9 responses to “The Stormont generation gap”

1. 

   DC October 5th, 2009 at 12:50

   Good post, of course you must realise that those generations not properly represented at Stormont may have less ideological connections with Unionism and Nationalism as we perceive it today.

   That is to say the bad-tempered intransigent Unionist attitudes and the vague, often lofty and unreasoned Nationalism may not be what they the underrepresented are looking for at just this moment in time.

   I’m thinking they might prefer a nice blend of accepting the powers that be and working the billions that come in to Stormont to better effect, to construct a modern ideologically unaligned version of politics here something different in terms of what we know to be Unionism and Nationalism – or different in style and approaches to that which is currently being played out at Stormont at an operational level.

   I’m thinking those bad attitudes leading to deadlock, there must be a better way than that?

2. 

   John October 6th, 2009 at 09:07

   There may well be a generation gap; however, the young are more likely to vote for so–called hardline rather than moderate parties. There is some evidence that in working-class districts of Belfast, the young are also more likely to espouse sectarian attitudes due largely to their complete lack of relationships with members of the other group.

   Selecting younger candidates would probably not make the Assembly that much more moderate, unless you had some system to filter out the hardliners.

   The issue is not age; it is more to do with the electorate who continue to eschew moderate candidates.

3. 

   DC October 6th, 2009 at 11:08

   “The issue is not age; it is more to do with the electorate who continue to eschew moderate candidates.”

   That isn’t entirely true, as people here have never had the choice to vote outside the apparent this all-encompassing circle of conservative-moralistic politics.

   Basically, all parties here are Christian Conservative, the leadership reflects that.

   Except for the Greens who are mobilising and have had good electoral jumps in terms of % increase.

4. 

   John October 6th, 2009 at 12:46

   ‘That isn’t entirely true, as people here have never had the choice to vote outside the apparent this all-encompassing circle of conservative-moralistic politics.’

   This is simply incorrect. For all of the sectarian underpinnings of Northern Ireland, there have always been free and largely fair elections. Any party, irrespective of ideological conviction, has been allowed to put up candidates. There have been numerous examples of parties who have explicitly sought to provide a non-sectarian vision which would appeal to all sections of society. The problem is that they are usually despatched to the political wilderness by the electorate who prefer ethno-nationalist parties, of whatever hue.

   The NILP, for instance, made some inroads during the late 1950s and early 1960s. However, the reason why many nationalists voted for them in some constituancies was because the first-past-the-post system meant that no nationalist stood a chance of winning, so nationalists voted for the party that could realistically challenge unionists. Once PR was introduced, nationalists switched their votes to nationalist parties.

   Similarly, nothing precludes people from voting for the Alliance Party. They simply don’t get enough votes because the electorate prefers parties that reflect their national identities.

   There’s little in the way of electoral engineering which can be done to change this situation. The Alliance Party call for the Alternative Vote to be introduced, but this would be even worse for them. The AV in Fiji rewarded hardline parties and in simulations for Northern Ireland, the Alliance Party would be completely wiped out if the AV was used.

   The lesson here, I suppose, is that ethno-national identities can’t simply be wished away. The issue is to deal with them constructively so that they can be managed in a non-violent and democratic fashion.

   This is realpolitik.

5. 

   DC October 6th, 2009 at 16:07

   You still don’t address the choice issue, which as you will notice that of the mentioned NILP was before full all-out murder.

   There are ethno-national identity politics at play now of course but look at those outcomes today at the operational level; they haven’t been effective nor has such ideological leanings been converted into any use, despite the opportunities being there in contrast to deliver better government together (without any national or regional governmental / discriminatory barriers I must add too).

   There are no creative political parties here, the Alliance Party is led by Presbyterian church goers, active in their churches ergo moralistic in belief and outlook. All parties here are conservative (and Christian) and you don’t opt for moderate conservatism or when you do it is less successful, as the tendency when conserving is to be aggressive about it, not loose and laid back.

6. 

   michael October 7th, 2009 at 11:35

   I think there is an issue of fatigue rather than age.

   The key figures still slogging it out in the assembly have been involved in Northern Irish politics for 35-40 years. The are not programmed to govern but to oppose. Therefore we have total deadlock.

