Latest news with #Unionists
Belfast Telegraph
6 days ago
- Politics
- Belfast Telegraph
Gerry Adams is a man of towering ambition who'd no moral qualms about securing his goal through murder
A British minister described Adams as a man of 'superior intelligence'. Unionists see him as sanctimonious and scheming – yet it was his foresight and cunning which persuaded the IRA to stop killing. Gerry Adams is one of the world's most enigmatic, most controversial, and most consequential living political figures. The former Sinn Féin president is a mass of contradictions. He supported – and by multiple credible accounts directed – a campaign of mass murder, yet was the single most important figure in bringing that murder to an end.
The National
28-05-2025
- Politics
- The National
Reform UK causing an upset in Ewing's former seat would be ironic
How ironic would it be if the upset of Winnie Ewing's famous 1967 by-election victory was repeated but with Reform now the surprise winners? At the 2021election they received only 58 votes. The SNP turnout will not be helped by Mr Swinney's recent suggestion that further moves towards independence will require somewhere near 74% support for the concept. READ MORE: I went on the SNP campaign trail in Hamilton. This is what I found out Mr Swinney visited Hamilton to announce yet again that the SNP are scrapping peak rail fares across Scotland from September. If he is to be believed, Hamilton commuters to Glasgow will save £760 a year, and those from Larkhall £910 a year. I imagine this will at most benefit a few hundred folk who have already been willing, and clearly financially able, to pay the peak fare, but at a cost to Scottish taxpayers in general (the rest of us). This will add to the list of 'free' stuff provided by the Scottish Government to a few but paid for by the many. Those who choose to vote Reform will no doubt be written off as right-wing, but unless both the SNP and Labour address the real problems and concerns keeping the majority of folk from getting a good night's sleep – the economy, immigration, jobs, housing, education, homelessness and the like – Reform are sadly here to stay and in next year's elections they will probably gain a foothold in the Scottish Parliament. Anne Laird Inverness I HATE to be negative about Swinney and the SNP, but there are so many open goals appearing. When are we going to take advantage of them? Swinney says that the by-election at Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse 'will be tight'. I would suggest that if the SNP were on their game they should win it at a canter and if they don't, all of the responsibility lies with his own party. Where is the positive vision of sovereignty in the EU? READ MORE: By-election hustings chaos as Labour candidate snub leads to walk out We were recently ignored again by Westminster when we asked for a tweak to the immigration system to ensure we have enough care and agricultural workers to aid our economy. Why did the SNP not get a media slot on TV over a week explaining why this is so necessary? This is just one example (DRS is another) where we have to be much more alive to the opportunities to get our message over. Ignore the Unionists. They can't tell us what's so great about the UK; all they can do is talk us down. We must get on the front foot before it's too late. Keith Taylor via email THE letter by Alan Hinnrichs on May 26 claims that only the 'historically illiterate' believe this Union is equal. But let's stop pretending that's the real problem. Scots aren't daft. We know we've been shafted. We see the double standards. We live with the consequences. The issue isn't ignorance – it's comfort. People aren't blind to injustice – they're tired. Ground down. Struggling to survive. And frankly, most don't have the energy to fight a system that's spent generations convincing them they should be grateful for scraps. That's not stupidity – that's what managed decline does to a people. READ MORE: Anas Sarwar gets Hamilton by-election candidate's name wrong Revolution – real revolution – demands sacrifice. It means giving things up. Risking jail. Losing jobs. Facing down riot shields, court summons, and headlines. In Ireland, people died for their freedom. In Ukraine, they bled for it. In Scotland, we host hotel conferences, share speeches, and then go home and scroll Twitter. If Scots truly believed independence was life or death – like the Irish did in 1916 or Ukrainians in 2014 – they'd be out risking everything. Jail. Beatings. Livelihoods. Even their lives. In other countries, people have been willing to die for national freedom. Some have even been willing to kill, not out of cruelty, but out of the raw conviction that living under subjugation was worse. But here? We argue over legal technicalities. We march now and then. We write angry letters. Then we settle back into routine. That's not revolution – that's ritual. The real reason this supposed 'bombshell' legal evidence hasn't