sluggerotoole--2020-12-16--“We can begin with the empowerment of civic society, by bringing about participative and deliberativ

“We can begin with the empowerment of civic society, by bringing about participative and deliberative democracy”

Following on from last month ’ s discussion , you can now watch back a panel discussion convened by the John & Pat Hume Foundation last week in Derry ’ s Guildhall looking at the topic of A Shared Home Place – the Unfinished Business of Reconciliation .
The address was delivered by Maureen Hetherington ( director of The Junction community and peace-building centre and coordinates Ethical & Shared Remembering with Johnston McMaster and the Liberation from Patriarchy with Cathy Higgins ) .
“ As a consequence of a world pandemic , we now have to look at reconciliation differently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ changed utterly .
No longer can we be insular in our thinking about our place here , or in the world ; we need a global vision .
“ Globalisation takes many different forms ; the globalisation we are familiar with is neo-liberalist .
It is destructive of humanity and of the earth .
But there is an alternative : a global system that is ethical , and compassionate , that following the Africa concept of ‘ Ubuntu ’ locates individual identity in the context of belonging to each other .
It enables @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on earth .
Ubuntu is about the removal of self-serving practices !
“ Can we as a society build neighbourliness , a tenacious solidarity that is relational – and , worth mentioning again , this has been evidenced throughout the pandemic , where communities have set aside their differences and worked across all community settings to support the vulnerable , sick and needy .
“ The Hume Foundation , in partnership with all who strive for real peace , has an opportunity to do something differently ; to throw out a new vision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We can begin with the empowerment of civic society , by bringing about participative and deliberative democracy.
” Helen Henderson and Seamus Farrell responded in a discussion chaired by Hume Foundation board member Sara Canning .
Working under three key principles of partnership , respect and resilience , the cross-community Hume Foundation was established to promote the peaceful legacy of John and Pat Hume .
“ The John and Pat Foundation wishes to recognise the incredible resilience of quiet peacemakers from the Bogside to the Waterside and Falls Road to the Shankill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for decades in building peace and reconciliation .
“ The speakers at the Derry session invited the Hume Foundation and all of us to think differently , ask different questions and change the conversation on reconciliation .
We were challenged to be more solution focused , where do we want to be in 2050 ?
and then work backwards with the goal of building a more reconciled society .
We are facing an existential crisis locally and globally .
We must be history makers and are called to make history .
”

Following on from last month’s discussion, you can now watch back a panel discussion convened by the John & Pat Hume Foundation last week in Derry’s Guildhall looking at the topic of A Shared Home Place – the Unfinished Business of Reconciliation.
The address was delivered by Maureen Hetherington (director of The Junction community and peace-building centre and coordinates Ethical & Shared Remembering with Johnston McMaster and the Liberation from Patriarchy with Cathy Higgins).
“As a consequence of a world pandemic, we now have to look at reconciliation differently and do things differently. Everything has changed utterly. No longer can we be insular in our thinking about our place here, or in the world; we need a global vision. “Globalisation takes many different forms; the globalisation we are familiar with is neo-liberalist. It is destructive of humanity and of the earth. But there is an alternative: a global system that is ethical, and compassionate, that following the Africa concept of ‘Ubuntu’ locates individual identity in the context of belonging to each other. It enables human flourishing and a future for life on earth. Ubuntu is about the removal of self-serving practices! “Can we as a society build neighbourliness, a tenacious solidarity that is relational – and, worth mentioning again, this has been evidenced throughout the pandemic, where communities have set aside their differences and worked across all community settings to support the vulnerable, sick and needy. “The Hume Foundation, in partnership with all who strive for real peace, has an opportunity to do something differently; to throw out a new vision, a new way of doing things. We can begin with the empowerment of civic society, by bringing about participative and deliberative democracy.”
Helen Henderson and Seamus Farrell responded in a discussion chaired by Hume Foundation board member Sara Canning.
Working under three key principles of partnership, respect and resilience, the cross-community Hume Foundation was established to promote the peaceful legacy of John and Pat Hume.
Sara Canning commented:
“The John and Pat Foundation wishes to recognise the incredible resilience of quiet peacemakers from the Bogside to the Waterside and Falls Road to the Shankill Road, who have demonstrated enormous courage for decades in building peace and reconciliation. “The speakers at the Derry session invited the Hume Foundation and all of us to think differently, ask different questions and change the conversation on reconciliation. We were challenged to be more solution focused, where do we want to be in 2050? and then work backwards with the goal of building a more reconciled society. We are facing an existential crisis locally and globally. We must be history makers and are called to make history.”


sluggerotoole--2020-12-16--How can we all be fact checkers in a pandemic?

Dr Orna Young is a cofounder and executive director of FactCheckNI .
Founded in 2015 , FactCheckNI is Northern Ireland ’ s first and only dedicated fact checking organisation .
Get in touch to book a free online interactive training session on fact checking for your organisation .
We are living through a global health emergency in which the communication of misinformation and disinformation — what has been termed “ an infodemic ” — quite literally means the difference between life and death .
Never before has the quality and accuracy of the information we are consuming mattered on such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much attention has been given to social media platforms and the role they must play their role in removing misinformation , individuals also have a responsibility to check what they are sharing .
This can be challenging , given the sheer amount of information we are all seeing online , much of which is designed to ensure you quickly hit the share button .
This is most certainly the case with the information being shared on the development and introduction of COVID-19 vaccines , with a surge in the circulation of conspiracy conspiracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questioning it : “ Is it part of a global ‘ plandemic ?
’ Are the vaccines being introduced to track us ?
” What happens when these discussions happen over your Christmas dinner , at the school gate , or in a usually friendly WhatsApp group ?
How can you be your own fact checker ?
In this article I explain how you can talk to people in your life about conspiracy theories and keep the focus on the evidence to ensure the safety of everyone in our communities .
I also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take to fact check the information you ’ re reading in real time .
Conspiracy theories come from a place of fear Before I discuss how to challenge conspiracy theories , it is important to understand why people believe them and how they gain traction .
A belief in conspiracy theories is a very normal response to difficult issues and situations .
2020 has presented us all with huge challenges — from limiting our social contacts and opportunities , to the economic and financial fall out — there have been huge changes in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only came to light just over a year ago , and with it came a whole host of unknowns ( many of which we are still making sense of ) : where did it come from ?
; how does it affect different people ?
; and how is it transmitted ?
Understandably , many of us were , and are still , afraid of things which can not be easily explained .
This fear is the common thread between different reasons why people believe in and share conspiracy theories .
They may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need for a sense of control over a situation ; or indeed , a need for a sense of belonging .
The emotional pull of conspiracy theories explains their “ stickiness ” , and why you probably know more than one person in your life that holds these beliefs .
Conspiracy theories provide simple stories for complex issues .
So how can we approach difficult conversations with family and friends about them ?
Dismissing is not the right approach How you talk to someone about a conspiracy theory is key .
Dismissing their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their position and add to the “ story ” they have been telling themselves about an issue .
More difficult still for us fact checkers is the realisation that evidence or data on their own often won ’ t change the minds of people who believe in conspiracy theories .
The tricky part is that many of these theories contain some kernel of truth and any attempt to debunk them can be explained away as someone simply attempting to undermine a person ’ s position .
As fact checkers we ’ re often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conspiracy theories can have the unintended consequence of promoting , rather than minimising , them .
Challenging conspiracy theories can enrage those who disagree with the evidence we point to and result in the further spread of the disinformation which we ’ re attempting to minimise .
Therefore , “ real world ” engagement affords us an opportunity to have open and respectful conversations with friends and family — which are often all too lacking in the online world .
In a real life situation where you are dealing with a person who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is key .
After all , their belief is often born from a place of fear .
By meeting that person where they are at on a specific issue , you are more likely to be able to ask questions which are not deemed threatening , but in the course of discussion may reveal inconsistencies in their beliefs .
It is also important to think about the intention of the conversation with someone about a conspiracy theory .
Are you having it to simply prove that you ’ re right and they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this could be to put even more distance between you and your friend/family member .
However , if the intention is to understand their perspective , and not belittle them , then perhaps the impact will be finding more common ground and openness .
Another consideration is the potential entanglement of the theory with an individual ’ s sense of identity .
For example , a person who passionately believes and expresses that governments have too much influence on our individual lives , may in turn relate this to a conspiracy theory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Similarly , a wellness influencer may reject calls for a COVID-19 vaccine , having espoused a particular way of eating and living .
This goes some way to explaining the passion with which many conspiracy theories are defended online .
This clash of emotion and identity with complex information , reveals the importance of putting an accessible and human face on high quality data and evidence — and telling the story of it .
The challenge in relation to conspiracy theories is that raw facts and data won ’ t necessarily change the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these theories .
However , three central — and crucially , non-threatening — questions can help us when chatting through these conspiracy theories with our friends and family members in our daily lives .
They can also support you in how you consider the information you read online , and how you can be your own fact checker .
Where did you read this / hear this from ?
A simple source check may stop someone in their tracks .
If they heard a particular theory on a Facebook thread or a WhatsApp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ check the source , and robustness of it .
This will often reveal inconsistency in that story .
Encourage people to open another tab !
As fact checkers , we say people should read across sources , as this often provides a much fuller picture of a particular issue or story .
Conspiracy theorists often use imprecise language to tell their story , ensuring that they are broad enough to potentially be true .
Simple questions regarding the detail of this language can also reveal the holes in the plot .
How does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a conversation about how the theory made the person feel .
If a piece of information makes someone feel sad , afraid or angry , it may have been engineered to do just that .
Stories and theories which evoke a strong reaction are also shared more .
If a theory that a friend or family member has shared or has read does this , suggest that they do a quick search to see what others are saying .
Encourage them to get outside of their Facebook or WhatsApp bubbles and ask questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory supporters is difficult .
The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown has been isolating for many of us and provided fertile ground for conspiracies to gain traction .
However , while any conversations we will have with friends and family to challenge them will be difficult , they are important .
They will put a human face to evidence and facts , and remove the distance that extreme views thrive in .
It is important to keep having them , as the more high quality and accurate information that is out there , hopefully @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poor health decisions on the basis of them .
At FactCheckNI we frequently get asked “ who fact checks the fact checkers ?
” , as if we consider ourselves to be some gate keepers of “ the truth ” .
In reality , we are interested in the quality and accessibility of the information people read and hear .
We want people to engage critically with what they are reading and hearing – including our work !
The international code of principles we work under ensures we are transparent about mistakes or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your part and think more critically about the information that is being fired at us all .
Organisations can book a free online interactive training session with us on fact checking , where we explore : what is fact checking ; why is it important ; how can you do it yourself ; and examine some of the tools you can use to make sure what you ’ re sharing both online and in your real life is accurate .

