uuptoday.org

My thanks to all of you for coming today; and my thanks, too, to those of you who came along to the EGM last night.

The grassroots are the backbone of the Ulster Unionist Party and I know that it hasn’t always been easy being a member of this party over the last ten years.

Membership is voluntary and it takes a certain type of person to raise the funds, knock the doors, keep the branches going and supply the footsoldiers at election after election. I thank them, and I thank you ladies and gentlemen, for keeping this party alive during the very darkest days.

I must pay tribute as well to our public representatives, at Westminster, Europe, Assembly and local council level. Again, because of reduced numbers, a large burden has been placed on their collective shoulders. I am grateful to them for their loyalty and commitment.

In particular, we owe a debt of gratitude to Sylvia Hermon who, along with her colleagues in the Lords, has continued to fly the flag for Ulster Unionism in Parliament against considerable personal and political odds.

And let me not forget our employees: those in HQ, in the Assembly and in our constituency offices. They tend to be forgotten on occasion, but they are often the unsung heroes of our party.

The UUP has weathered many storms since 1905. We created Northern Ireland and we have sustained Northern Ireland. We have never blinked first and we have never allowed the cause of the Union to go undefended.

My ambition, as Leader, is to ensure that our grassroots, our representatives and our staff, are bound together in a re-energized, re-invigorated party, which will see our collective efforts and renewed commitment rewarded with political success and electoral recovery.

DEL:

I am here today wearing two hats: that of Party Leader and that of Minister for Employment and Learning.

Given the subject matter of the excellent panel discussion we have just had, let me address my Departmental brief first and begin by asking you two questions:

Which part of the United Kingdom has had one of the fastest rates of output growth, manufacturing production growth, increase in exports and employment since 1990?

Which part of the United Kingdom now has an unemployment rate well below the national average and also well below that of such major European economies as France, Germany and Italy?

The answer, I am delighted to say, is Northern Ireland.

But that doesn’t mean that we don’t have problems.

Our average living standards remain about 80 per cent of the UK average and are not projected to change by much. An economic think tank recently pointed out that public spending actually contributed 70.5 % of the entire output of the Northern Ireland economy.

Of great concern, too, is the fact that, whereas in most Western economies 2-3 per cent of GDP is devoted to research and development activities, here, in Northern Ireland, the rate is barely 1 per cent.

That is a brief account of where we are at in economic terms. But I am pleased to say that my own Department (Employment and Learning) lies at the heart of the strategy directed at improving the longer term prospects both for the Northern Ireland economy and for all of our citizens.

The wealth and health of all, indeed.

As Minister I do want to see skills upgraded at all levels, because international experience indicates that it is on the quality of the workforce that regions and nations compete in the world’s market place.

Back in May I launched an investigation into the causes of the so-called brain drain. Too many talented people, particularly at age 18 or 21, leave our shores and too few return to bring us the benefits of their wider experience.

Since any society is best tested by the way in which it treats the most vulnerable, I have initiated an independent investigation into the way in which my Department handles the transition of young people with disabilities out of special schooling and into the work force.

Recognising the imperative to improve our game with regard to science and technology my Department will be grasping the opportunities created by the Innovation Fund which originated with the idea of the then Chancellor Gordon Brown back in November 2006.

I will continue to make it a personal as well as a political priority to deal with the scandal and, indeed, the human tragedy, that as many as one-quarter of adults in Northern Ireland do not have adequate ability in reading and counting.

The American politician Robert McNamara said, way back in the 1960s, “…some people look at the world and ask why? Other people look at what the world could be, and ask, why not?”

What I am aiming for is not easy; but it is important. I believe we can shift the emphasis of careers education, so that our young people and their parents may begin to value jobs and professions which very directly contribute to wealth creation.

I refuse to write-off vast tracts of our towns and cities and of our society; we can and should rebuild the culture which valued education and learning; the culture which characterised this city in its days of industrial greatness.

The Northern Ireland economy has plenty of critics. But I reject those Irish republicans and left wing English commentators in particular, who argue that we are some sort of failed entity kept alive only by the generosity of the London Exchequer.

The reality is that a terrorist campaign and political instability prevented Northern Ireland from performing as well as I know that it can perform.

Yet, that said, it does no good to pretend we are world class when we are not! Still, Harold Wilson and (more recently) Peter Hain were wrong to imply we were some sort of spongers.

All that we are asking for is a business tax regime which gives us a chance to compete (and this isn’t just about Corporation Tax alone, but fuel duties relative to the Republic—and recent events have emphasized again the tragic consequences associated with cross-border smuggling).

Incidentally, whilst I have been a longstanding supporter of co-operation between Northern Ireland and the Republic when it is truly to our mutual benefit—and also subject to democratic accountability—we will not gain prosperity by losing our political or economic identity.

In 1999 the Ulster Unionist Party opposed the introduction of a single industrial development agency; the arguments against it remain overwhelming.

