As Northern Ireland moves towards what will hopefully be a peaceful 12th July, the manager of ‘the Derry Model’, Maeve McLoughlin – a former Sinn Fein MLA – reflects on how peaceful parading was negotiated, after years of conflict and tension in Derry-Londonderry. “It was spurred on by a commitment to the city,” she says, “and by people who genuinely wanted to be in a better place.
“That was the feeling of the Apprentice Boys as well. They love the city. They want the city to be perceived and presented in a very positive light. There is no doubt that the demographics, the largely republican/nationalist city, spurred on those conversations. It was also that when you have rights, you also have responsibilities.”
The Derry Model is a conflict transformation peacebuilding project, which seeks to spread awareness of the city’s success in addressing its historic problems over parading – which used to lead to the city centre being virtually closed down during parades. Progress was achieved through extensive negotiations, compromises and recognition of both rights and responsibilities. Maeve explains the work of the Derry Model in the latest Forward Together podcast.
“It is not one thing,” says Maeve. “We couldn’t say the Derry Model equals this set of circumstances or experience. It’s a mixture. I think it’s our demographics. We had leadership. We had people willing to take risks. We have sets of experiences. I wouldn’t be naive enough to say we can simply lift those experiences and tailor them into other areas.
“But we have templates. We have a sense of people who were willing to take risks – that is a big important message for other communities. So it is how we use those experiences to cascade that learning to other circumstances. That is not to say it is all going to fit perfectly. In terms of parading, the relationship in this city of the Apprentice Boys with the residents’ groups, and the relationship we have between the Bloody Sunday Museum and the Siege Museum is unique. And the business sector played a very proactive role to reach an accommodation.”
Maeve says that republicans, nationalists and business leaders in Derry were willing to take risks to achieve agreement on parading, as were people in the loyal orders. “When we look at the Maiden City Accord between the bands’ forum, potentially sanctioning or disciplining individual band members or entire bands. That was a very significant message to the city, that people were taking this seriously.” This meant the city could take control of problems relating, for example, to drunken “hangers-on”.
The Derry Model is also concerned with dealing with the past. Maeve says that while the concept of ‘justice’ means different things for different people, learning the truth is central to how we should deal with the past. She adds that apologies – such as that from David Cameron for Bloody Sunday – can help the families of some victims and can be important.
But Maeve warns that Northern Ireland cannot made lasting and genuine progress unless there is economic, social and environmental regeneration that addresses actual need. “We won’t change the outcome unless we target that need,” she says. “If we keep doing what we’re doing, we’re going to have the same outcome.”
So the Stormont talks are in limbo. Why should they be different? Everything else is, including the future of the Union. The reputation of failed prime ministers can rise after they retire defeated and the problems continue to confound their successors. Even Theresa May is starting to look just a bit better. Straight after he lost two elections in quick succession in 1974 ,Ted Heath’s reputation as a statesman seemed secure when his historic achievement of EEC entry was confirmed in the 1975 referendum that would surely stand the test of time…
In this respect Theresa May has got ahead of herself. Although three times rejected the withdrawal agreement doesn’t look so bad after all. I predict it’ll look better and better as 31 October looms. Not called the WA of course and not without a tweak or two looking ahead to “alternative arrangements” that will make the backstop even fuzzier.
Critics of Jeremy Hunt and in particular Boris Johnson on their drop by on the Culloden hotel were loud in their accusations of hypocrisy and indifference over the fate Union and for displaying utter and complete ignorance about the impact of a crash out on both parts of Ireland. As well they might. Cold comfort can be gained in accepting this is no exception to the general run of things. The Tory candidates have eyes only for a constituency who commit the ultimate heresy by giving Brexit priority over the Union. And we can be sure that virtually none of them were among the handful of NI Conservative hosts to the Tory hustings.
The critical chorus is right though. It must dawn on Johnson and his party some time that an approach which is so spectacularly out of kilter with any potential wider constituency has got to have something wrong with it. As might Varadkar. Something will change after 24 July though God only knows what (literally – pre-supposing her/his omniscience or existence).
The general political chaos over Brexit will take time to work out although no doubt a crash out could force the pace. It’s not quite panic stations for the Union yet. Supporters of referendums in Scotland and Ireland need a stable platform to stand on even if it’s made of disaster. As the pro Union Scottish Correspondent of Alan Cochrane of the Sunday Telegraph observes:
Most nationalists believed that Brexit would make independence a certainty given that Scottish voters had voted by a large margin to remain in the EU. However, it hasn’t worked out like that. Support for independence has indeed increased but in the latest opinion polls it is still registering at below 50 per cent, whilst Ms Sturgeon and other SNP strategists have insisted that they wouldn’t prepare for another referendum until polls showed independence support running at 60 per cent.
