The Ballymena Accent

Dr John Coulter has been a journalist working in Ireland since 1978. He began his career as a trainee reporter writing a weekly column on the Boys’ Brigade for his local weekly newspaper, the Ballymena Guardian. He worked as a freelance journalist with BBC Northern Ireland before joining the staff of the News Letter in the early 1980s, later becoming the paper’s Education and Religious Affairs Correspondent. In the late 1980s, he moved into weekly newspaper management as a deputy editor in Larne and an editor in Carrickfergus. He then moved into PR as Director of Public Relations for the Sandown Group of private nursing homes, followed by a period as Director of Operations for Christian Communication Network Television. Since 1993, he has been involved in journalist training and has written a series of columns for national newspaper and online outlets. For 14 years, he penned the weekly Coulter’s Fearless Flying Column in the Irish Daily Star. He has co-written books on the media and politics. His sole publication, The Green Sash, is a non-violent ideology for modern republicanism and is available on Amazon Kindle. His doctorate from Ulster University is in journalism ethics. He is a conservative evangelical Christian and the son of a retired Presbyterian minister. His father, Robert, was an Ulster Unionist Assembly member for 13 years. You can follow Dr Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

Headline: United, unified or shared? Which Ireland is possible? 
The Irish unity debate has once more been sparked into life as a result of the Covid 19 pandemic. Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his regular Ballymena Accent column to explain why such discussions are merely theoretical with no practical reality. 
Calls for Unionism to prepare for the eventuality of a united Ireland are just as daft as republicans’ notions they will ever have a 32-county democratic socialist republic as set out in the 1916 Proclamation.
   There can be no doubting that the past three elections in Northern Ireland  have left Unionism as the minority ideology, although one wonders if Northern Ireland had Australian-style compulsory voting with around a 98 per cent turnout in all 18 constituencies, would the pro-Union thinking still be in second place?
   Likewise, the Covid 19 crisis has emphasised the need for an all-island approach to combating the effects of the pandemic. The coronavirus does not recognise the Irish border.
   However, it seems the effective cross-border co-operation to tackle the virus has created the misplaced perception, that along with Brexit and recent voting patterns on both sides of the border, the island is well on the way to political unity, therefore, the debate must begin.
   Republicans are constantly telling the pro-Union community that it should prepare for the inevitable and there can be no doubting that liberal Unionism, political liberalism in general, as well as ecumenical Christianity have all tumbled into the ‘unity talk’ pitfall set by Sinn Fein.
   All this is also being fuelled by the resurgent interest in independence for Scotland following the Scottish National Party’s success in the past Westminster General Election.
   Republicans seem to have the ability to spin SNP constituency victories as support for Irish unity. Practically, the only reason Sinn Fein did not win more seats in last year’s Southern General Election was simply because the party did not put up enough candidates.
   For the first time in living political memory, traditional rivalries between Fianna Fail and Fine Gael have been set aside to form a coalition government in Leinster House which excludes Sinn Fein.
   It may be almost a century since the notorious Irish Civil War in the 1920s when republican butchered republican, but it seems anti-Sinn Fein feelings have been passed from generation to generation through those decades.
   Unionists are forced to share power with the Shinners at Stormont, but there’s no way Southern nationalists will tolerate the Provisional IRA’s political wing in a Dail coalition government.
   Makes you wonder who really wants a united Ireland, or more importantly, who will foot the bill for Irish unity. If the colony of Hong Kong is taken as a benchmark, it won’t be the British. As Northern Ireland voted ‘remain’ in the European Union membership referendum, will the EU pick up the tab for Irish unity?
   In the event of Irish unity and Scottish independence, will we see the new nation of the Celtic Islands emerge as an EU member state? Then again, all this is the stuff of political academic papers rather than solid political reality.
   Even if the British decided to part-fund Irish unity for a period of years, eventually the English and Welsh electorate will get fed up with much-needed NHS cash going to the former colony instead of into the ‘what remains of the UK’ coffers.
   Given the changing nature of global terrorism, especially on the Far Right with the so-called ‘lone wolf’ tactics, would a united Ireland – even on paper – be politically and economically stable?
   The British and Irish governments as well as the EU Parliament will be acutely aware of what happened during the Ulster Workers’ Council strike of 1974 which brought about the collapse of the Sunningdale power-sharing Executive.
   In 1974, political Unionism along with the loyalist paramilitaries knew what they wanted to pull down – Sunningdale. But they had no viable political replacement. Of course, the Unionist leadership of that day could produce plenty of academic papers containing unworkable and unrealistic solutions to Sunningdale, but none what had an chance of success.
   Recognising this clear political vacuum, the Irish government attempted to break the logjam by putting forward its own proposals.
   But the result was the UVF’s no warning bombs in Monaghan and Dublin, causing some of the worst slaughter of the Troubles.
   The Dail had no other choice but to back away and it would be another 11 years and the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement of November 1985 before Dublin would have any real and meaningful say in the running of Northern affairs.
   What Dublin, London and Brussels seems to be ignoring is the changing nature of loyalist terrorism and the slow, but steady emergence of a violent dissident loyalist movement.
   All three seats of power are assuming the loyalist movement is still represented by those organisations which signed up to the 1994 ceasefire under the banner of the Combined Loyalist Military Command.
   They assume, too, that loyalism is largely dominated by criminality and making money from drug dealing and has no stomach or the resources for a 1974-style campaign against the republic.
   This assertion is partly accurate if you assume that any opposition to Irish unity would come from either the UVF or UDA. But Islamic fundamentalism has dictated the structure of third millennium terrorism, where an entire organisation may only comprise two or three members.
   This makes these organisations much harder to monitor and penetrate by the security forces and intelligence community. This strategy was first used by the dissident republican movement, which rather than have one single organisation like the Provisional IRA, that movement was organised along several different groups, such as the New IRA, Real IRA and Continuity IRA.
   The emerging dissident loyalist movement is not organised like the mainstream republican movement, which had the Provisional IRA and the Sinn Fein party – the so-called ballot box and Armalite strategy.
   No such relationship exists in the pro-Union community and those political parties linked to loyalist terror gangs have always remained fringe groups within the Unionist electorate.
   The new dissident loyalist movement clearly recognises that it will not enjoy the support of the mainstream Unionist parties, Loyal Orders and Protestant churches.
   Indeed, it recognises that any condemnation of its actions will in the first instance incur the wrath of liberal Unionism and the Protestant clergy, especially those liberal Protestant denominations.
   What would such dissident loyalists want as a result of their terror campaign in the event of a political united Ireland? Their ideology is brutally simple – an independent Ulster is the alternative to a united Ireland.
   First there would be a united Ireland; then, as a result of the dissident loyalist short-term bomb blitz, Dublin would be forced to re-partition the island again.
   All this may seem like yet more political science and the stuff of conspiracy theories or political thrillers, but the anxiety within the pro-Union community over the eventual outcome of Brexit, the continued dominance of Sinn Fein in Northern politics, and the rapid rise of Sinn Fein in the republic should not be dismissed.
   What is equally clear is that the pro-Union community needs to develop a strategy for the geographical island of Ireland which totally defuses any momentum for a politically motivated dissident loyalist movement.
   Like it or not, to achieve this outworking of pro-Union positive thinking, it will require anyone who believes in the value of the Union working together on a common agenda. In short, the ballot box must always win.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: Why Evangelical Christians should embrace Artificial Intelligence.
Evangelical Christianity and Artificial Intelligence; now there’s a potent theological mix! Religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his regular Ballymena Accent column to argue the case for born again believers to embrace the cause of AI. 
Mention Artificial Intelligence (AI) to many Christians, and images of science fiction blockbusters, such as The Terminator series or I, Robot spring to mind.
   The relationship between AI and Biblical Christianity has not always been an easy one. You might even be forgiven for concluding that to mention AI and Christianity in the same sentence is akin to modern-day blasphemy.
   Then again, evangelical Christianity – let alone its more hardline Puritan counterpart, fundamentalist Christianity – has always had a difficult problem embracing new concepts or thinking outside the box.
   This is why a new book by the prominent theologian, John C Lennox, is a ‘must have’ for any evangelical or fundamentalist Christian – indeed, any Christian who classifies themselves as ‘born again’ or ‘saved’ – in their personal devotion library to support their reading of the Bible itself.
   Entitled ‘2084 Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Humanity’, it is a ground-breaking work in expanding the debate about AI within the Christian community.
   The title of this heavy-weight theological masterpiece bears a striking resemblance to the work of author George Orwell, who penned 1984, which along with Orwell’s other work, Animal Farm, paint a bleak future for the human race.
   Indeed, as a former film critic with the Irish Daily Star, I could pen several columns of Orwellian themes developed in the science fiction horror sub-genre alone.
   Perhaps it is my love of political thrillers which makes me conclude that Lennox’s ‘2084’ needs to be read a couple of times before the main themes fully sink into the reader. Then again, perhaps as a self-confessed, unrepentant tabloid journalist, I am not best placed to review such a challenging work.
   But for me, Lennox carefully and logically sets out the case for Christians coming to terms with the concept of AI. My own conclusion having read this book three times is simple – could AI be used to find cures for any and all types of cancer and bring ‘normality’ to any and all people in the Special Educational Needs (SEN) community, particularly those with autism?
   As the parent of a severely autistic adult son, and having lost relatives and friends to various types of cancer, perhaps my conclusion is merely an emotional outburst rather than a realistic and rational critique of Lennox’s work and the ideas he communicates?
   Indeed, rather than get bogged down in a chapter by chapter analysis of this comprehensive work, it seems my review will raise more challenges for the evangelical and fundamentalist Christian community than it seeks to provide answers.
   Personally, let me hit the theological nail directly on the head – is AI a gift from God, or humans trying to play God in a modern-day version of Frankenstein? Could anything with AI ever have a soul, get ‘saved’ and enter Heaven for all eternity?
   These are the sorts of very deep questions which any reader – let alone a Christian – will face upon reading ‘2084’. It is time for me to nail my theological colours to the mast regarding AI.
   My severely autistic son, Adam, is 25 and has a vocabulary of two words – No and Up. He has very severe behavioural challenges, temper tantrums, and has never been – and never will be – in any form of mainstream education, having been statemented with severe autism in November 1997. The coronavirus lockdown was a nightmare for us as parents.
   I have never had a conventional dad/son conversation with him as he cannot talk. My Christian faith tells me there will be no autism in Heaven, and I will have to wait until we are both in eternity and he is blessed with a new, wholesome body before that conversation can take place.
   Likewise, according to the Biblical interpretation of Heaven, there will be no illnesses, therefore, I will be able to meet up again with loved ones and friends lost, for example, to cancer and COPD.
   But what if cures to these challenging conditions and diseases could be found on earth through AI? Through science, God has given the gift of solutions to many of the globe’s illnesses.
   Generations, decades, and centuries ago, illnesses which then were fatal can now in 2020 be cured. This is not to say that science has replaced Christianity and that I am a closet member of the Illuminati.
   I am merely stating that God has given mankind gifts, and these include finding cures to illnesses. I do not subscribe to the idiotic theology that Covid 19 is a punishment from God.
   But as a born again believer, I do believe that God can guide the hands and minds of the medical professionals to find a vaccine which can combat and cure Covid 19.
   Advancements in fertility medicine and treatments have meant that many couples who could not conceive naturally now have the chance of enjoying the benefits of raising a family. Who are we to judge where life begins?
   Put bluntly, is it a sin to either prolong life or create life through AI? Can AI understand the concepts of the soul and conscience?
   Does AI have a moral compass, or will mankind use AI to create killing machines which obey orders without questions? But then again, mankind does not require AI to do this – just think of the Hitler’s Holocaust, or Stalin’s Purges in Russia, or the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia; no AI there!
   The challenge for the Christian Church is how can AI be used in evangelism? As a devout Creationist, I firmly believe God created man without sin in the Garden of Eden as outlined in the Old Testament book of Genesis.
   Sin caused the Fall of Man in that perfect Garden. Could AI be one of the gifts through which God prepares mankind for the wonders of Heaven. Does the Christian journey to eternity begin with death, or when a person becomes a ‘born again’ believer?
   Years ago as a film critic, I had to watch Mel Gibson’s masterpiece, The Passion of the Christ, a number of times before doing my review. Similarly, I’ve had to read ‘2084’ through a number of times before comprehending how Christianity can live with AI.
   Whatever your outlook on Christianity, religion, or even spirituality, ‘2084’ is a ‘must read’. Okay, so I’ve posed more questions in this review than provided answers or recommendations.
   What ‘2084’ has practically done for me is to challenge myself as a Christian to ask – how can we discover and use the gifts of the Holy Spirit?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: The ‘Burning Bush’ which fired me to the Right!
Edge of the Union columnist Dr John Coulter is a self-confessed and unrepentant Radical Right-wing Unionist. He has been a life-long Ulster Unionist Party member and a former member of the Ulster Monday Club. In this Ballymena Accent column, he details how he made the political journey from Young Alliance to the Radical Right of Unionist politics.
Blame Bushy! That’s the Fianna na hEireann member who must shoulder the blame for all the articles which get so many heckles up in my writings and why I now classify myself politically as an unrepentant Radical Right-wing Ulster Unionist.
   Bushy was the nickname I personally gave to a member of the junior Provisional IRA in north Antrim. Although I come from a staunch Orange Order, evangelical Irish Presbyterian and Ulster Unionist background, my early political thoughts were heavily influenced by liberal-minded teachers and headmasters at Ballymena Academy.
   Indeed, after becoming a born-again Christian in 1972 and as political thoughts began to develop, I saw the Alliance Party as my natural home. While my late grand-parents had major connections to the Orange Order in Co Tyrone, they also had a strong relationship with the thriving evangelical Faith Mission movement in the county.
   Throughout the Sixties and early Seventies, the Twelfth in Tyrone was as big a family fun day out as the annual Christmas Day gathering of the Coulters in Stewartstown. The Twelfth in those early years of my life was not about sectarianism, but waving the Union flag which Gran bought me and bringing a punnet of strawberries to my dad, Rev Dr Robert Coulter, who was an Orange chaplain.
   The same family atmosphere was also true of the traditional end to the Protestant Marching Season, the last Saturday of August – known as Black Saturday – with the Royal Black Institution.
   Even when the family moved to Clough, Co Antrim, where my father had become the local Presbyterian minister, my liberal views on life flourished. Although the exclusively Protestant village had a large Glasgow Rangers following, I and a few friends from the church, took a keen interest in the successes of the rival Old Firm club, Glasgow Celtic.
   One of my best chums, who later became an RUC officer, was an avid Celtic fan. I looked forward to the visits to Clough Manse from one the neighbouring Presbyterian ministers, the Rev Robert Dalglish of Newtowncrumlin Presbyterian Church, known affectionately as ‘Bob D’ (My dad being equally affectionately known by the Rev Dalglish as ‘Bob C’).
   ‘Bob D’ had been an equally avid fan of the former Belfast Celtic club and we used enthusiastically to chat about the links between the two soccer clubs.
   My early years, too, at Ballymena Academy – one of the town’s grammar schools – were equally formative, and especially the influence of four key members of staff – my prep school form tutor James McWhirter; headmasters William Mol and Denis Jagoe, and my history tutor, Robert Mitchell (affectionately nicknamed Big Bob).
   My parents allowed me to develop my own political views and never rammed Orangeism and Unionism down my throat. From the age of 12, I became an avid follower of Alliance and could not wait until the age at which I could join either Young Alliance or the senior party in North Antrim.
   This was in spite of my early times as an Ulster Unionist activist, serving tea and sandwiches in Clough Manse to a shaking North Antrim UUP MP Henry Clark after a tough encounter with Paisley supporters near Clough during the hard-fought 1970 Westminster General Election campaign.
   In my youthful dreams, I imagined myself as first an Alliance councillor on Ballymena Borough Council, and then perhaps when Stormont was brought back, becoming a Stormont MP for Alliance. The original Stormont Parliament had been axed by the Tories in 1972, but I always harboured ambitions to work at Stormont.
   Even when my cousin, Arthur Henderson, a police reservist, was murdered by the Provos in a booby trap car bomb in my native Stewartstown in October 1974, I still felt Alliance was the best way out of the sectarian impasse.
   The turning point came in the mid Seventies when Ulsterbus decided to change the daily bus route into Ballymena to include republican strongholds near Clough. The Catholics would get on first, then we – mostly Protestants – would get on the bus as it picked us up at the former Carnbeg primary school and make its way into the town via the Doury Road.
   This was to be my first taste of naked anti-Protestant sectarian hatred. Any seats not occupied by the Catholics, they had covered in classroom chalk or spat upon making them unusable. They jeered and sneered as we Protestants had to stand.
   All of this sectarian vandalism had been done by male students attending the Catholic secondary school in Ballymena. The very few seats occasionally untouched and usable were occupied by middle class female students from the Catholic grammar in the town.
   Ulsterbus drivers did nothing to combat the sectarianism; in reality, what could they do? Unless you wanted you coat covered in Catholic spittle, or chalk, it was best to stand and endure the taunts than sit.
   When the Catholic grammar girls would give you a seat to sit, the male secondary school pupils pushed them out of the way to threaten you to their face; you were out-numbered a dozen to one, so physically either fighting them back or ‘giving them some verbal’ was pointless and a recipe for disaster.
   The Catholic male students would then produce their sheath knives and penknives and rub them up and down your legs to see your reaction. Sit tight and don’t move was the correct tactic.
   After a couple of the knife rubs, one young Catholic male taunted me as to why I didn’t fight him back. I decided to give him the response. I said I was a born-again Christian, that my dad was minister of Presbyterian Church they passed on the way to the Doury Road, and my dad would not approve of me fighting.
   The Catholic thug’s reaction was interesting. As soon as I told him I was related to a cleric – albeit a Protestant one – his face went as white as a sheet and he ordered all his mates to stop flashing their knives at me. From that day on, I was never taunted again, or threatened, and I always had a seat free of spittle and chalk. It was very clear my link to a clergyman frightened these supposed young republican ‘hardmen’.
   Was their respect or fear of their local Catholic clergy transported into a fear of any type of cleric? I can only assume that, but the initial experience of the Catholic ‘chalk and spittle’ tactic left a bitter taste in my mouth politically. Worse was to follow and the key turning point in the political development.
   In spite of my born again Christian beliefs, the inward Carnbeg bus journey left me questioning my Alliance principles. Maybe the Alliance methods were not tough enough to realistically combat sectarianism? Maybe Alliance was only a fancy talking shop with no real political muscle to deal with the seemingly bitter hatred between Catholic and Protestant.
   That key point came in the early to mid Seventies when some older Catholic males began getting our Carnbeg bus route home. One was Bushy. That was simply a nickname I gave him. He was never known as Bushy to anybody else. I never referred to him as Bushy – certainly not to his face!
   Bushy loved not just to taunt Protestants, but to target them. His mates would laugh at his sectarian antics, but never get involved in the physical sectarian bullying. It was clear from his comments towards me that he knew my dad was a senior member of the Loyal Orders.
   Rumours began to spread through our community that Bushy was a member of the Junior IRA. The situation came to a head on the bus one evening when Bushy set fire to my coat. He always sat behind me and had flicked a lit match onto my plastic coat which had been a present from a relative in Canada.
   I did not even realise my coat was burning until some girls sitting nearby saw the flames and stubbed them out. Bushy merely laughed. I was distraught more at the fact that the present from my aunt was ruined. When I showed my parents the remains of the coat, they lodged a formal protest, but Bushy never bothered me again on the bus.
   Even worse was to follow with the final incident. I was walking through Ballymena one day when Bushy and a group of his mates in a car pulled alongside me. Bushy opened his passenger door and began to hurl verbal abuse at me.
   Naturally, I backed away, but was saved by the fact that a short distance behind me was a member of the feared Harryville Tartan loyalist gang. Even though the Tartan member was alone, it was enough to scare Bushy and his mates away.
   The Harryville Tartan had a fearsome reputation in its day and probably struck more fear into the nationalist population in Ballymena and the surrounding areas than the loyalist paramilitaries.
   I never saw Bushy again. In February 1977, the IRA murdered a police reservist from my dad’s church, Samuel McKane. Again, rumours began to spread that Bushy was allegedly linked to the murder of the reservist.
   For me, Bushy became the living embodiment of republicanism which had to be combated and Alliance was certainly not the vehicle to do so. Down came the posters in my Presbyterian Manse bedroom of Glasgow Celtic, and up went Unionist Party posters and pendants of King Billy. I switched soccer allegiance to Glasgow Rangers.
   Within a year of Samuel’s murder, I was a member both of the Orange Order and the North Antrim Young Unionists, the UUP’s youth wing. My journey to the radical right of Unionism was complete. During my time in the Young Unionists, the North Antrim YU association became probably in its day the most hardline of all the YU associations in Northern Ireland.
   As for Bushy, he must be a pensioner by now, if he is still alive. Some people say he was ‘jumped’ by loyalists near his work, had his arms broken and he was tossed in the river. Others say he fled either to America or the Republic; another rumour had him killed by loyalists; others say he is alive, but has left republican politics.
   Maybe some day I will meet Bushy again. It would be interesting as adults to discuss our respective political journeys. There was no gradual indoctrination from my parents or peers on my own journey to the Radical Right of Unionism; it happened in seconds when a lit match landed on my coat.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: New band parade routes could march Parades Commission into a corner!
A Twelfth, Sham Fight and potential Black Saturday never witnessed in the history of the Protestant Loyal Orders are upon us in 2020. Commentator Dr John Coulter uses his Ballymena Accent column to maintain the pandemic provides the perfect chance for the marching bands to pile pressure on the under-fire Parades Commission. 
Since its inception, the Parades Commission has always seemed to be a step ahead of the Protestant Loyal Orders and marching bands as many traditional routes are curtailed, re-routed or have severe restrictions imposed on them.
   Earlier this year, as lockdown beckoned, the Grand Lodge cancelled the traditional Twelfth demonstrations as we know them because of the pandemic, opting instead for a virtual or home-based Twelfth.
   Also off is the traditional annual Sham Fight at Scarva, which usually sees around 60,000 people pack into the picturesque village for the parade by the Royal Black Institution and the re-enactment of the Battle of the Boyne.
   Likewise, the Black’s traditional Last Saturday in August is also off, and with many churches still trying to come to terms with restrictions around worship procedures, many annual divine services held by the Loyal Orders will also be in jeopardy.
   In the meantime, the Parades Commission has been inundated with applications from bands for parades – hopefully all planned with the social distancing in mind.
   This is a gift horse for the marching band fraternity. This presents the bands with an opportunity to use the Covid 19 restraints to launch entirely new ‘traditional’ parade routes in villages, towns, cities and housing developments across Ulster.
   Some Loyal Order brethren and sisters may even be preparing to host mini parades in their gardens or rural locations which do not require the permission of the Parades Commission.
   One Orangeman is even preparing to walk around his front and back gardens on the 12 July, 13 July (because the Twelfth falls on a Sunday in 2020) and 14 July in his Black regalia, complete with his mobile phone blaring out the traditional marching music.
   At first reading, this sounds daft, but just as many people hosted socially distanced street events to commemorate the 75th anniversary of VE Day earlier this year, the Twelfth at Home could become an integral part of the Orange and band culture in Northern Ireland.
   The change in demographics may have put an increasing pressure on traditional routes as Catholics begin living in locations which were either exclusively or predominantly Protestant a century ago.
   And its not just the Loyal Orders which have been affected by these demographic changes. Some traditional band parades have also been curtailed because of shifts in populations.
   While the vast majority of band parades and Loyal Order parades are held in Northern Ireland, those Loyal Orders and marching band scene is organised in the Republic, especially in the border counties of Cavan, Monaghan, Leitrim and Donegal.
   Indeed, even since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, the annual ‘Donegal Dander’ through the coastal village of Rossnowlagh in the Saturday prior to 12 July has become an increasingly popular event.
   Traditionally, it takes the form of a parade and religious service for the Southern county lodges, allowing them to parade with their Northern counterparts on 12 July.
   However, an increasing number of both bands and Northern brethren and sisters have been making the journey across the border to Rossnowlagh to such an extent that this has become one of the biggest Loyal Order events in the Orange calendar.
   This is also an opportunity for the Loyal Orders to emphasise their religious roots. While church services are curtailed at present, perhaps the Loyal Orders can consider extending the ‘season’ beyond the traditional end in late August and hold those church services later in the year.
   The traditional marching season normally begins with the Easter parades and ends with Black Saturday. Now there is an opportunity for both bands and the Loyal Orders to organise parades throughout the entire calendar year and not just limit themselves to the traditional Easter to August timeframe.
   What the Loyal Orders and bands need to realise is that the days of the mass protests at Drumcree in Portadown and the Lower Ormeau Road in Belfast are over. The Orders and bands will have to box clever if they are not to be outwitted by either Sinn Fein or nationalist residents’ groups.
   The solution may well be to use the Covid 19 crisis as a golden opportunity to increase the number and types of parades in predominantly Protestant locations, both urban and rural.
   The political fallout from the funeral of veteran republican Bobby Storey will be a test case as to how Covid 19 restrictions will be enforced. The Loyal Orders and bands should take careful note of the long-term outcome of this fallout and take advantage of the situation accordingly.
   However, the Loyal Orders and bands could once again find themselves marched up a blind alley by the Parades Commission if loyalists ‘play stupid’ with Eleventh Night bonfires, turning such events into social distancing nightmares.
   Only time will tell if Ulster is entering a new era of street and garden parades, or if the Loyal Orders and bands will find their traditional routes and events further curtailed.
   Indeed, both these sections of the marching fraternities need to ensure they don’t end up with the ultimate nightmare – restricted to events indoors in churches and halls with open air parades confined to history.
   In this respect, 2020 can truly be defined as a telling year and landmark occasion for the Loyal Orders and marching bands.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Headline: Fighting heaven’s battles!
The funeral of veteran republican Bobby Storey may have sparked a furious political row, but as religious commentator Dr John Coulter explores in his Ballymena Accent column today, it has also pushed the Christian Church into a frontline debate about heaven – and who is in it!
Heaven is certainly going to be an interesting place, if you take hardline loyalist and republican versions of paradise.
   After the death of veteran republican Bobby Storey – one of the hardest of republican hardmen – it was suggested in one republican circle that Storey was in heaven.
   Here was a man, who reportedly did not openly practice any Christian faith and was allegedly responsible for the deaths of countless people during the Troubles, and yet according to a faction of republicanism he is with our Lord in heaven.
   That must be bitter spiritual medicine for the families of his alleged victims which he dispatched into eternity to swallow.
   These claims about the location of Storey’s soul reminded me of as furore I found myself in when, as Northern Political Correspondent of the Irish Daily Star, I wrote an article 13 years ago in 2007 marking the 10th anniversary of the murder of the loyalist godfather, Billy Wright.
   Wright was perhaps the loyalist mirror image of the republican Storey. In December 1997, Wright was shot dead inside the maximum security Maze Prison by INLA inmates.
   Just as Storey had been a key figure in the Provisional IRA’s intelligence gathering network and had been rumoured to have at one time served on the IRA’s ruling Army Council, Wright had been a key figure in the Mid Ulster Brigade of the UVF.
   While Storey remained loyal to the Gerry Adams/Martin McGuinness peace strategy which led to the IRA ceasefire of 1994 and the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, Wright remained opposed to the 1994 ceasefire called by the Combined Loyalist Military Command.
   Wright was also disillusioned with what he saw as the increasingly left-wing leanings of the political voice of the UVF and Red Hand Commando – the Belfast-influenced Progressive Unionist Party.
   Unlike Storey, who remained loyal to the mainstream republican movement, Wright set up the dissident Loyalist Volunteer Force terror group, which continued the sectarian killing campaign begun with the Mid Ulster UVF.
   However, Wright was not always associated with loyalist terrorism. At one time, he had made a profession of being a ‘born again’ Christian and was at one time a Christian evangelist in the Republic of Ireland.
   This part of his life seems to have been swept ‘under the carpet’ so that when I quoted a Christian cleric as claiming that Billy Wright was in heaven, it naturally sparked outrage – especially among the nationalist community.
   How could such a mass killer like Wright have made it into heaven? Now I hear the same claims about Storey; how could someone with Storey’s track record in republican terrorism be sitting in heaven?
   Ironically, it is theologically possible that two of the most notorious terrorists which the Troubles spawned be actually enjoying the spiritual benefits of heavenly paradise?
   On paper, this seems like a total insult to the memories of people alleged to have been murdered by Wright and Storey.
   However, the theological debate begins when we examine the life of the New Testament leading character, Saul of Tarsus, better known as Paul the Apostle – one of the Christianity’s leading evangelists and one of the great authors of the Bible.
   Before his conversion to Christianity, Saul of Tarsus (not to be confused with King Saul from the Old Testament) was a leading persecutor of Christians. Historically, it has been assumed that Saul of Tarsus hunted Christians in the same way as the Nazi Gestapo hunted Jews during the reign of terror by Hitler’s Third Reich.
   But in the New Testament, we read how Saul of Tarsus had a conversion to Christianity on the road to Damascus during a direct encounter with God. After this conversion, Saul became known as the Apostle Paul and sparked the phrase ‘Road to Damascus conversion’.
   This is taken to mean – in both secular and Christian terms – that a person has had such a change of heart that they have gone from holding a position on one issue, to holding the opposite position on that issue. For example, a person moving from being a staunch Unionist to becoming an ardent supporter of a united Ireland; a person advocating pro-life and the rights of the unborn to becoming someone who believes passionately in a woman’s right to abortion.
   Such was the nature of Saul/Paul’s conversion, that he went from being one of the biggest Christian hunters in Scripture – perhaps as fanatical as King Herod who hunted the Baby Jesus – to the author of some of the great New Testament epistles, such as Ephesians, Corinthians, and Philippians.
   But what really throws the cat among the theological pigeons is St Luke’s account of the crucifixion of Christ, and especially the fact that two thieves were also crucified along with Jesus at Calvary.
   In St Luke Chapter 23 beginning at verse 39 (King James Version), we read: “And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
   “But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not this fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
   “And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
   “And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
   “And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”
   That final verse of this passage, number 43, can often be referred to as a death bed conversion. Many clerics would share the Salvationist point of view that it is possible for an individual to lead a life of sin, yet repent and ask for God’s Salvation moments before they enter eternity.
   Here was a convicted thief who cried out to Jesus as he was dying through crucifixion and Jesus assured him because he had repented that he would be with him in Glory.
   Many evangelists will use this passage from St Luke’s Gospel to challenge people are to where they will spend eternity. Will they be like the thief who mocked Christ, or the thief who sought Jesus’s Salvation?
   This account of the thief on the cross is a practical example of that great Salvationist text from St John Chapter 3, verse 16 (King James Version): “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
   The bottom line theologically as applied to Storey and Wright – how do we know what went through the minds of these two terrorists as they stared eternity in the face?
   Is it possible that before they died, each of them – like the convicted thief on the cross – asked for the Salvation of Jesus?
   We shall never know until Judgement Day and the books of heaven are opened and the names in the Lambs Book of Life are revealed. Only then will we truly know if certain people’s views that Storey and Wright are in heaven.
   But both were given large paramilitary funerals, critics might say. But those funerals concerned their earthly remains, not their eternal souls.
   For years to come, theologians will debate the act of Salvation. As a Presbyterian minister’s son, I am aware talking to my late father and other evangelical clerics of how they lead people to Christ and that Salvation as those people lay on their death beds.
   As to whether that Salvationist conversion process took place in relation to Storey and Wright, I simply cannot answer that question.
   All that I can say is that the theological concept of a death bed Salvationist conversion is genuine, according to the examples from Scripture.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: Alliance can be seen in its true colours!
Political commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to reflect on the way forward for the Alliance Party, including the controversial suggestion that it should organise in Southern Ireland as an alternative centre left/liberal party to the Greens and Sinn Fein. 
Naomi Long’s Alliance Party cannot bask in the sunshine of past electoral ‘bounces’ for the next few years, especially if the gamble by the Northern Ireland Green Party supporters pays off and the Southern Irish Greens form a stable coalition government in Dublin’s Leinster House.
   While the Northern Green Party has been split over the decision of its Southern counterparts to enter a power-sharing coalition in Dublin to keep Sinn Fein out of government, the fact remains – the Southern Greens have influence in Dail politics.
   The Sinn Fein and Green surge in last year’s Dail General Election can be interpreted as Southern voters using those parties as ‘protest votes’ against the so-called ‘Big Two’ – Fine Gael and Fianna Fail.
   It can also be suggested that the Alliance surge in three successive elections in Northern Ireland could be interpreted as the electorate using the party as a ‘protest vote’ against Brexit and the then Stormont stalemate.
   This was especially seen in the European election when Naomi Long snatched the once politically rock solid UUP seat. This ‘bounce’ was followed in the Westminster General Election with Alliance both taking the coveted North Down seat and reducing DUP majorities in other seats by replacing the UUP in the runner-up spot.
   Traditionally, since its inception in the 1970s, Alliance has always been viewed as a ‘soft u’ unionist party, even though it has pushed hard to emphasise its non-sectarian image. Now the political pendulum has swung in the other direction.
   Alliance’s stance over the flying of the Union Flag and North Down MP Dr Stephen Farry’s recent outburst about the choice of colours on a Linfield soccer shirt has fuelled the speculation – especially among the loyalist working class – that Alliance has now shifted politically to becoming a ‘soft r’ republican party.
   Alliance obviously would dispute this, preferring to argue that the party has been clear about its agenda while other parties have been vague, stressing that this would account for the party’s growing electoral support west of the River Bann – a part of the Province which for decades was barren land for Alliance.
   No matter what view you take on Alliance’s success, one fact remains indisputable – the party will have to plan its way forward if, as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, there may not be Northern elections until 2022.
   Alliance will certainly have to dispel the view that its ‘bounces’ were purely down to protest voting and the surge will have run its course by 2022 with electoral support slipping to single percentage figures again.
   I have often expressed the opinion that Unionism should organise south of the border, especially in the Southern border counties of Donegal, Monaghan, Leitrim and Cavan where there is strong Loyal Order activity.
   Given past Dail General Election outcomes where only a handful of seats have decided the make-up of a coalition government, even if that handful was Irish Unionist TDs then it would give Unionism a powerful voice in Leinster House.
   It would be an equally powerful platform for Unionism to act as persuaders to get Southern Ireland to at least rejoin the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association as part of a post Brexit economic strategy for the geographical island of Ireland.
   Sinn Fein and the Greens remain the only relevant political parties organised on an all-island basis. The SDLP has recognised the merit of having an all-Ireland identity with its rocky partnership with Fianna Fail.
   Attempts by both the Irish Labour Party and British Labour Party to contest elections in Northern Ireland have so far fallen on deaf ears. It might have been hoped either of these Labour Parties could have occupied the political spectrum previously vacated by the old Northern Ireland Labour Party during the original Stormont Parliament era.
   When MLAs Basil McCrea and John McCallister left the UUP to form the very short-lived NI21 middle of the road party, I suggested in one article they should consider organising in Southern Ireland as the SI21 party. But NI21 imploded!
   The key question remains – is there room on the political spectrum in Southern Ireland for a liberal nationalist party? With Fianna Fail and Fine Gael viewed as right-wing parties and the Greens, Labour, Aontu and Sinn Fein on the clear left, could Alliance make an impact in the solid centre and soft centre left and soak up many of the seats held by Independent TDs?
   Or if such a situation did develop, would the new look Alliance Party of Ireland face the same dilemma as the current Greens – with some Northern members believing they should not be interfering in Southern politics even though the Greens are an all-island movement?
   With the centenaries of the Anglo-Irish Treaty, partition, the split in republicanism and the bloody Irish Civil War looming, in spite of Sinn Fein’s electoral popularity, the party has a lot of historical baggage to contend with.
   If the Shinners are unable to rewrite history to make them look like ‘the good guys’ of the 1920s, voters may in future abandon Sinn Fein as the party of protest for another movement – enter the Alliance Party of Ireland!
   In Northern Ireland, only time will tell if the Alliance surge was merely a protest vote on Stormont and Brexit, or whether Alliance has finally become a genuine and serious liberal party.
   If it is the former, Alliance may need a new battle plan to spark yet another surge and a Southern electoral strategy may well be that much needed battle plan.
   If it is the latter and Alliance will be a major permanent feature of the Northern Ireland landscape for decades to come, then why not build on that success and power base to develop an all-island identity.
   The smart money would be on Alliance rebranding as the Alliance Party of Ireland, so move over the Greens and Shinners!
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Headline: Be local, think local, buy local, save local!
Support your local shops! That’s the economic solution which political commentator Dr John Coulter emphasises in his latest Ballymena Accent column today as the means to stabilise the Northern Ireland business scene in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic lockdown. 
As the lockdown steadily eases, the next challenge – setting aside Brexit if that’s possible – will be to rebuild the financially battered Northern Ireland economy in the wake of the losses it has suffered as a result of the virus.
   In this respect, every citizen in Northern Ireland can play their part by buying local and supporting local.
   Given the mental strains which the lockdown has thrown up at the Northern Ireland community, there is the massive temptation that once the airports and sea ports are fully functional, it will be a case of ‘sunshine holidays abroad here we come!’
   Whilst that is a natural reaction to ‘get away somewhere, anywhere’ after weeks of being isolated in lockdown with maybe only a back garden to dander about in terms of exercise, I would urge the community to think of ways of supporting the local economy.
   Even before the virus hit, many politicians were encouraging us to ‘buy local’ and support locally-based industries, especially in the agricultural community.
   Just as politicians also rammed home during the lockdown the need to remain at home, those same politicians will need to work together if the ‘buy local, support local’ mentality is to effectively work.
   In the days running up to the formal lockdown, there was massive panic buying of toilet paper. That ridiculous attitude towards buying food and ingredients needs to be quashed when it comes to locally-produced food stuffs.
   Whether shoppers are queuing socially distant, using home delivery, or ‘click and collect’, we all need to thoroughly examine our shopping lists and simply ask the question – what can we buy that is produced in Northern Ireland?
   Granted, there will always be some food products which will need to be imported, but can we all play our parts in rebuilding the local economy with a ‘support local’ attitude put into practice?
   The same attitude applies to the tourist and hospitality industry. Rather than jet off as soon as possible for other European shores, let’s ask ourselves – to help the local tourist trade, would it be possible to take our holidays in Northern Ireland in 2020?
   Indeed, perhaps for many families this may well be a necessity rather than an option given the number of workers who have either face financial furloughing or lost their jobs entirely as a result of the lockdown.
   Would this be the perfect opportunity for local cycling, running and walking clubs to expand their membership and make use of Northern Ireland roads and walkways and parks?
   How many restaurants, takeaways, pubs, hotels and B&Bs can be saved from financially ‘going under’ if the Northern Ireland community decided as do their civic duty and holiday in the Province this year.
   Although the Orange Order has decided to cancel this year’s Twelfth demonstrations in terms of the traditional marches and public gatherings, the Order is still planning virtual parades at home.
   Traditionally, too, that Twelfth fortnight also witnessed a mass evacuation from Northern Ireland of folk destined for the shores of European countries and beyond.
   But think of the revenue which could be generated for the Ulster economy if every family which normally went abroad for the Twelfth alone, decided to holiday in Northern Ireland.
   In spite of the personal horrors which the Covid 19 pandemic hurled at our community, there were equally many stories of the community pulling together like never before to combat the social effects of the lockdown. Home deliveries to vulnerable families and isolated individuals, especially among the elderly, were just two examples of this terrific community spirit in action.
   Could that same community spirit be mobilised to save the Northern Ireland economy rather than just simply relying solely – hopefully – on massive cash injections from either the Northern Ireland Executive at Stormont or the Westminster Government?
   Likewise, in the education and church communities, we witnessed people grab the lockdown bull by the horns and develop many excellent resources online.
   Numerous students have been able to complete their courses because of the online and remote teaching and lecturing provided by tutors. And among the religious communities, fellowships and congregations have remained in communication as clerics and Bible studies tutors provided church services and studies online.
   Given the vast amount of talent which was displayed in online education in recent weeks, could this be harnessed to sell Northern Ireland Online across the globe?
   With the new academic year supposed to start on 1st September, many schools and colleges may not still be fully operational in terms of pupils attending. Remote lecturing and staggered attendances may well be the order of the day.
   Distance learning, or blended learning, has now become part of the ‘new normal’ in education. Surely this expertise could be packaged and sold abroad.
   Just as the online shopping and delivery services saw a massive boost in operations during the lockdown, surely the same entrepreneurial development could be applied to training and education.
   For example, Northern Ireland has a wealth of people skilled in media and journalist training. Such distance learning courses would enable tutors to have remote classes across the globe.
   The same could be true of the film industry in Northern Ireland. Games of Thrones and other notable series put Northern Ireland on the map as a location for film making.
   With proper financial support, could the creative industries be developed so that young – and old – Northern Irish film makers could have their films, programmes and documentaries screened across the globe – and all made in Northern Ireland.
   The lockdown saw a massive interest in film outlets such as Sky Cinema, Netflix and Amazon Prime. Could the funding be made available to enable film makers to have their work screened on these outlets?
   Perhaps the motto of the ‘new normal’ for Northern Ireland should be ‘be local, think global’?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: Gandhi and Connolly: a sure remedy in combating the lockdown blues!
With the lockdown restrictions easing, political and religious commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to reflect on two people who helped him beat the lockdown ‘blues’. 
As a born again Christian, I have enjoyed the pleasures and challenges spiritually of the Covid 19 lockdown and viewed some terrific online messages as the Gospel message enjoys a religious revival across Ireland.
   The solace of lockdown has provided me with an opportunity to contemplate my Christian faith and reflect on my spiritual journey since I became a born again believer at the age of 12 in 1972.
   I’ve also reflected on my experiences as a Presbyterian minister’s son growing up in the heart of the North East Ulster Bible Belt in the 1960s and 1970s. There was also a chance to ponder what the political future of this island of Ireland will hold in a post lockdown society.
   It is with some irony that two people stuck out in my mind as I pondered these situations – the Indian nationalist leader Mahatma Gandhi, later assassinated, and the 1916 Dublin Easter Rising leader James Connolly, later executed by a British firing squad.
   While Gandhi was a devout Hindu, it was a quote about Christianity which has always stuck in my mind: “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
   The core challenge from this quote – how many of us Christians – myself included – put people off the faith because of our words and actions?
   While the church doors have been physically closed because of the lockdown restrictions, the online Christian Church has flourished. With church attendances falling in some mainstream Christian denominations pre-lockdown, the lockdown online Church is boasting attendances in the thousands.
   Speaking to one Pentecostal pastor as a benchmark, his church had a Sunday morning attendance of around 100 people; now, his online service is clocking up around 3,000 viewers.
   The big challenge for the Christian faith once the places of worship are re-opened again is – how many of the online congregations can be retained? Religious traditions and rituals can be a major part of of Christian worship, but some of these traditions may needed to be dumped in the ‘new normal’ church.