I would also say that if you wish the local economy to become more dynamic and entrepreneurial, then it is perverse to load ever more taxes on families and property owners. Our message to Treasury, to adapt Churchill’s wartime rallying cry, is “give us the fiscal tools and we will finish the job”.

There is, as we are well aware, a significant connection between the political environment of a country and its economic conditions and prospects.

By making Northern Ireland more stable, we are contributing to making more prosperity possible.

So it is a good sign in many ways that so many people are visiting our shores as tourists or as migrant workers.

An abundance of international surveys show that global business prefers peaceful locations, as well as countries with uncorrupt and transparent systems of government.

This is just one more reason why our new Executive and Assembly needs to make every effort to ensure that, like Caesar’s wife, it is truly beyond reproach as to the manner of its decision making. Government, here, at every level, must be clean, transparent and uncorrupted by the activities of former terrorists.

The Party:

The Ulster Unionist Party has committed itself to a political and policy process which allows Northern Ireland to complete the transition to “normal” politics.

As a Minister I want to play a part in making Northern Ireland a regional leader in the knowledge-based economy of the 21st century.

As Party Leader I want the Ulster Unionist Party to engage with like-minded allies in Great Britain to promote a pan-UK vision which endorses the over-arching benefits of a United Kingdom as the best framework in which to nurture the benefits available from devolution.

But that promotion shouldn’t be confined within the borders of the United Kingdom alone. The Ulster Unionist Party is the only mainstream pro-Union party with representation in the European Parliament.

I would be keen for this party to co-operate with others in that Parliament to ensure that the fundamental and historic rights of the United Kingdom and its constituent parts are protected and promoted. We are not opposed to a Europe of nations. But we are opposed to a European nation state which undermines the constitutional integrity and political identity of the United Kingdom.

A form or spirit of devolution which encourages “ourselves alone”, or is exploited by proponents of Scottish, Welsh or little-Ulster nationalism, is a form of devolution which will undo the constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom.

The Ulster Unionist Party is, first and foremost, a party of the Union and a champion of the United Kingdom. On that basis, we seek to build a Northern Ireland which will be valued as an economic asset to the United Kingdom as a whole; and valued as an upholder of the Union which has been of such huge benefit to all of the people in the United Kingdom.

Now then, let me turn to other matters.

For some time now the DUP has been demanding the credit for every positive development in Northern Ireland. You name it and they claim the praise for it. You point to it and they will say that it’s their doing.

The efforts of the Ulster Unionist Party—along with those of other parties, governments and individuals—have been airbrushed out of the shiny new history prepared by the DUP.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am sick to the back teeth of the DUP’s orgy of self-praise and self-promotion.

A cheap tin badge with “getting it right” stamped on it, isn’t half as valuable as having had the courage and the foresight to getting it started in the first place!

Boasting about a “fair deal” or a “better deal” doesn’t take the same degree of political skill as being able to say that you delivered the deal in the first place!

And, let’s face it, the sight of Peter Robinson leapfrogging from the front bench to the back bench in order to put the boot into Margaret Ritchie, makes a total mockery of the claim that the DUP had put accountability at the heart of the system.

Insisting that you have “smashed” Sinn Fein and put it in its place, looks like a joke when the reality is that the new deal consisted of a carve-up of office and a ganging-up against the smaller parties.

Indeed, I was surprised that the forthcoming legislative programme didn’t contain an UN-Civil Partnership Bill to formalise the new relationship between the DUP and Sinn Fein.

The truth of the matter is simple: Had we accepted the DUP’s advice, predictions and judgment calls in 1997/98, there wouldn’t be an Assembly today.

They got it wrong on just about everything. Sinn Fein would never accept a return to Stormont; or a partitionist settlement; or recognise the legitimacy of the police and justice system. Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

And, as I mentioned Sinn Fein, let us remember that they have been forced to accept the reality that their former “ballot box and armalite” strategy was not going to work. And let us also remember that it was pressure from this party—often acting alone—which forced them to confront that reality.

But however much we may knock the DUP and raise questions about their opportunism, hypocrisy and u-turns: nor however much we say that we took the risks and did the heavy lifting; we cannot deny the fact that they have gained ground at our expense.

But let me say this to you, ladies and gentlemen; and say it to you clearly and unambiguously:

We, the Ulster Unionist Party, helped the DUP into their current position.

Our internal war was a gift to them.

Our public spats were a gift to them.

Our seeming inability to run a coherent campaign was a gift to them.

Ladies and gentlemen—Those days are over.

At our EGM last night we took the first major step to sorting out our internal and organisational inadequacies.

No-one should underestimate the importance of these reforms. Every aspect of how we do our business has been held up to scrutiny and where it has been found wanting, we are changing it.

We are better placed now than we have been for a generation to present ourselves to the electorate as a party once again deserving of support.

Northern Ireland has changed over this past decade and it has changed for the better.

The Ulster Unionist Party has been a key factor in promoting and securing that change.

But as ever, there is more to be done.

