Anthony McIntyre's Blog, page 1204

Where J Does Not Stand For Justice

The Bradley Family , kin of the late IRA volunteer, Seamus Bradley, killed by the British Army in 1972, have penned a letter to the British Queen, the British Prime minister, the MOD, Judge Mc Kinney, Arlene Foster, Michelle O Neill, George Hamilton, seeking written reassurance that article J will not be in force at the inquest of Seamus Bradley. 
Dear Sir/Madam,

I write regarding the inquest of 11th December 2017 regarding the death of Seamus Bradley on 31st July 1972.

I wish to refer your attention to the attached document, in particular Article J. This states that, "the Army should not be inhibited in its campaign by the threat of Court Proceedings and should therefore be suitably indemnified."  

The above quoted Article J (from the Conclusions of a Secret Morning Meeting at Stormont Castle on 10th July 1972) clearly provides a legal basis to protect both those soldiers present on the day of the death of Seamus Bradley, as well as the British Army in Operating within Northern Ireland without concern for legal repercussion. 

Missing evidence in the investigation concerning the death of Seamus Bradley on 31st July 1972, I believe, was a direct result of the application of Article J and that consequently the original Inquest into the death of Seamus Bradley on 16th October 1973 was fundamentally flawed. I list below examples of how this original Inquest was flawed: 

‣ Only two black and white photographs were produced in the original Inquest on 16th October 1973, and colour photographs were not shown to the jury. 

‣ The PSNI stated on the 21st January of 2002 that there were only nine black and white photographs of the remains of Seamus Bradley. This remained the case until the summer of 2015, when Investigators from the Coroner's Office approached Sergeant Penney, a retired RUC Sergeant, to confirm that there was a roll of coloured negatives in Police files. My Solicitors Office was informed of this development and were given another eight coloured photographs.

‣ Both the provided colour photographs of Seamus Bradley after his death and the black and white photographs are completely different. It is highly likely that they have been taken from different film rolls - yet the PSNI have stated that only ten negatives exist. I believe the remaining photographs (and negatives) from each reel have been held back previously as a result of the application of Article J.
‣ Photographs of Seamus' neck have at no time been provided, nor has their existence been denied; it is highly unlikely a Coroner would have failed to photograph this.

‣ No evidence of the existence of Ciphers has to date been provided. I believe that the Cipher for those Soldiers who subsequently gave written statements concerning the death of Seamus Bradley holds different identities to those actually present on the day. 

‣ Seamus Bradley's clothes have never been located. An official statement relates that they were not returned as they had too much blood on them - photographs show otherwise. ·

‣ There are only two bullet wounds shown on Seamus' body from the photographs provided, there would have been five shown if all photographs had been provided. ·

‣ The ballistics report from 10th September 2016 states that Seamus was stripped naked. The original ballistics report by the Courts on 15th October 2015 is only five pages long (with no reference to Seamus Bradley being stripped naked), whilst the ballistics report produced by Geoffrey Arnold on 10th September 2016 amounts to many more pages than this.


In light of the above, and what I feel to be clear evidence of the application of Article J in preventing a full and impartial Inquest into the death of Seamus Bradley, I therefore write to you to seek your assurances that Article J is not now active in preventing me from gathering further evidence, and in having a truly fair, impartial and just Inquest into the death of Seamus Bradley on 11th December 2017.

I have pursued the truth concerning the events of 31st of July 1972 and worked tirelessly and without rest for justice for my brother. After forty five years, and an Inquest on 16th of October 1972 which it is manifestly obvious to all was flawed and indeed corrupted - I am resolved to seek your assurances that no impediment to truth and justice is in place concerning the Inquest into the Death of Seamus Bradley on 11th of December 2017.

I appeal to your own sense of humanity and justice in assisting me to gain your assurances that Article J is no longer active in preventing me from uncovering the truth about the death of my brother. Northern Ireland is now described as a 'post conflict' society, yet the death of my brother is a painful reminder that many have yet to achieve justice and the dignity of resting in peace. I seek your assurances that Northern Ireland truly has moved beyond this, and that there is no impediment (in the form of Article J) in uncovering and laying to rest the difficult events of our history. 


We the Bradley family deserve the Truth.

Yours Faithfully,

May McDaid (nee Bradley),Eta Darcy (nee Bradley) Daniel Bradley

Turkey Will Exclude Evolution Theory from High School

The threat to children's education posed by religious sentiment in Turkey is discussed by Lena M writing @ Atheist Republic.Photo Credits: FuturismThe level of support for evolution among scientists, the public and other groups is a topic that frequently arises in the creation-evolution controversy and touches on educational, religious, philosophical, scientific and political issues. The only country from which evolutionary theory was excluded in school education was Saudi Arabia and now it will happen with Turkey too.
The most recent draft of Turkey’s new national curriculum had been presented to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has approved it. Alpaslan Durmuş, head of the Education Ministry’s curriculum board, said:

We have excluded controversial subjects for students at an age unable yet to understand the issues’ scientific background. As the students at ninth grade are not endowed with antecedents to discuss the ‘Origin of Life and Evolution’ section in biology classes, this section will be delayed until undergraduate study.

Durmuş added:

We have undertaken a simplification in the curriculum. It is one of our targets to realize complete learning. In educational programs we are trying to convey basic values, information, skills, capability, sufficiency, attitude, and good behavior to our children. We have tried to add our local and national values to the curriculum.

Academics from top universities in Turkey previously criticized the prospective move: The academics stated:

The subjects of Science and Technology classes in elementary schools should be presented with a perspective that allows students to connect it to subjects they will encounter in future years. It should provide them with an evolutionary point of view.

... adding that "evolutionary biology information should be included in the curriculum starting from fifth grade."


Durmuş also addressed other issues during an Ankara seminar on June 20, noting that obligatory “Religion and Morality” classes would not be included within the curriculum of first, fifth, and ninth graders, but students would be able to choose religion classes as an optional course if they wish. If students from the ninth grade aren’t able to understand the evolutionary point of view, they are also incapable to accept the religious one.

If students learn about evolutionary biology from the fifth grade they would be prepared to have that subject in high school because children should get out of school smarter and more educated and not without any knowledge about evolution. This concept of learning and education will keep Turkish students even more in the dark about science than they already are.

DUP Ultra-Right Wing Take On Everything

The Transcripts  puts on record John McDonagh and Martin Galvin speaking to author, political analyst and former PRO during the 1981 hunger strike, Richard O’Rawe, via telephone from Belfast, who provides his analysis on the results of the general election in the United Kingdom. @ RFÉ 17 June 2017.

