Peter Cheney discusses the idea with the NIO Minister.

Instead of a cover for cuts, Hugo Swire sees the Big Society as a kind of confession. The NIO Minister, who leads on the subject in the province, describes it as an admission that “big government can’t always do it, shouldn’t always do it and when it does things, it doesn’t always do it very well.”

He sums up David Cameron’s concept as a transfer of power from the state to local people so they have more of a say in how their lives are run. The fundamental belief is that “the people who do things best for their communities are those people who live in those communities themselves.”

The Minister earlier addressed the UK Association of Preservation Trusts’ national conference at the Crescent Arts Centre. The Big Society, he told delegates, had three pillars:

1. decreasing the power of Whitehall and bringing decisions much closer to people;

2. reforming and opening up public services; and

3. encouraging social action.

Ministers have been keen to stress that the Big Society already exists and they want to make it ‘bigger’.

The UK Government’s plans will have the most impact in England, where Westminster has a free hand. Elsewhere, it has financial levers but otherwise has to persuade devolved administrations. Some voluntary sector groups are supportive, others sceptical.

Cameron launched the name Big Society through the Guardian’s Hugo Young lecture, in November 2009, but has emphasised the same theme since his leadership election speech in October 2005: “We know we have a shared responsibility, that we’re all in this together, that there is such a thing as society; it’s just not the same thing as the state.”

That contrasted with Margaret Thatcher’s 1987 comment: “And who is society? There is no such thing.” Swire points interviewers to the full quote, which continues: “There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first.”

Transferring power from government, he thinks, is “rather radical” and not unique to Conservatives. Many of his party members in East Devon are involved in charities, churches and fundraising. So too are people from other political backgrounds: “We want to recognise those people. We want to support those people. We want to encourage those people and we want there to be more of those people.”

Critiques

“Our critics have to say something,” he says when rejecting Ed Miliband’s view of the Big Society as “a cloak for the small state”. Swire adds: “As a Conservative, I actually believe personally that it is the individuals who should be empowered against the state. If that’s radical, so be it.”

From the right wing, Adam Smith Institute Director Eamonn Butler says the idea is a ‘brand’ and any ‘good’ government policy will be called the Big Society. “I think that what that’s missing is the very clear things that we’re doing,” Swire responds, pointing to Big Society Capital and National Citizen Service.

“It’s actually a sort of philosophical change. It’s a mindset. It actually represents a very fundamental shift in thinking and I think, ultimately, will come to define David Cameron’s premiership.”

Charities, social enterprises, private companies and co-operatives (including those owned by public sector workers) will compete to run public services, at least in England.

The proposed Big Society Bank has been renamed Big Society Capital to distinguish it from high street banks and is due to operate from April 2012.

Big Society Capital will not make direct grants but will instead act as a wholesaler of capital, attracting funding from foundations, institutional investors, companies and private individuals, to invest in intermediary organisations. Applicants, from all parts of the UK, could approach the intermediary organisations and access capital at a more competitive rate than through a normal bank. Independent of government, the organisation will initially receive an estimated £400 million from dormant bank accounts and £200 million from HSBC, RBS, Lloyds and Barclays (so-called Merlin money).

Swire was most passionate about the National Citizen Service as, after the English riots, “if there was ever a time to give teenagers a sense of belonging and purpose, it is now.”

The service, piloted in England last summer, brings together 16-year olds from different social backgrounds for a residential trip. Similarly to the Duke of Edinburgh Awards, young people take part in outdoor pursuits, design a community project and carry out 30 hours of part-time social action. Ten thousand young people took part and the UK Government is discussing a Northern Ireland version with the Executive.

Whether or not that goes ahead, Swire notes that the province’s Big Society is “alive and well in myriad different forms”. Indeed, he brought David Cameron to see the ARC healthy living centre in Irvinestown back in June, a high profile illustration of Britain learning from Northern Ireland’s experience.

Down to specifics

The Big Society is often written off as woolly and waffly but detailed policies are now taking shape. The National Citizen Service and the Big Society Capital Group are the two highest profile examples to date. In May, the Cabinet Office released its giving white paper, which highlights the following UK-wide schemes:

• Cutting inheritance tax from 40 to 36 per cent where 10 per cent or more of an estate goes to charity (takes effect from April 2012);

• Charitable giving through ATMs, being explored by banks, building societies and cash machine operators (operational later this year);

• JustTextGiving launched by the mobile phone industry (in May) after a challenge from government;

• The Do Some Good app for iPhones;

• The independent Philanthropy UK service encouraging more giving from wealthy individuals

(to receive £700,000 from government to develop its work).

Innovative pilots include the Round Pound scheme, allowing shoppers to round up their bills to the nearest pound and donate the difference to charity, and the Spice initiative (pioneered in south Wales) which thanks volunteers with a small gift e.g. off-peak swimming, spare theatre seats.

Community and voluntary groups across the UK can also apply for Big Society Awards. Winners receive a signed certificate from the Prime Minister and are invited to a networking event and 10 Downing Street reception.

The British Empire Medal (see page 7 in this edition) is being reintroduced to reward volunteering.

All UK Government ministers have pledged to volunteer for a day in the community. Swire had an army of NIO “weeders, sweepers, painters and cleaners” and was open to suggestions for projects.