We have to prove to the electorate, the media and even ourselves that we, as a party, have also changed and changed for the better.

We have to ensure that this party is, once again, returned to the very heart of political, electoral and civic life in Northern Ireland.

We have to focus on the sort of policies which will appeal to those who don’t vote; as well as to those who will be coming onto the register for the first time.

And yes—we have to win back those voters who left us for the DUP or Alliance.

That doesn’t mean trying to outflank the DUP on the right or Alliance on the left. It means replanting our banner and our values upon the very centre ground and setting out the vision we have for a Northern Ireland at peace with itself.

Events of the past few days have proved that the shadow of the gunman still hovers across our fledgling institutions. There is still far too much paramilitary, crypto-paramilitary and criminal activity for us to pretend that we are yet a truly peaceful society.

We are on the road to normality, but haven’t yet reached that destination. The job we began in the mid-1990s—that of getting all of the organisations to decommission and embrace politics—is still ongoing. As ever, though, we will continue to exert every influence we can. There can never ever be an “acceptable level of violence.”

I accept that the IRA has changed in the last few years. But rather than believing that it has gone away entirely, I suspect that it may actually be in a form of suspended animation—a hibernation, if you like. But the “potential” of the IRA still exists; and it will exist for so long as the IRA itself exists.

The IRA needs to disappear all together. Disband. Dismantle all of its structures. That, and that alone, would be the clearest possible sign to unionism that we really are living in a new political dispensation.

The “Argument” over the Executive Minutes, the Causeway Saga and the ongoing hoo-ha over a stadium at the Maze, suggests that there is a very important case to be made for the electorate to have a real and credible alternative at election time to the Sinn Fein-DUP coalition.

And I am delighted, by the way, to welcome Margaret Ritchie, Minister for Social Development, to our conference later today.

Unlike the DUP we have never wanted office for the mere sake of it.

Unlike Sinn Fein we do not want office to sustain the pretence that we can pursue a unilateral agenda.

We have always wanted a form of devolution which is genuinely better than Direct Rule. Mandatory coalition is an alternative to direct rule—but it is no more than that.

Genuinely better means that there has to be proper scrutiny and accountability. And it also means that the electorate has to have a real choice between an outgoing administration and an alternative incoming one.

Ladies and gentlemen, let me assure you on one thing: This party will not shy away from taking any decision, inside or outside the Assembly, which we believe is ultimately in the best interests of the electorate and of democracy.

Northern Ireland has changed. It will continue to change.

The Ulster Unionist Party has to show that it recognises those changes and show, too, that we have adapted ourselves to new realities.

I believe that there is a huge market out there for an Ulster Unionist Party which proves that it is an effective party with relevant policies.

I believe that there is a huge market out there for an Ulster Unionist Party which has a clear identity, purpose and vision.

I believe that there is a huge market out there for an Ulster Unionist Party which champions the values of an inclusive, caring, thoughtful socio-economic agenda.

I believe that there is a huge market out there for an Ulster Unionist Party which rejects the cynicism, opportunism and self-importance of the DUP.

Let’s face it; the DUP’s idea of choice is Ian Paisley as leader or Ian Paisley Jnr as leader!

There is an overwhelmingly powerful argument to be made in favour of the Union. Whether it be in terms of education, employment opportunities, welfare provision, housing, business, individual freedoms, the economy—the list goes on and on.

Northern Ireland and every one of its inhabitants benefits from the Union. We are citizens of one of the most important countries in the world. We have a range and scale of opportunities and possibilities which would not exist in any other constitutional alternative.

The Ulster Unionist Party is the only party in Northern Ireland which is an unambiguous and unashamed promoter of the Union as a whole; as opposed to the parts that happen to suit us.

The Ulster Unionist Party will continue to champion the Union and the United Kingdom; and within this new devolutionary settlement we will promote policies which enhance our relationship rather than distance us.

We are not Irish Nationalists. And we are not little-Ulster nationalists, either!

This party is ready for a fight-back and a recovery.

You, ladies and gentlemen, are ready for that fight-back.

I am ready for that fight-back.

So, when we leave this conference today, let one simple, united message go out:

The Ulster Unionist Party is back,

Back in business

And here to stay.

Thank you.

It’s a real pleasure to be addressing an EGM which has been summoned for a positive purpose rather than for a showdown.

Tonight is about the way ahead.

This is a very important meeting for our party—arguably one of the most important in our history.

It’s about rebuilding ourselves as a party and then replanting ourselves at the very centre of everyday life in Northern Ireland.

It’s about laying down the foundations upon which we will prepare ourselves for the new challenges which face us in these early years of our second century.

Reform has been talked about for years. Reform has been sidelined for years.

But one thing is clear: we really do have to reform.

Election results, media coverage, internal weaknesses and difficulties all tell the same story: as a party we have been getting a lot of things wrong.

As Leader, I am determined that the primary contribution I make to this party—although hopefully not the only contribution—is to push through the reform that we have needed for decades.

