Irish Left Archive: Northern Ireland: Statement by the National Executive Committee to the 1981 Conference (British Labour Party). March 22, 2010
Posted by irishonlineleftarchive in British Labour Party (Left Archive document), Irish Left Online Document Archive.1 comment so far
This document from the British Labour Party was issued in 1981 and came on foot of an eighteen month long examination by the NEC of the issue of Northern Ireland. As the introduction notes:
A study group set up early last year has examined in great detail every aspect of this vitally important issue. It has taken evidence from constituency groups and individuals in Northern Ireland. It has also held discussions with a wide variety of organisations, including trade unions, in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. In all its deliberations the study group was very conscious of its responsibility to formulate a clear, credible, socialist policy on Northern Ireland.
It’s worth noting also the ‘possible constitutional structures’ for the North which were considered. These included:
(i) continuing with direct rule;
(ii) establishing a devolved power-sharing government;
(iii) negotiating the establishment of a united Ireland;
(iv) restoring majority rule government;
(v) an independent Northern Ireland;
(vi) a confederation of the British Isles.
Each of these is considered in some detail, but the outcome of these deliberations will hardly be a surprise, unity by consent. But, there are aspects to this which are intriguing in terms of the details presented. Of particular note are the thoughts on Policing and Security and the Prevention of Terrorism Act
And it’s also interesting to find on page 26 a rationale for Labour not organising in Northern Ireland.
Financial regulation blues… redux… redux… March 22, 2010
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Economy, Irish Politics.14 comments
In a way FitzPatrick is a diversion. It’s not all personality by any means, but in the way it’s played currently, the huddled ranks of the photographers outside the Garda station, the tip off to the press and so on, the narrative is of the man of means taken down. To which one could say… well, who cares? It doesn’t serve us well for individuals to become lightning rods. But, perhaps that’s not the whole story, because the very delay in the arrest (a point raised by Vincent Brown this weekend in the Sunday Business Post) raises intriguing questions, and it shines the spotlight back onto the processes and systems. Which are, as ever, of much greater import.
Firstly, Brown and Richard Curran (also in the SBP), both made important points as regards to a profound failure in terms of the regulatory framework. Curran, in the course of a desperately depressing article which notes that Anglo-Irish was never of ‘systemic’ importance – despite the opposite being proclaimed widely by the government and its proxies – and that the guarantee was woefully misguided in its case, writes that:
Anglo Irish Bank may have engaged in certain unseen practices, which are now being investigated, but there was enough in the public domain about the bank to raise a warning flag. The bank was funding property deals in Britain for clients that other banks simply would not touch. Irish investors were paying what were dubbed ‘‘Paddy prices’’ for British property. The Financial Regulator was asleep at the wheel. While many things were hidden from the public or investors, including the true extent of Sean FitzPatrick’s indebtedness to the bank, it was not witheld from the Regulator. FitzPatrick provided quarterly details of his director’s loans with Anglo to the Regulator every three months. But no alarm bells went off.
Brown goes further…
…there may be big problems in delivering a head [in the case of Anglo Irish]. It seems that Anglo Irish Bank regularly reported to the Financial Regulator the movement of the money concerned. Was it the case that the Financial Regulator’s office saw no problem with what was being done, and indicated its approval? Or was it the case that they never asked the right questions?
If the Regulator did know, then how could FitzPatrick be convicted of offences that the Financial Regulator either knew of and did not complain about, or knew of and approved? The recklessness of Anglo under FitzPatrick has done enormous social harm. But wasn’t he egged on in his excesses – if not explicitly, then implicitly – by the culture of rampant capitalism spurred on and glorified by the Fianna Fail/PD governments? Worse still, didn’t the government, the Minister for Finance and the Department of Finance turn a blind eye to what was unfolding at Anglo Irish Bank?
Michael Somers, then head of the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA), told an Oireachtas committee last autumn that he had known that Anglo was in trouble from 2007, so was reluctant to deposit money with it.
The CLR touched on the nature of our Financial ‘Regulator’ in January and more recently, a nature that would make one deeply dubious about precisely what levers it was expected to employ when problems came its way.
That nature is, as much as the private financial institutions involved, going to be central to the ultimate critique of the crisis that has enveloped us. What Brown and Curran point to is hugely problematic for a range of people.
And with that thought let’s step back a way, and consider the larger partner in government.
These are the people who established the regulatory framework, a framework, as previously demonstrated that has arguably gone for the lightest touch regulation possible and seemingly put in place entities that did… well… what, precisely? We’ve heard no end of stuff about the public sector wasting taxpayers monies, some of it accurate, the vast majority of it not, but this… here is an institution that hitherto has attracted remarkably little interest. But then why should we be surprised? This was established within a dominant political discourse informed by a clear ideological approach.