More info: www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/big-society

Reactions to Sands’ death

A compelling weekly bulletin from the Northern Ireland Office (file NIO/12/194A) describes the first week of May 1981 in grim detail. The medical prognosis of the hunger strikers had a direct bearing on the security situation outside the jail.

“As anticipated in the last bulletin Sands’ condition became critical at the weekend when he lapsed into a coma on Sunday morning [3 May],” it records. “He did not regain consciousness before his death at 01.17 hours early on Tuesday 5, the 66th day of his fast.”

Secretary of State Humphrey Atkins regretted a “needless and pointless death” before adding: “We should not forget the many others who have died.” Atkins urged the people of Northern Ireland to “recognise the futility of violence and turn their faces away from it.” A press statement from republican prisoners blamed the British Government “primarily” for his death but also condemned “politicians and other leading people” for their alleged “timidity and lack of courage”.

The document goes on to report “rioting for most of the day in Belfast” on 4 May and “heavy petrol bombing of RUC targets plus factories, commercial premises and a Methodist church” after Sands’ death. An RUC officer was shot dead in North Belfast on 6 May and an INLA terrorist killed by his own bomb.

A “marked increase in shooting incidents overnight” (6-7 May) suggested that “[IRA] terrorist action will be stepped up to maintain the campaign impetus.”

Robinson’s prison hostage offer

Peter Robinson was prepared to take a government offer to loyalist prisoners holding four prison officers hostage, according to NIO notes (file CENT/1/10/91). The incident happened at Crumlin Road jail and was discussed at a meeting at Stormont Castle starting at 9.15pm on 11 December 1981.

Robinson met NIO Minister of State Adam Butler as part of the Ulster Loyalist Prisoners’ Rights Committee. He warned that “the prison might be burnt down” and said he had been “shouting up to some of the prisoners taking part in the protest and had been told the hostages were being well treated.”

If the committee members could meet the prisoners and take an offer from the Government, he expected that the warders would be released. A Mr McDonald, also on the committee, was “concerned [that] the irresponsible element in the prison would take over completely.”

Butler insisted that third parties could not negotiate with protesting prisoners. “It was a matter for the prison authorities to handle,” as had happened in Great Britain. However, the committee “bore a heavy responsibility if they had the prisoners’ trust and it was essential that they should try to encourage and influence the situation to reduce tension.”

Robinson countered that another NIO Minister, Lord Gowrie, and “all sorts of people” had gone to the Maze to ask the hunger strikers to call off their protest. He warned that if anything happened to the warders, “it would be on the Minister’s conscience.” Ulster Unionist John Carson, a UUP councillor and former North Belfast MP, added: “Protestant feelings were running very high especially when it seemed that Republican prisoners had won all their demands, whilst Loyalist prisoners were being ignored.”

Butler suggested that the committee make an appeal on radio to end the protest, but this was rejected as ineffective. After two and a half hours, both sides agreed that the committee would tell prisoners, through a loud hailer, that they could meet elected representatives if the protest ended; the Government would announce a review of conditions at Crumlin Road for remand prisoners; Lord Gowrie would meet “conforming prisoners” at an early opportunity.

The prison officers were subsequently released.

Leading profiles

Frank profiles of political and church figures by NIO staff (file CENT/1/10/36A) indicate their fears that moderate figures were being overshadowed by loud hard line voices.

Ian Paisley “gained his reputation as a fundamentalist preacher with violently anti-catholic views” in the late 1950s and was “far removed from the old traditional middle class unionism”. His majority in North Antrim was “impregnable”.

Catholic Primate Tomás Ó Fiaich was clearly resented: “His public pronouncements tend to gain him notoriety, believing in a phased British withdrawal from the North. He rejects violence, but has on occasion been far from helpful on the prisons issue.” The main Protestant church leaders, all seen as ecumenical, were viewed much more positively.

John Hume had been “an effective Minister of Commerce” and is described as: “Altogether an academically minded, moderate politician.” Jim Molyneaux is curiously listed third out of the four main political leaders, perhaps reflecting NIO frustration: “Rather lacking in populist appeal, his lack of flair may have contributed to the UUP’s steady loss of support to the DUP.”

The DUP had narrowly overtaken the UUP, in first preferences, at the local elections on 20 May (26.57 per cent to 26.56 per cent), more than doubling its vote from 12.7 per cent in 1977. “Not a charismatic man, but an effective leader” was the summary for Alliance’s Oliver Napier.

In economic terms, Northern Ireland was a “uniquely distressed region of the UK” with “exceptionally high unemployment” (17.6 per cent and 101,522 persons in May 1981) and a “high degree of dependence on declining staple industries”. Several factories were at risk of closure, according to official predictions, and the futures of “Shorts and especially Harland and Wolff are not assured in the longer term.”

‘Catholic support’ for shared college

Many Catholic teachers supported a shared teaching training centre, but feared speaking out “because it might harm their job prospects.” The claim was made by Mr Mallaghan from All Children Together (a pro-integrated education group) when it met Education Minister Lord Elton on 26 February 1981.

