sluggerotoole--2020-05-25--Mary Lou accused of lionising man who declared Nazis ‘friends and liberators of the Irish people’.

Mary Lou ’ s long-form interview with Hugh O ’ Connell in the Sunday Independent was generally pretty fair to the Sinn Féin leader , giving her time and space to answer questions about her own career , what shaped her politics and her move to that party .
As a result , it was revealing .
In response to a question on the IRA ’ s Enniskillen attack on a Remembrance Day commemoration , and Warrington before she joined the Provisional movement she gave , what looked and felt like an honest human answer : HOC : How did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and what the IRA were doing at that time ?
MLMcD : I just think that the whole cycle of armed actions and of violence just became debilitating for everybody .
[ Emphasis added ] Though it is hardly consistent with the continued attendance by SF public representatives at commemorations to IRA volunteers which regularly cause deep distress to the close family of their victims who still remain very much alive today .
That inconsistency was further revealed when O ’ Connell brought up her attendance at a commemoration of the wartime IRA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1940 on a U-boat on his way to Nazi Germany from whom he was seeking active support : MLMcD : He was a militarist , but he was not a Nazi collaborator .
There ’ s nothing to support that contention .
My assessment of him is that he saw in very narrow terms the struggle for freedom in a framework that was , as I said , ‘ Britain ’ s problem is our opportunity ’ .
I think that was misguided , if that assists you in your line of questioning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russell ’ s contacts with Nazi Germany dated from as early as October 1936 .
Under Russell ’ s control the IRA of the time become decidedly pro-Nazi and anti-Semetic .
It notes in fact : During 1938 that the Nazis were making efforts to win allies among Irish republicans in New York .
Russell and McGarrity cooperated in launching a coup within the IRA during that year , overthrowing its established leadership and committing the organisation to a bombing campaign in Britain .
Tom Barry , one of the ousted leadership , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the main Nazi organisation in the US , had been promised to fund the bombing campaign .
In January 1939 that bombing campaign began but , despite leading to seven civilian deaths and the execution of two IRA men , never caused the political crisis the IRA hoped for .
The international situation leading up to the outbreak of the Second World War preoccupied British opinion .
During the months after the outbreak of war the IRA publicly declared that it was supporting neither ‘ king ’ nor ‘ dictator ’ .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ leadership issued a statement outlining its position on the war .
The statement made clear that if ‘ German forces should land in Ireland , they will land .
.
.
as friends and liberators of the Irish people ’ .
Today , it fell to Micheál Martin to point out the obvious : “ Nazism was the greatest evil of all time which saw millions killed during the Holocaust , but in Sinn Féin folklore and Mary Lou re-articulates this idea of Britain ’ s difficulty is Ireland ’ s opportunity which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I , ” Mr Martin said .
“ The idea someone was working with the Nazis to undermine Britain when Europe was in great peril and he should be commemorated is something that Sinn Féin need a wake-up call on , ” he added .
Mr Martin said what Mr Russell did was “ wrong ” and added that “ collaborating with the Nazis should not be condoned in any way ” .
Not long after that passage in the interview , Mary Lou points out : “ Seán Russell Memorial In Fairview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” by infomatique is licensed under CC BY-SA

Mary Lou’s long-form interview with Hugh O’Connell in the Sunday Independent was generally pretty fair to the Sinn Féin leader, giving her time and space to answer questions about her own career, what shaped her politics and her move to that party.
As a result, it was revealing. In response to a question on the IRA’s Enniskillen attack on a Remembrance Day commemoration, and Warrington before she joined the Provisional movement she gave, what looked and felt like an honest human answer:
HOC: How did that impact on your thinking about republicanism and what the IRA were doing at that time? MLMcD: I just think that the whole cycle of armed actions and of violence just became debilitating for everybody. [Emphasis added]
Though it is hardly consistent with the continued attendance by SF public representatives at commemorations to IRA volunteers which regularly cause deep distress to the close family of their victims who still remain very much alive today.
That inconsistency was further revealed when O’Connell brought up her attendance at a commemoration of the wartime IRA leader Seán Russell, who died in 1940 on a U-boat on his way to Nazi Germany from whom he was seeking active support:
MLMcD: He was a militarist, but he was not a Nazi collaborator. There’s nothing to support that contention. My assessment of him is that he saw in very narrow terms the struggle for freedom in a framework that was, as I said, ‘Britain’s problem is our opportunity’. I think that was misguided, if that assists you in your line of questioning.
According to History Ireland however, Russell’s contacts with Nazi Germany dated from as early as October 1936. Under Russell’s control the IRA of the time become decidedly pro-Nazi and anti-Semetic. It notes in fact:
During 1938 that the Nazis were making efforts to win allies among Irish republicans in New York. Russell and McGarrity cooperated in launching a coup within the IRA during that year, overthrowing its established leadership and committing the organisation to a bombing campaign in Britain. Tom Barry, one of the ousted leadership, claimed that money from the German-American Bund, the main Nazi organisation in the US, had been promised to fund the bombing campaign. In January 1939 that bombing campaign began but, despite leading to seven civilian deaths and the execution of two IRA men, never caused the political crisis the IRA hoped for. The international situation leading up to the outbreak of the Second World War preoccupied British opinion. During the months after the outbreak of war the IRA publicly declared that it was supporting neither ‘king’ nor ‘dictator’. However, in July 1940 the IRA leadership issued a statement outlining its position on the war. The statement made clear that if ‘German forces should land in Ireland, they will land . . . as friends and liberators of the Irish people’.
Today, it fell to Micheál Martin to point out the obvious:
“Nazism was the greatest evil of all time which saw millions killed during the Holocaust, but in Sinn Féin folklore and Mary Lou re-articulates this idea of Britain’s difficulty is Ireland’s opportunity which is a throw back to World War I,” Mr Martin said. “The idea someone was working with the Nazis to undermine Britain when Europe was in great peril and he should be commemorated is something that Sinn Féin need a wake-up call on,” he added. Mr Martin said what Mr Russell did was “wrong” and added that “collaborating with the Nazis should not be condoned in any way”.
Not long after that passage in the interview, Mary Lou points out:
It’s like I said earlier on – you have to make your decisions, do your work.
Indeed.
“Seán Russell Memorial In Fairview Park [By Willie Malone]-131809” by infomatique is licensed under CC BY-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-05-25--Journalism 101… Or How To Miss A Scoop…

Journalism 101… Or How To Miss A Scoop…

In the olden days , Football was just a sport .
Now it is a business and entertainment .
In the olden days , Politics was about governance .
Now it is a business and entertainment .
And the means of reporting Football and Politics are now very different .
The designated man ( always a man ) from the Manchester Evening News sat on the United coach .
The designated men from the Liverpool Echo were on the Everton bus and the Liverpool bus .
It was Access…the link between the readers of the readers and fans of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very limited form of access because these embedded reporters were tolerated by Matt Busby , Harry Catterick , Bill Shankley and the rest on the understanding that they knew which players were gamblers , boozers and womanisers but they did not report it .
Likewise , the reporters might keep a training ground employee on a retainer and pick up some gossip on which players had had a bust-up in the dressing room .
But this was intelligence gathering not for general reporting .
The reporter might be in a dodgy night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or a dodgy night club in Copenhagen after a pre-season friendly .
They knew the high jinks and maybe even joined in the high jinks , but it never was mentioned in their newspaper columns .
Ah , Jumpers for Goalposts… .
and then the Premier League .
And Footballers became famous for more things than Football .
Celebrities .
And that produced a new kinda reporter—one who wanted to get a story on the front page rather than the back page .
The reporters who now attached themselves to European trips and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Back in the day , the BBC in London only seemed to have two correspondents covering Westminster .
Conrad Voss Bark and Peter Hardeman Scott might wonder just how many BBC need in 2020 .
But the reporting style has changed .
There are Political Editors , Deputy Editors , Assistant Editors , correspondents and reporters but in a very real sense political journalists are a bit like the football correspondents from the Manchester Evening News and Liverpool Echo .
It is about Access .
Limited Access .
Intelligence gathering .
Slipping a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some gossip is all high tech now .
The reporters can stand outside Downing Street or sit in a studio and look at their smartphones and say things like “ a source close to….
” They refer to it as the Westminster Village or the Bubble .
I tend to think of it as a Venn Diagram where politicians and reporters , both useful trades , of course , meet lobbyists ( useless of course ) .
Football reporters might get too dodgy night clubs in Amsterdam and Copenhagen , but political reporters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know the gamblers , the boozers and the womanisers .
But it ’ s a world of limited access .
What happens in Room 382 in Blackpool , Bournemouth and Brighton stays there .
Cosy .
And that worked fine until politicians became celebrities .
And generally speaking the poachers and the gamekeepers get on rather well .
There was that unfortunate business when the some elements of the Press started taking an interest in the expenses of Members of Parliament .
And the other unfortunate business when politicians started looking at phone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ break out before too many “ bad apples ” on each side ended up in Wormwood Scrubs and Pentonville .
Of course , football journalists never married footballers .
On the other hand , journalists always seem to be marrying politicians or other journalists .
Boris Johnson is engaged to Carrie , and Michael Gove is married to Sarah Vine .
Robert Peston is married to a journo .
Dominic Cummings another journo .
And probably a lot of others .
And that means perfect access or maybe it doesn ’ t .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ over corn flakes this morning.
” As I write this , Dominic Cummings has announced that he will make a statement and answer questions and maybe that will be enough to make the clamour for his resignation go away .
I am not overly bothered about his running off to Durham .
If it was an instinct , there are historical precedents for Londoners evacuating the city in times of plague or during the Blitz .
It seems perfectly reasonable .
Some of us are locked down in relative luxury like two old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Others are living in cramped conditions on the 10th Floor of a tower block in the East End of London .
If you are a resident of London and can take yourself off to ( say ) Balmoral or Sandringham , I don ’ t have a problem .
And if you are a resident of West Belfast and can take yourself off to your second home on the Donegal coast , I won ’ t judge you .
Cummings will probably rely on a defence based on the health of his child @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best-unsubstantiated statistic from LockDown is that 80 % of people support LockDown and 20 % adhere to it .
So I am not gathering the first stone .
What concerns me is that the scoop in The Guardian , The Observer and the Mirror was only published a few days ago .
I don ’ t know the full chronology , and that ’ s not the point .
The point is whether Dominic Cummings went off to Durham without telling at least some politicians and some members of his staff .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hubby without telling journalistic colleagues ?
And Cummings surely a high profile person who would be of interest to the spooks go off without the spooks knowing .
Presumably , Cummings local police station at Dock Green or Sun Hill are aware of the high profile resident .
It would seem like basic good manners to tell the local police ( especially as it was “ legal ” ) .
Likewise , those colleagues of Dominic and Mary would surely be texting “ can I bring you some groceries ?
” or “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the child ” .
Did nobody leave off a 12 pack of Budweiser or some blue WKD ?
Nobody fed the goldfish or took the hamster for a walk ?
Waitrose and LIDL made no delivery .
Nothing from Amazon ?
That seems a very odd LockDown .
If Cummings was doing that ZOOM thing at COBRA or SAGE at any point , then nobody noticed that he was not at home .
And all those journalists …nobody spotted anything until The Mirror , and The Guardian broke it .
There might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Journalists don ’ t come out of it well .
“ dominic cummings ” by trendingtopics is licensed under CC BY

