Letter: Only when unionist voters have better choice between each party will we see a stronger unionist electorate in Northern Ireland
A letter from Edward Ferrin:
I note David McNarry’s letter (One party, one leader – loyalty and discipline, July 31) and Jack Irwin’s letter (Infighting is the reason for dwindling support, August 5) and welcome the fact that both Mr McNarry and Mr Irwin have engaged in the debate as to whether unionism is best served by a single party or by the current three major parties.
However, I remain unconvinced that a single unionist party will restore the fortunes of political unionism.
First, designing a big tent party would probably mean the inclusion of the party membership in a leadership contest. Some could argue that this involves grassroots members to elect the party leader, but what if a single unionist party elected a leader who had opposite views on policy from the elected representatives?
Jeremy Corbyn was elected by the membership in 2015 and 2017 but led UK Labour to catastrophic defeat in 2019. The Conservative Party membership elected Liz Truss – need I say more?
Second, how would candidates in such a party be nominated for election? A catch-all party of unionism would not function unless it had primary elections to nominate candidates. We could have a scenario where a unionist candidate from North Antrim supports devolution and power-sharing but was deselected because the party membership in the constituency wants Stormont to fall on its ears.
Third, and probably most important - how can a single unionist party ever develop a united policy platform on social and economic issues? Every political party has internal debates, but a catch-all, single unionist party would have a never-ending debate on policy internally. That would weaken unionism’s ability to fight its electoral opponents.
There are other solutions to improve intra-unionist electoral support. Independent unionist candidates should be considered for the 2029 Westminster election, such as Claire Sugden in East Londonderry, where unionism is at risk of losing representation. If unionist politicians wish to have ‘unity’ at Westminster elections, they will only achieve this if non-party candidates are put forward.
A single unionist party is suggested only in the context of defending NI’s place within the UK, not in developing a new vision as to what the UK and Northern Ireland’s place within it will achieve. You have to offer voters something to vote for and unionism’s biggest problem right now is that it has simply just offered more of the same.
New solutions to the UK’s current problems, such as a federal UK, directly elected mayors, fiscal devolution, must be embraced by unionist parties if they are to genuinely offer an alternative to the current state of the UK and Northern Ireland’s place within it. We have three unionist parties, who all seem to read off the same hymn sheet when it comes to the future of the union – that is the threat.
The DUP must plot its vision, but the UUP must plot an alternative to it, and the TUV must plot another alternative to it also. Only when unionist voters have better choice between each party as to what they want for the future, will we see a stronger, more confident unionist electorate in Northern Ireland.
In 2022, the DUP-UUP-TUV polled 40.1% - an election where the UUP and TUV failed to compete with the DUP. The latest poll now has them at 43% - in a time when both the UUP and TUV are competitive against the DUP. Just like in economics where consumer choice and strong competition boosts market confidence, voter choice and greater electoral competition between unionist parties boosts the wider unionist cause.
Edward Ferrin, Belfast BT14