Letter: Do today's unionists have the same backbone as the defenders of Londonderry?

While these were doubtless interesting events, I am somewhat bemused by his assertion that 'neither Lee nor Peter agonised on the effects of the Northern Ireland Protocol...how are we going to win a border poll by highlighting the trading discrepancies between Northern Ireland and the UK mainland?' This surely is the classic case of ignoring the elephant in the room.

The longer the protocol restricts, and increasingly restricts, free trade between the mainland and Northern Ireland, and increasingly interferes in other everyday matters, the more irrelevant the Union between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK becomes.

Therefore, in a border poll scenario, it will become practically impossible to persuade the non-voting, allegedly pro-Union groupings to vote for a Union which has become, in all practical everyday matters, an irrelevance.

Sure, success stories are very good, but as - and if - they continue, due to the protocol, they will be taking place in a land that is getting economically closer to the EU and its local province, the Irish Republic.

The Union becomes more irrelevant and pointless as the tentacles of the protocol reach further and further into our everyday lives.

Mr Carson's assertion that 'the protocol is here to stay' suggests that he has given up on the struggle for equal citizenship of the UK, and is suing for the best surrender terms.

Sadly, by crawling back into Stormont under an 'oversold Donaldson Deal', it appears the DUP, (and UUP), are of the same mindset.

If the defenders of Londonderry in 1689 had had the mindset of the main unionist parties, they would have followed Robert Lundy's lead and surrendered the city.

Thankfully they were made of sterner stuff. The question is, have today's unionists the same backbone?

Tom Ferguson, Ballymoney