uuptoday.org

Last summer the House debated the issue of industrial rating.

The Member for East Londonderry MrDallat proposed the motion that industrial rates should be capped at 25% and this was agreed by all the members present.

We now need to move on and deliver that which we have agreed.

The Northern Ireland Manufacturing Focus Group have and continue to make cogent arguments for this assistance to what is left of our manufacturing base.

The economic climate is very different today than it was even 5 or 6 years ago.

Today manufacturing jobs are reduced to a fraction of what they were. We are competing in a global environment, against very low labour costs and materials. Our near neighbour in the Republic of Ireland has a much more beneficial tax regime. We are the only part of the United Kingdom with a land border to a country which operates a different fiscal regime and is within the Euro zone.

The decision to phase out industrial rating is seriously flawed. We need instead to develop a wealth –creating and wealth producing economy that retains as much of its manufacturing base as possible.

Indeed we need to add to it.

In the past we were often reminded that our economy relied too heavily on the public sector. The increasing application of industrial rate will do nothing to change that balance. Indeed it will have the opposite effect.

By increasing rates the profitability and viability of businesses will be under threat. Several thousand jobs will be at risk. We must not allow that to happen.

Mr Pearson, when he was in office promised to assist industry by reducing the higher electricity costs. Some £30million was set aside but the plan was turned down by our European friends.

That financial aid has not been made available to industry.

DTZ Pieda Consultancy when presenting its report to Government at that time forecasted that the impact from full de-rating would only be 2.7% of profits.

Invest Northern Ireland and others have produced revised figures which are considerably higher.

Rates may represent only a small proportion of business turnover but they represent a higher proportion of profits.

Those companies which experience low profits can have their viability altered dramatically by a change in its overhead costs – leading to closure.

It makes sense to assist such businesses to stay in business and create employment.

Manufacturing does represent a small percentage of our economy in terms of GDP and employment. It may be as low as 15%. But it also generates the vast majority of our exports.

We are told that 90,000 people are employed in manufacturing and that we could loose one third.

We cannot take that risk.

We also know that jobs would also be at risk in other industries.

We could rehearse many more arguments.
Mr Speaker I trust that the house will unite again in opposing the implementation of industrial rates beyond the 25% level.

I am fully behind the First Minister when he stated in the last debate that we must ensure that the industrial rate liability is kept at 25%.

We should keep our promises.

I beg to move.

Mr speaker

I understand that the debate this afternoon is really a matter of procedure.

We are already well into the current year and the budget is being used by the various departments.

We can all rehearse arguments to further our favourite interests but that is really a waste of time today.

However it is useful to set this budget in the context of the forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review which will apply for the next three years.

We already know that the CSR will be tight for both the UK as a whole and Northern Ireland in particular.

In the first Assembly the background was quite different from today. There were annual rates of growth in public spending in the region of 3% in real terms – that is after allowing for inflation. We may now be facing significantly lower rates than this – maybe 1% in real terms at best.

The spending in Northern Ireland per head of population is 28% above the UK average.

Public spending (as a percentage of regional GDP) in 2004/05 was

Ø 66% for Northern Ireland
Ø 51% for Scotland
Ø 49% for Wales
Ø 41% United Kingdom Average

Public sector employment as a percentage of total employment in 2005 was

Ø Northern Ireland 30%
Ø Scotland 24%
Ø Wales 23%
Ø UK average 20%

We have much catching up to do!

Next year we will hopefully have more scope to change our budget but today we can only accept the figures set under direct rule.

At the end of the summer we will be engaging in the budget preparations for 2008-09.

The budgets should arise from the Programme for Government and have a limited number of over-arching priorities which would guide Departmental-spending plans.

We need to ensure that the process adopted will allow for accountability through the various committees.

The establishment of priorities is crucial given that financial resources are limited.

We need to be realistic and allow for investment to promote growth for the future. Innovation and human capital should be priorities.

It is not acceptable that the Regional Economic Strategy will change from 80% (of UK average) to 80.5% by 2015.

We need to create real growth.

Some people including the Secretary of State have pointed to the fact that Northern Ireland needs £5 - £6Billion subsidy from H M Treasury. Surely it is normal for “richer” regions within the national fiscal and monetary union to transfer to poor parts of the Kingdom. Wales (including Mr Hains Neath Constituency) and Scotland also have considerable subsidies.

It is curious and unimaginative of the Treasury to propose that the way to cut this subsidy is to raise taxation here (for example the Rating Reform).

Surely the way forward is to reduce the burden of taxation (particularly on business - in rating, corporation tax and fuel duty) and so increase economic activity and hence revenue.

Finally I would like to refer to the Economic Package
– The empty economic package.

Others have made much play on their negotiating skills – well in this test case they have failed miserably!

There is little in the package in terms of real growth in the level of spending.

In terms of details the Executive is being allowed to do what it would have been able to do anyway –
Ø Efficiency savings
Ø Asset sales
Ø Year end flexibility

Mr speaker we need to have an adequate economic package to allow this Assembly to take Northern Ireland forward on a sustainable basis and not be handicapped from the outset.

This week has marked the eighth anniversary of the Omagh bomb - one of the most horrific days in the history of Northern Ireland.