In the olden days, Football was just a sport. Now it is a business and entertainment.
In the olden days, Politics was about governance. Now it is a business and entertainment.
And the means of reporting Football and Politics are now very different. The designated man (always a man) from the Manchester Evening News sat on the United coach. The designated men from the Liverpool Echo were on the Everton bus and the Liverpool bus. It was Access…the link between the readers of the readers and fans of the local teams. It was of course a very limited form of access because these embedded reporters were tolerated by Matt Busby, Harry Catterick, Bill Shankley and the rest on the understanding that they knew which players were gamblers, boozers and womanisers but they did not report it. Likewise, the reporters might keep a training ground employee on a retainer and pick up some gossip on which players had had a bust-up in the dressing room. But this was intelligence gathering not for general reporting. The reporter might be in a dodgy night club in Amsterdam after a European match or a dodgy night club in Copenhagen after a pre-season friendly. They knew the high jinks and maybe even joined in the high jinks, but it never was mentioned in their newspaper columns.
Ah, Jumpers for Goalposts…. and then the Premier League. And Footballers became famous for more things than Football. Celebrities. And that produced a new kinda reporter—one who wanted to get a story on the front page rather than the back page.
The reporters who now attached themselves to European trips and pre-season tours were a different breed.
And Politics.
Back in the day, the BBC in London only seemed to have two correspondents covering Westminster. Conrad Voss Bark and Peter Hardeman Scott might wonder just how many BBC need in 2020. But the reporting style has changed. There are Political Editors, Deputy Editors, Assistant Editors, correspondents and reporters but in a very real sense political journalists are a bit like the football correspondents from the Manchester Evening News and Liverpool Echo.
It is about Access. Limited Access. Intelligence gathering. Slipping a fiver to a training ground employee for some gossip is all high tech now. The reporters can stand outside Downing Street or sit in a studio and look at their smartphones and say things like “a source close to….”
They refer to it as the Westminster Village or the Bubble. I tend to think of it as a Venn Diagram where politicians and reporters, both useful trades, of course, meet lobbyists (useless of course).
Football reporters might get too dodgy night clubs in Amsterdam and Copenhagen, but political reporters get to party conferences, and they know the gamblers, the boozers and the womanisers. But it’s a world of limited access. What happens in Room 382 in Blackpool, Bournemouth and Brighton stays there. Cosy.
And that worked fine until politicians became celebrities. And generally speaking the poachers and the gamekeepers get on rather well. There was that unfortunate business when the some elements of the Press started taking an interest in the expenses of Members of Parliament. And the other unfortunate business when politicians started looking at phone hacking. But a Truce seemed to break out before too many “bad apples” on each side ended up in Wormwood Scrubs and Pentonville.
Of course, football journalists never married footballers. On the other hand, journalists always seem to be marrying politicians or other journalists.
Boris Johnson is engaged to Carrie, and Michael Gove is married to Sarah Vine. Robert Peston is married to a journo. Dominic Cummings another journo. And probably a lot of others. And that means perfect access or maybe it doesn’t. “I was speaking to a source over corn flakes this morning.”
As I write this, Dominic Cummings has announced that he will make a statement and answer questions and maybe that will be enough to make the clamour for his resignation go away.
I am not overly bothered about his running off to Durham. If it was an instinct, there are historical precedents for Londoners evacuating the city in times of plague or during the Blitz. It seems perfectly reasonable. Some of us are locked down in relative luxury like two old people in a three-bedroom detached house. Others are living in cramped conditions on the 10th Floor of a tower block in the East End of London.
If you are a resident of London and can take yourself off to (say) Balmoral or Sandringham, I don’t have a problem. And if you are a resident of West Belfast and can take yourself off to your second home on the Donegal coast, I won’t judge you.
Cummings will probably rely on a defence based on the health of his child. Fair play to him. The best-unsubstantiated statistic from LockDown is that 80% of people support LockDown and 20% adhere to it.
So I am not gathering the first stone.
What concerns me is that the scoop in The Guardian, The Observer and the Mirror was only published a few days ago.
I don’t know the full chronology, and that’s not the point.
The point is whether Dominic Cummings went off to Durham without telling at least some politicians and some members of his staff. And did Mrs Cummings run off with her hubby without telling journalistic colleagues?
And Cummings surely a high profile person who would be of interest to the spooks go off without the spooks knowing. Presumably, Cummings local police station at Dock Green or Sun Hill are aware of the high profile resident. It would seem like basic good manners to tell the local police (especially as it was “legal”).
Likewise, those colleagues of Dominic and Mary would surely be texting “can I bring you some groceries?” or “I have some crayons and colouring books for the child”. Did nobody leave off a 12 pack of Budweiser or some blue WKD? Nobody fed the goldfish or took the hamster for a walk? Waitrose and LIDL made no delivery. Nothing from Amazon? That seems a very odd LockDown.
If Cummings was doing that ZOOM thing at COBRA or SAGE at any point, then nobody noticed that he was not at home.
And all those journalists …nobody spotted anything until The Mirror, and The Guardian broke it.
There might be a bigger story here. And Journalists don’t come out of it well.
“dominic cummings” by trendingtopics is licensed under CC BY


sluggerotoole--2020-05-25--Taking control of our finances is the natural next step for Northern Ireland…

Devolution is a process , not an event .
Contrary to popular belief , it wasn ’ t actually Donald Dewar , the first First Minister of Scotland , who said that .
It was the lesser-known former Welsh Secretary , Ron Davies .
It was just another soundbite , but it does contain an important political point about the purpose and character of devolution .
At the time , there were two dominant and opposing trains of thought .
One was that devolution would satisfy the appetite of the majority of the voting public for greater self-government and therefore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The other , which featured heavily in Northern Ireland , was that the project would fatally undermine the Union by dilution and was a stepping stone to constitutional change .
For arguably the first time in two decades , the devolution settlement has come alive in the minds of the ordinary voter as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak , and there will be a natural inclination to wonder what ’ s next .
Historically , this has been the experience in Scotland and Wales , where a “ shock ” has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , the Calman Commission and the 2012 Scotland Act followed the SNP election win in 2007 .
Having worked in Stormont but also having spent the best part of a decade living and working around Holyrood and Westminster , I ’ ve been able to witness first hand the impact of further devolution on policymaking and political debate more generally .
Scotland , for instance , is now responsible for raising nearly half of the revenue it spends ( about 10 % in NI ) .
It has full control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level available to a government , an assignment of half of VAT receipts , stamp duty and few others .
Interestingly , the Scottish Government can also create its own new taxes with permission from the Treasury .
Now is the time for us to discuss the next steps in our devolution process , appreciating that it has been somewhat of a challenge to keep devolution as an event here , let alone anything else .
The closest we ’ ve come , other than some limited devolution of Air Passenger Duty , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as the only policy area where there was more or less universal agreement among our political parties , it was quite a flawed idea .
For starters , it assumed an incorrect comparability and causation between the Celtic Tiger and the economy of Northern Ireland , ignored the major structural supply-side issues in NI that would hamper any benefit of tax variation such as huge infrastructure and skills deficits , and conveniently forgot the enormous volatility of corporation tax receipts which would , in turn , introduce huge uncertainty into the Executive ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , NICVA commissioned PwC to review the fiscal settlement in Northern Ireland , led by reputable economist Esmond Birnie , but it was far too narrow in scope , resources , and time to mirror its counterparts in Scotland and Wales .
I can already see the tweets and hear snorts of derision about RHI etc and how our politicians can ’ t handle the powers they already have .
Having had to explain how the Barnett Formula works to members of Stormont ’ s Finance Committee as a junior public finance researcher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ representatives ’ limitations in this area more than most .
That said , I would politely suggest that this antipathy towards new ideas is a major part of our collective problem .
So , at least hear me out .
The study of how fiscal levers are distributed between national and subnational governments is known as fiscal federalism .
Of course , the UK is a bit of an ugly duckling in this regard .
I say ugly duckling because there is still time to emerge as a beautiful swan to follow the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of very good reasons why we should consider devolving a package similar to that in Scotland .
The first is to do with the economy itself .
Northern Ireland suffers from a few very fundamental economic ailments that have existed for decades and significantly hamper us – lower productivity , lower wages , higher economic inactivity , major skills and infrastructure deficits .
Without the ability to change economic behaviour and grow or reduce tax bases and yields , it ’ s very difficult to address these issues as a purely spending administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve seen here in Edinburgh , is the impact the responsibility has on accountability in policy-decisions .
You tend to be much more careful with the money you have to earn yourself over that which is just given to you .
This is a good thing for democracies .
It has the further impact of introducing a more grown-up public discourse .
At elections , our politicians would have to set out their stall in much more detail , including stating how they would fund the many commitments they make in manifestos @ @ @ @ @ @ @ introducing greater demarcation and choice between the parties beyond the constitution .
Finally , it would allow us to get creative with the economy here and potentially raise more revenue to fund the important investments , particularly in infrastructure , we need .
For example , the Scottish Government has increased the tax paid on purchasing a second home to raise more revenue .
You may not agree with this , but the point is you could then vote for someone who wanted to reduce the tax paid on your dream holiday home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , risks and it is complicated .
We would be importing risks into our budget allocation , and we would finally be properly accountable for the economic performance of our wee world .
But we ’ re adults , we can handle it .
At the very least , we should have an open mind .
Photo by Evelyn Chong is licensed under CC0

