Unionism needs to turn its values into positive action aimed at building a better Northern Ireland for all

The decision made by Secretary of State Hilary Benn MP with regard to the Stormont Brake can be added to the litany of Unionist ‘tilting at the windmills’ strategies. Unionism has to understand that if you created it, you have to own it.

Political Unionism in the shape of the DUP, TUV and to a lesser extent the UUP contributed to the situation that is the outworking of Brexit. The latter did not encourage a ‘yes’ vote but was not strong enough to hold to a robust line with members. When former MLA and Minister Danny Kennedy ran as an MEP candidate he was less than sure-footed on UUP European policy.

The preservation of the broad church prevailed but to limited effect for the party. In the years following, the DUP retained the lead, and what a lead!

Safeguarding the Union has not solved issues like divergence, the inherent democratic deficit within the Windsor Framework or the resulting disruption to the UK’s internal market. All continue to arouse passions within elements of the PUL constituency but for others, interest has cooled.

Brexit has not proven to be the game-changer that Irish republicans had anticipated.

Unionists recognise its optical implications for the constitutional status of Northern Ireland, the situation where ‘goods not for sale in the EU’ are taken into the republic of Ireland on a daily ‘seen but not seen ‘basis and the lingering  ‘hibernia irredenta’ of fourth green field advocacy however, preference is for reform of the Brexit arrangements in the interests of the whole of the UK and an increasingly volatile Europe rather than grandstanding that is proving counter-productive and running out of road..

This is grounded in a growing confidence that whilst Northern Ireland faces many challenges it is not the economic or cultural backwater that some would wish it to be; that there is no reason to be spooked by talk of an ‘all island economy’ which does not exist.

Socially, with religion diminishing as an influence on how people vote and live, the binary model is sustained more by the political structure established in 1998 than by lived experiences.

Within that constituency identified electorally as unionist, deference to and emotional investment in traditions and religious allegiance, whilst it survives, is reduced as the electorate seeks decision-making aligned with their needs.

Data is readily available to supply the evidence of change within a more diverse society. It is reflected too in recent election results. Whilst the DUP suffered from defections to the TUV this is not the only factor leading to its electoral decline; narrowly holding on to previously safe seats by narrow margins.

If rumours and the comments of well-placed individuals are to be believed, the solution to the loss of the Unionist majority at Stormont is focused on Unionist re-alignment or Unionist unity. This is not new.

Perusal of the archives shows that since 5 October 1968 and before, political Unionism, in all its various guises, has struggled to develop clear strategy. With the exception of 1998 it has offered tactics shaped by reaction to events and damage limitation based on tribal head-counts.

It seems that some want to turn to this again; to deny voters choice. It’s a forlorn hope that reflects an underlying poverty of strategic purpose; a crisis management approach and mission drift.

There are those within the UUP and DUP more minded to re-align around inclusivity, equality and respect for diversity but they seem unable, however well-motivated, to move their parties beyond the traditional narrow ground of protestant identity, religion, culture and insecurity.

Too many outcomes are limited in their realisation. Social justice, disability, segregation, latent sectarianism and racism in no way complete the list. Internal party discord finds expression in factional in-fighting, selection power-plays and leadership ‘group-think’ of the chosen few.

For political Unionism to do better in building a better future, it has to be prepared to disturb the present and consign rutted practices of the past. Whatever the motivation is for refusing to acknowledge the imperative, it cannot be allowed to act as a barrier.

Political leaders need to shed their timidity. There is a story told of an elder in a first nation American community when speaking to his grandson:

“Each of us has two wolves inside, always in battle. One feeds on anger, fear and greed; the other lives on faith, compassion and truth.”

When asked which will win, the elder replied: “The one we feed.”

Unionists of today need to ask themselves what kind of Northern Ireland they would wish to be born into if they were not Protestant, white or unionist Sinn Féin remains obsessed by perfidious albion and uncritical allegiance to the writings and decolonisation of Franz Fanon. They continue to fight the war.

Republicanism is fond of quoting Tone’s desire to unite Planter and Gael. Apart from the tired referencing of this terminology, what they aspire to is unachievable within a prevailing cult-like dictatorship of no alternative. It is a stance beset by a moral vacuum that has no purchase on real politics.

This is an opportunity for political unionism; to transform Northern Ireland by engaging with the progress that is taking place and ending the gulf between politics and people’s lives. This means less focus on the constitutional position and more on socio-economic issues; to promote the benefits of linkage to the United Kingdom in a more productive way.

Every new job, every reduction in damage to the environment, every affordable home, every improvement in healthcare and every advance in ending violence against women amongst many others indicators will serve to connect a society of like-minded people into a common purpose agenda and consensual relationships.

It may also, at last, bring meaning, beyond banners, bonfires and saying NO, to unionist politics that people can understand and relate to.