I am determined to leave this party in a better shape than I inherited it.

At our AGM in April, delegates unanimously endorsed a resolution committing us to that reform: and instructing me, as party leader, in conjunction with the Executive Committee, to urgently review and bring forward proposals.

Part of that resolution stated that the UUC “Determines that it must now become a modern political party, organised, financed and represented in a manner that again attracts the maximum of electoral support.”

To assist me in what I knew would be a massive task I sought the help of four convenors—David Campbell, Danny Kingahan, Terry Wright and Alex Kane—and issued a series of invitations to other party members to join them on four review committees.

They were tasked with looking at the specific areas of finance, constituency organisation, communications and the party constitution.

We have made every effort to reach as many members—particularly UUC delegates—as possible. There have been two rounds of roadshows, in Banbridge, Omagh, Coleraine, Belfast, Armagh and Enniskillen. There have been meetings in every association. There have been special meetings of the officers and the executive committee. Tonight’s meeting is the culmination of that consultation process.

I am grateful to the convenors and the committee members for all the help they have given. And I am grateful to all of those members and delegates who turned up or found other ways of making an input.

I also want to place on record my own thanks—and those of the convenors—to Mark Neale, who has acted as Secretary to the Review. As well as fronting many of the roadshows, he has also been responsible for bringing together all of the material from the various committees

Tonight, I am asking you to ratify and adopt the new Party Rules attached at appendix A; and to endorse the actions and recommendations outlined in appendix B.

Any changes we claim to have made will be utterly meaningless if the electorate in general, and our members and supporters in particular, don’t see evidence of change; evidence of new thinking; evidence of a renewed presence on the ground; and evidence of an effective performance in the Assembly and its committees, in council chambers and in the media.

We have to prove that we are aware of old failings, confident of our underlying virtues, and ready to put things right.

Let me say, too, that these changes will be utterly meaningless if we don’t have discipline in this party.

And the best type of discipline is self-discipline.

The primary task of members of this party—be they ordinary members or elected representatives—is the promotion of the party and the promotion of party policy.

Not the promotion of themselves and their own agenda.

Now, I know that some of you believe that we haven’t yet gone far enough or been radical enough. But this process is ongoing.

There will be more lessons to learn and fine tuning will be required.

But what matters most tonight is that the changes we are recommending are more significant, wide-ranging and sweeping than they may seem on paper. If we get these first stages right and put in place, then the Executive can continue to build and improve as and when necessary.

Regarding finance, we have to live within our means, use our money wisely, not place too heavy a burden on our associations and keep loans and overdrafts to a very bare minimum. But we also have to raise money. Politics is an expensive business.

I know that concerns have been raised about how we handled our financial affairs in the past; and I know, too, that members have worried that quotas—difficult to raise in their own right—haven’t been used to best effect. The Finance Committee has addressed many of these concerns and set out a series of recommendations.

In terms of constituency organisation we have to be seen as an on-the-ground, relevant and active party. Branch and association members are the front-line troops of this party and it is essential that we mobilise and deploy them to best effect.

Also, our internal and external communications haven’t been as effective as they should be or need to be. We will have an uphill task to get the media to take an interest in us again; but it is a task we must set ourselves to.

Just as important is the need to improve the communication structures between the centre and the grassroots; and between the various official bodies and representative groups within the party. We cannot continue with a culture in which are own members believed they were being kept in the dark.

You will note, too, that the rule book has been severely pruned. It is now a more manageable and more comprehendible guide to running our affairs.

The Convenors of the PR/Media and Constituency committees have put together a package of recommendations to address a wide array of problems and those packages will—and quickly—be brought before the Executive Committee for approval and adoption.

I know, too, that there are concerns about selection.

Let me say this to you: If we go into an Assembly, council or general election with a slate of candidates which is overwhelmingly male and overwhelmingly middle-aged, we will have no mission of attracting new or returning voters. We will, in fact and in effect, have made ourselves a very poor choice for women and younger voters.

During the course of the most recent round of consultations, but subsequent to the special Executive on October 6th, a number of issues of concern to members and officers have been aired. The officers met on Wednesday to consider these and decided that they merited further discussion and investigation.

The officers unanimously decided that these issues should be remitted to the Executive for in-depth discussion and resolution.

One of the issues was raised recently by colleagues in Fermanagh/South Tyrone, concerning representation of constituencies on the Executive. The Association feels that there should be a relationship between the memberships of a constituency association and the representation on the Executive.

Another matter was concerns expressed by the UYUC about the method to be adopted for the appointment of a Youth Development Officer. The UYUC feels that they should select this officer in a similar way to the appointment of the Councillor’s Association’s representative on the officer team.

I agree that this matter needs further consideration, and if remitted back, I would be supportive of the matter being resolved by reference to the qualifications for a Youth Officer being defined in Standing Orders to the mutual satisfaction of both the UYUC and the Executive.