Devolution is a process, not an event. Contrary to popular belief, it wasn’t actually Donald Dewar, the first First Minister of Scotland, who said that. It was the lesser-known former Welsh Secretary, Ron Davies. It was just another soundbite, but it does contain an important political point about the purpose and character of devolution.
At the time, there were two dominant and opposing trains of thought. One was that devolution would satisfy the appetite of the majority of the voting public for greater self-government and therefore quash Scottish, Welsh and Irish nationalism. The other, which featured heavily in Northern Ireland, was that the project would fatally undermine the Union by dilution and was a stepping stone to constitutional change.
For arguably the first time in two decades, the devolution settlement has come alive in the minds of the ordinary voter as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak, and there will be a natural inclination to wonder what’s next. Historically, this has been the experience in Scotland and Wales, where a “shock” has given the devolution settlement a kick onwards. For example, the Calman Commission and the 2012 Scotland Act followed the SNP election win in 2007.
Having worked in Stormont but also having spent the best part of a decade living and working around Holyrood and Westminster, I’ve been able to witness first hand the impact of further devolution on policymaking and political debate more generally.
Scotland, for instance, is now responsible for raising nearly half of the revenue it spends (about 10% in NI). It has full control of income tax, the largest fiscal level available to a government, an assignment of half of VAT receipts, stamp duty and few others. Interestingly, the Scottish Government can also create its own new taxes with permission from the Treasury.
Now is the time for us to discuss the next steps in our devolution process, appreciating that it has been somewhat of a challenge to keep devolution as an event here, let alone anything else.
The closest we’ve come, other than some limited devolution of Air Passenger Duty, was on corporation tax. Ironically, as the only policy area where there was more or less universal agreement among our political parties, it was quite a flawed idea. For starters, it assumed an incorrect comparability and causation between the Celtic Tiger and the economy of Northern Ireland, ignored the major structural supply-side issues in NI that would hamper any benefit of tax variation such as huge infrastructure and skills deficits, and conveniently forgot the enormous volatility of corporation tax receipts which would, in turn, introduce huge uncertainty into the Executive’s budget.
A few years back, NICVA commissioned PwC to review the fiscal settlement in Northern Ireland, led by reputable economist Esmond Birnie, but it was far too narrow in scope, resources, and time to mirror its counterparts in Scotland and Wales.
I can already see the tweets and hear snorts of derision about RHI etc and how our politicians can’t handle the powers they already have. Having had to explain how the Barnett Formula works to members of Stormont’s Finance Committee as a junior public finance researcher I’m aware of our elected representatives’ limitations in this area more than most. That said, I would politely suggest that this antipathy towards new ideas is a major part of our collective problem. So, at least hear me out.
The study of how fiscal levers are distributed between national and subnational governments is known as fiscal federalism. Of course, the UK is a bit of an ugly duckling in this regard. I say ugly duckling because there is still time to emerge as a beautiful swan to follow the metaphor through.
There are a number of very good reasons why we should consider devolving a package similar to that in Scotland. The first is to do with the economy itself. Northern Ireland suffers from a few very fundamental economic ailments that have existed for decades and significantly hamper us – lower productivity, lower wages, higher economic inactivity, major skills and infrastructure deficits.
Without the ability to change economic behaviour and grow or reduce tax bases and yields, it’s very difficult to address these issues as a purely spending administration.
The second, and something I’ve seen here in Edinburgh, is the impact the responsibility has on accountability in policy-decisions. You tend to be much more careful with the money you have to earn yourself over that which is just given to you. This is a good thing for democracies.
It has the further impact of introducing a more grown-up public discourse. At elections, our politicians would have to set out their stall in much more detail, including stating how they would fund the many commitments they make in manifestos. This has the additional benefit of introducing greater demarcation and choice between the parties beyond the constitution.
Again, a good thing.
Finally, it would allow us to get creative with the economy here and potentially raise more revenue to fund the important investments, particularly in infrastructure, we need. For example, the Scottish Government has increased the tax paid on purchasing a second home to raise more revenue. You may not agree with this, but the point is you could then vote for someone who wanted to reduce the tax paid on your dream holiday home at the Port.
There are, of course, risks and it is complicated. We would be importing risks into our budget allocation, and we would finally be properly accountable for the economic performance of our wee world. But we’re adults, we can handle it. At the very least, we should have an open mind.
Photo by Evelyn Chong is licensed under CC0


sluggerotoole--2020-05-26--A new borrowing arrangement for local Councils is key to funding a Just Transition

Sean Fearon is a Just Transition Researcher .
He is writing in a personal capacity .
It will be no surprise to anyone that the COVID-19 public health emergency has reshaped the economic and public finance environment in Ireland , as around the world .
Once upon a time the British and Irish governments , in lock-step with the European Commission , championed deficit-reduction and savage austerity programmes as a most noble and urgent economic crusade .
As of May 2020 , these same actors now run historic peace-time spending deficits to prevent outright economic collapse , funded by a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and debt sales .
The point here is that ‘ affordability ’ now has a new meaning , and the purely political nature of austerity has been laid painfully bare .
Borrowing is here to stay , as it should be – for both the Irish and British governments , debt has never been cheaper , and finding cheap debt has rarely been easier .
It is no surprise , then , that calls are mounting to ensure this period of unprecedented borrowing and deficit spending is also used to tackle the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the time to make the long overdue economic transformation needed to stave off irreversible climate breakdown , while raising living standards and rooting out social injustices – in other words , a Just Transition .
The scale of this challenge is unprecedented , as are the sums of funding required to finance it .
From central government , down to local government and households , a bold and effective financing strategy is urgently required .
Due to a total lack of any meaningful fiscal or financial powers , the options for this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremely limited .
In contrast to the Assembly , however , local Councils have the ability to borrow-to-invest , albeit a problematic one .
Councils in Britain borrow primarily through the Public Works Loan Board ( PWLB ) .
Though mixed with some private finance , some two thirds of local authority debt in England , Scotland and Wales is borrowed through the PWLB , who in turn sources this finance from gilt ( sterling denominated bonds ) markets , with a meagre marginal interest tacked on top .
In this way , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a very favourable rate , and close to the extremely low interest environment in which we now live .
Councils in the North are treated differently , to what seems like their evident disadvantage .
The North can ’ t access the PWLB – instead , local authorities borrow from the Department of Finance ( where lending is passed through ) , and from commercial lenders .
As a result , Councils here are , on aggregate , paying interest at around 4 or 5 % on their existing debt finance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the PWLB for British Councils in April 2020 bore interest rates of 1-2 % , with Councils having full autonomy on how this funding is put to use .
For some Councils in the North , 2018 expenditure statements show that more than £1 in every £10 spent in 2019 wasn ’ t spent on service provision or regional investment , but was instead used to pay down local authority debt .
When compared the almost zero , and in some cases negative , interest rate environment agreed by governments and central banks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fiscal deficits , this is jarring .
When considered against the urgent need to provide low-cost finance for a rapid Just Transition to a net-zero carbon society , it simply isn ’ t credible .
Living through a COVID-19 reset of policy horizons , we are presented with an opportunity to both tackle the climate crisis and expand the long-term income-generating assets owned by our local authorities .
But Councils need a new borrowing framework to unleash this potential , with access to long-term and as-close-to-zero interest financing as possible .
The obvious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Councils in the North .
But the same objective could be better advanced through the establishment of a separate green facility to pass-through near-zero interest finance to Councils across the North .
The cost of this finance is one thing , how it is used is equally important .
Greater access to cheaper investment capital can be used for any number of green infrastructural investment initiatives , from greenways and new active travel infrastructure , to income-producing assets like wind farms and solar panels .
Not doing so stifles the economic potential of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urgent climate action .
Borrowing to construct authority-owned onshore-wind , providing long-term Council revenue as the wind blows , is an open and shut case for investment and urgent climate action .
Better yet , this borrowing could instead act as seed capital to reduce financing costs to allow citizens to get in on the act , through joint-ownership Council-community energy cooperatives .
Drumlin and Carntogher community energy groups are flourishing local examples of this model , and , on a smaller scale , emulates the world-famous German success story of community energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generated in Germany is owned by local communities , groups of individuals , or farmers , lowering their energy costs , and providing a stable income to invest in their local community .
Crucially , access to low cost finance through the German Sparkassen model has been a catalyst of this success .
These are fairly meagre reforms which , if implemented , profoundly enhance the ability to Councils and local communities to tackle climate breakdown , while driving our own inclusive and sustainable economic and social development .

