Opposition parties have been described of late as shell shocked and panicked by Sinn Fein’s recent success in the Donegal by election and so they should be. The dangers that Sinn Fein pose to the structures of the state and Irish people’s quality of life cannot be understated.
Since the Good Friday agreement Irish politicians from the traditional parties have dealt with Sinn Fein very differently depending on what side of the border the issue at hand has been located. On the one hand, if discussions relate to the peace process itself, then it’s ok to talk to the likes of Gerry Adams. On the other hand if the issue is related to the south, let’s say services, then Fianna Fail and Fianna Gael politicians (and the PD’s at one time) refused to engage. The excuse, often only inferred, was that they are not prepared to speak to terrorists and thugs. Dermot Ahern infamously used this excuse when refusing to engage in a public debate on the issue of the closure of acute services in the Louth county hospital. This is however an excuse that does the country no service. There are many rational and purposeful reasons to engage with Sinn Fein on issues of policy in the south. Let’s briefly address some of Sinn Fein’s economic policies as an example of how doing so proves a far more assured way of ensuring Sinn Fein never holds the balance of power in Ireland.
Sinn Fein has of late rediscovered its socialist past. Maybe they have realised that it was James Connolly’s Irish Citizens’ Army that actually led the 1916 rising, providing the mass majority of men and arms. More likely Sinn Fein are jumping on the band wagon calling for a reduction in politicians wages and and tax hikes for the rich. And yet even now, on the eve of one of the most divisive elections in the history of the state, their actions contradict their words. Only a few weeks ago the expenses budget for the Houses of the Oireacthas, were presented to the Dail for approval. The document presented expenses increases all around but the most outrageous increase was/is for retired Dail members who have had their expenses increased from E49,000 per year to E149,000 per year. Not one TD spoke against the contents of the document, not one from FF, FG, Labour or Sinn Fein. What does this say about Sinn Fein’s approach to equality and fairness?
But there is more. Sinn Fein’s Deirdre De Brun has been the minister for education in Northern Ireland for a number of years now. Under her stewardship, Sinn Fein stewardship, the education budget was slashed with the knife cutting most deep into special needs services. As a people we can only judge politicians and parties by their actions. If you agree with this statement then the worth of Sinn Fein is weakened considerably.
The central driving force in Sinn Fein’s economic policy is the same as that which drives its very existence namely Irish unity and a thirty two county state. This is a fact that they have managed to avoid questions on so far as the hide in their newly bought socialist clothes. They don’t call it re unification but that’s what they are pushing for. Sinn Fein claim money can be saved by amalgamating services north and south of the border, thus avoiding the duplication of services. This underhand attempt at creating a united Ireland raises some very serious questions both in terms of actual policy roll out but also security concerns.
Firstly, does this mean that although local and national Sinn Fein politicians in the south have been campaigning against the closure of Louth hospital services, they would be given a choice between services in Dundalk or Newry? Would such a policy mean cross border tax harmonisation? Would traders both sides of the border be willing to loose out beneficial tax/income factors in their related jurisdictions? Would services originally delivered in the south move north if it proved cheaper?
There appears a terrible hypocrisy in Sinn Fein claiming to want to eliminate service duplication for economic reasons. In the North Sinn Fein have literally fed off division and duplication with services often mirrored on both sides of the sectarian divide. Sinn Fein has actually re-enforced such divisions and challenged the Alliance party’s attempts at uniting these communities. If the Sinn Fein leadership were truly interested in avoiding waste caused by service duplication why are they behaving in such a contradictory fashion up North.
Finally, and with the gravest sincerity, one must address that from which Sinn Fein was born and has grown, violence. `Has any of the Sinn Fein leadership contemplated for even one moment the reaction of loyalist terrorist groups to the idea of Irish services unity? Considering that all of the Unionist and Loyalist parties made angry public statements in response to the ESB’s recent takeover of NI electricity, what would be the end result of Sinn Fein’s cross border, indeed no border, policy? Bombs in Dundalk?
Sinn Fein cannot be ignored by way of refusing to communicate with them or using their violent past to brow beat them with. Instead we must open up their policies to the general public, reveal their glaring hypocrisies and counteract their underhand intentions.