Radio Free Éireann
WBAI 99.5FM Pacifica Radio
New York City
listen on the internet: wbai.org Saturdays Noon ESTAudio Player
(begins time stamp ~35:49)

Martin: And on the line we have the author and a great political analyst, also – it’s one of the people that I turned to just for ideas or analysis – that’s Richard O’Rawe. He is the author of Afterlives, which was about the secret offer made during the hunger strike. He’s the author of Blanketmen, about what it was like in the H-Blocks of Long Kesh. And also he is the author of a book that will be published soon, hopefully in September, In the Name of the Son, it’s about Gerry Conlon – somebody who was up in these studios. And I believe it also includes a lot about Sandy Boyer, former co-host of Radio Free Éireann, and John McDonagh and some of Gerry Conlon’s work with Sandy and with Radio Free Éireann on behalf of other political prisoners and on behalf of other causes. Welcome back, Richard.

Richard: Thank you so much, Martin.

Martin: Okay. (station identification) Alright, Richard – last week we talked briefly about the results of the British general election and how Theresa May was short of a majority to go back as British Prime Minister – her party got three hundred and seventeen votes – and in order to put her over the top she needed the ten votes of the DUP, the Democratic Unionist Party, led by Arlene Foster, founded by Ian Paisley, formerly led by Peter Robinson, and that deal seems to be about to materialise behind what’s called ‘the Queen’s Speech‘. But I didn’t realise at the time – there were cartoons that we talked about last week in which Theresa May bends the knee to Arlene Foster and says ‘Your Majesty, can I form a new government’ and Arlene’s there with a crown – but I didn’t 
Add captionThe Daily Mirror, for example has a front page picture of Theresa May with the headline, ‘Coalition of Crackpots’ – and you see pictures of – I believe it’s Peter Robinson wearing a beret and other members of the DUP. There was a cartoon in the London Times – ‘A Victory Parade’ – and you see a number of Orangemen with bowler hats and they hoisted up Theresa May being hung on a banner pole. The Independent said these are – they have a profile – these are the terrifying views of the party now propping up Theresa May. There was a ‘Changes at Downing Street’ – it was put out by a DUP Councillor, where you have a UVF, an Ulster Volunteer Force, the Loyalist paramilitaries, in front of Downing Street and the kerbstones in front of Downing Street painted red, white and blue – not for the United States but for Britain. And finally there was another Twitter post that was put up: you see Theresa May out in front of Downing Street, behind her in view of the religious fundamentalism that many members of the DUP have – you have Moses with the Ten Commandments pointing at her and saying what to say.
Richard, how is the DUP really regarded? I didn’t realise – I know how Irish Nationalists and Republicans think of them – but I didn’t realise how the British public would think of them. In fact, there’s already been a petition with hundreds or thousands of signatures, there was a big demonstration, Theresa May actually went to the scene of a tragic fire that occurred in London and was told to go back to the DUP – how is the DUP regarded now in England by some of the people who are going to see her in co – well, if not in coalition in a side deal with Theresa May to prop up Theresa May as Prime Minister?

Richard: Well, the thing is – it’s very interesting, Martin, the revelations that have come out – and particularly what you were actually saying there, the fact that these guys, the DUP, are religious fundamentalists, right? Religious Christians. They believe in creationism, for example. They don’t believe in gay rights, right? They don’t believe in abortion. They have an ultra-right wing take on everything and the interesting thing that I have noticed is, just exactly what you said, all of a sudden simply because they’re talking to May about doing a deal to keep May’s government propped up they are an item of interest. And the item of interest that the British people are seeing they don’t like. And it begs the question: Did they never, ever, prior to this elevation of the DUP, did they never ever look into them properly and see the type of people they are…?

Martin: …and the type of people that the British government has always propped up and supported and used – just bowed to their influence where ever they could in terms of The North of Ireland.

Richard: Absolutely! But here’s the point, Martin: Supposing they do do a deal, the DUP and the Tories, and the idea behind this deal is that there’ll be a pot of gold for Northern Ireland – that there will be extra money coming from the British Exchequer to the Northern Ireland Assembly. Even if they do do that deal the fact of the matter is, without an Executive, the DUP will not be able to disburse that money. They will have no control over because it will be disbursed, if there is no Executive, by civil servants and a British Tory minister and that is the key element in all of this. There is no Executive and, therefore, whatever deal they get is totally at the discretion, in terms of its disbursement, of British ministers.

Martin: Okay, John McDonagh wants to ask you the next question, Richard. John, are you with us?
John: Yeah, Richard – I wanted to tackle it now even from the Sinn Féin point of view – now they have Members of the British Parliament and you know representing you know slash Derry/Londonderry – and to let our audience know that with these MPs of the British Parliament – that Sinn Féin has offices in Westminster, they collect the Queen’s shilling. But I thought it was a joke during the week when I was looking on Facebook and there was a picture of the representative of Sinn Féin from Doire – when she put up a picture of the hotel room saying just to show you people in Doire – you know we’re not living high on the hog – look how small my hotel room is and that this is like – it’s a disgrace – at this stage.
Poor ElishaAnd Richard, I can tell you when people in the Republican Movement came to New York they were staying on couches up in The Bronx, out in Queens and where ever they were being sent around the country. You know, people were driving them – they weren’t certainly going first class and now the attitude of Sinn Féin members complaining that they have to fly first class to Australia because it’s a very long trip. And now they’re complaining about hotel rooms in London and maybe you could explain to us the room that was that was given to Her Majesty – gave to you – when you were in Long Kesh – but it beggars belief that this is the complaint that Sinn Féin now has – is the size of their hotel room!
Richard: Well, here’s the point, John -  at the end of the day that is very succinct – this whole business – Oh! Look at the size of my hotel room! And what she’s trying to do there is to say: Look, I’m still ‘of the people’. I’m still working class. But the fact of the matter is they’re now of the political class. The fact of the matter is that her life has changed irrevocably and the whole Sinn Féin thrust in all of this, as far as I can see, is to make money. I don’t really see any reason why, John, they’re not taking their seats in Westminster. I mean, they take their seats in Stormont. They take their seats in Leinster House – what is the big deal with not taking them over in Westminster? And you know, there’s a, there’s a like a charade going on here where these guys portray themselves as working class and they’re not. I mean, they’re all on good money. They’re all on extremely good money. And their friends is on good money; their acolytes is on good money. There are people – the working class, by and large, have been left behind by them – they have moved on in terms of their own monetary value while people in The North are still – have the yoke of austerity around their necks, you know?
And for Republicans, I mean for Republicans of any hue, Sinn Féin – a cornerstone of Sinn Féin’s whole ethos is that there are no principles and there are no principles that should stand in the way of progress – that was one of the things that came out of the 1986 Ard Fheis – Tom Hartley actually said it – and Martin McGuinness actually said at that time: ‘The war against the British must continue until freedom is achieved’, right? He said we have no intention of going into Westminster or Stormont. They’re in Westminster – sorry – they’re in Stormont. They’re in Leinster House. I don’t see no reason why they’re not in Westminster and whether they should or shouldn’t take their seats it’s a matter for them but I mean, I just don’t understand their position in all of this. And it’s not because it’s a ‘principled position’ because they really have no principles.

