Yes, I did … No, you didn’t …

Schoolyard debating stuff, which most parents and teachers are familiar with. ‘Stop that, you boys’, they say, hoping that puberty will kick in soon.

But what can be done if the children are – shall we say – somewhat over the normal age of puberty?

Today’s instalment of primary school squabbling is brought to you by none other than James Allister QC:

"I wish to answer the pernicious falsehood, being peddled by anti-TUV factions, that my party contributed in any way to the failure to win back Fermanagh & South Tyrone … “

STOP THAT, CHILDREN!

Now, Arlene, say sorry to Jim. Jim, stop sniggering and tell Arlene you accept her apology. Now go and play nicely. I don’t want to have to talk to you about this again.

Ah, if only adult politics was as mature as the playground.

How the TUV gifted victory to Gildernew

This is it, according to the DUP:

In order to cut through TUV spin and deceit, here are the facts about Michelle Gildernew’s 4-vote win in Fermanagh and South Tyrone:

1. Michelle Gildernew was returned by four votes as the Member of Parliament for Fermanagh and South Tyrone.

2. A greater number than four people spoiled their ballots in that election by writing “TUV” across them.

3. TUV supporters ensured Michelle Gildernew was re-elected.

4. That was the contribution TUV made to the Unionist unity and co-operation in the recent General Election.

Presumably the DUP has some evidence of the spoiled ballot papers through its tallymen. But since there were 263 'invalid votes' in the constituency, then there must be quite a few other possible culprits according to the DUP. Maybe there were even "a greater number than four people" who scrawled 'DUP' or 'UUP' or 'Conservative' on their ballots, in protest at the lack of any of these options in the election.

The public should be told - maybe the DUP tallymen could release their report?

The DUP's obsession with trying to blame the TUV looks quite odd. It could have completely contrary effects – either by hammering a large nail into the TUV's coffin, or by providing the TUV with the oxygen of publicity. Whatever the DUP is trying to do is not immediately obvious – perhaps developments will point towards some actual point to their current tantrum.

Curious and curiouser

Arlene Foster, DUP MLA for Fermanagh and South Tyrone, today took an unsolicited swipe at the TUV (and why not, because it’s always easier to kick someone when they’re down). But her attack on the TUV included the following curious accusation:

Grassroots Unionists are crying out for closer co-operation within Unionism. Jim Allister represents the divisions of the past. Grassroots Unionists want to see Northern Ireland moving forward. TUV wants to take us back to being sidelined and ignored in our own country. TUV supporters handed Fermanagh and South Tyrone to Gildernew: that was the TUV contribution to Unionism in the recent election.

Given that the TUV did not stand in FST – and explicitly called on unionists to unite where seats were closely contested with nationalism – this is a strange claim.

How precisely could ‘TUV supporters have handed Fermanagh and South Tyrone to Gildernew’? It can be fairly safely assumed that none voted for her, so Foster must be alluding to the question of turnout. The only possible explanation of her remark is that she believes that TUV supporters stayed at home, rather than vote for the ‘unionist unity’ candidate – who was not even a member of Foster’s own party.

But turnout was quite low by FST standards across the board. If TUV supporters stayed at home, then so did DUP and UUP supporters – so how can Foster accuse the TUV of particular complicity?

Foster may, of course, simply be trying to distract attention from her own party’s responsibility for the lower turnout. But pushing for a ‘unionist unity’ candidate Foster, Elliott, and both of their parties, ensured that some unionists felt uncomfortable voting for the chosen ‘unionist champion’. For some, he came too close to being seen as a sectarian ‘Protestant’ champion. Of course, it is very likely that Michelle Gildernew would have won in any event, had there been competition on the unionist side. But having conspired to pull a ‘stroke’ – and failed – Foster may be looking for a weak scapegoat.

The TUV have been quick to respond to Foster, saying that:

The facts are clear. We were the first party to call for non-party candidate.
Indeed, at that point Mrs Foster was still strutting around promoting herself as the DUP candidate. TUV kept out of the contest in Fermanagh and South Tyrone and called repeatedly for our supporters to vote for the unity candidate. Mrs Foster’s dishonest attempt to smear TUV, therefore, does not stand up to scrutiny.

It looks as if the intra-unionist bitterness and rivalry will continue for the time being – and probably as far as next year’s two major elections. This is, as has frequently been noted, a gift to nationalism – so this blog is pleased to note the resumption of normal relations between the DUP and the TUV.

What if the Alternative Vote system had been used?

A psephological 'what if' – 'what if' the Alternative Vote system had been used on May 6? Would the result have been significantly different?

