Progressive not resentful nationalism needed – Margaret Ritchie’s speech to McCluskey Summer School

The McCluskey Summer School took place on Saturday in Carlignford. Margaret Ritchie and Martin Mansergh debated the future of progressive nationalism. Here is Margaret’s speech. I am still trying to get a copy of Dr Mansergh’s to share with you.

There was also a debate about the future of progressive unionism which included a thoughtful contribution from University of Ulster academic, Arthur Aughey, which I will post tomorrow.

First of all I would like to thank the organisers of the McCluskey Summer School for inviting me to speak here.  It is a great pleasure for me to do so. I’m pleased there is such a good turnout and I hope that this annual event goes from strength to strength. It is important that we maintain our link with the true history of the Civil Rights movement.

It is also important that we go beyond reflection on the Civil Rights achieved for nationalists in the North and look at the future for nationalism itself.

There are of course significant challenges facing Irish nationalists in both the politics of the moment and in the politics that lie ahead.  But those challenges can certainly be overcome.

Of course, where there are challenges, there are also opportunities.  It is my intention that we seize those opportunities and that the SDLP leads the way in constitutional nationalism.

In looking at the future for constitutional nationalism – it is worth considering briefly, where  it has come from..

As I stand before you today, I am of course proud to be  the Leader of what’s often curiously billed as, ‘SDLP – the constitutional nationalist’ party.  However, the ‘constitutional nationalist’ label, of itself, does little for me.  In one sense it’s a clumsy term of convenience coined by the British Government and media – at a time of great turbulence and violence – to distinguish between those nationalists who would talk to you and those nationalists who might shoot you! It adds little more value than that.

My inheritance as an Irish nationalist is much richer and stronger than that. We have been around for a long time in a tradition that predates the SDLP or Sinn Fein or any 1970s label. And in the broad sweep of history there are actually few political movements that have been more successful or more democratic than the mainstream protagonists of Irish nationalism down the years.

Daniel O’Connell built a mass democratic movement and brought huge sections of the population to open air public meetings. O’Connell did this in Ireland a century before Ghandhidid it in India.  It was Charles Stuart Parnell as an Irish nationalist MP in Westminster, who deployed just about every parliamentary device and mastered every procedure – regarded now as routine to the skilled parliamentarians of today.  Irish nationalism has been profoundly democratic and positive in its instincts. Even De Valera, his own hands bloodied from fighting the British and from fighting those who initially settled with the British, having come in from the cold in 1927 handed over power peacefully having established democratic institutions of government and an independent civil service.

And just as O’Connell and Parnell and De Valera, and for that matter Collins, had their own huge successes.. Catholic emancipation; home rule; Irish independence; so too their direct descendants such as Garrett Fitzgerald, Bertie Ahern and John Hume have had theirs.

It was Fitzgerald, Hume and others (Irish Nationalists but also social democrats) who created the framework that has effectively brought to an end Ireland’s historic enmity with Britain.  It was Hume who was instrumental in helping Sinn Fein reverse the armed republican movement out of the cul-de-sac of violence.  It was Hume, Mallon, McGrady and Durkan who insisted that power-sharing would be at the core of any settlement in the North.  And similarly that any settlement required meaningful North Southinstitutional arrangements which gave real and expression to the ‘Irish dimension.’

So Ladies and Gentlemen I and those who share my perspective are much more than 1970s constitutional nationalists.  I represent the latest generation of Irish nationalist with a proud and continuous record of political success and change.  My understanding of constitutional nationalism is the same nationalism that flows from O’Connell, Parnell, De Valera, Collins.  Yes Wolfe Tone and Connolly as well. Fitzgerald, Hume, Durkan and others. 

Those who mark Sinn Fein moving onto the traditional SDLP ground of ‘constitutional nationalism’ should try to see the broader picture. With their disavowal of violence, Sinn Fein are merely rejoining the mainstream of Irish Nationalism.

Meanwhile the SDLP will continue to occupy the principled social-democratic ground at the centre of nationalism on the island. Time will tell if the authoritarian Sinn Fein can ever join us there.

SDLP Irish nationalism is also the nationalism of Seamus Heaney, an optimistic nationalism that believes that we can hope for a great sea change on the far side of revenge  – a nationalism that can believe that a farther shore is reachable from here.  And it is to Heaney’s farther shore that I now wish to turn.