Campaigners for a border poll will hang back until they see the form a future border will take – the harder the better and the greater the disruption – and to await the response of the Dail as a whole.
In the meantime, Northern Ireland knows very well what deadlines are like. Emergency legislation to defer an Assembly election yet again will be moved this week. This will present one of the last opportunities to challenge the shaky Tory control over the agenda in the small window between now and September, with Parliament rising on July 25, the day after Johnson is expected to become PM.
The really bold move would be to move an amendment to block No Deal. But the NI Bill might be too small a vehicle to attract support for such a massive challenge. Equal marriage supporters may try to tag on an amendment in favour of equal marriage as they tried and failed with abortion last time. They will again win cross party sympathy but not the desired result- and least not yet.
On the government side the prevailing confusion has reached new heights in a surprising quarter. Amazingly the Minister for Women has been talking as if she’s prepared to sacrifice the DUP’s confidence and supply deal on the altar of abortion reform. Does she know what she’s saying or is this another case of the bogey under their nose they can see only when they sneeze?
The reason why this hasn’t been dealt with to date is because this is a devolved matter and we take devolution seriously. But it has been shown, and we will soon see what the court’s ruling is on this, that what has been happening is not compatible with an individual’s human rights… If we have this ruling by the court I think government will act. Certainly that has been the indication from the Northern Ireland office. But if government did not, parliament would, and clearly all members of parliament, including prime ministers, would have a free vote on that.”
This raises other intriguing questions.
If Westminster really was prepared to legislate for abortion and equal marriage why not for an Irish Language Act as foreshadowed in the St Andrews Agreement? The impact on the Stormont talks would be – shall we say – interesting.
While it looks as if social reform won’t go away, further legal process and the general political chaos including a likely general election will push it down the agenda.
But the fundamental counter to Westminster action of this kind is that it runs directly counter to the principles and practice of UK devolution. If there was a direct Scottish equivalent superseding Holyrood directly, it would guarantee IndyRef 2 however much Westminster would try to assert its right ( non- existent for a border poll , remember) – to block it.
Jeremy Corbyn could disrupt the orderly handover of power, possibly turning Johnson into a mayfly premier, lasting barely a day. Labour is committed to tabling a vote of confidence in the new government. If Jeremy Corbyn does it right away on Wednesday July 24, the debate will be the next day, Thursday July 25, when parliament is due to rise for the summer recess.
Convention places no limit on the number of votes of confidence the leader of the opposition can demand. A vote after MPs return in September is a certainty. Such is the volume of business that will have to be transacted, come what may, veteran MPs expect the usual three-week recess for the party conferences to be cancelled, so the Commons can sit straight through to the Brexit deadline on Hallowe’en.
The main argument against a late-July vote of confidence is that Johnson would almost certainly win it. The Conservatives would rally behind the new leader — as, probably, would the DUP. It would be premature for the Tory pro-Europeans, perhaps led by Philip Hammond, to oppose their own government. They will act only if it becomes clear, after renegotiations with the EU, that the new prime minister is bent on leaving at the end of October with no deal in place.
Corbyn may still feel that the turmoil brought on by a token effort at no confidence in July is worth it — a protest against the change of national leader without recourse to a general election.
Either way, Johnson is likely to have the chance to assemble a government that will last until the autumn, at least.
British Army snipers killed five civilians at the Springhill estate in
west Belfast on 9 July 1972, eleven months after the Ballymurphy
massacre, and 47 years ago this week. Their families deserve support,
writes Gerry Adams (for Leargas)
The Upper Springfield area of west Belfast suffered many traumatic
events during the years of conflict. The area was the target of British
military invasion and occupation, pogrom and refugees. Scores of its
citizens were killed. Many more were injured. Hundreds spent years in
British prison camps and gaols. The British Army used every weapon in
its formidable arsenal to try and intimidate and terrorise the people of
the Upper Springfield. Brutal beatings, the frequent use of CS gas, the
indiscriminate firing of rubber and plastic bullets, arbitrary arrests
and torture, were all part of the daily experience of the civilian
population. So too were attacks by unionist death squads, working in
collusion with, and under the cover of British Army and RUC actions.
One legacy of this British government counter-insurgency strategy is
currently playing out in a Belfast Coroners Court where 10 of the 11
citizens killed during the Ballymurphy Massacre in August 1971 are
seeking the truth about the events surrounding the murder of their loved
ones.
Eleven months later, on a bright Sunday evening on 9 July 1972, and just
yards from the scene of the Ballymurphy Massacre, five more civilians
were shot dead by British troops. That evening British Army snipers were
hiding in what was then Corry’s timber yard overlooking the Springhill
estate and the Westrock Bungalows.