Martin: Alright. Richard, Gerry Adams, during the week said – he was talking about going back to Stormont – and he said we think, strategically, that is the way to a united Ireland. And he also said that Theresa May is playing fast and loose with the Good Friday Agreement and he was supposed to have stood up to her to say that. Is there anything that Sinn Féin can do in terms of whether Theresa May makes this deal, number one, and number two, Sinn Féin was in coalition with the DUP for a number of years – how has that moved ahead any step forward towards a united Ireland? How is there any strategic way, out of any of this political success that you’ve talked about, that seems to be heading us towards, or leading us towards, a united Ireland?

Richard: Well I don’t think there is to be quite frank with you. I mean what they have done is that they have replaced the SDLP (Social and Democratic Labour Party) as the dominant Nationalist party but other than that I don’t see much more that they have done in terms of a united Ireland. Gerry Adams said that Stormont is the way forward but he doesn’t explain how it’s the way forward. What is he talking about? Is he talking about Nationalists out-breeding Unionists and then coming to the position where they have more than fifty percent of the popular vote and then we’d have a border poll which’ll lead to a united Ireland? Or is he talking about trying to persuade Unionists not to be Unionists and to be Republicans? He doesn’t say.

And you know, I just keep coming back to the point that to me, there is a, there’s always a money aspect to this – I’m not saying that’s entirely the concept behind it all – but it is an element in this and there is, I mean there is no – Adams needs to explain to us, to the people who – to the Nationalist electorate – what he means by: ‘Stormont is the way forward towards a united Ireland’ because I don’t know how it is and I just don’t see – I just, I mean I can’t understand that statement at all.
Martin: Okay. Now, originally or first, I think people are going to be looking at how much money – and the British are going to be handicapped because if they give money to The North of Ireland well, they’re going to have to turn around to people who voted for them in Scotland, they’re going to have to turn around to people who voted for them in Wales – they’re going to have to do similar things under British formulas, economic formulas, now to give any kind of money. But beyond that, they have re-appointed James Brokenshire to be May’s Secretary for The North of Ireland. James Brokenshire, one of those people from England, he gets to ‘audition’ for a job he’d rather have that would be located in some place he’d rather be by administering, or running, The North of Ireland for the British. He’s somebody who’s already come out on the side of no prosecutions for British troops, about the imbalance. He’s somebody, certainly, the Ballymurphy Families are very concerned about as they finally get a date for an inquest – their families were murdered by the British – shot down over three days – and how they finally have a date for an inquest – they’re concerned about that.

Quinn Brothers’ funeral 1998

People on the Garvaghy Road are worried about whether the British government, down the road – not up front, but might do something with the Parades Commission – allow Orange parades in areas such as the Garvaghy Road where they have been kept from for a number of years. What is it that, you know, you expect or what are some of the things we should be concerned about from this unholy alliance between the DUP and Theresa May as time goes by and Theresa May seems to, you know needs votes on certain issues, and needs to go back to the DUP for a supply of those votes?
Richard: You’ve just highlighted one of the most contentious issues. And one of the most contentious issues in terms of the resumption of the Stormont regime is legacy. And both Theresa May has come out, and even before the election, and offered her support for an amnesty for British soldiers who were involved in, as you say, in Ballymurphy, the Ballymurphy Massacre and Bloody Sunday attacks and the New Lodge Road Massacre, etc – all these things and she supported that and the DUP most definitely supports it so I’d be very surprised if, after this process, after these talks finish that – maybe not immediately but certainly not long after – that you will find that there’ll be some indication that British soldiers are going to get an amnesty for the atrocities that they carried out – you know, the killing of young children with plastic bullets, etc, the mass slaughter in Doire on Bloody Sunday – I think that they’re going to get that, in honesty, for that. I also think that that in itself is going to be – if that were to happen – I think that again would, absolutely – well it should – but it could absolutely scupper any chance of resumption of the Stormont Assembly.

Martin: Alright. Richard, after the last election it seemed that Nationalists were saying this shows there’s been a big surge forward, we’re a lot closer to a united Ireland – that was after the Assembly election. It seems as if Arlene Foster was on the way out in a very much weakened position. It seems now as if she has been in the strongest position of any DUP member for some time and it seems as if, now that the Unionist vote came out in response to those claims, that a united Ireland is as far away as it has been for many years. What’s your comment on that?

Richard: Oh, I think that the person responsible for this is Gerry Adams. I think Gerry could not resist blowing his own trumpet when the Sinn Féin vote was so high and he made a statement that we’re now within sight – I’m paraphrasing him here – we’re now within sight of a united Ireland. And what he did, what he did – and by the way when he was doing that he was looking over his shoulder at the Ruairí Ó Brádaighs and the Mickey McKevitts and all those guys who split from the Republican Movement and formed their own movements over the last twenty-thirty years – and he was still like: I’m right. My strategy is right. Look where I’ve brought Republicanism – we’re on the thrust of a united Ireland. And what he did he woke a sleeping giant and that sleeping giant exercised itself at the last Westminster elections and you saw that the combined Sinn Féin-SDLP vote was only forty-one percent. It’s was about four percent for independence and all the rest was Unionist…

Martin: …it seems like it…

Richard: …and that is why Foster is in such a strong position now – that is why she got such a powerful vote – Gerry Adams galvanised their vote.

Martin: Alright. John, I believe, has another question. John?

John: Well you know what it is – Richard, it would be hard to explain to people here in America about the marching season that’s coming up – maybe when it’s finally here. Bundoran in Co. Donegal, they always said, looks like the Falls Road on July Twelfth. But maybe quickly explain what’s going to happen there, which probably wouldn’t be tolerated anywhere else in the United Kingdom, but how Nationalists will now be fleeing in the next week or two to The South, and particularly over to Donegal. What’s it like to live there on July Twelfth?

