeed. An inherent feature of Protestant theology where members dissent from what is being taught
 

JohnofWessex

Member
Joined
3 Jan 2026
Messages
135
Location
frome
A few observations if I may

A former colleague was a Northern Irish Catholic

Her MP was Ian Paisley and her comment was that he was an excellent constituency MP who served all his constituents equally and many Catholics voted for him as a result.

Someone else who knew him described him as having serious doubts about how he had behaved in the past as the peace process moved on.

I also saw a Loyalist paramilitary who had been imprisoned for killing Catholics saying that many Loyalists sought help from Catholic priests as unlike Loyalism the Nationalists were unified, one Church, Political Party & Terrorist organisation so they had an ability to get things done the Loyalists lacked.

There is a book I read some time ago now by the RTE Correspondent in Northern Ireland, ironically an Englishman about his time there I think its 'Watching the Door' by Kevin Myers which casts a baleful eye across those involved - do read it.

I used to view Northern Irish affairs as about as edifying as the sort of Council Tenant Neighbour Disputes my housing colleagues had to attempt to sort, but as was pointed out to me basically anyone with half a brain left the place.

There are two major problems with the Good Friday agreement, firstly the only people whose voices counted were those who committed violence as they had to be brought on board, secondly as with the Lebanon - and the didnt end well it 'ossified' the political structure shutting out non sectarian parties. Logically the structure should have had an end date but it doesnt.
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,414
Location
Taunton or Kent
Jeffrey Donaldson* will at least be relieved this verdict came the same day as Starmer's resignation:


Sir Jeffrey Donaldson's political career is a tale of two Good Fridays – the first a pivotal turning point, the second a shocking end.

It was in 1998, the day the peace deal - the Good Friday Agreement - was signed, bringing an end to decades of conflict in Northern Ireland, that he walked out of talks over the decision of his Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) to support it.

The dramatic move was uncharacteristic in a political life that usually avoided drama. But it did set him on a path that would see him go from being a thorn in the side of the UUP leadership, to becoming a party leader himself - but for the rival Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) after his defection to them in 2003.

Fast forward 26 years later, Good Friday 2024, and DUP leader Donaldson is charged with sexual abuse. He resigns as leader and then has his membership suspended by the party.

On Monday, Donaldson was found guilty of all 18 sex abuse charges he faced, including rape.

A few short weeks before being arrested and charged, he had been in Washington DC for St Patrick's Day celebrations, lauded as the man of the moment after getting his party to return to power-sharing government at Stormont.

It was deemed the pinnacle of his decades-long career.

Just weeks later, that career lay in tatters.

*I'm assuming his knighthood will be stripped at the earliest opportunity
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
17,474
Location
Isle of Man
Not many riots tonight, even after a paedophile is convicted of the vile abuse of young children.

Strange. Wonder why that might be?
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,711
mods note - split from this thread

Nobody in England cares about what is happening in Belfast. It's happening in another place and may as well be another country. Whatever loyalists have done in Northern Ireland has no real bearing on the British political centre of gravity, and will be ignored.

The average British person views loyalists in NI as some sort of errant franchise of Britain which we've washed our hands of long ago.

From a personal viewpoint I would say with most voters in England, Sinn Fein is the most unpopular party that has MPs at Westminster. I would say the DUP are also massively unpopular in England although not as much as Sinn Fein. The SNP and to a certain extent Plaid Cymru are also relatively unpopular in England.

Interestingly though Reform UK had a pact with the TUV to run joint candidates in Northern Ireland but Nigel Farage ended that by endorsing Ian Paisley Jr who then ironically lost to TUV leader Jim Allister. Nigel Farage and Reform made a massive error as had they kept the pact then it would be a stepping stone into having Reform UK enter Northern Ireland.

It's important to remember as well anti-immigration sentiment is growing in the Republic of Ireland so it's not exclusively a loyalist issue anymore.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
17,474
Location
Isle of Man
From a personal viewpoint I would say with most voters in England, Sinn Fein is the most unpopular party that has MPs at Westminster.
Sinn Fein don't have MPs at Westminster.

Nobody in England really gives a toss about Sinn Fein or the DUP and they won't have even heard of the TUV. You might get a Pavlovian "eugh, terrorist" reaction if you mention Martin McGuinness or Gerry Adams. You might get a "no surrender!" in a terrible cod-Belfast accent if you mention Ian Paisley Sr (or a blank look if you mention Gusty Spence), otherwise nah, nobody cares. Belfast is another country.

It's what makes me smile about the unionist position. For all they wave their Union Jacks and celebrate the Queen, when they come to England they're still treated as just another paddy.
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,711
Sinn Fein don't have MPs at Westminster.

