Alliance goes for 'short-term fix' as scorn heaped on redesignation Lasting damage, possibly irreversible, could be done to a central tenet of the Belfast Agreement
Irish Times - 5th November 2001
Frank Millar, London Editor
Indeed, to borrow from Harold Wilson's famous demand, just who do these people think they are? What right did they have to ignore the ruling of their own party executive? More to the point: by what insanity of the rule book could they stop Mr Trimble's return as First Minister when that is the manifest desire of more than 70 per cent of the entire Assembly?
Mr Ford yesterday sought to add to this state of confusion and disbelief, attributing Friday's result to a set of "byzantine rules" which his party had opposed all along. Mr Ford, however, knows very well the history of the agreement. It is perfectly true that Alliance members have argued against the system of designation of Assembly members as unionist or nationalist, by which the votes of the "Others" - Alliance and the Women's Coalition - are in effect of no value in any election for First and Deputy First Minister.
But he also knows the origins of dual consent, a process seemingly well enough understood before, now suddenly a byword for complexity and mystification.
As with so much else in the peace process, it can be credited to the retiring SDLP leader, Mr John Hume. For many lonely years, then finally with success, Mr Hume argued that simple majoritarianism would not work in a divided society.
Slowly, painfully, unionists came to embrace the concept of power-sharing, right down to a 50- 50 split of ministerial portfolios in the Executive.
Now they are being told a different form of majoritarianism might suffice after all, one first mooted by Sinn Féin's Mr Mitchel McLaughlin earlier this year, in which unionists comprise a minority component of a ruling pro-agreement bloc.
It is not hard to understand why the Secretary of State, Dr John Reid, prefers this to the fresh Assembly election alternative.
The Northern Ireland Office calculates, perhaps correctly, that time will be its friend and that the DUP's moral outrage will subside as normal political life reasserts itself.
As they explained Dr Reid's decision to hold fire on his legal obligation to call an election pending today's vote, British sources could contemplate a bedding-down of the institutions over an 18-month period leading, hopefully, to a more benign scenario when the next scheduled Assembly elections take place.
However, senior Labour MP Mr Kevin McNamara says the introduction of looser rules now makes it impossible to forecast what would happen as a result of any future election.
While accepting that the promised rules review might be deadlocked, he told The Irish Times: "The real question is what is the agreement that has been made (with Alliance) on voting matters and will it dilute the need for majorities in both communities?"
While fervently opposed to what the DUP is attempting, Mr McNamara did not shy away from the conclusion that any alteration in the rules of this political engagement "automatically raises fundamental questions about parity of esteem for both communities". |
