Alex Kane: If Stormont isn’t restored soon it may never be back

A no-deal outcome presents them with enormous difficulties, not least of which is the likelihood that the Assembly would never be restored. That would leave everything to the mercy of direct rule and the DUP is well aware – having fought against it for years – that direct rule rarely does any favours for unionism. And direct rule, in the context of no deal, no king-maker role for the DUP and a comfortable victory for Johnson’s increasingly populist and reckless brand of Conservatism, would leave the DUP (and NI unionism generally) in a potentially very perilous position.

I’m aware that a section of unionism thinks that a ‘properly’ right-wing government in Westminster would be a friend of Ulster unionism: personally, I think that view is utterly, utterly barking.

But if the DUP does prefer deal to no deal (and some would actually just like the whole problem to disappear by way of a second referendum won by Remain) it means accepting some sort of bespoke arrangement or backstop: or what I have christened the laid-back stop. In return for accepting that (although if push comes to shove Johnson could still impose it upon them) it has said it would like input from the Assembly, allowing both unionists and nationalists to have a say in how the new arrangements would operate.

Quite apart from the fact that I’m not convinced that the Remain parties (SF/SDLP/Alliance/Green) would agree to the DUP being able to exercise a veto in those circumstances, I’m also not clear what price the DUP would be prepared to pay to return to the Assembly.

As it stands – and I’m not aware of it having shifted its position – Sinn Fein will not reboot the Assembly in the absence of a not-able-to-wriggle-free-from DUP commitment to legislate for an Irish language act. But would it, in exchange for that commitment, allow the DUP to exercise a petition of concern-type veto on potential changes to abortion legislation here; as well as allowing it ‘flexibility’ on very specific unionist concerns in the event of a deal which includes a backstop in some form?

While I’m pretty sure that Sinn Fein recognises the political/electoral attraction of a no-deal outcome (hoping that it would magnify the case for a border poll and Irish unity) the party will also be cautious about the possibly uncontainable instability which would accompany that outcome. It knows, too, that the British and Irish governments, along with the SDLP and other elements of political/civic nationalism would also take a collective and similarly cautious view of what could follow in the wake of a no deal.

Is it possible, therefore, that Sinn Fein would be prepared to play a slightly longer game for the sake of the Holy Grail of unity? I don’t know the answer to that question. But I remember a senior SF figure telling me a couple of years ago: “I never thought in my lifetime we’d be this close to delivering unity. If we let it slip it could be another generation before anything like it happens again.”

And what about the DUP? Could it sell an Irish language act on the back of being able to prevent any change to abortion provision in Northern Ireland (same-sex-marriage is less of a problem for the party) and unionist input – through the Assembly – into the operation of a backstop? Would the pitch be: ‘We’re better having our own voice on these issues than leaving it to the EU and direct rule.’ And would SF be prepared to facilitate a soft landing for them?

Which brings us to the coming election. Sinn Fein is making noises about potential pacts: but those pacts have nothing to do with Brexit as such. No, what Sinn Fein wants is an outcome in which the DUP lose seats and unionism returns a minority of MPs from here. At the moment the breakdown is 11 unionist (10 DUP and Lady Hermon) to seven SF. But if a pact resulted in the DUP losing their seats in South, East and North Belfast the breakdown becomes eight unionist (I’m assuming a unionist would hold North Down, probably Sylvia) and 10 non-unionist (eight SF, one SDLP, one Alliance). Sinn Fein would be very happy with that result: unionism would be in a minority in the Assembly, Belfast council and Westminster – an uncomfortable position to find themselves in the run up to NI’s centenary in 2021.

I suppose what it boils down to is this: how important is a restored Assembly to the DUP and Sinn Fein? Or, putting that another way, which party has most to gain, or lose? If it had certainty that it would return to its king-maker role and wouldn’t, again, be shafted by a Conservative PM on a backstop (and it has certainty on neither) the DUP could probably live without the Assembly. That said, an Assembly could be crucial in the event of a no deal. If Sinn Fein had certainty it would win a border poll fairly soon (which it doesn’t; it doesn’t even have certainty about the poll) it, too, could live without the Assembly. But Sinn Fein also has to calculate if an ILA is more or less likely with continuing direct rule.

One thing is certain, though. At some point fairly soon a call has to be made on the Assembly. Public patience and confidence is almost exhausted. Sinn Fein and the DUP are the only parties who can save it. If the breakthrough doesn’t come in the next few weeks, it will never come.