changed anything is that no-one is willing to act on it. Not the leaders. Not the movement. Not the public. Not in the way history shows is required when a people truly want their freedom. READ MORE: The John Curtice verdict as Hamilton by-election looms This isn't about illiteracy – it's about fear. It's about comfort. It's about hoping someone else will make the first move so we don't have to. The truth is, we've already uncovered enough legal, economic, and historical evidence to dismantle the Union a dozen times over. But what good is truth without the will to act on it? None of it matters unless people are ready to disrupt, challenge power and, if necessary, break unjust laws. Nations aren't liberated by being right. They're liberated by being relentless. So no, Alan – the problem isn't that Scots are stupid. It's that no-one wants to pay the price of real change. And until that changes – until we stop being afraid to sacrifice – this movement will stay stuck making noise, instead of making history. James Murphy Bute
BBC News
18-05-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
UK-EU summit: Unionists size up possible new Brexit deal
Making up is never easy after such a bruising and bitter break-up but that challenge begins later for the prime minister as the UK and EU hold their first bilateral summit since trick for Sir Keir Starmer will be to reset relations with Brussels without making it appear like a Brexit sides are keen to tear down trade barriers and that could see a deal being struck to greatly reduce the impact of the Irish sea agri-food agreement would remove the need for checks and controls on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. But it will take some time to negotiate and may come at a high price, as the UK may have to align with some EU say opponents, would mean the UK becoming a rule taker from Brussels once more in what would be a Brexit is the tightest of tightropes for Sir Keir Starmer and his government to negotiate, coming at a time when a resurgent Reform party will now be targeting Labour seats in leave-voting it also presents a big challenge for unionists who want the Irish sea border completely do they strike the balance between welcoming a deal that begins to eradicate the border while at the same time undermining the Brexit they championed?Do they adopt a purist or pragmatic approach? What do unionists make of a possible new UK-EU deal? A Queens University poll last week suggested unionist support for the Brexit deal - the Windsor Framework - has dropped significantly in the past for those described as "slightly unionist" fell from 51% to 26%That trend is likely to continue as more checks and controls come into force across the Irish sea border - like pet passports, which from next month will require those travelling from Great Britain to Northern Ireland to obtain travel documents for their whatever the fallout, the Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) insist the UK must not concede to following EU rules whatever the impact on the the Irish sea border."The purpose of Brexit was to take back control and make our own laws," said TUV leader Jim Allister."If we embrace a veterinary agreement then we throw this away."He added: "Labour can try to further sabotage Brexit in this way but they will play a high price at the next general election." Meanwhile, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) say a new agri-food deal would not provide the "silver bullet to the whole host of problems created by the application of EU law specifically in Northern Ireland only"."For example, any agreement would not cover, or resolve, issues around customs and other barriers to trade, not least in relation to product standards," A DUP spokesperson party added that the government needs to be "radical in moving on from the Windsor Framework and not tinkering around the edges of it"."We continue to make the case for full restoration of Northern Ireland's place within the United Kingdom, including removing the application of EU law in our country and the internal Irish Sea Border it creates." Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) deputy leader Robbie Butler said if the UK and EU work to reduce the friction in trade then it would "cautiously welcome what amounts to an overdue recognition of what we have been advocating all along". However, he added that "warm words and rushed deals often leave Northern Ireland as an afterthought" and that any agreement that does not put Northern Ireland centrally in the UK market will "fail our people, our producers and our prosperity". He said the party will be "unapologetic in defending Northern Ireland's farmers, agri-businesses, and rural economy from the damage of needless economic borders". "Our prosperity depends on it - and so does the principle of a truly United Kingdom."
Irish Times
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Irish Times
Unionists must ask themselves: ‘is this as good as it gets?'