The geography of Northern Ireland bears witness to the depth and extent of conflict. Names that ought simply to map out locality instead catalogue atrocity – places like Omagh; Enniskillen; Darkley; Greysteel.

Communities have experienced tragedy throughout Northern Ireland. Many of these communities still experience a collective legacy of pain and suffering which society must deal with.

This is a vast challenge which must be faced up to. However, government policy on victims’ issues has been allowed to drift.

Commissioners, reports, investigations and consultations have all come and gone in the past number of years – yet we still lack a clear strategy, or even, understanding on how to deal collectively with the events of the past 35 years.

People like Sir Kenneth Bloomfield and Bertha McDougall have made invaluable contributions – but the core problem remains. And that core issue – of how we define who is a victim and who is not – demands clarity.

We should not expect that the solution can be provided by any one individual or commissioner – the answer lies in the thoughts and views of the people of Northern Ireland.

How have those opinions been articulated? How have the political class approached this issue?

The Government in its draft legislation stated that a victim is “someone who is or has been physically or psychologically injured as a result of or in consequence of a conflict-related incident”. And the 2003 Joint Declaration stated that that there is “no hierarchy of victims”.

This is the view of government. But what about local representatives? For example, the SDLP describes a victim as: “Any individual whose life has altered its course as a result of the bitterness and division in our society and who believes that the alteration was negative.”

In my view, the practical outworking of these statements are too loose to be workable, too fragile to bear the weight of equity required.

Constructive debate is vital to support the whole project. And while I value their contribution, I wholeheartedly disagree with the SDLP’s view.

Consider both the government and SDLP perspective, then consider: how would the families of those murdered by the Shankill Butchers, or those murdered at La Mon, Enniskillen or Omagh would react?

For example, could the application of the SDLP’s vision include Michael McKevitt or Torrens Knight as a victim? There can be no equivocation between the victim and the victim maker.

Perpetrators of violence are not victims of the Northern Ireland conflict. It is only right that account be taken of responsibility and criminal culpability in determining society’s collective approach.

Can those who operated outside the framework of civic society, who acted beyond the scope of acceptable, civilised values, who operated beyond law and order, who sought to remove from others the most fundamental of all rights – the right to life – be classed as ‘victim’?

This process must be built on principles of fairness, equity and understanding.

All agree that the state has a duty of care to victims of crime. But we need to be careful of government policy that chooses the path of least resistance.

The apologists of violence may seek to sanitise the horrors that were perpetrated on people here. But those who seek to justify and edify the victim maker must not be allowed to influence policy making.

Who would disagree with the application of agreed principles to ensure the process has the moral authority to be effective?

I am mindful that while this debate continues, for many, pain and hurt continues on as a very real aspect of daily life. It is imperative that resolution happens sooner rather than later.

If we are going to do our best by those who suffer then we have a responsibility to ensure that the conditions that created victims and conflict do not arise again. The Ulster Unionist Party will engage with all who share the vision for a peaceful, more tolerant and inclusive Northern Ireland.

I believe that the victims of the Troubles deserve no less.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, friends and colleagues, and thank you for coming today.

I am grateful to you all for taking time away from your home and family, not simply to make your views known, but also to demonstrate your continuing loyalty to the Ulster Unionist Party.

And thank you, too, for once again entrusting me with the highest honour that this Council can bestow—that of leading the party.

In its 102 year history—during which it forged and sustained the link between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom— the Ulster Unionist Party has rarely faced such testing times. As ever, though, the bedrock support of the Ulster Unionist Council has ensured that the party remains as committed to its core values as it has been since 1905. And, in the moments of our greatest need, it has been the delegates to this Council who have taken the toughest decisions and weathered the worst storms. I am grateful to you all for your efforts and your loyalty.

Friends, I wish we were meeting in happier circumstances. I believe that we fought a good, gaffe-free campaign; built around a policy agenda that was relevant, costed and forward thinking.

I wish, too, that we were meeting without the shadow of media stories about further splits hanging over us. There never needed to be a public squabble about who would lead the charge for reform, for it is clear from the resolution that it was a matter for review by the Executive Committee and this Council. What matters most is that the job is done. And that is what we have agreed today.

The irony, of course, is that we need the reform to stop this sort of negative story hitting the media in the first place! Have we learned nothing whatsoever in the past decade? Does anyone in this party actually believe that this sort of media coverage helps us?

If you have a gripe, then knock my door and talk to me.

ELECTION

But the reality remains. We have endured another difficult election. The numbers are stark.

We have to be honest about the questions that are being asked of us, and how we answer them.

It has become a cliché to claim that NI is today a better place because of the efforts of the UUP. But the reality of clichés is that they are generally founded upon truth. NI is a better place for our efforts. A safer place. A less violent place. A more stable place. A place where even the DUP and SF can agree to share in government.

Tempting as it is to keep banging on that the DUP are merely a bunch of hypocrites who have adopted our polices only after we had tested the water and taken the risk—such an attitude doesn’t really get us anywhere. The political process has moved on. The electorate has moved on. Circumstances have changed.

It wasn’t the DUP which broke the UUP apart. It was ourselves. Tolerating an environment in which we allowed our own members to destroy us from within. No other party would have tolerated it. And, as we have seen from recent events in both the DUP and SF, neither of them tolerated it.