AV is basically the well-known PR-STV system, but operated in single-member constituencies. If no candidate is the first preference of a majority of voters, the candidate with the fewest number of first preference rankings is eliminated and that candidate's ballots are redistributed at full value to the remaining candidates according to the next ranking on each ballot. This process is repeated until one candidate obtains a majority of votes among candidates not eliminated.

Obviously this particular 'what if' requires a certain number of assumptions to be made, but luckily Northern Ireland has a rich seam of previous elections – using PR-STV – to mine. So, for simplicity, the approximate transfer behaviour of the 2007 Assembly elections will be used. The TUV, of course, did not exist in 2007, but the transfer behaviour of like-minded unionists will suffice as a proxy.

West of the Bann Sinn Féin and SDLP transfers will go to each other – but only 60% of them – the rest do not transfer. East of the Bann (or, more accurately, in Greater Belfast), SDLP transfers will be split 50/50 between Sinn Féin and Alliance. Unionist transfers will remain within the family, but TUV votes will not all transfer – perhaps only 80% of them. Alliance transfers will be split 50/50 between the SDLPO and the UUP.

In addition, of course, account must be taken for the tactical voting in 2010, where voters had basically one chance to make it count, and may thus have already voted for their 'second, but most realistic, preference', rather than their real first preference (if he/she was perceived to have no chance of being elected).

With these brave assumptions, it is possible to assess the AV winners of each of the 18 seats as follows:

• West Belfast, Mid Ulster and North Down would be won outright, as their winner received over 50% of the 'First Preferences'.
• East Belfast: it is likely here that the Alliance first preference vote would not have been so high. The nationalist candidates would be quickly eliminated and their votes transferred to Long, but would make only a marginal difference. Vance's TUV votes would have gone in the opposite direction, adding slightly to both Ringland's and Robinson's total. The question of who would next be eliminated decides this contest. Probably all three – UCUNF, Alliance and DUP – are within a short distance of each other. If, at this point, Ringland is ahead of Long, then she is eliminated and many of her votes transfer to Ringland, giving him the winning margin. But if Long is ahead of Ringland, then it is the UCUNF votes that are transferred – and they may tend to stay in the unionist family, giving the victory – a narrow one – to Robinson.
• North Belfast: this would be close. All candidates except Dodds and Kelly would be eliminated – giving Dodds the UCUNF transfers, and Kelly some of the Alliance and SDLP transfers. But probably not enough, so Dodds would win.
• South Belfast: the Green and Alliance transfers would have seen McDonnell over the line without much difficulty.
• East Antrim: when the nationalists are eliminated a sufficient number of their votes would not transfer, and with a small number of transfers from the TUV Sammy Wilson would easily win.
• East Derry: Alliance and the TUV would be eliminated first, giving a small boost to the DUP and the SDLP. The SDLP would probably be next to go, giving Sinn Féin a boost, and in much smaller numbers, the UUP. Last to be eliminated, though, is UCUNF, who carry Campbell over the winning line.
• Fermanagh and South Tyrone; the SDLP transfers would see Michelle Gildernew safely home.
• Foyle: there was some unionist tactical voting here, but this merely pre-empted the transfers that would have happened under AV. Durkan would get in safely with unionist transfers.
• Lagan Valley: Donaldson is so close that the non-transferable votes after the elimination of Sinn Féin, the SDLP and the TUV would carry him mathematically over 50%.
• Newry and Armagh: this offers the interesting possibility of serious unionist tactical voting. Conor Murphy got 42% of the 'first preferences', but it would take 54% of all the other votes to transfer to the SDLP for Bradley would take the seat. The probability of such coordination amongst unionists is fairly small, though, so Murphy would probably retain the seat.
• North Antrim: nobody was within an ass's roar of Paisley, so he would take the seat with ease.
• South Antrim: the Alliance votes and some of the SDLP votes would probably transfer to Empey, and there is little chance that Sinn Féin transfers would go to McCrea. McCrea would get some TUV transfers, but there weren't enough TUV votes to change the outcome. Empey would have won.
• South Down: as in Foyle, Ritchie's 2010 vote was swollen by unionist tactical votes. But these would happen under AV, just one step later.
• Strangford: although Shannon may not have gotten many transfers, the non-transferrable votes from Sinn Féin and SDLP eliminations would see him safely over 50% of those remaining.
• Upper Bann: Alliance and SDLP elimination would take Sinn Féin beyond the UCUNF (and maybe DUP) candidates, but the elimination of UCUNF would have brought the DUP's Simpson out ahead.
• West Tyrone: Sinn Féin would be over 50% with the help of only a few transfers. It would have taken over 92% of all of the other transfers to have gone to the SDLP for them to have beaten Doherty, and that is nigh-on impossible.

