One of the surprises in the BBC's pre-prepared Election 2010 website is how overtly sectarian it is in respect of some Northern Irish constituencies.
In most of their Constituency Profiles they helpfully tell the reader how 'Catholic' or 'Protestant' the constituencies are:
Fermanagh and South Tyrone: "Just over half the population is Catholic and the nationalist voters have dominated in recent years."
West Tyrone: "This is a predominantly Catholic constituency".
Foyle: "The constituency has the second highest proportion of Catholics in Northern Ireland".
East Derry: "This mainly rural and Protestant constituency …"
South Antrim:"This is a largely Protestant and Unionist seat, with Catholics forming just over a quarter of the population".
Strangford: "Only just over an eighth of the population is Catholic. The Presbyterian community is dominant in this part of Northern Ireland".
North Down: "is a predominantly Protestant, middle class and suburban dormitory area".
Belfast East: "The seat is predominantly Protestant, with less than 10% of residents identifying themselves as Catholic. This is the smallest proportion of Catholics in Northern Ireland".
Belfast West: "is overwhelmingly Catholic and nationalist with the highest proportion of Catholics of any Northern Ireland seat".
Belfast North: "has a Protestant majority but has a substantial Catholic minority".
Now this blog is not averse to making presumptions about voters political preferences based upon their religions – but it is not often that the BBC so clearly demonstrates that it agrees! The polite pretence that religion is not an indicator of political preference has been blown out of the water by the BBC. What other reason would they have for providing information on the religions of voters in Northern Ireland, but not in Britain?
It is likely that someone will complain to the BBC, and that they will then change their constituency profiles – but the fact that in their raw state they present clearly religious data as an electoral factor shows that behind the façade that is what they think counts.
Tuesday 6 April 2010
Sunday 4 April 2010
Will Watson run as an independent?
Having lost their only MP over the Tory link-up, it seems increasingly likely that the UUP will now also lose their best hope for a gain in the Westminster election – South Antrim.
The constituency is the only one for which UCUNF has not selected a candidate. The UUP suggested Adrian Watson, who was apparently judged unsuitable (by the Tory half of the partnership) because of his ‘christian’ (sic) bigotry against gays. The Tories suggested Margaret McVeigh who was deemed unsuitable by the UUP because … well …, who the hell is she?
Then the Tories – in the person of their shadow home secretary, no less – upset the applecart by seeming to favour allowing B&B owners (like Mr Watson) to discriminate against gays – the thought crime which had cost Mr Watson his candidacy.
But by then there was no way back for Watson, because he had blasted the whole UCUNF project as being “a dictatorship” – and said that he was "totally against" it. So there is no way he will ever be a UCUNF candidate.
But will he stand as an independent, like Sylvia Hermon in North Down? According to Watson, 90% of his local UUP association backed him as a candidate, and he has not ruled out running as an independent candidate.
If he runs as an independent then the UCUNF must stand too, because Cameron has pledged to stand in all 18 constituencies, and between them they will split the UUP-Tory vote, probably letting the awful William McCrea retain the seat for the DUP.
All in all, it could represent yet another nail in the coffin for UCUNF – and it is all their own doing. It is a consequence of not having genuine Cameronesque ‘modern conservatives’. They simply do not exist in sufficient numbers in Northern Ireland – the 17 confirmed UCUNF selections demonstrate this – and so UCUNF was faced with either selecting the same old UUP faces (as they did in several places) or going for complete unknowns, presumably in the hope that they will grow into their roles. But the best way to grow into a political role is in a lower-level political role – via council politics, or the Assembly. Simply skipping the awkward phase and standing in Westminster elections is ‘instant gratification’ politics. If there are no ‘modern conservatives’ at council level, and none in the Assembly, then it seems a little presumptuous to think that they can be conjured out of thin air for Westminster.
Unionists are like Watson, whether the Tories like it or not. They are not modern, they are not liberal, they are not metropolitan, they are not even particularly clever. They are a defensive socially conservative tribe, increasingly worried about their future (and with good reason). The Tories should have known that, and heading into a pact with them they should have been aware that they would end up with troglodytes like Watson. Rejecting him without having any good alternative just shows how threadbare their whole Northern Irish excursion is.
Watson is not simply fading away, he is fighting back, and the more he does so, the more damage he will do to UCUNF. Even if he chooses not to stand he will have damaged whoever finally get the UCUNF ticket – perhaps costing him or her the seat. This blog hopes that Watson will stand as an independent, because the one thing you can never have too many of, is competing unionist parties and candidates. With luck South Antrim’s unionists will divide themselves between the DUP, UCUNF, TUV and Watson – and all of them will spend the next month tearing strips off each other.