I suppose if you looked at a snapshot of Irish nationalism today, you might conclude that there are three elements in the North, the SDLP, Sinn Fein, and the Dissidents.  Although they represent an ever-growing security threat, I think it is too early to try and categorise the Dissidents.  For me that leaves the two strains of Irish nationalism alive in the North. The social democracy of the SDLP and the populist authoritarianism of Sinn Fein.

For me, the differences between these two are profound.  Those profound differences are, admittedly, to some extent masked by what nationalists have in common on the surface.  Broadly speaking this includes their religious affiliation and even their cultural interests such as GAA, Music and Language etc.

However, on just about everything else that really matters the two nationalisms in the North are fundamentally different. 

Although I don’t like labels, I would tend to categorise the nationalism of the SDLP as progressive nationalism.  A nationalism optimistically reaching out for Heaney’s ‘farther shore’. 

The progress we have made in recent years with the Good Friday Agreement allows us to develop a progressive nationalism that could not have been developed before.  Because the legitimacy of the political pursuit of Irish unity is now accepted on a par with the legitimacy of maintaining the Union, then that surely allows us to look forward and to be more progressive. 

There is no longer a justification for a nationalism that is categorised by resentment or bitterness.  That is why I have said recently (although I’ve been criticised for it), that we want to make Northern Ireland an economic success.  Resentful nationalism says we don’t care about the economy, we are just biding our time until Northern Ireland is over. 

But the old nationalist ambivalence about the Northern Ireland economy cannot be justified. In the coming weeks the SDLP will set out in detail an economic vision for Northern Ireland which recognises that notwithstanding our political goal of Irish unity we must make this place as good as it can be for the people who live here now.  An economy that delivers jobs and prosperity for all our people. Not later. Now.

The other nationalism remains ambivalent on the Northern Ireland economy. Indeed it cannot bring itself to utter the words Northern Ireland. It remains suspicious of investors and entrepreneurs, and resentful of profit. Its leader has said the economy is ‘not important’

But perhaps the biggest difference between progressive nationalism and resentful nationalism is the view they take of society itself.  SDLP progressive nationalism says we want a shared society.  That means a society that is not only non-violent, but which welcomes, cherishes and embraces different traditions and actively sets out to end segregation and division.  Our vision of a shared society is one where people with different religions and races can live side by side in the same areas, sharing the same communities totally at ease with each other. 

Other nationalists reject this vision, largely because they feel it may reduce their control in their single identity communities.  They are happy to see our divisions continue.  They do of course want less violence and they would like to see better relations between the two communities.  But they see nothing wrong or abnormal about our social segregation.
SDLP progressive nationalists have a much higher ambition for our future society.

And of course resentful nationalists will use every device available to them to mark out their territory or to stamp their identity all over the other community.  That is why we have the inappropriate flag waving, the abuse of the Irish language as a cultural weapon and hundreds of unauthorised paramilitary memorials or tributes dotted all over the North.  That is the behaviour of nationalists who deep down do not want to integrate with their unionist neighbours. They seek to dominate.  We, however, in progressive nationalism are more confident, more optimistic and more ready to engage wholeheartedly withunionists across the divide.
Progressive nationalists are capable of uttering the words “Northern Ireland”.  We are unafraid of encountering a member of the British Royal Family at a function.  We do not feel the need to airbrush out of history the sacrifice of many thousands of Irish nationalists who fought in two world wars. We accept the realities of our history and our journey and we want to improve on the past.

Then there is the question of Irish unity itself.  Progressive nationalists see a unity that is a coming together of the two traditions on the island and not a hostile take over.  Our strategy is to provide assurances about the continuation of the institutions of Northern Ireland in any new United Ireland. 
Also an acknowledgement that the challenge for us as Irish nationalists is to make the case to unionists in a way that has never been done before.  What happens to the National Health Service in our vision of a United Ireland?  What happens to our Social Welfare System?  What happens to our Police Service?  These questions have to be answered. And we will try to answer them in a positive spirit.

Standing around waving flags, resenting Northern Ireland and its institutions, while we wait for the day when somehow we all wake up and Ireland is united – is not good enough. Sinn Feinsay that magical day will occur in 2016 to coincide with the 100th Anniversary of the Easter Rising”.  No it won’t.