   During lockdown, how many of us donned our traditional ‘Sunday best’ to watch the online services or Bible studies? Very few, I’d guess. Of course, even before the lockdown restrictions which closed churches, many fellowships had already adopted relaxed dress codes at worship, especially those of the Pentecostal theology.
   Perhaps the churches and fellowships which will face the biggest challenge post lockdown as the fundamentalists who, generally speaking, enforce very strict dress codes, especially that women should always have their heads covered in church.
   But what will such fundamentalist churches do if, as a result of the lockdown online evangelism, a crowd of women turn up at their places of worship with no hats or wearing trousers?
   What about the menfolk who don’t don the traditional ‘Sunday best’, but come to worship in tee-shirts, jeans, unshaven, or even wearing football shirts? Will all of these folk be turned away at the doors by hardline fundamentalist elders and clerics?
   While the coronavirus pandemic has probably been one of the globe’s biggest medical challenges since the start of this third millennium, the Christian Church must be ready to implement its vision for the ‘new normal’ once the buildings re-open for public worship; it must not fall into a Gandhi situation.
   Practically, was Gandhi referring to the activities of the judgemental gossips of the so-called ‘tut-tut brigade’ who pollute many of our churches,  with their whispering campaigns of criticism behind people’s backs? Realistically, will we ever rid our churches of the influence of the ‘tut-tut brigade’ as where you get humans, you get gossips!
   Politically, too, what sort of island of Ireland will emerge in the coming months in the ‘new normal’? Will the sense of co-operation to combat the virus be maintained by the political parties and pressure groups, or will we return to the days of political point scoring?
   Will supposedly contentious statues and monuments become the new parades crisis? Will political life revolve around fighting over how we remember and commemorate the dead?
   One of the films I watched during the lockdown was ‘The Wind That Shakes The Barley’ which is set in Ireland in the 1920s during the War of Independence and Irish Civil War.
   Whilst in jail, two republicans quote the words of James Connolly, one of the leaders of the Dublin Easter Rising, who was subsequently shot by firing squad on the orders of General Maxwell.
   They are taken from the 1916 ‘Under Which Flag’ document in which a speech by Connolly in January 1897 is used: “If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin Castle, unless you set about the organisation of the Socialist Republic, your efforts would be in vain.”
   Given the recent electoral results in both Northern and Southern Ireland, Unionism as an ideology on paper is seen as being on the back foot. Should ‘New Normal Unionism’ prepare for some kind of Irish unity, be that much closer co-operation between Dublin and Belfast, or all-Ireland unification?
   Let me redraft the words of Connolly and give you the words of Coulter: “If Dublin removes the British from Northern Ireland and hoists the green flag over Stormont, unless you set about the organisation of a socialist independent Ulster, then your efforts to smash the capitalist rule of Leinster House will have been in vain.”
   Being a Christian socialist does not mean you are a raving Marxist, or you believe in the liberal unionist approach of capitulation to Dublin’s whims. Christ’s Sermon on the Mount as described in Matthew’s Gospel is at the heart of the Christian socialist agenda. It is a people-first ideology.
   What politicians and voters in the ‘new normal’ will have to decide is clear – will they put people first, or point-scoring first?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: Could John Turnly have ended the Troubles sooner?
June 4 marked the 40th anniversary of the murder in 1980 by loyalists of leading Protestant republican and Larne councillor John Turnly. Political commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to pose the question – if Turnly had lived, could he have ended the Troubles sooner? 
Councillor John Turnly was only 44 and a rising star of democratic republicanism when he was gunned down by the UDA in the east Antrim coastal village of Carnlough on 4 June 1980.
   At first sight, it would be easy to simply classify his murder as another tragic statistic of the Troubles, but when you explore what Turnly could have achieved had he lived then his potential legacy can be viewed in a different light.
   Turnly was not a typical republican and it was this uniqueness which could have sealed his fate at the hands of UDA gunmen. A Protestant by birth and upbringing, he was a former British Army officer who believed passionately in the concept of democratic republican politics, not the violent terror campaign of the Provisional IRA.
   His initial foray into politics was via the moderate Catholic SDLP and in the mid-1970s, he served as a Convention member for North Antrim. But he saw the influence of then West Belfast MP Gerry Fitt as putting too much emphasis on a socialist agenda rather than a democratic republican influence.
   This prompted Turnly to abandon the SDLP and become a founder member of the overtly democratic republican organisation, the Irish Independence Party. Turnly had recognised from his Army experience that the Provisional IRA would never be in a military position to defeat the British security forces using the Provos’ terror campaign.
   He was a passionate believer that it was possible to be a hardline republican using purely democratic means and methods to secure a united Ireland. Perhaps it was this strategy which sealed his fate among loyalists?
   Taking the Turnly tactic into consideration, would the British Government be persuaded through political argument alone together with the ballot box to consider Irish unification rather than the IRA’s strategy of the bomb and bullet?
   Or was it simply pure hate which sealed his fate; did the UDA wish to merely make an example of a Protestant ex-soldier who dared to openly speak of a united Ireland?
   In the UDA’s mind, Protestantism equalled supporting the Union and any Protestant who supported Irish unity was akin to the Londonderry siege traitor Lundy.
   After all, seen through loyalist historical spectacles, the pro-Home Rule liberal Unionist movement in north Antrim in the early 20th century had been a major political thorn in the marching feet of Lord Edward Carson’s vehemently anti-Home Rule Ulster Unionist Council and Ulster Volunteers.
   Tunly stood as an IIP candidate in the 1979 Westminster General Election in his native North Antrim taking on Rev Ian Paisley, the sitting MP. Overall, the IIP proved that while it was an electorally fledgling political movement, it certainly had the potential long-term to severely dent the main nationalist voice at that time, the SDLP.
   However, Turnly’s 1979 Commons campaign was to be more remembered for an incident when he snatched a Union flag from a young Protestant and was promptly chased from the count by loyalists angry at his gesture.
   Turnly, meanwhile, had discovered the Achilles heel of the SDLP – it relied too much on Fitt’s Left-wing socialism rather than a more openly hardline agenda for Irish unity.
   In spite of his staunch republican principles, he strongly opposed the concept of ‘armed struggle’, and ironically became a member of the National H-Block Committee in which he was seen as a politically stabilising force.
   Had he lived, there is a strong chance the 1981 IRA and INLA hunger strike in the Maze prison would not have taken place. Could he have used his powerful persuasive skills to gain the republican inmates’ key demands?
   Likewise, given the rate he was building the IIP, again had he lived, would it have been that party which emerged as the leading voice in Northern nationalism and not Sinn Fein.
   It was the 1981 hunger strike which launched Sinn Fein as a significant force, which in the 2003 Assembly poll, overtook the SDLP as the main voice for Northern republicanism. Had Turnly lived, could his IIP –  not Sinn Fein – become the nationalist movement to eclipse the SDLP in the same way as the SDLP had itself eclipsed the old Stormont Nationalist Party once fronted by Eddie McAteer?
   Was it the example of Turnly who championed the cause of ballot box republicanism with his IIP which was really the foundation stone for republican success in Fermanagh South Tyrone Westminster by-elections won by IRA hunger striker Bobby Sands and later Owen Carron in 1981?
   When Danny Morrison, the then publicity spin doctor for Sinn Fein coined his famous slogan, the Armalite in one hand and the ballot paper in the other – was he thinking of Turnly’s IIP breakthrough in 1979?
   While republicans may wish to say that Sands’ and Carron’s success in 1981 was the electoral springboard for Sinn Fein’s breakthrough, perhaps it does not fit easily into republicanism’s view of its history that the real credit for republicans’ ballot paper strategy was devised by a Protestant ex-British Army officer?
   Turnly’s legacy is not so much what he did achieve in showing republicans it was possible to adopt a purely ballot paper tactic, but in ‘what might have been’ had he lived.
   Republicans had hoped they would achieve a united Ireland by 2016 – the centenary of the failed Dublin Easter Rising. Judging by the electoral springboard which Turnly had built by 1979, had he lived, that target date might have been achieved.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Headline: What do you expect from a duck but a quack!
Many in the PUL (Protestant Unionist Loyalist) community are getting their political knickers in a massive twist over Provisional Sinn Fein president Mary Lou McDonald’s recent extensive interview. Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to tell the PULs to take a ‘chill pill’ and adopt a ‘divide and conquer’ strategy towards the republican movement.
Provisional Sinn Fein president Mary Lou McDonald’s recent extensive interview with the Irish Sunday Independent had many in the pro-Union community up in arms over some of her comments.
   Three points seemed to have got Unionists in a real tizzy – her justification of the IRA’s terror campaign; her suggestion that she would probably have joined the IRA during the Troubles had she been old enough, and her rejection of the claim there are shadowy figures pulling her strings (my words) to which she replied: “I am the party leader and I am very much in charge.”
   Unionists felt insulted and angered by the remarks. But after 42 years in journalism in Ireland, I don’t see what the big issue is in her remarks.
   The clue was in her comment about the shadowy figures – ‘I am the party leader’. Yes, she is the leader of Sinn Fein, but not the leader of the republican movement of which Sinn Fein is an integral part.
   What Mary Lou was confirming was that she recognises Sinn Fein’s place in the broad republican movement, a movement where the IRA and especially its ruling Army Council call the shots.
   Mary Lou justified the IRA’s campaign of murder, bombing and shooting – as leader of the apologist wing of the republican movement, she was hardly going to commit political suicide by condemning the IRA violence or refusing to attend memorials to dead IRA terrorists.
   This was merely Mary Lou recognising that she knows her place within the republican movement, and knows her political ‘P’s and Q’s when it comes to talking about the so-called ‘armed struggle’.
   Mary Lou is also recognising that while she may be the leader of a rising political movement in Southern Ireland, it is the Northern Command of the IRA that presently holds sway within the republican movement. Why would a Southern TD stick out her neck politically and antagonise the Northern bosses of republicanism? It does not make sound political sense for a Sinn Fein politician.
   As for her claim that she would probably have joined the IRA had she been old enough during the Troubles, again, this is merely recognising how a person got ahead in Sinn Fein in those days – you had to serve your apprenticeship first in the Provos.
   During the Troubles, the vast majority of key Sinn Fein politicians had had some links to the IRA, unless you emphasise that you were never in the IRA, yet can tell a public rally that the IRA ‘has never gone away’!
   Being realistic, how else could Mary Lou have gained a significant place in Sinn Fein during the Troubles era without being an ‘active volunteer’, especially that during that specific period, the broad republican movement was a male-dominated movement in terms of who gave the orders.
   However, the key question still remains – how should the pro-Union community react to these home truths about the republican movement? Its all very well expressing righteous anger and indignation, but the political reality is that Sinn Fein now has a significant number of TDs in the Dail and MLAs in Stormont.
   Remember the strategy utterance of Danny Morrison, a one-time publicity director for Sinn Fein – the armalite in one hand and the ballot paper in the other? Put bluntly, where would the Sinn Fein part of the republican movement be today without the IRA’s campaign of terror?
   Until the 1981 republican hunger strikes, Sinn Fein was nothing more than an apologist element for the IRA. IRA hunger striker Bobby Sands’ election as Fermanagh South Tyrone Westminster MP in 1981 changed all that strategy.
   Sinn Fein’s role within the republican movement would change significantly and it would enter the political arena. Unionists need to see Sinn Fein like a political octopus – the party is just one tentacle of a much larger beast known as the republican movement.
   Oh yes, it now has a considerable number of elected representatives who have never served their republican apprenticeships in the IRA in a strategy which resembles the ballot paper in one hand and the honours degree in the other hand.
   But the IRA will never leave the broad republican movement. It controls that baby. No Sinn Fein ‘draft dodger’ with any titter of wit is going to risk their political career by condemning the IRA campaign of violence, or slamming republicans holding commemorations to dead IRA terrorists.
   However, what Unionists can do is to ‘suck Sinn Fein deeper and deeper into the democratic process’. The more Sinn Fein ‘draft dodgers’ who have no links to the Provos come to resemble the now defunct Irish Independence Party, the sooner the day will come when eventually that politician will have to chose between being a democratic representative or being a cog in a broad republican movement.
   Policy wise, Sinn Fein is nothing more than a revolutionary Marxist outfit. By being so, it helps bolster its anti-austerity image in Southern Ireland thereby attracting new younger voters.
   The challenges of Covid 19 have forced Sinn Fein to stop scoring political points and behave like a responsible party. But the key challenge for Unionists will still come after the majority of coronavirus restrictions are lifted and the so-called ‘new normal’ comes into play.
   Unionists and republicans have had to work even more closely together for the greater good of the entire community as the virus does not distinguish between pro-Union and pro-United Ireland voters. There is no such things as Orange Covid 19 and Green Covid 19 – there is just Covid 19.
   In this respect, Unionists should simply recognise Mary Lou’s recent utterances for what they truly are – giving the IRA Army Council its proper place within the broad republican movement, and reassuring that IRA Army Council that the Sinn Fein part of that movement is certainly not going ‘ourselves alone’ from that broad republican movement.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: How to get all all-island Unionist agenda back on track
While some in the pro-Union community see Brexit followed by the Covid 19 crisis as weakening the Union with Great Britain, Right-wing commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent to argue the case for a new Anglo-Irish Treaty to bring Southern Ireland into a closer relationship with the UK. 
The one attribute about Unionism which I constantly despise is the negativity of the prophets of doom within the pro-Union community who interpret every political development as a weakening of Northern Ireland’s position within the UK.
   From Provisional Sinn Fein’s surprise electoral ‘bounce’ in last year’s Dail General Election, to the official Brexit in January, through to the challenges of the current coronavirus pandemic, there has been an almost daily diatribe of Loyal Ulster slipping into the grey swamp of an all-Ireland democratic socialist republic.
   While we have just celebrated the 75th anniversary of Victory In Europe (VE) Day and the Allies’ defeat of Hitler and the Nazis, was it not the Nazi Minister for Propaganda Dr Joseph Goebbels who coined the maxim – tell a lie often enough and the people will believe it?
   You have got to hand it to Irish republican spin doctors in recent years; they are excellent at churning out their propaganda message that a united Ireland is within political touching distance. Even the so-called liberal pro-Union community has swallowed that bait.
   Unionism seems to have been poisoned politically by this superb republican spin. On one hand, some Unionists say we should be selling the merits of the Union to the nationalist community; others in the pro-Union community emphasise that we should begin the serious debate of what a future all-island identity should comprise and prepare Northern Ireland for the inevitable day when Westminster finally cuts the strings.
   The word ‘persuasion’ is the latest political football on the Northern Ireland pitch. Republicans and nationalists want to ‘persuade’ Unionists to consider a united Ireland.
   But why can’t Unionists be positive and persuade Southern Ireland to consider a closer political relationship with the UK? At least republicans recognise the tremendous cost of funding a united Ireland, which is probably why the Irish community is one of the biggest ethnic communities in mainland Britain.
   After all, in a united Ireland as envisaged by Sinn Fein, who will pay all the financial benefits enjoyed by the good republican folk in north and west Belfast – certainly not Leinster House! And what about all that lucrative cross-border smuggling? What happens to those ‘claiming unemployment benefits’ in both jurisdictions?
   The Shinners’ answer is naively simple – let the Brits foot the bill! Looks good on paper, but in practice, what parts of the old British Empire enjoyed generations of handouts after independence?
   Besides, all it takes is one dirty bomb to go off in Dublin City centre made by a handful of radicalised dissident loyalists and the Southern electorate will be screaming – we don’t want those nasty Northerners; give them back to the Brits, or give them an independent Ulster!
   The bottom line clearly is, the South cannot afford Northern Ireland, especially if it has to face a 1974-style, no-warning Monaghan and Dublin bomb blitz even from a handful of determined loyalist fanatics.
   So what would work in terms of an all-island arrangement which would satisfy both Unionists and nationalists? Yes, I said nationalists – not republicans, because the reality is that all that will satisfy them will be a united Ireland akin to a Marxist version of the former East Germany.
   You need only listen to the exchanges in the Dail between Fine Gael’s Leo Varadkar and Sinn Fein’s Mary Lou McDonald to understand the frictions between nationalism and republicanism; who said the Irish Civil War mentality ended with the death of Michael Collins!
   As to a workable solution – Northern Unionists and Southern nationalists agree a new Anglo-Irish Treaty (marking the centenary of the original Anglo-Irish Treaty which cemented partition) in which Southern Ireland will rejoin the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association of nations.
   If the Shinners want to stay outside the loop, that’s their problem. Eventually, they will have to enter the CPA arena, just as the DUP in 1998 was vehemently opposed to the Good Friday Agreement, but is now implementing that ethos in 2020 as if the GPA was Ian Paisley senior’s personal political vision.
   Unionists need to realise that ‘Home Rule’ is no longer ‘Rome Rule’. The influence of the Catholic Church in the South has been smashed irreparably. Indeed, one of the attributes of the Covid 19 lockdown on the island as a whole has been the massive increase in interest in the Christian faith, especially in the Pentecostal brand.
  Secularists will just have to swallow the bitter medicine that while church buildings have been physically closed, the online Christian evangelism is booming.
   Republicans can spin the notion of a 32-county united Ireland until the cows come home, but a 32-county ‘Ulster’ under the banner of the CPA is the more realistic and workable option.
   Besides, in a united Ireland as envisaged in the 1916 Proclamation, what’s the point in having a Sinn Fein? Its the same question – what’s the point in a Referendum Party now that there has been one on EU membership, or a Brexit Party now that Brexit has finally happened?
   The real question the pro-Union community must face – do they have the courage to sell the economic, evangelical and political benefits of the CPA solution?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Headline: Virtual demonstrations could solve parades dilemmas
With the Twelfth and Black Saturday falling victims to the coronavirus, the Protestant Loyal Orders are turning to virtual parades to keep up their marching traditions. This means no parade standoffs at Drumcree, the Ardoyne Shops, or the Lower Ormeau Road! Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his Ballymena Accent column to predict this could be a blessing in disguise for the Orange members, Sir Knights and Apprentice Boys. 
Perhaps the Protestant Loyal Orders will enjoy the same fallout from the coronavirus lockdown and social distancing as the Christian Churches are now soaking up – an huge increase in popularity!
   Vast numbers of churches have now gone online with their Sunday worship and mid week and daily Bible studies. In spite of church buildings being physically shut for congregations, online fellowships have sparked massive numbers tuning in which some smaller churches could only have dreamed off prior to the lockdown in March.
   As a benchmark, chatting to one rural Pentecostal pastor, his average Sunday morning attendance at church was around 100 people. Now his regular online service at the same time is attracting a virtual congregation of 3,000. In previous articles, I have dealt with the challenge to the churches as to how they will maintain this interest in Christian worship once the lockdown is ended or rapidly eased.
   Even if restrictions are eased by the time we reach 12 July, the traditional Twelfth parades have all been cancelled for 2020, as have the traditional Last Saturday (or Black Saturday) demonstration in late August by the senior Royal Black Institution.
   Many Orange and Black members are still determined to march, but within the Stormont and Government guidelines. It may well be a case – based on chats to a local Orangeman – that come 12 July, he will be dressed in smart suit and full regalia and will parade around his front and back gardens on his own, mobile phone in hand, booming out The Sash on his loudspeaker.
   Sounds ingenious, even daft, but on a serious note – would such a venture solve many of the contentious parade routes which have dogged the Province for decades.
   Just as the games technology community can communicate and play combat on unknown planets, the Loyal Orders could have virtual parades anywhere in Ireland – even along the Garvaghy Road in Portadown.
   Orangemen could don their bowler hats and virtual goggles and march up and down the republican Falls Road until their eyes get sore. Think of the number of new parade routes which could be developed in the Irish Republic with such virtual technology.
   The annual 13 July Sham Fight at Scarva – again a victim of this year’s virus – usually sees around 60,000 people physically pack into the tiny village to re-enact the Battle of the Boyne. A virtual Sham Fight this year could see millions attend from around the globe.
   For the Orange Order, although its governing body is known as the Grand Lodge of Ireland, its parades in the 26 counties are usually restricted to annual divine services by individual lodges, as well as the annual Rossnowlagh parade in Donegal held on the Saturday prior to 12 July.
   It cannot really be classified as a full-blown demonstration in the Northern Ireland sense as the parade route through the coastal village is only just over a mile to the beach and is more akin to a ‘Donegal Dander’ than a march.
   There are no political speeches at Rossnowlagh, but the ‘platform’ proceedings always take the form of a religious service. While the Rossnowlagh event has been steadily increasing in popularity in recent years as more and more Northerners attend the parade, a virtual Rossnowlagh could again see tens of thousands of people ‘attending online’.
   One of the problems which the Loyal Orders have faced in an increasingly secular Northern Ireland is the drop in numbers sitting or standing around the demonstration field platforms for the religious services.
   But just as the churches have seen a massive increase in online attendances at Sunday services, could the same enthusiasm for the religious section of the proceedings be developed by the Loyal Orders?
   The Loyal Orders have always emphasised their religious roots, but have had to adopt a constant defensive strategy against accusations of blatant sectarianism. Such online religious devotions would allow the Loyal Orders to clearly state their Christian foundations.
   Again, using modern digital technology, the Orders could create the atmosphere of bygone decades for their elderly and retired brothers and sisters. Many lodges on 12 July provide a lodge limo or van for lodge members who are either disabled or too elderly or frail to make the walk, but who still want to be on parade.
   Such technology would enable these members to enjoy the feeling of being on the march again.
   Likewise, the Loyal Orders have developed throughout the globe in nations afar afield as Canada, the United States, Togo and Ghana. Imagine how virtual technology would allow the Orders to march on 12 July through the depths of the Amazon jungle, or through the heat of the Sahara, or the icy cold of the North Pole.
   And such freedom to march would not simply be limited to the Loyal Orders. Republicans would also be able to cash in on such technological advantages – imagine republicans holding an Easter Rising parade along Belfast’s Shankill Road, or a hunger strike commemoration rally through Sandy Row?
   New and digital technology has witnessed an increase in the number of satirical photos and moving image clips mocking politicians and celebrities. And no doubt, those with an amusing mind will think of virtual parades where, in reality, no such event could ever take place.
   But if republicans could giggle at an H Block rally along the Shankill and Orangemen snigger at hosting a Belfast-style demonstration along Dublin’s O’Connell Street, and all done without anyone getting hurt, would it not be worth the effort?
   Of course, the virtual parades are the perfect solution – until someone decides to break the rules and wants to go back to the ‘bad old days’ of face to face confrontations. That’s the challenge to both republicans and loyalists as to how that specific scenario can be avoided in a post lockdown Ireland.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Headline: Churches need to become the new community social centres
If you want a decent, enjoyable and rewarding social life, then come to church! Religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column today to challenge the Christian Churches to build on their online profile in a post lockdown society. 
There can be no doubting that while church buildings have been closed because of the pandemic lockdown, the vast majority of Christian places of worship have taken advantage of the digital revolution and put their Sunday services, Bible studies and prayer meetings online.
   But the key challenge for the churches remains that once the lockdown either eases or is ended, how will Christians be able to maintain that interest in church life.
   Perhaps many people tuned into these online services because of fear or boredom, out simply to remain in touch with their flocks, congregations and fellowships in a time of strict lockdown.
   The churches must not lose this interest momentum which they have gained because of the virus. While some sections of the anti-church or secularist community may gloat at the fact that churches have had to be closed physically, it should be remembered that because many churches have now gone online with their outreach, even small fellowships are reaching digital congregations far in excess of their traditional Sunday service attendances.
   For example, some rural churches which may only get around 100 people attending on the Sabbath for morning worship, are now experiencing online flocks of over 1,000 viewers for a Sunday service.
   Today, in spite of the strict lockdown restrictions, tens of thousands of people will find ways to commemorate the 75th anniversary of VE (Victory in Europe) Day marking the surrender of Germany and the defeat of the evils of Hitler’s Nazism.
   Because of that defeat, churches in Ireland can enjoy freedom of worship. The clergy of all denominations should take the opportunity to give thanks for the victory over evil and to remember those who make the supreme sacrifice or were wounded in the service of their country in defeating Hitler.
   Seventy-five years on from the original VE Day, the churches should also be making preparations for another celebration – the much-needed VV Day (Victory over the Virus). Many Christians are praying that God will guide the scientists in their search for a workable vaccine to combat the pandemic. Statistics have also shown a rapid increase during the lockdown in the online prayer and worship sessions on the internet and social media.
   The Christian church has been provided with a wonderful opportunity to build on this online interest when the lockdown is finally ended, and must implement a social strategy akin to the 1960s and 1970s when in many localities, especially in rural regions, the church was at the centre of social activities.
   During my late father’s time in Presbyterian ministry, the church buildings were a hive of activities throughout the week, and not just on Sundays.
   Sundays were especially busy – the Sunday school and Bible class in the morning; morning service at noon; in the afternoon, many in the congregation would be involved with the network of independent Sunday schools based in mission halls and Orange halls throughout the community; in the evening, there would be the 7 pm worship service in the church, and around 8 pm, the young people would meet for the Youth Fellowship, while adults travelled to the mission halls for services run by the Faith Mission or the Christian Workers’ Union. And that was just Sundays!
   Monday evenings was the Junior Boys’ Brigade; Tuesday evenings was the church indoor bowling club which participated in inter-church competitions; Wednesday evenings was the Mid Week Prayer and Bible Study; Thursday evenings was the Girls’ Brigade; Friday evenings the Company Section of the Boys’ Brigade, and Saturday evenings the church youth club.
   An event was happening at the church every evening, and that’s not including the special events throughout the calendar year, such as the BB and GB enrolment services and displays, the Sunday school Soiree, the harvest celebration services, the annual meeting of the church, the BB and GB summer camps, as well as the traditional June Sunday school excursion to Portrush, initially by train from Glarryford station, then latterly by bus from the church.
   However, before the pandemic and the lockdown, many church attendances had been dwindling as the churches faced stiff competition from events in the secular world, such as the club scene, cinema and satellite TV.
   But total lockdown has seen the Northern Ireland social clock put back to zero. The churches are once again on an even playing field with the secular society. The huge challenge which the churches now face is – can they hold on to the impressive online audiences which they have gained in lockdown?
   In practical terms, can the thousands who would have tuned into online services be converted into ‘bottoms on seats’ in the church pews and church organisations and activities once the lockdown ends, or is even partially lifted?
   Certainly one activity which churches should invest in to get people back to Sunday worship is to relaunch the concept of the church Soiree, which are huge events – especially in rural Presbyterianism – in the Sixties and Seventies.
   The Soirees were amateur dramatics at their most pure. It did not matter if you could sing, act or recite a poem – the fact that you were on stage in a church hall in the first place was enough to gain you rapturous applause.
   For some children, it was a chance to genuinely show off their talents, especially at singing, which could guarantee you a prime spot in the annual Sunday school choir.
   For sensible adults, it was a chance to ‘let the hair down’ and act the fool for an evening by dressing up as a fictional character. Even forgetting your lines in a drama was entertaining. It was all good clean fun with wholesome entertainment, and a fitting Scriptural epilogue and delicious supper to conclude the evening.
   If the church is to have a meaningful role in a post lockdown society, it must relaunch the strategy of the Soirees to get the people physically back through the doors of the places of worship.
   Likewise, adults could send their children to Soiree practice knowing they would be safe from physical harm and not face the temptations of alcohol, drugs, cigarettes or an unwanted pregnancy. The post lockdown gauntlet awaits for all the Christian churches – the key question remains, do they have the courage to pick it up, or do they simply want to return to their cosy, ageing holy huddles?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
HEADLINE: HAS THE PANDEMIC KILLED OFF POPULISM?
The 2019 European elections demonstrated significant gains for Hard Right and populist parties across the European Union. Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to suggest the coronavirus pandemic may have temporarily stemmed the populist tide. 
Before the virus lockdown, The Donald seemed a dead cert for another four years in the White House, and BoJo looked an equally dead cert to spend as long as Maggie Thatcher’s reign in 10 Downing Street.
   For a handful of years prior to the lockdown, the Brexit debate has profusely divided the United Kingdom. Now, almost like 75 years ago when the UK united to face down the common enemy of Nazism, the UK has once more been forced to unite a common enemy – Covid 19.
   A simple medical fact – the virus knows no boundaries until a workable vaccine in found. Like it or not, citizens, the NHS and the Government will all have to work in tandem if the virus is to be defeated.
   Citizens in Northern Ireland are facing restrictions under the lockdown perhaps not witnessed since the Second World Two – and the conflict whose ending 75 years ago we as a community have been celebrating.
   Hopefully, with the cancelation of many parades as part of the traditional Protestant Marching Season, many previously contentious parades will not take place.
   Even the Twelfth has been cancelled, leaving many Orangemen, Orangewomen and band members with the prospect of remaining in lockdown and marching around their gardens, or even front living rooms in areas with no gardens.
   In reality, there will be loads of Mini-Twelfths and Virtual Twelfths this July, although the term ‘Mini-Twelfth’ is normally reserved for the Orange Order’s commemoration of the opening day of the Battle of the Somme during the Great War on 1st July, 1916, which turned out to be one of the bloodiest days in the history of the British Army with losses running into tens of thousands.
   But with the Northern Ireland community pulling together to defeat the virus – apart from the occasional dubious statement from Sinn Fein trying to score political points – populism in Ulster in the form of naked sectarianism could be reduced to the backfoot.
   Last year’s European poll saw the emergence of significant populist movements in Poland, Spain, Hungary, Germany and France – with big gains for the Brexit Party in mainland Britain.
   But what the overall community has to be aware of is that simply because the virus originated in China, that a populist blame game does not spark off against the Chinese community.
   In Northern Ireland, the Chinese community has been one of the largest of the country’s ethnic communities – and especially in the restaurant and take-away sector.
   Those particular food outlets have been hit just as hard as Western-style cafes and restaurants, such as the ‘chippies’ and ‘burger bars’. But the Chinese food sector are not to blame for bringing Covid 19 into Northern Ireland.
   For many years, especially during the Troubles, the populist Far Right has made numerous attempts to organise in Northern Ireland. All have ended in disaster. Even when the National Front tried to contest local government elections, it could only muster a handful of votes.
   Other populist movements, such as the British National Party, Britain First, and White Nationalist Party, have fared no better in terms of organisational support in Ulster.
   Brexit may have divided Northern Ireland society, but the challenges of coronavirus has the potential to heal the Province – provided the body politic in Ulster can keep a lid on populism and a blame game mentality against the Chinese community never gains ground.
   The danger from populism is that whilst many of its movements in Northern Ireland can now be classified as a ‘two man and a dog outfit’, unfortunately, it only takes a couple of radicalised nutters to cause a surge of trouble.
   The populist Far Right is especially prone to using the ‘lone wolf’ tactic to cause mayhem and murder, witnessed in some of the massacres in the United States, Norway and New Zealand by Right-wing fanatics.
   One of the nations which seems to be in full control and beating the coronavirus pandemic is South Korea, and that is because it has put the safety of its citizens above individual rights. The South Korean authorities know what the movements of all its citizens are.
   No doubt, if such a South Korean system was introduced in Northern Ireland and the wider UK to beat any second wave of the virus, the liberal Left and human rights militants would be screaming political ‘blue murder’.
   But if the BoJo Government at Westminster devolves such powers to the regional parliaments or even issues such orders directly from the Houses of Parliament, then I say – bring it on!
   With every citizen having to carry an identity card, but much-increased police powers for ‘stop and search’, the coronavirus second wave may not even get off the medical ground.
   The side effect of such a tightly controlled analysis of the population would mean that intelligence community could also keep an exceptionally close eye on the movements of radicalised suspects – and that included fanatical Right-wing populists who would try to target Chinese establishments as blame for the virus originating in China.
   What the Stormont Executive and the Assembly have also to be exceptionally wary of is a populist-inspired rebellion against the lockdown restrictions.
   While it is clear that out of a population in Northern Ireland of almost 1.9 million people, we can expect some to blatantly disregard the much-needed Government advice on remaining at home, social distancing and rules on shopping and exercise.
   However, such a rebellion could be sparked if too many people got frustrated by expressing the opinion ‘well, if the neighbours can get away with it, why can’t we?’ And so one family soon becomes two, and two becomes four – and before we know it, there is a full-scale revolt against the pandemic restrictions.
   The key observation that Government must monitor – do not let populist Far Right activists spark any pandemic revolt as a vehicle for their devious recruitment methods.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Headline: Virtual parties and elections are the way forward!
With the lockdown forcing many churches to host online services and Bible studies, Political Commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to suggest the way forward for post virus politics in Ireland is virtual parties and elections. 
Just as clerics are preaching from the comfort of their studies, kitchens and living rooms and developing the concept of the virtual church because of the lockdown, maybe in a post lockdown society political parties could do the same function.
   Think of the time they would save in physically having to canvas around homes, trudging the streets and lanes of Ireland in all kinds of weather to garner votes when it could be done from the comfort of the man shed?
   Maybe we could even consider elections being totally online in the future where voters would not have to travel miles to the polling booths. Simply press a button as if you were voting on the popular television programmes The X factor or Britain’s Got Talent and within minutes of the poll closing we have the result.
   Setting aside all the technical issues which may arise, there is also the situation that virtual parties could be set up which are only a ‘two men and a dog outfit’. I recall during the Troubles of hearing of a certain pro-Union party which had very, very few members.
   The supposed leader of that party would travel to a carpark, get out of his car, read his speech, then get in the car and proceed to phone the media giving the content of the speech as ‘speaking in wherever’! It gave the impression he was speaking to a packed meeting whereas in reality it was him talking to himself in a car park.
   It has been suggested that since the demise of the Monster Raving Looney Party, founded by the controversial rock artist Screaming Lord Sutch, that politics has become rather boring. Would the virtual parties campaigning on specific issues add more flavour to elections, or would the system become abused with people putting up their pets as candidates – Vote for the Pussy Cat Party!
   I recall many years ago in east Antrim during a council by-election campaign, a man disgusted by the selection of party candidates decided to put up his cat as a candidate. The rules had to be urgently changed when it emerged from surveys that the cat might actually win causing considerable red faces among the established party runners.
   Very strict rules on the registration of parties and the financial terms of contesting an election would have to be in place. While Irish politics has seen its fair share of single-issue parties and candidates, there is also the question how you prevent extremists movements from getting elected.
   In the United States, you need only see the freedom of expression granted to movements from the Far Right to see the concept of ‘total democracy’ in action.
   Likewise, in the present system of actually turning up at the polling stations, there was the slogan ‘vote early, vote often’ regarding vote stealing and voter impersonation. How could this be prevented in a virtual election given the allegations of Russian interference in elections?
   Given the so-called ‘snowflake society’ which is developing in Ireland whereby people seem to be offended at the drop of a hat, would the concept of virtual parties lead to a flood of complaints about campaign slogans, party names, party symbols and emblems, the use of flags on sites, and so the list goes on.
   Human rights militants would have a field day if a party set up entitled ‘Fry The Scum Party’, which campaigned on a policy of wanting the electric chair for convicted drug dealers, convicted child killers, convicted paedophiles and convicted rapists.
   With a secular society, too, increasingly annoyed by the antics of the traditional Hell-fire street corner preachers and evangelists, how would such secularists and liberals react if fundamentalists formed a ‘Burn In Hell Party’ to preach their messages online?
   Similarly, how would liberals and the Right-wing react if parties set up advocating the past Looney Left policies of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin or Pol Pot? Even if such parties made it into the virtual parliamentary chamber, would any business actually get done; could a government actually be formed, or would be witness the farce of Stormont being suspended for three years, or a Dail coalition government still not formed months after the election?
   In short, would electronic voting, the virtual parties and a virtual parliament actually undermine the very ideal of democracy? Just as the Christian Churches are having to redefine evangelical worship and outreach as a result of the pandemic lockdown, would the same redefining of what we mean by ‘democracy’ have to take place before the virtual parties became a reality?
   And how would we deal with the concept of current postal voting for people living abroad or on holiday or sick who wanted to vote in elections. Could we see third and fourth generation people living in Australia, Canada or the United States wanting a virtual vote in Irish elections. Could the massive Irish American community in there USA or the equally big Ulster Scots community in Canada decide the outcome of elections in Ireland?
   Or what about those people who follow the ideology and theology of British Israelism; that the Protestant people of Northern Ireland are descended from the Biblical Israelite tribe of Dan who came westward and eventually settled in Britain and Ireland? Could the Israelis demand a say in Irish voting?
   Perhaps virtual voting and online parties are just too much trouble and post lockdown, we just need to get back to conventional methods of door to door canvassing and counting votes by hand, and especially going to vote no matter what the weather.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning after 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Headline: Virus has created the Israeli-type border we loyalists yearned for!
Build a Trump-type wall along the Irish border to combat the virus by preventing travel between Northern Ireland and the Irish republic. Controversial political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to explore how Covid 19 could create the border security system which loyalists dreamed of during the Troubles.
The lockdown has provided me with the opportunity to re-organise my journalism portfolio of clippings acquired over more than 40 years working in Ireland, north and south.
   In the 1980s, I was the Belfast News Letter’s Education and Religious Affairs Correspondent, but given that we were still in the teeth of the Troubles, being assigned to do the so-called ‘border safaris’ added some journalistic flavour to the education and religion beats.
   In October 1986, I spent an entire Saturday with the then Fermanagh and South Tyrone Ulster Unionist MP Ken Maginnis criss-crossing the border along Ken’s constituency to test how often we would be stopped either by Northern or Southern security forces.
   The headlines on that two-page feature read: ‘Killing fields security test’,  ‘Alarm over low border profile’, and ‘147 IRA murders unresolved – Maginnis’.
   The blurb on the feature emphasised the scale of the border challenge: “Since 1971 there have been more than 170 murders in the Fermanagh Killing Fields – the border area of Official Unionist MP Ken Maginnis’s constituency. Last week News Letter reporter John Coulter travelled widely through border areas – on two assignments.
   “For the first he was accompanied by Mr Maginnis and their route included Dungannon, Aughnacloy, Emyvale, Monaghan town, Smithborough, Rosslea, Clonatty Bridge, Newtownbutler, Belturbet, Killyclogher, Rossinver, Bundoran, Ballyshannon, Ballintra, Pettigo and back to Dungannon.
   “Coulter’s purpose was to carry out an independent, on-the-spot assessment of security and alertness. This is John Coulter’s report of that journey.
   “It will be followed tomorrow by his account of a one-hour, 20-mile border patrol with the Eire security forces along part of the Monaghan-Armagh border.”
   That specific article was published in the Belfast News Letter on Monday 27th October, 1986, and could be summed up in two published paragraphs – “The News Letter spotted only four Gardai during the 150-miles plus which were travelled in the South through the counties of Monaghan, Cavan, Leitrim and Donegal.
   “In spite of driving a sporty northern registered car at no time were we challenged in Eire.”
   Also for that published article was another chilling observation: “One security source told us that blocked or cratered roads provided no operational difficulties for the IRA.”
   Quoting the source, I wrote: “At a blocked road they use the two-car method. A car from the South containing the IRA killers drives up to the blockage. They get out, cross the blockage and get into another car parked on the northern side.
   “They then carry out their attack and return to the South using the same method. The most vulnerable time for murders of loyalists is around 11 o’clock in the morning. Most of the victims are farmer and are in their yards at this time feeding their animals.”
   The following day, Tuesday 28th October, 1986, I published my account of “an official border tour organised by the Eire Department of Foreign Affairs”.
   I’ve selected some interesting quotes from my published interviews for that feature:
   “Troops in Eire are ready for action 10 to 15 minutes after being notified of a border attack by the IRA, a crack Army officer claims.”
   “One spokesman for the Eire authorities said the IRA was as much of a threat to democracy in the South as it was in Ulster.”
   “Although the spokesman recognised unionist fears about IRA men walking free in the South, he ruled out any undercover operations by the Eire forces involving the elimination of known terrorists.
   Quote: “There is a law. We just can’t walk up and put a couple of bullets into the back of the head of a known Provo.”
   The perception then among the Protestant Unionist Loyalist (PUL) community was that it was virtually an open border, allowing republican terrorists from the Provisional IRA and INLA to base themselves in the Southern border counties, roam into the North to bomb and shoot, and then escape back into the safety of the republic.
   The Provos and INLA had learned from the so-called ‘old’ IRA’s disastrous border campaign of 1956-62. Militarily, that had been defeated for a number of reasons. Primarily, it was contained to the border counties as – unlike the Provos and INLA – the IRA had been unable to spread its terror campaign deep into Northern Ireland.
   There was also the localised intelligence gathering operation of the Ulster Special Constabulary, namely the B Specials. They lived in the border areas in which they guarded and patrolled. Generally speaking, if the IRA carried out a terrorist attack, the B Men knew where to find the culprits.
   Likewise, the Southern security forces had as much dislike for the old IRA as they did during the Irish Civil War when Free State forces executed more IRA members than the IRA lost during the War of Independence against the Black and Tans.
   The Southern government also introduced internment on its side of the border during that 1956-62 period. In short, there was nowhere for the IRA to run. It could also be suggested that the old IRA did not have the access to training, weaponry and explosives which the Provos and INLA had with Libya, the United States and the Palestinians.
   During the Troubles, a delegation from the DUP visited Israel to see that nation’s tough border security prompting many Unionists to support an Israeli-style border.
   The Southern government in Leinster House has always resisted the concept of ‘hot pursuit’, which would allow the British security forces to chase an IRA gang deep into the republic if necessary.
   Of course, the security ‘quid pro quo’ would be that Southern security forces could chase loyalist terrorists deep into Northern Ireland if the UVF or UDA was to carry out acts of terror in the republic.
   In the United States, President Trump has long talked about the need for a border wall with Mexico. In spite of the peace process in Ireland, could such a Trump wall be needed in post Brexit Ireland to combat the spread of the coronavirus?
   It would be somewhat ironic if one of the only methods which are urgently required to defeat the first wave of the virus was an Israeli-border/Trump wall solution along the Irish border – a call which Unionists had clamoured for for years during the Troubles.
   I have one abiding memory from my trip in 1986 with the Southern security forces and the Department of Foreign Affairs; both knew precisely where the border was to the inch; they were expert at knowing where the South ended and the North began.
   During that specific border safari, I thought I would put that expert knowledge to the test – could I accidentally or deliberately persuade the Southern security forces to undertake an incursion into the United Kingdom?
   Now that would have been a headline to remember – ‘Eire army invades Northern Ireland!’ Or ‘Irish troops follow News Letter hack as part of UK incursion!’
   No such luck! Those Southern squaddies and the Foreign Affairs officials knew every inch of their territory, and more precisely where they could go, and where they dare not stray.
   In some spots along our trip that day in 1986, the border was only a fence or stream. I could cross with relative ease, but as if there was a magical invisible barrier, the soldiers and civil servants would stop and politely wait for me to return to Southern soil. There was just no fooling them.
   As a life-long Unionist and staunch euro-skeptic, I have long advocated that the British and Irish governments implement an Israeli border solution. Ironically, the peace process brought about a politically seamless border in Ireland. Ironically, too, a virus originating in China could well create the idealistic border security Right-wing Unionism always craved.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