Let the fun begin!
The constituency is the only one for which UCUNF has not selected a candidate. The UUP suggested Adrian Watson, who was apparently judged unsuitable (by the Tory half of the partnership) because of his ‘christian’ (sic) bigotry against gays. The Tories suggested Margaret McVeigh who was deemed unsuitable by the UUP because … well …, who the hell is she?
Then the Tories – in the person of their shadow home secretary, no less – upset the applecart by seeming to favour allowing B&B owners (like Mr Watson) to discriminate against gays – the thought crime which had cost Mr Watson his candidacy.
But by then there was no way back for Watson, because he had blasted the whole UCUNF project as being “a dictatorship” – and said that he was "totally against" it. So there is no way he will ever be a UCUNF candidate.
But will he stand as an independent, like Sylvia Hermon in North Down? According to Watson, 90% of his local UUP association backed him as a candidate, and he has not ruled out running as an independent candidate.
If he runs as an independent then the UCUNF must stand too, because Cameron has pledged to stand in all 18 constituencies, and between them they will split the UUP-Tory vote, probably letting the awful William McCrea retain the seat for the DUP.
All in all, it could represent yet another nail in the coffin for UCUNF – and it is all their own doing. It is a consequence of not having genuine Cameronesque ‘modern conservatives’. They simply do not exist in sufficient numbers in Northern Ireland – the 17 confirmed UCUNF selections demonstrate this – and so UCUNF was faced with either selecting the same old UUP faces (as they did in several places) or going for complete unknowns, presumably in the hope that they will grow into their roles. But the best way to grow into a political role is in a lower-level political role – via council politics, or the Assembly. Simply skipping the awkward phase and standing in Westminster elections is ‘instant gratification’ politics. If there are no ‘modern conservatives’ at council level, and none in the Assembly, then it seems a little presumptuous to think that they can be conjured out of thin air for Westminster.
Unionists are like Watson, whether the Tories like it or not. They are not modern, they are not liberal, they are not metropolitan, they are not even particularly clever. They are a defensive socially conservative tribe, increasingly worried about their future (and with good reason). The Tories should have known that, and heading into a pact with them they should have been aware that they would end up with troglodytes like Watson. Rejecting him without having any good alternative just shows how threadbare their whole Northern Irish excursion is.
Watson is not simply fading away, he is fighting back, and the more he does so, the more damage he will do to UCUNF. Even if he chooses not to stand he will have damaged whoever finally get the UCUNF ticket – perhaps costing him or her the seat. This blog hopes that Watson will stand as an independent, because the one thing you can never have too many of, is competing unionist parties and candidates. With luck South Antrim’s unionists will divide themselves between the DUP, UCUNF, TUV and Watson – and all of them will spend the next month tearing strips off each other.
Let the fun begin!
Tories move towards Adrian Watson
The Tory shadow home secretary Chris Grayling has been recorded suggesting 'people who run bed and breakfasts in their homes should have the right to reject homosexual guests'.
Rejection of gay guests at his B & B was, of course, the key piece of bigotry that cost Adrian Watson his nomination as UCUNF candidate for South Antrim (his anti-Irishness is apparently much more acceptable in UCUNF circles).
But now it seems that the English Tories are moving towards Watson’s position. Will this lead to Watson getting his candidacy after all?
The Adrian Watson Show is one of the most fascinating episodes in the UCUNF story, and its outcome may well demonstrate whether the project is serious in its claim to offer ‘new’ politics in Northern Ireland. Watson, on several levels, represents the ‘old’ unionist politics – anti-Irish, anti-gay, socially conservative – and if he succeeds in getting the nomination, or even the seat itself, it will show UCUNF to be no improvement on what went before.
Rejection of gay guests at his B & B was, of course, the key piece of bigotry that cost Adrian Watson his nomination as UCUNF candidate for South Antrim (his anti-Irishness is apparently much more acceptable in UCUNF circles).
But now it seems that the English Tories are moving towards Watson’s position. Will this lead to Watson getting his candidacy after all?
The Adrian Watson Show is one of the most fascinating episodes in the UCUNF story, and its outcome may well demonstrate whether the project is serious in its claim to offer ‘new’ politics in Northern Ireland. Watson, on several levels, represents the ‘old’ unionist politics – anti-Irish, anti-gay, socially conservative – and if he succeeds in getting the nomination, or even the seat itself, it will show UCUNF to be no improvement on what went before.