Worse, we even tried to kid ourselves that that sort of dissent and indiscipline was somehow ok! We boasted of being a broad church party; of being an open party; of being a truly democratic party.

You can’t be so democratic that a single member or group of members is allowed to behave as if he/she or they are the real or an alternative source of authority within the party.

Membership of a political party in not compulsory. But membership brings with it certain privileges, responsibilities and obligations. And the ultimate success and credibility of any party—indeed, of any voluntary organization boils down to whether or not those responsibilities and obligations will be upheld. Ladies and gentlemen, with your support I am determined that they will be.

WHAT OTHERS SAY

We have heard today what our members say. But what do our opponents say about us?

They say we don’t listen. They say that we’re antiquated. They say that we’re arrogant. They say that we’re disorganised.

Well, what do you think? Honestly, what do you think about such accusations?

Have we failed to respond to challenges facing society in a rapidly changing world?

Are we truly efficient, outward looking and thoroughly modern?

Do we assume we’re guaranteed a place in Northern Ireland’s political life?

Are we robust enough to taken on the challenges of tomorrow?

The most natural thing in the world is to reject what’s uncomfortable. To brush off what your opponents might say about you.

Now we need honest self-examination to guide us. We won’t survive unless and until we smash the shackles which chain us to antiquated structures and a constitution which doesn’t actually serve our purpose.

That is why the resolution on reform was tabled this morning.

And I promise you this: This Review will not be allowed to shrug off the problems. It won’t be allowed to shirk the responsibilities we have placed upon it. It will not be allowed to shy away from making some of the most difficult decisions we have ever had to make.

This is not a cosmetic exercise in tilting at windmills. Rather, it is a crusade to ensure that the UUP has the political, organisational, campaigning, electoral, financial, presentational and media tools to rebuild and move on.

I know that there are people who believe that it is the policies we have pursued, rather than the organisation and structures of the party, which have led to our present situation. I would have some sympathy for that view were it not for the fact that the DUP is presently preparing to share power with Sinn Fein having lock, stock and barrel adopted a policy which was previously exclusively ours.

I would have some sympathy for the view were it not for the fact that, for example, Arlene Foster—a former UUC Officer who orchestrated a campaign against the Belfast Agreement in this party—is today a Minister in Waiting for an Executive constructed upon exactly the same basis as the 1999 Executive!!

The reality of the situation is that it is not just a problem with policy. The real problem is that people, collectively and individually, were and are able to undermine whatever policy is adopted by this Council or the Executive Committee of the UUP. And that is why we need reform—and need it urgently.

NEW AIMS AND VISION

Structures and rules are not the heart and soul of this Party – they are merely means to an end. The Party does not exist to preserve structures and rules –we exist to adapt and make those rules and structures work for us.

In a 24 hour-a-day, media-intensive political environment, we need a streamlined decision-making process that allows the Party to effectively communicate our policies and values.

We currently do not reflect the diversity that exists in modern society in Northern Ireland.

Women, younger people, ethnic minorities and people from all backgrounds must have their rightful place, representing us and making decisions with us.

We need a selection process that ensures talented women and men of all backgrounds can represent this Party.

New voters will only be attracted to this party when they see that their own backgrounds and lifestyles, and upbringings, and gender, and age profile are reflected in the polices we promote and the candidates we field.

In an age when many are cynical about politics, when every membership organisation finds it hard to recruit and retain members, we need a constituency structure and an approach to membership which allows people to serve their local communities through their involvement in the Ulster Unionist Party.

Yet changing our rules and structures is only one part of the hard-thinking that must now take place within Ulster Unionism.

We also need to generate and promote an ongoing vision from this Party.

I am proud and privileged to lead our Party. I am proud of all that this Party has achieved, endured and secured for Northern Ireland. I know that for many in and beyond this room, that came at a great personal price.

Northern Ireland is now more diverse, more outward-looking than ever before. It is a Northern Ireland in which people’s aspirations and expectations are greater.

This is the Northern Ireland with which the Ulster Unionist Party must now re-connect. Not the Northern Ireland of the past – today’s Northern Ireland.

The Ulster Unionist Party is not an old-school reunion society. Yes, we have a legacy of which we can be proud and past successes which deserved to be trumpeted. But we also have a future to think about and a party that needs new blood and fresh thinking.

We are an unashamedly unionist party, a party that passionately believes in the Union as offering the most progressive constitutional, social and economic future for every region of the United Kingdom – and for all of us in Northern Ireland.

But the power and relevance of this – our core message – needs to be communicated to today’s Northern Ireland.

And that is our unique role, the mission of the Ulster Unionist Party in the 21st century: to demonstrate that unionism is not a sectarian power-grab – that the belief in “our cherished position of equal citizenship” within the United Kingdom ensures fairness and liberty for all of us in Northern Ireland.

The recent election has disguised the fact that while the DUP has gained ground, support for the unionism in general has declined. Indeed, one of the most disturbing trends of the past thirty years has been the election-by-election erosion of the total pro-Union vote. The loss of two more unionist seats at the next Assembly election would reduce the unionist representation to less than half of the total.