So AV would, in fact, have changed relatively little. Peter Robinson probably would have retained his seat, and Empey would have gained one. That, of course, is just for the 2010 election – in the future Northern Ireland's relatively sophisticated electorate may learn to play the system better, and use their transfers more decisively. Perhaps in 2015 the electorate will get a real chance to try.

Licking their wounds

The silence from the TUV since May 6 has been deafening.

The resounding rejection of the party by Northern Ireland's voters appears to have stunned them. They had been mislead by a small number of earlier contests to believe that they would attract about a quarter of the unionist vote – with luck and a split vote this might have even delivered them a seat or two. But the main intention, presumably, was to put in a strong performance that would position them for next year's Assembly elections.

But the paltry 26,300 votes that they received (admittedly in only 10 constituencies), puts them in a pretty poor position.

The TUV's score of the vote in the constituencies that they contested ranged from 3.5% to 16.8%, with an average of 7.3%. This is simply not enough to win seats in the Assembly. On the basis of the Westminster results the TUV would win one Assembly seat – Jim Allister in North Antrim. His hope of forming a block to bring down power-sharing would fail.

In the TUV's 10 contested seats the DUP won 49.2% of the unionist vote. Even UCUNF won 29.6%. The TUV won 11.6% of the unionist vote! Unionists rejected dissident unionism, and voted for participation in the power-sharing Executive.

So where does this leave the TUV?

Politics is ruthless, and failed parties rarely last long. The TUV has failed – twice now. Allister lost his European soap-box in 2009, and his party failed to make much impact in 2010. Will the TUV bother to wait around for its almost inevitable humiliation in 2011? Will it continue to attract members, supporters, or donators?

These are obviously the thoughts that are going through the heads of the TUVs band of loyal supporters. But on their own website there is no evidence of any activity whatsoever, and the TUV's Duracell bunny, David Vance – so willing to blog on anything and everything – seems to have little at all to say on the future of his brand of unionism, apart from trying to fold it into the other brands that he was so gleefully criticising before the election!

Is this the last hurrah for rejectionist unionism, or will it return like a zombie to scare us all again next year, and the year after that, and on and on until it finally gets the point?

Proportional representation

One of the unexpected outcomes of last week’s Westminster election in Northern Ireland was that the result was extremely proportional. In general the first-past-the-post system does not lend itself well to proportionality, but by chance the results last week were very close to what would be achieved by a PR system – as far as the major blocks are concerned, at any rate.

• Unionism won 50.5% of the vote, and won 50% of the seats.
• Nationalism won 42.0% of the vote, and won 44.4% of the seats.
• The Alliance party won 6.3% of the vote, and won 5.6% of the seats.

Within the blocks there was some proportionality too – Sinn Féin, with 60% of the nationalist vote, won 62.5% of the nationalist seats – the SDLP with 40% of the nationalist vote won 37.5% of the nationalist seats.

Only within unionism was there a distinct lack of proportionality. The DUP, with 50% of the unionist vote, won 8 out of its 9 seats (89%). The UCUNF, with 30% of the unionist vote, won precisely nothing. The ninth unionist seat was won, of course, by Sylvia Hermon, who won 6.2% of the unionist vote – but this was concentrated in one constituency.

The lesson appears to be that chance can also lead to a proportional outcome, but will not necessarily do so.

Did Alliance have a good election?

The celebrations amongst Alliance party supporters last Friday must have been legendary – to have won a Westminster seat at all was nigh-on unthinkable, but to take the seat of the King of Unionism himself, Peter Robinson, made the victory all the more dramatic.

Overall Alliance won 6.3% of the vote – respectable, but not earth-shattering. And most of their votes were won in only a few constituencies: East Belfast alone accounted for over 30% of its total. Seven seats of the greater Belfast area – East and South Belfast, East and South Antrim, North Down, Lagan Valley and Strangford – accounted for almost 77% of the party’s vote – and were the only seats in which Alliance actually retained its deposit. In the seats in the west and south of Northern Ireland – Fermanagh and South Tyrone, Foyle, Mid Ulster, Newry and Armagh, South Down and West Tyrone – Alliance won a total of 3,021 votes (7.1% of its total), and, of course, lost its deposit in each of these seats.

The election showed that Alliance is a sub-regional party. Where some parties limit themselves to the small pond of Northern Ireland (the DUP and the SDLP), and others are by historical fact wider in scope (Sinn Féin), or try to be (the UUP), all of these four are, at least, represented in all corners of Northern Ireland. The Alliance Party, though, is a party of only a part of Northern Ireland – a region within a region. Its existence outside Greater Belfast is paltry, and even its candidates in some ‘southern and western’ constituencies were blow-ins from Alliance’s East Ulster heartland.