I come from a unionist background in Northern Ireland . Nevertheless, I believe in Irish unity, but I welcome the recent efforts by those who believe that Northern Ireland should stay as part of the United Kingdom . Like many others I want to hear the views of those who believe that Northern Ireland is better off as it is, and that its people should not contemplate joining with the rest of the island of Ireland, even if I disagree. Open debate is a sign of a healthy democracy, and we need more of it, not less. Debate now will mean that when the unity referendums happen – and I believe that is when, not if – everyone will be better able to make an informed decision. For some, Irish unity may be wrapped up in images of 'the fourth green field', or such like. For me, however, the key issue is deciding on what will offer the best quality of life for everyone who lives across this island. READ MORE Every metric measuring living standards today – life expectancy, waiting lists for surgery, education standards and job prospects – shows that the South today outperforms the North. [ Kneecap and Boris Johnson have a lot in common Opens in new window ] Belfast writer and communications expert, Ben Collins For those who want Northern Ireland to stay part of the UK, I would ask is this as good as it gets? Are we living in Nirvana now or do you envisage that things will improve? If you think that things will improve, how is that going to happen? Northern Ireland is a small region within the United Kingdom. Everyone knows this, but some accept it more than others. But it is a significant part, a very significant part, of the island of Ireland. In a world where the all-island economy grows, the place that is now Northern Ireland can be a vitally-necessary part of that engine with the chance of being part of one of Europe's fastest growing economies. In a such a world, the quality of life of everyone across the island will be better. Every problem that we face will become no less problematic, but they can be better tackled together, not apart. [ How to fix the Northern Ireland economy Opens in new window ] The uniting of the island of Ireland must, first, be about creating peace and prosperity, not merely about history, posterity, or some echoes of the past. That for me is the Irish Unity Dividend. But we must prepare, for the referendum and for the new State to come afterwards, one where public services would have to be integrated, along with the island's infrastructure and economy. This is not about assimilation, capture, or takeover. it is about building a world-class nation where everyone has an equal stake, where everyone can thrive, especially the Border counties most damaged by Partition a century ago. Operating two of anything is more expensive, less efficient. Even people who are not economists, or know anything about economics know that. Partition has cost us all, and there is kinder, gentler form of partition. Sovereignty is not a flag on a pole, it's a roof over people's heads and food on the table. If unification is the will of the people on both parts of the island, I believe that Stormont should continue to exist, but for a finite period of time. Afterwards, the new State would have one parliament, in Dublin. However, immediate integration would be needed in some cases. Some issues, notably public health, would have to be dealt with on an all-island basis from the off to ensure that lives are saved. During the Covid-19 pandemic, Stormont followed the British Government lead, which left the two parts of the island, confusingly, with different rules at different times, but facing the same threat. Climate change and the spread of zoonotic diseases means that pandemics in the future are more likely, not less. Contradictory actions on the two parts of the island serve no one, and must not happen. With divided control, Stormont ministers could follow the approach of London, or somewhere else while the rest of Ireland runs to different rules. That makes no sense. Equally, immigration also be clearly better dealt together, from the off. For too long we have heard critics of Irish unity say that talking about Irish unity is a bad thing, that merely mentioning an aspiration for a United Ireland is antagonistic or provocative. However, the possibility of a Border poll when merited by circumstances was a key part of the Good Friday Agreement. Nobody should fear debate about an option that was part of an international agreement nearly thirty years ago. Brexit is an example, and a warning. We have seen what happens when people vote for a vague idea of constitutional change, as happened then. Nearly a decade later, people still argue about what the vote meant. Some argue that reconciliation must happen within Northern Ireland before a referendum is held. And, yes, we do not have a reconciled society, but Partition is and has been the source of that division. The Irish Border was created by the British government, dividing the island into two states, causing friction and barriers ever since. Before it, the counties making up Northern Ireland were the most economically advanced part. No longer. Like most UK regions, Northern Ireland has suffered, London and the Southeast of England has gained, and they continue to gain. In addition to London, I have been fortunate to live and work in Edinburgh, Cardiff, and Dublin in my career, before returning to my home city of Belfast. In each of those three capitals, the indigenous language is embraced. Unfortunately, it is seen as a source of division by some within Northern Ireland. I want to live in a country where diversity is celebrated and cherished. Culture should be something that can be appreciated by all, not a source of division. When unionists politicians state that they want to 'Make Northern Ireland Work' does that mean with, or without embracing the indigenous language or Irish culture? Does it mean with, or without building Casement Park? I understand that this is an unsettling time for unionism, especially because I come from that background. Brexit has not turned out well for unionism and unionists feel let down by the British government. The beauty of the Belfast Agreement before Brexit was that you could be Irish, British, European, or all three. Ireland and the UK were part of the EU, so borders were of little consequence. Brexit changed all that. Today, there are competing visions of the future – but the choice at one level is this: whether to stick in a UK with an uncertain future, or become part of a united Ireland that is firmly part of the European Union. Such a debate must happen respectfully. Believing in the benefits of Irish unity is not being anti-British. How one expresses that, however, might be. And everyone needs to remember