John Coulter’s Ballymena Accent column 9th April 2020

Headline: Memorial services will provide outreach challenge for Christian Churches.

As the virus death toll climbs, and with Christian Churches closed, religious commentator Dr John Coulter uses his regular Ballymena Accent column to pose the awkward question – when the lockdown is over and face-to-face worship begins again in churches, what approach will those denominations take towards memorial services for the dead?

Churches should cancel Christmas and instead focus on a series of memorial services to remember the victims of the coronavirus.
At first reading, maybe the words from Christmas Carol’s Scrooge character ‘Bhah, humbug’ might spring to mind in terms of my attitude towards Christmas.
Certainly, Christians – as with people of many other faiths and none – will be praying and hoping the current lockdown will be completely lifted and our National Health Service will be more than ready for the expected so-called second wave of the virus expected later this year.
While many churches and denominations are quite rightly preoccupied with remaining in communications with their specific flocks and communities generally via the internet, the various denominations and fellowships need to now start making preparations for a post-virus society, and especially how the victims and survivors of that virus will be remembered and honoured.
The human tragedy which the virus has created is that families are denied the opportunity and privilege to say goodbye to their loved ones before they enter eternity. At best, they can only watch through protective screens.
And as for funerals, what happens when existing morgues become so full that make-shift morgues have to be created to store the bodies of virus victims?
Even if someone dies of natural causes or is killed in an accident, the Government policy on social distancing is currently preventing full-scale memorial services, or services of thanksgiving from taking place.
On a personal scale, I simply cannot imagine the torment which families are suffering, who cannot hold a proper funeral for their loved one; who may have to wait several months until the lockdown is lifted so that they can honour those who have died.
I lost both mum and dad within a period of 16 months. Both had lived well into their eighties and led fulsome Christian lives. I miss them dearly. Dad died in September 2018, and mum in January 2020. I was present when both slipped into Glory, surrounded by family and members of the church.
I count myself one of the lucky ones as I write this article. I got to say a final earthly ‘goodbye’ to dad and mum. But it sends a shiver up my spine to think of how I would have coped had both of them passed away during the virus lockdown, or as a result of the virus.
When I think of the many people – relatives, friends, work colleagues – who came to both funerals, held in Clough Presbyterian Church in north Antrim, how would I feel if we had to wait days for the funeral, that only a handful of people could attend, and no church service of thanksgiving?
With the virus still to reach its initial peak in Ireland, and the second wave expected later, individual church and fellowship leaders now need to plan for the wave of memorial services which will be required later this year post lockdown.
I know the strain of the grieving process which I am currently going through for dad and mum. But spare a though for those families who cannot either congregate to say ‘goodbye’ to a loved one, or even properly mourn the loss of a loved one because of the much-needed Government restrictions regarding funerals.
The Churches need to be ready to help these people in need, too. This is not to detract from the tremendous work which many Churches are already doing in terms of providing services of worship online and organising physical support in terms of deliveries of food for the isolated in the communities.
Mum passed into Glory three months ago this week. She was in a nursing home at the end. We could visit her at any time and she received tremendous professional care from all the staff at that home.
But what must the families be going through mentally and physically – let alone the spiritual challenges – of not being able to visit their loved ones in the various nursing and care homes across Ireland?
I simply cannot fathom the torment of not being able to give a loved one one last kiss before they enter eternity if they had contracted the virus. Could I imagine a loved one sitting in a car outside the care home, mobile phone in hand, waiting for the call that their relative had died.
Or imagine that relative lock downed at home, waiting on the call from one of the critical care units or from one of the Nightingale Hospitals coping with virus victims?
While we in the media remain fixated on the death toll, what about the people who have survived the virus? How do we mark their victory over the virus while at the same time respecting the loss of those who succumbed to Covid 19 through death? Where do the Churches stand on this type of support?
Where the Churches can have a community healing role is in their recognition that the virus knows no boundaries – Covid 19 does not respect race, creed, colour, sexual orientation, age or gender. It can affect all and everyone.
It has often been said in Ireland that the island has suffered from too much religion and not enough Christianity. Instead of being swallowed up by judgemental criticism, the virus pandemic will bring a new mindset to our Churches. Are the Churches ready to truly demonstrate in the future, not just during the pandemic, the real love of Jesus Christ?
The question still remains – are the Churches ready for a post lockdown society?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

Headline: After we win the virus war, who wins the peace? 

As the British Isles steps up its cross-community war against coronavirus with a full-scale society lockdown and draconian powers to enforce it, political commentator, Dr John Coulter, asks in his latest Ballymena Accent column if the populist-style measures to win the virus war could be kept in place to maintain the peace? 

Never mind the Good Friday Agreement, Brexit and the RHI investigation, the coronavirus crisis has effectively redefined eight centuries of Irish politics.

   Hours ago, many of us sat transfixed to our television screens as Prime Minister Boris Johnson outlined some of the most draconian policies ever witnessed in a Christian democracy.

   The hardline populist-style policy has become necessary, not just primarily to defeat the spread of the virus, but also as a reaction to the horrific scenes of people partying and defying all the isolation advice to combat the spread of the virus.

   While the PSNI has been given sweeping powers to enforce the BoJo diktat, if significant numbers of police officers fall victim to the virus, then British troops may need to replace them on Northern Ireland’s streets and roads to ensure essential supplies get to the shops and pharmacies, to check the movements of citizens, and to provide a support network to the NHS.

   Indeed, on an even more morbid note, the Army may be called upon to transport the coffins of coronavirus victims should the death toll reach Italian-style proportions.

   Likewise, while Irish history has witnessed some seismic events since the turn of the new millennium – such as Rev Ian Paisley of the DUP and Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness forming a power-sharing Executive at Stormont; the Stormont Assembly enduring a three-year collapse; Sinn Fein making huge electoral gains in the Republic of Ireland – could we even see a bigger shift, namely the headline – ‘Sinn Fein supports return of British troops to Ulster’.

   In 1969, British troops were sent into Northern Ireland because its police, the then Royal Ulster Constabulary (now the Police Service of Northern Ireland0, could no longer cope with the violence between the Unionist Protestant population and the Catholic Nationalist population.

   If the current lockdown – imposed on 23 March – does not succeed in suppressing the coronavirus curve, the Johnson Government will have no other alternative but to introduce yet even more draconian methods to contain the spread.

   The central planks will be Spanish-style martial law whereby police and soldiers operate road blocks and security checks ensuring that only one person is allowed out of a home at any one time.

   To enforce the daily curfew, all branches of the security forces – Army, Air Force and Navy personnel, as well as territorial reserves will be called up. The net result to fully smash the virus will be an unofficial totalitarian ‘Fourth Reich’ more akin to a South American dictatorship than a Christian democracy.

   Police recruitment may have to be fast-tracked to get boots on the ground. In 1971, there was selective internment of suspected terrorists in Northern Ireland – if people persistently refuse to obey the curfew rules, they may have to be held in special hub camps. After all, it was the British Empire which invented the concept of the concentration camp to combat the Boers in Southern Africa in the early 20th century.

   Given the severity of the virus, these populist-style Government laws are a medical necessity. But could they actually become a permanent feature in a post-coronavirus society, but used to combat other social challenges, such as illegal drug dealing, organised crime, and illegal immigration

   These tactics are not scare-mongering. Northern Irish ex-pats in Southern Spain I interviewed said their extended lockdown is being “very very strictly enforced”.

   Ex pats are only allowed to go to a local shop and not pass two or three other shops to get to that local shop. They are only allowed out on their own, not as a couple.

   You can walk your dog alone too, but only to the nearest area – not an actual walk in the conventional dog walking sense; once the dog has done its business, you go straight home.

   If you meet someone, you keep a good distance – social distancing is mandatory. Spanish police and army drive around watching for people breaking the curfew.

   At roadblocks, they have personnel asking people where they are going or coming from. You have to prove your answer. If you do not have a legitimate reason, you are fined. If you are found in another area not near your home, you are fined.

   The communal swimming pool for ex pats has been locked and you can be fined for trying to have a sneaky quick dip. Police even stripped off and went into a pool to arrest and hand-cuff an ex-pat who breached this rule.

   Parks have been taped off and benches taped off, too. You are told to stay in your home unless you have to go to the doctors or pharmacy, super market or dog walk. There is no socialising.

   All shops – apart from supermarkets and pharmacies – are shut, including pubs and restaurants. Some restaurants to survive economically are doing takeaway service and home delivery, but security forces are still strict on people going to these takeaways to get food.

   A Northern Ireland ex-pat man in Southern Spain has given me this quote comparing the full Spanish lockdown as to what the coming days will be like in the UK: “Personally I see the  current situation needing an all-Ireland approach and stuff Westminster.

   “I don’t see how all Europe believes in lockdown and Boris feels the ‘let them catch it’ approach will work. Its all about the money for the health service.

   “What worries me is that catching it the first time may not be too bad for most, but what about the second time or the third time? The threat of a relapse is not an issue at the moment, but could it become?

   “Will you have resistance or will it be more aggressive? Ireland is an island and what is the point of closures in the south when you can walk a few hundred yards into the North and do as you please.

   “That was clearly the case over the Mother’s Day weekend, and the new measure announced by the PM may be a direct response to that breaching of the social distancing advice.

   “But what happens if people take an equally irresponsible attitude towards the lockdown? The minute the south closed schools the north should have followed.

   “And the current strategy of not testing unless you are really severe only hides how deep the problem may be. It’s tough here in Spain at the minute – it is days into the hostage situation here is Spain and already there is a short fuse and cabin fever is setting in.

   “Its now been announced that it is doubtful if two weeks is going to be enough so who knows what the next few weeks will bring. For me, one of the sufferers, I believe that this is probably the only way to stop this virus spreading.

   “It worked for China and it will work here. Results wont be instant but at the end of these two weeks I would hope to see the cases flatten out,” the Northern Irish ex pat told me.

   Indeed, Northern Ireland could again be leading the UK in terms of the security forces having to implement curfews and even rationing to prevent panic buying among the public.

   The PM has now moved from advising the public on social distancing, to telling the pubs, clubs and restaurants (apart from the takeaway services) to shut, and now to ordering people to remain at home.

   In Northern Ireland, with the schools formally closing from last Friday, many young people defied the advice to people congregating and held unofficial ‘end of year’ parties; tourists were still flocking to popular seaside towns in Northern Ireland, such as Newcastle. The key still remains – what action will the security forces take if some citizens maintain a stubborn stance?

   While many supermarkets limit their initial opening houses to specifically serving the elderly and health service workers, the PM may have to consider imposing rationing and strict curfews as are taking place in other nations – such as Italy and Spain – to smother the coronavirus.

   The main problem the PM and Government faces is that the UK is a liberal democracy and we have been ‘advising’, ‘telling’ and ‘ordering’ people – not forcing and enforcing them.

   If people ignore this latest ‘ordering to remain at home’, that ‘ordering’ of the PM may have to be upgraded to curfew enforcement – and that could mean selective internment of small-minded, selfish assholes who want to maintain their democratic rights by totally defying the ‘stay at home’ diktat.

   China has been able to do this as it is a one-party communist state; Italy and Spain were once dictatorships with strong populist parties. While combating and defeating the coronavirus is a national health war, could some of the tactics remain in place after the war to maintain the peace?

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter

Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Northern Ireland is ahead of the rest of the UK regions in firing the starting gun on an unofficial lockdown to combat the rapidly growing coronavirus crisis. Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to explore what full lockdown could mean, and uses the experience of the Ulster ex-pat community in Southern Spain to make his case. 
Where Northern Ireland goes, the rest of the United Kingdom will follow – that seems to be the strategy the geographical British Isles is following to combat the spread of the coronavirus as the UK moves emphatically into the delay phase.
    But while the British Government has not yet decided on a full lockdown as part of this stage, it has already begun in Northern Ireland – sparked by the recent North-South Ministerial meeting in Armagh.
   The Republic of Ireland has already implemented a full lockdown until 29 March with schools closed and even celebrations of the island’s national saint, Patrick, cancelled.
   Boris Johnston has advised people across the UK to avoid pubs, clubs and theatres and has now urged entire families to self-isolate if a family member in that home shows symptoms of the virus; a virus that is doubling in numbers affected every five to six days.
   In mainland Britain, while schools presently remain open, in Northern Ireland, the voluntary educational lockdown has started with 10 of Belfast’s special education needs (SEN) schools closing, with many other schools and colleges expected to voluntarily shut later this week.
   And while Stormont Education Minister Peter Weir has stressed school closures are not on the cards in the immediate future, some schools have gone ahead and imposed their own lockdown. Minister Weir has not ruled out a complete education lockdown at some future point.
   Northern Ireland’s universities are delivering lectures online to students, and the Province’s six regional colleges of further and higher education could soon be forced to follow this example.
   Even Northern Ireland’s thriving Women’s Institute movement has been seriously affected with its Annual General Meeting, usually attended by over 1,000 delegates from across the Province, cancelled, as well as numerous local branch meetings cancelled, which are a vital social lifeline for many members.
   Northern Ireland’s farming community – hit hard a few years ago by the Foot and Mouth crisis – looks set to take another hit with the prestigious annual Balmoral Agricultural Show in jeopardy. The top event, usually held in May, has been postponed until at least August.
    For some organisations, representation at Balmoral is their main source of income. The Balmoral decision could have knock-on consequences for other top farming shows across the Province, such as the Ballymena Show and the North Antrim Agricultural Show in Ballymoney – two of Northern Ireland’s leading rural-based shows.
  Northern Ireland Health Minister Robin Swann of the Ulster Unionists has already warned that social distancing may need to take place, and has called on people to stop stealing hand sanitisers from hospitals and GP surgeries.
   The political Unionist/Nationalist debate has even divided key members of the Executive with deputy First Minister Michelle O’Neill of Sinn Fein urging that the full lockdown of schools should start immediately following the Republic’s example, while the DUP First Minister Arlene Foster wants schools to follow the UK advice and remain open for the present.
   On the ground, one rural County Antrim pharmacist is already limiting people entering the shop to one person at a time, keeping their distance from staff – a tactic which pharmacies across the UK will need to adopt in a lockdown scenario.
   The key question is whether Boris Johnston will have to deploy the army as has already happened in Spain, where roadblocks and police checks are now a regular occurrence.
   Speaking to a Northern Ireland ex-pat family now living permanently in Southern Spain, they say even the beaches are closed, with military on the streets questioning people as to their motives for being out.
   People are only allowed to visit either the supermarket or the chemist. Only 40 people are allowed into a supermarket at any one time and there must be strict social distancing.
   Fines are being imposed on people out of their homes without a valid reason. Dogs can be walked, but only by one person at a time.
   An instruction in English on when the ex-pats cannot leave home states: “I can be penalised for not complying with these guidelines, a fine of 100 euros to 600,000 euros.”
   Going to the supermarket with the whole family is banned, as is “taking the opportunity to walking 10 km’, going running, go out by bike, to there park, cafe or bar, even “to see a family member other than for your assistance of care by a dependent or elderly person; to meet friends in a house”. Could the Spanish experience spark a curfew policy, or even marshal law in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK?
   In Ireland, in the Catholic community, Masses are being cancelled. Indeed, in numerous Protestant churches, plastic gloves are being worn to distribute the emblems during the sacrament of Holy Communion.
   Communicants are not allowed to handle the bread, but are given it by the servers; the wine glasses are handed to them, and then placed back in the serving dish by the servers limiting the amount of contact.
   Some places of worship are even preparing to broadcast their services online across the internet if a lockdown means that even churches are closed across Northern Ireland.
   Southern Ireland may have already gone into lockdown until 29 March, but the unofficial lockdown is already under way in Northern Ireland – an indication of practical measures Boris Johnston may have to introduce on mainland Britain.
   Indeed, Prime Minister Johnston may even face the regional battle which is currently taking place on the island of Ireland. With pubs closed across the Republic ahead of a very muted St Patrick’s Day commemorations, Southern residents may travel across the Irish border to Northern Ireland to get their pints.
   Likewise, just as there is a split in policy between Sinn Fein and the DUP as to who should take the lead in the closure of schools – the Republic’s example or the UK example – could the same situation face Boris Johnston with a Scottish Nationalist government in the Scottish Parliament whereby SNP First Minister Nicola Sturgeon decides to implement her own policies which run contrary to Westminster?
   However, if the Northern Ireland parties can compromise on an agreed strategy to combat the virus, that may well be the example which Boris Johnston can follow to avoid any fractious debates on the regional implementation of a national strategy involving the whole of the UK.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
With Ireland going into shutdown to combat the coronavirus, Political Commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to analyse the economic and health impact, not just for the Republic, but how it could affect Northern Ireland and mainland Britain. 
The Irish Republic could suffer an economic meltdown akin to the collapse of the Celtic Tiger economy a number of years ago which cost the Southern economy millions of euros for a European Union bailout.
   The Brexit debate and the talks to form a new Irish government have been put on the back burner as Taoiseach Leo Varadkar unveiled a national lockdown from 6 pm on 12 March until 29 March in a bid to contain the impact of the virus.
   In practical terms, this means across the Republic schools, colleges and childcare facilities will close from Friday; outdoor gatherings of more than 500 should be cancelled; where possible people will work from home, and business meetings on line where possible.
   While the British budget this week has set aside millions to help the UK combat the virus, all eyes will be on the Irish Republic to assess the practical impact of a total lockdown of the state.
   The first death linked to coronavirus has been recorded in the Republic of Ireland. The elderly woman died in a Dublin hospital on Wednesday.
   As well as the human tragedy, there is also the economic devastation which could be caused. Tuesday is St Patrick’s Day – Ireland’s national saint. Next to Christmas and Easter celebrations, it is perhaps one of the biggest holidays across Ireland – and one of the most financially lucrative.
   While the first and deputy first ministers of the Stormont Executive in Belfast have cancelled the traditional St Patrick’s Day trip to the United States, how much revenue will be lost to the island of Ireland geographically as a whole of tourists wanting to visit Ireland during the 17 March celebrations – which have now all been cancelled prior to the lockdown announcement by Varadkar.
   Will the Irish Republic have to use its lockdown period to establish a series of medical camps – and that word is used deliberately – to cope with the expected increase in the numbers diagnosed with the virus.
   And setting aside the strain on the health service in the Republic, there is the economic cost of the 17-day break until 29 March. It’s all very well hoping the lockdown will slow the spread of the virus, but more questions are raised than answers given.
   In educational terms, how will pupils continue to prepare for assignments and exams if they are not in class? With tens of thousands of young people now at home, who will care for them or supervise them if their parents are working from home.
   Could there be an increase in crime? Will the Irish army have to be deployed on the streets of Southern Ireland to assist the police in keeping order?
   Ironically, the fear of Brexit was that it could create a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic regarding goods, but could that hard border become a medical necessity to stop the spread of the virus from the Republic into Northern Ireland?
   Likewise, what about cross border travel in the immediate future as Northern Ireland is not yet in lockdown as part of a UK-wide move to combat the spread?
   The island of Ireland may see a security force presence along the border not witnessed since the worst days of the Troubles in the 1980s to control the flow of people crossing the border – in whatever direction.
   With the UK expected to upgrade its status on the coronavirus from containment to delay, it is clear that the Irish Republic is actually taking the lead; in short, what happens in Southern Ireland, will actually follow in Northern Ireland within a fortnight.
   There is also the impact on sport on both sides of the Irish border. The virus has already affected sporting events, not just in Ireland, north and south, but also in mainland UK.
   And there is the religious implications – churches and places of worship will have to cancel events in the hope the peak of the virus will be passed as 80 per cent of the population is expected to be eventually diagnosed with the virus to various degrees.
   Similarly, if the death toll does rise in Ireland as a whole, how will that affect the burial or cremation of the victims in terms of funeral attendances?
   There is also an assumption that the 17-day lockdown could mean that the virus will have peaked and people will be well on the road to recovery. But what happens if the lockdown and deep cleans have not delayed the spread in Southern Ireland by the 29 March supposed ‘lifting date’?
   Will the Irish government have to take the additional steps of creating safe zones across the country for people who are virus-free, especially if the self-isolation policy does not work?
   What will also be put under pressure will be the technology to cope with the lockdown if so many people have to communicate using online services. It may work on paper, but does lockdown online communication work in practice?
    The governments on both sides of the Irish border will have to cope with the already panic buying of shoppers. In Northern Ireland, there has already been mass buying of toilet rolls with many shops and supermarkets  running out of stock!
   With some medical experts suggesting it may be up to a year before an effective vaccine is available, is there the possibility people could suffer relapses of the coronavirus conditions in a few months’ time in the same way that people can suffer a relapse with the common cold, flu, or chest infection.
   While the Irish government will be hoping – as will Stormont – that the enforced lockdown will signal some kind of ‘all clear’ or ‘end of peak’ by March 29, Varadkar’s unveiling of the 6 pm lockdown today may well be the start of a series of much-needed draconian measures to physically control the virus.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
With Ireland going into shutdown to combat the coronavirus, Political Commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to analyse the economic and health impact, not just for the Republic, but how it could affect Northern Ireland and mainland Britain. 
The Irish Republic could suffer an economic meltdown akin to the collapse of the Celtic Tiger economy a number of years ago which cost the Southern economy millions of euros for a European Union bailout.
   The Brexit debate and the talks to form a new Irish government have been put on the back burner as Taoiseach Leo Varadkar unveiled a national lockdown from 6 pm on 12 March until 29 March in a bid to contain the impact of the virus.
   In practical terms, this means across the Republic schools, colleges and childcare facilities will close from Friday; outdoor gatherings of more than 500 should be cancelled; where possible people will work from home, and business meetings on line where possible.
   While the British budget this week has set aside millions to help the UK combat the virus, all eyes will be on the Irish Republic to assess the practical impact of a total lockdown of the state.
   The first death linked to coronavirus has been recorded in the Republic of Ireland. The elderly woman died in a Dublin hospital on Wednesday.
   As well as the human tragedy, there is also the economic devastation which could be caused. Tuesday is St Patrick’s Day – Ireland’s national saint. Next to Christmas and Easter celebrations, it is perhaps one of the biggest holidays across Ireland – and one of the most financially lucrative.
   While the first and deputy first ministers of the Stormont Executive in Belfast have cancelled the traditional St Patrick’s Day trip to the United States, how much revenue will be lost to the island of Ireland geographically as a whole of tourists wanting to visit Ireland during the 17 March celebrations – which have now all been cancelled prior to the lockdown announcement by Varadkar.
   Will the Irish Republic have to use its lockdown period to establish a series of medical camps – and that word is used deliberately – to cope with the expected increase in the numbers diagnosed with the virus.
   And setting aside the strain on the health service in the Republic, there is the economic cost of the 17-day break until 29 March. It’s all very well hoping the lockdown will slow the spread of the virus, but more questions are raised than answers given.
   In educational terms, how will pupils continue to prepare for assignments and exams if they are not in class? With tens of thousands of young people now at home, who will care for them or supervise them if their parents are working from home.
   Could there be an increase in crime? Will the Irish army have to be deployed on the streets of Southern Ireland to assist the police in keeping order?
   Ironically, the fear of Brexit was that it could create a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic regarding goods, but could that hard border become a medical necessity to stop the spread of the virus from the Republic into Northern Ireland?
   Likewise, what about cross border travel in the immediate future as Northern Ireland is not yet in lockdown as part of a UK-wide move to combat the spread?
   The island of Ireland may see a security force presence along the border not witnessed since the worst days of the Troubles in the 1980s to control the flow of people crossing the border – in whatever direction.
   With the UK expected to upgrade its status on the coronavirus from containment to delay, it is clear that the Irish Republic is actually taking the lead; in short, what happens in Southern Ireland, will actually follow in Northern Ireland within a fortnight.
   There is also the impact on sport on both sides of the Irish border. The virus has already affected sporting events, not just in Ireland, north and south, but also in mainland UK.
   And there is the religious implications – churches and places of worship will have to cancel events in the hope the peak of the virus will be passed as 80 per cent of the population is expected to be eventually diagnosed with the virus to various degrees.
   Similarly, if the death toll does rise in Ireland as a whole, how will that affect the burial or cremation of the victims in terms of funeral attendances?
   There is also an assumption that the 17-day lockdown could mean that the virus will have peaked and people will be well on the road to recovery. But what happens if the lockdown and deep cleans have not delayed the spread in Southern Ireland by the 29 March supposed ‘lifting date’?
   Will the Irish government have to take the additional steps of creating safe zones across the country for people who are virus-free, especially if the self-isolation policy does not work?
   What will also be put under pressure will be the technology to cope with the lockdown if so many people have to communicate using online services. It may work on paper, but does lockdown online communication work in practice?
    The governments on both sides of the Irish border will have to cope with the already panic buying of shoppers. In Northern Ireland, there has already been mass buying of toilet rolls with many shops and supermarkets  running out of stock!
   With some medical experts suggesting it may be up to a year before an effective vaccine is available, is there the possibility people could suffer relapses of the coronavirus conditions in a few months’ time in the same way that people can suffer a relapse with the common cold, flu, or chest infection.
   While the Irish government will be hoping – as will Stormont – that the enforced lockdown will signal some kind of ‘all clear’ or ‘end of peak’ by March 29, Varadkar’s unveiling of the 6 pm lockdown today may well be the start of a series of much-needed draconian measures to physically control the virus.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