An ideological approach, summarized perhaps unconciously by Colm McCarthy recently – and I paraphrase – not so much as ‘First do no harm’, as ‘first do nothing, and then second, third and fourth, do nothing’…
At the least this calls into question the capacity (not to mention the credibility) of the government to deal with the current financial crisis, indeed their ability to detach themselves from this ideological predilection, now so clearly and often expressed – as with the Commission on Taxation Report which explicitly argued in favor of a low-tax economy, one wonders whether they can deal with the financial sector in all its parts in any serious fashion, or the broader context. Or to put it another way, if the ideology itself informs a worldview that will allow for regulatory agencies who apparently can’t do that much in what we are told are strategic and essential areas of our economy that must – quite literally – be underwritten by us the taxpayers when things go wrong, what credence can we place in its broader analyses?
And let’s not ignore what those failures – driven in part, at least by ideology, have brought upon us. Richard Curran puts it succinctly.
…the losses at [Anglo Irish] are likely to cost the taxpayer around €10 billion to €11 billion. This excludes the likely losses that Nama will accrue from the €20 billion that it will spend buying nearly half of all of Anglo Irish Bank’s loan book.
To put it in perspective, the losses at Anglo Irish Bank are likely to be close to one year’s income tax collected in the entire country. So, all of our tax for one year might cover the cost of Anglo Irish Bank.
Sunday Independent Stupid Statement of the Week March 21, 2010
Posted by Garibaldy in media.14 comments
In a week when the wounds of the many who suffered at the hands of sex abusers who were clergy have been reopened yet again, the following from Eilis O’Hanlon is far and away the most tasteless statement of the week. It stands out on its own.
This weekend I’ll mostly be listening to… Spirit March 20, 2010
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Culture, This Weekend I'll Mostly Be Listening to....7 comments
Ah feck it. Let’s go the whole hog with Spirit. I posted up I Got a Line on You, from their 1968 album “The Family that Plays Together”… a drollish joke at their own expense given that Ed Cassidy, the drummer, was Randy California’s step-dad (and by the way, still alive today) and a mere 45 or so. Which didn’t stop him from being remarkably cool, all things considered and should in no sense be seen as the defining aspect of the band.
Now, critical plaudits often go to Love, and rightly so, but for my money this is a better album than Forever Changes, which was released a year earlier. Firstly it’s broader in its palette, secondly it’s just a little bit ropey in parts with a raw edge – something I like, thirdly, well, it’s just that bit rockier, which isn’t quite the same as the second point although it is linked. Give me a bit of grit, a bit of garage rock and I’ll be fairly happy at whatever jazz or classical noodling is thrown at me. From the most out and out pop/rock moment with “I Got a Line on You” through to curiosities such as ‘Jewish’… which is near inexplicable but good, this combines classical, jazz, rock in such a way as to be similar, but not the same by any means, as the experimentation of the Beatles on the other side of the world (splintered sunrise mentions the Twelve Dreams of Dr. Sardonicus which is also pretty great – perhaps splintered might be interested in tackling that album, but I think this one shades it ever so slightly).
I know, I know, I’m a sucker for any band that can produce a gem such as ‘I Got a Line…’, a song which Robert Christgau once noted was…
…that great shining 2:39 of hard rock guitar
And there’s a thing, for all the supposed excesses of the late 1960s and early 1970s this is an album where only one track on the original vinyl album exceeded 5 minutes and most averaged about 3 minutes or so. That speediness assists immeasurably in making this an absorbing listen.
I mentioned in the other post that Taurus, from their first album, has a great big surprise a short way in in terms of a sound that is… well… very… reminiscent of someone else.
I got a line on you
It shall be
Dream within a dream
Taurus
That rotating Minister debate March 19, 2010
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics, The Left.10 comments
Got to say the issue of rotating Ministers is not a topic which hugely concerns me one way or another. It’s one of those ideas that on paper, and perhaps in the halcyon days of the Summer of 2007, sounds alright and then one begins to think a little deeper about it. Not, I hasten to add that I’m averse to recall of representatives at all levels. But in this context it does seem to me to be something that is almost a sideshow. There’s also the small fact that reshuffles do occur and seem to generate none of the controversy that this issue is doing. Perhaps it’s the volunteerist aspect to it. Perhaps not.