That sobering fact leads me to what we, as a party, must do in the coming years if we are to copper-fasten support for the Union and reposition ourselves in order to attract a larger share of electoral support.

Firstly, now more than ever, there is a pressing need for a Party that demonstrates that the Union benefits all the people of Northern Ireland; for a Party that promotes an inclusive vision of Northern Ireland’s place the United Kingdom.

We must reach out to that growing number of people who do not classify themselves as either unionist or nationalist—but who would probably be broadly supportive of the Union and of pro-Union policies. We must persuade them that we can represent their beliefs and we can only do that by persuading them of the merits of our cause and our vision for Northern Ireland.

This has been our historic mission – and now is the time when we must recommit ourselves to this task with renewed vigour and in new ways.

Secondly, we must speed-up and build-up the process of “normalizing” politics in Northern Ireland. That was one of the central planks of our election campaign.

This means two things;

a)the policies we champion at future elections must be steered away from the mantras of the old days and, instead, reflect the socio/economic concerns that have a genuine impact on the everyday lives of the electorate.

b)the means of forming future Administrations must allow parties of like mind to voluntarily offer alternative coalitions.

CHOICE

The 1998 Agreement provided for what was, to all intents and purposes, a mandatory all party coalition. It was done to give sufficient confidence that all sections of the community would be represented in government. But it was not an end in itself. I firmly believe that the time is coming when we should move away from this form of government, to a form which is voluntary in nature and practice. Again, it’s what we hinted at in our manifesto.

We must work with other parties of the centre to offer an alternative to the Sinn Fein/DUP axis; an axis built around carve-up and party political self-interest. An axis based on mutual loathing and mutual veto. It will not be in the long term interests of Northern Ireland to sustain an arrangement of this sort. I think voters in future will want a choice based on social and economic issues as well as constitutional ones. We must be prepared to offer that choice.

Such developments would strengthen Northern Ireland and provide long term stability. More important, it will build genuine democracy, accountability and electoral choice into the system.

Meanwhile, the UUP will not just be nodding donkeys on the floor of the Assembly, in the Committees, in the Department of Employment and Learning, in the Department of Health and Social Services, and in the Executive. Our team is committed to making devolution a success. We will question and we will challenge – doing everything we can to ensure that the Programme for Government represents the needs of “all of us”.

We will use our position in the Executive and the Assembly to put Northern Ireland first. With 55% of the total Stormont budget in our two Departments, we now have a unique opportunity.

We must bring government closer to the people of Northern Ireland, making government better serve the people of Northern Ireland. Making the Union work for all of us in Northern Ireland. Making us relevant.

These are, clearly, challenging times for our Party. But we can change to meet these challenges. We can do it. We have to do it, and today you have given a signal to everyone in Northern Ireland that you want to do it.

That we have the courage to embrace change is telling. It describes who we are; it illustrates how far we have come. It’s the story of a party that built a country, sustained it, fought for it, preserved it and secured it.

That’s quite some story.

Now let’s make the next chapter even more inspiring.

The people of Northern Ireland, all of them, deserve more than a sectarian carve-up where sectional interests come before what’s best for everyone and where party politics comes before real political progress. They deserve, along with their fellow citizens across the United Kingdom, to have a meaningful choice in normal politics; accompanied by a political environment which evolves and matures beyond enforced coalitions.

We live in an age in which the Welsh Conservatives are prepared to share power with Plaid (the Welsh Nationalists) in order to give the people of Wales a real choice. So too must we, the Ulster Unionist Party, seek to build coalitions and partnerships that give real choice, a real alternative to the people of Northern Ireland.

As Northern Ireland moves forward, so must we.

The objective is clear. Think of where we are now. Now imagine where you want us to be.

Imagine the kind of Party you want to be a member of. Consider its values, its ethos, its relevance to your neighbourhood.

Imagine what you want its membership to do. How does the young person at the back of the meeting get pushed to the front? How do we assist the disadvantaged and downtrodden in your community?

Imagine what your representatives will look like. How will they operate? How will they respond to the issues that affect your branch, your association, your townland?

When you imagine what an electable Ulster Unionist Party looks like, you are thinking about what happened today. So today has been a good day at the office for all of us.

The only way to succeed, to realise our vision for a progressive, mature and constructive force for good, is to set about change with urgency.

CONCLUSION

Colleagues, we have endured such trials but we are unafraid of the future.

The Ulster Unionist Party is strong enough to adapt and to adjust; to react to a changing situation and to rebuild.

The Ulster Unionist Party is strong enough to resist the weight of opinion that writes us off; to be smart enough not to overlook what’s obvious and what’s necessary.

I want us to do all that we can to maximise our potential.

We once existed to make Northern Ireland work. It’s working. Against the odds, against terrorism, against everything that was thrown against us, we accomplished our mission.

Now Northern Ireland needs to hear what we can do next.

There are difficult days remaining; but they are also challenging days. This party has never lacked the courage when it came to promoting and preserving the Union.

Let us not lack the courage to put the Ulster Unionist Party back together again and back in business as the primary voice and choice of unionism.

(Letter to the Belfast Telegraph, 26th December 2006)

Dear Sir,

Conservative abstentions in the House of Lords on December 11 led to the defeat of an Ulster Unionist motion to defer the water charges until the restoration of devolved government following the St Andrews Agreement.