The interim Chilver report, in June 1980, called for a Belfast Centre for Teacher Education, which would include a Catholic college, Stranmillis College and Queen’s University’s School of Education on the Stranmillis site. According to the official note (file ED/13/2/544), Mr Mallaghan “suggested that the Roman Catholic Church had orchestrated a response to the report and that many people were not aware of what was in it.”

The Minister was sceptical about public demand as he had received “no such approaches” from members of the public. Lagan College was opened in September 1981 as the first formally integrated school, with 28 pupils. That said, several schools had educated Protestants and Catholics together earlier in Northern Ireland’s history e.g. the mill schools of County Down.

Hunger strike support assessed

The hunger strike had generated “substantial international interest, notably in the US, the Holy See and Western Europe” (file CENT/1/10/36A). The UK had “encountered no difficulties from allied governments over the hunger strike, although it remains to be seen whether President [Mitterrand] will succumb to left wing pressure in France.” Mitterrand’s government included ministers from the French Communist Party.

May was a turbulent time in Europe. Bobby Sands’ death (5 May) was followed by the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II (13 May) which, the NIO surmised, “has probably had the indirect effect of reducing sympathy abroad for terrorist prisoners in Northern Ireland.” However, officials expected interest to revive when the European Commission of Human Rights (a legal tribunal) declared two complaints by prisoners to be admissible.

Some US television coverage had been “unhelpful” but there had been “some attempt at balance” in recent days. The southern Irish and French media were “notably hostile”.

The Taoiseach (at that time Charles Haughey) had urged the British Government to be “flexible on prison conditions” but was also “careful not to associate himself with the prisoners’ demands for political status.” The briefing warned that “Provisional Sinn Féin sympathisers” could take six seats in the Irish general election, which was held on 11 June. Two Anti H-Block candidates were subsequently elected (hunger striker Kieran Doherty and fellow prisoner Paddy Agnew). Haughey was unable to form a government and was succeeded by Garret FitzGerald. Doherty died on 2 August 1981.

In the USA, dockworkers announced a 24-hour boycott of British ships entering US ports on 7-8 May and Irish bars in New York were closed for two hours as a mark of respect (file NIO/12/194A). The East German Communists described Northern Ireland citizens as “suppressed and subject to discrimination”. Anti-British pickets and arson attacks were reported in several countries.

The welfare reforms currently working their way through Westminster have been widely described as the most radical shake-up of the social security system in over 40 years. With the aim of simplifying the benefits system, improving work incentives to encourage the move from benefits to work and reducing administration costs, the implementation of the changes will impact upon a significant percentage of the working age population in Northern Ireland.

No one can argue that the present overly complicated and bureaucratic social security system doesn’t need to be overhauled. However, there is much more to this than simplification and achieving a better outcome for customers.

A recent report by the Institute of Fiscal Studies found that after London, Northern Ireland will be the hardest hit by the tax and benefit cuts announced and soon to be implemented under the Bill between January 2012 and April 2015. This is for two reasons: the high numbers of those in receipt of Disability Living Allowance, especially for mental health disorders, and the high number of families with children who will be adversely affected by cuts to social security. The loss to Northern Ireland’s benefit recipients will be more than £600 million per year by 2014-2015.

The changes will include existing work related benefits being replaced with a single universal credit, a cap on the total amounts of benefit families and individuals can receive, changes to how housing benefit is calculated, a new benefit to replace DLA which will require all existing and new claimants to undergo a new assessment, the abolition of the independent review of Social Fund decisions and the end of community care grants and crisis loans.

The issues are huge and the potential ramifications for Northern Ireland have yet to be fully understood. Though we do know two things for sure: that these changes will mean less spending power available for the economy and, secondly, that once again the most vulnerable and disadvantaged will bear the brunt of attempts to correct economic problems that are not of their making.

A group of organisations in the voluntary and community sector concerned about the very real potential of these changes to increase poverty, hardship and inequality in Northern Ireland has been meeting to monitor developments and unpick what this will mean for people, families and communities here. Led by the Northern Ireland Law Centre, group members include NICVA, Gingerbread, Save the Children, Barnardos, Advice NI, Disability Action, A2B, the Housing Rights Service, Employers for Childcare and the Women’s Support Network. The group has addressed MLAs and Stormont committees on this issue and has produced a useful overview of the changes proposed in the Bill which is available at www.nicva.org/news

The Bill is expected to receive royal assent early in the new year. Following this the Bill is due to be presented to the Northern Ireland Assembly, which will give our own elected representatives the opportunity to debate the impact of the reforms in Northern Ireland and shape how they are implemented here. NICVA supports the argument from the Welfare Reform Group that the DSD should set out its own arrangements and proposals which are tailored to Northern Ireland’s needs so that a full debate can occur on the practical consequences of any proposal within the Welfare Reform Bill.

In March 2012, NICVA and the Law Centre are joining forces to host a high level conference which will aim to explain and debate the impact of welfare reform in Northern Ireland. Details will be made available as we confirm the agenda and you can get more information by contacting Lorraine Boyd at lorraine.boyd@nicva.org

Lisa McElherron is NICVA’s Head of Public Affairs. For more information:

Tel: 028 9087 7777

Email: lisa.mcelherron@nicva.org

Northern Ireland is to receive an extra £142 million (including £134 million for capital projects) up to 2015 following the Chancellor’s autumn statement but may lose £150 million in current expenditure. Those reductions are expected in Barnett consequentials i.e. cuts in UK Government departments being matched by the Executive.