Richard: Well it’s pretty, John – it’s pretty harrowing to say the least. Not in the least because the Orange Order has traditionally walked through Nationalist areas – and that would be akin to the Ku Klux Klan walking through Harlem or some coloured area in New York – it’s exactly the same synopsis. And these guys on The Twelfth they, I mean – it’s very intimidating. Belfast City Centre, for example, is not a place on the Twelfth of July were you’d find too many Catholics – I mean it just isn’t because there’s hundreds of thousands of Orangemen and Loyalists and Unionists, etc on the streets marching and everything else. Bonfire on the Shankill Road
And then there’s the bonfires and then some of these of these bonfire are very, very big and they’re very sectarian – they burn effigies of the Pope, they would burn effigies of Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly, Bobby Sands – all of this. I mean it is a real – it is a real intimidating environment and it is usually a pain when Nationalists, and traditionally it’s still the same – Nationalists keep their heads down. And if you do have a house in Donegal, if you’re lucky enough to have the money to have a nice place in Donegal – well, it’s the place to go to get away from it.

Martin: Alright, Richard, we’re just about out of time – we could go on with this for a lot longer. I want to thank you for being with us.

Richard: You’re welcome.

Martin: We’re looking forward – you’re going to have that book,   In the Name of the Son, about Gerry Conlon.








I believe you make some references in it to Sandy Boyer, our former co-host, and to John and some of Gerry Conlon’s work – his appearances in this studio, Radio Free Éireann, how the work and the progress and the fight for Irish prisoners that he made in these studios – that that plays a part in the book – we’re looking very much forward to reading it and we very much appreciate your analysis today and the analysis you give me whenever I call for a question about what’s going on for events so I can present it to the audience and pretend it’s my own ideas. Alright.




Richard: You’re more than welcome, Martin. And it’s good to talk to you and John again.
(ends time stamp ~ 55:39)

Radio Free Eireann Broadcasting 1 July 2017

Martin Galvin with details of this weekend's broadcast from Radio Free Eireann.
Radio Free Eireann. will broadcast this Saturday July 1st on WBAI 99.5 FM radio or wbai.org at 12noon New York time or 5 pm-6pm Irish time or listen any time after the broadcast on wbai.org/archives.

Award winning Belfast based journalist Suzanne Breen will report on prospects for a DUP-Sinn Fein deal at Stormont before Monday's deadline, a claim by former DUP chief Peter Robinson that the British made false guarantees of an Irish Language Act to Sinn Fein, and the painting of loyalist markings outside Ardoyne's Holy Cross school.

We will have a special report about how an American in Donegal has blocked off one of Ireland's most beloved beauty spots, Fanad's Great Arch and the community's battle to reopen it.

Brooklyn historian John Ridge of the Irish History Roundtable will preview the unveiling of a memorial to Young Irelander and American Civil War hero Thomas Francis Meagher in Brooklyn tomorrow.

Go to Radio Free Eireann's web site rfe123.org for written transcripts of recent headline making interviews with Derry Councillor Gary Donnelly on the plight of Tony Taylor, internment-by-license- without charges or a trial, and with Liam Sutcliffe who blew up Nelson's Pillar, a huge symbol of British imperialism in the heart of Dublin 50 years ago.

John McDonagh and Martin Galvin co- host.

Radio Free Eireann is heard Saturdays at 12 Noon New York time on wbai 99.5 FM and wbai.org.

It can be heard at wbai.org in Ireland from 5pm to 6pm or anytime after the program concludes on wbai.org/archives.

Check our website rfe123.org.

Violence Begets Violence

Michael Lerner writing @ Tikkun slams the use of violence.

I am sickened by this despicable act. Violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society, and I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms. Real change can only be obtained through nonviolent action and anything else runs counter to our most deeply held American values.

We at Tikkun are fully aligned in our opposition to violence of any sort and condemn it in the strongest possible terms. We do so on spiritual, religious, and ethical grounds. Human life is sacred and should be protected and helped to flourish. This is a central teaching of the Bible and of Judaism through the ages. We also oppose it on strategic grounds. When anyone who could be seen as connected to liberal and progressive causes engages in violence, (against property even, but especially against human beings) he or she creates a new opportunity for the most reactionary forces in our country to pass new laws restricting free speech, to bring indictments against social change activists, to incite law enforcement to use excessive levels of violence, and to build popular support for new measures of repression.

While we agree with Sanders on most of what he said, we are also aware of statements made by others that have picked up  the notion that violence runs against American values or is in some way oppositional to what America stands for in the world. We will soon be celebrating Independence Day, July 4th, in which many Americans will celebrate the violent revolutionary uprising against the British and sing songs like the national anthem with its praise of “rocket’s red glare, the bombs bursting in air” and set off firecrackers to relive that violence.

The sad fact is that the United States of America has consistently used violence to achieve its policy aims, invading other countries with troops (Korea, Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, and the list goes on), training South and Central American police and military at the “School of Americas” in Ft. Benning, Georgia, in the use of violence and torture to defeat populist movements challenging undemocratic governments, , the Obama and Trump administration’s’ bombing from drones or airplanes civilian populations (e.g. these past many months assaulting the people of Yemen as part of our growing alliance with the reactionary and repressive and human-rights-violating regime in Saudi Arabia), and the policy of the Obama presidency to select individuals to be assassinated by drones and without trial in countries around the world who are suspected of being or aiding terrorists (and in the process, murdering at least several thousand non-combatant civilians). It sickens us to listen to the hypocrisy of those in the media who talk about this latest (immoral) assault on government officials as if it is somehow outside the path of violence that has been part of American society and celebrated as such by many.

The current Congress is engaged in another kind of violence—what is reasonably called institutional violence—when they vote to destroy health care benefits to those who are sick but cannot afford to pay for care, when they vote to remove benefits that have helped provide food for the hungry and shelter for the homeless, when they remove environmental measures that have been put in place to slow down the violence future generations will face very soon from floods and rising water levels and from the weakening of global food production. These are violent consequences of acts this Congress and this President are taking, and they deserve to be punished along with other violent actors.

It is predictable that those who are destroying the planet, using violence worldwide to achieve their policy goals and to protect American corporate interests, will face more violence from random individuals incensed by the hypocrisy that they hear from elected officials and media personnel pretending that America is an exception to, rather than a perpetrator of, the violence that is poisoning our world.