The absence of new DUP peer Baroness Paisley was also noted.

Ulster Unionists recognize that water charges are inevitable to bring us into line with Great Britain and as a result of an agreement back in 2001 between the Executive and the Treasury which gave the Executive borrowing powers to upgrade our deteriorating sewerage and water systems .This motion if successful would have deferred the charges to enable the incoming Executive to ensuring a fairer system of charging related to usage through metering.

Ulster Unionists will continue to demand parity with the rest of the UK on fair and equitable water charges .We hear now of secret memos indicating the water service may be privatized .We will continue to demand equality of treatment with the rest of the UK.The Treasury is insisting on a 5.8% rate of return from the NI water company when the equivalent rate for England is 5.1% and for Scotland 4.1%.On privatization the English water companies were paid a large contribution to enable capital infrastructure investment.As equal citizens and taxpayers in UK we demand the same treatment to make up for lack of government investment after years of direct rule under unaccountable civil servants in underspending departments of temporary direct rule Ministers .

While some of us may like and flirt with the idea of a style of politics more like the rest of the UK, the reality is we are a long way of this ideal ,our priority is to make Northern Ireland work within the UK while ensuring our rights as equal citizens of the UK .

Once again we see lack of engagement by local Tories on a serious local issue where we were within grasp of defeating one of the planks of Hain’s draconian direct rule.While Conservative spokesman Lord Glentoran claims to have obtained concessions from the Government ,he admits they are only technical.Once again we see the Conservatives complicit in their support of this colonial vice- regal style rule and reverting to bipartisan policy under Government pressure as one day they might be the Government in power.

yours faithfully,

Johnny Andrews
Party Officer
Ulster Unionist Party

“Following the recent proposed agreement and the ensuing consultation process within Unionism I feel it is vital that a strong pragmatic Unionist position is argued. There is a fundamental question which all who support a strong Northern Ireland at peace with itself within the United Kingdom MUST ask themselves. Are Unionisms and Northern Ireland PLCs best interest served via an Devolved inclusive mandatory coalition including Sinn Fein or should we stick with Direct rule? Anyone who thinks that there is any other possible outcome (i.e. one that excludes Sinn Fein) should now finally realise as a result of St Andrews that the exclusion of Sinn Fein is a complete non starter from our governments perspective.

The positive side of Direct Rule is that we do not have former IRA terrorists in ministerial positions of power within Northern Ireland but I passionately believe that the negatives are of far more of a threat to our citizens than that of a defeated Republican idealism who have lost the only thing that ever really mattered to them, a United Ireland.

Firstly Direct Rule is not as we have always known it. It is joint rule and the economic and cultural pain that would be hoisted on us all should we not agree to govern ourselves needs to be spelt out. The current line being spun by Government is that we are top of the UKs dependency table, that our subsidised existence will be brought to a shuddering halt and that we are all going to have to start paying far more for everything. Of course like a lot of Blair and Hains spin the truth lies somewhere else. Mr Blairs own constituency of Washington lies within the worse performing region of the UK, the North East. Mr Hains, South Wales is only marginally above us. Can you even begin to imagine the political and civil fall out if they raised Council Taxes in those labour heartlands by 19% as they did here last year with our regional rate. There would be wide spread civil disobedience. Unfortunately there is a lot more were that came from if we don’t get our collective act together.

Business is being crippled by the removal of Industrial Derating at a time when we are already seeing interest rate rises and significant rises in company National Insurance contributions. The differences in Corporation Tax rates between us and our cross border competitor is also a big issue although I do not believe this to be the answer to all our economic investment woes. Firstly the real Corporation Tax the majority of NI companies pay is significantly less that the much bandied 30% rate and also personal taxation is also still higher in the Republic. That said, and this is the reason why I believe movement is possible on the Corporation tax issue, it is the headline lower rate that will attract inward investors and probably wont cost the treasury that much. Water rates, fuel costs, electricity costs are all overheads that are critical to the success of Northern Ireland PLC and whilst we divorce ourselves from the difficult choices that lie ahead by staying out of Devolution, there is an argument to say “don’t then bleat about the outcomes you don’t approve of”. Of course if we do return to a local administration all of the issues above would have to be prioritised as suddenly WE would have to make the tough decisions to balance the books rather than picking on every populist issue and cry, more, more, more without saying how we propose to pay for it. This is the politics of the playground that have seen nearly 50% of our electorate not bother to vote.

We need a mature, costed, programme of Government that rewards innovation and entrepreneurial sprit at the same time as looking after societies most needy and vulnerable citizens. That is real politics were difficult choices are debated and a hard fought consensus is reached and stood over.

Our education system DOES need a major overhaul. Lets retain and be proud of the best via the retention of academic selection and some of the UKs best Grammar schools and remember we are now the only part of the UK were this is available to all citizens on the basis of ability alone and not your ability to pay. Unfortunately at the other end of the spectrum we are failing children, parents and Industry by not equipping them with the much in demand secular skills that society and business are crying out for. This will require radical action and for me could turn our economy round in a far more sustainable way that mere fiscal measurers. Northern Ireland has by far the most economically inactive working age population of any UK region. 500,000 of us, of working age, are not looking for work. What a massive untapped resource. What are WE going to do about it? Do you think that an English minister here a few times a month will give that as much focus as a local minister?

