Elliott unveils "game changer" but can it change the game?

I took a trip over to the Mount Business Centre in East Belfast this morning, to hear Tom Elliott unveil his‘game changer’ for power sharing in Northern Ireland.  It’s being reported as a call for official opposition at Stormont, but that‘s just one component of the UUP‘s ‘big idea‘.


Elliott believes that an official opposition can be delivered over a four year time scale, alongside other measures to improve governance in Northern Ireland, such as cutting the number of MLAs and Executive departments.


In the meantime the UUP proposes a change to the phasing of d’Hondt after Assembly elections.  Rather than have the parties divide up ministries before discussing policy, the Ulster Unionists suggest that a programme for government be agreed, along with budget arrangements, before d’Hondt is run.


Anticipating criticism that the process will take too long, Elliott cites the speedy formation of a coalition government at Westminster, following the general election.  He clearly believes that the new timetable could be instigated, without altering existing legislation.


As well as laying out the UUP’s policy innovation, this morning’s business breakfast is intended to get the party’s Assembly campaign up and running.  It believes it is putting the ball firmly in the DUP and Sinn Féin’s court.


“They stand accused of running a two party carve-up rather than an all party coalition”, Elliott remarked, “if Sinn Féin / DUP want to change, if they want to put this country first, let them speak out today and back this proposal”.


And if the two larger parties won‘t play ball what are the likely consequences for the UUP?


The Ulster Unionists want to fight the election on the premise that they will enter the Executive only if it is possible to agree a programme for government.  Logically, any party which does not agree to a programme would become part of the voluntary opposition.


If the UUP’s rivals insist that d’Hondt must precede any discussions about policy and finance, then the Ulster Unionists will face a familiar dilemma.  Do they refuse to participate in the allocation of ministries and will they stay outside the Executive?


The UUP’s idea certainly has potential.  It’s the most imaginative initiative that we’ve seen since Elliott became leader.


It will only gain legs, though, if the party is prepared to push it hard – right through to its logical conclusion.  That means agreeing a programme for government up front, or walking away from the Executive.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The more obvious problem is that these ideas have already been put forward by Alliance and, for the most part, the DUP.

They were rejected by both Nationalist parties.

Why would the UUP succeed where the DUP and Alliance failed?
16 February 2011 at 12:09
Anonymous said…
Sadly for the UUP its all too late.
As Ian says there is nothing new here. Even if it was it wouldnt win them any votes.
The UUP - esp after the breaking of the link with the Tories has no USP.
Its too late to leave the Executive and voting against the Budget will look petty.
The election will a headcount and the UUP seen as irrelevant
16 February 2011 at 13:14
slug said…
I guess the answer to IJP's question is: things move on. "Voluntary opposition" might be a possibility the nationalist parties go for - i.e. you can be in govt if you want to but you can also be in opposition if you want to.

There may be electoral advantages of opposing for both SDLP and UUP - that is what will make it happen ultimately.
16 February 2011 at 18:28
Anonymous said…
Slug,

The problem is Nationalist parties do not see it that way.

Margaret Ritchie has already responded saying it's not the system but the "spirit of government" that's broken.

So, just as with First Minister designations, the UUP is making big play of a policy it cannot possibly implement.

That should not stop us exposing Nationalist intransigence on this issue for what it is.

Ian P.
17 February 2011 at 09:36
Ed Simpson said…
As others have said, the UUP will have to stick to their guns on this issue or lose all credibility. For me, I think that the current UUP leadership do not have the will to do so. Which makes this little more than gesture politics.
17 February 2011 at 10:47
Anonymous said…
I think the biggest surprise in all of this is that Tom came up with these plans all by himself
17 February 2011 at 17:57
Anonymous said…
The UUP need to get some priciples and say if they are not the biggest unionist party they will go into opposition.

Will they? Not a chance they need the money to survive.
17 February 2011 at 21:06
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Football fever in Russia

Russia Blog is getting excited about Euro 2008. Indeed it is drawing parallels between Guus Hiddink and Peter the Great in terms of successful Russo-Dutch exchanges of expertise. Meanwhile, in Moscow, fans have been taking to the streets in order to celebrate the national team’s achievements.
Read more

Stormont might not collapse but paramilitaries continue to disfigure Northern Ireland

Image
The devolved institutions in Northern Ireland are supposedly ‘teetering on the brink’ of collapse yet again.  After repeated failures to agree a balanced budget or implement welfare reform created months of uncertainty, the Executive’s future is now in doubt because the PSNI believes members of the IRA were involved in murdering a republican hit man.  Despite its apparent seriousness, this particular predicament is unlikely to bring the shaky edifice at Stormont crashing down. The IRA was supposed to have disbanded its military ‘structures’ and decommissioned its entire arsenal of weapons back in 2005.  It was on the basis of this understanding that power-sharing resumed in 2007 and the DUP entered government with Sinn Féin.  From the outset it was a fairly flimsy pretext.   Less than a year after John de Chastelain, the retired Canadian general, oversaw decommissioning, the Independent Monitoring Commission reported that the IRA retained a substantial haul of arms.
Read more

Walker loada rubbish

Former BBC employee Brian Walker has overrun Slugger O’Toole lately with countless poorly structured, poorly written posts. It is possible quickly to recognize and avoid these by subjecting each Slugger piece to a cursory inspection and identifying those which feature characteristic lack of paragraphing and a tenuous grasp on the technicalities of linking source articles. Although I generally evade Walker’s posts by this method, occasionally (and unfortunately) I have persevered and found that their content is as unrewarding as the style in which they are written. Today, for instance, I inflicted upon myself Brian’s thoughts on a mooted Fianna Fail / SDLP merger . In actual fact, he is right to welcome news that the Southern Irish party has dropped this proposal from its agenda; however, the logic by which he arrives at this conclusion is parochial nonsense. To summarise, Walker believes that pursuing realignment with larger parties, whether they are from the rest of the UK or fro
Read more