Shouldn’t they be honest and grown-up about this fundamental issue?

We in the SDLP are developing a credible plan for Irish Unity. Because progressive nationalism is credible while resentful nationalism relies on exploiting fears and insecurities. The SDLP has a successful track record of persuading people about the political future that lies ahead and we are confident we can do the same again.

As we roll out this message of progressive nationalism, we get the usual knee-jerk criticisms from people who should know better.  Recently Brian Feeney suggested that because Sinn Fein have moved onto SDLP ground the SDLP’s reaction is to move on to Alliance Party ground.  He could not be more wrong.

We remain as committed as ever to the achievement of a United Ireland.  We are, after all, committed Irish nationalists.  What has changed in recent years is that unionists have accepted the legitimacy of our objective and goodwill of our endeavours. 

A substantial number of unionists voted SDLP in the last Westminster Election, I regard that as a significant accomplishment that we who proudly aspire to Irish unity can garner support from those who are completely committed to maintaining the union. I am proud of that fact and hope to see more of it. Indeed it is clear that unionists can see the difference between progressive and resentful nationalism.  Our task is to highlight those differences to more nationalists!

The challenge for nationalism now, led by the SDLP, is to make our case to all the citizens of the North and bring them round to our progressive way of thinking on jobs and prosperity; on a genuinely shared society; and on our credible plan for unity that we honestly believe brings benefit to all. 

The battles of the past are over. The only battle now is the battle of ideas. But, again, in line with the broad sweep of history of Irish nationalism it is the social democrats, the SDLP, who will be coming forward with the ideas that will take all of us to a better placed.

SDLP Leader, Ritchie: Time for North – South fightback against dissidents

Margaret Ritchie has asked for urgent meetings with Taoiseach, Brian Cowen and Secretary of State,  Owen Paterson to press the need for new approaches to dealing with the threat of dissident violence.

In a statement issued this afternoon the SDLP Leader said:

It is time for everyone to face up to some inconvenient political truths about this violence. It is now very clear that MI5 is not up to the task of leading intelligence-gathering in the north. By sidelining or standing down their political wings the dissident gangs have cut the flow of human intelligence.

This internal security strategy, which also involves deliberate avoidance of mobile phones, is being driven by ONH which is now acting as a secure superstructure for all the groups. And that brings us to the most inconvenient political truth of all, because enhanced security and reduced danger of informants is permitting and encouraging a flow of Provisional expertise into all the dissident groups. This reality must no longer be denied just because it makes some people uncomfortable, for it has raised the threat level enormously.

There is no evidence that MI5 puts a high priority on the dissident threat beyond providing some signals and background intelligence, which may amount to nothing more than listening to gossip and monitoring a few dodgy websites. The whole point about MI5 intelligence primacy since 2007 is that it was really just a political fix designed to ease Sinn Fein’s path onto the Policing Board and thus into power in the Executive. Nor does MI5 have to explain its deplorable lack of effectiveness because it operates beyond our policing accountability structures.

The SDLP believes we need an aggressive, high-profile, all-Ireland intelligence-gathering operation based on the bond of trust which has grown between police and public. We believe the relative success of An Garda Siochana demonstrates the need for a new approach and that the PSNI should again lead intelligence-gathering in the north. We believe the people will rally to protect their accountable, representative policing service if they are asked properly.  I will be pressing An Taoiseach and the Secretary of State to raise north-south policing and intelligence-gathering to a new level now, before we suffer another major tragedy.

Ritchie: Time for abstentionist politics is over

SDLP Leader Margaret Ritchie has called on people to turn out in big numbers today and vote for candidates who will take their seats and go and do the work.

In the context of a hung Parliament abstentionism makes no sense at all. 
 
There is every chance that Northern Ireland’s MPs could have a big influence on the next Westminster Government, and Sinn Fein’s absence means the DUP will have the greatest influence of all.
 
Whatever others do, the SDLP MPs will be there to fight for the best interests of all our people. 
 
The time for abstentionism has passed. It is no longer a valid principle when those who proclaim it are able to draw down vast sums in parliamentary expenses.
 
Referring to the estimated £3million ‘expenses’ that Sinn Fein MPs will have claimed from the House of Commons during the last Parliament, Margaret Ritchie said:
 
Sinn Fein are taking people for fools. Their policy of…We’re not going to GO – But we’re going to take the DOUGH is neither principled nor acceptable in this new era of politics. 
 
