Jim Allister was handpicked by Peter Robinson and Ian Paisley to be the DUP's standard bearer in the 2004 Euro election. He had been out of active politics for about 16 years (ironically enough, dropping out in 1987 because the DUP agreed an electoral pact with the UUP in East Antrim), yet was deemed the best candidate to fill Paisley's very large electoral shoes. He went on to top the poll, giving the DUP their best Euro result since 1984. He was hailed as a hero and became a ve
I remember sitting with him in a television studio during the election coverage of the 2007 Assembly elections and getting into a minor row when I dared to suggest that the DUP was now likely to cut a deal with Sinn Fein. He was angry, insisting that
the DUP was "not a party of easy compromise and sell-out". Yet within a few weeks of that interview, the DUP was in government with Sinn Fein and Jim Allister was an independent MEP. He was clearly still angry – but this time with his former colleagues.
Last week a UUP delegation met a delegation from Mr Allister's TUV and had a wide-ranging discussion about areas of mutual interest. Unsurprisingly, one of those areas was about the need to secure two out of the three Euro seats. There is a simple reality involved: if there are three or even four pro-Union candidates in the contest and if the supporters of each don't cast second, third and fourth preferences for the other pro-Union candidates, the chances of retaining two seats are greatly diminished.
Extraordinary
Given that background, along with the fact that Jim Nicholson and Jim Allister are defending their seats, it strikes me as extraordinary that the DUP should have made such a song and dance about the UUP-TUV discussions.
During the recent Fermanagh by-election the DUP publicly called for their voters to transfer to the UUP. After the election a number of senior DUP figures issued statements urging closer cooperation between the unionist parties.
In September 2007 and again when he became leader of the DUP in 2008, Peter Robinson issued an invitation to the UUP to discuss ways in which both parties could help each other to maximise turnout and seats won. Sir Reg Empey has indicated that he, too, is in favour of cooperation in the cause of building turnout and seats. But how, exactly, do you foster that cooperation if you don't talk to all of the pro-Union parties?
Touch of irony
To be blunt, there's more than a touch of irony in the fact that the DUP chastises the UUP for talking to the TUV while the DUP itself is at the heart of government with Sinn Fein. The DUP was happy to talk to the UKUP prior to the 2005 General Election. It was happy to share platforms with anti-Agreement elements of the UUP, some of whom have now switched allegiance to the TUV. And it's only a few weeks ago that Peter Robinson admitted he was willing to have talks with the leadership of the still armed UVF.
So why, precisely, shouldn't the UUP talk to other political parties as well: even those, like the TUV, with whom it has fundamental differences of opinion? The DUP objected to the UUP talking to Sinn Fein – even though it now sits in government with them. It objected to the UUP talking to the PUP – even though it is now prepared to talk to their armed wing. It objected to the UUP talking to the Alliance Party at the time of redesignation – even though it will now talk to them about bailing them out on policing and justice.