One has to preface this by noting that these reports have not been clearly confirmed by those said to be involved. No document has come to light yet and if it hasn’t one wonders how the substance of the reports could be proven one way or another. But political opinion and reflection requires no documents to fuel its voracious appetite. Including, it has to be admitted, this site. 
However, if correct, as an insight into the thinking in the Green Party at the cusp of a degree of political power it demonstrates the road travelled, and indeed the road yet to be travelled. It certainly has something of the consensual ethos that typified the party, but might also – and rather more dangerously in these straitened times – appear too much of a deal.
Those of us with longer memories will recall just how Ministerial and Junior Ministerial positions were issues that much – indeed to my mind overly – exercised Democratic Left. And the tokenistic aspects of it, these being representations of how much, or perhaps more realistically given the size of Cabinet government how little, power is wielded by a junior partner in a coalition. I was gone from DL by the time opinions were vented as to a ‘super junior’ Ministers job, that most unlikely of political creations, which more or less sold the deal on their participation in government. Interesting to reflect on what might have happened had that fallen through and DL had had to eschew coalition. A snap election? Labour returning chastened to the also chastened embrace of Fianna Fáil? Or, more likely, a subsequent face saving deal to pull it altogether.
Which only goes to prove that such things matter, that they have a currency amongst both political parties and as crucially, in terms of coalitions, government formation. One may laugh at the idea of constituencies seeking representatives who can ‘do a deal’ with a government. I don’t as it happens. But much the same process is true in terms of party members seeking ‘their’ voice at a cabinet table. We’re pretty much all like that, bar the parties that eschew on principle the notion of coalition (I take a median position which is that I think in general left parties should only enter coalitions where they can make up a majority of those in the coalition – except in extremis).
In any case does it make sense? It’s one thing to believe in recall of representatives, but in the context of what we have and the structures we adhere to at this point (none of which are unamenable to change, but seem unlikely to do so anytime soon) it seems to me to be another thing entirely to discuss artificially shortened stays in Ministerial positions. Simply coming to terms with a job, any job, requires a considerable length of time. That may well be an argument for reforming the nature of these tasks, but again, that’s not going to happen today or tomorrow. So, without wanting to seem wedded to the status quo merely for the sake of it, a full term has some virtues. What one then does with that full term is a different and arguably trickier question.
If there is anxiety or irritation inside the GP over this, and the comments to date have been somewhat light on detail, I think it could be made up of a sense of how – whether the reports are accurate or not – this plays. Poorly, one would have to say, in the wake of the (ironically) rather better days in the wake of the resignation of Trevor Sargent.
All that said it does make one wonder whether this devalues for the future the notion of a ‘rotating’ Taoiseach, an idea which again had a certain currency in the early to mid-1990s, where if two parties had achieved a broad parity in terms of seat numbers both would be entitled to have a turn at the top. It was meant to be Labour and Fine Gael’s destination, but reading the runes perhaps a similar attempt could be made in the wake of a future election between FF and Labour dependent on numbers.
Interesting that Niamh Connolly noted that discourse in the Sunday Business Post the weekend before last when she wrote:
Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny accused Green TDs of trying to feather their own nests before the next election, while Labour Party leader Eamon Gilmore ribbed the Greens about ‘‘crop rotation’’.
Labour was, however, cautious not to criticise the deal, since one of its own former leaders, Dick Spring, proposed a rotating Taoiseach in discussions with then Fine Gael leader John Bruton in 1992. Some sources in Labour were also not discounting suggestions that Gilmore would have a stint as Taoiseach in any future coalition government with Fine Gael.
But I’d bet that the last few days have brought into sharp focus the reality of changing Ministerial positions mid-term and put paid to that idea for quite some time to come.
As to the outcome of reshuffles and rotations. We’ll know all early next week, I’ll bet.
This week from the Irish Election Literature Blog March 19, 2010
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics, The Left.add a comment
Another week from AK at the IELB… and a most interesting one… first up and as he says…
The highlight being a copy of Ulsters Solemn League and Covenant from 1912, which was reportedly signed in blood by many.
Presumably from the late 70s a simple flyer urging you to join the Socialist Labour Party.
From 2005 an Irish Anti War Movement flyer -’US Military out of Shannon’, for a march and peace concert in Shannon.
Then from the 2007 General Election Campaign, we have Pat Rabbitte reading to a little girl ‘The story of Labours Rose’….
Also from the 2007 General Election People Before Profits Gino Kenny from the 2007 General Election.
Incidentally I went onto ginokenny.org and what slogan appears only ‘Think Local -Act Global’. Where have I seen that one before I wonder?
And finally in any language doesn’t this man look like a Taoiseach in waiting?