I urge people to support SDLP candidates who will go and do an honest day’s work at Westminster.

Ritchie’s platform: Jobs, stronger communities and credible vision for a new Ireland

Margaret Ritchie officially launched the SDLP’s campaign this morning with a strong speech about jobs, a shared future and a creidble vision for Irish unity.

Thank you, and thanks to each of you for coming here this morning for the launch of the SDLP Westminster campaign. 

Westminster is important. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. It sets the total Northern Ireland budget and decides on many other crucial social and economic issues which are not devolved. And it negotiates for us in Europe .

This Westminster election is going to be different from all the ones that have gone before. The global economic and financial crisis and the real consequence of unemployment and hardship means that people are looking to politicians for answers. For help. They want political leaders who can find solutions and deliver outcomes that will allow them to stay in employment and stay in their homes. For firms its about staying in business.

 That is why those who are offering little more than a reaffirmation of tribal identity are actually missing the point. There is a genuine cry going up in Northern Ireland for new politics – not the outdated sectarian bickering of the past – but politics of consensus-building and partnership focused on problem solving.

And in this election campaign and beyond the SDLP will offer that kind of political leadership.

The politics of the future rather than the politics of the past.

And it is not just that we will fight every constituency with strong candidates and refuse to participate in the sectarian dogfights and sordid deals favoured by others.

It is not just that we will take up the seats the voters entrust to us and work hard for all of the people we represent.

It is new active leadership based on the fact that we have the ideas and the personnel to deliver at Westminster and in any other forum where we have the privilege of representing our people.

I’ll come back to the personnel in a moment – but first to the ideas….

 There is a dismissive narrative alive and well in the media that the SDLP has either served its purpose or is indistinguishable from its main rival. While this is utter nonsense it is a media paradigm which sometimes results in our ideas going unheard.

So let me spell it out loud and clear: Our job is nowhere near completed:

Yes we secured Civil Rights and Equality; We got the IRA to see the futility of its campaign and yes we got everyone to see that a powersharing devolved Government was essential. All basic SDLP  objectives – all delivered.

But we are now targeting the next set of fundamentals which affect peoples lives. We are going to set the political agenda for the next generation by focusing on creating prosperity, building a Shared Future and planning, credibly, for Irish Unity

And let me spell this one out too – we could not be more different from our political opponents – on these three basic questions of Jobs and the economy, a new reconciled Society and a credible approach to the future politics of the island. The things that really matter to people.

Turning to the Economy first…

We have already shown in devolution that we have stronger ideas for developing our economy – both in the North and throughout the wider island. And clear thinking to bring our region out of recession. But we have bigger plans: we want more economic independence from Britain –  and ultimately our own taxation and welfare regimes. Northern Ireland needs to be able to control more economic levers and retain the gains made through better economic management. We believe in devolution so we want more of it. Broadcasting Telecoms and Fisheries and Pensions too. 

At the same time we want to deepen our North/South economic integration. And get serious about tourism and the green economy as a source of competitive advantage and jobs.

As a first step we will campaign for an all-island independent Environmental Protection Agency and a single all-island Regulator for Energy.  You will see more of our policies at the Westminster manifesto launch next week.

We are brimming over with ideas. The SDLP will show people that we, as modern social democrats, are trailblazers on Jobs and the economy. Our opponents can continue to pursue their outdated economic mix of  begrudgery and class warfare. 

We not only want a strong economy – we also want a strong Society

A Shared Future is a cornerstone of my agenda as Minister for Social Development and a foundation stone for my leadership of the SDLP. The mutual tolerance and co-existence we currently have are just not enough. We will aim higher. Not just by aspiring to genuine sharing and mutual respect, but by applying radical new ideas things happen in Housing, Education, Regeneration, Community Funding and Cultural Expression.

The so called Cohesion, Sharing and Integration strategy cobbled together recently by OFMDFM after three years of bickering is nothing short of an insult to the intelligence. It is the worst policy document I have ever read. It contains no serious or specific proposals whatsoever.

Again the SDLP is brimming over with ideas on building a Shared society. Not least because of the 14 public meetings I held right across the North absorbing the best aspirations and suggestions from people on the ground. 

Again, although most people want a shared Future – our opponents do not even believe in it. Another big difference.