Dr Orna Young is a cofounder and executive director of FactCheckNI. Founded in 2015, FactCheckNI is Northern Ireland’s first and only dedicated fact checking organisation. Get in touch to book a free online interactive training session on fact checking for your organisation.
We are living through a global health emergency in which the communication of misinformation and disinformation — what has been termed “an infodemic” — quite literally means the difference between life and death. Never before has the quality and accuracy of the information we are consuming mattered on such an immediate and global scale.
While much attention has been given to social media platforms and the role they must play their role in removing misinformation, individuals also have a responsibility to check what they are sharing. This can be challenging, given the sheer amount of information we are all seeing online, much of which is designed to ensure you quickly hit the share button.
This is most certainly the case with the information being shared on the development and introduction of COVID-19 vaccines, with a surge in the circulation of conspiracy conspiracy theories. We have all seen posts questioning it: “Is it part of a global ‘plandemic?’ Are the vaccines being introduced to track us?”
What happens when these discussions happen over your Christmas dinner, at the school gate, or in a usually friendly WhatsApp group?
How can you be your own fact checker?
In this article I explain how you can talk to people in your life about conspiracy theories and keep the focus on the evidence to ensure the safety of everyone in our communities. I also walk through some basic steps you can take to fact check the information you’re reading in real time.
Conspiracy theories come from a place of fear
Before I discuss how to challenge conspiracy theories, it is important to understand why people believe them and how they gain traction. A belief in conspiracy theories is a very normal response to difficult issues and situations. 2020 has presented us all with huge challenges — from limiting our social contacts and opportunities, to the economic and financial fall out — there have been huge changes in how we live our lives.
COVID-19 only came to light just over a year ago, and with it came a whole host of unknowns (many of which we are still making sense of): where did it come from?; how does it affect different people?; and how is it transmitted? Understandably, many of us were, and are still, afraid of things which cannot be easily explained.
This fear is the common thread between different reasons why people believe in and share conspiracy theories. They may have a need for understanding; a need for a sense of control over a situation; or indeed, a need for a sense of belonging.
The emotional pull of conspiracy theories explains their “stickiness”, and why you probably know more than one person in your life that holds these beliefs. Conspiracy theories provide simple stories for complex issues. So how can we approach difficult conversations with family and friends about them?
Dismissing is not the right approach
How you talk to someone about a conspiracy theory is key. Dismissing their claim as ridiculous will often simply re-affirm their position and add to the “story” they have been telling themselves about an issue.
More difficult still for us fact checkers is the realisation that evidence or data on their own often won’t change the minds of people who believe in conspiracy theories. The tricky part is that many of these theories contain some kernel of truth and any attempt to debunk them can be explained away as someone simply attempting to undermine a person’s position.
As fact checkers we’re often conscious that the process of publicly addressing conspiracy theories can have the unintended consequence of promoting, rather than minimising, them. Challenging conspiracy theories can enrage those who disagree with the evidence we point to and result in the further spread of the disinformation which we’re attempting to minimise. Therefore, “real world” engagement affords us an opportunity to have open and respectful conversations with friends and family — which are often all too lacking in the online world.
Have empathy
In a real life situation where you are dealing with a person who believes in a conspiracy theory, empathy is key. After all, their belief is often born from a place of fear. By meeting that person where they are at on a specific issue, you are more likely to be able to ask questions which are not deemed threatening, but in the course of discussion may reveal inconsistencies in their beliefs.
It is also important to think about the intention of the conversation with someone about a conspiracy theory. Are you having it to simply prove that you’re right and they are wrong? If so, the impact of this could be to put even more distance between you and your friend/family member. However, if the intention is to understand their perspective, and not belittle them, then perhaps the impact will be finding more common ground and openness.
Another consideration is the potential entanglement of the theory with an individual’s sense of identity. For example, a person who passionately believes and expresses that governments have too much influence on our individual lives, may in turn relate this to a conspiracy theory relating to COVID-19 and government control. Similarly, a wellness influencer may reject calls for a COVID-19 vaccine, having espoused a particular way of eating and living. This goes some way to explaining the passion with which many conspiracy theories are defended online.
This clash of emotion and identity with complex information, reveals the importance of putting an accessible and human face on high quality data and evidence — and telling the story of it.
Ask these questions
The challenge in relation to conspiracy theories is that raw facts and data won’t necessarily change the beliefs and behaviours of those committed to these theories. However, three central — and crucially, non-threatening — questions can help us when chatting through these conspiracy theories with our friends and family members in our daily lives. They can also support you in how you consider the information you read online, and how you can be your own fact checker.
Where did you read this / hear this from?
A simple source check may stop someone in their tracks. If they heard a particular theory on a Facebook thread or a WhatsApp forwarded message, perhaps they could double check the source, and robustness of it. This will often reveal inconsistency in that story.
What’s missing from that information?
Encourage people to open another tab! As fact checkers, we say people should read across sources, as this often provides a much fuller picture of a particular issue or story. Conspiracy theorists often use imprecise language to tell their story, ensuring that they are broad enough to potentially be true. Simple questions regarding the detail of this language can also reveal the holes in the plot.
How does the story make you feel?
Have a conversation about how the theory made the person feel. If a piece of information makes someone feel sad, afraid or angry, it may have been engineered to do just that. Stories and theories which evoke a strong reaction are also shared more. If a theory that a friend or family member has shared or has read does this, suggest that they do a quick search to see what others are saying. Encourage them to get outside of their Facebook or WhatsApp bubbles and ask questions.
What next?
Changing the minds of convinced conspiracy theory supporters is difficult. The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown has been isolating for many of us and provided fertile ground for conspiracies to gain traction. However, while any conversations we will have with friends and family to challenge them will be difficult, they are important. They will put a human face to evidence and facts, and remove the distance that extreme views thrive in. It is important to keep having them, as the more high quality and accurate information that is out there, hopefully the less likely people are to make poor health decisions on the basis of them.
Who fact checks the fact checkers?
At FactCheckNI we frequently get asked “who fact checks the fact checkers?”, as if we consider ourselves to be some gate keepers of “the truth”. In reality, we are interested in the quality and accessibility of the information people read and hear. We want people to engage critically with what they are reading and hearing – including our work! The international code of principles we work under ensures we are transparent about mistakes or corrections we make.
You can play your part and think more critically about the information that is being fired at us all. Organisations can book a free online interactive training session with us on fact checking, where we explore: what is fact checking; why is it important; how can you do it yourself; and examine some of the tools you can use to make sure what you’re sharing both online and in your real life is accurate.


sluggerotoole--2020-12-16--It seems that standing Bobby Sands for MP was proposed by Daithi O’Connell but opposed by Adams…

