Letter: It is hard to feel sympathy for the difficulties of the DUP, which is merely the chickens coming home to roost

It is difficult not to have some sympathy for the DUP. Their recklessness, stupidity, arrogance and incompetence; their acceptance of bribes from Theresa May, being conned by Boris Johnson and their naive devotion to false prophets has finally come to a head and they must now make a decision. They must decide whether to accept the protocol and a Sinn Fein first minister or be blamed for massive cuts in public expenditure. For the DUP this is a lose-lose situation.

The decision to support Brexit was reckless and taken without any debate within the party. The impact it would have on agriculture and the economy of Northern Ireland was never considered. It would appear the decision was based on a dislike of the EU, an opportunity to distance ourselves from the Irish Republic and the economic recommendation of Sammy Wilson, who when I once challenged him in the assembly justified an economic decision on the totally discredited ‘Laffer curve’ (which claims that decreased tax rates lead to increased tax revenue’).

Having made the wrong decision on Brexit, rather than supporting a soft Brexit which could have been negotiated without any need for a border on land or sea, the DUP kept digging and at every stage backed the hardest line Brexit put forward by Jacob Rees-Mogg, Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson and the European Research Group of anti EU Tory MPs. This support was not reciprocated when these false prophets refused to support the DUPs fight against the Windsor Framework. They used the DUP to get the 2020 Withdrawal Agreement through parliament and then dumped them.

Again the party made the wrong decision. They were naive in believing Johnson when he assured them that there would be no border in the Irish Sea “only over his dead body”. No one else believed him apart from the DUP.

The final part of the withdrawal agreement signed in January 2020 was designed to protect the all-island economy and the Good Friday Agreement and to safeguard the integrity of the EU single market. Initially, the DUP leader Arlene Foster seemed to reluctantly accept the first iteration of the agreement in October 2019 but under pressure from Sammy Wilson and Jim Allister TUV leader, who has tried to elevate the protocol from a trade issue to a major constitutional issue, the party decided to oppose the deal.

It is not a major constitutional issue as there have always been checks on some goods travelling between Great Britain and NI. The DUP leadership did not have the courage to stand up to Allister and caved in accepted his argument and refused to take part in the assembly unless the protocol was abolished.

This has led to the present dilemma. If the DUP reluctantly accepts the protocol, Allister wins the DUP loses credibility and members and probably splits. If the DUP rejects the protocol the secretary of state Chris Heaton-Harris will carry on with direct rule perhaps with some input from the Irish government and implement the massive cuts to local services set out in the draft budget.

The protocol will not be abolished. It has the support of a majority of MLAs, virtual unanimous support at Westminster, the full backing of the EU and the US Congress and is fundamental to maintaining the integrity of the single market.

I do not see the dilemma being resolved before the elections. In fact, the decision of the party to set up a panel to consider the revised protocol would appear to be a delaying tactic to defer any decision until after the election. The composition of the panel may indicate the final decision as it does not include hardliners like Wilson and Ian Paisley but does include two former party leaders Peter Robinson and Foster who have considerable experience in negotiations.

The inclusion of Robinson and Foster would seem to be a smart decision by Sir Jeffrey Donaldson as he is no doubt aware previous unionist leaders who accepted UK government policy were all overthrown by more hardline leaders (Trimble, Faulkner Chichester-Clarke O'Neill). The support of two former leaders would help Donaldson sell any decision to accept the protocol to party members.

I believe the party will reluctantly agree to accept the Windsor Framework after the election. This will create conflict within the party and perhaps a split of loss of members to TUV. My sympathy is limited as it is merely chickens coming home to roost.

Brian Wilson, Ex Green Party MLA and lecturer in Government, Bangor