The Covid 19, aka coronavirus, pandemic could well be hijacked by hardline Brexiteers as an excuse to implement very tight immigration laws, according to controversial political commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column today. 
Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth, is a maxim often quoted, and hardline Brexiteers must be quietly chuckling politically at the threat posed by the global coronavirus pandemic.
   Immigration is one of the huge issues which the post-Brexit UK will have to deal with with many Remainers still afraid the staunchly Leave dominated BoJo Cabinet will evoke the spirit of the late Enoch Powell.
   Powell, who died in 1998, has often been dubbed the greatest Conservative Prime Minister the UK never had, but his legacy is haunted by his so-called 1968 ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech warning about the dangers posed by mass immigration.
   That speech was so controversial, it led to Powell having to leave the Tory Shadow Cabinet – then fronted by the ideologically wet Ted Heath – and later seeking his political future as the Ulster Unionist MP for South Down.
   But as we get deeper into the so-called year of transition for the EU divorce deal, to protect the British economy we may see the BoJo Government adopting a more populist approach with a ‘British jobs for British workers’ ethos.
   To truly implement such an ethos, two key elements will have to happen. Firstly, the UK borders will need to be sealed to avoid illegal immigrants – and even legal immigrant workers – entering the UK.
   Secondly, this ethos could see repatriation of illegal immigrants from the UK back to their lands of national origin, and especially a repatriation programme aimed at reducing the so-called health tourists who place another unbearable strain on our already severely under pressure National Health Service.
   Both these policies can be viewed as key planks in a populist Brexiteer strategy during the transition year. However, the implementation of such policies could trigger a Hard Left and liberal backlash with the ‘Latte Libs’ branding such policies as Powellite or racist, even smacking of 1970s National Front utterances.
   But that opposition is neutralised if the policies can be sold as protecting the UK against the coronavirus pandemic. In a worst case scenario, troops may need to be deployed on British streets, towns and cities to keep order, and certainly prevent people entering UK territory illegally – or even legally.
   Whilst the coronavirus pandemic may only last a few months until a vaccine is found and distributed, the effects of the UK going into an effective lock-down could last for months – and if a populist Brexiteer lobby can spin it properly, for years.
   And the populist move to ‘shut up shop’ in terms of immigration would not have to face massive rallies or street protests, even campaigns of civil disobedience, because such congregations of large numbers of people would be banned. France is already streets ahead with this policy.
   The more contentious move would be to use the intelligence community to track down those living illegally in the UK and deport them to their  original country of nationality to prevent them becoming a ‘British problem’. In short, this would be Powell-style repatriation via the political back door.
   It may well be if the BoJo Government is on the verge during this transition year of negotiating a very favourable UK economic divorce package with the EU, that many citizens from other EU states or migrant workers living in the UK may wish to ‘jump ship’ before they are pushed.
   For them, whilst working in the UK when the nation was part of the EU was financially lucrative or beneficial, in a post-Brexit UK, such cash incentives may soon evaporate and the only route left is to return as soon as possible to their nation of origin.
   This prompts the key dilemma for staunch Brexiteers who use the pandemic as an excuse to implement a populist immigration or repatriation policy – does the UK still have enough British citizens to fill the current jobs or posts left vacant by the departing migrant workers?
   What strains would this place on the education system in trying to train legions of British workers to fill these posts? Could the pandemic also be used by a Right-wing Tory Government as an excuse to rid the UK of the threat posed by radicalised groups through compulsory expulsions?
   Such a move would place MI5 and MI6 at the forefront of deciding who was allowed to remain in the UK, and who would be expelled.
   Rather than a system of the new blue British post-Brexit passports becoming a key feature of UK society, every British citizen would have to carry an identity card with the World War Two phrase ‘Papers please’ becoming a normal request from the security forces.
   Just as the Chinese had to implement a drastic policy of containment hospitals to cope with the numbers affected by the coronavirus, would the UK have to implement a network of containment camps for people unable to prove to the security forces that they were living legally in the UK.
   This would be similar to the possible network of containment camps for people infected by the coronavirus allowing them to be medically treated.
   Clearly one of the areas for debate would be in a post-Brexit UK if EU human rights laws would have any standing in the UK. Ironically, the high medical risks posed by the coronavirus would allow the British Government to implement policies which effectively suspend human rights under the guise of combating the pandemic.
   A populist-leaning Tory Government could bring in emergency legislation to extend the ‘pandemic protection policy’ for years, long after coronavirus ceased to become a medical threat.
   Whilst the medical and political establishment is telling the population the UK is currently in a containment phase, for those hardline Brexiteers wishing to implement a tough-talking anti-immigration and repatriation programme, coronavirus is a blessing in disguise.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Sinn Fein in the Irish Republic’s government could ironically spell the end of a united Ireland because of the party’s Hard Left politics. John Coulter argues the case that Sinn Fein has shot itself in the kneecaps politically. 
It only took Sinn Fein, the self-style political apologist for the Provisional IRA, 81 years since its formation in 1905 to decide to enter a parliament in the island of Ireland.
   That was in 1986 when its annual conference – under the watchful eye of then party president Gerry Adams – Sinn Fein voted to take its seats in the Dail, the republic’s parliament in Dublin’s Leinster House.
   That historic vote sparked a walkout by hardliners under the leadership of former Sinn Fein president Ruairi O’Bradaigh to form the fringe Republican Sinn Fein party, the self-styled apologist for the dissident Continuity IRA faction.
   But ironically this month, Southern Irish voters delivered another shock when they elected 37 TDs (MPs) out of 160 in the Dail to make Sinn Fein the second largest party in the Dublin parliament.
   This should not be interpreted as a massive surge in support for the Provisional IRA, but merely the Southern electorate using Sinn Fein as the voting vehicle of protest against the outgoing Fianna Fail and Fine Gael establishment.
   On paper, it seems the next coalition government is an obvious choice – a joint Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein partnership along with the Greens to ensure a comfortable Dail majority.
   However, the two main centre Right traditional parties – Fine Gael and Fianna Fail – have both vowed they will not form a coalition government including Sinn Fein.
   Thursday 20 February will be crunch day to get a working coalition government in place. If no agreement can be reached, outgoing Fine Gael Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Leo Varadkar will stay in post until a new Taoiseach can be agreed.
   Tactically, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael are nudging Sinn Fein into a political corner. Sinn Fein may be the main voice of protest against austerity, the health crisis, homelessness and a lack of social housing.
   But Sinn Fein has never been part of any government in the Irish Republic. It has always been viewed as a militant Marxist protest movement.
   Whilst very popular with younger and first time voters, older voters may remember some of Sinn Fein’s past. One of Sinn Fein’s historical icons was James Connolly, a Scot wounded during the failed Dublin Easter Rising in 1916 and was executed by British firing squad strapped to a chair.
   But what Sinn Fein fails to stress about this iconic ‘Irish patriot and martyr’ was that Connolly was a hardline communist who founded his own  Hard Left party, the Irish Socialist Republican Party (not to be confused with the Irish Republican Socialist Party, the political wing of the terrorist group, the Irish National Liberation Army which murdered war hero and leading Conservative Airey Neave in a car bomb attack at the House of Commons.
   While Sinn Fein’s economic policies for the Republic read like a trendy Marxist manifesto, financially they cannot be funded and would probably plunge the Republic into a second Celtic Tiger economy collapse.
   The Fianna Fail and Fine Gael strategy seems to be to allow Sinn Fein president Mary Lou McDonald to attempt to form her so-called Broad Left ‘rainbow’ coalition, and when she cannot get the necessary 80 plus TDs on Thursday, the traditional parties will step in and save the day.
   And its not just Sinn Fein’s past links to excusing Provisional IRA violence, especially in Northern Ireland, which worries Southern parties if Sinn Fein is politically mature enough as a party to run a nation.
   In spite of the well-written spin, Sinn Fein is still viewed by the Irish establishment as being an integral part of the broad republican movement; a movement which is still controlled by the Provisional IRA’s ruling Army Council.
   Historians will be quick to remind Sinn Fein that it was the IRA faction of the movement which refused to accept the terms of the Anglo Irish Agreement of 1920, sparking a bloody Irish Civil War between pro and anti-treaty republicans – a war in which more IRA men were executed by the pro-treaty Free State Army than by the British during the earlier War of Independence.
   If Sinn Fein could pull the Anglo Irish Treaty apart, then could it deliberately collapse the Dublin Dail plunging Southern Ireland into more political confusion.
   After all, it was only in January 2017 that Sinn Fein collapsed the power-sharing Executive at Stormont, leading to three years of political stagnation in Northern Ireland.
   In the run-in to the 8 February Dail General Election, Sinn Fein had been indulging in a damage limitation strategy following near disastrous election results in the Irish Presidential poll, local government elections in the Republic, the European election and the Westminster election in Northern Ireland.
   Sinn Fein had hoped to adopt the policy – ‘what we have, we hold’, referring to its 22 existing seats. In the Dail election, based on this strategy, it only ran 42 candidates. Had the party run more, and based on the ‘Sinn Fein surge’ it could have run 60 plus candidates and pipped Fianna Fail as the largest party.
   Another fear among Southern traditionalists is that Sinn Fein in a coalition government could create such political havoc that a second Dail General Election could be held later in 2020 in which Sinn Fein will run significantly more candidates.
   While Sinn Fein has politically somersaulted over the European Union; it was once a staunch eurosceptic party, but since the UK Brexit vote switched to becoming a pro-EU movement.
   With British Prime Minister Boris Johnston enjoying an 80 plus Commons majority, he is in an exceptionally strong bargaining position at Westminster in terms of getting any deal during the 2020 transition period passed in the House of Commons.
   Sinn Fein – in Northern Ireland – has been to the fore in pushing the spin that Brexit will inspire Irish unity and a border poll is inevitable.
   But a Sinn Fein-led coalition government of the Broad Left – which would be more akin to a Corbyn-style Marxist government – will wreck such havoc on the Southern Irish economy that the only way forward for the Republic is to negotiate an even stronger link with the United Kingdom, thereby cementing Northern Ireland’s place within the UK even firmer.
   On paper, Sinn Fein’s victories in the Republic may have pushed Irish unity to the top of the political agenda; in practice, a Sinn Fein coalition government may have wrecked any hope of a united Ireland for at least another century.

 