Friday 2 April 2010
Deaths in 2009
The statistics on deaths in 2009, published by NISRA on 25 March 2010, are remarkable only in one respect. The death rate has gone down again, and is now at its lowest ever point. What this means, quite simply, is that proportionately fewer people are dying – on the contrary they are living, and for longer and longer.
As a consequence a greater proportion of deaths – 31% in 2009 – are to the very elderly, those aged over 85.
What this means in political terms is, as yet, unexplored. It is a known fact that the Protestant (and thus unionist) proportion of the population rises with age. Of those aged over 85, for example, over 67% are of Protestant community background (according to the 2001 census, when, as mere 76-year-olds they thus declared themselves). Their grandchildren (those aged 20 in 2001) represent only 47% of their age cohort!
So clearly the elderly are more unionist than the young, and research tells us that older voters are more likely to vote than younger voters. But there is no research on the voting habits of the extremely elderly. People in relatively good health are likely to vote, but what of the bed-ridden, extremely infirm and those suffering from dementia?
There may be a peak of electoral turnout somewhere around the age of 70 – and thereafter a drop off. Common sense would suggest this, but no research has been done to demonstrate it.
Unionism obviously is enjoying a windfall from longevity, but if it turns out that the turnout rate for the extremely elderly is lower than that of those slightly younger, then that windfall may not be as valuable as it seems. Since unionism does appear, in recent elections, to be getting a smaller proportion of the vote than the Protestant proportion of the electorate, then perhaps the effect of the elderly may already be visible. Unionist politicians like to imagine that there is a ‘reserve army’ of ‘garden centre Prods’ who will come to their assistance if ever their precious union is threatened – but maybe those missing Protestant voters are not in the garden centre. Maybe they’re in the old folks homes and the hospices.
As a consequence a greater proportion of deaths – 31% in 2009 – are to the very elderly, those aged over 85.
What this means in political terms is, as yet, unexplored. It is a known fact that the Protestant (and thus unionist) proportion of the population rises with age. Of those aged over 85, for example, over 67% are of Protestant community background (according to the 2001 census, when, as mere 76-year-olds they thus declared themselves). Their grandchildren (those aged 20 in 2001) represent only 47% of their age cohort!
So clearly the elderly are more unionist than the young, and research tells us that older voters are more likely to vote than younger voters. But there is no research on the voting habits of the extremely elderly. People in relatively good health are likely to vote, but what of the bed-ridden, extremely infirm and those suffering from dementia?
There may be a peak of electoral turnout somewhere around the age of 70 – and thereafter a drop off. Common sense would suggest this, but no research has been done to demonstrate it.
Unionism obviously is enjoying a windfall from longevity, but if it turns out that the turnout rate for the extremely elderly is lower than that of those slightly younger, then that windfall may not be as valuable as it seems. Since unionism does appear, in recent elections, to be getting a smaller proportion of the vote than the Protestant proportion of the electorate, then perhaps the effect of the elderly may already be visible. Unionist politicians like to imagine that there is a ‘reserve army’ of ‘garden centre Prods’ who will come to their assistance if ever their precious union is threatened – but maybe those missing Protestant voters are not in the garden centre. Maybe they’re in the old folks homes and the hospices.
Thursday 1 April 2010
Behind the bluster, unionist unity talks continue
Despite the recriminations from all three main unionist parties (temporarily including the TUV here, until reality intervenes), it seems that the efforts are still continuing to find a ‘unionist unity’ candidate in Fermanagh and South Tyrone.
The latest name being mooted is Rodney Connor, who retired yesterday after 10 years as chief executive of Fermanagh District Council.
As a public servant Mr Connor could play no public political role, but it seems that his unionist leanings were not exactly unknown – the BBC reports that ‘the DUP and the UUP locally see Mr Connor as an ideal compromise candidate for Fermanagh and South Tyrone’. Since he only retired yesterday they must have known this long before his retirement, so he clearly had not hidden his political light under any bushels.
However, despite being a name well known in Fermanagh, Mr Connor is hardly someone who is going to set the unionist world ablaze with enthusiasm. His attraction is probably less due to who he is than to what he might be – a ‘unionist unity’ candidate.
It seems that local unionists are so desperate for any candidate that could give them a chance of winning the seat that they will settle for political unknowns – first Norman Baxter, now Rodney Connor – without any platform beyond flag-waving. This seems to be increasingly what passes for ‘politics’ in the unionist camp – simple sectarian head-counting of the type that they complain about when nationalists do it. It is a far cry from the ‘normal politics’ (sic) that UCUNF claimed to be aiming for – to normal (dreary steeple) politics of the 'yabba daba doo (any Prod will do)' variety.