So when correctly condemning any acts of violence by those who protest the overt and institutional violence of our political and economic system, we ought simultaneously renew our critique of violence in all its forms and our mourning for and protest against the daily violence that is a central element in the way the U.S. has built and  maintains its global and domestic power. And perhaps even have a moment of compassion for the deeply misguided among us who, in moral outrage at the violence of this system, resort to violence rather than to the kind of empathic organizing that the (interfaith and secular humanist welcoming) Network of Spiritual Progressives has been offering (more info: www.tikkun.org/training) as the most effective way to deal with the destructive and immoral policies of the Trump Administration and the daily suffering and deaths caused by the normal operations of our global system of selfishness, materialism and endless growth at the expense of Earth’s life support system. Yet this compassion must be tempered by our strong condemnation of all forms of violence, no matter how well intended.

Rabbi Michael Lerner is the editor of Tikkun Magazine, chair of the Network of Spiritual Progressives www.spiritualprogressives.org, rabbi of Beyt Tikkun Synagogue in Berkeley Ca. www.beyttikkun.org  and author of 11 books including The Left Hand of God: Taking Back Our Country from the Religious Right,  with Cornel West: Jews and Blacks—Let the Healing Begin,  Embracing Israel/Palestine, and Jewish Renewal: A Path to Healing and Transformation.

Back To Basics - UUP

In this second part of his series on the way forward for the main political parties in the North, Political Commentator Dr John Coulter examines the future for the Ulster Unionist Party with merger with the DUP top of the agenda.

Back to basics – that’s what the election-battered Ulster Unionist Party, which dominated Stormont for decades, must do survive if it is not to suffer the same fate as the old Unionist Party of Northern Ireland (UPNI) – confined to the dustbin of history.

While there has been much talk of Unionist unity, given the DUP’s current tally of elected representatives and holding the balance of power at Westminster, conversations about forming a single Unionist Party are all but meaningless as the UUP has virtually nothing to offer the DUP.

In June’s Westminster election, the UUP suffered the same fate as the moderate Pro-Assembly Unionists in the October 1974 General Election when the Unionist Coalition of parties wiped the floor with Brian Faulkner’s pro-Sunningdale candidates.

The task of the UUP is two-fold focusing on policy and performance. Policy-wise, the UUP is paying the price for embarking on a five-year deadly flirtation with liberal secularism and abandoning its traditional voter bases of the Christian Churches, Loyal Orders, marching bands and Protestant working class.

The cancer of liberal secularism has left the UUP resembling the ecumenical Presbyterian wing of the centrist Alliance Party. Those UUP members and elected representatives who espouse the cause of same sex marriage, pro-abortion and champion the ideals of so-called ‘liberal unionism’ would be far better jumping ship from the UUP and joining their natural political home in Alliance.

In terms of realistic policies which could position the UUP for a closer accommodation with the DUP, the party must rebrand itself as a clear Centre Right movement more akin to the Ulster Unionism espoused by the late Jim Molyneaux in the days when the party was dominated by pressure groups, such as the Right-wing Ulster Monday Club.

The bitter medicine which the UUP must swallow is that the liberal secularist agenda has now damaged the party irreparably. It must end the stupidity of trying to compete with Alliance for some mythical centre ground utopia, and begin the process of preparing for an eventual merger with the DUP. The UUP must be purged of the cancer of anti-Christian secularism which has polluted the party’s political heart and soul over the past half-decade.

The clap-trap trendy atheism must be eradicated from party policy and, like the DUP, the UUP must provide clear Christian leadership to its traditional Church vote through a definite policy of social conservatism.

Alternatively, if the party hierarchy maintains that liberal secularism will be the policy of the UUP, then sadly anyone who calls themselves a Christian – especially a born again believer - will have no other alternative than to quit the UUP and formally seek political refuge in the DUP. Fundamentally, there is no room for yet another pro-Union party. Unionist unity is of the essence.

While a restoration of the Stormont institutions will be a political life-saver for the UUP with only 10 MLAs to bargain with, the last thing the party needs is another Assembly poll. If the May 2017 Westminster outcome was replicated in a Stormont poll, the UUP will be no better off than the TUV or People Before Profit Alliance.

With the DUP holding the high ground in terms of seats and influence, the UUP has only one bargaining chip – to lobby the DUP to get a return to the Good Friday Agreement deal of 1998 that the largest designation – unionist or nationalist – could lay claim to the First Minister’s post.

This vital negotiating position was given away by the DUP at the St Andrews Agreement in 2006 when the First Minister’s post went to the largest party. The March 2017 Stormont poll has left Sinn Fein breathing down the necks of the DUP.

If, as part of the new cosy Tory-DUP pact at Westminster, the DUP could persuade Prime Minister Theresa May to introduce legislation heralding a return of the largest designation status to the office and First and deputy First Minister, it would guarantee that the UUP would be part of a Unionist Coalition in any future Assembly poll.

Another vital card which the UUP can play is the sterling constituency work which its network of remaining UUP councillors have on the ground. Using the ethos of ‘Putting People First’, the party councillors can focus on bread and butter issues as they affect constituents in their daily lives. The UUP will be rebuilt in preparation and eventual merger with the DUP from the ground up, not the leadership down.

The dose of realism which the UUP must swallow is that it cannot afford to stand still and hope the tens of thousands of unionist voters it has lost to the DUP will magically return to the UUP fold.

The unionist electorate have used their votes to send a clear message that there can only be one pro-Union party of any significance in Northern Ireland, just as Irish nationalism has completed the mirror image in the Catholic community – there can only be one nationalist party, Sinn Fein.

Such is the depth of the political malaise which has currently gripped the UUP that the twin-track strategy of re-engaging with its traditional voter base and ‘upping’ its councillor constituency profile must be implemented as soon as possible.

Failure to do so will only see the UUP join the long list of pro-Union parties in that historical dustbin, such as the Vanguard Unionist Party, Ulster Popular Unionist Party, UK Unionist Party, UPNI, Northern Ireland Unionist Party, United Unionist Assembly Party to name but a few. Has the penny dropped yet?

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

Republicans And History

Matt Treacy has been subject to a Sinn Fein "Smearwa" for writing a book not approved by the party leadership. His experience is recounted  @ Brocaire Books.


Seems to be that only certain people are allowed to write about their past. Which upsets Dear Leaders and their attendants.

I wrote another book, and as with the others have been subjected not to the ordinary criticism that a book might attract, and it might well be crap, but to all sorts of other stuff.

Some people's notion of intellectual engagement is to tell you to shut up, or failing that to accuse you of any number of personal faults. Anyone who writes about Sinn Féin and doesn’t follow the Orwellian party line is obviously anything from a heroin addict to an MI6 agent. Or all of them.

So, who gets to write our history?

When it was proposed that I write a history of republican prisoners in Portlaoise, based on a vast archive kept by someone who had devoted years to this and to supporting republican prisoners and their families, it was rejected.