The whole UK is expected to experience lower growth in 2012 (0.7 per cent) with the Government borrowing an extra £111 billion over the next five years.

Critically, the Office for Budget Responsibility predicts 710,000 public sector job losses by 2017, up from its last estimate of 400,000. Public sector pay rises will be capped at 1 per cent after the freeze ends in April 2013. A review of regional pay could result in salary reductions and spending cuts will continue to 2017.

However, several announcements will benefit the Northern Ireland economy.

Fuel duty is frozen until next August (when a 3p rise is due). Local businesses can apply for the National Loan Guarantee Scheme, support from the Business Finance Partnership, and the national insurance exemption (which continues up to April 2013). Belfast is one of four cities to share the £100 million urban broadband fund, designed to achieve 80-100 MBps. Six others will be selected in a UK-wide competition.

Sammy Wilson claimed that there would be no compulsory redundancies but said he did not know how many voluntary redundancies would eventually be made. Wilson expected more invest-to-save decisions by ministers and said these had to be looked at “fairly quickly”.

Conor Murphy repeated Sinn Féin’s view that Northern Ireland had to break its dependency by taking on “maximum fiscal powers” and building a strong all-Ireland economy.

Alliance’s Naomi Long asked the Chancellor for action on air passenger duty on regional flights but was referred to the forthcoming UK aviation strategy. Long had wanted to see reduced VAT on renovations, to help the construction sector, but welcomed the moves to release credit to small businesses. However, she said there was “no serious effort” on pay restraint in company and bank board rooms.

The UUP was supportive and called for realism, but SDLP leader Alasdair McDonnell said that “squeezing” public sector workers “will simply cause pain and hardship for hardworking families and will have a negative impact on businesses here.”

Owen Paterson reiterated his defence of deficit reduction, which was “keeping interest rates lower for longer”. He claimed that the only alternative was “more borrowing and more spending … precisely the something for nothing economics that got our country into this mess in the first place.”

A wider divide opened up between the business and trade union responses.

CBI Director-General John Cridland said the statement “works with the realities of today and provides an imaginative framework”. The CBI in Northern Ireland wants changes in British employment law, including ‘protected conversations’ with older employees, extended to the province.

ICTU Assistant General Secretary Peter Bunting told striking workers that the public sector was “being sacrificed in the name of an ideology which favours the 1 per cent.”

Whatever you think of its estimates, the Office for Budget Responsibility has established its independence as a professional forecaster, according to Robert Chote. agendaNi spoke to him at the Northern Ireland Economic Conference on the first anniversary of his appointment.

“The key thing we needed to do on arrival,” he stated, “was to establish the reputation of the OBR as a source of rigorous, well-explained coherent analysis that people may well disagree with but at least they know it’s not politically-motivated wishful thinking.”

That independence, he comments, has been respected by the Treasury. The office also discloses all meetings with ministers and special advisors online, as well as its forecast timetable.

While many people are “very focused” on the short-term outlook, the medium-term outlook “matters more than anything” to the OBR. Its key task, when looking at the short-term trend, is to work out whether it is “temporarily bad news that we’ll bounce back from” or if it says something about medium-term prospects: “And that’s one of the tricky judgements we have to make.”

Asked to assess the euro zone’s performance, he quipped: “The days when I was a professional commentator on the merits of broadly based currency areas are long behind me.” Again, the key question for the OBR is the impact on the UK’s medium-term outlook, bearing in mind that the euro zone has an impact through export markets, interest rates for government borrowing, and general economic confidence.

More locally, corporation tax is the central policy objective of Northern Ireland’s business organisations and the Secretary of State, although the political will at Stormont is increasingly in doubt.

Chote was pressed for his view on whether corporation tax would be devolved, but replied that it was “not a decision for us to make” and “not for us to say whether this is a good idea or not.”

If the decision went ahead, the OBR’s task would be “relatively limited” i.e. producing forecasts and assessments. “Interestingly,” he added, “we’re having a similar role and similar challenges in Scotland because of the fact that from the Budget of next year, we’ll have to start forecasting Scottish income tax receipts and other areas.”

Scotland is to receive its new income tax powers by 2015 with the first changes taking effect a year later.

“One issue with corporation tax is that, of course, it is one of the more volatile streams of tax revenue,” Chote noted. “It goes up and down more than taxes on income or taxes on spending. It doesn’t make the task of forecasting receipts from it any easier.”

In the absence of lower corporation tax, Northern Ireland will continue to rely heavily on its subvention from Westminster. It was put to him that this dependence increasingly reflects badly on Northern Ireland, as a UK region, but he replied: “I wouldn’t say so.”

Chote continued: “It’s not our job to look in regional areas but I mean, clearly, if you think that we’re engaged in a fiscal consolidation at the moment and significant cuts in public expenditure, then those parts of the economy that are more dependent on the public sector are going to see more of a direct effect from there.”