Alliance is a party of a particular group – middle-class and suburban, both Protestant and Catholic, in the Greater Belfast area. Its failure to appeal either to working class people in Belfast or elsewhere, or to rural and small-town people, is an indication of its own limitations. As a party of the Belfast middle-class – probably primarily those employed in the public sector – it cannot truly understand the needs or wants of those who are not well-employed, pensionable, educated and urbane. In a large country such a self-limiting party may carve out a niche, but in a small region like Northern Ireland – and restricted to an even smaller part of that region by its own lack of appeal – the party will have to struggle to remain relevant.

Euphoria over Naomi Long’s historic victory in East Belfast should not blind the Alliance Party to its extremely marginal existence. It is a single-city party, and such narrow political vehicles do not often last long. It lost its deposit in 11 of the 18 seats! A failure to build upon Long’s success – by geographical and political broadening – may consign Alliance to history’s dustbin just when its members think that they’re finally arrived.

The TUV in 2011

In June 2009 Jim Allister revealed his cunning plan for world domination – well, Assembly domination anyway, but to flat-earth unionists the world probably only extends to six counties anyway.

Allister revealed that:

“... he hopes to topple power-sharing by using a boycott plan that would likely see a nationalist majority in a Sinn Fein-led Executive. This would be intolerable to most unionists, and might scupper the prospect of republican-led rule of the Province”.

Depending on how many MLAs Mr Allister enters Stormont with, any boycott by him could mean unionists are in the minority at the Cabinet table.

He said “his party would field candidates in every seat at the 2011 Assembly election, hoping to take enough seats to qualify for at least one Executive seat”.

In a situation where Martin McGuinness would probably be First Minister and unionists a minority in the Executive, Allister hopes that the entire Executive would "implode" because it would be unrepresentative of unionism.

Cunning, no?

However, Allister’s hopes for Executive implosion in 2011 may have taken a small knock last week. His party stood in 10 seats, and received less than an Assembly quota in nine of them. Only Allister himself in North Antrim would have been elected for certain if last week’s election had been an Assembly election. Obviously transfers are important, but since the TUV are sworn enemies of the DUP, and hardly best buddies with the UUP, it is hard to see where their transfers might come from.

The TUV would have an outside chance of taking Assembly seats in East Derry and Lagan Valley, but beyond these three seats, their chances are remote. Even with three Assembly seats Allister and the TUV would neither win an Executive seat nor be able to ‘implode’ the Executive. 2010 showed quite clearly that his appeal to unionists is limited, and he is increasingly only picking up support from unionism’s extremist fringe – the hoped-for defections from the DUP simply haven’t happened, and the DUP (apart from Robinson) came out of the Westminster election in fairly good shape, so a melt-down between now and the Assembly election is unlikely.

As the Assembly election approaches, and as it becomes clearer that the TUV is only a fringe party, its appeal may diminish further, perhaps leaving Allister all alone in opposition in the Assembly.

Borrowed seats

One of the things that annoyed unionists about Alasdair McDonnell’s victory in South Belfast in the 2005 Westminster election was that they felt that he did not deserve to have won the seat, as the total nationalist vote (41.3% of the votes cast) was less than the total unionist vote (51.1%). McDonnell has ‘stolen’ a unionist seat, in the minds of unionists. Well last week they were forced to admit that he did actually have a right to the seat, and that it is no longer a ‘unionist’ seat. McDonnell – the sole nationalist candidate – won 41.0% of the vote, which was almost the same as the combined unionist vote, but actually exceeded it by 16 votes. In South Belfast now nationalists outnumber unionists.

In East Belfast, though, Naomi Long’s shock defeat of Peter Robinson was more of a theft in unionist terms. Although Long got 37.2% of the vote, the combined unionist vote was 59.3% - but it was split three ways and Long slipped in through the middle. There can be little doubt, though, that East Belfast is a majority-unionist seat, and the Alliance Party has just borrowed it. They will have an incumbency advantage next time, but if unionism gets its act together it will get East Belfast back.

No other seats were ‘borrowed’ last week – though Fermanagh and South Tyrone came close. The defeat of unionist-unity candidate Rodney Connor, and continuing demographic changes, make it unlikely that unionism will ever feel that this is a seat that they can steal again, and it may become more like West Tyrone or Mid Ulster, where several unionist parties compete half-heartedly in the knowledge that none of them will actually win. Last Thursday may have represented the end of any unionist hopes west of the Bann.