Sean Fearon is a Just Transition Researcher. He is writing in a personal capacity.
It will be no surprise to anyone that the COVID-19 public health emergency has reshaped the economic and public finance environment in Ireland, as around the world. Once upon a time the British and Irish governments, in lock-step with the European Commission, championed deficit-reduction and savage austerity programmes as a most noble and urgent economic crusade. As of May 2020, these same actors now run historic peace-time spending deficits to prevent outright economic collapse, funded by a cocktail of quantitative easing, monetary financing, and debt sales.
The point here is that ‘affordability’ now has a new meaning, and the purely political nature of austerity has been laid painfully bare. Borrowing is here to stay, as it should be – for both the Irish and British governments, debt has never been cheaper, and finding cheap debt has rarely been easier.
It is no surprise, then, that calls are mounting to ensure this period of unprecedented borrowing and deficit spending is also used to tackle the greatest threat of our time. Now is the time to make the long overdue economic transformation needed to stave off irreversible climate breakdown, while raising living standards and rooting out social injustices – in other words, a Just Transition. The scale of this challenge is unprecedented, as are the sums of funding required to finance it. From central government, down to local government and households, a bold and effective financing strategy is urgently required.
Better borrowing for local Councils
Due to a total lack of any meaningful fiscal or financial powers, the options for this financing in the North of Ireland are extremely limited. In contrast to the Assembly, however, local Councils have the ability to borrow-to-invest, albeit a problematic one.
Councils in Britain borrow primarily through the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB). Though mixed with some private finance, some two thirds of local authority debt in England, Scotland and Wales is borrowed through the PWLB, who in turn sources this finance from gilt (sterling denominated bonds) markets, with a meagre marginal interest tacked on top. In this way, local authorities are capable of public borrowing at a very favourable rate, and close to the extremely low interest environment in which we now live.
Councils in the North are treated differently, to what seems like their evident disadvantage. The North can’t access the PWLB – instead, local authorities borrow from the Department of Finance (where lending is passed through), and from commercial lenders. As a result, Councils here are, on aggregate, paying interest at around 4 or 5% on their existing debt finance . By stark contrast, loans passed through the PWLB for British Councils in April 2020 bore interest rates of 1-2% , with Councils having full autonomy on how this funding is put to use . For some Councils in the North, 2018 expenditure statements show that more than £1 in every £10 spent in 2019 wasn’t spent on service provision or regional investment, but was instead used to pay down local authority debt .
When compared the almost zero, and in some cases negative, interest rate environment agreed by governments and central banks across the world to finance now yawning fiscal deficits, this is jarring. When considered against the urgent need to provide low-cost finance for a rapid Just Transition to a net-zero carbon society, it simply isn’t credible.
The opportunities of local green finance
Living through a COVID-19 reset of policy horizons, we are presented with an opportunity to both tackle the climate crisis and expand the long-term income-generating assets owned by our local authorities. But Councils need a new borrowing framework to unleash this potential, with access to long-term and as-close-to-zero interest financing as possible.
The obvious solution is to extend PWLB access to Councils in the North. But the same objective could be better advanced through the establishment of a separate green facility to pass-through near-zero interest finance to Councils across the North.
The cost of this finance is one thing, how it is used is equally important. Greater access to cheaper investment capital can be used for any number of green infrastructural investment initiatives, from greenways and new active travel infrastructure, to income-producing assets like wind farms and solar panels. Not doing so stifles the economic potential of Councils and local communities, while discouraging urgent climate action.
Borrowing to construct authority-owned onshore-wind, providing long-term Council revenue as the wind blows, is an open and shut case for investment and urgent climate action. Better yet, this borrowing could instead act as seed capital to reduce financing costs to allow citizens to get in on the act, through joint-ownership Council-community energy cooperatives. Drumlin and Carntogher community energy groups are flourishing local examples of this model, and, on a smaller scale, emulates the world-famous German success story of community energy – 42% of all renewable energy generated in Germany is owned by local communities, groups of individuals, or farmers, lowering their energy costs, and providing a stable income to invest in their local community . Crucially, access to low cost finance through the German Sparkassen model has been a catalyst of this success.
These are fairly meagre reforms which, if implemented, profoundly enhance the ability to Councils and local communities to tackle climate breakdown, while driving our own inclusive and sustainable economic and social development.


sluggerotoole--2020-05-26--Bowling For Michael Moore – The tricky business of renewable energy…

The Planet of the Humans , produced/tagged by Michael Moore caused a bit of a stir recently with the criticism ranging from “ hmmmm , a bit out of date ” to “ he ’ s effectively now a white supremacist ” Here ’ s a Guardian critique of Moore if you think the latter summary is a glib throwaway exaggeration : https : //www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/07/michael-moore-far-right-climate-crisis-deniers-film-environment-falsehoods My own criticism is reserved not for the clumsiness of the attempt to highlight both corporate involvement and the reality of renewables but for the rash conclusions from those on both sides of the environmental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ all renewables are bad so let ’ s start drilling in the Arctic ” it is simply questioning the recent gospel that renewables are ‘ all that ’ so we must not criticise them .
Meaning “ dig a little deeper ” into renewables and this is a fitting turn of phrase as renewables require digging .
LOTS of digging .
And drilling ( I ’ m writing this from a drilling rig on a wind-farm electrical cable-laying project , my tenth or so project this past year alone ) .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is being given to the topic of deep-sea mining , particularly for cobalt .
Cobalt is a mainstay of renewables , if you want solar power and electronics then you ’ re going to have to go and extract cobalt from somewhere .
This is true of many other materials for wind turbine magnets ; the need neodymium , dysprosium and praseodymium .
Though not particularly rare ( even though they ’ re classified as rare earth elements ) they are unsurprisingly rocketing in price due to the ‘ renewables boom ’ ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ labelled it ) .
What happens when minerals rocket in price ?
More mining .
Consider that mining is one of the sticks used to beat down the nuclear industry yet the scale of mining for nuclear is absolutely dwarfed by the mining activity required for renewables on a watt for watt basis ( uranium pit-mining in the USA is all but obsolete , they use water leeching to extract the uranium , not ideal but at a push they can extract uranium from seawater too , if they even need it what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reused… ) .
In our western bubble are we concerned at the environmental practices and standards in places that are likely to be the centres of such mining ?
Will the rainforests of Papua New Guinea be replaced once we in the west have extracted what we need ?
Same for Congo and wherever else we can find the various minerals and materials ?
We ’ re up in arms at the potential for gold mine in the Sperrins but happy enough to see other faraway places bear the brunt .
Apparently Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the alt-right and all the horror that comes with that .
The man clearly cares for his fellow man , his track record shows this .
If people were to be equally concerned about other humans they would do well to look at what goes on in mining in 3rd world countries .
While I doubt that they ’ re ALL run on the back of child slavery I ’ d be very surprised if the working conditions and wages are like those of an Australian coal or uranium mine .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more gas-fired power stations and though the gas industry itself is in a bit of a pickle at the moment this prediction is playing out , Germany and the US are building more gas-fired stations .
Yes , better than coal .
But still fossil fuels none the less .
Germany is closing down its nuclear plants before the coal plants ( I went past one of the lignite fuelled monsters recently , awful , its coalfield is about to eat up the remains of a once great forest at Hambach , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the arm with a visit from Greta ) , so , we can expect a temporary spike in carbon emissions until the gas fired stations are on line supplementing more wind-farms and the coal stations are off , where we can then expect less carbon emissions , but emissions nonetheless : https : //www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/10/greta-thunberg-climate-change-fight-germany-hambach-forest Coal plus renewables = greater carbon emissions than nuclear plus renewables Likewise gas plus renewables = greater carbon emissions than nuclear plus renewables .
No amount of nice posters , re-framing of the argument or narrative crafting will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is also a state of affairs ( well , rather a strong theory ) is that had the aforementioned coal station been built as a nuclear station instead then Hambach forest would not be chomped up by the coal mine to provide fuel for the lignite beast .
Greta and the protesters would not have been needed .
The forest would probably still be intact ( other commercial interests notwithstanding ) and the carbon emissions from the coal plant would never have existed .
The point is that renewables have an underside that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think the west , with its solid infrastructure and stability would be wise to have a mix of 4th generation nuclear and renewables .
Let the sunnier developing countries concentrate on solar and let them build their infrastructure around it , many don ’ t have the centralised grid infrastructure that we have .
If we go down the path of ONLY renewables we will unleash mining on barely imaginable scale ( I can imagine it from years of working around mines , drilling rigs and pipelines , I can fathom the carnage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to freight the stuff to the west from these developing nations when they could probably make better use of it .
Why should Portland Oregon use up the share of cobalt that could be used in Port Moresby ( PNG ) ?
To me it just doesn ’ t make sense creating all that extra unnecessary pollution under the banner of ‘ reducing pollution ’ .
And consider how much electricity we will require in the future especially if we need more hydrogen ( from electrolysis ) , more electric cars and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
That ’ s a serious number of wind farms and solar farms even if we can make battery storage from salts or muds ( also being looked at ) .
This is a terrifying amount of material , someone in a poor country will pay the price for this either physically or environmentally and this I believe was the point of ‘ The Planet of the Humans ’ ; look under green carpet before jumping on it .
How many people did this and how many just attacked Michael ‘ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without question ?
As a bonus point , regarding the criticism of the movies constant reference to overpopulation ( which OBVIOUSLY entails consumption too ) ; The Guardian et al are livid on this point as they somehow twist this to being some sort of racist Malthusian policy , so , I ’ m just going to leave these here : Photo by Free-Photos is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

