THE prospect of the Conservatives doing a deal with Arlene Foster’s hardline DUP has cast a cloud of uncertainty over fragile efforts to restore powersharing in Northern Ireland.
Irish Premier Enda Kenny yesterday dramatically entered the debate warning about the potential impact on the fragile peace process of a Tory/DUP alliance and why May should think again.
Below we set out the background of the situation to explain why Kenny and others are worried.
Q: Where do things stand at the moment?
A: Northern Ireland has been without a powersharing executive since March and without a first and deputy first minister since January. The institutions imploded after the late Martin McGuinness quit as deputy first minister in protest at the DUP’s handling of a botched green energy scheme — the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI).
Stormont structures meant McGuinness’s resignation automatically removed Foster from her job as first minister and triggered a snap election, which was held in March. The election campaign exposed many more divisions between the two main parties, on issues such as legislative protections for Irish language speakers and how to deal with the legacy of the Troubles.
Q: Did the Assembly election change things?
A: Sinn Fein’s decision to force a snap election paid dividends for the party. The DUP entered the election as Northern Ireland’s largest party, with a gap of 10 seats between it and second largest Sinn Fein. After the poll that gap was cut to just one seat. While the election altered the dynamic within the Assembly chamber — which was shorn of its overall unionist majority for the first time — it did little to restore devolution.
Post-election talks between the five main Stormont parties and the UK and Irish governments faltered from the outset. Deadlines to reach an agreement fell by the wayside amid a bitter stalemate between the DUP and Sinn Fein — the two parties whose agreement is essential to form an administration. When Theresa May called the snap General Election the stumbling talks were put on ice and are due to resume today with a new deadline — June 29.
Q: Why would the mooted confidence and supply deal between the DUP and Tories impact things?
A: Devolution in Northern Ireland is based on the template laid out in the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. The historic accord commits the UK government to demonstrate “rigorous impartiality” when dealing with competing political views in the region.
In subsequent agreements, the government has cast itself as an independent arbitrator in negotiations between the Northern Ireland parties. The government’s adherence to that position will clearly be brought into question by nationalists if its very existence in Parliament is dependent on a deal with the DUP; that sense of imbalance could in turn lead to an increase in support for dormant Republican paramilitaries.
Q: Is this situation unprecedented?
A: Yes and no. The Conservative Party has stated on a number of occasions that it will never be neutral on the Union, so for the Tories to align with a pro-Union party will hardly come as a bolt from the blue for the other parties. Its full name is the Conservative and Unionist Party, after all.
Also, ahead of the 2010 General Election, the Conservatives struck an electoral pact with the Ulster Unionists in Northern Ireland. David Cameron and William Hague were among senior Tories who travelled across the Irish Sea to promote the Ulster Conservatives and Unionists — New Force (UCUNF). However, the link-up failed at the polls and proved short-lived — so the potential impact on future Stormont dynamics never really became an issue. What is different about the potential alliance with the DUP is that they are a more hardline party with some members having past ties with loyalist paramilitary groups.
Q: Is there another approach?
A: The Good Friday Agreement was negotiated by US senator George Mitchell. Another US diplomat Richard Haass mediated an ill-fated talks process in 2013. It is possible nationalist concerns about the UK Government’s position could be assuaged by the appointment of another independent facilitator from outside the UK and Ireland. In the latter stages of the last round of negotiations, Sinn Fein concerns around James Brokenshire prompted the head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service to chair some talks sessions. But, given the DUP’s new-found influence over the government, it is unclear whether the party would rubber stamp the appointment of an outside talks chair.
Q: Will the likely confidence and supply deal have any other impact on the talks?
A: In the face of an increased Sinn Fein mandate and with questions about the RHI still hanging over the DUP, many believed it entered March’s negotiations to form a new executive on the back foot. During the talks the DUP signalled a potential softening of its opposition to an Irish Language Act and insisted it had no “red lines” preventing it from restoring devolution.
The General Election result has undoubtedly strengthened the DUP’s hand, with Foster now looking rock solid only months after facing down pressure to quit. With the DUP now essentially holding the fate of the UK government in its hands, will the party be as keen to compromise with Sinn Fein? Some are also asking whether efforts to restore Stormont will take a back seat for the DUP, given it arguably has bigger fish to fry at Westminster. On the other side of the coin, Sinn Fein is less likely to be inclined to form an administration with a party closely aligned to the Conservatives.
Q: So what will happen next?
A: Talks to restore powersharing are still scheduled to resume at Stormont Castle today. The prospects of a breakthrough looked slim prior to the General Election, and now the picture appears even more uncertain.
The return of Direct Rule from Westminster looms large, as does the prospect of yet another Assembly election. The government does have one potentially persuasive card still to play.
The 90 Assembly members elected in March are still getting paid, despite having no Assembly to attend. If the government exercised its power to stop those wages would that create an added impetus to get a deal over the line?
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here