The centenary of Irish partition in two years could see Sinn Fein in government on both sides of the border. Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to assess the fallout from this month’s historic general election in the Republic. 
Who is prepared to climb into bed politically with Sinn Fein, the one-time apologist of the Provisional IRA, following the dramatic outcome of the Irish Republic’s election to form the 33rd Dail (parliament)?
   That’s the key question which both the traditional and smaller Southern Irish parties are asking after the so-called ‘Sinn Fein Surge’ which has shattered decades of two-party rule in the Republic.
   However, unlike December’s Westminster General Election, the Southern Irish counterpart was not directly Brexit-related. Indeed, the fact that the outgoing Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Leo Varadkar tried to make Brexit a key issue backfired badly on his Fine Gael party.
   This Sinn Fein surge even took the republican movement by surprise. Formed in 1905, for generations the ‘party’ was always viewed as the political apologist for the terrorist actions of the IRA.
   While that was the case in 1920, in 2020 Sinn Fein heavily targeted a young populace who are not concerned with the party’s past links to IRA violence through the broad republican movement.
   Long gone are the days when to be a high profile Sinn Fein candidate, you had to have served an apprenticeship in the IRA. Sinn Fein 2020 mobilised a first time voter base with a simple propaganda message – if you want to protest at how the establishment has treated you over housing, then vote Sinn Fein !
   Instead of either of the two centre Right parties of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail forming a government, the fallout from the February general election has now created a ‘three-party’ system in Dublin’s Leinster House, the Southern parliament.
   This has been Sinn Fein’s best general election result since 1918 when it took over 70 of the 105 Irish seats at Westminster when Ireland was entirely under British rule.
   Sinn Fein entered this election defending just over 20 seats in the 160-seat Dail, where 80 TDs (MPs) are needed to form a majority (the speaker does not vote). The surge for Sinn Fein is a surprise given the movement’s recent election disasters in the Southern local government elections, European election and December’s Westminster election where it lost considerable ground.
   With only a few seats still to declare, Sinn Fein is predicted to almost double its TD tally, making it a strong contender for a coalition government partnership – but with whom?
   With both Fianna Fail and Fine Gael maintaining the view that neither of them will form a stable coalition with Sinn Fein, it has left Sinn Fein president Mary Lou McDonald trying to form a ‘Left rainbow’ coalition with the smaller Dail parties, such as the Greens, the hard Left Solidarity/People Before Profit party, the Social Democrats, or Independent TDs.
   But the numbers are not as yet stacking up for Sinn Fein. There will need to be a coalition government as none of the now ‘Big Three’ has enough TDs – unlike Boris Johnston at Westminster – to form a majority government.
   There will have to be compromises, but who will blink first? It will either be a joint Fianna Fail/Fine Gael partnership to keep Sinn Fein out, or most likely, Fianna Fail will reach an accommodation with Sinn Fein pushing Fine Gael into the opposition benches.
   But whatever the outcome, the question of Irish unity and a border poll is now pushed heavily up the political agenda. The Sinn Fein surge can be attributed to two main factors – Sinn Fein targeted the youth vote and first time voters for whom IRA atrocities during the Troubles are now merely dates in history books.
   Secondly, Sinn Fein became the vehicle of protest against the existing ‘two party’ Fianna Fail/Fine Gael establishment, with Sinn Fein’s heavy focus on health, housing, and homelessness in the Republic. Sinn Fein clearly dodged the Brexit bullet.
   The hesitation from traditional parties to jump into bed politically with Sinn Fein is based on three key factors – the party’s past links with the IRA; the hard left ideology of Sinn Fein, and the fact that Sinn Fein collapsed the power-sharing Stormont Executive in January 2017, fuelling the perception – would Sinn Fein collapse the 33rd Dail if it didn’t get its way?
   But, as with the days of the Troubles, is Sinn Fein going to face the same dilemma as the Provisional IRA faced? Just as the IRA had a Northern Command and Southern Command, will we now see the emergence of a so-called Southern Sinn Fein compared to a radically different Northern Sinn Fein?
   And given the influence of the IRA Army Council on the broad republican movement, will that Army Council have to give separate autonomies to the IRA’s Northern and Southern Commands?
   If academic predictions are accurate in reflecting what could possibly be that final tally of TDs, then it can already be suggested that both Fianna Fail and Fine Gael ran too many candidates, while Sinn Fein has underestimated the number of candidates required – and ran too few.
   Already one dangerous trend is emerging. Just as Sinn Fein sparked the collapse of the Northern Ireland Executive, heralding in a three-year political stagnation period in the Province, could the presence of an increased number of Sinn Fein TDs in the Dail make the possibility of a stable coalition government so precarious that another snap Dail General Election is inevitable later this year?
   This allows pro-Union pundits to pose the blunt question – is Sinn Fein only playing at politics given its volatile stereotype, or is it possible that this part of the republican movement (Sinn Fein) has the maturity and responsibility to mature into a stable, democratic party?
   In the South, it is very clear Sinn Fein has managed to rebrand itself as the party of protest; the part of anti-austerity, the party of the youth. In the North, Sinn Fein is the unapologetic voice of the republican movement.
   Northern Sinn Fein has been able to eat into traditional moderate nationalist, middle class Catholic voter areas, whilst retaining its hard core support in solid working class republican heartlands, with the Foyle Westminster disaster in December 2019 being the obvious exception to the rule.
   In the Republic, Southern Sinn Fein has targeted the youth voter, especially the first time voters for whom the IRA and the Northern Ireland Troubles are merely abbreviations and dates in history. The IRA slaughter at Claudy, Teebane, Kingsmill, Tullyvallen and La Mon mean little to teenage first time voters in the South.
   Sinn Fein has successfully pushed the propaganda that if they want to give the ‘two-fingered salute’ to the Leinster Home establishment and the Southern elite, then Sinn Fein is the best party to use that protest – and it has worked.
   In Northern Ireland, while the new Stormont deal looks stable enough on paper, in reality could it all fall apart later this year over the legacy issue and especially an Historical Investigations/Inquiries Unit? Indeed, could there still be such a rebellion amongst the Unionist grassroots that the implementation of Irish Language legislation be a deal breaker?
   After all, if the Rev Ian Paisley party (DUP) can run a power-sharing Executive at Parliament Buildings in Stormont with Sinn Fein, why can’t the same deal be reached in the Republic?
   If all the Southern parties agree a coalition agreement of ‘anyone but the Shinners (the nickname attributed to the party by its opponents)’, how stable does that make the 33rd Dail?
   And with the Northern security forces hammering out virtually weekly warnings about the threat from dissident republicans – especially over the recent Brexit Bomb by the Continuity IRA – will Southern Sinn Fein take a more liberal stance on dissident republicans compared to Northern Sinn Fein?
   Has Sinn Fein the political discipline to run two separate parties in Ireland, or would the Northern Sinn Fein/Southern Sinn Fein experiment eventually run aground. Could we have a situation whereby Southern Sinn Fein moans daily about austerity cuts in the Republic, while Northern Sinn Fein implements such cuts in Northern Ireland?
   No doubt, Sinn Fein would love to be in government in both Stormont and Leinster House come the centenary of partition in Ireland. The real elephant in the political room remains, if Southern parties allow Sinn Fein to coalition in the 33rd Dail as a result of its mandate, would it signal a green light to an already uneasy dissident loyalist movement?
   If Sinn Fein does join a Southern coalition government, Irish politics could witness a Sinn Fein Dail Foreign Minister talking to a Sinn Fein Stormont deputy First Minister at the British Irish Ministerial Council about future political arrangements for the island of Ireland!
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Will the real Sinn Fein please stand up? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses the initial exit poll from the 8th February Dail General Election to query, like the island which has two political states, there is a separate Sinn Fein party in the Republic and Northern Ireland. This is the theme of his latest Ballymena Accent column. 
It may only be an initial exit poll, and certainly not a clear indication of the final tally of seats won for the parties and Independents in the 33rd Dail, but already some seismic shifts – and seismic decisions – lie ahead for the winning parties and victories TDs.
   If this exit poll translates accurately into seats won, it is already clear that Sinn Fein has reversed its losses suffered in the local government and European elections in the South.
   Indeed, as with the so-called Alliance ‘bounce’ in Northern Ireland producing a three-party dominance of Sinn Fein, the DUP and Alliance, so too, the Sinn Fein ‘bounce’ in the Republic has collapsed the traditional two-party ruling establishment of either Fianna Fail or Fine Gael.
   Sinn Fein now joins the establishment in Leinster House – but not necessarily the coalition government – as one of the South’s ‘Big Three’: Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, AND Sinn Fein.
   But, as with the days of the Troubles, is Sinn Fein going to face the same dilemma as the Provisional IRA faced? Just as the IRA had a Northern Command and Southern Command, will we now see the emergence of a so-called Southern Sinn Fein compared to a radically different Northern Sinn Fein?
   And given the influence of the IRA Army Council on the broad republican movement, will that Army Council have to give separate autonomies to the IRA’s Northern and Southern Commands?
   If the exit polls are accurate in reflecting what could possibly be that final tally of TDs, then it can already be suggested that both Fianna Fail and Fine Gael ran too many candidates, while Sinn Fein has underestimated the number of candidates required – and ran too few.
   Already one dangerous trend is emerging. Just as Sinn Fein sparked the collapse of the Northern Ireland Executive in January 2017, heralding in a three-year political stagnation period in the Province, could the presence of an increased number of Sinn Fein TDs in the Dail make the possibility of a stable coalition government so precarious that another snap Dail General Election is inevitable?
   It makes radical Unionist commentators like myself pose the blunt question – is Sinn Fein only playing at politics given its volatile stereotype, or is it possible that this part of the republican movement (Sinn Fein) has the maturity and responsibility to mature into a stable, democratic party?
   In the South, it is very clear Sinn Fein has managed to rebrand itself as the party of protest; the part of anti-austerity, the party of the youth. In the North, Sinn Fein is the unapologetic voice of the republican movement.
   Northern Sinn Fein has been able to eat into traditional moderate nationalist, middle class Catholic voter areas, whilst retaining its hard core support in solid working class republican heartlands, with the Foyle Westminster disaster in December 2019 being the obvious exception to the rule.
   In the Republic, Southern Sinn Fein has targeted the youth voter, especially the first time voters for whom the IRA and the Northern Ireland Troubles are merely abbreviations and dates in history. The IRA slaughter at Claudy, Teebane, Kingsmill, Tullyvallen and La Mon mean little to teenage first time voters in the South.
   Sinn Fein has successfully pushed the propaganda that if they want to give the ‘two-fingered salute’ to the Leinster Home establishment and the Southern elite, then Sinn Fein is the best party to use that protest – according to the initial exit polls.
   In Northern Ireland, while the new Stormont deal looks stable enough on paper, in reality could it all fall apart later this year over the legacy issue and especially an Historical Investigations/Inquiries Unit? Indeed, could there still be such a rebellion amongst the Unionist grassroots that the implementation of Irish Language legislation be a deal breaker?
   If the exit polls turn into actual ‘bums on seats’ for Sinn Fein TDs and the final number tops or even exceeds 30, would either Fianna Fail or Fine Gael be tempted to eat their words and form a two-party coalition with Sinn Fein?
   After all, if the Paisley party (DUP) can run a power-sharing Executive at Parliament Buildings in Stormont with Sinn Fein, why can’t the same deal be reached in the Republic?
   If all the Southern parties agree a coalition agreement of ‘anyone but the Shinners’, how stable does that make the 33rd Dail? Could a sizeable Sinn Fein cohort in the new Dail form a stable board Left opposition, forcing Fianna Fail and Fine Gael to work together to outgun the Sinn Fein-led ‘rainbow coalition’?
   And with the Northern security forces hammering out virtually weekly warnings about the threat from dissident republicans – especially over the recent Brexit Bomb by the Continuity IRA – will Southern Sinn Fein take a more liberal stance on dissident republicans compared to Northern Sinn Fein?
   Has Sinn Fein the political discipline to run two separate parties in Ireland, or would the Northern Sinn Fein/Southern Sinn Fein experiment eventually run aground. Could we have a situation whereby Southern Sinn Fein moans daily about austerity cuts in the Republic, while Northern Sinn Fein implements such cuts in Northern Ireland?
   No doubt, Sinn Fein would love to be in government in both Stormont and Leinster House come the centenary of partition in Ireland. The real elephant in the political room remains, if Southern parties allow Sinn Fein to coalition in the 33rd Dail as a result of its mandate, would it signal a green light to an already uneasy dissident loyalist movement?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Saturday 8 February is D-Day in the Irish Republic as voters elect the next Dail, but what could voters learn from the centrist Alliance Party surge in three elections in Northern Ireland last year? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to address the issue. 
For many years, the Alliance Party in Northern Ireland was regarded merely as a ‘wine and cheese supper brigade’ for middle class folk who didn’t want to be bogged down in political conversations.
   But three elections in 2019 – the local government, European and Westminster – shattered that perception.
   Indeed, in the days leading up to the restoration of the Stormont power-sharing Executive in mid January, the only party relishing a snap Assembly poll was the Alliance Party, which was predicted to double its tally of MLAs based on the so-called ‘Alliance bounce’.
   Not since the local government elections of the late 1970s has Alliance seen such a massive surge in its popularity. In 2020, Alliance now has elected representatives at all levels of government – council, Assembly, the House of Commons, and the European Parliament.
    What we saw in 2019 was nothing short of a liberal revolution. In hard number terms, if the current Alliance surge would be replicated in any forthcoming Stormont poll, the party would return with somewhere between 11 and 17 MLAs depending on turnout and transfers.
   The big problem which Unionism now faces is, if liberal and Remain Unionists have defected in voting terms to Alliance, how do the Unionist parties win those voters back?
   In recent years the UUP’s message has been too mixed; in contrast, Alliance’s has been blunt and clear. Could the Alliance ‘surge’ be the very political electric shock treatment which the Unionist family needed to reassess what they have to offer Northern Ireland?
    Alliance has demonstrated its capability to politically mop up the Unionist Remain vote – but could another unthinkable happen; could Alliance ever push into traditional working-class loyalist heartlands? There is a strong feeling that both the Unionist parties – the DUP and UUP – have abandoned their traditional voter bases.
   For years the DUP had their eyes on taking the North Down constituency, but in December they failed by a substantial margin to Stephen Farry.
   But there could be another reason for the ‘Alliance bounce’ and it has nothing to do with ideology. Northern Irish voters were simply totally fed up with the intransigence and lack of progress by the establishment parties – especially the DUP and Sinn Fein – and plumped for Alliance as a kick in the teeth for the other parties.
   Moving south of the border, could the Republic’s voters see Sinn Fein the ‘The Southern Alliance’ and give the Provisional IRA’s apologists a shot at coalition government as a means of protesting against the establishment parties Fianna Fail and Fine Gael.
   While the Provos used the Irish Republic, and especially the border counties, to launch a campaign of terrorist genocide against targets in Northern Ireland during the Troubles, with Sinn Fein now heavily targeting  young and first time voters, how many of them actually remember the IRA’s atrocities?
   If there is one political attribute which Sinn Fein has become the absolute expert at, it is rebranding the party image. Sinn Fein, in terms of political propaganda, is the master of revisionism and rewriting of history – even the art of airbrushing!
   Of course, hard core Alliance activists will say their ‘bounce’ was due to the clear message of the party, that voters knew what they were getting politically when they voted Alliance, that under Naomi Long’s leadership, the party now had a genuine liberal ideology and had successfully binned the stereotypical image of the ‘wine and cheese supper brigade’.
   Or is Alliance’s success due to a clever whispering campaign to Remain Unionists of ‘lend us your vote and we’ll stop Brexit!’. The trouble with that tactic so far as Remain Unionists are concerned that once voters ‘lend’ their votes, it is very difficult to get them back again.
   Look at the struggle which the SDLP has had to win back moderate nationalist voters who ‘lent’ their votes to Sinn Fein in a bid to bring the republican movement in from the political cold.
   Yes, that move helped Sinn Fein considerably in terms of its influence within the broad republican movement, but the Provisional IRA Army Council still has the final say in the movement. Thanks mainly to the John Hume/Gerry Adams talks, it was political Sinn Fein rather than violent Provisional IRA which dictated who was to the fore in the republican movement’s strategy.
   However, in Stormont polls, just as the DUP has eclipsed the Ulster Unionists, so Sinn Fein has continued to out-poll the SDLP in terms of the number of seats. It is still Sinn Fein which is the majority voice for nationalism at Stormont.
   In the Republic, there are many young and first time voters on Saturday for whom IRA violence is merely a date in a history book. If they use Sinn Fein as the main voice of protest against austerity and the establishment parties, it could leave Sinn Fein as the second or third largest party in the Dail.
   The late Rev Ian Paisley’s 1985 local government election slogan was ‘Smash Sinn Fein’, and he launched his campaign pictured with a sledge hammer. Yet he signed up to the St Andrews Agreement in 2006, paving the way for him to enter a power-sharing Executive with Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness as deputy First Minister.
   So when we hear Fine Gael and Fianna Fail beating the moderate republican drum that there will be no truck with Sinn Fein in any future coalition government, if the Northern experience is taken as a benchmark, take all this with a large pinch of political salt!
   The real problem which the Southern electorate and political parties face is that if they give a sizeable mandate to Sinn Fein, it can be very difficult to dislodge them from government – just ask the Foyle SDLP constituency association in terms of the effort it took to win back the Westminster seat.
   Sinn Fein – largely – is playing a clever public campaign, filling its teams and candidates with so-called ‘draft dodgers’ – people who have no convictions or known links to the Provisional IRA.
   While Gerry Adams’ time as Louth TD mobilised Sinn Fein in traditional republican heartlands in the Republic, it was Mary Lou McDonald’s brand of republicanism which has seen Sinn Fein move into the Southern working class heartlands and the youth vote previously occupied by the traditional parties and the Left.
   The Southern parties and candidates have only one ace card they can play against Sinn Fein at this very late stage in the campaign. Could Sinn Fein, if it was part of a Dail coalition government, be trusted not to collapse that government in the same way it collapsed the Stormont Executive in January 2017, leading to three years of political stagnation?
   The seismic shift in Southern politics will not be the emergence of Sinn Fein as a coalition government partner, but the party leadership having the guts to tell the ruling IRA Army Council to ‘butt out’ and let Sinn Fein run the republican movement.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Which unity is most important for unionists?
Political commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to argue that unionists must begin the process of creating a single Unionist Party after last month’s Westminster general election confirmed that unionism as an ideology is now a minority in Northern Ireland.
Within the space of two Westminster General Elections, unionism has gone from being the majority ideology in Northern Ireland to the minority ideology. Surely both the DUP and UUP must face the reality that so-called unionist unity is now a ‘must have’.
   The Alliance ‘bounce’ continues to undercut unionism’s edge over nationalist parties. Indeed last month’s election completes a hat trick of Alliance successes in 2019 following May’s local government and European results.
   DUP fortresses, such as Lagan Valley and East Antrim, are now potential Alliance targets in future Westminster showdowns. In Belfast, unionist representation has been nearly decimated entirely after the DUP lost North Belfast to Sinn Féin and South Belfast to the SDLP and having just clung onto East Belfast against Naomi Long of Alliance.
   Surely the UUP, having seen none of its candidates come close to getting elected, must consider whether its future as a political entity is viable.
   In addition to all of this, given Boris Johnson’s majority in the House of Commons, unionists must realise the realities that will come with being surplus to requirements.
A united front
Unionism needs to form a united front. If a merger between the DUP, UUP, TUV, PUP, UKIP and NI Tories is too much of a ‘political ask’ with another potential Assembly poll looming within two years, at the very least, it could establish an arrangement similar to the United Ulster Unionist Council (the Unionist Coalition or UUUC) which existed in the early 1970s and saw agreed candidates from four different unionist parties take 11 of the 12 Westminster seats in the February 1974 general election.
   Perhaps a reforming of the Ulster Monday Club pressure group could be a starting point, to get much closer co-operation between the DUP and UUP.
   Rebranding as a liberal version of Alliance is doomed to fail; unionism also needs to re-engage with its traditional voter bases – the Christian Churches, loyalist working class, the Loyal Orders, and the marching band scene.
   The next club unionism has to juggle with is how to keep the growing dissident loyalist movement on board. Unlike the post-Good Friday Agreement era, this movement should not be dismissed as those from the UDA or UVF who are making their living from criminality and drug pushing.
Time is ticking
Grassroots unionist unity is a new movement keen to ensure that history does not repeat itself when it comes to a Conservative Government with a strong Commons majority.
   In 1985, two years after then British Tory PM Margaret Thatcher scored her landslide Westminster general election victory in 1983, she signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement which gave the Republic its first meaningful say in the running of Northern Ireland since partition in the 1920s.
   Unionists should be quite rightly afraid of what Boris Johnson will implement, not just agree to, to get the UK out of the European Union. In 2020, Boris can boast all of the UK is leaving the EU ‘on paper’, but the practical outworking of his deal could be a different ballpark altogether.
   Unionists must, therefore, prioritise which unity is more important – European unity, Irish unity, or Unionist unity? Time is ticking.
   Ironically, one of the barriers preventing formal unionist unity is ‘blame game bitterness’, whereby older generation unionists remember the splits in the late 1960s which saw the creation of the DUP. Unionism cannot afford to wait until this generation literally dies out so that the process of creating a single unionist party can begin.
   For instance, there are two key questions which must now be posed – how could this idea (i.e. single unionist party) appeal to voters who don’t see themselves as unionist, and how could they work better with parties which aren’t explicitly (or in any way) unionist?
   For unionist unity to work practically in the form of a single party, it must become a grassroots movement rather than a leadership devised project. Over the decades, unionism has suffered from an ‘ego complex’ as to who is the successor of Carson and Craig – was it Rev Ian Paisley? Was it Jim Molyneaux? Was it Harry West? Was it Bill Craig?
   The best way to make the unionist community work together politically is through a grassroots pressure group. The Right-wing Vanguard movement of the early 1970s was one such organisation. Its demise was signalled when it decided to become a separate political party.
   While it was Molyneaux who coined the concept of unionism being ‘a board church of the pro-Union community’, the separate party structures were seen as excluding sections of that community.
   For example, would the DUP under Paisley senior include the so-called upper middle class of ‘Fur Coat Brigade’ Ulster Unionists? Would the aristocratic ‘Big House’ unionist families in the UUP accept working class loyalists with links to the Protestant paramilitaries. Would Christian fundamentalists within the DUP rub shoulders with working class socialists within the PUP?
   A single party based on the pressure group system would solve these difficulties. Within the original Unionist Party which governed Northern Ireland until 1972, there were numerous pressure groups to represent various interests, but all with one core belief – that the Union with Great Britain was the best way forward for Northern Ireland.
   For example, the Christian Churches had the Loyal Orders (Orange delegates), Right-wingers had the Ulster Monday Club; socialists had the Unionist Labour group; unionist living west of the River Bann had the West Ulster Unionist Council, and there were separate groups to represent women and young people.
   A single unionist party can speak with one voice politically and can emphasise that the Union with GB is diverse and can be sold to a wide variety of voter.
   Indeed, if the island of Ireland can survive the economic challenges of Brexit and the peace process and Stormont both hold firm, the political foundations will have been laid for an Irish Unionist Party to contest elections in the Republic, especially in the border counties of Cavan, Donegal, Monaghan and Leitrim where the Loyal Orders have a strong presence. Such integration can only be beneficial for the body politic in Ireland.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Could an Independent Ulster survive economically along with an Independent Scotland and the Irish Republic as a Celtic Alliance of Nations within the European Union? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to put the case for this solution in the event of a Boris Government throwing Northern Ireland ‘under the bus’ as the price for the UK exiting the EU. 
I’ll be 61 this year, God Willing, and I’ve been a card-carrying member of the Ulster Unionist Party since I was 18 when I joined the North Antrim Young Unionists as an A Level student at Ballymena Academy.
   My parents and grandparents all had long associations with the Party, with my late father, Rev Dr Robert Coulter MBE, being a former UUP Councillor and Mayor in Ballymena, UUP Chief Whip in the Northern Ireland Forum, and a former Assembly member and Stormont Commissioner between 1998 and 2011.
   Even as a primary school pupil, I recall serving sandwiches to UUP Westminster candidate Henry Clark during the 1970 Westminster election campaign when he lost the supposed safe Ulster Unionist Commons seat to a certain Rev Ian Paisley.
   One element has always struck me about the Unionist ideology – we never seem to have a Plan B when things go wrong! Monday 13 January is a D-Day for the Stormont Assembly; either the power-sharing Executive is on the road to clear restoration, or Northern Ireland faces another Assembly poll, or the Boris Government imposes Direct Rule from Westminster.
   In the past, many Unionist leaders have deluded themselves into thinking that a Conservative Government really politically ‘loves’ Northern Ireland. Unionists, in reality, need to waken up politically and smell the coffee on offer from the Tories.
   It was Ted Heath who shafted the original Stormont Parliament in 1972; it was Maggie Thatcher who stabbed Unionism in the back with the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement; it was John Major who agreed the Downing Street Declaration in 1993 which set the wheels in motion for Sinn Fein in government in Northern Ireland, and the eventual disbanding of the RUC; and it was Boris Johnston who has thrown the DUP ‘under a bus’ concerning the Brexit deal.
   Have you got the message in Northern Ireland, Unionists? You may be able to trust individual Tories, but you cannot trust a Conservative party in Government. Get with the programme!
   So if things go ‘pear shaped’ for the Assembly next Monday, and the Northern Ireland economy goes equally ‘pear shaped’ after Brexit on 31 January, what is Unionism’s Plan B for the Six Counties of political Ulster?
   Alliance, the SDLP and Sinn Fein all have their Plan B’s ready to implement – Irish unity. Even liberal Unionism wants a discussion on the possibility of a Unionist role in a united Ireland.
   Unionism’s Plan B should be an Independent Ulster within the European Union, forming a Celtic Alliance with the Irish Republic and an equally Independent Scotland.
   The key question which Unionists must ask; given that Boris Johnston threw the DUP ‘under the bus’ regarding his Brexit deal, he is equally capable of driving that bus over Northern Ireland several times economically so that the Province becomes a financially crippled wasteland.
   Yes, you can point to the fact that Johnston has chucked a bucket of politically freezing water over Scottish National Party calls for a second independence referendum, but even with his massive Commons majority, even Boris cannot ignore the latest surge in support for the SNP in December’s Westminster General Election.
   I’ve made mention of the solution of Ulster Independence in my writing in the past:
   Indeed, for the past five years, since 2015, I have been advocating the need for Unionists to consider the merits of an economic Celtic Alliance:
   The one pitfall which a Celtic Alliance must avoid is that the European Union fails to fund the new political arrangement. This may sound politically hypocritical coming from myself as an ardent Brexiteer.
   I have not switched sides. I am recognising that while in a national UK vote, the electorate in 2016 opted to leave the EU, but Scotland and Northern Ireland voted ‘Remain’.
   What Unionists need to understand is the brutally honest question – which is the better situation? To be in an Independent Ulster which is milking the EU cow for all that it is worth, or to be a minority partner in a UK in which the Tory Government is punishing Northern Ireland with massive austerity for the DUP pre-Christmas voting habits?
   A key plank of the SNP’s independence programme is that it would rejoin the EU, but Scots take note – you need to avoid the scenario that you become nothing more than a third rate banana republic:
   The ‘Independence’ Plan B involving Ulster, Scotland and the Irish Republic will only work if the EU can guarantee funding for the new Celtic Alliance, especially if the economic price tag for the UK leaving the EU under a Boris Brexit Deal is financial austerity in Scotland and Northern Ireland, but an economic boost for England and Wales.
   In the meantime, Unionists must not hang around their Orange Halls with wee meetings hoping that Johnston and his massive Commons majority will change their minds on Tory austerity for Northern Ireland.
   Unionists need to some time in early 2020 establish a Unionist Embassy in Dublin’s Leinster House. It is something which I have campaigned for since 2014: http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/Daily_Star/arts2014/jul14_Loyalists_need_Dublin_input__JCoulter_Star.php
   Unionism made a fatal tactical error in 1985 after Thatcher signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement. Unionists should have reciprocated the Republic establishing the Maryfield Secretariat by setting up a Unionist Embassy at the very heart of the Dublin parliament and demanding a say in the running of Southern affairs.
   Maryfield gave the Dublin government its first real say in the running of Northern Ireland since partition in the 1920s. As we near the centenary of the original Anglo Irish Treaty which paved the way for partition, Unionism needs to box clever and get its Unionist Embassy in Dublin off the ground and up and running politically.
   In 1985 and 1986, while Unionism tramped the streets of Northern Ireland with its ‘Ulster Says No’ and ‘Ulster Still Says No’ campaigns, Dublin Nationalism made strides politically using Maryfield.
   Such a Unionist Embassy would lay the foundations for a Celtic Alliance and could also act as a springboard to defuse the emergence of a dissident loyalist movement; the latter aiming to repeat the Dublin and Monaghan atrocities of 1974 in the event that Irish unity becomes a reality in a post Brexit British Isles.
   Whatever decisions emerge on 13 January, there can be no doubting that Unionism must begin thinking with its head rather than marching with its feet in 2020. Unionism requires a Plan B if the Stormont Plan A flops – like it or not, the Celtic Alliance is that Plan B.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
If you can’t beat them, join them! How does Unionism cope with the Alliance ‘Bounce’ in any future election? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter in his latest Ballymena Accent column, comes up with a radical alternative for both the UUP and DUP. 
One of the legions of challenges which Unionism faces in 2020 is how to combat the so-called Alliance ‘Bounce’ which has battered both the Ulster Unionists and DUP in three successive elections last year.
   The knee-jerk reaction would be for Unionism ideologically to immediately ideologically lurch to the centre ground and rebrand both parties as 1912 Home Rule-style liberal Unionist movements.
   Perhaps bringing the situation into more modern times, should the UUP and DUP ideologically rebrand themselves as 2020 versions of the late Brian Faulkner’s old pro-Assembly Unionists, which later became the now defunct Unionist Party of Northern Ireland (UPNI).
   Or maybe Unionism should rekindle the moderate spirit of the now totally dead NI21 movement, once led by former UUP MLAs Basil McCrea and John McAllister.
   In a past column, I assessed the clear threat which Alliance posed to the Unionist parties and that both the DUP and UUP could not rely on the perception that the Alliance ‘Bounce’ could be dismissed as Remain Unionists using Alliance as a protest vote against the hardline pro-Brexit stance of the DUP.
   Unionism needs to really get to grips in 2020 with the political reality that it is a minority ideology in what was once Loyal Ulster. Likewise, does Unionism have the time, wisdom or personnel to ‘plant activists’ in Alliance branches and get the party to politically implode by issuing statements which would offend the Protestant middle class.
   Such a tactic was successfully used by Ulster Unionist activists against the fledgling Northern Ireland Conservatives in the early 1990s when some newly formed Tory constituency associations posed a potential electoral threat to sitting UUP MPs.
   Perhaps the real way Unionism can outgun Alliance is on bread and butter issues, not to lurch to the centre – or even the Right-wing – but to drift ideologically to the Left; in short, become closet socialists.
   If Unionism needs a benchmark, perhaps it could rekindle the spirit of the old Northern Ireland Labour Party, or the old Unionist Labour pressure group which once existed within the UUP.
   Take a look at the success of old style Paisleyism in building the DUP out of the foundations of the late 1960s Protestant Unionist Party. Paisley senior was to the Right in terms of the Union and the Constitution, but to the Left in terms of constituency work and bread and butter issues.
   Politically, he was able to create a shotgun marriage between two sections of the Unionist community which were previously voiceless under the dominations of the Church of Ireland/liberal Unionist Party under Terence O’Neill and later James Chichester-Clark.
   These sections were working class loyalists and evangelical Christians. To the loyalists, Paisley senior was a socialist messiah; to the Christians, he was the new fundamentalist messiah. Paisley senior could implement a socialist constituency agenda without the fundamentalists screaming about ‘reds under the bed’!
   The Progressive Unionist Party – which was a clear Left-wing Unionist movement – enjoyed no such success. Its peak came in the 1998 Assembly elections when it gained two MLAs. But in 2020, apart from a few councillors, the PUP is a fringe organisation.
   Perhaps this lack of support for the PUP could be explained because of the party’s links to loyalist terrorism. For many years, the PUP has been viewed as the unofficial wing of the banned Ulster Volunteer Force and Red Hand Commando.
   Similarly, numerous loyalists believed Paisley senior behaved like the ‘Grand Old Duke of York’, leading them up the hill politically with firebrand speeches, but when the going got rough, he abandoned them, especially when loyalists ended up in prison.
   The perception that Paisleyism would turn its back on loyalists who ended up in jail, equally fuelled the view that loyalism should consider another political ideology as an alternative to Paisleyite Unionism.
   This was where socialism, Marxism and even full-blown communism entered the loyalist thinking. The following quote is always attributed to Kark Marx, the founder of communism: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.”
   In loyalist terms, listening to firebrand fundamentalist preaching had resulted in loyalists serving jail terms and was a prime example of religion (that is, fundamentalist, Hell-fire Christianity) becoming the ‘opium of the loyalist people’. Marx warned against this, so Marx must be right!
    To this new generation of loyalists, they had listened to sermons about the persecuted Christian Church, but what about those folk who were being persecuted BY the Christian Church? To such loyalists, fundamentalists Christian preachers represented the modern day Pharisees – saying one thing in their sermons, but in their actions towards loyalists, and especially loyalist prisoners, doing something completely different.
   At this stage, a socialist alternative entered the political fray as a workable alternative to fundamentalist Paisleyism. Some loyalists even toyed with the idea of revamping the old Communist Party of Northern Ireland as a political voice.
   Indeed, animosity developed between socialist loyalists in the PUP and fundamentalist Christians in the DUP to such an extent that the former was once branded ‘the Shankill Soviet’ by some in the latter.
   So, here’s the key question – could a political way forward ever be formulated which saw a compromise between Unionism, loyalism and socialism, and formulated in such a manner that it neutralised electorally the threat posed by the Alliance ‘Bounce’?
   A lot of bread and butter constituency work by Unionist politicians could be described as ‘soft socialism’.
   Ironically, it can also be suggested that Jesus Christ was the first real communist and that Karl Marx simply rewrote Christ’s Sermon on the Mount in Matthew’s Gospel – namely the Beatitudes – and rebranded the ‘blessed are the …’ attributes as the communist manifesto.
   Even if the Northern Ireland parties succeed in getting a restored Stormont Executive by the Monday 13 January deadline, the Province still has to cope with the expected backlash from Brexit on 31 January.
   Should Northern Ireland be bracing itself for another round of Tory austerity cuts as a result of Brexit?
   If this becomes a reality, should Unionism adopt a Hard Left socialist agenda on bread and butter issues which affect constituents, but not slide into the realm of Godless Marxism?
   Such a so-called ‘Christian Communist’ agenda could also be the ideological key which could unlock the political doors to ensuring Remain Unionists return to the UUP or DUP fold.
   The ‘Christian Communist’ manifesto in practice is based on the principle of ‘Putting People First’ – namely, putting pupils first, putting patients first, and putting pensioners first. It is about putting the Province first, not putting the party first.
   While the demise of the Traditional Unionist Voice party can be interpreted that a Hard Right agenda is no longer popular among Unionist voters, this does not mean that a populist manifesto cannot be sold to Unionist voters.
   The strategy which Unionist parties will need to adopt to re-engage with the Unionist electorate – both those who don’t vote, or those who have defected to Alliance – is to combine Hard Left socialism with Unionist populism.
   Liberal unionism, like the DUP ‘Confidence and Supply Arrangement’ and the past UUP/Tory election pact are all dead ducks. Unionism needs to think with its ideological heads rather than march with its feet in 2020 as the Unionist family no longer enjoys an electoral majority in Northern Ireland.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
A genuine liberal breakthrough, or just a Unionist protest against the DUP? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, devotes his latest Ballymena Accent column to assessing the seriousness and lasting effect of the so-called ‘Alliance Bounce’ in 2019.
The only party which would relish a snap Assembly poll in early 2020 should no agreement on a power-sharing Stormont Executive be reached by 13 January is the so-called middle of the road Alliance Party.
   Not since the local government elections of the late 1970s has Alliance seen such a massive surge in its popularity.
   Who would have thought after leader Naomi Long lost her Commons seat to the DUP’s Gavin Robinson that Alliance would bounce back with such political venom?
   As we leave 2019, Alliance now has elected representatives at all levels of government – council, Assembly, the House of Commons, and the European Parliament.
   With the UK now destined to formally leave the European Union on 31 January now that BoJo has secured his Thatcherite-style Commons majority, Mrs Long will see her having to give up her European seat. The DUP has already indicated that its MEP Diane Dodds will return to the Assembly via the co-option route.
   But for Right-wing Unionist pundits like me, the question buzzing around my head concerning Alliance is a brutally simple one – how did a party once branded as only a ‘wine and cheese supper brigade’ now end up being more electorally stronger than the once ruling Ulster Unionist Party that I’ve been a member of since 1977?
   As an active member of the Young Unionists in the late Seventies – the youth wing of the UUP – I’d query my peers as to why they got involved with Alliance. Were they genuine liberals, or soft socialists who could not come ‘out’ as being Left-wing?
   For adults of that era, ‘the wine and cheese supper brigade’ perception was of someone who did not want to get bogged down in political discussions. In practical terms, to avoid an argument with a DUP supporter or Right-wing UUP activist, you gave the simple retort: “I’m Alliance!”
   But 2019 was something clearly more than “I’m Alliance!” 2019 became a liberal revolution. Indeed, if the current Alliance surge would be replicated in any forthcoming Stormont poll, the party would return with somewhere between 11 and 17 MLAs depending on turnout and transfers – in short, holding the balance of power.
   Has Alliance really made the significant breakthrough in Northern Ireland politics it has always yearned for, or was 2019 simply the year that Remain Unionists voted Alliance to give the DUP a thump on the political jaw?
   Have Remain and liberal Unionists chosen Alliance, rather than the election battered UUP, as the vehicle to deliver a clear political bloody nose to the DUP over Brexit, RHI, the Stormont impasse, and all the other political sins they can think of?
   For example, Alliance snatched North Down from under the very nose of the DUP; Alliance cut the majorities of a number of sitting DUP MPs, converting those constituencies from safe DUP to Commons marginals.
   The big problem which Unionism now faces is, if liberal and Remain Unionists have defected in voting terms to Alliance, how do the Unionist parties win those voters back? Is it a reality that when you vote Alliance once, you are always Alliance?
   Maybe Right-wing Unionists could use the same tactic to wreck Alliance as they did in the early 1990s to wreck the surge in support for the fledgling Conservative Associations which were springing up across Northern Ireland.
   Under the personal direction of the late Jim Molyneaux, individual UUP activists joined a Conservative Association and began suggesting ultra Right-wing policies, or ensuring that a more liberal Tory candidate was selected to run against a sitting UUP MP.
   Could the same tactic be employed by the Unionist Right-wing against Alliance? Infiltrate the party and propose increasing Left-wing policies which would alienate Alliance’s core middle of the road, middle class power base?
   What Unionism needs to understand is that flirting with liberalism has not worked – just ask the UUP! It is not a case that Alliance now dominates the middle ground of Northern Irish politics, but that Alliance has clearly branded itself as the party of protest against the DUP/Sinn Fein impasse at Stormont while our NHS stagnates.
   The UUP’s message was too mixed; people did not know what they were getting when they voted UUP – was it a Remain or Leave candidate; was it a liberal or Right-wing candidate; was it a pro-life or pro-choice candidate? With Alliance, the message was blunt and clear.
   In 2019, Alliance’s clear message as the Remain voice was loud – and effective. The challenge which Alliance faces in 2020 is how it makes its voice equally clear in a post Brexit Northern Ireland, especially now that BoJo has chucked the DUP ‘under a bus politically’ in terms of his 31 January Brexit deal.
   Likewise, if the Unionist parties cannot mobilise the Christian Churches into combating any post Brexit austerity in Northern Ireland throughout 2020 and beyond, maybe the Alliance Party can? But now that Brexit is happening, will Unionist voters who ‘lent’ their votes to Alliance return to the Unionist parties?
   Could the ‘Alliance Bounce’ be the very political electric shock treatment which the Unionist family needed to waken up and begin the process of forming a single Unionist Party to represent all shades of pro-Union thinking?
   Alliance has clearly demonstrated its capability throughout 2019 to politically mop up the Unionist Remain vote – but could another unthinkable happen; could Alliance ever push into traditional working class loyalist heartlands?
   There is a strong feeling that both the Unionist parties – the DUP and UUP – have abandoned their traditional voter bases in the loyalist working class, the Loyal Orders, and the marching band scene.
   At first saying, the thought of the Orange Order voting Alliance seems totally daft. But remember how a certain Rev Ian Paisley broke the Unionist Party’s stranglehold on North Antrim in the 1970 Westminster General Election – through hard constituency work and getting loyalist housing estates their inside toilets instead of having to rely on the traditional slop bucket.
   If Alliance activists were to secure benefits for working class loyalists; ensured that grants for Orange halls were forthcoming and maintained, could a day ever come where we would see Orangemen parading on the Twelfth with Alliance Party badges emblazoned on their collarettes?
   It’ll never happen, I hear you say. Try telling ‘never, never, never’ to the DUP after the St Andrews Agreement in 2006 in terms of a power-sharing deal with Sinn Fein, and the North Down Alliance constituency association in 2019 in terms of a Dr Stephen Ferry victory!
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious discussion show, Call In Coulter, on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 fm radio on Saturdays around 9.30 am, or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com
Loyalist murmurings about using civil disobedience to protest against the so-called ‘Boris Brexit Deal’ are doing the political rounds as the clock ticks down to the 13 January Stormont Executive deadline. John Coulter uses his Ballymena Accent column to issue a pre-Christmas warning that such a policy has always back-fired on loyalism, and the pro-Union community needs to find another way of defusing growing loyalist anger. John can be followed on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Cynicism is a very useful attribute to possess as a journalist, especially after 41 years of covering the political scenario in Ireland. That cynicism allows you to question when radicals, extremists and hardliners make outlandish statements or begin sabre-rattling, particularly during an election campaign.
   But when the person warning about a campaign of civil disobedience is a respected Presbyterian cleric and senior Orangeman, then my ears take note.
   It was with some alarm when I heard the Rev Mervyn Gibson, a former RUC officer turned Presbyterian minister and now also the Grand Secretary of the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland warn on the BBC that a campaign of cicil disobedience could be called for given the anger among the loyalist community at Tory PM Boris Johnston’s Brexit deal. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07wfq2s
   If there is one clear conclusion which I have drawn from my 41 years as a journalism in Ireland, it is that loyalism does not do civil disobedience well!
   This is a theme I have warned about before on the Northern Slant website in July as to how dissident loyalists might interpret any Brexit solution: https://www.northernslant.com/could-brexit-bring-about-the-rebirth-of-a-violent-dissident-loyalist-movement/
   It also poses the startling question if Right-wing Unionism still has a future role in Ireland, given the centre ground Alliance ‘bounce’ in May’s local government, European and recent Westminster elections, and the perceived increasing liberal trends within both the Ulster Unionists and DUP – again, an issue which I explored in July on Northern Slant: https://www.northernslant.com/does-unionisms-right-wing-have-a-political-future/
   The core of the problem for loyalism is that when it initiates civil disobedience, it cannot control its ultra fringes on the street; in short, it lacks the same discipline which the Provisional IRA had over its street rioters.
   In this respect, you can point to the ability of the IRA to turn on and off the tap of violence during the hunger strike riots in Northern Ireland in 1980, but especially in 1981. Loyalism lacks this discipline.
   Inevitably, loyalism has failed to grasp this fault historically and civil disobedience always backfires on the pro-Union community.
   For instance, in 1974, when loyalists took to the streets to protest against the power-sharing Sunningdale Executive between liberal Unionism and the moderate nationalist SDLP, the UDA brought Northern Ireland to a standstill.
   However, the loyalist community could not stop hardliners in the UVF setting off no-warning bombs in Dublin and Monaghan, which killed over 30 people and injured scores more.
   What triggered that bombing was the inability of political Unionism to come up with an alternative to the Sunningdale Executive and the Dublin government tried to end the stalemate by proposing a greater say for the Dail in Northern Irish affairs.
   Loyalism lacked the discipline to stop the civil disobedience of ordinary Unionists against Sunningdale from being hijacked by UVF hardliners, especially those allegedly linked to the notorious Glenanne Gang.
   Indeed, that gang of loyalists is now being investigated by former Bedfordshire Police chief Jon Boutcher over allegations of collusion, given that it is the supposed Glenanne Gang which is blamed for the Dublin and Monaghan attacks in 1974: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-50617175
   Just over a decade after those atrocities, the then British Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, attempted to break the political deadlock in Ulster politics by signing the Anglo-Irish Agreement in November 1985.
   In expected – and predicted – true Unionist style, loyalists again took to the streets with their Ulster Says No and Ulster Still Says No campaigns. Those campaigns spawned new groups within loyalism, including the Ulster Clubs, Ulster Resistance and the pro-independence Ulster Movement for Self Determination (MSD).
   But the crunch for the campaign of civil disobedience came in March 1986 when supposedly united Unionism staged a Day of Action against that Agreement, also known as the Hillsborough Accord and the Dublin Diktat.
   I covered events that day as a News Letter reporter. I watched as loyalist farmers – against the wishes of the Unionist organisers – drove their tractors at speed into a loyalist housing estate to confront the then RUC. Across Northern Ireland, similar loyalist civil disobedience was descending into open violence with the security forces.
   The net result was that respectable middle class Unionism walked away from the civil disobedience campaign in disgust at the violence. As in 1974, so in 1986, Unionism had lost the moral high ground.
   As Northern Ireland digests the results of yet another ‘crunch’ General Election where Unionism again found itself as a minority ideology in Westminster terms, the boogie man of civil disobedience is once more raising its head in loyalism.
   The poor showing for the pro-Union community – dropping from 11 of the 18 MPs to eight – will only further fuel the aims of that boogie man, especially with the DUP losing more two of its MPs and Ulster Unionism unable to win back Sinn Fein-held Fermanagh/South Tyrone.
   Meetings of loyalists angry at the ‘Boris Brexit’ deal have already been held across Northern Ireland. Wild allegations of a new loyalist terror group are already circulating which will make the Republic pay for any perceived all-Ireland gains it gets from a Brexit deal.
   The reality is that the loyalist boogie man is rattling his sabre; the practical political reality is how can he be defused?
   The solution within loyalism is brutally simple – the Christian Churches must now step up to the mark and make it clear to their flocks that the ballot box is the only way forward for Unionism.
   The Christian denominations can no longer hide their heads in their Bibles, pulpits and pews. In the same way that Christian Churches mobilised the Afro-American voters in the Southern States in the civil rights era of the 1960s, the Northern Irish Churches must encourage their flocks to vote in future elections to show any potential loyalist militant group that democracy is the only way forward.
   In hard political terms, if the Northern Ireland parties cannot agree to reform the power-sharing Stormont Executive by 13 January, the Province will then face either another Assembly poll or Direct Rule from Westminster.
   Taking the 12 December Commons result as a benchmark, only the Alliance Party will benefit substantially from a Stormont poll – probably doubling its tally of MLAs. The DUP and Sinn Fein will still be the largest parties and the two key players needed to reform the Executive.
   Likewise, the Protestant Loyal Orders have a moral obligation and public duty to play their part in keeping the lid on loyalism by emphasising the democratic solution.
   Only then can the boogie man of civil disobedience be chased off the field and back into the depths of the woods, out of sight, out of mind.

#GE2019 raises questions for nationalism and unionism

The upcoming general election seems to be asking questions of both nationalism and unionism respectively. Moderates or the so-called ‘extremes’ – John Coulter asks who the big winners might be when the votes are counted. You can follow John on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter.

Is Corbyn trying to lure Sinn Fein MPs to take their Commons seats? That’s the key question which political commentator, Dr John Coulter, is asking in his Ballymena Accent column in the run-up to the 12 December General Election.  
What could be the real reason for Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn emphasising that Tory rival Boris Johnston must be ‘truthful’ over the Treasury documents in relation to the Brexit impact on Northern Ireland?
   It is not to drive a wedge between the Conservatives (especially the Right-wing, pro-Brexit European Research Group, the ERG) and the DUP as that rift already exists.
   It is to drive a wedge between pro-Union voters in Northern Ireland and the DUP, which is defending 10 of the 18 seats.
   A worst case scenario for the DUP is that it could return with only seven MPs, leaving the other 11 seats in the hands of nationalists, especially Sinn Fein which – unlike the Scottish and Welsh nationalists – has operated an abstentionist policy towards Westminster since its formation in 1905.
   Corbyn’s sabre rattling about the Treasury report is already having an impact in Northern Ireland, as 1,000 loyalists held a public meeting recently against the ‘Boris Brexit deal’.
   Corbyn is stirring the pot that the Tories will cut Northern Ireland adrift in return for the remainder of the UK voting Tory and allowing Great Britain to formally leave the European Union in January.
   Corbyn is angling for a hung Parliament in which he could persuade Sinn Fein to drop abstentionism in return for a snap border poll in Ireland.
   This would be dangerous for Unionism if the current 11/7 balance in favour of Unionism for MPs swings to 11/7 in favour of republicanism/nationalism.
   However, the DUP has not ruled out a deal with Labour – provided the party ditches Corbyn as its leader. While the DUP boasts about the billions of pounds it has gained for Northern Ireland through the confidence and supply agreement with the Conservative party – no matter who was the premier, both Theresa May and Boris Johnston.
   So if Corbyn needed the votes of several Northern Ireland MPs to complete a political rainbow coalition with Scottish and Welsh nationalists, the Greens, even the Liberal Democrats, could he rely on the DUP for a separate confidence and supply motion.
   However, while the DUP has made it clear it will not enter a House of Commons pact with Corbyn, the party could develop an arrangement with a Labour Party whose leader was not Corbyn.
   Ironically, Corbyn may face the mother of all nightmare political decisions – stay as leader and try to run a minority Government, or step down as leader and let Labour run the rainbow coalition Government?
   Again, in spite of Sinn Fein emphasising its abstentionist policy towards the House of Commons – a stance it has held since the party’s formation in 1905, Irish politics is the art of ‘never saying never’.
   After all, Sinn Fein managed to change policy dropping its past historical abstentionist position towards both the Dail in Dublin and the Assembly at Stormont.
   Sinn Fein may also be forced to rethink its abstentionist strategy if the SDLP wins a couple of MPs, and begins to make its votes count in the Commons chamber – could that affect a Sinn Fein vote in any future assembly poll if the SDLP is delivering at Westminster?
   But lurking in the background is a growing dissident loyalist lobby growing here in Northern Ireland, not witnessed since the 1985 Anglo Irish Agreement and the Ulster Says No campaign in terms of the support from grassroots loyalism.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter

Will Sinn Féin hold its own?

Nationalism has steadily advanced in Northern Ireland since the February 1974 General Election when it only claimed one Westminster seat out of then 12. Now the political ‘greening’ of the North can account for seven of 18 seats – all of them now the dark green of abstentionist Sinn Féin.

In spite of the potential negative impact the Brexit debate has had on Ireland, north and south, the Remain/Leave argument has thrown nationalism a new political lifeline – choice!

Since the early 1980s, the battle for the heart and soul of nationalism in Northern Ireland has been a two-horse race between the moderate SDLP and the overtly republican Sinn Féin.

In 2017, Sinn Féin managed to wipe the SDLP off the face of the Westminster map in then Prime Minister Theresa May’s snap poll, eating substantially into the SDLP’s middle-class Catholic voter base while keeping a firm grip on its own working-class republican heartlands. A potentially resurgent SDLP could take at least two of the three seats it lost to Sinn Féin back then. As Michelle O’Neill will have realised from the result of Sinn Féin’s recent vice presidential contest, in which her competitor John O’Dowd hardly campaigned yet won 33% of the vote, success cannot be taken for granted.

What role could a re-emerged SDLP play a Westminster, and what will this mean for the debate within nationalism? Likewise, what impact will the appearance of the pro-life republican party Aontú, formed by ex-Sinn Féin TD Peader Tóibín, have on the seven constituencies in which it’s fielding candidates – five of them currently held by Sinn Féin? Given Sinn Féin’s brand of socialism continues to be challenged by the hard-left People Before Profit in Foyle and West Belfast, might this election see its long-standing abstentionist policy come under pressure?

What about unionism?

Just like in nationalism, this election has raised questions of unionism. Talk of electoral pacts has prompted unionism to agree their own understandings, in North Belfast and Fermanagh/South Tyrone. But what message will be sent to unionism if even with agreed candidates it still can’t hold North Belfast or win back Fermanagh & South Tyrone?

New UUP leader Steve Aiken has firmly positioned the party on unionism’s liberal wing. What will be the future for the UUP if this strategy fails to deliver a single MP? Having lost its MEP seat in May – a role it had held for 40 years – and witnessed around 40,000 votes disappear in a single month between the council and European elections, another electoral drubbing on 12 December will only herald the demands for a single unionist party.

The DUP should not be cock-a-hoop at this prospect for the UUP. What happens if grassroots loyalist opinion turns into political moves against the DUP in the future, incensed by the perceived betrayal of Boris Johnson’s Withdrawal Agreement?

Is the wider political landscape changing?

One of the biggest questions which should focus the minds of nationalism and unionism respectively during and after this election is the growing number of people in Northern Ireland who identify as ‘neither’ – according to the recent LucidTalk polls, roughly half of the electorate currently do so. The impact of this is already being seen – in May’s European election, Naomi Long’s Alliance Party deprived Sinn Féin of a first-place finish at the polls and convincingly took the UUP’s MEP seat. As has been pointed out by Lisa Whitten already on Northern Slant, should these trends from the opinion polls continue, this will be transformative.