It was rejected by someone who had written a book about the H Blocks. I suspect the irony was lost on him. The reason it was rejected was because I suspect it conflicted with their then – early noughties – plan to be in coalition with Bertie.

Anyway, I was in middle of doing a degree course and writing other stuff, and no one was going to tell me what I could and could not write about.

Others have crossed the Rubicon and fell under the intellectual fatwa. Anthony McIntyre’s account of what he perceived to be the reality of the ceasefire and its outcome led him to be not only ostracised but subject to physical threats.

Richard O’Rawe who wrote about his time in the H Blocks during the blanket protests and hunger strikes was suddenly a “tout.” The irony again being lost on people who were regaling this bullshit and had been in anti-republican parties at the time. You make your own history I suppose.

Or the Donnelly family in Derry whose house was invaded by men with nailed baseball bats who beat little girls. Moral of the story being : “Shut the fuck up.”

Well, some of us won’t shut the fuck up.

Conflict Brewing In Maghaberry

Statement from Roe 4 Republican Prisoners: 27-06-2017
Republican Prisoners, Roe 4, wish to highlight another marked increase in repressive measures being enforced against us on the Republican Wing.
This began yesterday evening when screws on the landing refused to provide Republican Prisoners with information regarding visits, legal visits and health care appointments. 
Instead they claimed that they would only deal with Republican Prisoners on an individual basis.

It is obvious that Republican Prisoners will never allow ourselves to be individualised and thus the stage has now been set for a prolonged period of increased tension and conflict until this decision is reversed.
This is not an isolated issue, over the past number of months there has been an increase in such measures designed to break the resolve of Republican Prisoners.

We wish to make clear that these measures will fail, and we will go to any lengths necessary for as long as it takes rather than allow ourselves to be denigrated by measures such as this.

We would ask all of those who have supported and continue to support us to be more conscious than ever of our need for their assistance in such matters.

Republican Prisoners
Roe 4
Maghaberry

Undemocratic DUP-Tory Pact

Seán Ó Dubhláin, National PRO, Sinn Féin Poblachtach/Republican Sinn Fein, on the 27-06-2017 issued a press release in response to the DUP-Tory pact.


Back in 1997/98 Sinn Féin Poblachtach stood alone as the only political organisation in Ireland opposing this inherently failed, tribalist, sectarian and un-republican so-called peace plan brokered by US imperialists. As history has shown, there can be no peace without justice.

For us in Ireland the undemocratic nature of the UK is a reality we have had to endure and struggle against as a People since 1801.

The people living under occupation in Ireland’s north-eastern counties did not vote for Brexit, nor did the People of Scotland.

For those who were content to live in this supposed United Kingdom, Brexit has exposed the inherently undemocratic nature of England’s Westminster to a people who, for a large part in the past, could ignore bigoted, racist and sectarian organisations such as the DUP, once they stayed over in Ireland. Now it seems, the chickens have come home to roost, but at what cost? As much as the DUP wants to be England’s yes man, the people of England do not want them, they consider the DUP Irish, and they should just stay in Ireland. This is a reality the DUP choose to ignore.

Nicola Sturgeon has today declared she is postponing plans for a second independence referendum until the end of the Brexit negotiations. It is a strategic move, indeed the timing could be just right and land Scotland in a strong position to vote Yes to Independence, the Scottish vote to remain in the EU was 62%, a significant tally. Whilst we view the EU in the same light as the UK and would warn the Scots of swapping one imperial power for another, however they are now in a strong position to work towards Independence. The incompetence of Teresa May to date and now aided by her new ally Arlene Foster will surely only strengthen common sense to reign in Scotland towards the eventual goal of Independence. The DUP can have their heyday today, it could well be their last.

Ireland 2017
In Ireland, we too want our Independence. The political landscape in Ireland is rapidly changing, the unanswered questions surrounding the border of partition and how it will be managed add to the current uncertain climate. In the midst of all the talk, speculation and sheer political incompetency there seems to be no real plan for the future.

Provisional Sinn Féin’s diversion of a once revolutionary movement, down the path of constitutionalism is quickly ending, discredited and in tatters. Their next move will be most interesting. In the short term, even the soft approach of a border poll will not be granted. In the long term the only option they have of securing a united Ireland is at best a two state federal solution. This in itself will be to appease a tiny pro-British minority. A united Ireland does not in itself guarantee Independence. In 1916 Ireland was united, the objective then and now is to rid Ireland of British imperialism.

Today those of a Unionist persuasion in Ireland need to realize that Ireland’s future strength and prosperity rests only in a united nation that is brave enough to make its own decisions working cooperatively with other sovereign nations. The lack of justice in dealing with the legacy of colonisation in Ireland will never see a guarantor of peace as long as Westminster is involved in the manipulation of Irish affairs. This is a lesson the DUP knows full well, but as of yet is to stubborn to address as they cling tightly to a dying beast that is the United Kingdom.

While currently the Irish nationalist vote would indicate a United Ireland is within the grasp of a coming generation, moves from those who have kept the Revolutionary Republican flame alive must be geared with an eye on outcomes. In the medium term a National Constituent Assembly must be set up in Ireland to determine its future. In the short term Republicans and other interested parties should endeavor to cooperate on a Consultative Assembly for discussion on the Ireland we want.

We in Sinn Féin Poblachtach place the four Province Federal Solution of Éire Nua on the table for discussion and debate. As far back as the 1970’s Loyalists entertained this concept in the eventuality of a British withdrawal. It is a fair proposal, realistic it its structures for governance and with a firm eye on justice to correct centuries of wrong. It will be the guarantor of Peace in Ireland.

Audit 2017: How Democratic Is Local Government In Northern Ireland?

Local authorities play key roles in the devolved government of Northern Ireland, as expressions of communities that were in the past highly polarised on religious and political lines. They are also the only other source of elected legitimacy to the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive, and can act as checks and balances on the domestic concentration of power. As part of the 2017 Audit of UK Democracy, James Pow explores how democratically local councils have operated in difficult conditions. James Pow is a postgraduate research student at the School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy, Queen’s University Belfast.

Detail from the Belfast city crest on a carpet in the City Hall. Photo: Irish Fireside via a CC BY 2.0 licence

What does democracy require of Northern Ireland’s local governments?