A similar discussion may be necessary with regards to concerns expressed by the UWUC. Furthermore, as representative bodies, the UYUC and UWUC must be fully integrated and involved at all levels within the party.

To ensure this is achieved I think it is timely to review all these matters urgently, and I will bring a proposal to this effect to the Executive.

The officers also identified a small number of alterations that should be made with regard to definitions: and rather than try and bring amendments on the hoof of this meeting, they feel that these should also be discussed at the Executive.

You may well ask that, if further amendments are required, how will they be dealt with? The officers feel that as we work our way through the standing orders in the next few months, other issues could arise. Consequently, a further opportunity will present itself at the AGM in March to bring forward any tidying up amendments that are deemed necessary.

This method would be in stark contrast to our attempts to deal with amendments at our last, yet unsuccessful, attempt at change in the Europa Hotel in early 2006!

Other issues have been raised over the past six months and I know that some of you were keen to table amendments tonight.

Ladies and gentlemen, the decision not to take amendments is a decision I support. We would have ended up with a never-ending series of speeches and votes and few of us would have been any the wiser at the end of the night.

There are issues which will require serious and detailed debate; but that debate can be held within the confines of the Executive Committee, when there will be the time we need.

Colleagues, we have to demand more of ourselves. We, members and representatives, are the public face of the Ulster Unionist Party. If we, ourselves, can’t convince the electorate and the media that we have changed and that we are serious about our own survival and revival, then nobody else will do it for us.

What I am asking you to endorse tonight is not a panacea for all our problems. There is no miracle cure; no instant recovery tomorrow morning. We will still face a daunting and uphill task.

But it is worth doing. The legacy of this party is one of which we should all be proud. We have weathered many storms and faced down many opponents. But we are still here. We are still standing.

And remember this: even with all of our problems in the past ten years in particular, we still managed to deliver a settlement for Northern Ireland which is now accepted by 95% of unionism.

That’s no mean achievement: and we shouldn’t sit back and allow others to take the credit when they themselves did every thing they could to destroy us.

Reform alone isn’t enough. Reorganisation alone isn’t enough. Better communications isn’t enough. A smaller rule book isn’t enough. Financial stability isn’t enough. A wider array of candidates isn’t enough.

Yes, the collective impact of all of these changes will make a difference and it is important that we do things differently and do them better.

But what matters most is that we—as a party—believe in ourselves and are seen to believe in ourselves.

The root of all of this must be confidence in ourselves; confidence in our abilities and confidence in the role that we, and we alone, can play in Northern Ireland.

The message I want to send out tonight—and I want it to be unanimous—is that the Ulster Unionist Party is once again fit for purpose and deserving of votes.

And I promise you this: when we send out that message it will be accompanied by hard evidence of change.

Ladies and Gentlemen: the Ulster Unionist Party is back; back in business; and back to stay.

Thank you.

At long last, after 35 years of assorted negotiations, we have a government with local Ministers representing us at all levels. We must congratulate Dr Paisley on taking the brave and unexpected step to a new era of co-operation in politics. In many respects the St Andrew’s Agreement is indistinguishable from the 1998 original so heavily lambasted by the DUP. He may claim it’s a better and fairer deal—I’m not so sure.

The DUP are purporting that all is rosy for Unionism. The reality is that while the Dr Paisley may seem to have skilfully led the DUP into a deal with which it is not naturally comfortable, he has also taken unionism into a strategic cul-de-sac in which the room for manoeuvre is extremely limited.

Peter Hain’s very personal and very draconian form of direct rule brought political blackmail to the level of an art form, with its threats of increased domestic and industrial rates and the removal of academic selection. Water rates bills were ready to be posted, seven super councils (supported by Sinn Fein) were pending, along with tighter planning rules and tighter funding in all areas. The sole object of this blackmail was to “persuade” the DUP into Government with Sinn Fein. The very fact that the tactic worked, showed just how little influence the DUP could exert; and it also demonstrated the weakened state of the Union itself.

We now have an added threat posed by the rise of nationalism in Scotland and Wales. Dr Paisley seems remarkably comfortable with the leaders of nationalist movements across the United Kingdom and Ireland. He is also comfortable with his own version of little-Ulster nationalism, happier to promote the “ourselves alone” version of unionism rather than an overarching pan-UK unionism.

It all begs the question why could we not have had power sharing 33 years ago with constitutional nationalists, a question Dr Paisley has yet to answer? It was Paisley himself who fanned the flames on numerous occasions, encouraging increased divisions and sectarianism. Bigotry remains endemic in Northern Ireland due to a process of polarisation of politics practiced by both the DUP and Sinn Fein for their own party political ends. Hardly surprising, I suppose, that they are now top dogs in their own packs and able to bark their supposed triumphs to their own followers. They may have done well from the spoils of office; sadly though, the same is not true for the province as a whole.

And what happened to the financial package promised by the tough, “no push-over” DUP? Newly appointed Finance Minister, Peter Robinson, is preparing a budget that will impose cuts across most departments and put many projects on the back-burner.The DUP’s relative failure to obtain a substantial financial package linked to the return of devolution highlights their impotence when faced with the political clout of the Sovereign government.