A region in that situation will “need to be thinking about policies that will allow the public sector to rebalance” but he concluded: “It’s not unique to Northern Ireland and it’s a challenge for everybody.”

Nigel Dodds’ private members’ Bill aimed at highlighting and preventing abuse of older people and vulnerable adults will have its second reading in the House of Commons on 20 January. The Support and Protection for Elderly People and Adults at Risk of Abuse Bill, which enjoyed cross-party support at first reading, seeks to ensure training on how to recognise and respond to such abuse, promote local strategies for preventing abuse and provide assistance to victims.

At the first reading on 10 November 2010, Dodds said different forms of abuse affect hundreds of thousands of people across the UK every year and that abuse often goes unreported due to stigma, shame, dependence on the abusers as well as guilt or isolation. Stating that the benchmark of child protection should be used, Dodds said that his legislation would require abuse to be investigated, a more consistent and effective response by statutory providers, ensure better training and education, and offer enhanced guidance to the criminal justice system.

Speaking to agendaNi, Dodds said: “Part of the issue that I just wanted to focus [on] and highlight was that this needs to be taken much more seriously and in a more co-ordinated way across government.” He said his aim in producing the Bill is “promoting the need for a requirement on [social services] agencies to be aware of and to make this a priority.” The aspirational provisions of the Bill would apply across the UK, with the devolved administrations responsible for implementing the policies.

Support, at present, can be unco-ordinated and fragmented, with little formal contact between the relevant agencies and services, he claimed.

The DHSSPS says it has improved inter-agency working over the last two years, including financial support for establishing local and regional ‘safeguarding partnerships’.

Dodds told the Commons that there would be “immense benefit in bringing existing provisions together, including principles, definitions, a duty to investigate, clarification of powers of entry, powers to remove a perpetrator or perpetrators of abuse, and a duty of co-operation.”

In a UK-wide study of abuse and neglect of older people conducted by King’s College London and the National Centre for Social Research, published in 2007, 2.6 per cent of people aged 66 and over living in private households reported mistreatment involving a family member, friend or care worker during the past year. The predominant types of mistreatment were neglect (42.3 per cent of abuse), financial abuse (31.8 per cent), psychological and physical (18.2 per cent each) and sexual (9.1 per cent). Fifty-one per cent of mistreatment involved a partner, and 49 per cent another family member, with only 13 per cent of abuse reported to have been from a care worker.

The prevalence of abuse rises from 2.6 per cent to 4 per cent when incidents involving neighbours or acquaintances were included. The study stated that its findings were likely to represent an under-estimate of mistreatment.

Two per cent of people aged 66 and over in Northern Ireland suffered from mistreatment, according to the study, with neglect constituting half of this.

In his Commons speech, the DUP deputy leader added that a “major shift towards understanding the circumstances and situations that contribute towards abuse or render people vulnerable to it” was needed.

Earlier this year a cross-border qualitative study of older people’s understanding of elder abuse reported that some participants would be reluctant to tell anyone about mistreatment for fear of having to go into a nursing home, which was their biggest dread.

In Northern Ireland, the DHSSPS and the Department of Justice are currently developing policy on the safeguarding of vulnerable adults, with a framework to be issued for public consultation in 2012.

The details of Dodds’ Bill are expected to be published at committee stage if it advances past second reading.

Rising costs and interference mean the UK is better off outside the EU, according to Diane Dodds. The DUP MEP discusses Northern Ireland’s place in Europe and her priorities with Peter Cheney.

Diane Dodds is in the conflicting position of wanting the best financial deal for Northern Ireland in Europe and also wanting the UK to quit the EU, therefore cutting off those funds. However, she sees no such contradiction when the point is put to her.

As part of a net contributor, Northern Ireland must “get more back out of Europe than it currently does” and leaving the EU would ultimately mean getting back “all the millions and billions that we actually pay in.”

The UK’s net contribution was £9.2 billion in 2010-2011. Dodds recognises that Northern Ireland has benefitted from Europe, especially through CAP and the Peace funding, but her basic principle is sovereignty. “I don’t want people from 26 other different countries in Europe deciding what I can or cannot do with my money,” she states.

Food focus

Making the most of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Common Fisheries Policy reforms is Dodds’ main priority at present. Both policies directly affect lives in Northern Ireland and she sits on the relevant European Parliament committees.

£268 million has been paid out to date from DARD’s 2010 single farm payment budget.

Two battles stand out in CAP: the ongoing European talks and challenging the UK Government, which wants to move money from farmers’ support to environmental schemes. In Dodds’ view, CAP should be “a food policy not an environment policy” and she claims that many Conservative and Unionist pronouncements would not “sit easy” with farmers in Northern Ireland.

The phrase Conservative and Unionist, of course, harks back to the UCUNF pact. Jim Nicholson was the only successful candidate. The DUP is keen to connect the UUP with unpopular government policies. Later, Dodds pledges to hold the Conservatives and Unionists responsible if the UK Government fails to hold a referendum on treaty changes. And ultimately, she wants a referendum on the UK’s membership; the DUP has consistently called for the UK’s withdrawal.

Dodds predicts a growing demand for a poll: “No matter what Cameron said at the [Conservative Party] conference, the Government will be edged towards allowing people a free choice and because we are net contributors, because this place costs every citizen in the United Kingdom, then I believe that we need to have a say in where we’re going.”