Historian Robert White has started a blog which I think hugely valuable since he ’ s using it to explain how he works and puts together his books .
This one shows a remarkable level of self discipline in winnowing out the facts on who ’ s idea it was to have hunger striker Bobby Sands stand as MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone .
The answer he comes up with is very different to the publicly accepted version , ie that it was member of Gerry Adams ’ kitchen cabinet Jim Gibney who first thought of it : …while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ó Brádaigh , I interviewed Cathleen Knowles ( later , Cathleen Knowles McGuirk ) , who was the joint-General Secretary of Sinn Féin in 1981 .
According to Knowles , it was Daithí O ’ Connell who suggested putting Sands forward .
The competing accounts were noted in the biography .
[ i ] Around the time the biography was published , my approach to “ Writing the Troubles ” was broadened to include visual sociology , because “ the world that is seen , photographed , drawn or otherwise represented visually is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through words and numbers ” .
[ ii ] I began complementing oral history with photographs and video of individuals and events .
One product of this new approach was an open-access documentary titled , Unfinished Business : The Politics of “ Dissident ” Irish Republicans .
[ iii ] Another product , in order to get her account on record , was a video-recorded interview with Cathleen Knowles .
A partial transcription of this interview appears in my oral history of the Provisionals .
[ iv ] Because the written word does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ account that putting Sands forward was not Jim Gibney ’ s idea , the video remained interesting but unused .
In 2018 , Líta Ní Chathmhaoil was interviewed for another documentary , Cumann na mBan : The Women ’ s Army ( 2019 ) .
[ v ] Ní Chathmhaoil , a member of Cumann na mBan , had also been a member of the Sinn Féin Ard Chomhairle ( National Executive Committee ) .
After confirming that she attended the 1981 meeting during which the Sands candidacy was discussed , and without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recorded a Zoom-interview with her in the Spring of 2020 .
The Knowles and Ní Chathmhaoil interviews are now publicly available in the short , open-access documentary , Bobby Sands : Whose Idea Was It ?
Now , as Robert notes , Sinn Féin are not the only political actors to put a post hoc gloss on past decisions , although I think he does put out a none too subtle appeal to fellow historians not to take evidence for uncontested decisions at face value .
But what the revelations in the video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ separate occasions and unbeknownst to each other , who tell a remarkably detailed and consistent story which completely contradicts the official line is revealing .
From a political point of view it reveals that Adams talent lies less as the strategic genius he is sometimes projected as and more of an opportunist tactician .
[ And someone whose memory of things past is not the most reliable ?
– Ed ] The short , open source documentary is well worth watching… “ Belfast – “ Reason for being an athiest # 6420 ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CC BY-SA

Historian Robert White has contributed to the excellent Writing the ‘Troubles’ blog which is a hugely valuable asset I’ve only just discovered. His contribution shows a remarkable level of self discipline in winnowing out the facts on who’s idea it was to have hunger striker Bobby Sands stand as MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone.
The answer he comes up with is very different to the publicly accepted version, ie that it was member of Gerry Adams’ kitchen cabinet Jim Gibney who first thought of it:
…while conducting interviews for a biography of Ruairí Ó Brádaigh, I interviewed Cathleen Knowles (later, Cathleen Knowles McGuirk), who was the joint-General Secretary of Sinn Féin in 1981. According to Knowles, it was Daithí O’Connell who suggested putting Sands forward. The competing accounts were noted in the biography.[i] Around the time the biography was published, my approach to “Writing the Troubles” was broadened to include visual sociology, because “the world that is seen, photographed, drawn or otherwise represented visually is different than the world that is represented through words and numbers”.[ii] I began complementing oral history with photographs and video of individuals and events. One product of this new approach was an open-access documentary titled, Unfinished Business: The Politics of “Dissident” Irish Republicans.[iii] Another product, in order to get her account on record, was a video-recorded interview with Cathleen Knowles. A partial transcription of this interview appears in my oral history of the Provisionals.[iv] Because the written word does not do justice to Knowles’ emphatic account that putting Sands forward was not Jim Gibney’s idea, the video remained interesting but unused. In 2018, Líta Ní Chathmhaoil was interviewed for another documentary, Cumann na mBan: The Women’s Army(2019).[v] Ní Chathmhaoil, a member of Cumann na mBan, had also been a member of the Sinn Féin Ard Chomhairle (National Executive Committee). After confirming that she attended the 1981 meeting during which the Sands candidacy was discussed, and without commenting on the Knowles interview, I recorded a Zoom-interview with her in the Spring of 2020. The Knowles and Ní Chathmhaoil interviews are now publicly available in the short, open-access documentary, Bobby Sands: Whose Idea Was It?
Now, as Robert notes, Sinn Féin are not the only political actors to put a post hoc gloss on past decisions, although I think he does put out a none too subtle appeal to fellow historians not to take evidence for uncontested decisions at face value.
But what the revelations in the video interview with two women, recorded on separate occasions and unbeknownst to each other, who tell a remarkably detailed and consistent story which completely contradicts the official line is revealing.
From a political point of view it reveals that Adams talent lies less as the strategic genius he is sometimes projected as and more of an opportunist tactician. [And someone whose memory of things past is not the most reliable? – Ed]
The short, open source documentary is well worth watching…
“Belfast – “Reason for being an athiest #6420”” by Effervescing Elephant is licensed under CC BY-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-12-16--For the first time ever, you can go to Slugger’s End of Year Review wherever you are in the world…

So last night was part one of our Review of the Year .
If you want to catch up with or join us tonight and tomorrow , get your tickets here .
I have to say the quality of the live stream is exceptionally good and nice dynamic between David and Alan .
There ’ s great insight into how the MPs were key to the DUP tipping hard into backing Brexit , and asking whether as the first big decision of Arlene Foster , who was riding high just after she became leader , from Tim Cairns .
Tina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she found it fairly easy to access to London government officials , but often struggled to get our local politicians ‘ out of the weeds ’ as she puts and to ‘ see the bigger picture ’ opportunities .
Other ‘ hot ’ topics include : will chicken nuggets still be available after 31st of December ?
With Tina on board the subject of NI21 came up but it quickly segues to what do the Ulster Unionist Party have to do to effect even a modest revival ?
This , I suspect along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ End of Year Review ( since its run on our customary shoestring and with the help of our sponsors this year Brown O ’ Connor Communications , so flights home are generally out ) .
I wasn ’ t disappointed .
The production is great as in the conversation , with David Chairing and Alan doing this techie Rick Wakeman impersonation at the keyboard heart of the operation .
Their Slugger TV experience coming to fruition .
Tonight we have rising star of the NI commentariat Sarah Creighton and with the now regular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and highly valued friend of Slugger , Chris Donnelly .
The conversation I ’ m sure will be thought provoking .
And we finish with a grand finale with our most regular nationalist/unionist pairing of Allison Morris and one of Slugger ’ s oldest friends in the media , Alex Kane .
Often insightful , sometimes provocative , and always entertaining .
Don ’ t worry if you are not free for the live viewing , you can watch them back anytime you like .

So last night was part one of our Review of the Year. If you want to catch up with or join us tonight and tomorrow, get your tickets here. I have to say the quality of the live stream is exceptionally good and nice dynamic between David and Alan.
There’s great insight into how the MPs were key to the DUP tipping hard into backing Brexit, and asking whether as the first big decision of Arlene Foster, who was riding high just after she became leader, from Tim Cairns.
Tina McKenzie talks about how in handling Brexit she found it fairly easy to access to London government officials, but often struggled to get our local politicians ‘out of the weeds’ as she puts and to ‘see the bigger picture’ opportunities.
Other ‘hot’ topics include: will chicken nuggets still be available after 31st of December? With Tina on board the subject of NI21 came up but it quickly segues to what do the Ulster Unionist Party have to do to effect even a modest revival?
This, I suspect along with many others, was my first End of Year Review (since its run on our customary shoestring and with the help of our sponsors this year Brown O’Connor Communications, so flights home are generally out).
I wasn’t disappointed. The production is great as in the conversation, with David Chairing and Alan doing this techie Rick Wakeman impersonation at the keyboard heart of the operation. Their Slugger TV experience coming to fruition.
Tonight we have rising star of the NI commentariat Sarah Creighton and with the now regular columnist with the Irish News and long and highly valued friend of Slugger, Chris Donnelly. The conversation I’m sure will be thought provoking.
And we finish with a grand finale with our most regular nationalist/unionist pairing of Allison Morris and one of Slugger’s oldest friends in the media, Alex Kane. Often insightful, sometimes provocative, and always entertaining.
Don’t worry if you are not free for the live viewing, you can watch them back anytime you like.
Get your tickets here…


sluggerotoole--2020-12-17--Hyde Park Bombing case opens a route for families the Stormont House Agreement forgot…