Local governments should engage the wide participation of local citizens in their governance via voting in regular elections, and an open interest group and local consultation process.Local voting systems should accurately convert parties’ vote shares into seats on councils, and should be open to new parties entering into competition.As far as possible, consistent with the need for efficient scales of operation, local government areas and institutions should provide an effective expression of local and community identities that are important in civil society (and not just in administrative terms).Local governments should be genuinely independent centres of decision-making, with sufficient own financial revenues and policy autonomy to be able to make meaningful choices on behalf of their citizens.Given the special history of Northern Ireland, deliberative policy-making has a particularly key role in building local political harmony and understanding of multiple viewpoints and interests.Local governments are typically subject to some supervision on key aspects of their conduct and policies by a higher tier of government. But they should enjoy a degree of constitutional protection (or ‘entrenchment’) for key roles, and an assurance that cannot simply be abolished, bypassed or fully programmed by their supervisory tier of governmentThe principle of subsidiarity says that policy issues that can be effectively handled in decentralised ways should be allocated to the lowest tier of government, closest to citizens.

Recent developments

Local government areas and structures recently went through the biggest shake-up to its structure and organisation since the early 1970s. A major 2005 review initially recommended that 26 local government districts be radically streamlined into just seven ‘super-councils’.  After devolution was restored at Stormont in 2007, the power-sharing administration ultimately made a compromise to reduce the number of districts, but only to 11. Of these, six have predominantly unionist electorates, four have predominantly nationalist electorates, and one, Belfast City, is relatively balanced.

The first elections to the revised council districts took place in May 2014; the transfer of power from outgoing administrations was complete within a year. The reformed councils removed many ‘legacy’ features, and so provided fresh opportunities for citizens to re-engage with local government politics. A key reform hope was also that councils themselves can enhance the democratic quality of their decision-making processes. Their average size is over 171,000 people, far larger than their predecessors, with a range from 339,000 in Belfast City to 115,000 in rural Fermanagh and Omagh.

Figure 1: How structural reforms changed local government districts




Northern Ireland councils have fewer responsibilities than councils elsewhere in the UK, partly reflect both the province’s relatively small population and the deeply divided nature of its society.  The Housing Executive is Northern Ireland’s single public housing authority, set up in 1971 in the wake of discriminatory housing allocations by district councils. It is a quasi-government agency (technically an executive non-departmental public body or NDPB). It is operationally independent of the Northern Ireland Executive, but accountable to the Minister for Communities. Transport NI is the region’s sole road authority. The Education Authority (EA) is responsible for all educational and library services. And the provision of social care is overseen by six trusts. These public bodies are each accountable to the Northern Ireland Executive, but not to local councils.


Proportional elections in the new councils

Apart from general elections for the Westminster Parliament, all elections in Northern Ireland are conducted using the Single Transferable Vote electoral system (known as PR-STV in Northern Ireland). The most recent council elections in 2014 using STV generated reasonably proportional results – that is, the number of first preferences received by each of the five main parties broadly corresponded to their total share of seats, to within a handful of percentage points. The results produce a deviation of proportionality (DV) score of 11.1% This is much lower than average scores for Britain’s Westminster elections, using plurality rule voting.


Figure 2: How the main parties’ shares of votes compared to their share of seats in the 2014 council elections
Add captionNotes: DUP: Democratic Unionist Party; SF: Sinn Féin; UUP: United Unionist Party; SDLP: Social Democratic and Labour Party.

However, STV elections are preferential (i.e. voters can number multiple choices of candidates 1, 2, 3 etc. in an order they choose) as well as proportional. So effective vote management and how voters transfer preferences to other parties can influence the results. In 2014 a fragmented distribution of first preference votes across smaller unionist parties disrupted their chances of winning seats. Once these early preferences were eliminated in the counting process, then second or later preferences from these parties’ voters were transferred to their next preferences. Figure 2 shows that the DUP gathered the most of these later vote transfers, thus apparently ending up ‘over-represented’ against their first preference votes. So it would be too simplistic to say that voters who supported smaller parties are left unrepresented – they may not be represented by their first preference party, but by one lower but still positive in their preferences.

Northern Ireland voters historically participate more in local government elections than those elsewhere across the UK. In 2014 over 51 percent of registered voters cast a ballot. This was none the less the lowest level of turnout recorded in a local government contest in Northern Ireland. But it still compares favourably to England’s 36% on the same day. The continued predominance of ethno-national voting in Northern Ireland (at all levels) encourages voters from rival political/religious groups to try and maximise unionist and nationalist representation respectively. Participation is also encouraged by holding council elections concurrently. All other council elections over the last two decades have occurred on the same day as either Westminster or Assembly elections. But in 2014 contests the other elections were for only the European Parliament.


Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) analysis


Current strengthsCurrent weaknessesLocal authorities across the UK have no entrenched constitutional protections. However, following their protracted and controversial creation process, Northern Ireland councils have perhaps more protection from further changes coming from the tier above them.Despite a proportional electoral system, important groups are under-represented. Only a quarter of councillors are women, lower than the percentage of women in the Northern Ireland Assembly. Citizens who identify as neither nationalist nor unionist may also not be adequately represented.The PR-STV electoral system is broadly proportional. The preferential voting aspect of the system minimises the likelihood of wasted votes.Relatively high levels of turnout may partly reflect the continuing salience of sectarian loyalties (linked to ethno-national political competition) rather than a high level of engagement with municipal issues per se.Participation levels in local government elections are relatively high, facilitated by a tradition of holding them concurrently with elections to other levels of government. Under STV you cannot easily hold by-elections, since the process relies on multi-member seats. Instead the political party holding the seat is allowed to nominate (co-opt in) a new person when councillor vacancies arise. This gives parties a lot of power, since one in ten councillors across Northern Ireland has been co-opted. Between May 2014 and April 2017, 42 co-options have been made across Northern Ireland, at least one on every council. The highest number has been made on Belfast City Council, where 18.3% of incumbent councillors are unelected.Councillors are no longer permitted to hold multiple mandates. The shift away from ‘double-jobbing’ is designed to promote clearer electoral accountabilities.Despite recent reforms of local government, there has been no effort to introduce innovative mechanisms of public consultation, such as citizen juries or planning cells.The transfer of local planning powers to councils may help to promote transparency in and engagement with local decision-making.
Future opportunitiesFuture threatsThe transfer of some additional powers to local government level may increase support for additional democratic reforms, such as developing better or new forms of public consultation. Gaining these additional powers could help focus councillors’ minds away from controversial issues of symbolism towards more substantive policy decisions that lack any obvious ethno-national connection.The recent election to the Northern Ireland Assembly (2 March 2017) was preceded by a bitter campaign, showing an increasing salience of the ethno-national dimension. This may trigger regressive polarising motions and debates in local councils in reaction. As the dispute over the flying of the flag at Belfast City Hall demonstrated, decisions on sensitive issues – even if they are the result of a democratic procedure – can stir fervent opposition beyond the council chamber.In the event that the fragile power-sharing administration fails to re-start (or collapses) at Stormont, representatives from the local government level will play a greater role in mitigating any democratic deficit.If direct rule has to be restored, because Stormont cannot, the oversight responsibilities for three key quasi-government agencies with urban roles - the Housing Executive, Education Authority and Transport NI - will transfer to Westminster. This would add further distance between citizens and accountability mechanisms over major agencies of local/regional government.There has been some trend towards fostering local economic development at least in bi-partisan ways.There is still not a consensus on all the key roles played by local governments across the main parties, and sensitive sectarian issues can arise in many applied policy contexts.