Over a decade ago we in the UUP mapped out a vision for a Northern Ireland secure within the Union and striding confidently forward into the 21st Century. A Northern Ireland were all sections of our people were respected and in turn were society demanded core British values of decency and cherishing diversity in return. All of us in general but the two main Unionist political parties in particular have reached the point of no return. Do we simply lobby and carp from the sidelines while Stephen from Sussex does what ever he wants or do we get stuck into the massive array of issues that our people voted us all in to resolve. Peace, prosperity and safeguarding OUR fellow Ulster citizens must surely be THE major priority for us all, regardless of colour, creed or religious affiliation. The time is now to finally to take the decisive move forward.”

On Wednesday night last Party Officer responsible for Youth Development and Memebership and Recruitment Kenny Donaldson was guest speaker at Crossmore Branch’s AGM. In a wide ranging and interactive address Kenny spoke about issues pertaining to the two portfolios and he also gave an insight into his thoughts around recent events at St Andrew’s.

Extracts of Kenny’s speech:

“You gathered here tonight will be as incensed as I with the downright hypocrisy displayed by Dr Paisley and his supporting cast in recent times. That Party to which he commands has engaged in somersault after somersault of the position which they once contended was a ‘principled stance against the purveyors and associates of terrorism and criminality.’

“Of course we, as Ulster Unionists should not be surprised by what Dr Paisley and his colleagues have done or are proposing to do because we know that his motivation remains in 2006 what it was in 1969, pursuit of exclusive power. We all know that our Party has borne the brunt of Paisley’s incessant, egotistically driven campaign to be top dog within unionism.

“Throughout Ulster Unionism’s history, we have sought to place the good of Northern Ireland and its’ people above all else, it is because of this fundamental position and belief that we have faced virtual electoral oblivion! Unionists across Northern Ireland were lured and duped by the prophetic ramblings of someone who promised them the frankly; downright impossible.

“Throughout his political career, Ian Paisley has existed as an obstructionist force; his never, never defensive wailings and doomsday prophecies have sucked the lifeblood out of the unionist community, he has achieved and delivered nothing of benefit to unionism or indeed Northern Ireland in its’ fullest terms.

Mr Donaldson added: “What have the last 35 years really been all about? Thousands of people have been murdered, families left distraught, communities left in turmoil, our economy decimated and for what? Neither Paisley nor his new partners, the Republican Movement can evade responsibility for what their ideologies caused happen in this Province of ours!

“Unionists across Northern Ireland need to finally sit down and individually reflect upon what has occurred here in this past 35 years, people need to stand up and tell it like it is! Unionists need to say with one unified voice; ‘Paisleyism has achieved nothing other than tear our community apart, it has not contributed one jot to building the prosperous and peaceful Northern Ireland more of us crave.

“Friends, interesting times lie ahead and only time will tell whether “Paisley the hypocrite” or “Paisley the coward” will step forward.”

‘In a recent speech given in Fivemiletown, Peter Robinson stated ‘the changes to the institutions set up under the Belfast Agreement that we (the DUP) campaigned for and demanded are close to becoming a reality.’ Well well! I understood DUP policy was to destroy the Belfast Agreement, and confine it to the dustbin of history!

Some in the DUP still believe that this is their policy. In the Assembly on 6th October Ian Paisley Jr. said that the Belfast Agreement had been buried. It is self evident that you can’t bury the Agreement and change it at the same time.

This exchange exposes the real dilemma facing the DUP. They divided unionism when in 1997 they ran away from the Talks that led to the Agreement. All of unionism could have been in the driving seat had they stayed at the table. In subsequent years they campaigned to scrap the Agreement. Now as the years have passed, the DUP is forced to recognise that their campaign has failed, and they are reduced to clinging on to some changes to the working of the Assembly to claim that they have actually negotiated something different. They haven’t. Let us see why:

Many of the so called ‘changes’ to the Agreement that Peter claims he has achieved are not changes to the Agreement at all. They are alterations to the Northern Ireland Act 1998 which sets out the working of the Assembly. It should be understood that the Agreement has two provisions for review built into it thus indicating that over time operational issues would be looked at in the light of experience.

Many of the matters Peter is referring to would by now have been adopted by the Assembly had it not been for suspension. The former Executive was drafting a Ministerial code at the time of its closure. Some of the enhancements to accountability that are proposed are admirable and supported by all parties. Other proposals, such as the Stalinist proposal that if you don’t support a DUP and Sinn Fein First and Deputy First Minister you would automatically be excluded from holding office for four years are an attack on democratic rights.

Such control freakery underlines the fundamental lack of confidence the DUP displays to this process. It has tried to adapt somebody else’s policy and it doesn’t work.

The facts are that the DUP made no contribution to bringing about the decommissioning process, saying in 2000 that only a fool would believe that the IRA would decommission its weapons. They went on to claim last week that the IMC report was a positive one because they had been ‘tough.’ Well they were tough, tough on the IMC as they campaigned against its establishment and scorned it saying it would be toothless and not independent. Ulster Unionists negotiated the creation of the IMC which is now the benchmark in determining the behaviour of all paramilitary organisations. The DUP can now meet with the Irish Prime Minister instead of throwing snowballs at him because Ulster Unionists negotiated the necessary changes to Articles 2&3 of the Irish Constitution.