The SDLP believes in a United Ireland.  Unambiguously.

We will work every day to lay the foundations upon which a United Ireland can be built – mutual trust, respect and protection for minorities.

We will take our unique ideas for achieving unity to the heart of decision-making in Dublin and London . We will press every party in Westminster to engage around the SDLP’s radical thinking on unity and our work will present people with the first detailed view of what Unity would look like – ever produced. 

Further, we will not promise something unrealistic like Irish Unity by 2016, simply because it is the anniversary of the Easter Rising! Unlike others, we will be credible on Irish Unity.

So overall we offer a hugely different approach to politics from that of our opponents. A prosperous increasingly independent economy that lifts the lives and wellbeing of all.  A genuinely shared society And in time, a United Ireland.

We alone can deliver this vision. And Westminster has a key role to play.

We have the people who can turn these ideas into realities. And to do so they will have to be there.

Those who claim that Westminster doesn’t matter or that there is no need to actually be there are simply wrong.

And the living proof is Mark Durkan. He has on numerous occasions made interventions in the Commons that have persuaded or forced the Government to change direction or change the law.

Thousands of Desmonds pensioners in Northern Ireland are better off today because Mark tackled the Government’s legislation in the Commons with a series of amendments – won support for his arguments – and carried the day.

Mark will continue to be an outstanding achiever at Westminster because he is an outstanding politician.

There is no-one of his calibre among his would-be opponents in Foyle and I believe the people of Derry recognise that.

And we can say the same of Alasdair McDonnell in South Belfast . He has served a brilliant first term with some exemplary work on the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and trojan work on the ground for all of his constituents. He is by far the best candidate in the field. He is a formidable campaigner (no-one knows that better than me!) and I believe he will win.

Modesty forbids that I present my analysis of our offering in South Down – so let me move quickly on to Fermanagh South Tyrone. This is where the new politics faces its sternest test in the presence of a widely held view that the tribal contest is all that matters.

Fergal McKinney has had the courage and skill to point out the hollowness of this prejudice. And how dare our opponents suggest that Fergal – again, by far the best candidate in the field – should stand aside to facilitate a sectarian headcount in favour of someone who doesn’t even intend to take their seat.

My message to Fermanagh South Tyrone is move on to the new politics – vote for Fergal McKinney!

I could tour all the constituencies where we have many more fine candidates but I think I have made my point.

This election is about grown-up, bread and butter politics and coming forward with the ideas that will improve peoples lives in very difficult times.

We will not enter a tribal contest with unionists or a slanging match with other nationalists.

I read in a newspaper yesterday that the President of Sinn Fein had made a speech making unkind references to the SDLP – some 25 times! That’s about one for each year he has been the MP for West Belfast .

I would humbly suggest to him that before he runs up to Derry to pontificate about the SDLP, that he sorts out a few issues in his own back yard. And you people might even some day get round to asking him what exactly he has delivered for West Belfast in the quarter of a century of being the big Boss there.

He can continue to call us names and try to include us in the choreography of his election stunts but we will not be responding in kind.

The SDLP will continue to move forward. No going back. No looking back.

We are standing on our record. Taking our seats. Being where it matters when it matters.

Driving forward our ideas on jobs and the economy; on a shared Future; on Unity.

And delivering for all our people in this new era of politics.

And always, always ..ahead of our opponents – stronger on jobs and the Economy; genuine about a Shared Future; Credible on Irish Unity.

 

Ritchie rejects Adams’ offer of a sectarian pact.

SDLP leader Margaret Ritchie MLA has rejected an offer from Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams for co-operation in the general election. Below is the text of her letter of rejection:

Dear Gerry

I refer to your letter (delivered yesterday afternoon) requesting a meeting to discuss cooperation between our Parties in the upcoming General Election. I was disappointed to receive such an approach given the fact that both of our Parties have roundly condemned as sectarian/tribal, the recent unionist electoral pact in this election.

It is my strong view that this election must be about a positive future, about fulfilling the hopes of our people and shaping politics to deliver on the needs of the community. The actions of all parties should be judged against these standards. In doing so, no-one should cling to the failed politics of the past.

