For years the DUP laid into the UUP at every opportunity, yet stood meekly aside in quite a few Westminster seats to ensure they remained in unionist hands. A few weeks ago, Nigel Dodds issued a very public invitation to Sir Reg Empey to discuss ways of "maximising" the unionist vote; an event followed by a number of unionists, from both parties, making favourable noises about closer co-operation.



As I see it, there are four main arguments being advanced in favour of a pact or, indeed, an eventual merger: maximising the unionist vote, maximising unionist representation, maximising unionist confidence and preparing unionism for potential difficulties ahead.



I have never voted DUP and I can think of no reason for voting for them. Their record is one of division and abuse. In terms of their tactics and strategy over the past ten years in particular---culminating, as it did, in a monumental U-turn which placed them at the very heart of the Agreement they had vowed to "destroy rather than renegotiate,"---there will be many people, some in the UUP and some who voted DUP last time, who will not want to vote for them. The same, it has to be said, applies to DUP voters who will not vote for a UUP candidate.



The other main problem with a UUP-DUP pact or merger is that it excludes those within the pro-Union community who have stopped voting for either party. And that pool, as I have said on many occasions, has continued to expand. There is an ongoing debate about actual numbers, but it is certainly well over 100,000 and growing.



So, if a pact can't guarantee to maximise the unionist vote, then what is the point of a pact? To maximise unionist representation, is the answer. But even that brings its own problems. Yes, it may be possible to push the SDLP and Sinn Fein from South Belfast, South Down and Fermanagh/South Tyrone, but the longterm consequence will be the cementing of polarisation and the ring-fencing of sectarian headcounts. Instead of a situation in which the supposedly "new" Northern Ireland will witness the breaking down of political barriers, we will probably see the reinforcing of existing barriers and the erection of new ones.



And one thing is certain, if you want a government in Northern Ireland which is able to concentrate on a socio-economic agenda and shift from border politics to normal politics, it will only happen when Orange and Green cease to be the primary motivating factors at the ballot box. Again, if there is to be any chance at all of creating a viable opposition and alternative government within the Assembly, that, too, will depend on a much closer working relationship between the UUP and SDLP. That, by the way, is a process which would be greatly helped by Mark Durkan urging Fianna Fail to push off.



I remain to be convinced that a pact or merger will do all that much for unionist confidence, either. There was a dominant unionist party from 1921 to 1972, but it began to fracture in the mid-1960s because it couldn't keep its component parts and factions together. There was a United Ulster Unionist Coalition between January 1974 and the summer of 1977, but it failed to deliver anything of note. Mind you, it was responsible for knocking down the Sunningdale Agreement because it regarded the SDLP as too extreme! There was a working arrangement between the Unionist parties post-1985, in opposition to the Anglo-Irish Agreement, but that also failed to deliver an alternative. Why does anyone think that a UUP-DUP merger in the near future would result in a new found confidence within unionism?



Unionism will continue to face huge hurdles and challenges. Sinn Fein hasn't abandoned its unity agenda. Fianna Fail is preparing to muddy the local waters. Nationalism, be it the Scottish, English, Welsh, Irish or Little-UIster variety, is a growing force across the United Kingdom. There will be economic difficulties which our own Executive will find difficult to address, let alone conquer. There will be increasing tensions within an Assembly in which the majority of MLAs are more interested in self-promotion in the local weeklies than in the fiscal and political realities of government. So far, the quality of debate has never risen above verbal mogadon and most decisions consist of throw-money-at-it or put it out to consultation. Believe me, the electorate and the media will become increasingly cynical and critical if things don't improve and standards aren't raised.



I have argued before, and do so again, that there is room for two mainstream pro-Union parties within Northern Ireland; co-operating when necessary, whilst competing to reach out to, attract and truly maximise the total vote. The UUP's Billy Armstrong wondered why we needed "two pro-Agreement unionist parties?" I'll tell him why: Because there are voters that the DUP can never reach and voters that the UUP can never reach, and if you merge the parties you will lose those voters. Also, if you merge the parties you will simply encourage insularity and singularity. The unionist unity preached by Craig and Carson was based on a fear of what others might do to us; today, we need a unionism which can prove that it is vibrant, relevant and unafraid.



The UUP is coming to the end of a review/reform process which, if it goes as intended, will put it on a surer footing and more firmly on the road to political, organisational and electoral recovery. It should then be able to win back votes which it lost to the DUP and Alliance and make inroads into the non-voting pool. The DUP also needs to make inroads into that pool. Both parties need to find a political role and a socio-economic platform above and beyond that of the traditional mantras and drumbeat outlook.



So yes, we have to ensure that our unionism is strengthened and secured, but we also have to ensure that we don't encourage an "us-and-them" mentality which, once again, allows unionism and unionists to be portrayed as some sort of anachronistic aberration. There is a future and a purpose for both the UUP and the DUP: separately perhaps, yet with a common goal and overarching theme.