Interesting judgement in London yesterday which I think asks serious questions about how we are going about handling the legacy of the Troubles… Last year , a High Court judge ruled that John Downey was an “ active participant ” in the bombing.Last year , a High Court judge ruled that John Downey was an “ active participant ” in the bombing .
On Wednesday , the court ruled that an award of “ substantial damages ” to “ mark society ’ s condemnation ” of the bombing can only be made if either parliament or the supreme court allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ £715,000 in the case of Sarah Jane Young , daughter of one of the soldiers , L/Cpl Jeffrey Young , who was 20 when he was killed .
This is in recognition of her father ’ s loss of earnings in what is known as a dependency claim .
It ’ s one of those cases where the passage of time probably intensifies the problem ( and the quantum ordered against Downey himself ) .
Justice delayed is not only denied , it merely increase the cost and the depth of injury .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ first of four other cases currently in play in this case alone .
A short , unpublished paper on legacy , recently sent to Slugger by Trevor Ringland , notes : 3,665 were killed , there were approximately 3,000 related suicides , thousands were injured , thousands were imprisoned and billions of pounds of damage was inflicted on our economy .
That is before we consider the less measurable damage caused to society and the deep divisions that remain today .
According to the book Lost Lives , Republicans were responsible for 2,148 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Army caused 309 deaths and the police 50 .
The lack of balance and context in dealing with past crimes is undermining reconciliation rather than assisting it , when it could be very different .
Too often we respond to the loudest voices and allow political agendas to warp the process .
So long as the political system is unable or unwilling to act in providing a broad , fair and accessible reconciliation process which puts victims at the centre of its concerns , the filing of such civil claims against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their loved one is one of the few actions available to families uncatered for under present arrangements .
It ’ s far from an ideal way to proceed , and depending on how far it goes it could create substantial instabilities within the presence system .
But the piecemeal and highly political response proposed in the Stormont House Agreement simply won ’ t respond to the vast majority of victim ’ s families whose lives have been marred by non or anti state actors .
Photo by Sora Shimazaki is licensed under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CC BY-NC-SA

Interesting judgement in London yesterday which I think asks serious questions about how we are going about handling the legacy of the Troubles…
Last year, a High Court judge ruled that John Downey was an “active participant” in the bombing.Last year, a High Court judge ruled that John Downey was an “active participant” in the bombing. On Wednesday, the court ruled that an award of “substantial damages” to “mark society’s condemnation” of the bombing can only be made if either parliament or the supreme court allowed it. However, the court awarded £715,000 in the case of Sarah Jane Young, daughter of one of the soldiers, L/Cpl Jeffrey Young, who was 20 when he was killed. This is in recognition of her father’s loss of earnings in what is known as a dependency claim.
It’s one of those cases where the passage of time probably intensifies the problem (and the quantum ordered against Downey himself). Justice delayed is not only denied, it merely increase the cost and the depth of injury. This, remember, is just the first of four other cases currently in play in this case alone.
A short, unpublished paper on legacy, recently sent to Slugger by Trevor Ringland, notes:
3,665 were killed, there were approximately 3,000 related suicides, thousands were injured, thousands were imprisoned and billions of pounds of damage was inflicted on our economy. That is before we consider the less measurable damage caused to society and the deep divisions that remain today. According to the book Lost Lives, Republicans were responsible for 2,148 of these deaths, loyalist paramilitaries 1,071. The Army caused 309 deaths and the police 50. The lack of balance and context in dealing with past crimes is undermining reconciliation rather than assisting it, when it could be very different. Too often we respond to the loudest voices and allow political agendas to warp the process. So long as the political system is unable or unwilling to act in providing a broad, fair and accessible reconciliation process which puts victims at the centre of its concerns, the filing of such civil claims against known actors in the death or maiming of their loved one is one of the few actions available to families uncatered for under present arrangements. It’s far from an ideal way to proceed, and depending on how far it goes it could create substantial instabilities within the presence system. But the piecemeal and highly political response proposed in the Stormont House Agreement simply won’t respond to the vast majority of victim’s families whose lives have been marred by non or anti state actors.
Photo by Sora Shimazaki is licensed under CC0
Photo by succo is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-12-17--Why we are where we are with our high Covid-19 rates…

Dr Claire Donnelly is a consultant physician with expertise in infectious diseases and an MSc in epidemiology I want to try to explain from an epidemiological perspective how NI is approaching a cliff-face with Covid 19 .
Professor Devi Sridhar has used the analogy of boiling milk to explain this very well .
Initially , it starts to boil slowly and it seems like nothing much is happening .
As you get closer to the boiling point , if you take your eye off the cooker it can boil over in seconds .
That is where we are now in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restrictions but case numbers are still high .
Increases in cases could and likely will happen quickly .
On 17th December , the NI Covid dashboard reported 656 new cases , with 3531 cases diagnosed in the previous 7 days .
The exponential rise in case numbers can be explained in different ways .
Many people are familiar with Ro .
However , I find doubling time a more useful figure to understand .
This is the number of days it takes for case numbers to double .
The fast exponential rise is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ September and early October before the introduction of a series of restrictions .
On 30th September , the NI Covid dashboard showed 424 new cases , and on 7th October that number increased to 828 new cases in a day .
On the 7th October , there were 4417 cases diagnosed in the previous 7 days , compared to 2049 in the 7 days preceding that .
The number of cases more than doubled over a 7 day period .
If that had continued without restrictions or a change in people ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to increase exponentially .
To put this into figures , without a change in peoples contacts , 4417 could have increased to over 8000 and then to 16000 etc .
It is likely that many people would have stopped going out and the exponential growth would have slowed down , but those figures are what would happen without any change .
No healthcare system in the world can cope with those numbers , and even countries like Germany with over 5 times the intensive care capacity as NI , has had to introduce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ models have been used to monitor , predict and direct public health policies throughout the pandemic .
It is important that people understand the limitations of models .
They are trying to predict what will happen based on different factors , which include people ’ s behaviour and the number of interactions they have with other people .
Assumptions will be made about how people will interact in the run-up to Christmas .
However , there is no data that will accurately tell you how people in NI will behave in the lead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That data will be available after Christmas .
Collateral information such as mobility data will help , but to rely on assumptions like this overestimates the accuracy of models as prediction tools .
If our contacts are even similar to late September , then our numbers will surge from a high number , and we could easily exceed the record numbers we saw in October over a short period of time .
Literally , the milk could boil over before you get to turn off the cooker .
Sometimes it seems as if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid guidance because only the non-compliant people are highlighted in the media .
Ro was approximately 3 at the start of the pandemic .
Over the last several months , it has been often around 1 and always considerably under 2 .
This shows many people are complying with guidance .
My view is waiting to introduce restrictions after Christmas is a very risky strategy .
It is very possible that the numbers will surge before that to a high level that could overwhelm healthcare in NI .
We will not know for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem with trying to predict the future with a mathematical model based on human behaviour .
The higher the numbers rise over Christmas then the longer and harder restrictions will be in the New Year to bring the figures down .
To people who say this is just the flu .
It is not .
I have worked in infectious diseases for over 20 years and have been a doctor for over 25 years , and Covid is not remotely like the flu .
My interpretation of the guidelines is that Christmas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and friends .
For many people , the most effective way of doing that is not to meet them in person and meet them virtually .
However , for many people who are struggling with the restrictions and loneliness , the pandemic has brought , the guidelines allow them to meet a small number of contacts .
My Christmas dinner will be with my household family members only .
I will say an outdoor , socially distanced Happy Christmas to my parents , and will not meet them inside until we have all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