That is why it was important that, only last week, the SDLP, your own party and others took a strong stand against a Unionist electoral pact. I believe that both my party and yours described the pact as ‘sectarian’. I believe it is important now to be principled and consistent. Co-operation between our parties or an electoral pact – whatever description you choose – would put my party and yours in precisely the same place as the DUP and UU/Tories.

Yesterday afternoon in the Assembly, Martin McGuinness spoke about the Sharing and Integration strategy delivering for the entire community. Yesterday evening you wrote to me about electoral co-operation. I find there is a tension between the view of Sinn Fein in the afternoon and the view at teatime. I believe that you cannot build a Shared Future on the basis of narrow, sectarian electoral pacts. It is wrong for unionism – it is wrong for us. The SDLP is committed to offering positive leadership on the issues that matter to people building equality and a truly Shared Future.

Therefore the SDLP will not be entering any electoral pact with your Party.

In any event, your letter on nationalist unity contradicts your party’s recent and past actions.

Yesterday, we saw the result of your concession, to the DUP, of a veto against nationalists in the appointment of a Justice Minister. Your Party has acted with unionism to deny nationalists an extra seat at the Executive table to which they were entitled through the Good Friday Agreement, the democratic will of the people of Ireland . Nationalists are now under-represented in Government, courtesy of Sinn Fein.

You negotiated (also privately with the DUP) a set of boundaries for the new 11 Councils which has the net effect of transferring around 100,000 citizens into councils with an inbuilt unionist majority.

You hold to abstentionism at Westminster . Nationalists are predominant in areas of greatest multiple deprivation, including constituencies where Sinn Fein hold Westminster seats. At a time when we are facing cutbacks and the possibility of a hung or tight Parliament it is even more crucial that our communities are represented fully. Abstentionism works to the disadvantage of people in need.

It is not credible to ask the SDLP to co-operate in such an approach.

We are in an economic crisis and people and businesses are finding it very difficult to get by. I honestly believe they want politicians to get away from the old adversarial sectarian politics – and in particular to concentrate on jobs and the economy. That is what the SDLP will be doing.

We will not be doing any electoral deal with Sinn Fein or any other Party. We are of course prepared to meet with your Party, or any other Party, so we can discuss face-to-face delivering for people at Westminster , how we can do more on jobs and the Economy, and how we can build a Shared Future.

Sincerely

Margaret Ritchie

Margaret Ritchie – Mna na hEireann

Mna na h Eireann (Women of Ireland)

It was Mary Robinson who brought the poet’s phrase into Irish politics. She lit a torch that has since been carried by Mary Harney, President McAleese, Dawn Purvis and today Margaret Ritchie. Women of Ireland and leaders of people.  They embody our modern island.

Margaret Ritchie has excelled around the Executive table. She may be out numbered and often outvoted by Sinn Fein and the DUP but never out maneuvered.  The SDLP membership recognised this today and voted for a new ’shared future’ politics.  They endorsed a programme for renewal in policy and personality terms. 

Here is Sinead O’Connor’s version of the Sean O’Riada classic.

SDLP should take the time to debate the future

So the race is on to succeed Mark Durkan as SDLP Leader. I have been asked by a number of media outlets to offer my views on who should succeed him.  

I think the real issue is whether the SDLP chooses to make the leadership election a debate about renewal or whether it reduces it to just a personality contest.

We need a policy on community relations.

We need more then tough words from the Deputy First Minister on Sectarianism. We need a policy on community relations. A few months ago Margaret Ritchie MLA highlighted the lack of leadership in the issue from SF and the DUP.

….We now look to the unlikely duo of the DUP and Sinn Fein to deliver reconciliation and the signs so far are not very encouraging. They couldn’t bring themselves to put reconciliation at the centre of the Programme for Government where it belongs. In fact I’m not sure they know what reconciliation really means, or worse still, that they actually want to achieve it.

The real work of reconciliation is not just to end conflict and to reduce tension but to figure out a pathway to a Shared Future. There is an enormous difference between the vision of a Shared Future which I would subscribe to and the uneasy coexistence that the two parties leading our government seem to be content with. But it won’t put me off doing what needs to be done in DSD.

When Mark Durkan asked me to take on the Social Development Department, I of course, spotted the opportunity to tackle the growing housing crisis.  I also saw the potential to direct the work of the Department in such a way as to effect positive social change in pursuit of reconciliation and a Shared Future.