The Daily Telegraph calculates that in 2010 each household made a net contribution of £299 towards EU funds. Her husband Nigel helped to present a 100,000-signature petition to Downing Street, separate from the e-petition which triggered the House of Commons vote.

“No country can live unto itself. We need to be able to trade with our European partners,” she explains. “What we don’t want is the federalism and the invasion and the intrusion into the minutiae of national life that these institutions represent.”

Calling referendums runs against the British parliamentary tradition, but she says that argument has “long since passed the post” as UK voters approved EU membership i.e. the 1975 referendum.

All EU institutions are “convulsed” by the debt crisis and the need to set priorities for the 2014-2020 budgeting cycle. Given the waste and bureaucracy in the EU, she supports a cut in the overall budget (currently projected at €1.03 trillion) and says that a smaller version could still fund CAP, the structural funds and the Cohesion Fund.

Foreign affairs

The European External Action Service is, to Dodds, a key example of waste. Launched last December, this is the EU’s new diplomatic arm but its Commissioner, Baroness Ashton, has been “given an impossible job, to try to form a coherent foreign policy for 27 nations”.

Ashton, for example, was unable to give a coherent response when MEPs debated Palestinian statehood in September. “Foreign policy is the prerogative of member states,” Dodds maintains. The service’s 2011 budget is €464 million.

Israel is a “long-held interest” of Dodds. She has no objection to giving aid to Palestinians but finds that the European Parliament “can sometimes be a lonely place for those who speak out in support of Israel.” Two EU-Israel trade agreements, on industrial and pharmaceutical products, were signed and approved by the Council of Ministers in May 2010 but have been held up in the Parliament. The delay, she explains, is holding back cutting edge research and potential medical treatments.

The MEP says that the “pejorative language” of occupied territories should be avoided, even though the term is broadly recognised: “If we go into a situation with pre-conceived views to tell people how to do things then we will never be able to work with those people.”

Instead, she focuses on building blocks for peace e.g. the inclusion of Arab-Israeli women in the workplace. Asked whether she is uncomfortable with the loss of British personnel in the Israeli War of Independence, Dodds responds: “We cannot keep going back and back. As a democratic politician, I want to see democracy flourish. Israel is a democracy in every modern sense of the word.” She adds: “I am a friend of Israel but not an uncritical friend of Israel.”

She rejects the idea of abstaining from the Parliament as her manifesto commits her to going to Brussels. Back home, her office has drawn up a funding guide for community groups and non-profit organisations. Her overall ambition is to end British EU membership. Norway, she stresses, enjoys free trade agreements outside the EU before lamenting on “the disadvantages of the working time directives, the social and employment legislation, and all of the red tape and hassle and money that this place involves.” To put it another way, Diane Dodds hopes the day will come when MEPs are no longer needed.

Voters in South Belfast may be back at the polls early next year, due to Alasdair McDonnell’s election as SDLP leader. He will become its only double-jobbing MP when Margaret Ritchie leaves Stormont in January.

The party has a commitment to end dual mandates (after backing a UUP Assembly motion in November 2009) and has confirmed to agendaNi that McDonnell will make his decision “soon”. The move is already overdue as the motion set a deadline of 2011. The new leader effectively faces three choices: leave Parliament, leave the Assembly or change policy.

Resignation from Westminster would cause a by-election, which is normally called within three months of a vacancy. The May Assembly poll was the most recent with all main parties taking part.

Back then, the DUP polled 7,845 first preferences to 7,718 for the SDLP. Alliance was third with 6,390. The Ulster Unionists and Sinn Fein battled for fourth place (4,382 and 4,038 respectively).

South Belfast has been a DUP target since McDonnell’s win in 2005. Rev Martin Smyth had previously held it for the UUP (1982-2005) and unionist parties have since accused each other of splitting their vote. However, demands for a single unionist candidate are a clear sign of weakness. Alliance is growing in strength.

The 2010 general result was skewed as Sinn Féin stood aside. McDonnell’s majority was 5,926, although this included an unknown number of republican voters. Turnout has steadily declined, from 62.4 per cent in 2007 to 52 per cent in 2011.

Winning South Belfast brings the added prestige of holding a university seat, although the constituency also includes several deprived inner city areas.

Resignation from Stormont is far less likely as it would take McDonnell out of the local political fray. The Assembly’s co-option procedure allows the party leader to nominate a new MLA, who would first be selected by the SDLP constituency association.

McDonnell could also abandon the policy and stay as MP and MLA. This would attract some criticism but is consistent with all previous SDLP leaders. Seven other MPs still double-job: Sammy Wilson, Gregory Campbell and the five from Sinn Féin. However, Owen Paterson’s plan to end the practice could force McDonnell to step aside later on.

South Belfast (officially known as Belfast South) was formed in 1885, dissolved in 1918 and reconstituted in 1922. As the Boundary Commission has earmarked it for abolition at the 2015 general election, McDonnell, or his successor, may be the constituency’s last MP.

Traditional DUP conference rhetoric stood in stark contrast to Robinson’s appeal to moderate voters. Meadhbh Monahan reports.