North Belfast in Sinn Féin’s sights

After Thursday’s Westminster election it is clear that Sinn Féin’s N° 1 target next time must be North Belfast. This blog remarked, almost 18 months ago that:

“Dodds [… ] could lose his seat, if not at the next election, then at the one that follows it”

Thursday was the ‘next election’ and Dodds held his seat, but not easily. True, he received 14,812 votes (40.0%) to Gerry Kelly’s 12,588 (34.0%). But the gap between the two ‘blocks’ – unionist and nationalist – narrowed to little more than a margin of error:


It appears that Dodds had been kept afloat in 2001 and 2005 by the absence (actual in 2001, virtual in 2005) of the Alliance Party. But now that they have returned to life in the constituency unionism’s decline has become clearer. With only 47.7% of the vote unionism is perilously close to being overtaken by nationalism, which is now on 46.3%. Although Fermanagh and South Tyrone is a poor role model for urban North Belfast, the ability of nationalists to unite around a single candidate if they feel that a seat should be theirs should not be underestimated.

Unionism’s problem in North Belfast – and thus Dodds’ problem – is that the Protestant population is older, and thus prone to higher ‘natural decrease’ (i.e. deaths) than the Catholic population. As this blog has pointed out before, in North Belfast (as it was in 2001, before the boundary changes) over 70% of old people were Protestant, whereas that religious group falls to around 40% amongst young people. Amongst the young – who are now starting to vote – Catholics comprise over 50% of the cohort.

The turnout rate increased significantly in 2010, to 56.5%, from the 45.6% recorded on 2005. Both blocks benefited – but nationalism benefited far more than unionism, adding 3,435 votes while unionism added only 1,560. Whether this implies a greater surge of enthusiasm amongst nationalists than amongst unionists, or simply a relatively greater number of potential nationalist voters, we cannot yet say. Perhaps unionists were also motivated, but too many of their habitual voters were simply dead. Or perhaps the nationalist parties – in particular Sinn Féin – were simply more determined to get their voters registered and get them to the polling booths.

If the votes received by the two blocks are looked at as proportions of the electorate, we can see the following:


Apart from in 2005, when turnout appears to have been abnormally high, the pattern is one of nationalist stability, with the two parties receiving a vote equivalent to around 23-26% of the electorate. The (linear) trend is going up, however. But for unionism, if 2001 is excluded as well, the trend is clearly downward, and at a fast rate.

Unionism is still slightly ahead in North Belfast, but on the basis of the demographic profile of the constituency, and the trends in voting patterns, 2010 represents probably the last time it will be ahead. In another 4 or 5 years this will be a nationalist plurality seat (if not an outright majority seat). Whether nationalism comes together successfully, as in FST, to claim its prize we will have to wait and see. Next year’s Assembly elections will give another opportunity to examine the evolution in this constituency.

No Robinson, No Connor, No UCUNF

All in all, today has been quite a positive one for northern nationalism.

Peter Robinson, leader of the DUP and successor to Paisley, has been defeated in the constituency that he virtually owned for over 30 years.

Rodney Connor, the 'non sectarian' unionist unity candidate in Fermanagh and South Tyrone, has been defeated despite a split nationalist vote.

UCUNF, the bastard child of the English Tories and their UUP lap-dogs, has been left bereft of seats, and with a very uncertain future.

Nationalism made no seat gains – and none were realistic – but thanks to 4 votes in Fermanagh and South Tyrone it has not lost any seats either.

Unionism, on the other hand, lost one seat, dropping from 10 to 9. For the first time ever, only half of Northern Ireland's MPs are unionists.

The proportion of the vote that went to nationalist candidates remained virtually unchanged – 42% against 41.8% five years ago. Despite the habitual hostility of the media, Sinn Féin's share of the vote has again increased, from 24.3% in 2005 to 25.5% in 2010 – making Sinn Féin Northern Ireland's largest party again.

Unionism's share dropped by 1.4%, though, from 51.9% to 50.5%. One more election, perhaps, and unionism will be only a plurality.

This election has been a stressful one, and one with many unknown elements. But at the end of the day nationalism has emerged unscathed, while unionism in all of its guises – DUP, UUP/UCUNF, TUV and independent unionist, has emerged battered and diminished. Good.

UCUNF, you go …

In the Westminster elections in 2005 the two parties that make up UCUNF received 130,032 votes – 18.1% of the total.

In 2010 the vote for combined entity of UCUNF dropped to 102,361 votes – or 16.3% of the total.