Dr Claire Donnelly is a consultant physician with expertise in infectious diseases and an MSc in epidemiology
I want to try to explain from an epidemiological perspective how NI is approaching a cliff-face with Covid 19. Professor Devi Sridhar has used the analogy of boiling milk to explain this very well. Initially, it starts to boil slowly and it seems like nothing much is happening. As you get closer to the boiling point, if you take your eye off the cooker it can boil over in seconds. That is where we are now in NI with Covid. We have reduced restrictions but case numbers are still high. Increases in cases could and likely will happen quickly. On 17th December, the NI Covid dashboard reported 656 new cases, with 3531 cases diagnosed in the previous 7 days.
The exponential rise in case numbers can be explained in different ways. Many people are familiar with Ro. However, I find doubling time a more useful figure to understand. This is the number of days it takes for case numbers to double. The fast exponential rise is illustrated by the NI Covid figures in September and early October before the introduction of a series of restrictions. On 30th September, the NI Covid dashboard showed 424 new cases, and on 7th October that number increased to 828 new cases in a day. On the 7th October, there were 4417 cases diagnosed in the previous 7 days, compared to 2049 in the 7 days preceding that. The number of cases more than doubled over a 7 day period. If that had continued without restrictions or a change in people’s behaviour, the number would have continued to increase exponentially. To put this into figures, without a change in peoples contacts, 4417 could have increased to over 8000 and then to 16000 etc. It is likely that many people would have stopped going out and the exponential growth would have slowed down, but those figures are what would happen without any change.
No healthcare system in the world can cope with those numbers, and even countries like Germany with over 5 times the intensive care capacity as NI, has had to introduce restrictions leading up to Christmas.
Mathematical models have been used to monitor, predict and direct public health policies throughout the pandemic. It is important that people understand the limitations of models. They are trying to predict what will happen based on different factors, which include people’s behaviour and the number of interactions they have with other people. Assumptions will be made about how people will interact in the run-up to Christmas. However, there is no data that will accurately tell you how people in NI will behave in the lead up to Christmas during a pandemic. That data will be available after Christmas. Collateral information such as mobility data will help, but to rely on assumptions like this overestimates the accuracy of models as prediction tools. If our contacts are even similar to late September, then our numbers will surge from a high number, and we could easily exceed the record numbers we saw in October over a short period of time. Literally, the milk could boil over before you get to turn off the cooker.
Sometimes it seems as if few people in NI are complying with Covid guidance because only the non-compliant people are highlighted in the media. Ro was approximately 3 at the start of the pandemic. Over the last several months, it has been often around 1 and always considerably under 2. This shows many people are complying with guidance.
My view is waiting to introduce restrictions after Christmas is a very risky strategy. It is very possible that the numbers will surge before that to a high level that could overwhelm healthcare in NI. We will not know for sure until January, but that is the problem with trying to predict the future with a mathematical model based on human behaviour.
The higher the numbers rise over Christmas then the longer and harder restrictions will be in the New Year to bring the figures down. To people who say this is just the flu. It is not. I have worked in infectious diseases for over 20 years and have been a doctor for over 25 years, and Covid is not remotely like the flu.
My interpretation of the guidelines is that Christmas is a time to support our families and friends. For many people, the most effective way of doing that is not to meet them in person and meet them virtually. However, for many people who are struggling with the restrictions and loneliness, the pandemic has brought, the guidelines allow them to meet a small number of contacts.
My Christmas dinner will be with my household family members only. I will say an outdoor, socially distanced Happy Christmas to my parents, and will not meet them inside until we have all received the vaccine.
Photo by Queven is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-12-18--Why Unionists are asking “aye, but who can we vote for (and not against)?”

This question crops up more and more within the broad pro-Union constituency .
It is shaped by disillusionment and frustration with representatives entrusted with the stewardship of sustaining Northern Ireland ’ s place within the United Kingdom .
The view is that political unionism is becoming a greater threat to the Union than those who have for years tried to bomb it out of existence or build enough political strength to deliver their aspiration for merging Northern Ireland with the Republic of Ireland .
Unionist parties have long decried the disinterest of voters in areas deemed working class in registering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ non-voting garden centre unionists but the mood is spreading further and deeper .
If this were not the case there would be no strong inclination to see unionism as toxic , no growth in calls for civic assemblies , participatory democracy and inclusion as opposed to exclusion ; no growth in community- based do-it-yourself political messaging .
Living in a representative democracy , voters are realising that where representatives are elected to keep others from holding power , the will of the voter is interpreted through a narrow prism and leads to blinkered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the case of unionism , negative catastrophising that manifests in spin and obsessive conspiracy-imagined distrust ; politicians are bestowed more power than indulged politicians should have .
Politics struggle to move beyond tribal and territorial instincts .
Amongst those no longer comfortable with the label ‘ unionist ’ , yet wishing to maintain the Union , there is a preference for non-binary issue-centred politics underpinned by integrity and accountability as the cornerstones of sound governance and committed to building Northern Ireland into a modern , prosperous and inclusive home .
Across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backgrounds face economic , health and social demands , there is a desire to eradicate the stereotyping of inappropriate and inaccurate labels like PUL and CRN , discard the term ‘ shared for ‘ ours ’ ; where the common goal is to abandon oppressive discourse which pollutes politics through disruption , irrational contradictions between stated values and political turbulence characterised by muddled self-interest , flawed judgement and lazy scrutiny .
There is strong evidence that , on the basis of election results , polling and feedback within communities and organisations , political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been the case for some time and has spurred strategists into attempts at softening hitherto negative hardline posturing and seeking ways to harness the perceived ‘ unionist vote ‘ of those who would vote to remain in the United Kingdom but do not vote for unionist parties in elections .
It is sometimes identified as a ‘ liberal ’ unionist vote but this is only part of any analysis .
The whiff of corruption and the legacy of the 3 years of the shutdown of Stormont , RHI and the costly mismanagement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as blatant sectarianism remains fresh in the minds of voters .
It is unlikely that floating voters and those who have abandoned political unionism will be attracted by patronising and condescending commodifying of their votes by a pan -Union , essentially Protestant Unionist strategy , wherein conviction seems paper-thin .
Honest remorse for failings could offer a better foundation .
The Italian novel ‘ The Leopard ’ is set in a time of political upheaval in Italy .
The main character , Tancredi , used to privilege and power but now facing unwanted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mantras of the past or breaking with tradition to secure continuity .
It is his view that : “ Everything needs to change so that everything can stay the same.
” It is maybe not appropriate to stretch comparisons too far or allow cynicism to unduly influence commentary but has this more than a passing resonance with Northern Ireland where we see in the recent writing by former leader of the DUP , Peter Robinson , and current leader and First Minister and MLA Arlene Foster ’ s tentative attempts at addressing how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sustain the Union ; in essence to remain a dominant influence in Northern Ireland ?
It is not the first time that the DUP has dipped its toe into this particular pool .
Under Mike Nesbitt MLA , the UUP courted something similar .
Whilst encouraging to note belated recognition that the reality in the community is different to the conversation that political unionism has been trying to dominate , the approach has been undermined already by the recent use of a petition of concern with the Executive at Stormont and the post-Brexit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ changing its spots .
Maybe the real solution is to cease being the leopard .
The votes of those , baptised as Catholic , who identify as cultural nationalists but support the maintenance of the Union and the large swathes of the so-called unionist , but now more pro-Union constituency , who have already moved on will not parade blindly to the ballot box .
Put frankly the parties need to earn their support and maybe , in the case of some political unionists it is too big an ask and something of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Northern Ireland ’ s essentially home rule unionist parties failing to aspire to or deliver leadership at Westminster and failing so spectacularly in their Brexit stance has damaged unionism .
They now rage at Northern Ireland being a place apart but over 100 years , unionism has kept it thus .
Albeit that the public spat between the two peers , Empey and Dodds on the NI Protocol presented as unseemly , the former is correct to say that the DUP played a major role in authoring the current Brexit outcome .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Economy , presumably enjoying a pension from the EU and placed into a ministerial position , once again going to Westminster with a begging bowl to compensate for the loss of grants from the EU , in which her party has been complicit , is not as lost on the electorate as it appears to be on her party .
Just how attuned then is political unionism to the community and has it a clear vision beyond symbols , party interests and power , used to obstruct rather than create ?
During the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emerged with a focus on culture , social enterprise , peace-building and inter-community reconciliation .
Casting aside unionist stereotypes , they work across the communities , with LBGT , multi-ethnic groups , in schools and bring professional expertise to festivals and inter-community projects Prepared to challenge their own issues and perceptions they engage in dialogue and lead collaboration on conflict , the past and old prejudices .
When problems and differences occur , they are addressed and not allowed to become a barrier to a better future as they evolve , sometimes erratically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and whilst acknowledged by politicians are often perceived as a threat or as useful cover for change that Janus-prone politicians recognise as necessary but lack the courage to lead for fear of losing support within the core constituency they have moulded in their image .
It is a cautionary and conservative approach also seen in judgemental attitudes to rights , review and reboot of political structures and distrust of civic voices .
Stand-still political unionism just can not change its spots or deeply within , lacks the desire to do so .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , vote for ?
The UUP under the leadership of Sir Reg Empey formed a brief and poorly named UCUNF coalition with the Conservative party .
It initially enjoyed success in a European election but for a number of reasons failed to deliver in Westminster elections and following the election of a new UUP leader was abandoned , probably too soon in that within the party there are many who are socially and economically conservative .
Initially those with socially-democratic leanings would lack a home but it is an option that the UUP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boris Johnson as PM may not be favourable .
Perhaps a better focused and organised NI Conservative party should lick its electoral wounds and try again The PUP could be a home for social democrats but unionists are disinclined to vote for a party with historical connections to para-militarism .
Is the default position therefore the DUP or TUV or a sojourn with Alliance ?
Nothing changes .
Where is NI21 when you need it ?
Before his untimely death around the time when NI 21 was being discussed , the late David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as an independent and I discussed how unionism could evolve towards more inclusive politics more reflective , amongst other things , of pro-union values allied to social justice , enterprise and economic accountability .
Home Rule unionism and ulster nationalism deeply imbued within political unionism was not and has not delivered on these issues .
Belfast may be enjoying economic growth but it is not trickling down to other areas which are struggling .
With parties unwilling to change the only solution seemed to be to encourage individuals to at least challenge the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a brand of pro-union politics with less of an emphasis on traditional unionism and more on issues important to the social and emotional well-being of individuals , quality of life , employment , fairness and equality of opportunity , community and civic leadership and addressing social deprivation .
Whilst independents would have limited power if enough were elected , they could , within the GFA structures and with a strong mandate , coalesce to provide creative input and scrutiny .
Should communities be considering this ?
Politicians make sacrifices to do what they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criticism as the current pandemic illustrates .
But , even as they struggle with the effects of the current emergency situation old weaknesses in our politics re-emerge on a continuing basis and clearly have an impact internally within parties , or at least that ’ s what the tensions within the DUP suggests .
This is not what Northern Ireland needs as it goes into a post-Brexit/NI Protocol world which could throw up as yet unforeseen challenges which must be addressed and new opportunities which must be grasped .
Pro-union politics must be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that old solutions and prejudices which created more problems than they solved will not work in future .
An ever-increasing proportion of the pro-union electorate want something different ; something they can vote for and not against .
Photo by mirian357 is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA Photo by mirian357 is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