Nobody in England really gives a toss about Sinn Fein or the DUP and they won't have even heard of the TUV. You might get a Pavlovian "eugh, terrorist" reaction if you mention Martin McGuinness or Gerry Adams. You might get a "no surrender!" in a terrible cod-Belfast accent if you mention Ian Paisley Sr (or a blank look if you mention Gusty Spence), otherwise nah, nobody cares. Belfast is another country.

It's what makes me smile about the unionist position. For all they wave their Union Jacks and celebrate the Queen, when they come to England they're still treated as just another paddy.

If people were to rank the parties I would say Sinn Fein is the least popular, DUP as I say is also unpopular.

I agree though that the Northern Ireland parties are largely ignored by the rest of the United Kingdom though.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,275
Location
LBK
If people were to rank the parties I would say Sinn Fein is the least popular, DUP as I say is also unpopular.

I agree though that the Northern Ireland parties are largely ignored by the rest of the United Kingdom though.
Would this be after you had explained to them which party is which? Most people wouldn't know who they are.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
6,448
Location
Sheffield
Sinn Fein don't have MPs at Westminster.
Sinn Fein does not participate on the floor of the House of Commons but that's by their choice. Their candidates stand for election and in 2024 7 were elected (out of 18 MPs from Northern Ireland).

Sinn Fein will not swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen/King so cannot take up their seats, but they are able to act on behalf of constituents. Funding gets complicated. They don't draw their salaries but can claim expenses. see; https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN01667/SN01667.pdf


Sinn Fein, allowances and access to
Commons facilities
Standard Note: SN/PC/1667
Last updated: 8 March 2006
Author: Oonagh Gay
Parliament and Constitution Centre
On 18 December 2001 the House debated and agreed a motion to allow Members who had
chosen not to take their seats to use facilities within the precincts of the House and use the
departments of the House, and claim Members’ Allowances. The motion did not provide for
access to Short money, the scheme of financial assistance to opposition parties at
Westminster. However SF Members in the Assembly are entitled to financial assistance as a
party, in a statutory scheme analogous to Short money. Similarly the motion did not affect
the exclusion of parties with two or more Members of Parliament, but whose Members have
not taken the oath, from receiving Policy Development Grants, under the Political Parties,
Elections and Referendums Act 2000. For further information on Short money and Political
Development Grants see Library Standard Notes no 1663 Short Money and 3138 Funding of
Political Parties. The full text of the Parliamentary Oath is given in Appendix 1 of Library
Research Paper 01/116 The Parliamentary Oath.

Sinn Féin took moved into their offices on 21 January 2002. Reports of the Independent
Monitoring Commission in Northern Ireland recommended sanctions against Sinn Fein
following events in April 2004. The Northern Ireland Secretary suspended allowances for SF
members, as members of a political party, in the Northern Ireland Assembly, from April 2004,
but these were restored from 1 November 2005. A motion from the Leader of the House to
suspend allowances for Sinn Fein MPs at Westminster for one year from 1 April 2005 was
debated and passed on 10 March 2005. A motion to backdate the restoration of allowances
to 1 November 2005 for Sinn Fein Commons Members was debated and passed on 8
February 2006, together with a motion to grant Sinn Fein funds analogous to Short money
for the first time. For recent developments in Northern Ireland, see Library Standard Note no
3905 Political Developments in Northern Ireland since September 2005.................
Many arguments can be made as to whether it's fair to represent all their constituents this way, but that's part of the tragedy of Ireland.
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,711
Many arguments can be made as to whether it's fair to represent all their constituents this way, but that's part of the tragedy of Ireland.

It's common knowledge that Sinn Fein don't take their seats at Westminster. Whether that is the correct decision is a matter for Sinn Fein. Importantly for voters the vast majority of voters know that a vote for Sinn Fein is a vote for abstentionist politics.

If another party was to suddenly adopt an abstentionist position after an election without telling voters for either being a nationalist party or a republican (in the British sense) then it would be wrong in my opinion.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
6,448
Location
Sheffield
It's common knowledge that Sinn Fein don't take their seats at Westminster. Whether that is the correct decision is a matter for Sinn Fein. Importantly for voters the vast majority of voters know that a vote for Sinn Fein is a vote for abstentionist politics.

If another party was to suddenly adopt an abstentionist position after an election without telling voters for either being a nationalist party or a republican (in the British sense) then it would be wrong in my opinion.
My point was that although Sinn Fein don't sit in the Chamber they can still represent their constituents by asking written questions. They don't, but they claim expenses. Or at least the Irish Independent said Jerry Adams did in a paywalled story published in 2011, see; https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gerry-adams-claimed-1m-as-mp-but-never-took-seat/a/150383040.html
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,711

Top