Of course, the 2005 total includes both Sylvia Hermon in North Down and Tom Elliott in Fermanagh and South Tyrone – neither of whom counted towards UCUNF's total this time around.

However, UCUNF did have a candidate in North Down yesterday – the awful Ian Parsley – and campaigned vigorously against Hermon, so they cannot exclude that constituency from a comparison.

If FST is removed from the 2005 figures, the combined UUP/Tory vote was 121,163 – 16.9% of the total poll.

So it seems that the non-merger of the UUP and the Tories – even at a time of Tory advance in Britain, and distaste with the DUP's Robinson family – has actually gone backwards in both absolute and relative terms; from 121,163 votes (16.9%) in 2005 to 102,361 votes (16.3%) in 2010.

What a failure! The inability of UCUNF to win any seats is perhaps indicative of the whole project. It managed to lose its sole MP, and despite shackling itself to an ascendant British party it managed to lose votes. It proclaimed non-sectarianism and then entered a nakedly sectarian pact in Fermanagh and South Tyrone – thereby losing the support of some of its most capable supporters.

It's time to quietly drop the whole project. UCUNF is a dead party walking.

Tactical voting – Part 2 – South Down

Continuing the theme of tactical voting: South Down.

If the share of the vote that the unionists and the SDLP received in 2007 were applied to the voting turnout of 2010, unionism should have got 13,326 votes (or 31.8% of the votes cast) – but yesterday it got only 8,244. The SDLP, on the other hand, should have got 13,358 (or 31.4% of the total) – but they actually got 20,648 votes (48.5%).

So the unionist total decreased by 5,282, and the SDLP total increased by 7,290. It seems likely that over 5,000 of the SDLP's extra votes were unionists trying to thwart a Sinn Féin victory.

But who were the other 2,000 votes that the SDLP received over its 'natural' vote? Well, a few hundred may have been people who had voted Green in 2007, but it seems likely that even some Sinn Féin voters switched to the SDLP. The Sinn Féin vote yesterday was actually 1,898 votes lower than in 2007. So South Down may have seen a strange combination – unionists, ex-Greens and ex-Sinn Féin voters combining to thwart Caitriona Ruane - this may be a report-card from the voters on Ruane's performance as Minister of Education.

Tactical voting – Part 1 – Foyle

If the results of yesterday's Westminster election are compared with the most recent Assembly election in 2007, it is possible to estimate the scale of tactical voting. In 2007 it is unlikely that many voters voted tactically with their first preferences, as in a PR-STV election this is unnecessary. So the 2007 results can be seen as a close approximation to the voters' 'true' political adherence. In 2010, though, because of the 'winner-takes-all' nature of the voting system used, there is greater incentive on voters to vote tactically where they know their preferred candidate has no hope, and where they have a strong preference (positive or negative) between the candidates with a realistic chance.

This blog will look at several of the constituencies where tactical voting probably happened, to estimate its extent. Firstly, Foyle.

In 2007, on a 62.7% turnout, unionism got 8,788 votes (21.4%).

In 2010, on a 57.5% turnout, unionism got 5,710 votes (15.1%). If the 2007 turnout had been repeated, this would have been 6,222, so 512 unionists failed to vote due to apathy or demographic decline. But another 2,566 disappeared from the 2007 unionist total (8788-6222) – where did they go?

The clear beneficiary seems to have been the SDLP. In 2007 it got 15,182 votes (37.0%), on a turnout of 62.7%, equivalent to 13,930 votes on a turnout of 57.5% as yesterday.

But the SDLP actually received 16,922 votes (44.7%) yesterday – almost 3,000 more than the 2007 experience would have led us to expect. The electorate in Foyle has slightly increased (though this was slowed down by the loss, due to boundary changes, of some territory to East Derry). The absence of Green and independent candidates yesterday may have slightly boosted the SDLP's total, but the inescapable conclusion is that, not for the first time, a large number of voters (around 2,500) who are unionists in local and Assembly elections voted tactically for Durkan yesterday.

Preferences, not predictions

This blog does not intend to try to predict the outcome of the Westminster election. Although in some constituencies the outcome seems almost certain, in others it is too close to call, or complicated by too many unknowns.