This question crops up more and more within the broad pro-Union constituency. It is shaped by disillusionment and frustration with representatives entrusted with the stewardship of sustaining Northern Ireland’s place within the United Kingdom. The view is that political unionism is becoming a greater threat to the Union than those who have for years tried to bomb it out of existence or build enough political strength to deliver their aspiration for merging Northern Ireland with the Republic of Ireland.
Unionist parties have long decried the disinterest of voters in areas deemed working class in registering to vote as well as the so-called non-voting garden centre unionists but the mood is spreading further and deeper. If this were not the case there would be no strong inclination to see unionism as toxic, no growth in calls for civic assemblies, participatory democracy and inclusion as opposed to exclusion; no growth in community- based do-it-yourself political messaging.
Living in a representative democracy, voters are realising that where representatives are elected to keep others from holding power, the will of the voter is interpreted through a narrow prism and leads to blinkered decision-making, unchallenged ideological mindsets and, in the case of unionism, negative catastrophising that manifests in spin and obsessive conspiracy-imagined distrust; politicians are bestowed more power than indulged politicians should have. Politics struggle to move beyond tribal and territorial instincts.
Amongst those no longer comfortable with the label ‘unionist’, yet wishing to maintain the Union, there is a preference for non-binary issue-centred politics underpinned by integrity and accountability as the cornerstones of sound governance and committed to building Northern Ireland into a modern, prosperous and inclusive home.
Across the community, within which individuals of all backgrounds face economic, health and social demands, there is a desire to eradicate the stereotyping of inappropriate and inaccurate labels like PUL and CRN, discard the term ‘shared for ‘ours’; where the common goal is to abandon oppressive discourse which pollutes politics through disruption, irrational contradictions between stated values and political turbulence characterised by muddled self-interest, flawed judgement and lazy scrutiny.
There is strong evidence that, on the basis of election results, polling and feedback within communities and organisations, political unionism is getting the message. This has been the case for some time and has spurred strategists into attempts at softening hitherto negative hardline posturing and seeking ways to harness the perceived ‘unionist vote ‘of those who would vote to remain in the United Kingdom but do not vote for unionist parties in elections.
It is sometimes identified as a ‘liberal’ unionist vote but this is only part of any analysis. The whiff of corruption and the legacy of the 3 years of the shutdown of Stormont, RHI and the costly mismanagement of the wind farms initiative as well as blatant sectarianism remains fresh in the minds of voters. It is unlikely that floating voters and those who have abandoned political unionism will be attracted by patronising and condescending commodifying of their votes by a pan -Union, essentially Protestant Unionist strategy, wherein conviction seems paper-thin.
Honest remorse for failings could offer a better foundation.
The Italian novel ‘The Leopard’ is set in a time of political upheaval in Italy. The main character, Tancredi, used to privilege and power but now facing unwanted change, must choose between upholding the mantras of the past or breaking with tradition to secure continuity. It is his view that: “Everything needs to change so that everything can stay the same.”
It is maybe not appropriate to stretch comparisons too far or allow cynicism to unduly influence commentary but has this more than a passing resonance with Northern Ireland where we see in the recent writing by former leader of the DUP, Peter Robinson, and current leader and First Minister and MLA Arlene Foster’s tentative attempts at addressing how unionism has to change in order to sustain the Union; in essence to remain a dominant influence in Northern Ireland?
It is not the first time that the DUP has dipped its toe into this particular pool. Under Mike Nesbitt MLA, the UUP courted something similar. Whilst encouraging to note belated recognition that the reality in the community is different to the conversation that political unionism has been trying to dominate, the approach has been undermined already by the recent use of a petition of concern with the Executive at Stormont and the post-Brexit fallout. The leopard is having difficult changing its spots. Maybe the real solution is to cease being the leopard.
The votes of those, baptised as Catholic, who identify as cultural nationalists but support the maintenance of the Union and the large swathes of the so-called unionist, but now more pro-Union constituency, who have already moved on will not parade blindly to the ballot box. Put frankly the parties need to earn their support and maybe, in the case of some political unionists it is too big an ask and something of a false hope.
The optics of Northern Ireland’s essentially home rule unionist parties failing to aspire to or deliver leadership at Westminster and failing so spectacularly in their Brexit stance has damaged unionism. They now rage at Northern Ireland being a place apart but over 100 years, unionism has kept it thus. Albeit that the public spat between the two peers, Empey and Dodds on the NI Protocol presented as unseemly, the former is correct to say that the DUP played a major role in authoring the current Brexit outcome.
The irony of the DUP Minister for the Economy, presumably enjoying a pension from the EU and placed into a ministerial position, once again going to Westminster with a begging bowl to compensate for the loss of grants from the EU, in which her party has been complicit, is not as lost on the electorate as it appears to be on her party. Just how attuned then is political unionism to the community and has it a clear vision beyond symbols, party interests and power, used to obstruct rather than create?
During the absence of devolved government, alternative leaderships emerged with a focus on culture, social enterprise, peace-building and inter-community reconciliation. Casting aside unionist stereotypes, they work across the communities, with LBGT, multi-ethnic groups, in schools and bring professional expertise to festivals and inter-community projects
Prepared to challenge their own issues and perceptions they engage in dialogue and lead collaboration on conflict, the past and old prejudices. When problems and differences occur, they are addressed and not allowed to become a barrier to a better future as they evolve, sometimes erratically.
But, they have limited influence and whilst acknowledged by politicians are often perceived as a threat or as useful cover for change that Janus-prone politicians recognise as necessary but lack the courage to lead for fear of losing support within the core constituency they have moulded in their image. It is a cautionary and conservative approach also seen in judgemental attitudes to rights, review and reboot of political structures and distrust of civic voices.
Stand-still political unionism just cannot change its spots or deeply within, lacks the desire to do so. So, who can an unaligned pro-union voter, vote for?
The UUP under the leadership of Sir Reg Empey formed a brief and poorly named UCUNF coalition with the Conservative party. It initially enjoyed success in a European election but for a number of reasons failed to deliver in Westminster elections and following the election of a new UUP leader was abandoned, probably too soon in that within the party there are many who are socially and economically conservative. Initially those with socially-democratic leanings would lack a home but it is an option that the UUP should maybe re-visit although the timing with Boris Johnson as PM may not be favourable.
Perhaps a better focused and organised NI Conservative party should lick its electoral wounds and try again
The PUP could be a home for social democrats but unionists are disinclined to vote for a party with historical connections to para-militarism. Is the default position therefore the DUP or TUV or a sojourn with Alliance? Nothing changes.
Where is NI21 when you need it?
Before his untimely death around the time when NI 21 was being discussed, the late David McClarty MLA who was enjoying his time as an independent and I discussed how unionism could evolve towards more inclusive politics more reflective, amongst other things, of pro-union values allied to social justice, enterprise and economic accountability.
Home Rule unionism and ulster nationalism deeply imbued within political unionism was not and has not delivered on these issues. Belfast may be enjoying economic growth but it is not trickling down to other areas which are struggling.
With parties unwilling to change the only solution seemed to be to encourage individuals to at least challenge the status quo by running as independents with a brand of pro-union politics with less of an emphasis on traditional unionism and more on issues important to the social and emotional well-being of individuals, quality of life, employment, fairness and equality of opportunity, community and civic leadership and addressing social deprivation.
Whilst independents would have limited power if enough were elected, they could, within the GFA structures and with a strong mandate, coalesce to provide creative input and scrutiny. Should communities be considering this?
Politicians make sacrifices to do what they do and are an easy target for criticism as the current pandemic illustrates. But, even as they struggle with the effects of the current emergency situation old weaknesses in our politics re-emerge on a continuing basis and clearly have an impact internally within parties, or at least that’s what the tensions within the DUP suggests.
This is not what Northern Ireland needs as it goes into a post-Brexit/NI Protocol world which could throw up as yet unforeseen challenges which must be addressed and new opportunities which must be grasped. Pro-union politics must be fit for purpose and abandon any notion that old solutions and prejudices which created more problems than they solved will not work in future.
An ever-increasing proportion of the pro-union electorate want something different; something they can vote for and not against.
Photo by mirian357 is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA
Photo by mirian357 is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-12-18--Common History, Uncommon Remembrance