that. This is not a debate that can be endlessly postponed. Life in Northern Ireland is changing. People's views are changing. Even Brexit has changed Northern Ireland. That is not a coincidence. Northern Ireland was created to guarantee a permanent Protestant and unionist majority. Today, it has neither. It has a nationalist First Minister. Sinn Féin is the largest party in Stormont. Westminster has more nationalist MPs than unionists. Sinn Féin is now the largest party in local government across Northern Ireland. Unionism holds a minority of seats in Westminster, in Stormont and across local councils in Northern Ireland. I fundamentally disagree with those who say there was no alternative to violence. Terrible things were done, terrible things were suffered. Irish unity will be achieved through purely democratic means, not through violence. One of the many benefits of a United Ireland is that unionist votes and voices will matter much more in an all-Ireland Dáil and Seanad, than they do in Westminster. The time for a referendum is fast approaching, perhaps in the next decade. The very populists who forced a Brexit vote in 2016 and who provoked the economic decline and division that has so troubled the UK since may now be the people to gain from that disorder. Just look at t the Runcorn by-election in recent days. A Westminster government led by such people will be actively hostile to the EU, will seek to undermine Ireland and will resent financially supporting Northern Ireland. The momentum for Irish unity may not just come from Ireland. Unionists must be sure they will be shown respect in a new Ireland, that they will enjoy a higher quality of life, but, most importantly, that they enjoy the same rights and status as others. I am certain that this can happen, should unionists choose to accept it. Ben Collins is the author of two books with Luath Press: The Irish Unity Dividend, which will be published in September and Irish Unity: Time To Prepare
RTÉ News
07-05-2025
- Politics
- RTÉ News
Adams says he was previously advised not to sue over IRA claims
Former Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams has said he never sued over allegations made in the past that he was a member of the IRA because of legal advice given at the time. Mr Adams said he would have sued over the many publications but was advised that he would not have got a fair hearing. Mr Adams was giving evidence during a third day of cross-examination in a defamation case he had taken againsT the BBC. Mr Adams alleges he was defamed in a 2016 Spotlight programme and a subsequent online article, which he says falsely claimed that he sanctioned the killing of former senior Sinn Féin official Denis Donaldson. Donaldson was shot dead in 2006, months after admitting being an informer for the police and MI5 over two decades. Mr Adams has denied any involvement in the killing. Senior Counsel Paul Gallagher took Mr Adams through a number of newspaper articles which contained various allegations that he was an IRA member, including an article in the Guardian about a book by Ed Moloney, which stated he was in charge of unit of the IRA which murdered and disappeared at least nine people. It was also put to him statements made by former taoisigh Bertie Ahern and Garret Fitzgerald about his involvement with the IRA. Mr Adams said he could not speak for the late Mr Fitzgerald who was "anti Sinn Féin and anti IRA" and that Mr Ahern could be called to give evidence in the case. Mr Adams said he would always have gone to a solicitor when material was published but was advised he would not have got a fair hearing if he had sued. He said it was a mark of how serious he took the allegations made in the Spotlight programme that he was now in court suing the BBC. He also told Mr Gallagher that he was aware of what had been stated publicly about him, but said "you are trying to say to the jury that I don't have a reputation and my reputation is useless and what this is is a smothering of the jury and saturation of the jury with all of these obscure (allegations) that you are asking me to refer to 30 and 40 years later". The jury was again reminded by Mr Justice Alex Owens that they did not have to decide on whether or not Mr Adams was a member of the IRA, but could consider the published material in assessing how it would have impacted on public opinion of him. Asked by Mr Gallagher what would be wrong with someone saying he was on the army council, Mr Adams replied "it's not true". He said the allegation that the IRA killed Denis Donaldson and that he was contacted by the army council to authorise it was a lie. Asked if the allegation he was on the army council was damaging, Mr Adams said a lot of people had supported the IRA, but others would have been appalled. Asked if he was appalled by the allegation, he said he would have been irritated as he was trying to reach out to "people of influence internationally and in Ireland and had lines of communication to Unionists and loyalists and church representatives, so all of this made it more difficult for them to engage with people like me who might be depicted" in that way. Mr Adams was also asked about his dealings with the family of Brian Stack, a prison officer who was murdered by the IRA. He said he had met with sons of Brian Stack and arranged a meeting with a trusted person who could find out what happened to their father and the Stack family had thanked him for helping them to get clarity. He said the issue was later politicised during a general election and regurgitated by Micheál Martin who made a malicious and unfair attack that he was withholding information. He said he did his best to help the Stack family and regretted that it ended up the way it did. Mr Adams said four names he later gave to gardaí were given to him by Austin Stack who had got the name from garda and journalistic sources. It was put to him that Mr Stack later said he did not pass on the names to Mr Adams. Asked if he had taken Brian Stack's sons to meet a former IRA member, John Duckster, also known as Martin Lynch, Mr Adams said he did not know either of those names. He said he took them to see a person on the basis that he would be anonymous "and they would not be named and that was the arrangement". He said one of the consequences of "this sad affair" was that he stopped meeting with the families of victims as he was advised he was putting himself in jeopardy. He said his informal efforts to help families get closure turned into a party political issue. After a short break Mr Adams was again asked about Martin Duckster Lynch and he said he was a friend of his but would not comment on who the person was in the meeting with the Stacks as the "arrangement" was that it would be anonymous.