   The young people attracted to politics it seems are not those who may have studied and worked away from Northern Ireland and are now returning with some perspective. It seems to be those who have remained in their sectarian trenches in Queens and UU.

   The rest of us; educated, experienced in business and the public sector, with some experience away from Northern Ireland, unionist or nationalist with a small u and n and with a genuine desire to see the executive stimulate the economy, sort out the education chaos, infrastructure weakness, improve the nhs and lead a police and Judicury everyone in country has faith in; have nowhere to go.

   A radical idea I would be for the SDLP, UUP and Alliance to come together declare the constitutional question resolved and put together a plan for government and work out the electoral map and maths for their success. This focused approach would give the electorate some real policies to vote for and new candidates something to aspire to. The DUP and sinn fein could then go back to what they do best which is opposition and hopefully disappear to the wilderness.

7. Voters as ‘cougars’? | Local Democracy October 8th, 2009 at 08:35

   [...] – where I spend a good deal of my time currently. Here’s Conall revealing that there is an unusually large generation gap between Norn Irn’s MLAs and the electorate. Northern Ireland also has an unusually idiotic electoral system in which party selection is the [...]

8. 

   John October 8th, 2009 at 19:41

   DC,

   I believe I did answer your question; it may not be the answer you wanted, but I’ll reiterate the point. Northern Ireland has free and fair elections open to any party subscribing to any particular ideological point of view. There are an abundance of parties today and from previous generations who have articulated cross-cleavage politics. The sad fact is, whether we like it or not, they have all been despatched to the political wilderness by voters who display a preference for communal politics.

   The use of the PR-STV, in theory, should enable the smaller non-sectarian parties to flourish, yet voters continually eschew them. In fact, the so-called narrow ground is continually being eroded as the moderates lose support – the Women’s Coaltion and the AP are perfect examples of this.

   Choice is not the problem. No-communal parties would flourish if people voted for them. They don’t; that is the reality we have to deal with.

   Moreover, the AP may have religious types at the helm of the party, but show me what major political parties are there anywhere in the west which don’t have politicians who place a strong emphasis on their faith?

   In terms of NI, we also have to take into consideration the high level of religious attendance – though a declining figure – compared to the rest of western Europe.

   I agree to some extent with your point that Troubles probably did hasten the decline of the NILP. However, their decline was primarily down to the reintroduction of PR, which enable nationalists to switch their votes for

9. 

   DC October 8th, 2009 at 20:37

   No my point still stands that political parties here are all conservative and not radical enough to attract the more utilitarian common non-voter and affect their attention so that they lend their concentration to some form of useful leadership. You know a leadership that actually tends to change things on the ground.

   Like say the person who thinks that abortions might be best to just actually be had here locally using the rationale that it saves an airplane to Britan and the air fees.

   Or the person who thinks that agreement is easier reached by a little compromise than solidifying around tried and tested and failed ideas. Conserving and preserving is done aggressively and those who do it less so tend to get less votes.

   Or whatabout the person who believes the age of consent should have been 16 many many many years ago, but recently our lot still fought it, with a muffled plea from Alliance and Farry in particular to move on. A muffled single voice was I suppose still better than bitter outbursts to freeze the age ad infinitum or indeed better than not even having one at all.

   The cries of “they are children!”, “if they can have legal sex at 16 what next, drinking and smoking and driving and working and taxing?” Hang on they pretty much do all of that already anyway today; despite conservative protestations to the contrary over the decades, the increased volume by our lot shouting change down tends only to elicit an increase in the numbers of youths participating in it. A bit like Arleen Foster saying no to double-jobbing but she ends up actually triple-jobbing herself.

   There aren’t any parties out there in NI that are really outside of this Christian Conservative realm; the state of politics here with its little in the way of positive effective leadership with even less useful outcomes, means that in the end those talented people see little can be done so dont’ waste their talents and time.

   Except of course for the more moralistic in outlook (of whatever gender) who really believe that, in taking to their feet at Stormont dressed in middle-class powersuits, they really are so decent and are making a damn good deal of difference. But really they are conserving and preserving deadlock by re-running old ideas hammered to death while societal changes carry on at pace those political ideals don’t.

   Ineffective is the word.