Seán FitzPatrick… lest we forget… March 18, 2010
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Economy, Irish Politics.11 comments
I never get dewey eyed over US style capitalism, but one aspect of it which has always been quite admirable, however partial in implementation, has been an ability to tackle certain aspects of problems in financial areas. Now, sure, almost all of that has been for the optics, and for sending out a message that the system is fine, and even strengthened by such acts of expiation. And I’m not ignoring the remaining massive flaws. But, no harm.
In this state there hasn’t even been that fig-leaf of propriety. Sonofstan, made an excellent point at the weekend about how the Sean Brady case demonstrates, yet again, a class based issue, where the clergy, as an adjunct to the middle classes were not to be questioned. Deference, oaths of secrecy, whatever, were the order of the day.
I’m dubious, whatever about the optimism of Murray Rothbard, that a more capitalist or libertarian setup would be more ‘just’, but, every once in a while it would be interesting to see capitalism live up to its own supposed standards.
It would also be good to see this approach extended.
Meanwhile, as for Seán FitzPatrick… well, I think this, should tell us some interesting things about him.
Well, maybe this as well…
And er… this…
And now… this.
Postmodern Paddy’s Day March 18, 2010
Posted by Garibaldy in United States.6 comments
Just when you think that the American obsession with Paddy’s Day can’t get any worse, this story comes along.
Analysis of the 2009 Local Election Results in Dublin March 18, 2010
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics, The Left.23 comments
Many thanks to AK of the Irish Election Literature Blog (who has become a very welcome ex officio contributor to the CLR) for writing up this analysis of the 2009 Local Election Results in Dublin focusing on Fianna Fáil transfers and seat bounces. For anyone, but most particularly the left, this is an important battleground… perhaps the most important one, whatever our affiliations, because of the sheer concentration of left wing voters (such as that concentration may be). AK has carried out an analysis of other parties which it would, I think, be useful to post here as well in the near future.
Seat Bounce stats for 2009 LE in Dublin
Dublin City Council
FF 11.5% of seats with 17% of votes (seat bounce of 0.67)
FG 23% of seats with 18% of votes (1.28)
Labour 36.5% of seats with 27% of vote (seat bounce of 1.35)
GP 0% of seats with 3% of votes
SF 13.5% of seats with 12% of votes (1.13)
PBP 4% of seats with 4% of votes (1)
Left (WP +Ind) -10% of seats with 10% of votes (1)
SDCC
FF 15% of seats with 18% of vote (0.83)
FG 31% of seats with 27% of vote (1.15)
Lab 35% of seats with 25% of vote (1.4)
SF 11% of seats with 11% of vote (1)
Fingal
FF 16% of seats with 16% of vote (1)
FG 25% of seats with 21% of vote (1.19)
Lab 37.5% of seats with 26% of vote (1.44)
SF 0 seats wit 5%
GP 0 seats with 6%
SOC 12.5% seats with 14% of vote (.9)
Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown
FF 14% of seats with 16% of vote (.87)
FG 40% of seats with 34% of vote (1.18)
Lab 29% of seats with 23% of vote (1.26)
SF 0 seats wit 3%
GP 0 seats with 6%
PBP 7% of seats with 7.5% of vote (1)
At the last General Election in the Dublin Constituencies
FF 40% of seats 39% of votes (1.03)
FG 21% of seats 19% of votes (1.11)
LAB 19% of seats 14.5% of votes (1.31)
GP 11% of seats 8% of votes (1.38)
PD 2% of seats 4% of votes
SF 2% of seats 7% of votes
Party seats/ quotas
Fianna Fail
Dublin City Council
1 seat
Cabra Glasnevin 2.05
Clontarf 1.22
Donaghmede 1.07
Artane Whitehall 1.06
Pembroke Rathmines 0.98
Ballymun Finglas 0.93
0 seats
South West Inner City 0.8
Crumlin Kimmage 0.66
Ballyfermot Drimnagh 0 seats 0.5 quota
North Inner City .59
South East Inner City .59
SDCC
1 seat
Clondalkin 1.35
Rathfarnham 1.21
Tallaght Central .99
Tallaght South 1.05
no seats
Lucan (a six seater) .8 quota
Fingal
1 seat
castleknock 0.97
Howth-Malahide 1.07
Mulhuddart 1.15
Swords 0.93
No seat
Balbriggan 0.62
Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown
1 seat
Dundrum 1.06
Glencullen Sandyford 1.02
Stillorgan 0.94
Dun Laoghaire 0.77 (lab got 2 seats on 1.13)
no seat
Ballybrack 0.68
Blackrock 0.89
Looking at the stats Fianna Fáil’s core vote dropped too low to elect councillors in many areas.