Common History, Uncommon Remembrance

Peter Sheridan is the CEO of Cooperation Ireland The tangled events of 100 years ago are integral to the history that has shaped our peoples in all their distinctiveness .
How we recall and understand these events will continue to shape us and the choices we make into the future .
Co-operation Ireland exists to promote reconciliation and to strengthen and deepen relationships on this island and between these islands .
Three relationships are important to us .
The north south relationship , the internal relationships in Northern Ireland and the British Irish relationship .
The triumph of the Good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ examine and explore very complex issues through dialogue .
We know that dialogue is the best way to solve problems .
As a result thousands of lives have been saved , tens of thousands of our people have been spared injury and across the world it is seen as a template for conflict resolution .
Co-operation Ireland seeks to approach the centenary in ways which are reflective of the range of historical issues involved and to ensure that the opportunity is taken to extend a sympathetic understanding of the complex story that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their loyalties we should promote greater toleration of different perspectives .
Our Entwined Histories youth education programme on the decade of anniversaries is an example of this , where we talk of a ‘ Common history but an Uncommon Remembrance of it.
’ Co-operation Ireland seeks to advance understanding of the multiple readings of history and of the different identities and traditions which form part of the overall story , promoting the use of multiple memories but in a way that avoids igniting old tensions Our approach to the Centenary should have its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two main traditions but also look at how that fits in with the wider international story at that time .
The post First World War era affected almost every developed nation and any exploration of our own experience has to be included in the wider world context .
Co-operation Ireland will work to encourage a measured reflection of the period in a way that is informed by full acknowledgement of the complexity of historical events and their legacy .
This approach has to be inclusive .
We should not ignore the differences but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to our differing traditions .
“ Belfast City Hall ” by D-Stanley is licensed under CC BY

Peter Sheridan is the CEO of Cooperation Ireland
The tangled events of 100 years ago are integral to the history that has shaped our peoples in all their distinctiveness.
How we recall and understand these events will continue to shape us and the choices we make into the future.
Co-operation Ireland exists to promote reconciliation and to strengthen and deepen relationships on this island and between these islands. Three relationships are important to us. The north south relationship, the internal relationships in Northern Ireland and the British Irish relationship.
The triumph of the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement came through a willingness to examine and explore very complex issues through dialogue. We know that dialogue is the best way to solve problems.
As a result thousands of lives have been saved, tens of thousands of our people have been spared injury and across the world it is seen as a template for conflict resolution.
Co-operation Ireland seeks to approach the centenary in ways which are reflective of the range of historical issues involved and to ensure that the opportunity is taken to extend a sympathetic understanding of the complex story that has unfolded.
Without expecting individuals to abandon their loyalties we should promote greater toleration of different perspectives.
Our Entwined Histories youth education programme on the decade of anniversaries is an example of this, where we talk of a ‘Common history but an Uncommon Remembrance of it.’
Co-operation Ireland seeks to advance understanding of the multiple readings of history and of the different identities and traditions which form part of the overall story, promoting the use of multiple memories but in a way that avoids igniting old tensions
Our approach to the Centenary should have its foundations in exploring the experience of the two main traditions but also look at how that fits in with the wider international story at that time.
The post First World War era affected almost every developed nation and any exploration of our own experience has to be included in the wider world context.
Co-operation Ireland will work to encourage a measured reflection of the period in a way that is informed by full acknowledgement of the complexity of historical events and their legacy.
This approach has to be inclusive. We should not ignore the differences but acknowledge and understand these differences with respect to our differing traditions.
“Belfast City Hall” by D-Stanley is licensed under CC BY


sluggerotoole--2020-12-18--If only mainstream politicians could speak “human being” again…

Great observation from Dave Winer which I think resonates with my essay for the Congregation.ie Unconference… The key point that the Democrats keep missing is that we want to do more .
We will give you money and we will vote , but that ’ s not all we can do .
Each of has special talents , abilities .
Some of us have more time to give than others .
But almost to a person , we want to be part of this , not spectators .
Trump kind of got that , with his rallies .
He didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his speeches .
Talked to them like humans .
This stuff isn ’ t hard , you have have to try to see things differently .
We ’ re not just dollars and votes .
I ’ d like to hear Biden say , when asked if the US can get rid of the virus , hell yeah we can .
This is what we ’ re good at .
It ’ s why we invested in the military and science , to protect our people from deadly threats .
Here ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the timetable , and here ’ s how you particpate .
The Dems talk about Americans , but rarely talk to Americans .

Great observation from Dave Winer which I think resonates with my essay for the Congregation.ie Unconference…
The key point that the Democrats keep missing is that we want to do more. We will give you money and we will vote, but that’s not all we can do. Each of has special talents, abilities. Some of us have more time to give than others. But almost to a person, we want to be part of this, not spectators. Trump kind of got that, with his rallies. He didn’t condescend. He included them in his speeches. Talked to them like humans. This stuff isn’t hard, you have have to try to see things differently. We’re not just dollars and votes.
I’d like to hear Biden say, when asked if the US can get rid of the virus, hell yeah we can. This is what we’re good at. It’s why we invested in the military and science, to protect our people from deadly threats. Here’s the plan, here’s the timetable, and here’s how you particpate.
The Dems talk about Americans, but rarely talk to Americans.


sluggerotoole--2020-12-18--Fianna Fáil needs radical but practical solutions to reignite the Republic’s sense of a ‘greater us’

Fianna Fáil needs radical but practical solutions to reignite the Republic’s sense of a ‘greater us’…