“There can be no greater guarantee of our long-term security in the union than the support of a significant part of the Catholic community,” Peter Robinson told delegates at the party’s annual conference on 26 November.

Sammy Wilson’s comparison of Sinn Féin members’ children to hunger strikers and Nigel Dodds’ criticisms of all Irish nationalists, including Enda Kenny’s call for a Pat Finucane inquiry while “trying to neuter” the Smithwick Tribunal, grated against Robinson’s calls for a shared future and an end to ‘no surrender’ politics.

Delegates also listened to a debate on the DUP leading a pro-union campaign for unionists in Scotland and Wales. Members also attended sessions on financing local government and a Health Service for the 21st century (which was addressed by Edwin Poots and had a £50 charge). The concept of registered party supporters, which would see more people “ease themselves into membership of the party itself,” was introduced and more female members will be sought.

Outlining a new direction for the DUP, the party leader stated that, contrary to some accusations, he does not want a society which is “carved up rather than shared.” In order to end the division in Northern Ireland, the ‘them and us’ attitude must be replaced with ‘all of us.’

However, insults were directed, not only at Sinn Féin, but at the SDLP (Wilson wearing sunglasses in a jibe at Alasdair McDonnell), the Greens and the media. Arlene Foster tackled the Irish News and Robinson attacked Stephen Nolan, saying: “It’s not the size of your jaws but your vote that gives you the right to speak for the people.”

The leader’s speech began by outlining the DUP’s dominance in Northern Ireland politics and its “rise from the ashes” after being punished by the electorate for entering government with Sinn Féin. Robinson lamented the direct rule days when “every aspect of British life in our province was attacked and diluted.”

He took credit for a long list of successes e.g. investment from major global companies, getting onto the international map for film, free public transport for pensioners, frozen student fees and the Presbyterian Mutual Society package. An embarrassed party member worried: “Why is no one cheering?”

Shared education, endorsed by Robinson in October 2010 must be “advanced”, he told delegates. It wasn’t until he outlined the party’s aim to introduce tougher sentences for attacks on pensioners that the party faithful applauded. A DUP Assembly motion on mandatory sentences for those attackers was narrowly passed by 44 to 41 on 29 November with David Ford saying sentencing should be at the discretion of the judiciary.

The next roar of approval came when he dismissed all-island institutions (despite DUP participation) and pointed to the fact that Stormont has “a unionist majority, enacts British laws … and [has] the union flag’s red, white and blue flying from the flagstaff.” This contrasted with the stony silence in the hall as Robinson outlined that as “the first generation of peacetime unionists”, they should respect the province’s “varied and colourful traditions”.

Making a choice

Robinson emphasised the party’s “unalterable” core values and beliefs. It is hard to judge the reaction of party members, who are notoriously kept in line by the disciplined party, but their impromptu rendition of ‘We shall not be moved’ again contrasted with the leader’s message. Gregory Campbell commented that the membership would follow the leader as long as the core values are protected.

In setting out a pathway for the next 100 years, getting the votes of Catholics who are happy with the current situation in Northern Ireland will be essential; 52 per cent of Catholics in the 2010 Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey wanted Northern Ireland to stay in the UK. Naomi Long’s success in East Belfast and Alliance’s potential to take more middle class unionist votes is the likely impetus for the DUP’s new image. The strategy also compares with Sinn Féin’s attempts to ‘reach out’ to unionists.

An unexpected quote from Bobby Sands that the IRA’s revenge “would be the laughter of our children” was described as “narrow” and Robinson’s altered version was: “The DUP’s ambition will be the laughter of all our children, playing and living together.”

When asked about his reaction to the party’s new stance, Mervyn Storey told agendaNi that it reflected the reality in society.

“We can make a choice; we can either continue to live in a divided society which brought us much of the pain, anguish and sorrow that we’ve had for 40 years or we can face up to certain realities,” he said.

He sees “a healthy inter-dependence” in the province “that [is not] a threat to people who have particular values, especially if those values can be cherished and shared.”

While the DUP are the largest party, Storey conceded that some of the extra votes may have come from unionists intent on keeping Sinn Féin away from the first ministry. “That is a reflection of trust because they had other unionist parties that they could have endorsed to take that position,” he argued.

The DUP’s priorities for 2012 are “delivery on manifesto commitments, delivery on our promises to the people and delivery of a stable and long-lasting union,” according to Ian Paisley Junior. He has dismissed the Assembly as being “more like a grand county council rather than a regional parliament” (agendaNi, Issue 47, page 124). When asked what the DUP can do to improve this, he replied: “As the largest party we cannot afford to be complacent. We are in a position to deliver our mandate and must be efficient on all levels: council, constituency, Assembly and Westminster.”

On day-to-day working with Sinn Féin, Paisley Junior stated: “That’s the arrangement we are in; coalitions are never easy.”

Former prisoner Conor Murphy said Sammy Wilson’s comments were “a disgrace” and reflected badly on the Executive as a whole, while Belfast’s Lord Mayor Niall Ó Donnghaile said the comments were “offensive, hurtful and ran contrary to the theme of the DUP conference.”