But times change, that’s politics, and we must move on,we in UUP welcome the DUP’s conversion to real politics. In their ministerial roles we see them working the system ,let’s hope that with no extra money available they can make the departmental efficiency savings necessary to release funds to other priority areas.

Meanwhile,the UUP’s new objectives clause includes the objective to promote and strengthen the Union. It is vital we ensure that the fundamental principles and philosophy of Unionism are not threatened further. We fought successfully for parity with equal rights as equal citizens in the United Kingdom. We will continue to press for a Royal Commission into the future of the Union, for above all else we must participate and contribute to the Union and gain and build friendships within and throughout the United Kingdom.

Under DUP /Sinn Fein rule I fear that the true principles and philosophy of Unionism are under threat. The principles upon which the Union itself was founded are under threat. We now have an Ulster-centric, Ulster-nationalist style of Unionism developing under the DUP, with increased reliance on the state in all walks of life. This fits well with Sinn Fein’s centralist socialist economic policies, a public sector dependent economy and a decimated private sector following the years of violence. We see DUP and Sinn Fein Ministers on TV espousing similar policies based on state intervention and control over our lives.

The UUP’s founding principles were based on the freedom of the individual, free from state control and underpinned by the promotion of science, industry and enterprise within an open and free economy, following the traditions of the Scottish enlightenment.The UUP once again needs to grasp the true principles of Unionism.We need real practical cross-community politics rather than subsidise sectarian politics through DUP and SF’s axis of state interference.

The DUP has fallen into Sinn Fein’s trap with their joint campaign for equal rates of corporation tax and more state control over our lives. This is diametrically opposed to the principles upon which Unionism was founded ie parity of taxation and welfare rights within the UK. Sinn Fein is trying to create an all-Ireland economy with a socialist agenda while the DUP acquiesce in the comfort of their new found power and multiple mandates.

Instead we in Unionism should be arguing for lower Corporation Tax rates within the whole Union. Gordon Brown has already signalled lower rates in the future for the whole Kingdom with a reduction from 2008 to 28%. This is an example of how Unionism must learn to engage with our partners in the Union and contribute to the Union.

The UUP is committed to ensuring equal rights to quality public services within the Union and to ensure a successful market economy where the freedom of the individual is paramount. The individual needs freedom from the shackles of state control and public sector domination and its ‘crowding out’ of talent from the private sector; otherwise we will be outgunned by the dynamic free market capitalist economy of the Celtic Tiger and some newly emerging economies. All Unionists need to work out what the Union is about, promote its’ principles, contribute to it and ensure that it not only survives but also thrives and with Northern Ireland an integrally working part.

UUP Deputy Leader and Chair of the Committee of OFMDFM, Danny Kennedy MLA, has expressed his concern at the decision by the Dail to invite Northern Ireland MPs to sit on its newly-established Committee on the Implementation of the Belfast Agreement.

Mr. Kennedy said, “last night’s decision by the Dail is a deeply disappointing move. The text of the motion referred to ‘Members of the Westminster Parliament elected for constituencies in Northern Ireland’. While it is interesting to note that Dail Eireann – in contrast to Sinn Fein Ministers of the Crown in Stormont – can refer to this jurisdiction by its proper title, it is the view of the Ulster Unionist Party that the proper forum for dialogue between MPs and TDs is the East-West framework set up by the Belfast Agreement.

“Although rightly concerned, there is no need for unionists to over-react to this move by the Dail. Despite the ambitions of republicans, the Dail has refused to allow Northern Ireland MPs any ‘right to vote or to move motions and amendments’ in the new Committee. Such a stance is quite understandable – why would citizens of the Republic of Ireland want Members of another Parliament, accountable to another electorate, to have a vote in a Dail Committee? In light of the insignificant role granted to Northern Ireland MPs on the Committee, it is difficult to understand why the Dail supported a mostly symbolic move that nevertheless detracts from the existing East-West institutions.

“The Ulster Unionist Party will strongly urge Her Majesty’s Government and the First Minister of Northern Ireland to express their disapproval of this development and to reaffirm the centrality and integrity of the East-West institutions. Whatever the token participation of republican and nationalist MPs from Northern Ireland in the Dail Committee, the British Isles framework of the Belfast Agreement is the proper forum for the respective parliaments to jointly examine the Agreement’s implementation”.

Ulster Unionist Member of the European Parliament Jim Nicholson MEP has said the Prime Minister’s refusal to hold a referendum on the EU Treaty agreed last night at a meeting of EU Leaders in Lisbon is an affront to democracy.

The Treaty of Lisbon will be signed by EU Leaders on December 13th in Lisbon.

In a statement Mr Nicholson said,

“The new EU Treaty will have a profound effect on the way the UK is governed taking further powers away from Member States and it is nothing less than an affront to democracy that the Prime Minister will not allow the British people to have their say on it.