The DUP, despite the spin, are really the backseat drivers in all of this. They are on the cusp of sharing power in a mandatory coalition with Sinn Fein in an Assembly, North/South ministerial Council and a British Irish Council, all established under the Belfast Agreement.

This begs the question: What was the last ten years of turmoil in unionism all about? Are we really saying it is all about a few technical amendments to an Act of Parliament?

The real agenda at St Andrews is the establishment of the power sharing Institutions of the Belfast Agreement with knobs on. It will take more than a few changes here and there to convince people otherwise.

This is the gamble that the DUP have to take and ultimately for them it will come down to presentation. The stalling, hardballing and supposed grass-roots unionist consultation are merely window dressing for the inevitable - Power sharing with Sinn Fein. This will be such a massive shift in position for a party that promised to ‘smash Sinn Fein’ that it is little wonder that they will want to play it as long as possible.

Nobody should be fooled by the “we need time to get it done properly” line that is being trotted out by DUP spokespeople. They can do now what they can do in the spring. It is not a case of doing anything properly for Northern Ireland. It is a case of buying sufficient time to sell a massive climb down in position on the Agreement and everything that it stands for. In the meantime rates, changes to education and a host of other deeply unpopular direct rule policies are continuing. Northern Ireland will continue to pay the price for the DUP ‘doing it properly.’

Following Tony Blair’s announcement that this was to be his last Party Conference as Labour Leader and Prime Minister there has been an understandable clamour by senior figures for positions of power.

I would be worried that an internal Labour Party bloodbath could distract minds and attention from resolving once and for all the blockages standing in the way of a return to devolution in Northern Ireland.

Being openly selfish about this from a Northern Ireland point of view, the Leader of the Labour Party is also the leader of our nation. As we are moving to the most critical two months in a process that has lasted over ten years, you will forgive me for pointing out that any distractions created by internal party problems will mean that the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State will have other things on their minds when we go to Scotland next month.

My party has been through this cycle before. It wasn’t good for us and it won’t be good for you. I would ask that circumstances are created that ensure that both men are able to be totally focused on the task ahead in October, and we create the best possible atmosphere for a positive outcome. While I know that party matters are unavoidable and inevitable, we must appreciate that the country still has to be run and clear directions given by Ministers.

With the largest unionist Party and Sinn Fein trying to dribble the ball for as long as possible for internal party political reasons, unless a real, dedicated, focused push from the Prime Minister and Secretary of State is forthcoming we will be squandering the years of effort, blood, sweat and tears, that my party and others have invested since 1996 and indeed before.

We would also be squandering the opportunity to re-establish a devolved Assembly and Executive and ensure that Northern Ireland, like our Scottish and Welsh counterparts within the union, have local decision makers making local decisions.

I know that there has been a debate in Westminster about the right of Scottish MPs to determine the outcome of English legislation. I had to choose my words carefully considering the prominent position of one particular Scottish MP who currently controls the purse strings, nonetheless if this current scenario sticks in the throat of some English voters, I would ask you to consider this:

Imagine having politicians that you didn’t elect making up policy and using you as guinea pigs for unpopular reforms across the policy spectrum: from introducing higher rates to changing your leader-in-its field education system to name but two. You wouldn’t like it would you?

Well this scenario is what the people of Northern Ireland have to live with under Direct Rule. Some of this is self inflicted, but most of it can be traced to how this government has chosen to manage the process. Nobody can argue that there has not been a level of commitment shown to us in Northern Ireland unlike any shown in the recent past by the Prime Minister, however the implementation and holding to account of the commitments given by some parties has not been what it should have been.

Because of this lack of holding to account, the Secretary of State should understand the scepticism that has existed about the 24th November deadline. Never before in this process has any deadline been kept; look at decommissioning for example.

The UUP believes, however, that despite the past, now is the time to decide whether or not it is possible to re-establish Stormont. We have had long enough, over 10 years, and we will make our decision when we see everything that is on the table.

But the Secretary of State has left the back door open with the ongoing existence of the 2003 Assembly to May 2007, creating the opportunity for people to procrastinate at St Andrews, and delude themselves that perhaps what they will not do in November, they will be able to do in the spring.

This very thinking is what led us to suspension when the republican movement thought it could play the long game. That, and government turning a blind eye to Sinn Fein’s activities, led to the present suspension, and the same thinking will lead to failure again.

That’s why I repeat the importance of getting it right this time. This could be our last chance for a generation.

On Friday night last, Party Officer responsible for Youth Development, membership and Recruitment Kenny Donbaldson was a guest speaker at Strangford Constituency Association’s Annual dinner.

Extracts of Kenny’s speech:

“As a native of Crossmaglen, South Armagh it will come as no shock to you that this is the first occasion I have spoken at a gathering of Ulster Unionists within the Strangford Constituency. I’m afraid I have been guilty in the past of not acquainting myself with the challenges and opportunities faced by Unionists in the East and North of our Province but have instead allowed myself to occasionally behave in a self-indulgent way towards what the craic is for Unionists who live as a minority community in the south and west of our Province.