This week we had a reminder that parties on the left are not going to let the crash of twelve years ago die any time soon , when the Taoiseach Micheál Martin misspoke and claimed that the banks had not been bailed out .
He went on to clarify that what he meant to say was that the banks were actually nationalised without compensation to the shareholders , which is pretty much what the UK government did with Northern Rock .
It damaged the Fianna Fáil government at the time , but in mitigation it can be argued they tied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a course that eventually took the Irish economy out of choppy economic waters pretty swiftly , even as the party sank .
Despite the fact it is still a live political issue for Martin , Fianna Fáil and more generally other centre left parties who took similar evasive actions , the response to such criticism is still fairly patchy .
As Brian Feeney points out , that ’ s because : In terms of averages , the Republic ’ s income equality is significantly greater than the UK ’ s for example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ co author of Angrynomics Mark Blyth likes to point out , no one leads an average life .
The problem lies not with the Republic ’ s averages ( comparatively decent ) but how wealth and assets are distributed .
What Blyth and Lonergan identify is the need for the state to recover greater agency in using bond market largesse ( which may last up to ten years ) to reflate lost communities , not just the national economy ( important though that is ) .
As noted here previously re-floating the banks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went missing at the time was any understanding that states also need to refund their communities as communities of citizens , not just consumers .
Now , European parties like Fianna Fáil , who once played the role of bulwark to poorer communities , are in danger of being replaced by populists who ’ s predilection is telling folks what they want to hear , and best claim is not to be ‘ themuns ’ .
But , in fact , as I ’ ve argued elsewhere populism is merely a symptom of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interest in the thoughts and feelings of the people who live in the place where we feel most real , ie the parish .
Watching Micheál Martin joust with only departmental figures to defend himself against the rich landscape narrative of Kerry ’ s water needs with Michael Healy Rae , I ’ ve little doubt Martin is competent , but it is an uneven contest .
Into all of this you have to factor voter volatility .
As Shane Coleman has highlighted , in this era of Big Brother politics ( listen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ series , if you think I ’ m making it up ) it is impossible to predict ways forward : A few months out from the 2016 election , Martin and FF were being widely written off , by many of the same commentators now once again consigning them to politics ’ answer to hurling ’ s Joe McDonagh Cup .
“ Pale , stale and male ” was the cliche du jour in relation to FF back then .
And many in FG , including its current leader , were talking about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SF .
That proved way off , as Martin ran a brilliant campaign .
FF brushed aside SF and came just a percentage point behind FG .
Fast forward four years and nobody saw the Sinn Féin surge until the final days of the campaign .
Not even the party itself , as evidenced by its failure to run enough candidates .
Less than a year earlier , the party had disastrous local elections and there were questions about Mary Lou McDonald ’ s future as leader .
Now it was the biggest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her party caught a wave last January/February , particularly among younger voters .
Fianna Fáil will be judged by the voters on their ability to change lives of ordinary people .
To do that they need ambition , money and ideas that break out of the straight-jacket that austerity has created for the people they once represented .
Insofar as SF has any policies it seems prepared to hold to for more than the next change in wind direction , on housing much of it is farmed to Eoin Ó Broin ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ Plausibly deniable by ‘ the leadership ’ then ?
– Ed ] .
It invokes Nye Bevin ’ s 1945 UK Labour Party vision , which resonates deeply with folks like me who have spent much of their lives living in rented accommodation on precarious short term tenancy agreements .
However , his “ return to the state ” summary ignores the fact that the state today is already much larger with far more core responsibilities .
More fundamentally it ignores the fact that as Eric Lonergan points outs in Angrynomics… Mainstream @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interested in such matters ( such that many reference Eoin ’ s book , but show little sign of having opened it ) .
That doesn ’ t mean they aren ’ t crucial to the future health of southern Irish society .
This present government has a self interest in calming the anger in a way the populists don ’ t whether they are of the right , left or “ local hero ” variety who sell dreams of a perfect past that never existed and a future they ’ ve no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in particular , if it is ambitious enough to retain a challenge to the anti democratic instincts of some of its populist challenges must seek out ideas that are capable of reigniting the Republic ’ s communitarian sense of ‘ greater us ’ .
The ‘ mistake ’ it made in 2008 was the same one made across Europe which was bailing into the banks , and not seeking long term equity of the type Norway sought from the oil industry , and which has transformed its fortunes ever since .
There ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you learn from mistakes and put lessons into practice .
How does putting all eggs in an 1945 basket enable farmers on an income of €10k or less and who already own their own land to adapt to a climate emergency ?
As the authors of Angrynomics show , across these islands we face more complex issues than flattening slums or bomb sites for the mass building of houses .
Inequality , not relative against the past but the present , is the deeper more pressing issue .
Getting assets , or access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , both in terms of increasing their access to new housing and to help them compete with those who have privileged access to both via trust funds and/or private education .
It may eventually fall to a Sinn Féin led southern administration to sort these problems out .
But I think Eoin ’ s mea culpa at the beginning of “ Home ” for the book ’ s omission of NI ( where his party has at best an indifferent housing record ) is telling .
There is an important role for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and facilitating an awful lot more .
Time someone gave it a go , it might as well be now , and it might as well be a Taoiseach who hasn ’ t got that much left to lose .
“ Lightbulb – Great Idea !
” by uberof202 is licensed under CC BY-SA

This week we had a reminder that parties on the left are not going to let the crash of twelve years ago die any time soon, when the Taoiseach Micheál Martin misspoke and claimed that the banks had not been bailed out.
He went on to clarify that what he meant to say was that the banks were actually nationalised without compensation to the shareholders, which is pretty much what the UK government did with Northern Rock.
It damaged the Fianna Fáil government at the time, but in mitigation it can be argued they tied the wheel of the ship of state to a course that eventually took the Irish economy out of choppy economic waters pretty swiftly, even as the party sank.
Despite the fact it is still a live political issue for Martin, Fianna Fáil and more generally other centre left parties who took similar evasive actions, the response to such criticism is still fairly patchy. As Brian Feeney points out, that’s because:
FF hasn’t come to terms with the fact that young people aged 18-34 working in modern high tech and services like banking, finance and insurance can’t afford houses because, though they earn high salaries, they’re priced out of the market and they blame Fianna Fáil.
In terms of averages, the Republic’s income equality is significantly greater than the UK’s for example:
However, as political economist and co author of Angrynomics Mark Blyth likes to point out, no one leads an average life. The problem lies not with the Republic’s averages (comparatively decent) but how wealth and assets are distributed.
What Blyth and Lonergan identify is the need for the state to recover greater agency in using bond market largesse (which may last up to ten years) to reflate lost communities, not just the national economy (important though that is).
As noted here previously re-floating the banks had to be done, but what went missing at the time was any understanding that states also need to refund their communities as communities of citizens, not just consumers.
Now, European parties like Fianna Fáil, who once played the role of bulwark to poorer communities, are in danger of being replaced by populists who’s predilection is telling folks what they want to hear, and best claim is not to be ‘themuns’.
But, in fact, as I’ve argued elsewhere populism is merely a symptom of a broken governance model which invests insufficient interest in the thoughts and feelings of the people who live in the place where we feel most real, ie the parish.
Watching Micheál Martin joust with only departmental figures to defend himself against the rich landscape narrative of Kerry’s water needs with Michael Healy Rae, I’ve little doubt Martin is competent, but it is an uneven contest.
Into all of this you have to factor voter volatility. As Shane Coleman has highlighted, in this era of Big Brother politics (listen to Jamie Bartlett’s excellent radio series, if you think I’m making it up) it is impossible to predict ways forward:
A few months out from the 2016 election, Martin and FF were being widely written off, by many of the same commentators now once again consigning them to politics’ answer to hurling’s Joe McDonagh Cup. “Pale, stale and male” was the cliche du jour in relation to FF back then. And many in FG, including its current leader, were talking about voters having a choice between it and SF. That proved way off, as Martin ran a brilliant campaign. FF brushed aside SF and came just a percentage point behind FG. Fast forward four years and nobody saw the Sinn Féin surge until the final days of the campaign. Not even the party itself, as evidenced by its failure to run enough candidates. Less than a year earlier, the party had disastrous local elections and there were questions about Mary Lou McDonald’s future as leader. Now it was the biggest vote-getter in the state. McDonald and her party caught a wave last January/February, particularly among younger voters.
Fianna Fáil will be judged by the voters on their ability to change lives of ordinary people. To do that they need ambition, money and ideas that break out of the straight-jacket that austerity has created for the people they once represented.
Insofar as SF has any policies it seems prepared to hold to for more than the next change in wind direction, on housing much of it is farmed to Eoin Ó Broin’s recent book on the subject, Home [Plausibly deniable by ‘the leadership’ then? – Ed].
It invokes Nye Bevin’s 1945 UK Labour Party vision, which resonates deeply with folks like me who have spent much of their lives living in rented accommodation on precarious short term tenancy agreements.
However, his “return to the state” summary ignores the fact that the state today is already much larger with far more core responsibilities. More fundamentally it ignores the fact that as Eric Lonergan points outs in Angrynomics…
Our new [economic] software needs to address wealth inequality so that our societies become more adaptive to change, and a broader asset ownership is key. And by that I mean something way more than Margaret Thatcher’s famous “property owning democracy”. We need fundamentally new ideas about who owns what and who gets the returns to assets.
Mainstream Irish journalists by and large not that interested in such matters (such that many reference Eoin’s book, but show little sign of having opened it). That doesn’t mean they aren’t crucial to the future health of southern Irish society.
This present government has a self interest in calming the anger in a way the populists don’t whether they are of the right, left or “local hero” variety who sell dreams of a perfect past that never existed and a future they’ve no intention of realising.
And Fianna Fáil in particular, if it is ambitious enough to retain a challenge to the anti democratic instincts of some of its populist challenges must seek out ideas that are capable of reigniting the Republic’s communitarian sense of ‘greater us’.
The ‘mistake’ it made in 2008 was the same one made across Europe which was bailing into the banks, and not seeking long term equity of the type Norway sought from the oil industry, and which has transformed its fortunes ever since.
There’s no need to apologise, if you learn from mistakes and put lessons into practice. How does putting all eggs in an 1945 basket enable farmers on an income of €10k or less and who already own their own land to adapt to a climate emergency?
As the authors of Angrynomics show, across these islands we face more complex issues than flattening slums or bomb sites for the mass building of houses. Inequality, not relative against the past but the present, is the deeper more pressing issue.
Getting assets, or access to assets to the poorest cohorts matters, both in terms of increasing their access to new housing and to help them compete with those who have privileged access to both via trust funds and/or private education.
It may eventually fall to a Sinn Féin led southern administration to sort these problems out. But I think Eoin’s mea culpa at the beginning of “Home” for the book’s omission of NI (where his party has at best an indifferent housing record) is telling.
There is an important role for the state in doing some of that, and facilitating an awful lot more. Time someone gave it a go, it might as well be now, and it might as well be a Taoiseach who hasn’t got that much left to lose.
“Lightbulb – Great Idea!” by uberof202 is licensed under CC BY-SA