Since the Good Friday agreement Irish politicians from the traditional parties have dealt with Sinn Fein very differently depending on what side of the border the issue at hand has been located. On the one hand, if discussions relate to the peace process itself, then it’s ok to talk to the likes of Gerry Adams. On the other hand if the issue is related to the south, let’s say services, then Fianna Fail and Fianna Gael politicians (and the PD’s at one time) refused to engage. The excuse, often only inferred, was that they are not prepared to speak to terrorists and thugs. Dermot Ahern infamously used this excuse when refusing to engage in a public debate on the issue of the closure of acute services in the Louth county hospital. This is however an excuse that does the country no service. There are many rational and purposeful reasons to engage with Sinn Fein on issues of policy in the south. Let’s briefly address some of Sinn Fein’s economic policies as an example of how doing so proves a far more assured way of ensuring Sinn Fein never holds the balance of power in Ireland.
Sinn Fein has of late rediscovered its socialist past. Maybe they have realised that it was James Connolly’s Irish Citizens’ Army that actually led the 1916 rising, providing the mass majority of men and arms. More likely Sinn Fein are jumping on the band wagon calling for a reduction in politicians wages and and tax hikes for the rich. And yet even now, on the eve of one of the most divisive elections in the history of the state, their actions contradict their words. Only a few weeks ago the expenses budget for the Houses of the Oireacthas, were presented to the Dail for approval. The document presented expenses increases all around but the most outrageous increase was/is for retired Dail members who have had their expenses increased from E49,000 per year to E149,000 per year. Not one TD spoke against the contents of the document, not one from FF, FG, Labour or Sinn Fein. What does this say about Sinn Fein’s approach to equality and fairness?
But there is more. Sinn Fein’s Deirdre De Brun has been the minister for education in Northern Ireland for a number of years now. Under her stewardship, Sinn Fein stewardship, the education budget was slashed with the knife cutting most deep into special needs services. As a people we can only judge politicians and parties by their actions. If you agree with this statement then the worth of Sinn Fein is weakened considerably.
The central driving force in Sinn Fein’s economic policy is the same as that which drives its very existence namely Irish unity and a thirty two county state. This is a fact that they have managed to avoid questions on so far as the hide in their newly bought socialist clothes. They don’t call it re unification but that’s what they are pushing for. Sinn Fein claim money can be saved by amalgamating services north and south of the border, thus avoiding the duplication of services. This underhand attempt at creating a united Ireland raises some very serious questions both in terms of actual policy roll out but also security concerns.
Firstly, does this mean that although local and national Sinn Fein politicians in the south have been campaigning against the closure of Louth hospital services, they would be given a choice between services in Dundalk or Newry? Would such a policy mean cross border tax harmonisation? Would traders both sides of the border be willing to loose out beneficial tax/income factors in their related jurisdictions? Would services originally delivered in the south move north if it proved cheaper?
There appears a terrible hypocrisy in Sinn Fein claiming to want to eliminate service duplication for economic reasons. In the North Sinn Fein have literally fed off division and duplication with services often mirrored on both sides of the sectarian divide. Sinn Fein has actually re-enforced such divisions and challenged the Alliance party’s attempts at uniting these communities. If the Sinn Fein leadership were truly interested in avoiding waste caused by service duplication why are they behaving in such a contradictory fashion up North.
Finally, and with the gravest sincerity, one must address that from which Sinn Fein was born and has grown, violence. `Has any of the Sinn Fein leadership contemplated for even one moment the reaction of loyalist terrorist groups to the idea of Irish services unity? Considering that all of the Unionist and Loyalist parties made angry public statements in response to the ESB’s recent takeover of NI electricity, what would be the end result of Sinn Fein’s cross border, indeed no border, policy? Bombs in Dundalk?
Sinn Fein cannot be ignored by way of refusing to communicate with them or using their violent past to brow beat them with. Instead we must open up their policies to the general public, reveal their glaring hypocrisies and counteract their underhand intentions.
No comments:
Post a Comment