Still ‘tribal’ elections?

Just over half (52%) of councillors elected in 2014 were elected to one of the main unionist parties, and 37% to one of the main nationalist parties. However, cross-sectional evidence from the annual Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey has consistently found since 2006 that at least 40% of citizens (a plurality) identify as neither nationalist nor unionist. As in higher levels of government, this group of voters appears to be systematically under-represented under the existing party system.
The reformed structures of local government have not been accompanied by a significant improvement to women’s representation. A quarter of councillors elected in 2014 were women, up just 1.6 percentage points on 2011. The aggregate level masks variation across the new districts. Women are a third of the members of Belfast City Council, but just one sixth of members on North Down and Ards Council.

Until new legislation prohibiting dual mandates came into effect in 2016, several incumbent members of the Northern Ireland Assembly (MLAs) were also elected to local government in 2014. The new rules now prevent the democratically dubious practice of ‘double-jobbing’. But the one-off vacancies left by MLAs vacating their seats were filled by ‘co-option’ (see Weaknesses, above) giving political parties, not voters, the exclusive right to nominate a successor.

Some council planning powers, but not more transparency

As part of the reorganisation of local government, the 11 new councils gained some additional powers from the Northern Ireland Executive. Most notably, decisions on the majority of planning applications and urban regeneration now rest at the level of local government, not the Department for Infrastructure. This transfer of power mandated by the 2011 Planning Act (Northern Ireland) has a democratic objective:

[The change] will make planning more locally accountable, giving local politicians the opportunity to shape the areas within which they are elected. Decision making processes will be improved by bringing an enhanced understanding of the needs and aspirations of local communities.

A 2011 report on public and stakeholder opinion of the Northern Ireland planning system found it to be poorly regarded by citizens, developers, and planners themselves. Citizens tended to see the relationship between planners and developers as too close, while developers tended to see the process as too inefficient. The reformed planning system remains in its infancy, so it is too early to tell whether or not the public and stakeholders perceive the revised system as more legitimate than its predecessor. At this stage, there is no evidence that the new councils have embraced global democratic innovations in planning, such as utilising citizen juries or deliberative planning cells. Regardless of their satisfaction with the new system, citizens and stakeholders may at least more clearly identify council representatives as accountable for decision-making.


Budgets remain constrained

As in Scotland and Wales, local councils receive most of their funding from the next tier up, here the Northern Ireland Executive. However, most of this money in turn comes from the UK exchequer under the Barnett formula, which maintains a broad parity with England public spending. As a result of UK-level austerity policies, funding for Northern Ireland local authorities has declined appreciably.


Decisions are sometimes contested

Given the carefully limited powers of local government, it may be somewhat surprising that council decisions still have the potential to spark controversy and raise fundamental questions over democratic legitimacy. But symbolism is still important. In December 2012 Belfast City Council voted to restrict the number of days that the Union Flag could be flown from City Hall. Nationalist councillors initially proposed a motion that would discontinue the flying of the flag altogether, but lacked a majority to carry it. The cross-community Alliance Party successfully proposed an amendment that would see the flag flying on 18 designated days during the year, in line with official government guidelines. In the end 29 councillors supported the amendment, but all 21 unionist councillors voted against.

The decision prompted street protests across Northern Ireland, some of which turned violent. Loyalists saw the decision as an attack on their British identity. A public consultation conducted as part of an Equality Impact Assessment suggested that a large number of citizens would be offended by any change to the council’s policy. The Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland blamed loyalist paramilitaries for orchestrating disorder. The Alliance Party, holding the balance of power on Belfast City Council, was a key target. Some of its councillors’ homes were attacked, one of its offices was set alight and destroyed, and its sole MP (Naomi Long) received a death threat. Violence eventually dissipated, but the council’s decision stood. Small, peaceful protests have been held outside Belfast City Hall every Saturday afternoon ever since.

This case study shows how a democratic decision, made after a major public consultation, can still face widespread disorder in a politically polarised society like Northern Ireland. Even if a decision is made following consultation and in line with majority views, the decision itself may lack sufficient buy-in on a cross-community basis. Each of the 11 new reorganised councils has made individual decisions on flag-flying policies. Some decisions have attracted protests, but none of the intensity or scale of those seen in Belfast in 2012.


Northern Ireland politics in flux

At the time of writing (June 2017), Northern Ireland lacks a devolved power-sharing government. After a snap Assembly election on 2 March and a highly acrimonious campaign, the two largest parties (the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Sinn Féin) failed to reach agreement for many months on the formation of a new administration. If direct rule from Westminster has to be restored, then the British government assumes responsibility for matters devolved under the Northern Ireland Act (1998), diminishing potential oversight over public services from Northern Ireland voters, especially housing, education and road maintenance (see above). Connections with local council services might suffer too, since the vast majority of Westminster MPs lack experience in, or any strong incentive to understand, local governance in Northern Ireland.

The June 2017 general election further complicated matters by creating a further polarisation of the province’s Westminster MPs between just the DUP and Sinn Féin, and by bringing the DUP into supporting the Conservative’s minority government, potentially jeopardising the UK government’s ability to be seen as impartial arbiters in Northern Ireland politics.


Conclusion

Local government in Northern Ireland apparently meets many democratic criteria to an encouraging extent, especially in the electoral legitimacy of councillors, high turnouts at elections, and a continuing ability to engage citizens’ political interest. However, the continued predominance of the ethno-national dimension at all levels of Northern Ireland politics casts doubt on the extent to which citizens engage with the substantive issues of local government, impairs the deliberative and consensual quality of their decision processes, and has caused democratically-controlled local powers to be kept very minimal. Still, at the time of writing, councillors have for several months been the only elected officials making public policy decisions in Northern Ireland. Despite their comparatively narrow remit they have maintained some reality behind devolved powers across the region.
This post does not represent the views of the London School of Economics.