“The new EU Treaty contains more than 90% of the original constitution that was rejected in 2005 by the French and Dutch voters. The name may have changed but the substance is still the same.

“No – one disagrees with the need for fundamental reform in the EU so that it can become more accountable, transparent and more responsive to people’s needs but this is not the answer.

“At a time when public confidence and belief in the work of the EU is at an all time low the Prime Minister should be encouraging people in Northern Ireland and all across the UK to debate the future direction of the EU, not stifling discussion and attempting to bring the constitution in through the back door.”

Speaking to Young Unionists at Queens University on Monday night, Ulster Unionist Chief Whip and Strangford MLA David McNarry said the UUP was not against people wishing to speak or promote Irish but that an Irish Language Act would have been deeply divisive. In a speech to Young Unionists Mr McNarry set out the UUP position,

“I should say at the outset that, despite Republican efforts to paint us as bigots on the language issue, the Ulster Unionist Party respects cultural diversity. It creates a stable, peaceful, pluralist society. In a way tolerance, diversity and pluralism of views is the very essence of what it means to be British.

Modern Britain is a haven for different cultures, ideas, traditions and languages precisely because we do not seek to impose our will or project some kind of superiority or political connotation onto our language and culture.

That’s why we oppose this Act– this respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity - and that we tried to enshrine into the Agreement before the DUP opened it all up again - would have been fundamentally undermined by the proposed Act.

Make no bones about it, the Irish Language Act would only further politicise Irish, place an undue and costly emphasis upon it and allow it to be used as a cultural weapon in an unarmed struggle. It is not enough for Republicans (and to a lesser degree nationalists in the SDLP) to have Irish language promoted normally, they demand a neon ultra-Irish shoved in the face of the majority of people in Northern Ireland.

Listening to those in the Pro-Act lobby and Irish lobby generally, you’d think that the use of Irish was widespread and was somehow being held back from a renaissance type explosion. Not so. The last census shows us that just a little over 75,000 people in Northern Ireland can speak, read and write in Irish. 75,000 people. That’s about 4% of our population here in Northern Ireland.

You will all be aware of the current pressures on public expenditure in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland must tighten its collective fiscal belt after the miracle financial package that the DUP made a pre-requesite to devolution, failed to materialise.

So, on a sound financial basis it doesn’t make any sense to spend that much money on such a small group. But it’s about more than money. Irish Language is used by Republicans not to be inclusive but to be exclusive. It is used as an expression of the aspirations of Irish Republicans.

As a result it has been turned from something that any pluralist British person can accept as a legitimate form of expression and a celebration of tradition, into something deeply political divisive. We don’t need an Irish Language Act and never will.”

Speaking after the DCAL Minister Edwin Poots kicked a proposed Irish Language Act into touch, Ulster Unionist Chief Whip and DCAL Committee Deputy Chair David McNarry said in a statement,

“The Ulster Unionist Party had settled the language issue through the Belfast Agreement in 1998. Language was to be carried through the North/South language body which comprises of the Board of Ulster Scots and the Irish Bord na Gaelige. This created parity and a level playing field.

The Ulster Unionist Party respects cultural diversity as a key foundation for a stable, peaceful, pluralist society. That’s why we oppose this Act – respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity would have been fundamentally undermined by the proposed Act. The Irish Language Act would further politicise Irish, place an undue and costly emphasis upon it and allow it to be used as a cultural weapon in an unarmed struggle.

The DUP went to St Andrews and signed up to Annexes which included the Irish Language Act proposal. At the conclusion of the negotiations, the overall package was described by the DUP Leader as ‘a great day for all of Ireland’.

The DCAL Minister has now kicked the issue into touch. This is to be welcomed especially after the Minister, in response to my specific question, said it was unlikely that the matter would go to Westminster. The DUP have turned around on this issue after repeated pressure from the UUP.”

Ulster Unionist Deputy Leader Danny Kennedy tabled a motion today calling on the Executive to get a move on and produce, before the Halloween recess, an executive legislative programme detailing executive business for the current assembly session.

Speaking in the House Mr Kennedy said,

“This is the 166th day since the Ministers and Executive assumed office. This is almost 24 weeks, nearly half a year.

In that time, this Assembly has debated 68 private members motions. These motions are basically nothing more than members of this House flagging up issues of concern to them. That is all. They may be worthy and well intentioned but in terms of action, they are going nowhere. I contend that the sheer number of them is undermining the reputation of this Assembly. It is causing journalists to comment that this is not a legislative Assembly at all but nothing more than a debating chamber.

It would be more normal if Executive business dominated 70% of the Assembly’s time and private members business some 30% and not the other way around. In the first mandate this was the case.

That is why I tabled a motion asking the Executive to produce a legislative timetable detailing executive business to come before the Assembly before Christmas.