And surely no one can doubt that radical social change is what is needed now in Northern Ireland if we are finally going to grow up and face the things that divide us. We cannot expect to heal our divisions if we continue to reinforce them by maintaining the comprehensive and thoroughgoing segregation of our people.

Our ‘Troubles’ have created a legacy of communities that live apart. For too long people have grown up, played and lived in separate neighbourhoods, been taught in separate schools, followed different sports and been slow to share the workplace.

There can be no doubt that over the years this segregation fuelled the conflict. Entrenched, both physically and mentally, communities grew further apart, unwilling and unable to see that this segregation was as much the cause of their insecurities, as the answer to them.

It is my view that unless we try to reduce segregation by driving forward a progressive public policy agenda then we cannot achieve reconciliation.  And for me the obvious place to start is in housing.

When I announced the New Housing Agenda in February this year, I very deliberately made Shared Future a central theme in all housing policy development. Although I have always held this view about segregation, it is heartening to know that I am not alone.
The Northern Ireland Life and Times survey has revealed that some 80% of people would, given the choice, live in a mixed neighbourhood. Yet the reality is that those waiting for social housing have very often little or no choice in this regard, and more often than not end up in single identity estates simply because there is no alternative. In the same survey some 52% of people thought that Government could do more to address the problem.

We have now started work on a number of new Shared Future housing developments across Northern Ireland. In these Shared Future developments a considerable amount of community involvement is required to ensure that tenants are ready to commit to sharing and abandoning the trappings of a single identity enclave.

Significant progress has been made on new schemes in Loughbrickland and Sion Mills and I expect to launch these in the coming months. Every new build scheme that now comes forward onto our Social Housing Development Programme will be screened to explore its potential for inclusion as a shared future development. In time, and I accept it will take time, shared future housing in the context of our new build programme must become the norm, not the exception.

However it is not enough just to focus attention on new developments.  The majority of existing social neighbourhoods remain single identity estates.

Over the next three years, we will develop at least 30 Shared Future housing neighbourhoods within existing NI Housing Executive estates. These will offer existing tenants the opportunity to live in a neighbourhood where diversity is welcomed and where there is real encouragement and support.

Five neighbourhoods from across Northern Ireland have already committed to participating in the programme – Springfarm in Antrim, Lissize in Rathfriland, Knockmore/Tonagh in Lisburn, Gortview/Killybrack Close in Omagh and Ballynafeigh in Belfast.

The key for me to this programme, the unique aspect that will make the Programme work, is the community-led nature of it. Neighbourhoods must commit to the Programme, if they seek inclusion within it. It builds on good work already underway within a community where there is already a realisation that a Shared Future will lead to a better future for everyone on the estate. When that desire is there, then the statutory authorities can support it but no amount of money will deliver that support if neighbourhoods are not ready to make that first step.

The first ‘Shared Neighbourhood’ initiative at Springfarm estate in Antrim provides a good example

Springfarm Community Association five years ago identified that older residents were moving away, replaced by younger people who didn’t want to stay long. The estate had a growing reputation for drug dealing, and sectarian attacks were on the increase. Not surprisingly, the Housing Executive struggled to find tenants for empty homes and these vacant properties added to the ant-social behaviour issues in the area

Throughout this time, the Springfarm Community Association worked hard to develop a sense of community cohesion. They improved not just the image of Springfarm but also the physical appearance of their homes, gardens and streets within the estate.  A voluntary charter has been put in place, signed by all residents and embracing anti-sectarian measures as their commitment to a new future, once and for all turning their back on the past. There is now a waiting list to get re-housed in the estate.
 
I want to replicate this work in each of the other 29 neighbourhoods who have signed up to our Programme. Just like Springfarm, they will require support and buy-in from their respective communities. There remains a need for community volunteers to work alongside the Community Cohesion Officers that we will put in to support the Programme. I recognise that some Shared Neighbourhoods will undoubtedly suffer setbacks, but these initiatives will improve the lives of many people.

However for me – while I will celebrate the Shared Future initiatives now underway in new and existing estates – I know their limitations. We can trumpet the progress in the selected areas but the truth is that the Shared Future work we are doing is only possible in areas where there is already a fair degree of cross-community integration. In a sense we are picking off the low-hanging fruit, places where sharing has a chance. At the same time, if we are honest, we are doing relatively little to counter the ghetto mentalities that exist in more staunchly single-identity communities.