The Planet of the Humans, produced/tagged by Michael Moore caused a bit of a stir recently with the criticism ranging from “hmmmm, a bit out of date” to “he’s effectively now a white supremacist”
Here’s a Guardian critique of Moore if you think the latter summary is a glib throwaway exaggeration: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/07/michael-moore-far-right-climate-crisis-deniers-film-environment-falsehoods
My own criticism is reserved not for the clumsiness of the attempt to highlight both corporate involvement and the reality of renewables but for the rash conclusions from those on both sides of the environmental debate; the film is NOT saying “all renewables are bad so let’s start drilling in the Arctic” it is simply questioning the recent gospel that renewables are ‘all that’ so we must not criticise them.
Meaning “dig a little deeper” into renewables and this is a fitting turn of phrase as renewables require digging. LOTS of digging. And drilling (I’m writing this from a drilling rig on a wind-farm electrical cable-laying project, my tenth or so project this past year alone).
They require so much digging that serious thought is being given to the topic of deep-sea mining, particularly for cobalt. Cobalt is a mainstay of renewables, if you want solar power and electronics then you’re going to have to go and extract cobalt from somewhere.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/04/is-deep-sea-mining-vital-for-greener-future-even-if-it-means-destroying-precious-ecosystems
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/03/deep-sea-mining-to-turn-oceans-into-new-industrial-frontier
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/16/collapse-of-png-deep-sea-mining-venture-sparks-calls-for-moratorium
This is true of many other materials for wind turbine magnets; the need neodymium, dysprosium and praseodymium. Though not particularly rare (even though they’re classified as rare earth elements) they are unsurprisingly rocketing in price due to the ‘renewables boom’ (as an investment magazine I once read labelled it).
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/rare-earth-mining-china-social-environmental-costs
What happens when minerals rocket in price? More mining. Consider that mining is one of the sticks used to beat down the nuclear industry yet the scale of mining for nuclear is absolutely dwarfed by the mining activity required for renewables on a watt for watt basis (uranium pit-mining in the USA is all but obsolete, they use water leeching to extract the uranium, not ideal but at a push they can extract uranium from seawater too, if they even need it what with all the waste that can be reused…).
In our western bubble are we concerned at the environmental practices and standards in places that are likely to be the centres of such mining? Will the rainforests of Papua New Guinea be replaced once we in the west have extracted what we need? Same for Congo and wherever else we can find the various minerals and materials?
We’re up in arms at the potential for gold mine in the Sperrins but happy enough to see other faraway places bear the brunt.
Human rights
Apparently Michael ‘The Monster’ Moore is now on the alt-right and all the horror that comes with that.
The man clearly cares for his fellow man, his track record shows this. If people were to be equally concerned about other humans they would do well to look at what goes on in mining in 3rd world countries. While I doubt that they’re ALL run on the back of child slavery I’d be very surprised if the working conditions and wages are like those of an Australian coal or uranium mine.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/oct/12/phone-misery-children-congo-cobalt-mines-drc
https://www.ft.com/content/c6909812-9ce4-11e9-9c06-a4640c9feebb
Gas
The movie also pointed to the likelihood of more gas-fired power stations and though the gas industry itself is in a bit of a pickle at the moment this prediction is playing out, Germany and the US are building more gas-fired stations. Yes, better than coal. But still fossil fuels none the less.
(And look at this snippet regarding the UK)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/22/uk-approval-for-biggest-gas-power-station-europe-ruled-legal-high-court-climate-planning
Germany is closing down its nuclear plants before the coal plants (I went past one of the lignite fuelled monsters recently, awful, its coalfield is about to eat up the remains of a once great forest at Hambach, the protest site there received a publicity shot in the arm with a visit from Greta), so, we can expect a temporary spike in carbon emissions until the gas fired stations are on line supplementing more wind-farms and the coal stations are off, where we can then expect less carbon emissions, but emissions nonetheless: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/aug/10/greta-thunberg-climate-change-fight-germany-hambach-forest
Loosely summarised:
Coal plus renewables = greater carbon emissions than nuclear plus renewables
Likewise gas plus renewables = greater carbon emissions than nuclear plus renewables.
No amount of nice posters, re-framing of the argument or narrative crafting will change this state of affairs.
What is also a state of affairs (well, rather a strong theory) is that had the aforementioned coal station been built as a nuclear station instead then Hambach forest would not be chomped up by the coal mine to provide fuel for the lignite beast. Greta and the protesters would not have been needed. The forest would probably still be intact (other commercial interests notwithstanding) and the carbon emissions from the coal plant would never have existed.
Anyway…
The point is that renewables have an underside that is not often discussed.
Personally I think the west, with its solid infrastructure and stability would be wise to have a mix of 4th generation nuclear and renewables.
Let the sunnier developing countries concentrate on solar and let them build their infrastructure around it, many don’t have the centralised grid infrastructure that we have.
If we go down the path of ONLY renewables we will unleash mining on barely imaginable scale (I can imagine it from years of working around mines, drilling rigs and pipelines, I can fathom the carnage). Plus we’ll then have to freight the stuff to the west from these developing nations when they could probably make better use of it.
Why should Portland Oregon use up the share of cobalt that could be used in Port Moresby (PNG)?
To me it just doesn’t make sense creating all that extra unnecessary pollution under the banner of ‘reducing pollution’.
And consider how much electricity we will require in the future especially if we need more hydrogen (from electrolysis), more electric cars and perhaps carbon scrubbers (being looked into). That’s a serious number of wind farms and solar farms even if we can make battery storage from salts or muds (also being looked at).
This is a terrifying amount of material, someone in a poor country will pay the price for this either physically or environmentally and this I believe was the point of ‘The Planet of the Humans’; look under green carpet before jumping on it.
How many people did this and how many just attacked Michael ‘The Monster’ Moore and believed the counterpoints without question?
As a bonus point, regarding the criticism of the movies constant reference to overpopulation (which OBVIOUSLY entails consumption too); The Guardian et al are livid on this point as they somehow twist this to being some sort of racist Malthusian policy, so, I’m just going to leave these here:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jul/12/want-to-fight-climate-change-have-fewer-children
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/20/give-up-having-children-couples-save-planet-climate-crisis
https://www.theguardian.com/membership/2017/oct/07/should-we-be-having-fewer-children-for-the-sake-of-the-planet
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/06/heres-how-you-can-parent-less-and-give-your-children-space-to-try-fail-and-grow-from-it
Photo by Free-Photos is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-05-26--Sewage monitoring could be one of the most effective weapons in the battle against the coronavirus

A recent paper from Yale University has raised hopes that monitoring of sewage could provide a key early warning indicator of a community outbreak of the coronavirus .
Researchers compared the amount of virus RNA found per mL in primary sludge collected from a wastewater treatment facility in New Haven , Connecticut in the United States , with the number of positive new cases in the community from mid-March until the end of April .
The chart below shows the amount of virus RNA found per mL of primary sludge ( the red line ) with the number of new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
The amount of virus collected from the sewage samples almost perfectly correlates with the number of new cases several days later .
Having good quality , timely data warning of an outbreak of COVID-19 could be an invaluable new weapon in the fight against the coronavirus .
It could allow for all households connected to a particular sewage treatment works to be tested for the virus , and/or a localised stay at home order that would impact upon a comparatively small region .
There are 7,078 sewage treatment plants in England @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and community septic tanks in Scotland and Northern Ireland , and 1,100 treatment plants in the Republic of Ireland .
Whilst the number of households connected to sewage treatment plants will obviously vary significantly , on average in England and Wales there are 8,400 people per sewage treatment plant , 4,500 people per plant in the Republic of Ireland , and 680 people per treatment plant or community septic tank in Northern Ireland and Scotland .
Given the small numbers of people per plant , a local stay at home order followed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be possible given current testing capacity ; 98 % of UK households are connected to the country ’ s sewerage service .
The equipment used by the Yale researchers , the Qiagen RNeasy PowerSoil Total RNA kit , currently has a list price of £269 .
Whilst obviously there are many other costs to consider , a back of the envelope estimate suggests it would cost £4.8m to purchase testing kits for the UK ’ s sewage treatment plants and €330,000 to cover the Republic of Ireland , extremely small sums given the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy .
The Yale paper has yet to be peer reviewed , but the signs are extremely encouraging that there may be a way to systematically collect early warning data of a community outbreak of the coronavirus .
Sewage monitoring is already being discussed by the British government as part of its plans to track the prevalence of the virus .
However , given recent research , the British and Irish governments , and the devolved administrations , should bring forward plans to introduce sewage monitoring to their plans to test , trace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ 20140601 122351 Kläranlage Coerde , Münster ( DSC02141 ) .jpg ” by Günter Seggebäing is licenced under CC BY-SA 3.0 Chart taken from : Jordan Peccia et al .
( 2020 ) “ SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations in primary municipal sewage sludge as a leading indicator of COVID-19 outbreak dynamics ” and is licenced under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