The avowedly pro-life republican party, Aontu, is making its first serious British General Election foray. Just as the Protestant community in the Republic votes for republican parties, could a situation arise whereby Northern Unionist voters would transfer to Aontu based on the abortion issue. Political Commentator Dr John Coulter explores the issue.
For the first time in almost a generation, nationalist voters will have a choice of republican parties in the 12 December General Election.
   Dipping its political toes in a Northern Westminster poll is Aontu – formed by Peadar Toibin from Meath West, who was initially elected to the Dail as a Sinn Fein TD.
   So could the avowedly pro-life Aontu party make a dent in nationalist politics, or is it merely a political candle in the wind? Indeed, is this new kid on the block a potential seat decider as the dark horse of the looming 12 December General Election in Northern Ireland, or will the X voting system reduce Aontu to a flash in the pan when the votes are counted on 13 December?
   In hard voting terms, would socially conservative nationalists and republicans defect from the SDLP and Sinn Fein to Aontu by putting faith before party?
   As a socially conservative Unionist and ‘born again’ Christian, Aontu could prove to be a voting dilemma for me. Indeed, if I was an Irish republican, hypothetically speaking, and lived in one of the seven constituencies where Peadar Toibin’s Aontu party was standing, my X would be against its candidate.
   The Brexit debate has sparked a warning to every pro-Union sympathiser that a united Ireland may be at some time on the political cards. Could this be the reason both the DUP and UUP are so eager to secure Catholic, soft nationalist and liberal Protestant voters in their last ditch attempt to patch up the Union?
   The argument could be put that in the event of a united Ireland, an Irish Unionist Party could well be a permanent fixture of any future Dail coalition government. Could a united Ireland be the one concept that would unite Unionism behind a single political movement?
   More significantly, who would Unionists transfer to in a united Ireland voting scenario? And in particular, who would the various Protestant and Christian denominations encourage their flocks to vote for?
   Aontu may not win any seats in December’s General Election, but could the foundations be laid for a meaningful vehicle for Christian voters to transfer to in the future?
   Specifically, too, for republican voters, 12 December may not simply be about whether they support or don’t support Brexit.
   Aontu has thrown another ingredient into the political mix – what do republicans from a socially conservative background put first? Is it the right to life, especially of the unborn, or the desire to see a united Ireland?
   Being an Irish republican does not mean you have to abandon your Christian faith and doggedly follow the atheistic rantings of Marxism, which are peddled by Sinn Fein.
   But at some stage, you may have to make a choice – which is the more important to you; protecting the rights of the unborn from some of the most draconian abortion laws in Europe, or your desire to see Ireland become a 32-county democratic socialist republic as dictated by the 1916 Proclamation?
   There can be no doubt that Aontu is dipping its toe in the General Election waters on 12 December and the ultimate aim, no matter what the result, is to prepare the ground politically for a potential fresh Assembly poll in the New Year.
   Of the seven out of the 18 Westminster constituencies in which Aontu is standing, two have DUP MPs (South Belfast and East Londonderry) and the other five held by Sinn Fein (West Belfast, Foyle, Newry and Armagh, South Down, and West Tyrone).
   The chances of Aontu winning any of these seats is virtually impossible, but the party could play a role in deciding who does get the most votes.
   This is especially true in South Belfast where nationalists and Alliance are trying to convert this DUP marginal into a Remain victory. Will Aontu take more votes off the SDLP’s Claire Hanna, or Alliance’s Paula Bradshaw?
   Likewise, in Foyle, would the Aontu intervention have a bearing on the outcome between defending MP Sinn Fein’s Elisha McCallion and SDLP leader Colum Eastwood in this republican marginal?
   Is there an outside chance that South Down could swing back to the SDLP if Aontu took enough votes off defending Sinn Fein MP Chris Hazzard – along with Unionist tactical voting – to help the SDLP’s Michael Savage?
   West Belfast, Newry and Armagh, and West Tyrone are now Sinn Fein strongholds so the intervention of Aontu will have little effect on the outcome. Similarly, East Londonderry is the stomping ground of safe DUP MP Gregory Campbell. In all these constituencies, Aontu will be looking merely to establish a political presence in the hope of building a power base for future Assembly and local government polls.
   However, the key issue of the pro-life lobby should not be dismissed as it is a major issue which can cross the sectarian divide in Northern Ireland.
   For example, during my late father’s (Rev Dr Robert Coulter MBE) time in politics at council, Forum and Assembly levels, because of his strong pro-life stance as a Christian and evangelical Presbyterian minister, he secured a significant number of transfers from nationalist voters.
   It was amazing at elections counts to see – under proportional representation – SDLP 1, Coulter 2, and even Sinn Fein 1, Coulter 2.
   And here’s a dilemma which the pro-life cause could create for many Unionist voters in the future. Which would they put first – their Christian faith, or the Union?
   If faced with the prospect of a Unionist candidate who was pro-choice and supported more liberal abortion laws, or an Aontu candidate who was avowedly pro-life, but supported a united Ireland, who would that Unionist vote for?
   Just as the Brexit debate – especially in the European election in May – saw a new realignment coming into play with Alliance’s Naomi Long taking the Ulster Unionist seat which the latter had held since the first European poll in 1979, could a future pro-life debate also redraw some of the traditional voting boundaries?
   Aontu was politically conceived from Sinn Fein and many of its policies – including abstentionism from Westminster – mirror those of Sinn Fein.
   However, while abstentionism may be the flavour of the moment in terms of the republican political recipe, the taste may not last forever. The abstentionist policy towards the Dail and Stormont have both been overturned, so why not a future Sinn Fein and Aontu MPs who take their seats in the British House of Commons like the Scottish and Welsh nationalists?
   After all, if Unity candidate, the then Miss Bernadette Devlin, could take her Commons seat following the 1969 Mid Ulster Westminster by-election, defeating the Unionist candidate by just over 4,000 votes, why can’t Sinn Fein and Aontu MPs find a similar form of words which allows them to take their seats?
   In the 1970 Westminster General Election, Miss Devlin increased her majority over the Unionist candidate to almost 6,000. However, in the February 1974 General Election, the intervention of the SDLP saw the Mid Ulster seat swing back to Unionism.
   If Ian Paisley senior can enter a power-sharing Stormont Executive with Sinn Fein, and Sinn Fein can operate ministerial posts in a partitionist parliament at Stormont, then republicanism is capable of finding a way to dump abstentionism from Westminster.
   Similarly, in spite of Aontu’s clear republican agenda, could the increasing growth of the liberal agenda within Unionism see many within the evangelical and fundamentalist Christian community consider giving votes to Aontu simply because of its staunch pro-life stance?
   Putting myself in the voting spotlight – who would I sooner vote for – a republican Aontu candidate who believes in the protection of the unborn, or a liberal Unionist who backs abortion on demand?
Dr John Coulter is author of the ebook ‘An Saise Glas: (The Green Sash) The Road to National Republicanism’, published on Amazon Kindle.
Follow Dr Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
CAPTIONS: FRONT COVER OF THE GREEN SASH
THE LATE REV DR ROBERT COULTER, FORMER NORTH ANTRIM MLA, WITH SON JOHN AT FUNCTION IN PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS, STORMONT.
Boozy battles – that’s the real causes of conflict in Irish history. Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to take a very irreverent look at how alcohol has really guided the hand of history on this Emerald island. 
Battles of the Booze. That’s really been the root cause of conflicts won and lost in Irish history.
   It’s even the stuff of legends, especially in the tale of Tain Bo Cuailnge, which details the bloody war between Connaught and Ulster.
   Central to the Tain is the notorious Cattle Raid of Cooley, when Queen Maeve, the evil Black Witch of Connaught led a daring booze-inspired raid across the provincial border into Ulster to pinch sacred cows.
   And how did it happen? The Ulster champion of the day, Cuchulainn, went on a bender and was overheard by Maeve’s demonic spies boasting how “that stupid bloody bitch from Connaught doesn’t have the balls to come north and nick our cattle!”
   Incensed by Cuchulainn’s drunken smears, the secretly alcoholic queen flew into a rage, downed a keg of ‘Connaught Moonshine’, and ordered her equally pissed crack troops to storm north and nab as many cows as possible.
   The two sides, according to the Tain, clashed at Cooley – and event which was to spark rivalries lasting for generations and even contributed to the partitioning of Ireland by the British in the 1920s.
   While most historians point to the Northern unionists wanting their own state in Ulster, it was really the bad blood from the Cooley cattle raid which prompted the British not to put Connaught and Ulster in the same country.
   An unofficial history of the hours leading up to the signing of the Treaty which partitioned Ireland, is reported to contain an account of late night drinking between IRA icon Michael Collins and Britain’s wartime hero Winston Churchill.
   It was said Collins demanded Ulster be in the settlement, but Churchill, already tired and emotional from downing several shorts of Collins’ complimentary Irish whiskey, retorted: “Piss off, not until you’ve given Carson back the cows Maeve snatched at Cooley!”
   And so began several decades of Troubles throughout much of the 20th century in Ireland.
   And a few years ago, the Danish government formally apologised for the drunken raids which the Vikings unleashed on Ireland during the period 795 to 915.
   The pagan Viking gods Odin and Thor apparently told the Norse wizards to get in their long ships and head west for some good raves.
   The original Viking plan was just to plunder ancient Scotland, but they were so drunk, they went radically off course and landed in Rathlin in 795.
   Sampling top rate Irish booze, the Vikings returned year after year, rampaging especially though Kerry, Armagh, Westmeath and Waterford.
   Why did it take 1,200 plus years for the Danes to apologise? The Vikings were so drunk during the raids, they accidentally burned the records of which Irish monasteries and villages they plundered.
   And a generation of parade controversies need not have happened if the 13 Apprentice Boys who slammed the gates of Derry shut on King James’ face on 18th December 1688 had not been celebrating the end of the Christmas term for their apprenticeships.
   This date has become a major cause of celebration in the Protestant marching calendar, but it happened as a drunken prank.
   James’ Catholic army was about to enter the city with a Christmas food peace offering for the Protestant citizens, but took the hump when the 13 pissed Apprentices slammed the gates in their faces – thereby triggering the bloody Williamite wars.
   Two years later on 1 July 1690, the Boyne battle became a disaster for both sides because of booze.
   The battle may not have happened at all because during the morning Jacobite snipers fired their cannon at King Billy as he had breakfast. But the Jacobites were drunk from the previous evening’s binge, and missed the Orange champion, merely wounding him in the shoulder.
   Many of William’s troops were also ‘rat-arsed’ after marching hundreds of miles to the Boyne banks from Carrickfergus Castle in east Antrim.
   Who in their right mind crosses a river by wading up to their chests under heavy musket fire when there was a perfectly good bridge a few miles down stream on the Dublin road?
   Why didn’t the Williamites use boats? Again, they were too drunk to row them.
   Mind you, the first Williamite troops into the river to confront the Catholic Jacobites were actually William’s own elite Catholic troops, the Dutch Royal Blues.
   Many of the Dutch Blues dived into the Boyne water to help cure their hangovers after the long, tedious journey from Holland.
   It was at this point the Blues’ sobering up session was totally misinterpreted by one of William’s finest generals, Marshal Schomberg. Thinking the Blues were having second thoughts about crossing, he charged headlong into the river to encourage them across – and was promptly shot dead by Jacobites.
   A century later in the 1790s, alcohol played a vital role in the untimely defeat of Wolfe Tone’s United Irishmen, which comprised both Catholics and Protestants, mainly Presbyterians.
   On 9 June 1798, the rebels knocked seven bells out of the English Army at the Battle of Saintfield, and then decided to celebrate with a massive piss-up.
   However, a few days later even with the party in full flow, the Presbyterian commanders advised all troops to get a good night’s rest to prepare for a crucial confrontation with the English a matter of miles away from Saintfield at Ballynahinch.
   This key battle was to prove the death knell for the United Irishmen’s rebellion. The battle raged over 12 and 13 June, but on the 11 June, the Catholic section of the united army had gone on another celebration drinking binge.
   The Presbyterians, meanwhile, abstained from the ‘devil’s buttermilk’, said their prayers, got a good night’s rest and turned up bright and early to confront the English at Ballynahinch.
   The Catholics, however, were still drunk and went to the wrong field, leaving the Presbyterians outnumbered – and beaten.
   If only the Catholics had listened to the fate of their Scottish rebel counterparts half a century earlier at Culloden Moor on 16 April 1746 when the French-supported Jacobites got the kilts whipped off them by the sober troop of the Hanoverian British Government.
   The Scotch had downed gallons of whiskey the evening before Culloden and were all standing ‘having a pee’ on the moor when the English sneaked up their cannons and literally blew the asses of the Scottish army.
   And the past decade’s Northern parades crisis between the Orange Order and nationalist residents’ groups has its roots in booze.
   On 21 September 1795, three years before the United Irishmen’s debacle, drunken Catholic Defenders burnt down a pub frequented by the Protestant Peep O’Day militia.
   Pissed of at their ‘local’ Dan Winter’s bar going up in smoke, they had a fight with the Defenders, which before dubbed the Battle of the Diamond and inspired the formation of the Orange Order.
   And some great Catholic commanders have made some real cock-ups in battle when they were drunk, which turned the tide of history.
   A year after the Boyne, the Jacobites could have turned the tide of the Irish campaign in their favour at the bloody battle of Aughrim.
   But as the Orange forces were getting a hammering, the completely sloshed Jacobite commander, St Ruth, decided to charge the Orange ranks – and promptly got his head blown off with a cannon ball.
   Worse was to follow for nationalists in 1848 when booze-driven Catholics in the Young Ireland movement staged a very ill-prepared rising against the well-armed English Army.
   They got stuffed and had to dash to American where they formed the Fenian Movement.
   But the worse cases of drunken disasters befell Ireland in 1916 – the years of the Easter Rising in Dublin and the bloody Somme battle during World War One.
   If all the Irish Volunteers had turned up on 24 April 1916, then republicans would have taken the island.
   But Connolly and Larkin’s crowd had been on their Easter celebration drinks, completely misread the orders that the rising was off until everyone sobered up.
   This resulted in the Irish Volunteers going into battle in Dublin, while other sections remained in bed to recuperate.
   Outnumber and outgunned, the British crushed the rising within days, and then dispatched the notorious general Bloody Maxwell to quell any support for the rebels.
   Even worse was to follow for the Loyal Northern unionists of Edward Carson’s UVF who formed the 36th Ulster Division.
   Stuffed to the gills on brandy, the bungling English generals running the Somme offensive were still half cut when they sent thousands of troops into action against German machine gun posts at breakfast on 1 July.
   The brave 36th suffered more than 5,500 casualties out of a total British balls-up of 60,000 dead and wounded that day.
   If sober heads had prevailed instead of boozing sessions, how much conflict would have been averted in Ireland and generations saved from murder and mayhem?
Follow Dr Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter

 

LESSON FROM SPAIN: THERE’S NOT ENOUGH ROOM IN THE CENTRE FOR EVERYONE

If you think the Westminster general election is hotting up in Northern Ireland over the issue of pacts and alliances, then there’s a very bitter election lesson to be learned from this month’s national election outcome in Spain.

I’ve just returned from Southern Spain after chatting to the ex-pats community about the outcome of the country’s fourth contest in as many years.

As predicted, as with the last general election earlier this year in April, the socialists were returned as the largest party with 120 seats in the 350-seat parliament. The PSOE lost only three seats, this time after failing to secure an overall majority and even a coalition pact from the April poll.

The big winners were the conservative People’s Party (PP) and the far-right Vox. The PP saw its tally of seats rise from an April outcome of 66 to a November tally of 88.

However, the biggest shock was that Vox doubled its representation from a marginal tally of 24 in April to 52 this month, leaving the hard-right movement as the third largest party in the Spanish lower house.

“How is the European trend of gains by the far right a warning to Northern Ireland parties?” you may well ask. After all, in spite of numerous attempts by English-based extreme right-wing parties to gain a foothold in Northern Ireland, their bids have always crashed and burned electorally.

For example, although in the 2009 European election the British National Party (BNP) won two MEPs, the BNP has never secured even one councillor in Northern Ireland.

The list of far right parties ending up in the electoral or organisational dustbin in Northern Ireland includes the National Front, White Nationalist Party and the British Peoples’ Party.

While the rapid rise of Vox over just seven months can be attributed to an anti-immigration message and protest against the Catalan independence movement in Spain, until this month’s poll, the far-right in Spain had always remained a fringe movement in the country since the death of former dictator Francisco Franco in the 70s.

Even the recent decision to move Franco’s body cannot be seen as a decisive motivating factor in the rise of the far-right in Spain.

Speaking to many ex-pats, their conclusion was the inability of the conservative PP to maintain its position as a broad church of the Right. Until the most recent election, the PP had always been able to attract right-wing supporters from both the centre-right and the more extreme end of the spectrum.

However, the PP decided it would chase the so-called ‘middle ground’ and become more liberal in its bid to overtake the PSOE. The result of the PP liberalising was to drive its traditional hard-right supporters into the arms of Vox.

However, it should be emphasised that many socially conservative voters may not necessarily agree with the entire platform of Vox, but that they have turned to the Far Right party as they do not feel as if they have been listened to by traditional Centre Right parties, such as the PP.

In Northern Ireland, this should be a warning to some existing parties. Since the centrist Alliance ‘bounce’ in both the local government and European elections in May, there has been an almost hypnotic fixation with the need for parties to be liberal and seek out the so-called ‘centre ground’.

Among the unionist parties, both the DUP and UUP are almost politically unrecognisable movements since the Ian Paisley and Jim Molyneaux eras. Both parties are now trying to present themselves as supposedly either liberal or progressive.

Compared to the Paisley senior’s obvious Christian fundamentalist era, what must be noted is the DUP’s failure (and, indeed, perceived lack of serious effort) to prevent changes to abortion and same-sex marriage legislation in Northern Ireland this year,  and the clear change of tone of the UUP under the new leadership of South Antrim MLA Steve Aiken.

But as with Spain, is there the danger that if existing parties are perceived to be too liberal a movement in terms of both ideology and policies, could it open the door to the formation of a more hardline right-wing movement?

Some may point to the fact this is not the case currently in Unionism as neither the Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) or the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) have made a significant breakthrough in Northern Ireland; both remain fringe movements. Likewise, it must be stressed that neither the TUV nor UKIP can be classified as ‘Far Right’ in the literal political definition of the term as ‘fascist’ or ‘neo-Nazi’.

Of the 18 Northern Ireland Westminster seats, 11 are currently held by pro-Union MPs and seven by abstentionist Sinn Féin members. However, if unionists lose MPs, perhaps as a result of new anti-Brexit pacts, could it spark a backlash against a liberal agenda by grassroots unionism and loyalism?

Among nationalist parties, will the Remain experiment result in anti-Brexit MPs who will take their seats, or could we see an outcome that adds momentum to the right-wing pro-life agenda among nationalist voters?

Even if the SDLP can recover seats that it lost to Sinn Féin, there is the real possibility that many Catholic voters will have to face the decision of what matters most to them: faith in a religious pro-life stance, or party loyalty?

The temptation to rebrand themselves as ‘liberal’, or at least less conservative, could well backfire in the long-term on existing parties driving their traditional hardline factions into new parties, such as a Vanguard-style movement in Unionism and Aontú in nationalism.

And clearly it must also be stressed that these shifts would not imply the growth of a ‘Far Right’ movement, but could fragment an already fragile political system further. Similarly, while this election may be dominated by Brexit and the Union, that’s not to say that voters don’t care about other issues, such as health, education, farming, pensions, employment, and the environment.

As the various candidates hit the doorsteps selling their ‘progressive’ and ‘liberal’ manifestos to attract the supposed ‘centre ground’ and ‘middle ground voters’, they would do well to take note of what happened in Spain when the hunt for the middle ground backfired on the PP and boosted Vox.

In contrast, it must equally be made clear that different voters will want different things from their various parties – and factions within those parties. It’s not that all candidates should stay away from the ‘centre ground’ (some voters have always been, or are, there), but if all are perceived to be heading there, then that’s when a backlash may emerge.

If everyone occupies the so-called ‘middle ground’, it clearly leaves the political ‘wings’ or ‘extremes’ open to occupy, manipulate, or take advantage of.

 

Irish Christian Churches need to grow a set of theological testicles and call for the re-introduction of heresy as a crime, according to contentious religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column. You can follow John on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter. 
This is an urgent memo to all Bible-inspired Christian clergy in Northern Ireland ahead of the 12 December Westminster General Election – this is an equally urgent statement you need to release to voters either from your pulpits, or via the media.
Dear clerics, you need to radically reclaim the pulpits of this island for Bible truths before heresies and fantasies are mistaken for spiritual realities.
   In 2006, the same year that the St Andrews Agreement was signed, Christian clergy sat silent while the heresy of the so-called Gospel of Judas did the theological rounds.
   Over recent years, you have failed to mobilise to prevent same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion laws introduced into Northern Ireland.
   In a nutshell, all evangelical and fundamentalist Christian denominations and churches need to issue their ‘Biblical Manifesto’ in the coming weeks before voters actually go to the polls.
   If you want a campaign to rally behind, then flex your muscles and urge the re-introduction of heresy as a crime against Christianity, the state religion.
In case you haven’t remembered, but the 2006 Easter celebrations of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection were overshadowed by a campaign to justify the existence of the so-called Gospel of Judas – the beliefs of Judas Iscariot, the Satan-gripped traitor who betrayed Jesus to the Romans.
For centuries, Bible-believing Christians have correctly portrayed Judas as the ultimate sell-out. His name has become a by-word for treason, treachery and skulduggery of the lowest kind.
But the emergence in the last decade of a 1,700-year-old papyrus copy of a document dubbed the Gospel of Judas gave this arch traitor a whole new spiritual make-over.
In what amounts to heresy by Biblical standards, this teaching in the Gospel of Judas portrays Iscariot as being Christ’s favoured disciple.
Judas’s betrayal of Jesus was actually a cleverly concocted plot between Christ and Iscariot to ensure the crucifixion took place, elevating the supposed traitor above the other 11 Apostles, according to this document.
The Gospel of Judas – supposedly written more than 200 years after Christ’s resurrection – paints Iscariot as Jesus’s confidant, loyal servant and a true and triumphant Christian hero.
So when are you clerics going to wake up and combat heresies, such as the Book of Judas, by preaching some Biblical truths from your pulpits and reclaiming your positions of influence and respect among Irish citizens? This is why a Biblical Manifesto is urgently needed before the 12 December election.
Take a leaf out of the radical muslim activities handbook. Look at the global demonstrations against the Danish cartoons. When are Irish Christian clerics going to show their courage by publicly declaring the Gospel of Judas to be downright heresy for a start?
While there are references in the Bible to people being demon-possessed, there is only one person noted who was possessed by Satan himself – and that’s Judas.
It clearly states in the New Testament text Luke 22 verses three and four – “Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. And Judas went to the chief priests … and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus.”
Wake up, you folks with the dog collars – Judas was one of the bad guys! Are you going to sit and twiddle your thumbs while Bible teachings are undermined yet again? You’ve lost the battles in the short term on Biblical marriage and the protection of the unborn.
   You need to face the reality that Christian clergy are losing the battle against pluralism.
Unfortunately, the sad reality of the Christian Church on this island is that the pulpit’s credibility has become ridiculed because of the outrages caused by convicted paedophile clergy, problems in clerics’ marriages and the row over the ordination of gay ministers.
Opponents of the Bible will push heresies, such as the Gospel of Judas, to dilute the Christian message and the relevance of Christ Himself to this modern world.
Combating this vile heresy and other heresies which threaten Christianity will not come by protesting outside halls where the Gospel of Judas will be discussed. It must come from Christian pulpits the length and breadth of Ireland.
Christianity at one time scored a big hit with an English exam board agreeing to put the Biblical version of how the world was created on the curriculum alongside the daft notions pushed by Godless Darwinism.
But all these gains will be lost if people think there is some semblance of truth that Judas was a dead-on bloke who simply had a bad press from puritans and the Spanish Inquisition.
The trouble is in this high-tech world, fiction can become reality and gossip can become gospel. Take the blockbuster movie The Da Vinci Code based on Dan Brown’s successful novel and starring screen legend Tom Hanks.
Brown openly says his book is a fictional novel, but because it contains real-life organisations, such as the Priory of Sion and Opus Dei, there is the danger film entertainment will become stunning historical truth in people’s minds.
The Code suggests Christ had an affair with Mary Magdalene before He was crucified and fathered a child and that this blood line exists today.
Given the hype surrounding both Brown’s novel and director Ron Howard’s film, the true Biblical Christian Church will be faced with the hellish situation of answering genuine questions about what is essentially a made-up, but grossly heretical plot, about Jesus having descendants here on earth protected by a secret society.
If Christian clerics are not careful, the Biblical faith will be seen as a farcical set of beliefs just as daft as the clerics portrayed in television sitcoms, such as Dad’s Army, the Vicar of Dibley and Father Ted.
   I await the response from the pulpits with interest – and to see if the Churches will issue a pre-election Biblical Manifesto which outlaws heresy against Christianity.

 

Provisional Sinn Fein has always been dominated by the Marxist politics of Easter Rising icon James Connolly, but in the present Brexit upheaval, could the party swing to the Right-wing in nationalism to re-invent itself politically on both sides of the Irish border? That’s the contentious debate which commentator Dr John Coulter sparks. Follow John on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Sinn Fein has always been an electorally pragmatic party, but with general elections north and south of the border expected in the not too distant future, as well as the looming centenary of partition, could the surprise tactic for the party be to swing it to the Hard Right and rebrand it as the unassailable heroes of Patriotic Nationalism?
   In the current Northern Ireland Assembly (albeit suspended since January 2017), Sinn Fein was already in bed politically in the power-sharing Stormont Executive with what was once perceived to be one of the most hardline of the Right-wing loyalist movements, the Democratic Unionist Party.
   While the DUP was clearly Hard Right on the constitution and Union, it was equally viewed as a quiet soft Left party on bread and butter issues because of its Protestant working class roots. In spite of this supposed ‘soft socialism’ of the DUP, there is no way under Paisley senior’s leadership it could even have been branded a Marxist movement in terms of economic policies.
   Any future Assembly poll will more likely see the SF/DUP dominated Executive returned as Sinn Fein finally puts what remains of the socialist-leaning SDLP under boss Colum Eastwood to the electoral sword, and the DUP pulls yet another poll rabbit of its magic hat to fend off both the challenge from a supposedly resurgent Ulster Unionist Party (if the Lisburn and Castlereagh council election is taken as a benchmark and not the European poll disaster) as well as the Alliance ‘bounce’ under Naomi Long.
   In the Republic, Sinn Fein urgently needs to reverse both the recent Council and European election slides if it is realistically to become a minority coalition partner in the next Dail, probably with Leo Varadkar’s Fine Gael, still known in some circles as ‘The Blueshirts’ because of the party’s past history in the 1930s with the fascist Blueshirt movement which stomped about Southern Ireland.
   Some might say – why should Sinn Fein give up its hardline socialist principles simply to climb into bed politically with Fine Gael, when it did not need to perform an ideological U-turn to enter Stormont with the DUP in 2007 following the St Andrews Agreement?
   The core problem is not for Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland, but in the Republic, where memories of the bitter Irish Civil War of the 1920s still run deep in many republican families.
   Again, Sinn Fein spin doctors could box clever, play ‘the red card’ and indulge in some historical revisionism by emphasising that the 1916 Easter Rising was inspired by the openly Leftist Irish Citizens Army, and fanatical socialists, such as James Connolly, the Scottish communist who formed his own Irish Socialist Republican Party – not to be confused with the terror group the INLA’s political wing, the Irish Republican Socialist Party.
   However, an historical hurdle which republican revisionists have to leap is that the failed Dublin Easter Rising came a year before the 1917 Leninist-inspired revolution in Russia. The Irish Volunteers and Irish Citizens Army were active at a time when the core foe was Right-wing imperialism, and particularly the British Empire.
   The Rising was a shotgun marriage between the fundamentalist Catholicism of Patrick Pearse and Connolly’s militant socialism.
   But the modern Ireland which commemorates the Rising annually is a different political animal from the Ireland which witnessed the failed coup; a coup which saw some Dublin residents spit on the rebels as they were marched into captivity by the British. It was only the uncompromising decision of General ‘Bloody’ Maxwell who insisted on having the Rising leaders executed which turned them from political upstarts and nuisances into republican icons.
   If Sinn Fein is now to capitalise on future Rising commemorations, the centenary of partition and the formation of the Northern state, as well as the centenary of the Anglo-Irish Treaty and the Irish Civil War, it must use them to create a new brand of Right-wing Patriotic Nationalism.
   To achieve this rebranding, it must eliminate the view that modern-day Sinn Fein is a communist party under a new banner.
   Likewise, while Sinn Fein’s propaganda machine has worked effectively in wiping the political landscape on one hand with the SDLP, and on the other, ensuring dissident republicanism does not become a significant electoral force in the same way as in the Unionist community, the No Camp parties against the Good Friday Agreement – especially the DUP – eventually overtook David Trimble’s Yes Camp UUP.
   Sinn Fein must now convince the Southern electorate it has the political maturity – in spite of all Sinn Fein’s rantings against austerity and Brexit – that it is a party fit for government in Leinster House. The only way Sinn Fein can achieve this is for party president Mary Lou McDonald to swing her party to the Hard Right to avoid an Ian Paisley senior-style coup within her own ranks.
   What Irish republicanism now as an ideology needs is a new radical Right-wing party – not Sinn Fein spinning out more left of centre rhetoric about saving the working class.
   For years after the Irish Civil War in the 1920s, the Southern electorate rejected Sinn Féin because it regarded it as the Communist Party under another name. Could that perception of being too Hard Left have been the reason for the party’s poor showings in both the council and European polls in the Republic earlier this year?
   Sinn Féin needs to relaunch itself as an ultra Right-wing nationalist party under the banner – Ireland for the Irish and nobody else!
   Sinn Fein activists aligning themselves with Left-wing policies might have been cool in 1916 in the days of Connolly and Larkin, but it has become a major millstone in the third millennium.
   Irish Labour’s recovery is at a snail’s pace; the Stickies’ agenda (Workers Party) has faded into the dustbin of history, and the new kids on the Left block, Peadar Toibin’s Aontu is viewed as a one-trick pro-life party.
   Other leftist republican parties – such as the IRSP, Republican Sinn Fein, Saoradh and the 32 County Sovereignty Movement – will be nothing more than fringe organisations.
   Former Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams had talked in the past about his admiration for radical Irish Presbyterianism. Could the solution to Sinn Fein’s political migraines following the Southern poll disaster be to turn Sinn Féin into an Irish National Party with the slogan – Be Proud to be a Patriot.
   One of Ireland’s greatest Protestant nationalist patriots was the Lisburn journalist Ernest Blythe, who became a leading light in General Eoin O’Duffy’s Blueshirt movement.
   To stop young republicans – for whom the 1994 Provisional IRA ceasefire is merely a date in a history book – becoming Saoradh radicals, Sinn Fein should launch the Greenshirts – a radical Right-wing youth movement which instils disciplined Irish patriotic values, folklore and culture into its ranks.
   The Greenshirts could help eliminate the nationalist scourges of joyriding and recreational rioting.
   Mary Lou should announce that the ‘Shinners’ are amending their title to Sinn Féin, the Nationalist Patriots Party.
   If you want a radical Right-wing Presbyterian to explain this much-needed new Irish Patriotism to the unfaithful, give me a shout at my Twitter account @JohnAHCoulter
   As a life-long Rangers fanatic, even I’d be happy to swap my beloved Glasgow blue top to don the shamrock shirt of the Greenshirt movement. Right is might, Mary Lou!
With pre-Christmas election fever hotting up, Religious Commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to examine how the Christian Churches could affect the outcome of the General Election in Northern Ireland. 
Has Santa come early for the Christian Churches in Northern Ireland in the form of the December 12 General Election?
   After the expected failure of pro-life MLAs to get a power-sharing Stormont Executive formed by 21 October, Westminster has now ruled to bring in same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion laws to Northern Ireland.
   This can be viewed as a heavy theological defeat for Christian fundamentalists and evangelicals in Northern Ireland who would be Biblically opposed to both concepts.
   In spite of these twin setbacks for the overall Christian lobby, the evangelical and fundamentalist denominations and individual fellowships have been handed a potential pre-Christmas bonus in the form of the Westminster General Election.
   Rather than Brexit being the dominant topic on the canvas or hustings, could the Christian Churches push issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, gay rights, divorce laws up the political agenda, especially when it comes to deciding Northern Ireland’s next 18 MPs.
   But this is all dependant on the Christian Churches mobilising their flocks, not just to be registered, but to actually enter the polling booths on 12 December and put their X against a pro-life candidate.
   There is much talk about the pro-Remain parties, such as the SDLP, Alliance, Sinn Fein and very liberal elements with the UUP, trying to form a pro-Remain coalition to combat the existing 10 pro-Brexit DUP-held seats.
   However, that unofficial pot-Remain pact could fall apart given the traditional Orange/Green voting mentality which has dominated Northern Ireland elections since the formation of the state in the 1920s. So how much chance is there of the Christian Churches organising a pro-life pact in terms of voting?
   And more significantly, what are the long-term implications for the Christian Churches’ voice in Northern Ireland should the pro-life lobby lose DUP seats in North, South and East Belfast?
   In June this year, I noted how attendances at mainstream denominations in Northern Ireland were falling, and this posed the question – who constitutes the real Christian Churches of influence in the Province?  https://www.northernslant.com/there-has-to-be-a-reconciliation-between-republicanism-and-the-catholic-church/
    This debate was emphatically answered by Jason Sime’s excellent analysis about the rise in the smaller denominations in Northern Ireland, probably at the expense of the larger traditional denominations. https://www.northernslant.com/non-traditional-faith-island-ireland/
   The challenges facing the various Christian denominations is one of forming a united political front which will have real voter impact in the same way as the so-called Moral Majority in the United States can play a very influential factor in getting a President elected.
   The real problem is not an organisational one – all the Christian Churches have to do is encourage their flocks to both register and vote in the same way as the Southern Baptist churches in the United States mobilised the Afro-American voter base during the 1960s civil rights era.
   The essential problem the Northern Irish churches have to overcome is a theological one, especially among some of the more fundamentalist denominations who view voting as being part of the world.
   The overwhelming majority of the evangelical and fundamentalist denominations and fellowships would adhere to the Salvationist principle of being ‘born again’ or ‘saved’, as outlined in the New Testament gospel of St John Chapter 3 and verse 16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (King James Version).
   Such theology maintains that once ‘saved’, you should leave the old worldly ways behind – and in many interpretations, this could mean boycotting the ballot box. This is known as the ‘come ye out’ theology.
   It is based on a strict interpretation of the New Testament text of 2nd Corinthians 6 verse 17: “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.” (King James Version).
   If the Christian Churches are to have genuine influence at the ballot box, they need to change the theological mindset of many potential voters in their flocks.
   In this respect, the spotlight could fall on two minor fundamentalist denominations in Northern Ireland – the Plymouth Brethren and the Exclusive Brethren. This was especially true during the 1986 Unionist by-election campaign against the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement in the bid to get the then South Down Westminster MP Enoch Powell re-elected in the face of a strong challenge from the SDLP. In 1983, Powell had sneaked the seat by 548 votes over the SDLP in the face of a DUP challenge.
   In 1986, Powell was the agreed Unionist candidate, but it still took intensive lobbying among the Brethren denomination to ensure a UUP victory. Powell fought off the challenge from the SDLP’s Eddie McGrady with a majority of 1,842.
   While the UUP under new leader Steve Aiken MLA has a conscience vote on matters such as same-sex marriage and abortion, what happens if Aiken sticks to his electoral guns and contests all 18 seats, causing a split Unionist vote and causing the DUP (which is strongly pro-life) to lose MPs?
   Likewise, would many socially conservative Catholics and evangelical Protestants vote for Aontu candidates, given that party’s strong pro-life stance even though it is avowedly republican and an abstentions party?
   If the Christian Churches cannot mobilise their flocks to vote for candidates who hold Biblical values, then perhaps the only way forward for the Christian community is to form its own party – the Irish Christian Party.
   This was a theme I first explored in the Sunday Times in August 2017: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/let-us-have-faith-in-a-truly-christian-political-party-6dpmtx8p3
   However, is there enough theological unity among Irish Christians to ensure such a venture would work? Or, would the whole project simply disintegrate in rows over women wearing hats at church, the role of musical instruments in worship, and the definition of marriage?
   For example, the mainstream Irish Presbyterian Church at its General Assembly in 2018 voted not to allow people in same-sex relationships become communicant members of the denomination. However, the much smaller Non-Subscribing Presbyterian Church, also known as the Unitarians, supports same-sex marriage. The same split is also revealed within the Church of Ireland over same-sex marriage.
   Would such an Irish Christian Party end up as a theological hotchpotch more akin to the former Protestant Reformation Party, which once existed in England? Indeed, what would be the role of pressure groups in Northern Ireland, such as the Evangelical Protestant Society and the Caleb Foundation in either mobilising the Christian vote, or in a worst case political scenario – having to launch an overtly fundamentalist Irish Christian Party?
   Could we even see an unholy alliance between the Protestant Loyal Orders and the republican Aontu party to mobilise unionists and nationalists under a common pro-life agenda?
   One element is certain – Christians will have to vote if they want to have their voices heard. They cannot complain about the development of a secular and pluralist society if they are not prepared to vote for candidates who can make a difference. This was an issue I addressed in March 2016: https://www.longkeshinsideout.co.uk/?p=3518
   The pro-Remain camp has talked about the ethos of cross-community support. But should our Churches be embarking on an electoral strategy of cross-denominational support for candidates?
   This was an issue explored by a colleague Jude Collins, following my Sunday Times and BBC Sunday Sequence debate on an Irish Christian Party: http://www.judecollins.com/2016/03/an-irish-christian-party-good-idea/
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Today is D-Day (Decision Day) for Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists in Northern Ireland. They have only hours to lobby for the return of the power-sharing Stormont Executive to prevent some of the most liberal abortion laws in Europe being introduced into Northern Ireland via Westminster. Commentator Dr John Coulter uses his Ballymena Accent Column today to examine Christians’ religious Alamo plan to save the unborn.
If you thought the battle to find a Brexit deal, extend the Brexit deadline, or even halt the Brexit process entirely before the 31 October deadline, then Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists opposed to more liberal abortion laws coming from Westminster have an even tighter deadline.
   In practical terms, they must find a loophole in Stormont standing orders so that 30 Assembly members can recall Stormont, form some kind of hotchpotch Executive, and get a petition of concern up and running to halt what Christians view as some of the most draconian abortion laws in Europe – and all by midnight tonight!
   Sunday 13 October saw a day of prayer across many churches – both Catholic and Protestant – to pray against this planned legislation and for the protection of the unborn.
   At face value, it may seem that getting Westminster to introduce legislation which has always seemed as political sticking points and red lines to getting a power-sharing Executive back at Stormont.
   On paper, if there is no functioning Assembly by close of business today – Monday 21 October – Westminster will legislate to introduce same-sex marriage to Northern Ireland as well as more liberal abortion laws.
   Again, on paper, then only a stand alone Irish Language Act remains a stumbling block to the restoration of devolution, which has been moth-balled since January 2017.
   While it has been some five years since death of the founder of the DUP, the late Rev Ian Paisley, who was also the founder of the fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster in 1951, the voter influence of Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists both within and outside the party should not be underestimated.
   Similarly, of the three supposed red lines to devolution’s return – same-sex marriage, abortion, and an Irish Language Act – perhaps the most contentious is abortion.
   The electoral challenge which the DUP faces is – which issue has the potential to lose or gain votes. In practical terms, pluralist Protestants may not have the same strong views on protecting the unborn as DUP traditionalists among the socially conservative evangelical and fundamentalists.
   If the DUP agreed to a stand alone Irish Language Act in exchange for blocking new draconian abortion laws, would liberal unionists and secular Protestants punish the DUP at the ballot box, especially in the looming Westminster General Election?
   The DUP privately recognises that it has lost the battle to halt same-sex marriage coming to Northern Ireland. But for the Christian lobby, it would rather see the protection of the unborn than halt same-sex marriage.
   Why? Practically, you cannot save an aborted baby, but you could ‘witness’ to same-sex couples that a Christian heterosexual lifestyle is a better alternative to gay marriage. In Christian thinking, at least the people in a same-sex marriage are alive; aborted babies are corpses.
  However, pro-life lobbyists are well aware of this month’s earlier ruling in the Sarah Ewart case in which the Belfast High Court ruled that Northern Ireland’s abortion restrictions breach UK human rights laws.
   If pro-life lobbyists did manage to create a situation whereby the Assembly was recalled for today’s deadline and new abortion laws halted in their tracks, how would that decision play out against the October 3 Belfast High Court ruling?
   And its not just the DUP which faces an abortion dilemma. Sinn Fein may have been able to see off any electoral challenge from parties supporting dissident republican groups, or even a revitalised SDLP, but could the intervention of the vehemently pro-life Aontu party cost Sinn Fein vital seats.
   Okay, pundits can point to the fact that Aontu has only a handful of elected councillors straddling both sides of the border, but many socially conservative Catholics may also opt either to vote for Aontu or the DUP if pro-life lobbyists can move the debate to the top of the political agenda ahead of, or even on a par with, Brexit.
   The abortion debate could provide the Catholic Church in Northern Ireland with the chance to regain some moral ground lost because of the fallout from the clerical abuse scandals which have hounded the Church in recent decades.
   A visible tactic orchestrated by the Church would be to picket Sinn Fein offices and advice centres with the warning – support pro-life or we abandon you! In electoral terms, the pro-life lobby within Catholicism has a better opportunity to inflict voter damage on Sinn Fein than the dissident republican lobby.
   My late father, Rev Dr Robert Coulter MBE, was a North Antrim UUP Assembly member from 1998 to 2011. He was an avowed pro-life champion because of his strongly evangelical Biblical views. In elections, he attracted a significant number of transfers from Catholic nationalist voters because of his tough pro-life stance.
   The same observation can also be said of the late Rev Ian Paisley’s vote in North Antrim, too. In elections, voters knew precisely what either my father or Rev Dr Paisley stood for in terms of the pro-life debate.
   Likewise, the UUP faces a similar electoral dilemma as it seeks to elect a new party leader on 9th November. Presently, the UUP allows a conscience vote on abortion.
   One of the accusations which has been levelled at the UUP compared to the more liberal Alliance party is that voters in the European poll in May were actually confused as to the UUP’s stance – pointedly, what does the UUP stand for?
   A new more liberal UUP leader elected on 9th November could make support for the pro-choice position party policy in a bid to go head to head with Alliance.
   However, that could backfire on the UUP if the traditional Right-wing party members who were to the fore in the Molyneaux era vote with their feet and defect to the DUP.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious discussion show, Call In Coulter, on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 fm radio on Saturdays around 9.30 am, or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com

