CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 23, 2021 15:35:07 GMT
If so, Alliance should take a moderate non-sectarian unionist stance.That us where they'll get the most votes from, basically usurping the UUP That’s what they were founded as wasn’t it? Indeed, and the UUP have never been a moderate non-sectarian Unionist voice, although they are seeking to partially fill that space. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,729
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jun 23, 2021 15:49:28 GMT
That’s what they were founded as wasn’t it? Indeed, and the UUP have never been a moderate non-sectarian Unionist voice, although they are seeking to partially fill that space. The UUP were very strongly associated with the Orange Order for most of their existence, though the link may be looser now. And the Orange Order were pretty much the definitive example of sectarianism. |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 23, 2021 15:56:16 GMT
Indeed, and the UUP have never been a moderate non-sectarian Unionist voice, although they are seeking to partially fill that space. The UUP were very strongly associated with the Orange Order for most of their existence, though the link may be looser now. And the Orange Order were pretty much the definitive example of sectarianism. I was avoiding mentioning that; thought I'd leave it to someone else. Of course, Revd Ian Paisley was never a member of the Orange Order, nor wished to be. |
|
|
|
Post by elinorhelyn on Jun 23, 2021 15:56:52 GMT
If so, Alliance should take a moderate non-sectarian unionist stance.That us where they'll get the most votes from, basically usurping the UUP That’s what they were founded as wasn’t it? Exactly so it won't be hard for them. |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,366 
|
Post by stb12 on Jun 23, 2021 16:03:57 GMT
The UUP were very strongly associated with the Orange Order for most of their existence, though the link may be looser now. And the Orange Order were pretty much the definitive example of sectarianism. I was avoiding mentioning that; thought I'd leave it to someone else. Of course, Revd Ian Paisley was never a member of the Orange Order, nor wished to be. Bet he said ‘never’ when they asked. |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 23, 2021 16:10:39 GMT
I was avoiding mentioning that; thought I'd leave it to someone else. Of course, Revd Ian Paisley was never a member of the Orange Order, nor wished to be. Bet he said ‘never’ when they asked. |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,366
|
Post by stb12 on Jun 23, 2021 16:38:52 GMT
Bet he said ‘never’ when they asked. Just on the Mrs Thatcher mention there, its interesting to think how she ended up so despised by both sides of the NI conflict |
|
|
|
Post by seanryanj on Jun 26, 2021 15:27:11 GMT
I would say on the face of it Unlikely that Alliance would take it, but with the way craziness in NI unionisim I wouldn't be against advising if you had 5 quid to spare shove it on time. Unionist vote could be split, Alliance have a good candidate, not a banker, I am still waiting for odds, if ye get them let me know....worth a shot!
|
|
|
|
Post by boondock on Jun 29, 2021 10:32:21 GMT
Alliance re-designating as unionist would be political suicide. why would they risk losing a number of voters. Polling shows that prior to their recent surge 4/7 of their voters were actually from a catholic background. Even if the UI debate becomes more intense and even if there is a referendum they can easily fudge the issue and allow their representatives to pick and chose for themselves which side of the debate to be on. The only gain would be if they were so desperate to be in power that if they ended up ahead of the DUP then they would be entitled to be first or deputy first minister but I would be amazed if that was even on their radar.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,005
|
Post by Khunanup on Jun 30, 2021 10:19:39 GMT
Alliance re-designating as unionist would be political suicide. why would they risk losing a number of voters. Polling shows that prior to their recent surge 4/7 of their voters were actually from a catholic background. Even if the UI debate becomes more intense and even if there is a referendum they can easily fudge the issue and allow their representatives to pick and chose for themselves which side of the debate to be on. The only gain would be if they were so desperate to be in power that if they ended up ahead of the DUP then they would be entitled to be first or deputy first minister but I would be amazed if that was even on their radar. Well they're not going to redesignate as Unionist are they, to even speculate as such is a waste of time. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 30, 2021 10:42:38 GMT
Alliance re-designating as unionist would be political suicide. why would they risk losing a number of voters. Polling shows that prior to their recent surge 4/7 of their voters were actually from a catholic background. Even if the UI debate becomes more intense and even if there is a referendum they can easily fudge the issue and allow their representatives to pick and chose for themselves which side of the debate to be on. The only gain would be if they were so desperate to be in power that if they ended up ahead of the DUP then they would be entitled to be first or deputy first minister but I would be amazed if that was even on their radar. Well they're not going to redesignate as Unionist are they, to even speculate as such is a waste of time. That's because they aren't Unionist, or Nationalist. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 30, 2021 10:55:53 GMT
Alliance Party MLAs did designate as Unionists to solve a political crisis in November 2001. Trimble had resigned as the IRA wouldn't make any progress on disarmament, but after a positive move sought to return to office. Owing to defections he didn't have a majority of Unionist votes. So David Ford, Eileen Bell and Séan Neeson redesignated as Unionists and that gave him a majority.