A recent paper from Yale University has raised hopes that monitoring of sewage could provide a key early warning indicator of a community outbreak of the coronavirus.
Researchers compared the amount of virus RNA found per mL in primary sludge collected from a wastewater treatment facility in New Haven, Connecticut in the United States, with the number of positive new cases in the community from mid-March until the end of April.
The chart below shows the amount of virus RNA found per mL of primary sludge (the red line) with the number of new cases of COVID-19 (the black line). The amount of virus collected from the sewage samples almost perfectly correlates with the number of new cases several days later.
Having good quality, timely data warning of an outbreak of COVID-19 could be an invaluable new weapon in the fight against the coronavirus. It could allow for all households connected to a particular sewage treatment works to be tested for the virus, and/or a localised stay at home order that would impact upon a comparatively small region.
There are 7,078 sewage treatment plants in England and Wales, 10,814 sewage treatment works and community septic tanks in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and 1,100 treatment plants in the Republic of Ireland.
Whilst the number of households connected to sewage treatment plants will obviously vary significantly, on average in England and Wales there are 8,400 people per sewage treatment plant, 4,500 people per plant in the Republic of Ireland, and 680 people per treatment plant or community septic tank in Northern Ireland and Scotland.
Given the small numbers of people per plant, a local stay at home order followed by universal testing in the affected area would be possible given current testing capacity; 98% of UK households are connected to the country’s sewerage service.
The equipment used by the Yale researchers, the Qiagen RNeasy PowerSoil Total RNA kit, currently has a list price of £269. Whilst obviously there are many other costs to consider, a back of the envelope estimate suggests it would cost £4.8m to purchase testing kits for the UK’s sewage treatment plants and €330,000 to cover the Republic of Ireland, extremely small sums given the current incalculable loss to life and the economy.
The Yale paper has yet to be peer reviewed, but the signs are extremely encouraging that there may be a way to systematically collect early warning data of a community outbreak of the coronavirus.
Sewage monitoring is already being discussed by the British government as part of its plans to track the prevalence of the virus. However, given recent research, the British and Irish governments, and the devolved administrations, should bring forward plans to introduce sewage monitoring to their plans to test, trace and isolate. Ideally, tomorrow.
Update 28th May 2020:
As pointed out by Brendan Halpin of the University of Limerick, Neil O’Leary, and this excellent Twitter thread by Nick Brown, the relationship between virus RNA in wastewater and COVID-19 is not as neat as what is suggested in the pre-print.
The paper makes two statistical errors; it reports a correlation between time-series and does so on smoothed data. Brendan Halpin wrote on his blog:
It turns out that the correlation between the RNA measurement and hospital admissions is 0.357 (R2 = 0.13). If we lag by one day, the R2 rises to a very respectable 0.45, but declines again if we lag by 2 (0.22) or 3 (0.22) days. In other words, there is a real signal here, but it is vastly overstated by R2 = 0.99, and the lead it gives is not as big as claimed.
The authors of the pre-print are looking into this issue and are working on an update.
Despite the lead not being as large as claimed, it appears that there is a useful signal in the data. Given the relative ease and low cost of collecting this data, monitoring of wastewater treatment plants and publication of data is still something that should be urgently considered to assist with efforts to contain future outbreaks of the virus.
“20140601 122351 Kläranlage Coerde, Münster (DSC02141).jpg” by Günter Seggebäing is licenced under CC BY-SA 3.0
Chart taken from: Jordan Peccia et al. (2020) “SARS-CoV-2 RNA concentrations in primary municipal sewage sludge as a leading indicator of COVID-19 outbreak dynamics” and is licenced under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0


sluggerotoole--2020-05-26--What can we change to help consume less of the earth’s precious resources – and in doing so, improve

Joan McCoy is President of the Royal Society of Ulster Architects and writes in support of # OurChangedPlaceNI – a campaign which asks people what they ’ d change about the built environment During lockdown , I have been entertained by receiving and sending memes commenting on the current situation – some funny , some less so .
One has stuck in my mind though – it was a cartoon of the earth , battered and bruised and coved in bandages – beside an almost equally large coronavirus cell .
The earth was thanking the virus ‘ for the break @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a global emergency due to the pandemic , but we are in the midst of a climate crisis .
With reports of clean air over global cities and clean canals in Venice , the earth appears indeed to be ‘ getting a break ’ .
One thing that many of us have been given over the past few weeks is the opportunity to reflect on how we live our lives .
The effects on us all personally have been different – ranging from coping with illness , even death , at a distance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and juggling working with restless , cooped up children ; or the boredom and isolation of furlough ; the relentless work to keep frontline services working ; to struggling to keep businesses and livelihoods from going under .
One common theme however is that many of us are experiencing our homes and the places we inhabit in a completely different way and are questioning if our environment and lifestyles could be better .
Those questions and the answers to them could and should have a profound impact on how we choose to live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ This storm will pass .
But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come.
” Yuval Noah Harari ‘ The world after coronavirus ’ Financial Times 20 March 2020 .
We find ourselves in a moment of great opportunity – one that should not be allowed to go to waste .
That is why RSUA has launched its # OurChangedPlaceNI campaign .
In the short term , we need to come up with innovative ways of making our existing towns and cities work for the ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unprecedented opportunity to challenge many of the accepted norms and to try out something different .
We can try on ideas for ‘ fit ’ , see how they work and take the best of them forward into long term visions and plans for the future of this place .
We can change our cities and towns to be more liveable , now .
The government has shown how things we thought impossible , can happen in this emergency .
What do you want to change ?
Have you ever wondered why you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sit outside a restaurant or bar in a square in freezing cold Prague or Krakow in November ?
Why people in Copenhagen or Amsterdam cycle to work , shop , school , despite it being a similar climate to Belfast – and they don ’ t feel the need to wear lycra to get on a bike ?
What would it feel like to cycle to work or school in Belfast or Newry or Ballymena – if you felt safe because there were full road lanes dedicated to bikes and no parked cars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What streets could be temporarily closed to cars to be opened up to customers ?
In the lockdown , access to green spaces and the need to experience the outdoors have become crucial .
Could there be more pocket parks ?
Trees in the city ?
Shared spaces for apartments ?
Places for play ?
Streets where cars don ’ t have priority ?
Our priorities need to change – the lockdown has shown that we can do much more than we all thought at home – is the office dead ?
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , do we need to change our designs ?
Should our homes be in the new revived multi-cultural , open air , pedestrian and cyclist friendly , diverse town and city centres ?
What can we change to help consume less of the earth ’ s precious resources – and in doing so , improve our lives ?
# OurChangedPlaceNI – show us your ideas to make our place better !

Joan McCoy is President of the Royal Society of Ulster Architects and writes in support of #OurChangedPlaceNI – a campaign which asks people what they’d change about the built environment
During lockdown, I have been entertained by receiving and sending memes commenting on the current situation – some funny, some less so. One has stuck in my mind though – it was a cartoon of the earth, battered and bruised and coved in bandages – beside an almost equally large coronavirus cell. The earth was thanking the virus ‘for the break’.
Not only are we enduring a global emergency due to the pandemic, but we are in the midst of a climate crisis. With reports of clean air over global cities and clean canals in Venice, the earth appears indeed to be ‘getting a break’.
One thing that many of us have been given over the past few weeks is the opportunity to reflect on how we live our lives. The effects on us all personally have been different – ranging from coping with illness, even death, at a distance from loved ones; to home schooling and juggling working with restless, cooped up children; or the boredom and isolation of furlough; the relentless work to keep frontline services working; to struggling to keep businesses and livelihoods from going under.
One common theme however is that many of us are experiencing our homes and the places we inhabit in a completely different way and are questioning if our environment and lifestyles could be better. Those questions and the answers to them could and should have a profound impact on how we choose to live, work and play in the future.
“This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come.” Yuval Noah Harari ‘The world after coronavirus’ Financial Times 20 March 2020.
We find ourselves in a moment of great opportunity – one that should not be allowed to go to waste. That is why RSUA has launched its #OurChangedPlaceNI campaign.
In the short term, we need to come up with innovative ways of making our existing towns and cities work for the ‘new normal’. We have an unprecedented opportunity to challenge many of the accepted norms and to try out something different. We can try on ideas for ‘fit’, see how they work and take the best of them forward into long term visions and plans for the future of this place. We can change our cities and towns to be more liveable, now. The government has shown how things we thought impossible, can happen in this emergency. What do you want to change?
Have you ever wondered why you want to, and are able to sit outside a restaurant or bar in a square in freezing cold Prague or Krakow in November? Why people in Copenhagen or Amsterdam cycle to work, shop, school, despite it being a similar climate to Belfast – and they don’t feel the need to wear lycra to get on a bike? What would it feel like to cycle to work or school in Belfast or Newry or Ballymena – if you felt safe because there were full road lanes dedicated to bikes and no parked cars at the side of the road? What streets could be temporarily closed to cars to be opened up to customers?
In the lockdown, access to green spaces and the need to experience the outdoors have become crucial. Could there be more pocket parks? Trees in the city? Shared spaces for apartments? Places for play? Streets where cars don’t have priority?
Our priorities need to change – the lockdown has shown that we can do much more than we all thought at home – is the office dead? If we are going to work from home, do we need to change our designs? Should our homes be in the new revived multi-cultural, open air, pedestrian and cyclist friendly, diverse town and city centres?
What can we change to help consume less of the earth’s precious resources – and in doing so, improve our lives?
#OurChangedPlaceNI – show us your ideas to make our place better!


sluggerotoole--2020-05-27--Why wait for a Covid-19 vaccine; could we consider “natural vaccination”?