 

Following Boris Johnston’s ‘Sad Saturday’ defeat in the Commons showing his Brexit deal ever closer to the political dustbin, the DUP could be back in vogue again as king-makers. Dr John Coulter analyses the latest twists and turns in the Brexit bust-up. Follow John on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
The political stage in the British Isles is now set for Manic Monday – one of the craziest days in the islands’ democracy since the UK declared war on Nazi Germany in 1939.
   On Saturday morning as MPs met at Westminster to debate the so-called Boris Brexit deal, across the Irish Sea, the mood music in Ulster was sombre with the view that Prime Minister Johnston had supposedly thrown the Democratic Unionists under ‘a right bus’! – a pun on recent moves to save over 1,000 jobs at the Co Antrim bus builder, Wrightbus, which supplied many London so-called ‘Boris Buses’ when the Prime Minister was then London Mayor.
   During the first Parliamentary Saturday sitting since the Falklands War in 1982, MPs backed a motion tabled by the Independent MP Sir Oliver Letwin which “withholds approval” for the Boris Brexit deal until legislation implementing it has been passed.
   The PM lost the motion to rule out a no-deal Brexit by 322 votes to 306. This was a major set-back for the Johnston Government. The Westminster jungle drums say the PM will try again on Monday to get his deal through the Commons rather than ask the EU for yet another extension.
   Monday is also the same day the Stormont Assembly has been recalled to ‘debate’ the proposed more liberal abortion legislation which Westminster has planned for Northern Ireland should there be no return of the power-sharing Executive by midnight.
   The big question remains – where does the DUP now stand with the Johnston Government given that DUP MPs helped defeat the PM on Saturday? So much for the ‘confidence and supply’ arrangement!
   Significantly, is confusion being replaced by conspiracy? As it stands, Boris’ Brexit deal with the EU has the blessing of the Southern Irish, but not the DUP. Boris remains determined – in spite of Saturday’s defeat – to leave the EU on 31 October.
   But will the 19 October Commons defeat force the Johnston Government to ask for an extension of Article 50 under the recently approved Benn Act?
   Equally significantly, can Johnston still snatch victory from the jaws of defeat? Enter the DUP stage right! What could ‘politically buy’ the DUP’s votes to secure a ‘no deal’ scenario for the ERG in the Conservative party rather than have an exit deal?
   Indeed, the 19 October vote may still not be the final throw of the dice as far as the DUP is concerned. The deal which Johnston sought approval for on Saturday clearly demonstrated that the EU side dug in its heels on the need for Northern Ireland to remain in its Customs Union after 31 October.
   Likewise, back in Ulster, with the DUP’s uncompromising stance over a stand-alone Irish Language Act – which saw the latest Ulster peace talks flop – the Prime Minister could be forgiven for thinking he had no way through the Customs Union impasse, but to compromise on a stand-alone Customs Union for Northern Ireland.
   This has the DUP unhappy with allegations the party has been ‘thrown under the bus’ by the Johnston Government. The DUP wants Northern Ireland to leave under the same conditions as the rest of the UK, which means in practical terms – no special Customs Union for Ulster.
   The DUP has got to come up with a strategy which answers a fundamental question – which is worse for Northern Ireland, a ‘no deal’ or a compromise on a Northern Ireland Customs Union? Obviously, the latter is the ideal solution, but the DUP will soon – like many parties in Northern Ireland – be facing a General Election.
   A number of the DUP Westminster seats are vulnerable, including North, South and East Belfast. The DUP will not want to agree a deal which loses the party vital votes – and seats – come the expected pre-Christmas General Election.
   But the DUP must now consider a potential new compromise which is both achievable and workable – a special new Customs Union between Northern Ireland and the European Union post Brexit could well be the compromise which the staunchly euro skeptic DUP could compromise on.
   The current Boris deal does not contain an Irish backstop, which Dublin demanded to protect the Southern Irish economy from another Celtic Tiger economic meltdown and to avoid the financial ravages of a Hard Border in the island of Ireland.
   As the situation currently exists, the DUP does not agree to Northern Ireland remaining in the present Customs Union after Halloween Night, but if past experiences of DUP compromises during the Irish peace process are taken as a benchmark, a completely new – and unique – Customs Union could be on the cards.
   The latest Boris deal may get through the Commons on Monday – but with amendments.
   The political wild card which must be factored in at this stage is the collapse of the negotiations between Sinn Fein and the DUP which could have seen the devolved power-sharing Executive at Stormont fully restored. It has been collapsed since January 2017.
   Ironically, the Assembly is being recalled on Monday in a last ditch bid by Christian evangelical and fundamentalists to block Westminster introducing same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion laws to Northern Ireland if there is no working, power-sharing Executive.
   This is unlikely to achieve anything and is being viewed as a political stunt. With no agreement on restoring devolution, Direct Rule from Westminster seems the likely option.
   The DUP has already negotiated a cash boost for Northern Ireland – estimated to be around one billion pounds – in exchange for the votes of its 10 MPs to keep the Conservative Government in power.
   While the DUP is now vehemently opposed to Northern Ireland remaining in the Customs Union as it presently exists, the party could compromise on a new deal which would see the creation of a special one-off Customs Union between Northern Ireland and the EU.
   What is at stake here in dictating which format any proposed new Customs Union could take will be the type of Direct Rule over Northern Ireland.
   Traditionally and historically, Direct Rule from Westminster has involved the Government of the day appointing MPs from British mainland constituencies to run the various political departments in the Northern Ireland Office.
   However, given the unique arrangement which the DUP now has with the Tories, could the DUP be in a position to negotiate which MPs are appointed to the NIO? Even better for the DUP, could the party actually demand that the NIO ministerial team be staffed by MPs elected from Northern Ireland?
   The current tally of 18 MPs from Northern Ireland comprise 10 DUP, one Independent Unionist (Lady Sylvia Hermon, the widow of a former police chief constable) and seven abstentionist Sinn Fein MPs, who still refuse to take their Commons seats.
   Given that Sinn Fein and the Dublin government oppose Direct Rule, for Boris to appoint a team of DUP MPs to run the NIO could be a step too far and destabilise the entire peace process established by the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.
   The compromise which the DUP could agree to is that it could negotiate with the Prime Minister which Conservative MPs are appointed to run the NIO. This would allow Boris to select Tories from the euro skeptic Right of the party who would be favourable towards the DUP – even through Northern Ireland overall voted ‘remain’ in the referendum.
   The Dublin government, likewise, would naturally prefer the existing Customs Union to be in place after 31 October to avoid the economic nightmare of the so-called ‘hard border’, which would make cross-border trade between Northern Ireland and the Republic very cumbersome.
   While euro skeptics in the DUP point to the fact that Northern Ireland does more trade with mainland Britain than with the Republic, the DUP will have to adopt an economic all-island – as opposed to a political all-Ireland – compromise to secure the financial stability of both states on the geographical island of Ireland.
   The key question – with some form of Direct Rule inevitable – is who would negotiate this unique Customs Union between the EU and Northern Ireland? Would this be done as part of the overall UK negotiating team, or could an NIO – staffed by either Tory or DUP MPs, or a combination of both – be given special negotiating rights to agree an EU/NI Customs Union compromise? Perhaps only the expected Westminster General Election could solve this riddle.
   London and Dublin must also keep uppermost in their minds that the DUP2019 is not the same political beast as the DUP1989 led then by the late Rev Ian Paisley.
   While Paisley senior – later Lord Bannside – is perhaps best known for his ‘Never, never, never’ speech against the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985, he did compromise and negotiate the St Andrews Agreement of 2006 which heralded in the power-sharing Stormont Executive between the DUP and Sinn Fein. The bottom line is – in spite of the DUP’s perceived Hard Right image, it can be pragmatic enough to compromise when called upon.
   On paper, a unique EU/NI Customs Union is the obvious solution to guarantee the required ‘soft border’ option between Northern Ireland and the Republic. It is the clear compromise which could politically palatable for the EU negotiators, the House of Commons – and especially the DUP.
   The DUP’s opponents will be reminding the party of the fate of a previous leader of Unionism, the late James Molyneaux of the Ulster Unionists. His downfall was assured when former Conservative PM Margaret Thatcher signed the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement giving Dublin its first major say in the running of Northern Ireland since partition in the 1920s.
   Molyneaux always boasted of his special relationship with Thatcher, but she didn’t inform him of her intentions to sign the agreement.
   Boris has talked about his admiration for Winston Churchill. But in spite of the latter’s wartime heroics, Churchill always wanted to dump Ireland into a republic.
   Has the DUP walked into another Conservative ‘Churchillian pitfall’, or does it have the sense and political maturity to get an amendment and compromise on implementing a unique EU/NI Customs Union?
  After Saturday’s Commons vote, the Dail may need to move its ‘no deal’ preparations off the back-burner. In Scotland, the SNP will be demanding the same special Customs Union being offered to Northern Ireland.

Political commentator Dr John Coulter maintains that his ’Special Customs Union for Northern Ireland’ solution to the Brexit impasse at the European Union is now back on the agenda since he first floated the idea in the Daily Telegraph online in February 2018. Here is an amended and updated version of that article for the Ballymena Accent column. 

With the EU seemingly digging in its heels on the need for Northern Ireland to remain in its Customs Union after Brexit, and the Democratic Unionist Party’s uncompromising stance over an Irish Language Act which saw the latest Ulster peace talks flop, Prime Minister Boris Johnston could be forgiven for thinking he has fallen into the same political pitfall as his predecessor in that there is no way through the Customs Union impasse.

   But a potential compromise is achievable and workable – a special new Customs Union between Northern Ireland and the European Union post Brexit could well be the compromise which the staunchly euro skeptic DUP could compromise on.

   As the situation currently exists, the DUP will not agree to Northern Ireland remaining in the present Customs Union after Brexit, but if past experiences of DUP compromises during the Irish peace process are taken as a benchmark, a completely new – and unique – Customs Union could be on the cards.

   The political wild card which must be factored in at this stage is the collapse of the negotiations between Sinn Fein and the DUP which could have seen the devolved power-sharing Executive at Stormont fully restored. It has been collapsed since January 2017.

   With no agreement on restoring devolution, Direct Rule from Westminster seems the likely option. Last year, the DUP had already negotiated a cash boost for Northern Ireland – estimated to be around one billion pounds – in exchange for the votes of its 10 MPs to keep then Theresa May’s Government in power. That ‘confidence and supply’ agreement still applies to BoJo’s Government.

   While the DUP is vehemently opposed to Northern Ireland remaining in the Customs Union as it presently exists, the party could compromise on a new deal which would see the creation of a special one-off Customs Union between Northern Ireland and the EU.

   What is at stake here in dictating which format any proposed new Customs Union could take will be the type of Direct Rule over Northern Ireland.

   Traditionally and historically, Direct Rule from Westminster has involved the Government of the day appointing MPs from British mainland constituencies to run the various political departments in the Northern Ireland Office.

   However, given the unique arrangement which the DUP now has with the Tories, could the DUP be in a position to negotiate which MPs are appointed to the NIO? Even better for the DUP, could the party actually demand that the NIO ministerial team be staffed by MPs elected from Northern Ireland?

   The current tally of 18 MPs from Northern Ireland comprise 10 DUP, one Independent Unionist (Lady Sylvia Hermon, the widow of a former police chief constable) and seven abstentionist Sinn Fein MPs, who still refuse to take their Commons seats.

   Given that Sinn Fein and the Dublin government oppose Direct Rule, for Boris Johnston to appoint a team of DUP MPs to run the NIO could be a step too far and destabilise the entire peace process established by the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.

   The compromise which the DUP could agree to is that it could negotiate with the Prime Minister which Conservative MPs are appointed to run the NIO. This would allow BoJo to select Tories from the euro skeptic Right of the party (namely the ERG) who would be favourable towards the DUP – even through Northern Ireland overall voted ‘remain’ in the referendum.

   The Dublin government, likewise, would naturally prefer the existing Customs Union to be in place after 2019 to avoid the economic nightmare of the so-called ‘hard border’, which would make cross-border trade between Northern Ireland and the Republic very cumbersome.

   While euro skeptics in the DUP point to the fact that Northern Ireland does more trade with mainland Britain than with the Republic, the DUP will have to adopt an economic all-island – as opposed to a political all-Ireland – compromise to secure the financial stability of both states on the geographical island of Ireland.

   The key question – with some form of Direct Rule inevitable – is who would negotiate this unique Customs Union between the EU and Northern Ireland? Would this be done as part of the overall UK negotiating team, or could an NIO – staffed by either Tory or DUP MPs, or a combination of both – be given special negotiating rights to agree an EU/NI Customs Union compromise?

   London and Dublin must also keep uppermost in their minds that the DUP2019 is not the same political beast as the DUP1989 led then by the late Rev Ian Paisley.

   While Paisley senior – later Lord Bannside – is perhaps best known for his ‘Never, never, never’ speech against the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985, he did compromise and negotiate the St Andrews Agreement of 2006 which heralded in the power-sharing Stormont Executive between the DUP and Sinn Fein. The bottom line is – in spite of the DUP’s perceived Hard Right image, it can be pragmatic enough to compromise when called upon.

   On paper, a unique EU/NI Customs Union is the obvious solution to guarantee the required ‘soft border’ option between Northern Ireland and the Republic. It is the clear compromise which could politically palatable for EU negotiator Michel Barnier, the UK Brexit team – and especially the DUP.

   But this all comes with a severe health warning. If Northern Ireland gets a unique Customs Union deal, the Scottish nationalists will equally demand one given that Scotland also voted ‘remain’. Could this see the formation of a Celtic Alliance between Ireland and Scotland?

   Then what happens if Westminster compromises on Dublin and Sinn Fein’s demands that a peace deal be negotiated for Northern Ireland using the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference?

   The Conference is currently only a recommendation-making body. What happens if it is upgraded to a decision-taking forum? That could leave a unique EU/NI Customs Union looking like an exact mirror image of the current structure.

Are dissident republicans changing tactics and organising behind a single terror movement – the New IRA? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to reflect on changes within the dissident terror strategy as Brexit looms.
Talk of Brexit sparking violence has been kicking around the Brexit debate for three years, so when we hear warnings of the Troubles resuming in Ireland, it would be easy to dismiss such statements as political point-scoring or electioneering sabre-rattling.
   However, North Down Westminster MP Lady Sylvia Hermon – the widow of a former RUC Chief Constable – can certainly never be branded as a hardliner who shoots from the lip.
   Speaking in the House of Commons, Lady Sylvia issued a stark warning that Brexit could see an increase in dissident republican activity, which in turn, could spark retaliation from loyalists. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-49840060
   Lady Sylvia’s warning should be taken seriously. In a previously published article, I have examined developments within the dissident republican terror strategy. https://www.northernslant.com/why-can-dissident-republicans-not-accept-that-armed-struggle-is-in-the-past/
   As someone who has been reporting on Irish affairs since 1978, I have long held the suspicion that one reason for the development of the dissident republican movement has been that the Provisional IRA has not been able to keep full control of its members, thus preventing key personnel from defecting to dissident groups.
   In this case, I have argued since 2004 that the IRA should have disbanded and reformed as an Irish Republic Association of former terrorists to maintain such discipline in the movement. http://indiamond6.ulib.iupui.edu:81/jc11111g.html
   In 2012, in my role as Northern Political Columnist with the Irish Daily Star, I conducted an interview with the New IRA – then one of a number of dissident republican factions.
   It was then my distinct impression that the dissident republican movement was organised into a number of separate groups to try and avoid infiltration by the British and Irish security forces in the same way the intelligence community had penetrated both the Provisional IRA and the INLA.
   I have included the full text of that interview as submitted to my news editor at the Irish Daily Star. Bearing this 2012 interview in mind, it is now my conclusion that the New IRA is emerging as not just the most dangerous of the dissident republican factions, but will become the main – and only – vehicle for violent dissident republicanism in a post Brexit Ireland.
   I strongly believe the other remaining dissident republican groups, such as the Continuity IRA, will merge with the New IRA to form one coherent terror group, particularly in the event of a ‘no deal’ Brexit resulting in a so-called ‘hard border’. Here is the 2012 New IRA story:
“Actions speak louder than words – that’s the blunt message coming from a source close to the leadership of the New IRA.
   Dissident republicans should have carried out a major attack first before announcing an amalgamation of some of their terror factions, the well-placed source close to the leadership of the New IRA told the Star last night.
   Speaking exclusively to the Star at a location in County Antrim, the source emphasised the delay in publicly announcing the amalgamation was “because of personality clashes within the various groups which have now been resolved”.
   Earlier this summer, three of the factions which comprise the broad dissident republican movement announced they were coming under a central command.
   These were the Real IRA – which carried out the 1998 Omagh bomb massacre; the mainly Derry-based vigilante group, Republican Action Against Drugs (RAAD), and a group of independent dissident terrorists, thought to be experienced ex-Provos. 
   However, two dissident groups remained outside the new central command – Oglaigh na hEireann (ONH) and the Continuity IRA. 
   The policy of forming an umbrella organisation actually ran contrary to previous interviews for the Star in which some of the various dissident groups stressed they wanted to remain separate of each other to avoid infiltration by spies and informers. 
   While the PSNI has consistently warned of the danger still posed by the republican dissident terror factions, there was no statement of panic from the police leadership reacting to the news of the amalgamation. 
   The Star’s source close to the leadership of the New IRA, reacting to the supposedly luke-warm PSNI response, said: “The various factions were working together anyway, and the announcement was regarded simply as a bit of a PR stunt.
   “It did not impress the memberships on the ground who felt they should have acted up first, done something together, and then announced the amalgamation.”
   In an earlier Star exclusive, a source close to the leadership of RAAD has emphasised how that group had already been working in collaboration with the Real IRA. 
   At that time, that RAAD source added: “RAAD did collaborate with the Real IRA for a time, but RAAD members didn’t like being told what to do, with Real IRA people who were less experienced.”
   This was an indication of the personality clashes which had been unveiled by the Star’s source close to the New IRA leadership.
   He added: “There was a wee bit of personality clash that kept the factions apart. These clashes have now been resolved out of necessity.
  “But there is still a body of opinion which believes that the groups should remain splintered. And there are some who believe that the coming together is good. But all it takes is one big tout and the whole thing is gone.”
   The source said ONH had been most emphatic about staying separate from the New IRA. The problem was that the new IRA group wanted to call itself Oglaigh na hEireann, but that name was already taken by this faction, he said. 
   “Given this new game they are playing, they didn’t want to make the same mistakes as the Provisionals. They have learned from these mistakes and there are wiser heads running this central command. 
   “However, there is still a body of opinion which believes the case now is that it is too centralised. But a combined group needs to produce something to make headway.
   “But the big point is there already is a loose association and co-operation among the groups so there was really no need to announce a central command. 
   “Oglaigh na hEireann and the Continuity IRA were always refusing to be part of this co-operation in the early stages, but there is now more co-operation as their individual campaigns have not come to very much. 
   “But it does not get around the core issue in that the new combined group should have produced the goods first, then an announcement if they are to be taken seriously. 
   “Making an announcement without having first done something makes them look foolish. That’s the sort of stuff that happened the Stickies – making announcements but never following them up,” said the source close to the New IRA.”
   In short, co-operation will lead to merger under the banner of the New IRA, with the current Irish border being the main focus of a future New IRA terror campaign in a post Brexit Ireland.
   Like the Provisional IRA and INLA during the conflict, the New IRA will attempt to extend the terror campaign away from the border to as many part of Northern Ireland as possible rather than just trying to create so-called ‘liberated zones’ along the border.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious discussion show, Call In Coulter, on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 fm radio on Saturdays around 9.30 am, or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com

 

Is the Michelle O’Neill/John O’Dowd tussle for the deputy leadership of Sinn Fein either a genuine attempt to shift the movement into 21st century internal democracy, or a cynical attempt to hoodwink the Southern Irish electorate to vote for the party in the next Dail poll? Political commentator Dr John Coulter uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to cast a critical eye over this unprecedented election in the republican movement. 
Next month’s Sinn Fein Ard Fheis, or annual conference, will be the most historic for the movement, formed in 1905, since 1986 when then senior republican Ruauri O Bradaigh led the split from Provisional Sinn Fein over taking Dail seats to form the dissident Republican Sinn Fein.
   Sinn Fein delegates will be hoping for a repeat of the 1986 Adams/McGuinness ‘bloodless coup’ in the battle for who will become vice president, or deputy leader, of the party.
   As one of the few Irish political parties organised on an all-island basis, the VP battle could easily be dismissed as a Northern ‘storm in a tea cup’ involving two Stormont Assembly members – current post holder Michelle O’Neill from Mid Ulster, and former Stormont Minister John O’Dowd from Upper Bann.
   Both could claim to represent the modern face of republicanism, as both as so-called ‘draft dodgers’ – the nickname given to Sinn Fein elected representatives who have never been convicted of terrorist offences, or served an apprenticeship in the Provisional IRA.
   But perhaps that’s where the similarity ends. O’Neill comes from the staunch working class republican heartland of Mid Ulster, once the power base of some of the IRA’s most ruthless terror cells.
   O’Neill’s strategy must always be to recognised the role of the IRA in propelling Sinn Fein into the post of leading nationalist party in Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein gained that success by politically eating into the moderate nationalist SDLP’s middle class Catholic vote, whilst at the same time, keeping its hardline working class republican heartlands on board.
   O’Neill caused outrage in the Unionist community when in 2017 she addressed a commemoration to the eight IRA members of the East Tyrone Brigade shot dead by the SAS in the Co Armagh village of Loughgall in May 1987. O’Neill makes no secret of her recognition of the role of ‘armed struggle’ in the republican movement.
   O’Dowd is a different breed of republican. While O’Neill could be said to be the modern face of traditional Sinn Fein, O’Dowd represents the up to date face of new Sinn Fein – someone who would sit just as comfortably politically in the dark green wing of either the SDLP or Fianna Fail.
   Seat losses in this May’s council and European elections in the Republic left Sinn Fein with a severe bloody nose. With the Stormont project suspended since January 2017, Sinn Fein’s Irish unity project focused on achieving a united Ireland through the backdoor of Dublin’s Leinster House.
   With Sinn Fein doggedly maintaining its Westminster abstentionism policy, and Stormont in mothballs, the unity project was to build on Gerry Adams’ achievements in the Dail and win enough TDs to become a minority government partner in the next Southern coalition government.
   But if the 2019 council and European poll disasters are replicated in the expected Dail general election later this year or early 2020, then Sinn Fein will once again be relegated to the fringe status back benches.
   Sinn Fein was always an autocratic movement – the grassroots rallied behind what the leadership demanded. It worked effectively under Adams and McGuinness, but seems to have come off the political rails under Mary Lou McDonald and O’Neill.
   While Sinn Fein’s economic policies have a distinctively hard socialist agenda to them, there are still numerous conservative Catholics within the ranks and support base. Support for abortion is Sinn Fein policy rather than a conscience vote.
   Could the grassroots be uneasy about the development of the staunchly pro-life Aontu party fronted by former Sinn Fein TD Peadar Toibin? Indeed, Sinn Fein could find itself squeezed on three fronts.
   As well as potentially losing the support of conservative Catholic republicans to Aontu, there is also the danger of losing support to a revitalised SDLP, especially in the Foyle constituency.
   With Brexit votes so tight at the House of Commons and PM Boris Johnston’s majority in tatters, if the seven Sinn Fein MPs had taken their seats, could the original Theresa May deal been voted through along with a guaranteed Irish backstop?
   SDLP MPs in the past had always taken their seats, so could a hard spin by the SDLP against Sinn Fein’s ‘outdated abstentionism’ be a Brexit vote winner with the nationalist electorate in any future Westminster General Election.
   While the Alliance Party ‘bounce’ has hit the pro-Union community, could the demand for middle ground politics inflict itself on republicanism? Alliance has been making inroad west of the River Bann in terms of votes and council seats – could this seriously affect Sinn Fein Assembly and Westminster seats in the event of a split nationalist vote?
   So far, O’Neill has been unable to get the Stormont project back in business. Would the more moderate image of O’Dowd be the solution to kick-starting the power-sharing Executive, as O’Dowd earned himself a credible reputation among Unionists during his time in the Executive.
   Likwise, at the back of grassroots minds in Sinn Fein must be the fear of defections politically to the parties linked to dissident republicans, especially the fringe Saoradh movement.
   It should not be forgotten what Sinn Fein was in the period 1969 to 1973 – it was merely a fringe party which served as an apologist for the IRA. While Saoradh is certainly a minority political movement in 2019, if the New IRA was able to mount  sustained terror campaign, could Saoradh develop in the same way as Sinn Fein did?
   One of dissident republicans’ power bases is Craigavon, in the heartland of O’Dowd’s Upper Bann constituency. An O’Dowd victory at the Ard Fheis could well be the hammer blow which puts the dissident republican campaign into the dustbin of activity.
   Many republicans may wish to continue to commemorate their ‘patriotic dead’ in terms of honouring dead IRA members, but do these homages really generate votes in terms of showing that Sinn Fein is a party capable of running a coalition government in Leinster House.
   Would an O’Dowd victory be the first step in a revolution within Sinn Fein marking the end of McDonald’s reign as party president? Has Sinn Fein dabbling with democracy backfired in terms of the rank and file demanding their meaningful say in the running of the party rather than blandly accepting the dogma of the leadership?
   No doubt, some cynics may see this Sinn Fein VP tussle as a carefully stage-managed stunt in democracy.
   There is the real possibility that if O’Dowd can notch up significant votes from delegates from the deep South in Tipperary and Cork, then we could see the beginning of a hitherto never seen revolution within Sinn Fein.
   This could see Sinn Fein moving as a party back to the original vision of a dominion status supporting party under its 1905 founder Arthur Griffith.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Is the Irish Labour Party strong enough to compete with established movements in Northern Ireland elections? That’s the brutally honest question posed by political commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column. 
With Westminster generating a new bout of General Election fever, the concept of official British Labour Party candidates contesting Northern Ireland constituencies has once more nudged its way to the top of the socialist agenda in the Province.
   In an earlier article, published on the Northern Slant website, I put forward the argument that if the British Labour Party held to its firm position that it will not put up official candidates in Northern Ireland, then the Dublin-based Irish Labour Party should live up to its pledge to fight Northern Ireland seats. https://www.northernslant.com/socialist-alternative-northern-ireland/
   Ideologically, there is a need for a formal labour party to contest Northern Ireland polls in the same way as the British Tory Party runs official candidates in the Province.
   While gone are the days when Northern Ireland socialists had their cheques to join the British Labour Party returned and bluntly informed to join its sister party, the moderate nationalist SDLP, since the demise of the old Northern Ireland Labour Party, there have not been Labour candidates run in the Province who stood with the official public blessing of the Labour leadership in London.
   Strategically and tactically, is the Irish Labour Party in a position to fight elections in Northern Ireland given the disastrous outcome of the 2016 Dail General Election when the party suffered a 30 seat loss, reducing its Dail representation to only seven TDs.
   It was a far cry from the 2011 result, when Irish Labour was able to enter a coalition government with Fine Gael with 37 seats. It seemed as if Irish Labour had suffered the same electoral fate as the Liberal Democrats in mainland Britain when they entered a coalition government with the Tories at Westminster.
   The bitter lesson which Irish Labour and the Lib Dems learned was that short-term gain can be punished by the electorate with long-term losses.
   Strategically, what can Irish Labour gain by contesting Northern polls given its current tally of elected representatives in the Republic – seven TDs, four senators, and 57 councillors, according to the party website?
   To save face, and rebuild, Irish Labour needs to sell itself as an all-island movement. Merely organising in Northern Ireland is not sufficient. It must contest elections.
   Even fringe movements, such as the anti-abortion Aontu party led by former Sinn Fein TD Peadar Toibin has only a handful of elected representatives, but can claim it is an all-Ireland movement as those elected representatives do politically straddle the Irish border.
   The gamble Irish Labour must make is that will its central focus be rebuilding the movement in the Republic, and if it does not contest Northern Ireland seats, is it opening the electoral door either to Aontu or a revitalised SDLP should the latter regain the Foyle Westminster seat from Sinn Fein?
   There is a chink of light for Irish Labour in that Aontu has indicated that if it should win one of Northern Ireland’s Westminster seats, its MP will not take the Commons chamber seat thus mirroring Sinn Fein’s current abstentions policy.
   Irish Labour’s big selling point – especially in the Brexit debate – is that it would take its Commons seats, if elected to Westminster. Given the tight mathematics which could emerge following the expected Westminster General Election, even a single Irish Labour Commons MP could make a significant difference.
   Although Irish Labour was founded in 1912, several years after Sinn Fein in 1905, ironically, Irish Labour copied the Sinn Fein tactic of dogmatic abstentionism for the 1918 Westminster General Election when all of Ireland was still under British rule.
   This did not help Irish Labour as the big winners in that poll immediately after the end of the Great War in November 1918 was Sinn Fein, sweeping up more than 70 of the 105 Commons seats available in Ireland.
   Just over a century later, in 2019, Irish Labour – tactically – needs to emphasise that it would be prepared to join a so-called ‘rainbow coalition’ of pro-EU/Remain parties at Westminster to oust Boris Johnston’s Tories in the expected Commons poll.
   If British Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn is to lead such a coalition, he may need to make significant gains in Scotland at the expense of the SNP. Scotland was for many years a traditional Labour heartland, but has now become a nationalist bastion in terms of Commons MPs.
   In spite of greater than expected losses in the snap 2017 Westminster poll, the SNP has clawed back some lost ground in May’s European poll snatching an extra seat.
   If there is a European-style Lib Dem ‘bounce’ under leader Jo Swinson in Britain, Corbyn may – like the Tories with the DUP – need to rely on Northern Ireland MPs to form his ‘rainbow coalition’ Government. This is where an Irish Labour MP in Northern Ireland could prove invaluable, especially in any future talks over an Irish backstop.
   Even with only seven TDs in the Dail plus a Commons MP, the Irish Labour Party could find itself propelled into the position of political kingmaker in terms of both Westminster politics and a UK Brexit deal.
   The key selling points to Northern Irish voters are that Irish Labour is not an overtly republican party like Sinn Fein or Aontu, therefore, could be capable of attracting cross-community support; is prepared to take its Commons seats if elected, unlike the abstentionism of Sinn Fein and Aontu; is organised on an all-Ireland basis, unlike the SDLP which is Northern-based and has only a working relationship with Fianna Fail in the South.
   Likewise, given its cross-border organisation, Irish Labour would also be in a prime position to challenge the Alliance Party as the main middle ground voice of opposition to Brexit across the island, given that Alliance – in spite of the ‘bounce’ in the council and European elections – is only organised in Northern Ireland, but is part of the broad European Liberal movement.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious discussion show, Call In Coulter, on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 fm radio on Saturdays around 9.30 am, or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com

Will the world as we know it end after Brexit? The confusion as Halloween Night looms ever nearer has been a God send for the religious prophets of doom and especially those preachers predicting the ‘end times’. Religious Commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his Ballymena Accent column to examine the validity of when the Biblical Book of Revelation becomes a reality. 