Instead, this blog will simply list the outcomes it would prefer – despite the obvious improbability of some of them. Where there is simply no chance of a nationalist victory, a choice must be made amongst the unionist candidates – the reasons for the choice will be explained below:

• Belfast East: Peter Robinson (DUP) – this blog sees less danger in the DUP than in UCUNF. The DUP as 'Ulster nationalists' are devolutionists, whereas UCUNF are increasingly integrationist.
• Belfast North: Gerry Kelly (Sinn Féin)
• Belfast South: Alasdair McDonnell (SDLP)
• Belfast West: Gerry Adams (Sinn Féin)
• East Antrim: Sammy Wilson (DUP), as above.
• East Derry: Gregory Campbell (DUP) is more likely, but a victory by Cathal O hOisin (Sinn Féin) would be nice if the unionist vote splits three ways.
• Fermanagh and South Tyrone: Michelle Gildernew (Sinn Féin)
• Foyle: Martina Anderson (Sinn Féin)
• Lagan Valley: Jeffrey Donaldson (DUP), as above.
• Mid Ulster: Martin McGuinness (Sinn Féin)
• Newry and Armagh: Conor Murphy (Sinn Féin)
• North Antrim: Jim Allister (TUV) – this blog has a soft spot for Allister – he has done a lot for nationalism, and if elected he would be a great help.
• North Down: Sylvia Hermon (Independent Unionist)
• South Antrim: This is a really tough one. This blog wants both main unionist challengers to lose. On balance, though, McCrea (DUP), extremist as he is, is a better friend of nationalism.
• South Down: Caitriona Ruane (Sinn Féin)
• Strangford: Jim Shannon (DUP), as above.
• Upper Bann: John O'Dowd (Sinn Féin)
• West Tyrone: Pat Doherty (Sinn Féin)

So, if this blog had its way, May 7 would see nine Sinn Féin MPs abstaining from Westminster – an almost impossible outcome, but one that would blow open the debate on Northern Ireland's constitutional future. The UCUNF, astute readers may have noticed, get not one seat in this blog's fantasy outcome – the sooner that non-party withers away the better.

Although the TUV is as far to the right within unionism as it is currently possible to go, this blog wishes them some limited success. Partly because they are useful splitters of the unionist vote, and partly because they would advertise to the world just how backward, bigoted and odd unionism can be. A TUV MP would show the world outside Northern Ireland just how strange unionism is, and drive a nice wedge between unionism and the metropolitan political elite in London.

The reality, of course, will be different to the list above – and this blog will be disappointed. There may be only four Sinn Féin MPs, there may be three SDLP MPs, there may be one or more UCUNF poodles sitting on Tory laps, and there may be no rabid TUV MP to scare the horses. But this blog will not be disheartened – the future is long and change comes dropping slow (apologies to WB Yeats).

A modern sophisticated society

Yesterday Kenneth Clarke, the shadow (or 'Tory party') business secretary, warning of the dangers of a hung parliament, told politics.co.uk:

"There would be really quite appalling consequences for this country if we are not able to produce a credible plan for dealing with the deficit and the debt. And that involves some very difficult decisions.

If I have to sit and talk to three or four other groups... in the end you can always do a deal with an Ulsterman, but it's not the way to run a modern sophisticated society in the grips of an economic crisis which weak government under Gordon Brown has already caused."

That pretty much sums up how the DUP and the UUP are seen by the British political elite.

Colonials, not 'us', not really British, and neither modern nor sophisticated.

That Belfast Telegraph poll

The Belfast Telegraph has put its flawed poll on the web. The poll, published today, but based on interviews conducted between 22-29 April, is out of date and thus quite pointless. Additionally the sample size was small – 3,200 people across Northern Ireland but less than 200 per constituency.

For what it's worth, though, the poll has the following 'results':

Overall – DUP 26%, Sinn Féin 25%, SDLP 17%, UCUNF 13%, Alliance 7%, independents 6%, TUV 5%, 1%.

Fermanagh and South Tyrone:

The Belfast Telegraph has Michelle Gildernew (44%) slightly ahead of Rodney Connor (43%).

Upper Bann:

John O'Dowd is within 4% of David Simpson.

South Down: Margaret Ritchie (43%) is well ahead of Caitriona Ruane (26%).

East Belfast: an easy win for Peter Robinson (42%) ahead of second-placed Ringland (26%).

North Antrim: Paisley 39%, Allister 31% …

South Antrim: McCrea 36%, Empey 30% …

North Down: an easy win for Sylvia Hermon.

The rest of the seats are reckoned to stay with their incumbents, without any shocks. In fact, if this poll is correct, all the seats will remain in their current party hands. However, to repeat – this is a week-old poll, and based on fairly loose methodology, so its resemblance to reality on Thursday is not likely to be perfect. It disagrees with the evidence of the bookies – who may also not be correct, but their 'results' are what people are prepared to stake their own money on!

Paddy Power shows opinion changes

Since last week Paddy Power has recorded some changes in the odds offered in a number of Northern Irish constituencies.