The latest name being mooted is Rodney Connor, who retired yesterday after 10 years as chief executive of Fermanagh District Council.
As a public servant Mr Connor could play no public political role, but it seems that his unionist leanings were not exactly unknown – the BBC reports that ‘the DUP and the UUP locally see Mr Connor as an ideal compromise candidate for Fermanagh and South Tyrone’. Since he only retired yesterday they must have known this long before his retirement, so he clearly had not hidden his political light under any bushels.
However, despite being a name well known in Fermanagh, Mr Connor is hardly someone who is going to set the unionist world ablaze with enthusiasm. His attraction is probably less due to who he is than to what he might be – a ‘unionist unity’ candidate.
It seems that local unionists are so desperate for any candidate that could give them a chance of winning the seat that they will settle for political unknowns – first Norman Baxter, now Rodney Connor – without any platform beyond flag-waving. This seems to be increasingly what passes for ‘politics’ in the unionist camp – simple sectarian head-counting of the type that they complain about when nationalists do it. It is a far cry from the ‘normal politics’ (sic) that UCUNF claimed to be aiming for – to normal (dreary steeple) politics of the 'yabba daba doo (any Prod will do)' variety.
No unity, no UCUNF
That seems to be the DUP’s message to the UUP. The DUP has announced that it will not stand in North Down in order to not “oppose a sitting Unionist Member of Parliament”. The fact that that ‘sitting Unionist Member’ is the same Sylvia Hermon who just quit the UUP is, no doubt, entirely irrelevant. The fact also that the only possible alternative to Hermon would be some other brand of unionist is also ignored. There is no chance whatsoever of a nationalist winning North Down this side of rapture.
So the DUP are essentially saying to the UUP – in very unsubtle terms – ‘you refuse to play ball in South Belfast and Fermanagh and South Tyrone and we’ll make sure that you are humiliated in North Down. Not only have you lost Hermon, but we’ll help her to win against your Tory friend Parsley'.
The UUP’s difficulties in North Down are compounded by the resignation of their local MLA Alan McFarland, who also referred to the damage being done by the Tory link-up.
It seems that UCUNF is moving closer to the New Farce that many predicted at the time of its establishment. If it cannot work in North Down – the nearest Northern Ireland has to a Tory-friendly constituency, then it may not work at all.
So the DUP are essentially saying to the UUP – in very unsubtle terms – ‘you refuse to play ball in South Belfast and Fermanagh and South Tyrone and we’ll make sure that you are humiliated in North Down. Not only have you lost Hermon, but we’ll help her to win against your Tory friend Parsley'.
The UUP’s difficulties in North Down are compounded by the resignation of their local MLA Alan McFarland, who also referred to the damage being done by the Tory link-up.
It seems that UCUNF is moving closer to the New Farce that many predicted at the time of its establishment. If it cannot work in North Down – the nearest Northern Ireland has to a Tory-friendly constituency, then it may not work at all.
The Adrian Watson Show becomes a comedy
Initially a drama, then a thriller, now the long-running Adrian Watson Show has become a comedy. Watson, picked by the UUP as its choice to stand in South Antrim, was apparently vetoed by the Tory side of the joint selection committee of UCUNF and the Tories wanted to stand a total nobody in the constituency instead. Watson’s unsuitability may have been connected with his unprogessive views on homosexuality – it is unlikely that his anti-Irish bigotry would have bothered UCUNF much.
Now Watson has announced that he is ‘totally against’ the whole UUP-Tory alliance!
If he had been selected for South Antrim would he have let the world know his true feelings? How many other UUP members (and Tories) are also ‘totally against’ UCUNF but are too shy to tell the world?
What now for Watson? He claims that he “got 90% endorsement from the good people of the South Antrim [UUP] Association”. So perhaps, like Sylvia Hermon in North Down, he will stand as an independent and humiliate the person who is eventually selected to stand in South Antrim for UCUNF.
One thing is for sure – the Adrian Watson Show is going to continue, much to the amusement of its many fans.
Now Watson has announced that he is ‘totally against’ the whole UUP-Tory alliance!
If he had been selected for South Antrim would he have let the world know his true feelings? How many other UUP members (and Tories) are also ‘totally against’ UCUNF but are too shy to tell the world?
What now for Watson? He claims that he “got 90% endorsement from the good people of the South Antrim [UUP] Association”. So perhaps, like Sylvia Hermon in North Down, he will stand as an independent and humiliate the person who is eventually selected to stand in South Antrim for UCUNF.
One thing is for sure – the Adrian Watson Show is going to continue, much to the amusement of its many fans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
