We need an SDLP – UUP alternative

Patrick Murphy had a typically thought provoking piece in yesterday’s Irish News about the need for an ‘Opposition’ at Stormont which was also covered on Slugger.

Mr Murphy’s central premise is that some day the North will need to consider whether compulsory power sharing is working. This is not a new argument. Last year Mark Durkan raised the issue in the context of a debate around a strong and inclusive Bill of Rights.

The Irish News columnist has a point:

In the old Stormont, the opposition was ignored.  In the new Stormont, the opposition has been abolished.  How democratic is a parliament without an opposition?  Advocates of the new system argue that it brings political benefits.  But does it?  It gives constitutional authority to sectarianism and promotes political schizophrenia.  Both the DUP and Sinn Féin claim the other is the enemy, within a supposedly partnership government.  Do nationalists benefit by having nationalist ministers?  For example, would our roads policy be different if Arlene Foster replaced Conor Murphy as regional development minister?

But does a focus on the structures of government take away from other significant weaknesses in Northern politics?

Adversarial, winner takes all, politics with clear governments and opposition is the way here in the UK and Ireland but not everywhere. The American system is much more complex as is the French one. Not to mention Isreal or Belgium, both of which have systems in which power is effectively shared between different offices which may or may not be held by representatives of the same party.

Our system doesn’t make politics more difficult it just makes it different. What is worrying is that the weakness of our political parties may be the real issue which is undermining the opportunity for government here.

Neither SF or the DUP will score well on their record in Government. To date the Executive they both lead has distinguished itself for inaction rather than results and this is very unlikely to change in the run up to the 2010 UK General Election and the 2011 Assembly poll. This is not because they have a free run in institutional terms with no opposition breathing down their necks - it is because they are being measured by their support base on their ability to stand up to each other rather then work together. That said we do need to ask whether to some extent the SDLP and UUP are letting them away with it.

I see no great public desire to see instability return to Stormont. As much as it pains many who are ambitious for the North, the basic threshold for success in the public mind appears to be stability. The vast majority of Northern voters seem willing to reward parties who stay together. That they are achieving very little whilst doing so is not an issue as there is nobody offering an alternative which would also be stable.

So heads down and do nothing then?

With the exception of the 60,000 who support the TUV the other million voters in NI seem supportive of powersharing and devolution.

If either the SDLP or UUP were to leave the Executive they would stand accused of fostering instability. But that does not mean they cannot change they way they work together and inside and outside the Executive. Right now is not so much a debate about opposition but one about alternatives.

There is nothing in the structures of government which would prevent the UUP and SDLP from developing common positions on key issues.

Education is an obvious example. Agree the basic principles of a workable system based on academic excellence and social justice, possibly with pupil choice at 14 and at least both parties could demonstrate that Irish and British people who call this region home can agree on important issues.

Tackling our divisions is another. Commit to a shared future and stand together against sectarianism and racism.

Even on the economy there is very little on which the DUP and SF agree.  This creates yet another opportunity for the UUP and the SDLP. They should agree a real Green New Deal and have the courage to publish it as an alternative response to the current recession.

All this does not in any way prejudice either party’s nationalism or unionism. No more than it would prejudice the Green Party, Alliance or PUP if they were to support agreed positions. What it would illustrate is that our two communities and their representatives can work together and share a commitment to the success of this region and its people. This would be a real platform for change.

The system can be reviewed till the cows come home but real change will come when nationalists and unionists start really sharing power and working together for the betterment of all.  The DUP and SF seem unable or unwilling to do this. The question is whether the SDLP and UUP could?

Has the power sharing brand been damaged?

Today’s Irish News piece considers the damage to the standing of power sharing as a system of government after 152 days of political stagnation.

The word on O’Conall St and on every other street for that matter is that there will be a meeting of the Executive on Thursday. It is being reported that our ministers will address the economic crisis. This is a very welcome step forward. It will, however, take months if not years however to win back the public confidence. I should point out that the article was written before yesterday’s news of a breakthrough.

Here is my full Irish News article:

How mad are you are the political impasse in our Executive?

Very mad, mad, sort of mad, don’t really care mad or not mad at all?

I’m in the “very mad” group as are very many I meet in business, the NGO sector and the media. This is not a partisan madness, it is 152 days of no government madness. I have no problem with a power sharing executive led by whichever two big parties the people choose. I don’t believe the system is broken like Jim Allister MEP does, nor do I buy into the argument which Sinn Fein appear to be making that the devolution of justice is more important then the 11plus, health policy, the global economic crisis or functioning government for that matter.

What I do believe in is government for the people and by the people. Here in the North of Ireland that means sharing power between our two communities for the benefit of both communities and those who belong to none.

It means putting people before party interest and issues before matters which should be dealt with by separate political processes. In simple terms, it means a working Executive and Assembly delivering an agreed Programme for Government and building on the common ground of bread and butter politics tackling bread and butter issues.

What has this got to do with PR? Everything. You see many of us who make a living from Public Relations do so by providing services to the private sector. We create jobs by growing our business and staying ahead of the curve. Over the past couple of years there has been considerable growth in digital communications practices as well as public affairs. The latter of which relies not just on a vibrant private sector but also on a functioning government.

Next year there will be job losses in my industry. That’s not me being pessimistic; it’s just a statement of fact. And for PR read law, accountancy, architecture, journalism or advertising for that matter. This is not a good place to be looking for a job and our political shenanigans could not send out as worse message to those thousands of graduates considering whether to stay or emigrate, not to mention potential investors.

The expectation of a functioning government is a reasonable one. Access to accountable representation is a right, not a luxury. There is another PR dimension to all this. By engaging the crudest form of party politics our leaders are themselves devaluing the reputation of politics and government.  They are presiding over a ‘brand assassination’ of power-sharing which is leaving the vast majority of our people disillusioned and disconnected from those who should be providing them with hope and opportunity at this time of need.

I want to see the devolution of justice here. For that matter I believe we should devolve taxation and broadcasting too. The closer government is to the people the better. That said, we can’t expect the public to entrust politicians with more powers when they seem incapable of sharing the authority they already have.

The Good Friday Agreement is premised on the assertion that victories are not solutions and that by working the common ground confidence can grow between our communities. It is not the institutions that are failing; the issue is the apparent unwillingness of the two big parties to share power.

As for PR. We will knuckle down and focus on delivering the very best for our clients. We have our big awards night later this month; a time to celebrate the very best in our industry. One thing I am sure of though. There will be no prizes for the political spin doctors this year.