In North Antrim: last week the odds were DUP 4/11, and TUV 15/8; but today they are DUP 1/3 and TUV 2/1. This shows a slight swing in the mind of the punter further towards the DUP.

In South Antrim the odds have completely changed: last week the odds were DUP 5/6 and UCUNF 5/6. Now the odds are UCUNF 4/6 and DUP 11/10. In other words the punter now thinks that Reg Empey will win.

In North Belfast last week the punter thought that Nigel Dodds was a dead cert: the DUP was at 1/4, and Sinn Féin at 11/4. Now, although Dodds is still ahead, the odds have moved slightly towards Sinn Féin – the DUP are on 2/7, and Sinn Féin are on 5/2.

In South Down Margaret Ritchie has weaked a little: last week she was on 1/9, but now she is on 1/7. Caitriona Ruane has shortened from 5/1 to 4/1. It still leaves the SDLP are clear favourites, of course.

In Fermanagh and South Tyrone last week Rodney Connor was on 8/11, and Sinn Féin’s Michelle Gildernew was on evens. Today it’s Rodney Connor on 8/13 and
Michelle Gildernew on 6/5. That represents a strengthening of Connor’s position.

East Derry shows a different type of swing. A week ago the DUP was on 1/6, and the TUV on 10/1 (UCUNF was on 6/1). Today, though, the DUP has slipped to 2/9, and the TUV has strengthened to 7/1 (UCUNF remain on 6/1). So although Gregory Campbell is still very much the favourite, Willie Ross is catching up – but not fast enough.

In Strangford the DUP was on 4/7 a week ago, UCUNF was on 5/4 and the TUV was on 20/1. Today, though, the DUP is on 2/5, UCUNF is on 7/4, and the TUV is on 25/1. So the DUP is increasing its lead here.

Lastly, in Upper Bann, a week ago the DUP was on 4/7, UCUNF was on 9/4, and Sinn Féin was on 8/1. Now the DUP’s odds have slightly shortened to 8/13, UCUNF’s have shortened to 2/1, and Sinn Féin’s have shortened to 7/1. So although the DUP remain favourite to win, all three major parties see their odds improve slightly.

What does it all mean? In short, most seats will remain in their current hands, except for:

• South Antrim – Empey to win
• FST – Connor to win

But several other constituencies become closer and thus more interesting to watch – including North Belfast, South Down, East Derry and Upper Bann. If there are to be surprises, they should be in one or other of these constituencies.

Swings and roundabouts (the punters' opinion, part 4)

In the absence of reliable opinion polls, the bookies odds have become an invaluable way of gauging voter sentiment in Northern Ireland. Not an infallible way, of course – only betters' opinions are counted, and it's quite likely that few fundamentalist Christians ever darken the doors of a betting shop.

Nonetheless, it’s the only tool available, so for what it's worth, here are some of the small swings that the odds have shown so far:

• In South Antrim, William Hill is now showing a slight UCUNF advantage – 8/11, with the DUP on evens. Last week both parties were level-pegged at 5/6.
• In contrast to that, though, William Hill is showing shorter odds for the DUP in Strangford (i.e. they reckon the chance of the DUP winning is better than it was). Last week Jim Shannon was on 8/13, but today that is 1/2. The chances for the UCUNF candidate, Mike Nesbitt, have lengthened from 6/5 to 6/4.
• In Fermanagh and South Tyrone, William Hill now have Rodney Connor on 8/11, a slight dis-improvement (but a relative improvement) from last week's 5/6. Michelle Gildernew, who was also on 5/6 last week, has slipped back to evens.

Apart from these three constituencies, the odds quoted by William Hill appear unchanged. Tomorrow this blog will look at how Paddy Power sees things evolving.

When is a Tory not a Tory?

When his name is Rodney Connor, apparently.

On Monday night, when FST 'colourful' independent candidate John Stevenson asked Rodney Connor "Are you a Tory or not, yes or no?", Connor replied "I'm not a Tory and I'm not a member of any party. I will always make my decision on what I believe to be the best for the people of the constituency."

But according to Connor himself, he 'is prepared to accept the Conservative whip'.

So what's it to be – Tory or not? If you take the Tory whip, are you not to all extents and purposes a Tory? If you permit yourself to pick and chose whether or not to support the Tories, then you are clearly not a Tory.

'Colourful' Mr Stevenson followed up by stating the word 'Tory' means 'bandit' in Irish and received cheers and a rapturous applause from the audience. He finished by offering this message to David Cameron, "Go back to England and keep your dirty nose out of Northern Ireland politics!"

This blog is starting to like Mr Stevenson more and more!