|
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,366
|
Post by stb12 on Jun 30, 2021 11:08:55 GMT
Well they're not going to redesignate as Unionist are they, to even speculate as such is a waste of time. That's because they aren't Unionist, or Nationalist. They did start life as a moderate unionist party though so there is some history there |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Jun 30, 2021 11:14:21 GMT
Alliance Party MLAs did designate as Unionists to solve a political crisis in November 2001. Trimble had resigned as the IRA wouldn't make any progress on disarmament, but after a positive move sought to return to office. Owing to defections he didn't have a majority of Unionist votes. So David Ford, Eileen Bell and Séan Neeson redesignated as Unionists and that gave him a majority. Indeed they did, and it was a serious violation of the principles of the power sharing agreement which is built on the notion of majority support from both Unionists and Nationalists. In this case a majority of Unionist representatives opposed a course of action but it went ahead due to the disgraceful machinations of the Alliance. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 30, 2021 11:17:52 GMT
Alliance Party MLAs did designate as Unionists to solve a political crisis in November 2001. Trimble had resigned as the IRA wouldn't make any progress on disarmament, but after a positive move sought to return to office. Owing to defections he didn't have a majority of Unionist votes. So David Ford, Eileen Bell and Séan Neeson redesignated as Unionists and that gave him a majority. Indeed they did, and it was a serious violation of the principles of the power sharing agreement which is built on the notion of majority support from both Unionists and Nationalists. In this case a majority of Unionist representatives opposed a course of action but it went ahead due to the disgraceful machinations of the Alliance. I don't think it did them any favours, either. So it's not something I think they would try again. Better to retain the moral high ground and of all parties, they are the ones who would most welcome a Stormont election |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Jun 30, 2021 11:23:46 GMT
Of course, Revd Ian Paisley was never a member of the Orange Order, nor wished to be. He was a member until 1962. He quit in protest at the Lord Mayor of Belfast attending a Catholic funeral. |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 30, 2021 11:25:38 GMT
Of course, Revd Ian Paisley was never a member of the Orange Order, nor wished to be. He was a member until 1962. He quit in protest at the Lord Mayor of Belfast attending a Catholic funeral. I stand corrected, I was quoting him but assumed he had never been a member. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jun 30, 2021 12:10:43 GMT
Alliance Party MLAs did designate as Unionists to solve a political crisis in November 2001. Trimble had resigned as the IRA wouldn't make any progress on disarmament, but after a positive move sought to return to office. Owing to defections he didn't have a majority of Unionist votes. So David Ford, Eileen Bell and Séan Neeson redesignated as Unionists and that gave him a majority. Indeed they did, and it was a serious violation of the principles of the power sharing agreement which is built on the notion of majority support from both Unionists and Nationalists. In this case a majority of Unionist representatives opposed a course of action but it went ahead due to the disgraceful machinations of the Alliance. If the rules of the power-sharing agreement allowed MLAs to change their designation in such a way, it was a valid use of the rules, and therefore not a "violation". |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,366
|
Post by stb12 on Jun 30, 2021 12:42:47 GMT
Indeed they did, and it was a serious violation of the principles of the power sharing agreement which is built on the notion of majority support from both Unionists and Nationalists. In this case a majority of Unionist representatives opposed a course of action but it went ahead due to the disgraceful machinations of the Alliance. If the rules of the power-sharing agreement allowed MLAs to change their designation in such a way, it was a valid use of the rules, and therefore not a "violation". I think Richard clearly meant it was a violation of the spirit of the power sharing rules/arrangements even if it was within the rules |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Jun 30, 2021 14:05:26 GMT
And, that, unfortunately is what is wrong with Stormont. They should step up and work within the rules, not fart-arse about with the spirit of them.
|
|