The party’s questionable commitment to “one, united, shared and peaceful society” was one story from the conference but its attacks on other parties and the media were divisive and opposite to a shared future.

Ulster Unionists are weighing up their place in the political system and considering how to reverse a long decline.

Peter Cheney reports on the conference.

‘Common Sense Government’ seemed the right slogan for a longstanding conservative party, again settling into the Executive but several Ulster Unionists see their future outside that fold. Around 400 UUP delegates gathered for the party’s annual conference in Armagh on 22 October.

For now, though, the party is focused on improving government from within. Most parties want smaller government and have gone into detail about what the revised departments should do. Tom Elliott, though, proposed how and when to achieve it: a cut from 12 to eight when justice devolution is reviewed next year. It is the most obvious opportunity for change before the next Assembly election.

Turning to his own party’s performance, Elliott warned that voters needed reasons to vote UUP, one being the Executive’s delay and apathy. A “sky high lack of interest in politics” was a danger for all parties and Northern Ireland was ruled through a “flawed democratic process”.

The fact of power-sharing and the Assembly’s survival for four years was not good enough: “How long do we keep telling people that it’s better than what we used to have?” In a neighbourly gesture, Mary McAleese was praised for her contribution to peace. Pressure to leave government is growing but the status quo has allowed Danny Kennedy to scrap car parking charges in town centres and influence the future of transport and water policy.

Ulster Unionists are keen to restate their role in leading unionism through the Troubles and taking risks for the peace process. The House of Commons’ failure to invite the party to a commemoration for murdered MP Robert Bradford (mistakenly described as a DUP member) caused hurt. Some inquiries into the Troubles are seen as rewriting history with a bias against the state.

Links

History is always in the air at UUP conferences but it appeared that members were becoming more realistic about the party’s future prospects. It’s always tempting for them to look back to the days when the UUP was dominant (which ended six years ago) but it now finds itself in a much weaker position. The gap before the European Parliament in June 2014 gives the party a breathing space to consider two key questions: how to link with the Tories and whether to go into opposition.

Owen Paterson’s appearance highlighted the UUP’s failed pact and continuing partnership with the Conservatives. Members appreciated Westminster’s support for Presbyterian Mutual Society members and tax-cutting plans for corporation tax and air passenger duty. Elliott had campaigned on “no more UCUNFs” but clearly wants to have some Tory link e.g. within a centre-right federation if the Scottish Conservatives become more independent.

Too close a link with the Conservatives at a time of spending cuts will be politically costly. However, the more embarrassing relationship is between its members and the Orange Order. Party Chairman David Campbell was “ashamed and disgusted” at a Belfast lodge’s protest over Elliott and Kennedy attending Constable Ronan Kerr’s funeral and robustly pointed out how previous leaders showed the same example. Mike Nesbitt put in a strong performance in the economy debate. Fellow former journalist Fearghal McKinney demonstrated the “trust” and “hand of friendship” between the UUP and SDLP by chairing a panel discussion. Both parties are going through a considerable amount of soul-searching about their future but the UUP is in a more stable position under Elliott’s leadership.

The conventional media story is one of continual UUP decline. At Assembly level, the party has shed almost half its voters since the Belfast Agreement (a net loss of 84,694 first preferences). It lost two Assembly seats and 15,614 votes between 2007 and 2011, and 16 councillors and 25,113 votes between 2005 and 2011. The Westminster collapse is well-known.

However, that is not the full picture as the table below shows.

Tom Elliott has not recovered ground but the decline has apparently stopped, with a support base fluctuating between 80,000 and 100,000 voters. The difference between the council and Assembly figures may be due to supporters voting DUP to stop Martin McGuinness becoming First Minister.

The UUP is winning in the west and south but losing the east of the province. It’s ahead of the DUP in five councils (Armagh, Banbridge, Fermanagh, Newry and Mourne, Moyle) and in the Newry and Armagh constituency.

Those successes need to be weighed against dismal performances in greater Belfast where most Ulster Unionists came in on the late counts, well behind Alliance. The UUP’s centre of gravity is well outside the capital (perhaps near the Cathedral City) and, overall, it remains a long distance behind the DUP.

Opposition in practice

Accountability at Stormont can improve if a proper opposition is provided, according to speakers at a Young Unionist fringe meeting. Essentially, they wanted to see the UUP acting as a clear alternative to the DUP rather than sharing collective blame for bad Executive decisions.

Michael Shilliday explained that speaking time and finances for researchers depended on the number of MLAs per party, not a place in government. An official opposition would require specific funding but “democracy costs money”.

Ed Miliband’s office is allocated £700,699 for 2011-2012.

The UUP would obviously lose access to Executive papers but, under the Westminster system, the official opposition is sent an advanced copy of ministerial statements. Sceptics fear that leaving the Executive will give the DUP and Sinn Féin a free hand. Shilliday said that the UK Supreme Court could strike down legislation that ran against British liberal democracy.

Reg Empey noted that all parties had to have “a hand on the wheel” at the time of the Agreement but no-one envisaged that those structures would last forever.

The pro-opposition lobby hopes to persuade grassroots members and is prepared for a detailed debate. It also wants cross-community support for change, and sees Alex Attwood and Conall McDevitt as the most supportive SDLP members.