Sir, – I read with interest Newton Emerson’s article “What exactly is the DUP fighting for?” (Opinion & Analysis, May 3rd) and in particular his question: “Is Arlene Foster seeking to keep NI as exclusively British for as long as possible for as long as she can?”
I think the answer to the question has to be yes, for why would a unionist wish for anything else? However, I think the term “exclusively British” might be examined.
As a Northerner, resident in Dublin for over 30 years, I do not think there is any widespread comprehension of the unionist position.
The usual Southern analyses of unionism vary from seeing it grounded in fear, or in religious bigotry, or, a recent wondrous novelty, in a psychological analysis (Denis Bradley, May 1st) of unionism as a person in need of therapy over a united Ireland.
At present, Northern Ireland is exclusively represented in person in the House of Commons by the 10 DUP MPs and one other independent unionist MP.
The DUP sits with other unionists, the Conservative party, and together they constitute a majority in the House of Commons. In Northern Ireland, local government is administered by locally elected councils, some of which have a unionist majority and others not. In addition, the Northern Ireland Assembly is not in operation. I suggest this is a situation entirely acceptable to the sort of broad unionist opinion that exists outside what your columnist describes as middle-class Belfast.
The present state of affairs is not unlike the electoral arrangements for Ireland in 1904/05. This is why it is acceptable to unionists. It may be recalled that this period saw the end of what historians have called “constructive unionism”, an attempt to stave off Home Rule by a devolution mechanism involving two councils in Dublin; one to be a legislative body consisting of all Irish MPs and some Irish peers. That is, there would not, per se, be a parliament for Ireland in Dublin, but the unionists would be in a minority on the legislative body, even with the representative peers. While there are some farcical elements in what developed, including that perennial, the lost or unread letter, I think it is fair to say that this initiative by unionist grandees, such as Lord Dunraven, was thoroughly trashed by the unionist MPs and movement in Ulster. The Ulster Unionist Council was established in 1904 in part as a reaction to these initiatives.
Here, then, is a very old and a very hard question: why would unionism give up its representation in a parliament in which, at times, it forms part of the support for the majority of the house, and in other times forms part of the support of the main opposition, in what is the key legislative body of the United Kingdom? – Yours, etc,
JOHN EVANS,
Fairview,
Dublin 3.
Sir, – Denis Bradley, despite being a reasonable nationalist, indicated in his opinion piece just how difficult the unification of Ireland, many of us desire, is going to be (“If unionism was a person it would be in therapy over a united Ireland”, Opinion & Analysis, May 1st).
His proposal for unionists to break “free of the past, no longer hostage to its restrictions, is where the healing begins” places the onus on one side to become involved in healing. The DUP is one extreme in maintaining community division in Northern Ireland – the other is Sinn Féin which supports the sectarian headcount analysis which, surprisingly, Bradley blithely contends will inevitably result in a united Ireland.
This is some assumption, especially with the complication of Brexit, that every non-unionist will vote for a united Ireland in a border poll. Economics will always influence voting decisions and, even without the complication of Brexit, there is no certainty that the Republic will vote for a united Ireland with consequent call on the support of taxpayers.
Denis Bradley could have suggested that Sinn Féin, even temporarily, should stand by the Remain-voting citizens of Northern Ireland, take their seats in Westminster, and help to influence the Brexit outcome in the interests of all of the citizens of Northern Ireland.
He expects unionists to break with the past but, by omission, exonerates others from being equally willing to do so. – Yours, etc,
DECLAN MacPARTLIN,
Enniscorthy,
Co Wexford.