The Tories’ meddling is undermining the Unionist cause in Northern Ireland

strapworld

Leave this god forsaken province to go it alone!

OFT. I do hope the Conservative Party are geared up for a snap election. I think Brown will call it as soon as they come back from their mini break. Hence the 'soft' interviews on television and newspapers and no date announced for the budget.

Warfooting Cameron and prepare for the dirtiest campaign ever. I would also keep a very careful watch how the EU help the Labour Party behind the scenes. They want a socialist government here to ensure that the EUSSR becomes a fact!

JONNY

And no Budget Date announced yet either, strapworld
- sounds a bit fishy thinks PB

Ali

Why should Cameron aspire to be neutral? Surely as a potential British Prime Minister he should clearly position himself in favour of the continued union, while respectfully listening to the republicans' position.

Grassmarket

Ali, there is no respectable neutral position to take between the Unionists (democratic politicians, some of whom have rather loopy obsessions) and IRA/Sinn Feinn - a gang of thugs and murderers who have temporarily renounced mass violence for tactical reasons, but who reserve the right to return to it.

Willie de Peepul

@Ali

Spot on. Cameron represents the CONSERVATIVE AND UNIONIST party and should propound THEIR policies, nobody else's.

Robert Eve

If some of the Unionists are socialists they should welcome Cameron.

Chingford Man

So off Strapworld goes on his SW1 watering hole rant.

Paterson is rather sensibly flying a kite. Back in 2007 the DUP got a clause to say that the post of First Minister had to come from the largest party. This was a cynical way to pressurise unionists into keeping it as poll toppers by raising the spectre of McGuinness as First Minister. It is now apparent that the DUP will lose enough support at the 2011 Assembly election not to top the poll. So there is a problem on the way.

James, you are being too hard on Cameron (not something that’s easy for me to type). I don’t doubt his desire to open up unionist politics by wanting this CDU-CSU type of arrangement. (It’s nonsense that someone like the fragrant Joanne Cash has to move to England to have a chance of national ministerial office.) But the settlement was always a delicate balance which would require (a) institutional tweaking and (b) the unionist parties forming an alliance to preserve the settlement in response to a waxing Sinn Fein vote.

I’ve been a member of both the Tories and the UUP, and my impression is that the overwhelming number of UUP people would fit easily into the Cornerstone bit of Toryism: patriotic, socially conservative but also socially concerned. Those who would be comfy in New Labour tend to stand out.

I think the UUP’s failure to get candidates selected is down to bad management at the top of the party, plus a concern that an alliance with the DUP may be more in the UUP’s (and the Belfast Agreement’s) long term interests than one with Cameron. Perhaps the Tories are coming to this view as well.

DJT

David, presumably you expect that Cameron should also referee between the SNP and Labour in Scotland, while adopting a "neutral" position on the Union, north of the border. Or perhaps you don't and you think NI is somehow "special" and British citizens here don't deserve equal rights, responsibilities and treatment as those living in Birmingham, Bedford or Bradford?

Dirty Euro

The tories do not care about the union. They spend most of their time telling the scots to get lost then they are more interested in winning seats than peace in Ulster.
Most tories only care about the south of England.
As long as the south of England can get all the the top government subsidized civil service jobs but then pretend it is the free market part of the UK and then goad everyone else about how much of a burden they are the tories will be happy.
As long as the the tories can build multi billion pound infrastructure projects in the south of england and then claim it is not subsidise for the south of england as it is vital infrastructure project for the whole of the UK, to have good railways in the south, then tory south english hypocrites will be happy. The rest of the country is just a joke to goad and abuse for the southern imperialist tories.
The tories are and always have been just the part of southern england exploitng the rest of ht eocuntry.
They are not the part of the union they are the party of little England no, make that little southern england.

Scary Biscuits

Dirty Euro, I don't think there's going to be any money for infrastructure projects in the south of England or anywhere else. But even if they were why would this be so bad seeing as your Labour party has spent the last 10 years taking tax money from the south and spending it in central London and the north (with unemployment worse than when they started)? As to your highly paid Civil Service jobs 'in the south', I think you'll find most of those are already in the north too: e.g. Head of the Charities Commission (Liverpool), DWP Sheffield, Home Office Hull etc. I suppose you also hate the Tories' plan to build a high speed rail link to Scotland as just benefiting the south too. I'm not aware of any other infrastructure projects they have proposed. The only others are Crossrail and HS1, both serving Labour's London constituencies but those are by your party of the, er, north.

Back on topic, the Conservatives aren't 'interfering' in Northern Ireland; they are simply seeking to engage and to stop treating the place like a no-go area. They are as entitled to seek the votes of residents there as anybody else.

Dirty Euro

Scary Biscuit How much do you want to bet that the high speed rail link will be listed as a purely scottish subsidy by the southern english civil service.
The south does not subsidise the north it gets all the HQs, government jobs. It gets the benefits from being the capital.
It manipulates figures to claim is is subdising the north.
For instance 16 billion pound rail link in London is being classed as an infrastructure project for all of the UK.
While the same in other part of the UK would not be given the excuse.
The south gets far more subdidies than then north, but its written off as civil servants live in the south and have an interest to hide that.
If the channel tunnel had been built in any other part of the UK it would have been counted a regional subsidy as it was in the south it was counted as a subsidy for all of us.
It is a conn trick.

Scary Biscuits

Dirty, I'd be interested to know where you get your facts from. You say Civil Servants live in the south. True but very far from all of them and indeed government spending on salaries is much higher in the north of England than in southern counties.

You should also be aware that the south isn't just London (although I know it can sometimes seem like that if you live in the north). Actually, London has great depravation and great riches which effectively cancel each other out, making its effect on the UK neutral. Crossrail might be listed as a UK project but it is being part paid for by a special additional business tax for London only. No other metropolitan area is having to do this for its projects.

The real unfairness is when comparing the southern (non London) counties with the north. My own borough collects £77 million in business tax of which only £12 million is kept; the rest goes to subsidise boroughs elsewhere in the UK. This is true of almost all southern boroughs outside London. However, it isn't really a north versus south thing. It is how Labour has governed not for all citizens but simply for its own electoral advantage. That is the real con. Unfairness ultimately hurts everyone. We shouldn't let them divide us like this.

Holly ......

Dirty Euro,
If the Channel tunnel had been built in any other part of the UK as you suggest, It wouldn't be the Channel tunnel now would it?
Where would you suggest they should have built the channel tunnel?