The race is on and the stakes high .
A safe and effective vaccine in the near future is the best chance we are told of controlling a virus that brought so much death and economic destruction in the first half of 2020 .
A vaccine without side-effects administered to the whole population and giving total protection is what we seek but are unlikely to achieve .
Things just don ’ t work this way , but that should not stop us trying .
There is already an impressive global governmental commitment ; enormous resources aligned , vaccine candidates synthesised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lines under construction .
What we are witnessing is a minor miracle of cooperation that augers well for a successful vaccine .
That outcome will be far short of the ideal , but then we don ’ t need perfection only sufficient “ herd immunity ” to hamper the movement of Sars-Cov-2 through global populations and allow us to get on with our lives .
A vaccine ’ s job is to create an immune response without producing the disease or other nasty side-effects and enable the body to respond immediately if it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ date .
Vaccination as a concept has been around for over 300 years since Edward Jenner reasoned that cowpox was a milder form of smallpox providing dairymaids who had suffered the former to resist the latter .
In a spectacularly unethical clinical trial – only a proof of concept study really – Jenner took material from a cowpox blister on the hand of a dairymaid Sarah Nelms and scratched it into the skin of an eight-year-old boy called James Phipps .
James suffered a mild fever suggesting he had caught cowpox .
Armed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Jenner inoculated James with matter from a fresh smallpox lesion .
It worked ; lucky for James he did not contract smallpox and lucky for Jenner he had just discovered vaccination .
He off course reproduced his results in other victims and by 1800 achieved some considerable fame at home and then in the US where Thomas Jefferson became a fan .
Interestingly , Jenner made nothing from his discovery and even suffered a financial hardship in his campaign to bring his innovation to the masses ; vaccinating the poor free of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 1950s is supposed to have refused to get or take royalties for his polio vaccine famously saying when asked what he made from the patent “ There is no patent .
Could you patent the Sun ?
” .
There is a dispute about Salk ’ s philanthropy some suggesting this phrase merely meant his team had looked into the possibilities of a patent since it was based on a modified virus , a natural product , it was deemed impossible to patent .
Anyway , society benefitted and Salk got a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are maybe 100 Sars-coV-2 vaccine candidates in the running and considerable ethical challenges to rushing the programme .
It must be safe , it must be effective and it must be high quality .
But a process that would typically take eight years is being compressed into 12 months and even less if the Oxford Team is to be believed .
So what if we get it wrong in some places , we simply need to cut some corners to get something out .
Jenner would be struck off the medical register and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his clinical studies today .
A colleague of Jonas Salk trailing a rival polio vaccine caused those who use it to contract polio and all its life-long attendant side-effects .
Still , we needed , and have greatly benefitted from , a Polio vaccine .
Perhaps given the circumstances and the economic damage of delay we might consider a “ natural vaccine ” in the way that not too many years ago , before a vaccine was available for it , parents organised chickenpox parties so their children got the condition while young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in childhood but in later life it can be severe and cause long-term side-effects .
As we learn more about the Sars-Cov-2 virus we better understand it and its health impact .
We know it is generally a mild condition for 90 % of the population .
We know it kills the elderly , those with co-morbidities and the obese and we need to throw a ring of steel around these vulnerable individuals .
We also know that there seems to be a dose effect ; the more virus inhaled and the more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of serious and fatal outcomes .
This is why so many healthcare workers on the front-line tragically died .
With this knowledge would someone be brave enough even to consider “ natural vaccination ” where healthy adults are infected with the “ live ” virus in controlled conditions so that we build up the necessary population herd immunity of about 60 % .
No , nothing about Covid-19 is that simple and where we get some poorly defined protection from our encounters with the virus some individuals also have some protection from encounters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cold and surprisingly other vaccinations such as BCG .
What Jenner did with smallpox and parents did for their children at Chickenpox parties is not it seems a strategy for Covid-19 and the implication of this is that a vaccine is far from certain .
Photo by padrinan is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

The race is on and the stakes high. A safe and effective vaccine in the near future is the best chance we are told of controlling a virus that brought so much death and economic destruction in the first half of 2020. A vaccine without side-effects administered to the whole population and giving total protection is what we seek but are unlikely to achieve. Things just don’t work this way, but that should not stop us trying.
There is already an impressive global governmental commitment; enormous resources aligned, vaccine candidates synthesised, clinical trials underway and vaccine production lines under construction. What we are witnessing is a minor miracle of cooperation that augers well for a successful vaccine. That outcome will be far short of the ideal, but then we don’t need perfection only sufficient “herd immunity” to hamper the movement of Sars-Cov-2 through global populations and allow us to get on with our lives.
A vaccine’s job is to create an immune response without producing the disease or other nasty side-effects and enable the body to respond immediately if it encounters the real virus at a later date.
Vaccination as a concept has been around for over 300 years since Edward Jenner reasoned that cowpox was a milder form of smallpox providing dairymaids who had suffered the former to resist the latter. In a spectacularly unethical clinical trial – only a proof of concept study really – Jenner took material from a cowpox blister on the hand of a dairymaid Sarah Nelms and scratched it into the skin of an eight-year-old boy called James Phipps. James suffered a mild fever suggesting he had caught cowpox. Armed only with this suggestion and nothing more, Jenner inoculated James with matter from a fresh smallpox lesion. It worked; lucky for James he did not contract smallpox and lucky for Jenner he had just discovered vaccination. He off course reproduced his results in other victims and by 1800 achieved some considerable fame at home and then in the US where Thomas Jefferson became a fan. Interestingly, Jenner made nothing from his discovery and even suffered a financial hardship in his campaign to bring his innovation to the masses; vaccinating the poor free of charge.
Similarly, Jonas Salk in the 1950s is supposed to have refused to get or take royalties for his polio vaccine famously saying when asked what he made from the patent “There is no patent. Could you patent the Sun?”. There is a dispute about Salk’s philanthropy some suggesting this phrase merely meant his team had looked into the possibilities of a patent since it was based on a modified virus, a natural product, it was deemed impossible to patent. Anyway, society benefitted and Salk got a Noble Prize for his toil.
There are maybe 100 Sars-coV-2 vaccine candidates in the running and considerable ethical challenges to rushing the programme. It must be safe, it must be effective and it must be high quality. But a process that would typically take eight years is being compressed into 12 months and even less if the Oxford Team is to be believed. So what if we get it wrong in some places, we simply need to cut some corners to get something out. Jenner would be struck off the medical register and most likely imprisoned were he to perform his clinical studies today. A colleague of Jonas Salk trailing a rival polio vaccine caused those who use it to contract polio and all its life-long attendant side-effects. Still, we needed, and have greatly benefitted from, a Polio vaccine.
Perhaps given the circumstances and the economic damage of delay we might consider a “natural vaccine” in the way that not too many years ago, before a vaccine was available for it, parents organised chickenpox parties so their children got the condition while young. Chickenpox is normally mild when contracted in childhood but in later life it can be severe and cause long-term side-effects.
As we learn more about the Sars-Cov-2 virus we better understand it and its health impact. We know it is generally a mild condition for 90% of the population. We know it kills the elderly, those with co-morbidities and the obese and we need to throw a ring of steel around these vulnerable individuals. We also know that there seems to be a dose effect; the more virus inhaled and the more often this happens, the more likelihood of serious and fatal outcomes. This is why so many healthcare workers on the front-line tragically died. With this knowledge would someone be brave enough even to consider “natural vaccination” where healthy adults are infected with the “live” virus in controlled conditions so that we build up the necessary population herd immunity of about 60%.
No, nothing about Covid-19 is that simple and where we get some poorly defined protection from our encounters with the virus some individuals also have some protection from encounters with other viral infections such as common cold and surprisingly other vaccinations such as BCG. What Jenner did with smallpox and parents did for their children at Chickenpox parties is not it seems a strategy for Covid-19 and the implication of this is that a vaccine is far from certain.
Photo by padrinan is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA


sluggerotoole--2020-05-27--Podcast: #CargoOfBricks talks to Ian Parsley on Northern Ireland’s response to #Covid19

Well , since everyone else is doing one , I thought I would take a plunge into podcasting with short @ @ @ @ @ I think can add value to our understanding of the changing world around us .
@ @ @ @ @ to Ian Parsley whose frequently updated blog you should definitely put on your reading list @ @ @ @ @ many aspects government , and most recently for his coverage of Covid 19 .
In @ @ @ @ @ How Northern Ireland was lucky to get Stormont back to work on time • How @ @ @ @ @ the Republic ’ s efforts compare with the approaches of other European countries • Why @ @ @ @ @ our initial responses is key to learning how to better respond to a second wave @ @ @ @ @ a subtitle option if you click on CC : Enjoy and see you next week @ @ @ @ @ you can subscribe to Cargo of Bricks , Slugger TV , and other podcasts on @ @ @ @ @ or Spotify .

Well, since everyone else is doing one, I thought I would take a plunge into podcasting with short weekly conversations with someone who I think can add value to our understanding of the changing world around us.
This week, I spoke to Ian Parsley whose frequently updated blog you should definitely put on your reading list for its incisive analysis of many aspects government, and most recently for his coverage of Covid 19.
In it we cover:
How Northern Ireland was lucky to get Stormont back to work on time
How the UK’s and the Republic’s efforts compare with the approaches of other European countries
Why honesty in the shortcomings of our initial responses is key to learning how to better respond to a second wave.
The video below has a subtitle option if you click on CC:
Enjoy and see you next week. In the meantime, you can subscribe to Cargo of Bricks, Slugger TV, and other podcasts on Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts or Spotify.


sluggerotoole--2020-05-28--Patronising the “liberal unionist”

Patronising the “liberal unionist”