Not alone that but looking at the stats for quotas required, FF in all bar one area had to have at least 0.93 of a quota to get elected, which was very large considering the amount of Non Transferable
votes there would be about the place. In essence FF have gone back to being transfer unfriendly (Its probably best to look at Eoin Ryans figures in the Euros to see the lack of transfers he got.)
The only LEA to buck the trend was 6 seat Dun Laoghaire where Cormac Devlin scraped in on the last count with FF initially on 0.77 of a quota.
FF fielded too many candidates in some areas which also diluted their vote.
Its also apparent from the seat bounce stats (and the counts themselves!) that Labour got transfers from everywhere. Indeed there was a marked shift relating to both Green and Sinn Fein Transfers.
Sinn Fein transfers in the past have favoured both Fianna Fail and the Green Party. This time though Labour were the main beneficiaries, especially where a candidate from the Left was not still involved.
The more middle class an area the higher the Green Transfers were to Labour too.
Strikingly in Dublin City Council The broad Left (Lab, SF, PBP, WP and Ind) got well over half the vote.
In cases where there were no Labour candidates remaining The Left actually transfered to Fine Gael in numbers too.
That opposite could also be seen in cases where Fine Gael transfered more to Sinn Fein than to Fianna Fail. Of course in the Euros we had transfers to Joe Higgins from everywhere to keep Eoin Ryan out (and Mary Lou McDonald also).
Needless to say Fine Gael also transfered well to Labour.
In all councils the Labour vote was up and in all bar DLR the seat bounce was up too.
In all Council area Fine Gaels seat bounce was higher than that of the 2007 General Election as was their first Preference vote.
So what is indicated are a number of different dynamics.
The usual transfer pattern along Left/ Right lines but also the added change in that Labour got a lot more transfers from all quarters especially Sinn Fein and The Greens.
A more pronounced transfer pattern along government /opposition lines. We are probably more polarized now than ever.
So whats in it for the Left?
Well if the Left are in a position to strike, transfers will be far more likely to come their way,in many cases not due to who they are, but due to who they are not.
Labour
Dublin City Council
3 seats
Pembroke Rathmines 2.33
2 seats
Artane Whitehall 1.97
Ballymun Finglas 1.89
Crumlin Kimmage 1.99
North Inner City 1.75
South East Inner City 1.9
South West Inner City 1.75
1 seat
Ballyfermot Drimnagh 1.23
Cabra Glasnevin 1.29
Clontarf 0.99
Donaghmede 1.76
SDCC
3 seats
Tallaght Central 2.39
2 seats
Lucan 1.03
Tallaght South 1.67
1 seat
Clondalkin 1.51
Rathfarnham 0.99
Fingal
2 seats
Balbriggan 1.81
Howth-Malahide 1.63
Mulhuddart 1.63
Swords 1.53
1 seat
Castleknock 0.82
Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown
2 seats
Ballybrack 2.04
Dun Laoghaire 1.13
1 seat
Blackrock 1.11
Dundrum 1.19
Glencullen Sandyford 1.66
Stillorgan 0.74
Elsewhere today March 17, 2010
Posted by Tomboktu in Capitalism, Class, Economics, Housing, Human Rights, Ireland, Justice, Political Philosophy.5 comments
HumanRightsInIreland, a blog run by Irish academic lawyers, has a series of posts today on the theme (to my ear, hi falutin) of ‘Human Rights Lexicon’. However, don’t let that put you off. I recommend the post by Illan Rua Wall on the right to housing in a post-crash Ireland. It gives some thoughts that are new to me on how we might approach economic injustices through the legal concept of human rights. (Whether it will ever get legs is another story.)
To begin the task of shifting the neo-liberal imagination, I suggest the crime of squatting (for it is a criminal offence in Ireland). Squatting is to take direct action, not against this or that policy of the government, but against trite neo-liberal abstraction and injustice. By placing people, real lived experience, in these ‘toxic’ assets, the reality of the situation is manifested in a material sense. Ireland is increasingly a country which is divided between the rich within their neat comfortable zones, and the poor who are increasingly subjects of toil, insult, degradation and burden. It is not alone in this, but that is not the issue. What if the 43,000 families currently waiting for social housing, broke into the empty houses and apartments all over the country, now in state (or at least NAMA) ownership? I suggest this would at once be an a-legal vindication of their economic rights, but it would also present an attempt to rupture the neo-liberal ideological hold on the country.
