Dialogue, not deflection

Posted by Jim on October 11, 2016

Pauline Mellon on the Ardoyne parades dispute, from her blog,
‘The Diary of a Derry Mother’.

Let me take you out of Derry tonight and into the heart of North Belfast
to a place called Ardoyne. Ardoyne has been at the centre of a lot of
controversy recently following negotiations to dismantle the Twadell
Protest Camp. The Protest Camp was set up in July 2013 in opposition to
a parade ruling to restrict an Orange Order Parade. What was effectively
an act of trespass on the part of the protesters ended up costing the
taxpayer a staggering #21 million to police, with the the camp located
close to the nationalist Ardoyne area. Yes folks you’ve read that
correctly, at a time when health, education and welfare budgets were
being slashed, #21 million was spent on policing an illegal camp.
Welcome to Starship Norn Iron!

A few weeks ago it emerged that negotiations to dismantle the Twadell
camp were not only ongoing but at an advanced stage. Key to these
negotiations were two gentlemen in particular, the Reverend Harold Goode
and Derry ‘business’ man Jim Roddy MBE. The Reverend Harold Goode is
well known for his input in situations of a sensitive nature but I fail
to see where Jim Roddy fitted here, in fact I’m equally curious as to
what line of business he is in.

Let me clarify, it is not my intention to dismiss Jim’s efforts, on the
contrary, his temerity is to be commended. With the removal of the
Twadell camp marking the first phase of a possible many Jim now has the
task of engaging with residents who are clearly unhappy with the process
and the outcome of the negotiations both he and others played a pivotal
role in. So on that note, Good Luck Jim!

The angry scenes in Ardoyne last weekend dominated news headlines and
singled out one Ardoyne resident in particular, GARC spokesperson Dee
Fennell. In a spate of unbalanced media reporting Fennell has been
heavily criticised and labelled a bully for his forthright manner
towards local clergy member Fr Gary Donegan. What some press outlets
have failed to show or mention is that Fennell’s input came about as he
tried to diffuse a potentially volatile situation involving irate
residents. This is clear from the unedited version of video footage
which appeared online. In the ‘edited version’ the media didn’t show Mr.
Fennell pointing out to Fr Donegan how local residents were unable to go
about their business, and how the allowing of this parade was not
welcomed by a lot of people in the area. As someone who has crossed
swords (online debate) with Fennell in the past and with no axe to
grind either way I feel that Fennell is being used as a scapegoat to
deflect from a deal which excluded residents from a process they should
have been central to. Something which has has been confirmed by one
Ardoyne resident I am friendly with. Not much of a fresh start!

As the dust settled I was surprised to read that Father Gary Donegan
stated that the ‘confrontation with protesters’ on Saturday reminded him
of the Holy Cross dispute. Oddly, I don’t remember any news reports from
Saturday showing people throwing bombs at children trying to get to
school. It would seem that Father Gary is playing his part in trying to
move the focus away from the issue of contention residents face, which
is they don’t want a loyalist parade in their area. If you’re reading
this Father Donegan I would suggest a period of reflection followed by a
concerted effort to engage with your flock, and this time the entire
flock. After all if I’m not mistaken does Catholic not mean universal
and all encompassing because if I’m right then helping exclude residents
from the process wasn’t very Catholic of you.

To understand why people are feeling angry particularly those who were
prevented from going about their daily business on Saturday those quick
to condemn them should have a cursory glance at Article 8 of the
European Convention on Human Rights. This article provides for the right
to have your family, private life, home and correspondence respected.
Article 9 provides for the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion, so those parishioners of Father Donegan’s who couldn’t attend
his church, in their own area, or who are being lambasted by the media
for expressing an opinion are having their human rights violated. But
hey why let facts get in the way of deflection!

One of the things that saddened me most this weekend was the scene with
the older man who was clearly frustrated by the way he and his community
had been treated, a man who has since been described as a heckler. Where
was Father Gary’s Christianity as he stood glaring at this older man? It
seemed that Father Donegan was incapable of understanding that this man
was upset and moreover, incapable of responding to him. This was a long
way from when the same Father Donegan was interviewed for an article
called ‘Faith on the Interface’ when he said “the fact that his
parishioners did not have to endure the return parade reduced tension on
the Catholic side.” When my husband watched Fr Gary’s performance on the
news, he said “if ever there was a poster boy for atheism it’s yer man
there.” If the picture had of been in black & white I would’ve guessed
it was back at the time when no one could say boo to man of the cloth,
and just look where that ended up!

As people watch the biased news reports singling out individuals as
bullies or hecklers maybe they should look at what the people of Ardoyne
have had to endure. There were nearly 100 lives lost in the parish
during the troubles and there was the Holy Cross issue and the attacks
on School children. Added to this has been the violence meted out
against residents during successive marching seasons. Violence such as a
leading loyalist ramming his car into a crowd of people injuring a 13
year old girl, and those incidents barely scratch the surface of what
they have endured.

The reality now for the people of Ardoyne is that a precedent has been
set for the return leg of the Orange Order march. As it stands residents
are now in limbo as to what happens next and unsure of what they will
have to ‘endure’. To address this there needs to be immediate dialogue
between the negotiators and local residents, particularly those
initially excluded from the process,. With this I do hope a broad
consensus can be reached. I would also hope that those buying into the
outcome of the alleged consultation on the issue consider that the views
of community groups, most of which are politically weighted, are no
substitute for the views and input of the people who live in the area.
The people who will have to endure the aftermath of each deal imposed
upon them and the precedent it sets.