“Too often, many of us have concentrated upon our own immediate backyard and haven’t shown a willingness to learn what the varying experiences of our Unionist colleagues elsewhere in this Province are. I believe it is imperative for us, if we are to move forward as a Party to cast aside this cultural mindset, perhaps better described as a; debilitating parochial shackle!

“Life for Unionists in Strangford is very different to life for Unionists in South Armagh. In Strangford Ulster Unionism’s principle opponent is the DUP. In my neck of the woods, our principle opponent is Sinn Fein, its’ parents, the Provisional IRA and the hawks in the dissident republican factions.

“In Strangford the growth of the economy and its associated outworkings is arguably the principle issue for local unionist inhabitants. In South Armagh, the priority for Unionism is survival and a wish to be tolerated as valued neighbours by the majority nationalist/republican community.

“Despite the different lives we lead, there are undoubtedly collective unifying aims and objectives which we, as Ulster Unionists all share; our wish to remain as part of the Union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, to see this Union promoted and strengthened, to see Northern Ireland stand on its own two feet and become a political entity which is considered successful both locally and Internationally, our wish to see the violence and paramilitarism which has marred our past to be once and for all consigned to the dustbin of history, our wish to see our young people progress in life educationally, to create the circumstances whereby our young people wish to settle in Northern Ireland, work and raise their families as opposed to leaving us for the perceived “greener pastures of Mainland UK.”

“We, as Ulster Unionists want the same things, we want a society which is at ease with itself, which cherishes, instead of regrets the fact that we are so culturally diverse.

“The good news story of our increased membership should be publicized by our Party throughout the media and the Province in counteraction of the defections of “so-called Ulster Unionists” to the Tory Party. As someone who lives as a Unionist in Crossmaglen I simply cannot fathom the rationale of individuals such as Peter Bowles, James Leslie and your own Bob Lyttle. Regardless of these individuals’ frustrations as to how local politics here has become semi-paralysed, they should understand that their actions have served only one purpose, to divide Unionism further, promote disenchantment within that community and weaken that community’s efforts at instilling a sense of cohesion within it.

“Many of you here tonight will have stronger memories than me of what the Tory Party has done for Unionism and this Province. Remember the nightmare year 1985 when the Tory Party began the process of selling Unionism down the river through the Anglo-Irish Agreement? History has proven time and time again that the Conservative Party are incapable of doing in Government for Unionism what they purport to support when in opposition. I accept and regret the fact that the UUP have become marginalized from the greater politics of our Nation in recent times but I cannot and do not support the reckless movement of “so-called Unionists” to the non-entity that is the Northern Ireland Conservatives Movement.

“Rather I believe that we, as a Party should be striking up relationships with Mainland opinion through the parameters of our own Party vision. Only this morning, I met with our Party Leader, Sir Reg to discuss an idea, which I hope to develop in the coming weeks of Unionist outreach with Political Schools and Societies based in mainland UK Universities.

“Ulster Unionism needs to get its’ message out to a wider audience; we need to court local, National and International support. Without our movement there would be no Northern Ireland, we won the right to call this part of our Island, Northern Ireland and a Constituent Province of the United Kingdom. It is us who have fought throughout our history to bring about peace and cohesiveness within and between our communities. It is us, who sacrificed our electoral supremacy in exchange for the better good of our Country, it us who continue to provide responsible political leadership to all the people of Northern Ireland. We may not be the lead electoral voice within Unionism, but our words our based upon the principles of equity, diversity and interdependence between our people. Our words and actions are not exclusively motivated and are not designed to augment sectarian rivalries.

“We offer the best hope for the future of this Province, we have a vision which accommodates our diverse peoples, and it is that vision which each of us must evangelize out there in wider society.”

Speaking of further initiatives, which have taken place under the remit of the Youth Development portfolio, Kenny added:

“Over the course of the Summer, a series of training seminars were held which gave younger members a good grounding in the principles of PR, interacting with the public - canvassing, political campaigning etc.

“As the new Young Unionists build centrally, it is incumbent upon all of us to work towards establishing Youth Branches in Constituencies across this Province. It is imperative that young people are also recruited and integrated into their local Branches and Constituency Association.

“I look around the room and the story is similar to Ulster Unionist get-togethers throughout the Province, there is an absence of younger folk under 45 years of age. If we do not redress this cycle at local level, our Party frankly cannot continue indefinitely. We must therefore increase our appeal to a broader range of the electorate – one initiative I will be taking forward in the coming weeks is that of; establishing a research team under the Youth Development portfolio who will be charged with developing ideas and formulating policy in areas which specifically concern our young people – getting on the Property ladder, youth suicide, motor insurance, financing Higher Education, combating the scourge of drugs and the opportunists who seek to imprison our young people through addiction.

“I say to you here tonight that a Northern Ireland without a strong, unified and visionary Ulster Unionist Movement would be an extremely bleak place. Those of us involved in Ulster Unionism should realize that we hold the key to the future of this Country, we can either; be self-indulgent, cry about all those who’ve betrayed us, done us wrong and stolen our clothes or we can take control of our own destiny and make this beautiful Country of ours work for the betterment of all the Northern Ireland community,” concluded Mr Donaldson.