Part of the reason for this of course is that our system of allocating houses according to objective need, actually reinforces the status quo. The existing housing segregation means that waiting lists are largely segregated also, so that when a house becomes available to be re-let it is, in the vast majority of instances, going to be allocated to someone of the same community background as the previous tenant – thus perpetuating the segregation.

So a more radical approach is needed if we are serious (and believe me, I am) about stepping up the delivery of ‘Shared Future’ housing. My view is that we now have to regard Shared Future housing as an entitlement for those who want it.  This is a radical proposition, yet it is only replicating what already exists in the Education sector

Many parents today choose the medium of integrated education for their children because they want them to be educated in a mixed, shared environment. The State recognises this demand and generally does its best to meet it. So why do we not offer the same thing in housing? If parents want to bring up their children in a mixed, shared community then surely the State has a duty to meet that demand also?

The Education sector also has a well established Shared Future ‘product’ – the integrated school. We now need to create a similar product in Housing and, although I don’t underestimate the difficulty, I will be undertaking the necessary work to make this a reality.

Factoring Shared Future thinking into the provision and allocation of social housing could have profound implications for both our system of allocating houses (the Housing Selection Scheme) and also our planning of where to build (The Social Housing Development Programme) – but I am convinced that it is necessary.

I also want to factor Shared Future thinking into how DSD develops policy around its many community support programmes and initiatives aimed at tackling deprivation.

I know I will face opposition to this policy direction: There are those who are simply opposed to a Shared Future. In some cases because they find their single identity communities easy to control. Also, some housing and/or equality ‘purists’ will object to any interference with the Housing Selection Scheme – and yet how can they justify a perpetuation of a sectarian carve-up?

This is the big issue in housing and social development. The proverbial elephant in the room. Yet if we don’t radicalise our Shared Future agenda our society will never grow up. And it needs to grow-up.

Do we really want to have a society where the first thing people think about when they meet is ‘which foot’ the other person kicks with? Where we have a Minister changing an official document 150 times because he finds the term ‘Northern Ireland’ unbearable. Where the BBC has a daft ‘policy’ on the use of the word ‘Derry’?  And where paramilitaries still rule the roost in single identity  working class communities all over Northern Ireland.

I believe most people want to move on. They want to ditch all the baggage from the past and build a new future together. They want to make our new society a success.
And what will success look like? There is a great example from the South.

I have a picture in my mind of the Ireland/England Rugby match at Croke Park where 75,000 Irishmen stood respectfully for ‘God Save the Queen’ and many proud Ulstermen stood for a thunderous rendition of Abhrainn na Fheinn.

I have never seen so many tears before a match! But they were tears of joy, a recognition that a special moment had passed. Where a nation was able to show that it had grown-up and buried the prejudices of the past.

When do we get our special moment?

Isn’t it time for us all to grow up?

 

Will SF back Ritchie?

The High Court judgement against Social Development Minister, Margaret Ritchie  MLA, presents an interesting dilemma for Sinn Fein. Does the party back a nationalist minister who stood up to the UDA when they were ‘on riot’ or does it stand with Peter Robinson who sought to scupper Ms Ritchie’s initiative on technical grounds?

Earlier SDLP MLA Carmel Hanna pointed out that the High Court vindicated the Minister’s substantive position which, she said, is overwhelmingly backed by all decent members of the community. The court of public opinion has ruled firmly in her favour, according to the South Belfast politician.

The Minister won on three substantive grounds with the judge ruling on technicalities regarding the ministerial code.

On the other, the issues raised by those who opposed her decision – that she pre-judged the issue, that she failed to consult, that she was wrong to take the decision– were all dismissed, as they had already been dismissed in the court of public opinion.

At the time of writing I can see no public comment from Sinn Fein on the judgement. The First Minister, Mr Robinson, has claimed total vindication for his attempts to block Ms Ritchie.

The question as to where they stand on this issue therefore remains.

Can the SDLP go on in the Executive?

Social Development Minister, Margaret Ritchie MLA, has publicly suggested the SDLP may not be able to continue in the Executive if the party’s mandate and her role as a minister are not respected by the DUP and Sinn Fein.

With the SDLP conference little more than a month away this is a conversation we are likely to hear a lot more of after Christmas.

The BBC has the story.