The Springhill estate and Westrock Bungalows represented some of the
worst public housing existing at that time. The Springhill estate was a
concrete, soulless estate with no public facilities. The Westrock
Bungalows were temporary aluminium structures. They were built in the
1940s and 40 years later were still being used by large families. By
then they were in a poor state of repair. The bungalows were cold, damp
structures.
The Springhill Massacre reflects in many ways the events the previous
year in Ballymurphy. All those shot dead were civilians. The British
claimed that the victims were gunmen or had been caught in crossfire
during a gun battle. None of this was true. Three of those killed were
children, one was a father of six and the last was the second priest
from the greater Ballymurphy area to die in the conflict.
In February, the families, their lawyer Pádraig Ó Muirigh, and prominent
lawyer Michael Mansfield relaunched their campaign for truth. The
families and other eye witnesses recounted the events of that evening in
1972.
John Dougal who was aged 16 was the first to die. He was the eldest of
eight children. He was shot as he tried to help others who had been
shot.
Margaret Gargan was 13 years old. She had been sitting talking with
friends in the street when she was killed. One of her friend’s recalls:
“We were only sitting talking, you know the way wee girls talk about
things. Next thing she fell down. We never heard the shot. Within a
couple of seconds, she was lying on the ground. It all happened so
quickly. Then everybody started to scream.”
Fr. Noel Fitzpatrick was a curate at St. John’s Church on the Falls Road
but was based at Corpus Christi only a short distance from where he was
shot dead. He had gone out to try and help a local man, Martin Dudley,
who had been shot and wounded. He was shot through the neck.
Paddy Butler was 38 and had six children. His son Eddie had been one of
those shot and wounded during the Ballymurphy Massacre the previous
August. Paddy had gone out with Fr. Fitzpatrick to help the wounded. Fr.
Fitzpatrick was waving a white hanky. As they bent over the wounded man
a bullet went through the priest’s neck and into Paddy’s head. Both
died.
The last victim was David (Dee) McCafferty who was 15 years old. He was
with Fr. Fitzpatrick and Paddy Butler trying to help a wounded man. When
Fr. Fitzpatrick was shot Dee tried to pull him to safety and was shot
several times.
Subsequently, forensic evidence showed that none of those killed or
wounded were armed or had been in contact with any weapons. An RUC
detective admitted that there was no investigation into the killings.
The trauma for all of these families has continued for 47 years. In the
years afterward it was especially difficult as the British Army and RUC
often singled the relatives out for additional harassment. Paddy
Butler’s daughter Jacqueline remembered that: “Although Daddy was an
innocent man, because he had been shot by soldiers, the RUC raided our
house every week after he died, ransacked it at four or five in the
morning. Mum didn’t understand that either. She used to say, ‘How could
they do that to us after killing Daddy?’ Every time there was a knock on
the door, she would shudder and think of the day Daddy went out and
never came back.”
Like the Ballymurphy families the Springhill families have been
campaigning for years for the truth. In December 2014 the Attorney
General John Larkin agreed to the establishment of new inquests. In a
letter to the family he said: “It seems to me that the truth about what
happened in Springhill on 9 July 1972 is, at present, only likely to
emerge through an inquest.”
That was over four years ago. The decision by the families to relaunch
their campaign at this time is because currently, due to a lack of
funding for inquests, there appears little likelihood that the
Springhill Inquests will be heard in the next few years.
In 2016 the North’s Lord Chief Justice, Declan Morgan, proposed a plan
to deal with all inquest cases within five years. It was blocked by
Arlene Foster. Last year a Belfast Court ruled that Foster, as First
Minister, unlawfully stopped a discussion at the Executive of the plan
by the Lord Chief Justice. It was claimed that because the majority of
the inquests relate to state killings that the DUP leader refused to
allow an inquest process to go ahead which would “rewrite the past.” The
funding has been blocked since then.
The Springhill families deserve support. They have demonstrated enormous
courage and perseverance over almost 50 years. Fr. Des Wilson put it
well when he said:
“There is still a long way to go to reveal the truth about what our
neighbours suffered. It is worth the journey because one of our most
heartening principles in the truth will set us free, and so it is the
duty and privilege of us all to reveal it.”
(Abridged from elnacional.cat)
The Catalan independence movement has made a new show of strength in
Europe.
Eighteen months after the large-scale demonstration in Brussels,
some 10,000 protesters, according to French police, had travelled to
Strasbourg by some eighty coaches, three special flights and other
indeterminate means. They gathered this Tuesday in front of the European
Parliament to express their opposition to Carles Puigdemont, Oriol
Junqueras and Toni Comín being prevented from taking the seats they won
in May’s election.
