IF, as Tom Elliott says in his letter to UUP members, the talks between the UUP and DUP were “without prejudice to the interests or integrity of the UUP and to explore areas of cooperation for the benefit of unionism in general,” then why conduct them in secret?
If he wanted to “do justice to that section of the pro-Union electorate who urged our candidates to work more closely with other unionist parties” then, again, why the secrecy?
Very little – particularly in the UUP – stays secret for long and once secrecy has been exposed it does tend to raise the question of why it was required in the first place. And then the whole saga took on epically bizarre proportions when David McNarry was punished for spilling the beans about something that most of his Assembly group colleagues were being kept in the dark about!
Actually, and still on the subject of internal discipline, is there not a case for disciplining Basil McCrea for addressing a Sinn Fein conference on Saturday, where he managed not to promote Ulster Unionism or pan-UK Unionism, but did manage to attack Peter Robinson for “laying a trap for the unwary and the politically naive”? Not one word of his speech undermined, let alone even challenged, Sinn Fein’s philosophy and mythology.
It’s a speech that could have been delivered by someone from Alliance. So, let’s be frank, given Basil’s record of solo runs and self-promotion I’m pretty sure he’s not the best person to raise questions about McNarry’s future in the UUP!
Anyway, there are very many issues the UUP and DUP should be talking about and talking about openly, because they are issues which concern the entire pro-Union community.
One of which is that before the next election Northern Ireland will be reduced from 18 to 16 constituencies, with a knock-on effect across the political/electoral map: it will mean two less MPs and 12 less MLAs. It is essential that unionist losses are kept to the barest minimum.
I have argued before that there is room for two mainstream pro-Union parties in Northern Ireland and that it would be a huge tactical and electoral error to assume that the needs and concerns of the pro-Union electorate could be encompassed by just one party.
But division and bickering between the pro-Union parties actually puts off all of their potential voters, so it is important that both parties cooperate where and when necessary to ensure three things: maximum turnout, the maximum number of seats and maximum collective influence.
And they should also work closely together to ensure that unionism and the Union are effectively promoted and championed in order that support for the Union continues to grow in Northern Ireland.
The next few years – in the run-up to the referendum on Scottish Independence – will see immense focus on the political/geographical/constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom. The pro-Union cause will be challenged from many sources and we must be able to counter those challenges.
So it is important that the mechanisms of cooperation are in place: and it makes sense that the UUP and DUP take the lead in constructing those mechanisms. Also, when required, it is important that other elements of the pro-Union family have an input into this cooperation.
It was the hard work and cooperation of unionism during the original Home Rule Crisis which ensured that the new Northern Ireland was in the title deeds of the United Kingdom as we know it today and the promotion, protection and preservation of the Union remains the fixed purpose of all pro-Union parties.
The pro-Union family is almost certainly fed-up with intra-unionist squabbling. Yes, there are differences of approach and different orders, perhaps, to our political priorities: but – we are united in our collective desire to remain citizens of the UK.
One thing is certain, though, if the pro-Union parties field four, five or even six types of candidate and manifestos in each constituency it seems likely that seats will be lost to Sinn Fein, SDLP and Alliance. And, as we have seen, the shifting of a few hundred voters from one constituency to another can – under the mathematics and quirks of proportional representation – result in the loss of pro-Union seats.
The best way of ensuring that doesn’t happen is to make sure that there are arrangements constantly in place for the pro-Union parties to discuss and make early decisions based on firm polling evidence and analysis. At heart, that’s what regular talks between the UUP and DUP (and others) should be about. Against a background in which there is a shift in demographics it would be foolish not to have this sort of dialogue. When all is said and done it is in the long-term interests of unionism, the Union and Northern Ireland that the pro-Union parties have a civil, respectful and cooperative relationship. They need each other to do well: they need each other to increase and expand.
This should never have been a news story about merging the DUP and UUP: it should, in fact, have been a story about much-needed cooperation between the pro-Union parties and long-term preparation for the future – two issues which should be of concern to everyone here who supports the Union.
I think the DUP’s Lee Reynolds summed it up well in the News Letter on Thursday: “If after a thorough, intense and constructive debate the conclusion is that we can create something better then we should proceed. The debate itself is something no unionist ... should be fearful of.”
Now, as it happens, I think the result of that debate would be a rejection of a merger between the UUP and DUP; and I think the UUP’s Michael Shilliday set out some of the reasons in Friday’s paper. Yet even if there isn’t a merger there remains a need for much closer cooperation at elections and in the Assembly and local councils (particularly after they are reorganised).
It is probably worth noting that the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties have already agreed mechanisms for cooperation and campaigning on the issue of Scottish Independence.
If it makes sense for those parties to work together to protect the UK, then it certainly makes sense for the pro-Union family in NI to do likewise.