I ’ ve often noticed a strange but predictable phenomenon , and last week I experienced it directly here on Slugger .
It was on Jay ’ s thread about the merits or otherwise of the established unionist parties .
When I bookended criticism of the two main unionist parties with similar criticism of the priorities of Sinn Fein , I had a number of responses deriding me as a poor representative of “ liberal unionism ” or as a member of the “ liberal wing ” of unionism .
That got me thinking .
I ’ m not concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offered that viewpoint so it ’ s out there to be shot at .
It ’ s more the terms used that set me off .
Not only have I never claimed to be a “ liberal unionist ” , but I don ’ t think I ’ ve ever even used the term , on Slugger or in any other context .
That ’ s because I think it ’ s a meaningless term that contributes nothing to anyone ’ s understanding of unionists or the unionist community .
When I say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unionism ” exists , I can imagine heads nodding throughout Sluggerland , followed by a collective “ aha !
I knew it ” from a number of readers .
But I don ’ t mean it in the accepted sense .
What I mean is that most unionists are united in identity and nationality but are otherwise as diverse as any other similar sized community .
It ’ s insulting to say otherwise .
“ Liberal Unionist ” implies that unionist people are homogenous mass with a few minor differences in emphasis .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ just as it ’ s generally not the case with sizeable communities .
It implies that we are generally politically extreme weirdos with a few of us who are a bit less weird .
That ’ s patronising and insulting , and shouldn ’ t go unchallenged .
What the people who use the term – even in innocence – really mean is “ liberal Protestant ” .
Which is equally wrong since most of us don ’ t attend church .
In the context of last week a couple of people made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by criticising ( albeit in strong terms ) politicians who glorify IRA actions I had somehow let some sort of mask slip and I should be put back in a box with the rest of them .
That ’ s not really an attitude I would see as liberal , but it has become increasingly prevalent towards the pro-union community in recent times .
One would nearly suspect that there ’ s a feeling abroad that demographics are moving in such a manner that the views and concerns of the unionist community can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggest that its fear of that sort of attitude that defined him or her in the first place !
I don ’ t see my politics as defined by my constitutional preference .
I tried to explain this fully in my debut piece back in March here .
It ’ s best explained in the context of the communities I grew up in and have lived within .
We were totally at ease with our Britishness because that was what we were born into .
It was our nationality and what we identified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Twelfth ( though we enjoyed it ) .
Not anti-Irishness ( I was always conscious of being Irish and I never struggled with that .
I ’ m still totally comfortable with my Britishness and my Irishness .
But it doesn ’ t define my political outlook .
The vast majority of people in Northern Ireland have the same constitutional preference and cultural identity as their parents .
Who got it from their parents and so on .
Yet there ’ s an increasing tendency for people within republicanism to try to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sat down and figured out for themselves .
It isn ’ t .
It ’ s something they got in the cradle .
Just like me .
Some people in both sections of the communities obviously had their attitudes hardened by terrible experiences during the troubles .
It would be daft to ignore that and unfair to blame them for it .
Other people Yet here we get people who offer up the most intolerant invective about unionists , like we ’ re not real people .
People who no doubt count themselves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worse ) “ progressive ” , making it clear that they don ’ t consider our input , let alone consent , to be necessary to forging the new society they claim to want .
It ’ s not a majority here by any means , but it ’ s a very voluble element .
These are the same people who , demonstrating an incredible lack of self-awareness , question the existence of “ liberal unionism ” in such a pejorative manner .
This came up – when I had nearly finished this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trimble who I know from personal experience was keen to see an agreement acceptable to the SDLP ( and by extension Dublin ) as far back as 1981 .
The debate then quickly and inevitably took a turn towards questioning how “ liberal ” Trimble really was , The word is completely inappropriate .
The question is how pragmatic he was .
He proved to be very pragmatic once he was elected to a position that gave him the freedom and muscle to demonstrate it .
That ’ s what mattered .
Of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immediately rejected Seamus Mallon in favour of Gerry Adams and Gerry Kelly ( and fi you ’ re sceptical , check the timelines ? )
, which in turn assisted the rise to dominance of the DUP .
Yet the term “ liberal nationalism ” is rarely if ever used .
Does that show a certain lack of self-awareness among those who most volubly question the “ liberalism ” of unionists .
I ’ m not referring to the DUP here or its obvious illiberalism on social issues .
Like most people I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to unionism and the union , increasingly so know as they have so little in common with the bulk of their voters .
I ’ m referring to members of the unionist community and their attitude to others .
The crux of the issue here is that most of the pro-union people I know , unless its directly challenged , park the constitutional question when making their mind up about other issues .
Pretty much like most people of whatever background .
I Lived in England for the 2001 and 2005 general elections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his cronyism ) voted Labour both times .
It never seriously occurred to me not to do so .
Many thousands of unionists here – including many who feel corralled into voting DUP – would love little more than the opportunity to do likewise .
Obviously , I don ’ t think attitudes on social media are especially reflective of broader society .
But the increasingly aggressive demonisation and dehumanising of an entire community – the vast bulk of whom are guilty of nothing , just as the vast majority of nationalists didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign – is unhealthy and unacceptable .
It says to those unionists whose emotional commitment to the traditional union may be waning , that when the time comes , they will face extreme payback for what people a few generations ago may have done .
It certainly doesn ’ t act as a persuader .
Also , I doubt if its found particularly edifying by too many in the Republic .
So in a mirror image of the DUP , those attitudes serve as a major obstacle to a United Ireland , if @ @ @ @

I’ve often noticed a strange but predictable phenomenon, and last week I experienced it directly here on Slugger. It was on Jay’s thread about the merits or otherwise of the established unionist parties. When I bookended criticism of the two main unionist parties with similar criticism of the priorities of Sinn Fein, I had a number of responses deriding me as a poor representative of “liberal unionism” or as a member of the “liberal wing” of unionism.
That got me thinking. I’m not concerned about criticism of my viewpoint. I offered that viewpoint so it’s out there to be shot at. It’s more the terms used that set me off. Not only have I never claimed to be a “liberal unionist”, but I don’t think I’ve ever even used the term, on Slugger or in any other context. That’s because I think it’s a meaningless term that contributes nothing to anyone’s understanding of unionists or the unionist community.
When I say I don’t believe “liberal unionism” exists, I can imagine heads nodding throughout Sluggerland, followed by a collective “aha! I knew it” from a number of readers. But I don’t mean it in the accepted sense. What I mean is that most unionists are united in identity and nationality but are otherwise as diverse as any other similar sized community. It’s insulting to say otherwise.
“Liberal Unionist” implies that unionist people are homogenous mass with a few minor differences in emphasis. That’s not the case, just as it’s generally not the case with sizeable communities. It implies that we are generally politically extreme weirdos with a few of us who are a bit less weird. That’s patronising and insulting, and shouldn’t go unchallenged. What the people who use the term – even in innocence – really mean is “liberal Protestant”. Which is equally wrong since most of us don’t attend church.
In the context of last week a couple of people made those comments, with the implication that by criticising (albeit in strong terms) politicians who glorify IRA actions I had somehow let some sort of mask slip and I should be put back in a box with the rest of them. That’s not really an attitude I would see as liberal, but it has become increasingly prevalent towards the pro-union community in recent times. One would nearly suspect that there’s a feeling abroad that demographics are moving in such a manner that the views and concerns of the unionist community can be disregarded. An illiberal unionist might suggest that its fear of that sort of attitude that defined him or her in the first place!
I don’t see my politics as defined by my constitutional preference. I tried to explain this fully in my debut piece back in March here. It’s best explained in the context of the communities I grew up in and have lived within. We were totally at ease with our Britishness because that was what we were born into. It was our nationality and what we identified with. Not the church. Not the Twelfth (though we enjoyed it). Not anti-Irishness (I was always conscious of being Irish and I never struggled with that. I’m still totally comfortable with my Britishness and my Irishness. But it doesn’t define my political outlook.
The vast majority of people in Northern Ireland have the same constitutional preference and cultural identity as their parents. Who got it from their parents and so on. Yet there’s an increasing tendency for people within republicanism to try to pretend this is something they’ve sat down and figured out for themselves. It isn’t. It’s something they got in the cradle. Just like me. Some people in both sections of the communities obviously had their attitudes hardened by terrible experiences during the troubles. It would be daft to ignore that and unfair to blame them for it. Other people
Yet here we get people who offer up the most intolerant invective about unionists, like we’re not real people. People who no doubt count themselves as “liberal” or (even worse) “progressive”, making it clear that they don’t consider our input, let alone consent, to be necessary to forging the new society they claim to want. It’s not a majority here by any means, but it’s a very voluble element.
These are the same people who, demonstrating an incredible lack of self-awareness, question the existence of “liberal unionism” in such a pejorative manner. This came up – when I had nearly finished this article – in a discussion about David Trimble who I know from personal experience was keen to see an agreement acceptable to the SDLP (and by extension Dublin) as far back as 1981.
The debate then quickly and inevitably took a turn towards questioning how “liberal” Trimble really was, The word is completely inappropriate. The question is how pragmatic he was. He proved to be very pragmatic once he was elected to a position that gave him the freedom and muscle to demonstrate it. That’s what mattered.
Of course, a majority of the electorate immediately rejected Seamus Mallon in favour of Gerry Adams and Gerry Kelly (and fi you’re sceptical, check the timelines?), which in turn assisted the rise to dominance of the DUP. Yet the term “liberal nationalism” is rarely if ever used. Does that show a certain lack of self-awareness among those who most volubly question the “liberalism” of unionists.
I’m not referring to the DUP here or its obvious illiberalism on social issues. Like most people I have always considered them the biggest threat to unionism and the union, increasingly so know as they have so little in common with the bulk of their voters. I’m referring to members of the unionist community and their attitude to others.
The crux of the issue here is that most of the pro-union people I know, unless its directly challenged, park the constitutional question when making their mind up about other issues. Pretty much like most people of whatever background. I Lived in England for the 2001 and 2005 general elections and (despite misgivings about Blair and his cronyism) voted Labour both times. It never seriously occurred to me not to do so. Many thousands of unionists here – including many who feel corralled into voting DUP – would love little more than the opportunity to do likewise.
Obviously, I don’t think attitudes on social media are especially reflective of broader society. But the increasingly aggressive demonisation and dehumanising of an entire community – the vast bulk of whom are guilty of nothing, just as the vast majority of nationalists didn’t support the IRA during its campaign – is unhealthy and unacceptable.
It says to those unionists whose emotional commitment to the traditional union may be waning, that when the time comes, they will face extreme payback for what people a few generations ago may have done. It certainly doesn’t act as a persuader. Also, I doubt if its found particularly edifying by too many in the Republic.
So in a mirror image of the DUP, those attitudes serve as a major obstacle to a United Ireland, if not the biggest.