The rally, which lasted almost five hours, ended with speeches organised
by the Catalan Council for the Republic. Those who spoke included
members of pro-independence organisations and from MEPs from around the
continent.
As their lawyers feared they could be arrested, Puigdemont and Comín
didn’t attend in person, but could speak via video from the German
border. Similarly, a letter by Junqueras from prison was read out.
The three decried what they said was the violation of their political
rights, asked Europe to no look aside and warned them that the
independence movement isn’t giving up despite the repression: “We’ll do
it again”.
Speaking from a bridge on the Franco-German border, Puigdemont argued
the importance of him being able to continue the fight from exile, for
which he apologised for his absence. He also thanked the thousands who
had travelled to Strasbourg for their commitment, saying they are “the
proof of their failure and our success”.
Comín, with the president in Kehl, made similar remarks. He said that
democracy is under threat in Spain and, as such, in the whole of Europe
and that they will continue to be a “free voice” from exile.
Finally, Oriol Junqueras, writing by letter from prison, said that if
the price he has to pay is the loss of his freedom, he’ll pay it. He
argued that Catalonia can be the “spearhead” for the future of Europe,
and called on the continent to not look the other way.
Among the pro-independence leaders there, ANC’s Elisenda Paluzie said
that it won’t be easy to achieve their goal, and that the “battle” must
be won in Catalonia: “We will win independence ourselves, no one will
give it to us”. Marina Llansana, of Òmnium, meanwhile, said that “no
sentence, however severe it may be” will make them give up: “We’ll do it
again, each and every one of the crimes they tell us we’ve committed”.
More than 20 MEPs attended from various countries, members of the
EU-Catalonia Dialogue Platform. They all denounced the situation where
Puigdemont, Comín and Junqueras couldn’t take their seats alongside them
in the Parliament today.
But it was an Irish voice, that of Sinn Féin MEP Matt Carthy, who spoke
up in the brief opening plenary of the European Parliament in Strasbourg
to decry the absence of the three Catalan voices. During a short session
to constitute the newly-elected European chamber, the European United
Left representative demanded the floor to send a powerful message of
criticism to acting parliamentary president Antonio Tajani.
Visibly indignant, Mr Carthy said that the pro-independence Catalan
leaders had not been allowed to enter the EU Parliament and take their
seats because of the decision of one member state and demanded that “the
voices of the people of Catalonia must be heard”, while at his side, a
colleague [Martina Anderson] held up a photo of Carles Puigdemont. Matt
Carthy denounced to president Tajani, who presided over Tuesday’s
session, that the decision to close the door to Puigdemont, Junqueras
and Comín “undermines the credibility of this house “, which is
entrusted with the mission of “standing up for democracy and human
rights “.
As the Irish MEP explained to the press later: “Tajani opened his
remarks by describing the European Parliament as the house of democracy,
the only EU institution that is directly elected by the people. If that
is the case, the votes of all the people must be equal and there cannot
be administrative or judicial barriers put in place to prevent the will
of the people from being recognised,” he said. “Two million Catalan
people voted for their MEPs and they are as entitled to have
representation in this house as those who voted for me or anyone else
here.”
Mr Carthy, who also forms part of the EU-Catalonia Dialogue Platform,
said that any MEP who fails to stand up for the rights of those Catalan
voters “undermines our own ability to talk about democracy, human rights
and rule of law anywhere else in the world.”. For the Irish MEP, the
“silence” of all EU leaders on the matter is “deafening.” “If it were in
South America or the Middle East, we would be hearing the lectures from
European leaders,” he lamented. If such “administrative loopholes” were
used to block elected MPs in other parts of the world, EU leaders “would
be shouting from the rooftops.”
According to him, the EU is doing a “huge disservice to the people of
Europe” because it is making it “impossible” for us to try and build
peace and democracy in other parts of the world. “People see us clearly
as hypocrites,” he warned.
Independence Day is a day of celebration and reflection about how far this experiment in representational democracy has come, and just how far we have to go. In the 243 years of our nation’s existence, we have seen the slow, hard-won expansion of our democracy — and we still have a long road ahead.
Our history has been a long battle for equality, fairness, and opportunity for all. The America we celebrate today would not be the nation we love so dearly without the activists who marched for voting rights, championed the labor movement, and fought for civil rights, LGBTQ equality, and so much more.
Today we remind ourselves just how much we have to fight for. Together, we must continue our fight for freedom — the freedom of every person, no matter their background, to have a fair shot at the American dream; the freedom of every family to live with dignity; the freedom to live in a world with clean air and water; and the freedom to build a brighter future for the next generation.
I am so proud of you, my team at the DNC, and the millions nationwide who are working tirelessly to protect, strengthen, and expand our American democracy.
Happy Fourth of July, Jim. Thank you for standing with us in this fight.