The Assembly is meant to work. It is meant to legislate. It is meant to administer. It is not meant to sit like some third world dictator’s Rolls Royce with no petrol in it. So I am saying to the Executive – get a move on.”

Speaking to the North Lurgan Branch of Upper Bann UUP tonight, a sceptical UUP Leader Sir Reg Empey said he would approach talks with the DUP in good faith but cast doubt over the merits of the UUP subsuming into the DUP.

Sir Reg said,

“Eoghan Harris raised a few eyebrows at the Reform Club last Friday, when he argued in favour of a merger between the UUP and DUP.

Never let it be said that the UUP expects our guests to toe the line and say only what we want to hear!

But he did raise some points that need to be addressed.

The timing of the invitation from Nigel Dodd’s to the UUP’s Officers, for talks with the DUP (an invitation that Eoghan regarded as an encouraging development) was interesting:

It came late on that Friday afternoon, when it was becoming clear that there could be a major difficulty for Dr. Paisley at that night’s meeting of his free Presbyterian ruling council.

It came on the same day that rumours were circulating that Jim Allister and others were preparing to set up a vehicle for disaffected DUP members and supporters.

The news of the invitation was released to the media before I had time to read it.

And let us not forget that the DUP knows that this party is in the final stages of an internal review and reform exercise. I had to bear in mind that they were possibly throwing a spanner into our works, holding out the prospect of accommodation and pact at the very time we were preparing to re-launch ourselves.

But taking all of that into consideration, the leadership team of the Ulster Unionist Party decided to test the bona fides of the DUP and what they had to offer for unionism and the Union. But let no-one kid themselves that this is some sort of launching pad for unionist unity at this stage.

The previous and best time for unionist co-operation was in the 1996-1998 period, when the Belfast Agreement was being negotiated. It would have been so much better had the DUP stayed on board at that stage – particularly in light of the fact that they are more or less in precisely the position that the UUP negotiated almost alone. I heard no talk of pacts and co-operation in March of this year, when the DUPs only agenda seemed to be the destruction of Ulster Unionists and the accommodation of Sinn Fein.

So it is tempting to draw the conclusion that the DUP – which has quite a few problems on its plate at the moment – regards inter-unionist co-operation now as a means to a particular end; namely entrenching its own dominance at our expense.

It is interesting too to note the receptive noises of Jeffrey Donaldson, one of the people responsible for so much internal damage to the UUP!

As Leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, I need to bear in mind also that there tens of thousands within the pro-Union community who never have, or maybe never will, vote for the DUP.

Politics is about choice. It’s about reaching out to voters who haven’t been and probably can’t be won over by your opponents.

It needs to be remembered that a single Unionist Party, or permanent coalition, shuts off for ever the opposition option in the Assembly. Accountability, scrutiny, transparency, opposition and real choices at elections are the cornerstones of a democratic government.

There are now, and will be again, occasions when some practical on-the-ground co-operation between the pro-Union parties could assist in the winning of extra votes and seats.

As Party Leader I have to be careful in the choices I advocate for my colleagues, members and voters. I have to ensure that some sort of pact doesn’t, in reality, do more damage to the UUP and to unionism.

We will approach discussions with the DUP in good faith to see if we can end the lack of representation in Parliament that so many people in Northern Ireland have to endure. How can it be of benefit to stay away from the Parliament that votes vast sums of money for us to spend in Northern Ireland. Yet this is what Sinn Fein and shortly to arrive Fianna Fail intend for the people.

If there is a realistic possibility of helping any electors in Northern Ireland achieve representation, then Ulster Unionists will take seriously a proposal that could bring about change.”

Marking the 95th anniversary of the signing of the Ulster Covenant on 28th September 1912, Ulster Unionist Party Leader Sir Reg Empey MLA has called for 21st century unionism to reconnect with the Covenant’s bold and generous vision of the Union.

Sir Reg said, “today we commemorate a defining moment in the history of the British Isles, when ordinary people declared that they would not stand aside and allow Parliament to deprive them of their rights as citizens. At the heart of the Ulster Covenant was a determination that ‘our cherished position of equal citizenship in the United Kingdom’ would be maintained for all people in this part of the Kingdom.

At a time when some parties of the right across Europe were speaking the language of aggressive, chauvinistic nationalism and parties of the left were preaching class war, the Ulster Covenant spoke of different and better values – of securing equal citizenship within the constitution of the United Kingdom. Here was an inclusive, pluralist understanding of what it was to be a citizen of the United Kingdom, in which both the material well-being and the civil and religious freedoms of all were protected.

Almost a century later, this must again be the unionist vision. Our commitment to the Union is not based on ancient hatreds or a narrow nationalism. It flows from our belief that if Northern Ireland is to flourish as a community, then it must be a community in which opportunities for all are promoted and the rights of all protected.

In the Ulster Covenant, unionism has been given a founding charter of which to be immensely proud. Unionism must now reconnect with the Ulster Covenant’s values, to inspire a new generation in the 21st century to promote the Covenant’s bold and generous vision of the Union”.