The Biblical Battle of Armageddon, signalling the end of the world, is almost ready to be fought, according to numerous speakers and theologians on the Christian preaching circuit in Ireland.
   Predictions over when and how the world will end are favourite topics for such prophetic preachers, but the confusion sparked by Brexit has increased the number of sermons and Bible studies which issue the warning that we, as a society, are now in the ‘end of days’ as forecast in the final book of the Bible – Revelation.
   ‘End Times’ sermons seem to be the most popular in both evangelical and fundamentalist churches, especially those which are part of Ireland’s Elim Pentecostal movement, one of the North’s most popular Christian fundamentalist denominations.
   The Elim movement was founded in Monaghan in 1915 during the Great War when Ireland was entirely under British rule, and many churches, which are now located in Northern Ireland, were among the first established on the island.
   I recall an interview which I did with one such Elim pastor dealing with the ‘End Times’.
   He told me: “The Battle of Armageddon is almost upon us given the horrific developments in the Middle East in recent weeks. We have some frightening facts from the Bible concerning the literal, physical return of Jesus Christ.
   “God’s prophetical clock is ticking. I want all Christians to watch and read the news to see how close it is before God comes.”
   This pastor believes the world will end with nuclear destruction and this is prophesised in the Bible.
   For example, he points to the New Testament text of Mark chapter 13, verses 24 and 25, which state: “But in those days, after the tribulation, the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give her light. And thre stars of heaven shall fall and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.”
   Ironically, this particular pastor is lucky to be alive to give his startling Biblical nuclear holocaust warning. As a teenage street evangelist on Belfast’s loyalist Shankill Road, he preached most Saturdays as well as handing out Christian literature outside Frizell’s fish shop.
   He was doing so on Saturday 23 October, 1993, when he ran out of Gospel tracts. He cross the road to collect more at a nearby church. About 30 seconds later after leaving his regular preaching spot, the no-warning Provo bomb aimed at wiping out Johnny Mad Dog Adair’s UFF command exploded prematurely.
   It killed 10 people – including one of the IRA bombers, Thomas Begley – and injured 58 others. The pastor was uninjured, but emphasised had he been standing at his usual spot, he more than likely would have caught the full force of the lethal blast.
   And the pastor has no doubts as to how the present Middle East crisis will end: “Iran has made it clear it wants to join the nuclear club and has almost finished her programme. Iran will share its nuclear programme with the islamic world.
   “The Bible tells us to look at Jerusalem. Islam will declare war on what it regards as Big Satan (The United States of America) and Little Satan (Israel). Iraq and Palestine will lend their terror support.
   “There will be a battle for Jerusalem and the storm clouds and winds of war are already gathering over Israel.
   “I believe Iran is planning nuclear attacks on New York, Jerusalem and London using medium and long-range missiles. Russian scientists are helping Iran achieve its dream. There will be economic chaos if these three cities are hit, and we are on a global countdown to this.
   “There are six major stages to making a nuclear bomb and Iran is at stage five in this process. I also believe the Americans have plans to attack seven nations including Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Libya, Syria and China.
   “This will be one of the signs of the nuclear age and it will happen when Iran comes of age in nuclear terms.
   “These are the signs that Christ is on the verge of coming again to set up His Kingdom. I believe Israel will attack first in the events which are foretold in Mark’s Gospel chapter 13.
   “Reading these verses, we can only conclude we are on the brink of the nuclear Armageddon. In the New Testament book of Revelation, we read of the nations known as Gog and Magog gathering together for battle.
   “This is a reference as to how modern Russia will gather and govern seven nations to help Iran. Russia is seeking oil as its ‘spoil’ and Iran has oil estimated to last for 130 years. Russia is an evil nation and it will come against Israel and will help the islamic nations.
   “Within fundamentalist Islam, the highest honour is to die as a martyr killing Jews and Christians. Such fundamentalists believe when they die as martyrs they will go to an islamic heaven surrounded by virgins,” he added, claiming the Koran contained instructions on how to kill Christians.
    This pastor said when the United States forced Israel to hand over the Gaza Strip in the Middle East, America had broken the command of God and America would suffer the judgement outlined in the Old Testament book of Joel chapter 3, verse 2.
   “The land of Israel belongs to the Jews and the judgement of God will hit the United States because it parted the land of Israel. In the past, Hurricane Katrina was an example of this judgement.
   “Jerusalem and Israel are very special in the eyes of God and the devil is bringing the nations together for destruction of Israel.”
   The pastor said there was other clear evidence from the Bible about the impending nuclear destruction of the world. For example:
   In the New Testament, 1st Corinthians chpt 15, verse 52 talks about the speed with which events will happen. It uses the description: “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye …” He said the Greek word ‘atomic’ means ‘will be quick’.
   Another reference to nuclear destruction comes in 2nd Peter chpt 3, verse 10 – also from the New Testament, which states: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned.”
   Back in the Old Testament in Zechariah chpt 14, this pastor points to the atomic Armageddon in the verse 12 text: “Their flesh shall consume away while they stand on their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes.”
   However, the pastor said ‘born again’ Christians should not fear the prospect of the atomic holocaust because this was prophesised in what is known as the Armageddon Psalm from the Old Testament – Psalm 91 verse 5: “Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day” – a  reference to missiles with atomic warheads.
   This Psalm also warns of tens of thousands dying from these ‘arrows’ and the plagues which will follow.
   However, the pastor also said only ‘born again’ Christians, according to the Bible, would escape the carnage of Armageddon. This is where God will appear and bring up to heaven all the ‘born again’ believers, leaving the ‘unsaved’ to die in the nuclear holocaust.
   He emphasised this escape was clearly outlined in the New Testament text of 1st Thessalonians Chpt 4 verses 15 to 18. He added: “This guarantees that God’s people will be preserved. The Lord is coming back; his people will be called up and will escape Armageddon’s carnage.”
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Northern Ireland needs Australian-style compulsory voting as well as lowering the voting age to 14. Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his Ballymena Accent column to maintain that these revolutionary election changes would herald more stable democracy in the Province.
The local government and European polls in May gave the impression that Unionism is no longer the dominant ideology in Northern Ireland, but that is based solely on turnout.
   The local council election showed a 52 per cent turnout, while Northern Ireland’s three MEPs were elected on a 45 per cent voter turnout. In Australia, meanwhile, May’s federal elections had an almost 92 per cent turnout where voting is compulsory.
   This begs the clear question – how would the political map of Northern Ireland change if such Australian-style mandatory voting was introduced? Australia is one of almost two dozen nations which have mandatory voting laws, while less than half formally enforce them.
   In Australia, registering to vote is part of the legal duties of becoming a citizen if you are aged 18 and over. Supposedly, failing to do so will result in a fine of around 20 Australian dollars, about £12. It may even mean a court appearance.
   If the Euro poll in the Province was taken as a benchmark, could the 55 per cent of voters who remained at home or ignored the ballot box have made any difference to the result?
   Would Danny Kennedy have held the UUP seat, or would it have seen an even bigger landslide for Alliance’s Naomi Long, or saw Jim Allister of the Traditional Unionist Voice return to the European Parliament?
   At first glance, this may be seen as needless speculation and a large dose of ‘what iffery’, but Northern Ireland, in terms of democratic elections, is heading dangerously close to electing people on only an average 50 per cent turnout.
   Likewise, it could be suggested that the turnout perhaps says more about the electorate’s non-engagement with the democratic process; that refusing to vote is also part of that process. In a true democracy, people can choose not to vote.
   But is a 50 per cent turnout of voters a true reflection of the political mindset of Northern Ireland? If there was a border poll, a second referendum on Brexit, or Republic-style referenda on same-sex marriage or more liberal abortion and divorce legislation, would that 50 per cent turnout rapidly climb?
   In October 2018, a council by-election took place in Carrickfergus and the successful candidate won with only a 22 per cent turnout. The DUP won the seat, which had previously been held by the late Jim Brown, a former UUP Mayor of Carrickfergus who was an Independent when he died.
   Had we had compulsory voting, and a 92 per cent voter turnout, would the UUP have won back the seat? Indeed, how many seats at council, Assembly, Westminster and European level have been won and lost because of the people who did not register and did not vote?
   Could we have a more democratic society because mandatory voting could encourage smaller parties to enter the political fray? For instance, if the DUP and UUP became more secular in political ethos, could the Orange Order put up its own candidates campaigning on a Biblical agenda?
   Is it a perception to say that lower voter turnout is favouring the Orange/Green divide and playing into the hands of the DUP and Sinn Fein?
   Was Naomi Long’s 100,000-plus European vote a personal vote for her, the continued Alliance Party ‘bounce’, or merely voters using Alliance as a protest vote against the current stagnation at Stormont which has existed since January 2017? It seems this article is posing more questions than it is providing solutions!
   If the Australian model is taken as a benchmark, then mandatory voting results in a more stable democracy. But mandatory voting linked to responsible citizenship will only work if there is proper education of the electorate in the political process.
   For this to be achieved long-term, then the voting age should be lowered to 14. While campaigners for a lower voting age want 16, with a proper curriculum of Citizenship Studies in secondary education, then the voting age at 14 will work.
   In Northern Ireland, the vast majority of students who sit the transfer tests, then move into secondary-level education are aged either 11 or 12.
   In preparation for voting at 14, all secondary-level schools would have the compulsory subject of Citizenship Studies as part of every student’s timetable in much the same way as every secondary-level student takes mandatory Maths and English in preparation for GCSEs.
   Just as many students are already both computer literate and social media literate by the time they are entering secondary-level education, likewise many students are already politically active by the time they reach the age of 14.
   Would we have a better quality of politician in Northern Ireland if that voter age was lowered to 14 supported by the appropriate education programme in schools? Could the current Stormont impasse have been avoided if Northern Ireland had enjoyed a flow of politically mature voters coming through the electoral system?
   Many parties across Ireland have vibrant youth wings. There is even a youth parliament in Northern Ireland. But are these genuine attempts to involve our youth in the democratic process, or merely humour them by pretending they have a significant voice?
   As someone who joined the Young Unionists, the youth wing of the UUP, as an A level student in the 1970s, I initially felt that while I was made very welcome in the party, it was more of a ‘humouring exercise’ than a serious attempt to listen to the views of youthful Unionists.
   Of course, it gave us valuable practical experience of electioneering and canvasing, but it was always the elderly men in grey suits who had the final say in terms of the manifesto contents.
   Even in today’s society, how much of an input into the election manifestos and party policies do the current youth wings of the various parties have?
   Or is it still a case that youth wings of parties are merely tolerated, and like many Irish Presbyterian Church functions which I have experienced, reality is more akin to an attitude of ‘the ladies will now leave and make the tea!’
   One element is a certainty, if political parties in Northern Ireland want to see a significant increase in voter numbers in the future, they will have to invest heavily in the youth. Mandatory voting and Citizenship Studies on the curriculum would be excellent starts to that process.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious discussion show, Call In Coulter, on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 fm radio on Saturdays around 9.30 am, or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com

Leo says we need a backstop; BoJo says we don’t. Can there ever be a meeting of minds over a Brexit deal which benefits both states on the island of Ireland? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to propose a Trans Atlantic Alliance as a basis for solving the issue. 
The initial telephone conversation between new British premier Boris Johnston and his Irish counterpart, Leo Varadkar, produced an outcome we all knew – Dublin wants and needs the backstop; the UK doesn’t want or need a backstop!
   An impasse almost as awkward as exists at Stormont has been created. Is there a workable solution? Yes, there is: the United Kingdom, United States and Canada may well be in the process of forming what has become known as the Trans Atlantic Alliance (TAA) as a radical global alternative to the severely under-pressure Eurozone.
   The first hints of this slowly emerging TAA blueprint came a few years ago when former British PM David Cameron decided not to bless the so-called rescue package for the euro, much to the annoyance of France and Germany.
   Rather than Cameron’s apparent snub to the euro being labelled a desperate move to calm his Conservative Party’s growing Eurosceptic right-wing or indeed fly the patriotic flag for sterling, it was seen as the opening shots in a new ploy to set up an economic alternative to the euro based on the pound and dollar.
   Then Cameron lost the EU membership referendum! Indeed, the Brexit policy has lost its way. So just as the row over whether ‘no deal’ should be back on the negotiating table, so too, should the plan to form a united front with the dollar and sterling to outgun the euro.
   Its long-term aim would be to bring other nations out of the financial European Union and into the TAA. The TAA is not seeking the political break-up of the EU, merely to set up in opposition to the seemingly crumbling Eurozone.
   The test case for the fledgling TAA will be the Republic of Ireland, which has been lumbered with massive debt following the multi-billion Euro bailout to save the Irish economy – dubbed the Celtic Tiger – from tumbling into the same financial pitfall as Greece and Portugal.
   Southern Ireland is currently part of the Eurozone and its land border with the North means it is the only EU state with such a physical link to the UK. The Northern Ireland peace process has become a global example of the art of the political impossible.
   In financial terms, what was unthinkable a decade ago is now creeping slowly onto the political agenda – a re-introduction of the Irish pound, and closer ties with the UK, possibly even the negotiation of a new Anglo-Irish Treaty.
   Ireland’s role is crucial to the TAA’s development. The UK and North America have retained their respective currencies. What the TAA urgently requires is for a significant member of the Eurozone to defect.
   Given that growing economic crisis in the Republic, if the Dail – the Irish Parliament – could be persuaded to leave the Eurozone, re-introduce their former currencies, then the financial floodgates could open.
   The growing political warmth between the UK and the Dail, and especially the success of the British-Irish and Northern cross-border bodies make the Republic a prime target for such a defection.
   There have also been suggestions British TAA sympathisers also see the Hungarians as other potential ‘prime members’. In this case, Hungary would be persuaded to keep its Forint rather than join the Eurozone.
   If the TAA could claim the financial scalps of Ireland and Hungary, it would provide the British and North Americans with the political muscle they require to back the influential French and German governments into a corner.
   Politically, the TAA would not be seeking the disbanding of the EU. But the TAA would have the long-term aim of seeing the present EU return to the original European Economic Community (EEC), which was a more loose alliance of European nations – but each retaining their individual currencies. Political primacy would also be held by these nations’ respective sovereign parliaments – not the European Parliament.
   However, conspiracy theorists detect the hand of the increasingly influential Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) somewhere in the TAA arrangements. The CPA represents some 50 plus national and regional parliaments, based mainly on the former British Empire member states.
   Privately at least, the CPA is vehemently opposed to the Eurozone, and could make a natural home for any disgruntled EU member state seeking both political and financial independence. Another key factor will be the outcome of any second independence referendum in Scotland.
   Scotland’s current First Minister Nicola Sturgeon – and her predecessor – of the Scottish National Party has also succeeded in getting a Nationalist majority government installed in the Scottish Parliament. However, the key question remains, would an independent Scotland join the Eurozone if it remained within the EU, or would it keep sterling as its national currency?
   Even if the SNP did not win the referendum for full independence, a narrow defeat would be sufficient to give Nationalists the upper hand in demanding even more powers for the Scottish Parliament – a sort of ‘Devo Max Plus’.
   A more politically and financially independent Scottish Parliament remaining in the UK would also have similar knock-on effects with the Northern Ireland and Welsh assemblies legitimately demanding similar increased devolved powers.
   Likewise, while an independent Scotland would signal the break-up of the UK, it would not necessarily mean political unity in Ireland. Given the looming potential collapse of the Southern Irish economy if there is a ‘no deal’ Brexit on 31 October, for the Republic to take on the tremendous cash burden of an additional 1.7 million Northern citizens would be a financial impossibility.
   Even sharing the costs with Britain would be a scenario placing the South beyond the pale of any economic recovery.
   Retaining their national currency and sovereign parliament, yet being a part of a global coalition could make the TAA an attractive prospect for any emerging Eastern European nations. Indeed, the EU could find itself in direct competition with the TAA.
   A key factor will be the Russians who clearly want more integration with Western Europe. Rather than a Cold War, the former Soviet Communist bloc ringleader is embarking on a Charm Offensive, forging relationships which half a century ago would have sent the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation into political convulsions.
   If Russian kingpin Vladimir Putin could be persuaded to join Team TAA rather than push the former Soviet republics into the EU, it would transform the global power structure not just in Europe, but right across the entire Northern hemisphere.
   A crucial factor in allowing Russia to join the TAA would be the reaction of the Far Eastern nations and key financial players, especially China, Japan and India. Indeed, given the current ripples of instability in Russia and in many of its former satellite states, how might Putin’s ‘empire’ react to China and Japan joining the TAA instead?
   In 1914, all it took was a few shots in Sarajevo and the world was engulfed in a global conflict which cost millions of lives.
   June 2019 witnessed the centenary of the signing of the post Great War Treaty of Versailles. A 100 years later, could we see the political opening shots being fired which could see European maps, borders and power blocks being redrawn once again? In 1914, it was the Serbian Black Hand; in 2019 it could well be the hand of the TAA.

 

If Premier BoJo fails to get the Irish backstop axed as part of a Brexit deal, could it trigger the re-emergence of a populist nationalism among the pro-Union community in the form of Ulster independence? Political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to examine an ‘independence’ way forward for Unionism should 31 October bring Brexit with a backstop.
Northern Ireland’s pro-Union community must vomit at the idea of the Scottish National Party’s dream of an independent Scotland, outside of the UK, but remaining – or re-entering – the European Union.
   But many Brexiteers within that pro-Union community would also politically vomit at the idea of a backstop and must be praying that new British Prime Minister Boris Johnston can successfully exit the EU on Halloween Night, minus an Irish backstop.
   However, what will Unionism’s Plan B be if BoJo is forced to swallow his pride – or even does a political U turn – and accepts the implementation of an Irish backstop as part of an exit deal?
   Unionist Brexiteers view the backstop as a ploy merely to protect the Irish Republic from the effects of Brexit. Privately, many Unionist Brexiteers are hoping for either a ‘no deal’ exit, or a Brexit deal with no backstop.
   Some would like to see the Republic pay heavily for the years it allegedly allowed republican terrorists to roam across the border on murder and bomb missions, then escape to the safety of the republic.
   Either exit scenario will see the South’s economy take a massive financial hit, virtually seeing a return of the dark days of the Celtic Tiger meltdown when the EU had to provide millions of euros to bail out the Republic’s economy.
   However, Unionist Brexiteers must consider the possibility that a backstop could emerge in some form, ironically leaving the South’s economy in a more stable condition than the North’s in a post Brexit Ireland.
   In these circumstances, an all-island economy along with an inevitable border poll are on the cards. Rather than slide into an all-Ireland republic, should Unionism in Northern Ireland prepare its Plan B of being an independent Ulster within the European Union? After all, Northern Ireland – like Scotland – was one of the two regions of the UK which voted ‘remain’ in the referendum.
   If Brexit does go ‘pear shaped’ economically for Northern Ireland, could one long-term solution be a Celtic Alliance of the Irish Republic, an independent Ulster, and an independent Scotland, all separate states within the European Union?
   The internal Tory election of Johnston as Conservative leader, and ultimately Prime Minister, is like a red flag to the nationalist bull in Scotland.
   While the SNP took a bigger hit than expected in Theresa May’s snap Westminster poll in 2017, losing more MPs than it bargained for, much ground was regained electorally for the SNP in May’s European poll where the party gained an MEP and saw an increase in its percentage share of the vote. In 2015, the SNP captured 56 of Scotland’s 59 Westminster seats, losing 21 in 2017. It had expected losses, but anticipated only around a dozen.
   However, the main point is that the SNP ‘bounce’ is back and the campaign for a second independence referendum is gathering momentum again.
  The key question which the pro-Union community must now address is – which is the better option if there is a bad Brexit, Irish independence or Ulster independence? The latter will inevitably see the re-emergence of an Ulster populist nationalism, especially in the Protestant Unionist Loyalist (PUL) community if they perceive that the Tories either cannot prevent a united Ireland, or see a united Ireland as the price for keeping England and Wales out of the EU.
   This should not come as a shock to the pro-Union community as it is not the first time that Unionism has flirted with the idea of a doomsday political scenario based around an independent Ulster.
   In the Seventies, following the collapse of the Sunningdale power-sharing Executive, when Unionism could not produce a viable workable alternative to that Executive, the then highly influential Right-wing Vanguard movement – fronted by the late Bill Craig – toyed with the idea of an independent Ulster.
   Vanguard’s most influential period came when it was a pressure group. Its decision to become a political party signalled its eventual demise in less than a decade.
   At the same time, Northern Ireland’s then largest paramilitary group, the Ulster Defence Association (which at that time had not been proscribed) also flirted with the concept of an independent Ulster rather than be forced into an all-island solution post Sunningdale.
   However, the failure of the mid Seventies Northern Ireland Convention and the continued imposition of Direct Rule from Westminster along with the strong integrationist wing in the then ruling Ulster Unionist Party pushed notions of Ulster independence onto the political back burner.
   It would not be until the mid 1980s and the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement that Ulster independence would again enter the Unionist mindset. It seems the concept of Ulster independence is a political knee-jerk to Unionism being caught on the hop by a Westminster Government.
   In 1985, the then biggest Unionist party, the Ulster Unionists, did not see Prime Minister Maggie Thatcher’s decision to sign the Anglo-Irish Agreement with Dublin until it was too late.
   Its leader, the late James Molyneaux, had often boasted privately about his special relationship with Thatcher, but she still went ahead with implementing the Agreement against his wishes. The political penny soon dropped with Unionism that Dublin had been accorded its first real say in the running of Northern Ireland affairs since partition in the 1920s.
   Again, the knee-jerk of an independent Ulster reared its head with the UDA jumping on that bandwagon.
   Also joining the Ulster independence train were organisations such as the loyalist working class Ulster Clubs movement (a bid to recreate the anti Home Rule network of Unionist Clubs which had existed at the turn of the 20th century), the middle class Ulster Movement for Self-Determination (MSD), and even the Far Right National Front attempted to cash in on Unionist fears.
   The Ulster Clubs movement failed to have a long-term influence because it was perceived to have been heavily infiltrated by the loyalist paramilitaries, especially the UDA.
   Indeed, as a News Letter reporter in the mid 1980s, I recall covering a loyalist ‘show of strength’ in Ballymena in 1986 to mark the first anniversary of the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. While the event was under the banner of the so-called ‘Loyalist Reaction Force’, it had been staged jointly by the UDA and Ulster Clubs.
   MSD, while not being a paramilitary group, used as its emblem a nine-county Ulster map. Its form of Ulster independence would see the three Southern border counties which comprise the geographical province of Ulster becoming a buffer zone with the Republic in much the same way as Israel used parts of Southern Lebanon as a buffer zone in its battles with Hezbollah.
   The NF’s flirtation with Ulster independence was merely a cynical ploy, and ultimately a failed attempt, to gain some kind of political foothold in Northern Ireland. Indeed, even when the Ulster Independence Movement became the Ulster Independence Party, it failed to win any elections.
   While the success of Alliance has focused many parties in Northern Ireland on the so-called centre ground of Ulster politics, it will be the contents of a future Brexit deal (or lack of one!) which will realistically determine if the Ulster populist nationalism of an independent Ulster once more makes it onto the pro-Union negotiating table, or is merely dismissed as another example of ‘Project Fear’ in Ireland.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s show, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, or listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
With days to go before we learn if BoJo will be crowned as the new British PM, political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to suggest that Sinn Fein may have no other option but to abandon abstentionism at Westminster. 

Eighteen MPs from Northern Ireland will shape the outcome of the next Westminster Government if another hung Parliament is the outcome of this winter’s expected General Election.

Not since the Commons poll of 1918 immediately after World War One has Ireland played such a pivotal influence in shaping British politics.

As with 1918, all eyes in 2019 will be firmly focused on the Sinn Fein vote. In 1918, the fledging republican party was only 13 years old, but managed to secure more than 70 of Ireland’s 105 Commons seats.

The island was then entirely part of the British Empire, but the huge Sinn Fein support effectively fired the starting gun on the War of Independence and ultimately the Treaty which partitioned Ireland.

The Sinn Fein landslide also sounded the death knell for moderate nationalism. Indeed, any forthcoming Westminster poll could see a ‘déjà vu’ outcome with the moderate nationalism fighting to save its very existence as the Sinn Fein electoral bandwagon rumbles through Northern Ireland once more.

Will Sinn Fein be able to hold its existing seven seats, or will abstentionism see a shift back towards moderate nationalism in the form of Fianna Fail/SDLP MPs?

The moderate nationalism bandwagon has an ace card – the party (whether that be an MP aligned to Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, or Irish Labour), like the Scottish and Welsh nationalists, will take its Commons seats. Sinn Fein still operates its outdated abstentionist Westminster policy of refusing to take Commons seats because of the royal oath, spinning the yarn that people voted for the party because of its abstentionism policy.

But how many Brexit votes in the Commons could have been won if Sinn Fein MPs had been present? Instead of leaving the European Union as originally planned in March, what if the seven Sinn Fein MPs had triggered a ‘no confidence’ motion in Theresa May as PM, thereby forcing a General Election?

While this stance has been the norm for republicans since Sinn Fein’s founding in 1905, it has steadily dumped abstentionism in the Dublin Dail and Belfast’s Assembly.

Ever since the 1994 IRA ceasefire, Sinn Fein negotiators have used the Good Friday, St Andrews and Stormont House Agreements to wring major concessions for the republican community from both the British and Irish governments.

With its seven current MPs, Sinn Fein could easily be in a position to hand the 10 Downing Street keys to Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn – provided the party abandons its Commons Chamber boycott.

Sinn Fein MPs can roam Westminster’s corridors for an eternity, but its ‘bottoms on seats’ which will decide the shape and shade of the next Government – so enter the Democratic Unionists again stage right! What if BoJo – like May before him – cannot secure a Tory Commons majority, but needs the help of the DUP MPs?

Would a Tory PM in BoJo politically pussy-foot with the DUP’s 10 MPs, sparking rumours of a potential Right-wing rainbow coalition of the Conservatives, Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party and the DUP?

But if BoJo was to stab the pro-Union community in the back in Northern Ireland over Brexit, the rumour mill might be rumbling to the sound of the DUP joining a Broad Left rainbow coalition of Labour, the Fianna Fail/SDLP ‘merger’, the SNP, Plaid Cmyru, Independents and the Greens. While the DUP is certainly to the Right on the Constitution, it is broadly to the Left on social bread and butter issues.

Within the Unionist community, the prospect of the DUP being offered a place in the next Cabinet could well spell the end of any chance of Commons seats for the smaller Unionist parties.

How attractive to pro-Union voters in Northern Ireland would the prospect be of a DUP Secretary of State under Direct Rule? Pro-Union voters – in the absence of a Unionist pact – will naturally support DUP candidates, a move which will put even more severe pressure on the once dominant Ulster Unionists who ruled Northern Ireland for 80 years plus.

The Westminster battle is a dry run for Sinn Fein for the real prize – a place in the Southern Parliament based at Dublin’s Leinster House. If the IRA cannot bomb the British out of Northern Ireland, and Sinn Fein’s Stormont Project has hit a crucial impasse, maybe it could ‘persuade’ the British to quit the Six Counties via the Dail method?

If this year’s European poll result for Sinn Fein is avoided in a Dail General Election, Sinn Fein under party president Mary Lou McDonald will be in a prime position to form the next Dail coalition, with Mary Lou becoming Tanaiste, the post of the Irish Deputy Prime Minister.

Sinn Fein in the Irish Republic is always selling itself as the main voice against austerity. Sinn Fein’s opponents have always taunted the party about its Hard Left credentials.

Irish politics has always been about the art of the impossible. If McDonald played the ‘Red Mary Lou’ card, could that steamroller take Sinn Fein all the way to becoming the largest Dail party, thereby claiming the coveted Taoiseach’s (Prime Minister) crown? Judging by the recent council and European outcome in the Republic, this could be fantasy politics!

Remember the fate of another political movement formally launched in the Republic under the guidance of former Fine Gael leading politician, Lucinda Creighton. It was expected to be a Centre Right party, similar to the now defunct Progressive Democrats, and also campaigned on an anti-austerity platform. It crashed and burned politically!

Of course, we have witnessed in the Republic the birth of yet another political movement – Aontu, formed by ex-Sinn Fein TD Peadar Toibin. Given the abortion referendum result in the Republic, is there any chance of Aontu becoming a significant minority voice in the Dail the same way as Sinn Fein began its Dail journey in recent decades?

If Stormont can be run by a DUP/Sinn Fein dominated power-sharing Executive, why can’t the next Dail be run by a Mary Lou/Peadar-led coalition with the so-called Southern ‘Big Two’ – Fine Gael and Fianna Fail – occupying the Opposition benches? Or are we still in the realms of fantasy politics for republicans?

The ultimate prize for Sinn Fein could be to be in power in three parliaments by the centenary of the end of the doomed Irish Civil War. Stormont is in the bag (Almost!); the Dail is a potentially strong runner (Maybe!) – but what price Westminster?

If Sinn Fein did abandon absentionism, could hardline republicans form yet another militant party, and so the seeds of yet another Irish conflict are sown? Is it better for Sinn Fein to stay out and keep a lid on dissidents, or enter the Commons Chamber and risk a second Irish Civil War? Remember the old saying about republicans who form a new party – the first item on the agenda is the split!

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to Dr Coulter each Saturday on Belfast’s Sunshine Radio 1049 fm on the Call In Coulter Show around 9.20 am. Listen online at  www.thisissunshine.com

 

The next Westminster General Election in Northern Ireland could well be decided by the so-called Twinkles Generation, according to political commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column.
It’s time for the ‘Twinkles Generation’ to shine on polling day! Who, you ask?
   The expected Westminster General Election later this year will be a major opportunity for teenage voters who were born after the signing of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement to have their say in the electoral process.
   Just because we are also expected to have a new British Prime Minister by the end of this month does not mean we will have a stable Commons Government between the DUP and the Tories.
   All it takes is for the DUP to get really annoyed with the small print in any new Brexit deal, and it will be a case of ‘all bets are off’ in terms of the Confidence and Supply arrangement in the Commons between the DUP and the Conservatives.
   Or maybe, too, Labour boss Jeremy Corbyn could persuade the seven Sinn Fein MPs to adopt a form of words which would enable them to ditch abstentionism and take their seats, thereby severely reducing the influence of the 10 DUP MPs.
   After all, if Sinn Fein can dump abstentionism for party reasons in Leinster House and Stormont, why not Westminster? But that’s a row for another day!
   To use a common Irish phrase, the first-time voters of the Twinkles Generation would have been mere twinkles in their fathers’ eyes when the peace process was itself conceived.
   And if there was to be a Stormont poll, too, there’s a perception voters will return the DUP/Sinn Fein power-sharing Executive back for another term in spite of all the spin about a dysfunctional Assembly. The fact remains – the former extremes of Ulster politics will inevitably keep the democratic institutions alive!
   There’s the suggestion, too, that Northern Ireland is heralding in a new era of so-called ‘middle ground’ politics. If this is the case, then based on the European result, Alliance will pick up half a dozen Westminster MPs at the expense of the DUP and Sinn Fein.
   Centre ground, my ass! Naomi Long’s impressive vote was a personal vote for her, plus a protest vote against the Stormont stagnation – and the fact that soft unionists knew what they were getting with Alliance this time around at the polling booths.
   There is no middle ground in Northern Irish politics – only tactical voting by the Green and Orange camps!
   If this centre ground was a political reality, the DUP and Sinn Fein would be losing considerable ground to a revitalised Ulster Unionist Party, the moderate Catholic SDLP, as well as centre Left parties.
   But reality is a bitter pill. The loyalist marching season is as contentious as ever, and dissident republicans are still shooting and bombing, so where is this ‘middle ground’ emerging from?
   It’s not a case of Irish politics shifting to the centre; more like previously hardline parties rebranding their image.
   Such has been this remodelling process that former liberal unionist and nationalist leaders like the late Terence O’Neill and the late Eddie McAteer would be spinning in their graves with laughter.
   Gone are the thundering fundamentalist speeches from Paisley senior. The DUP is now led by Arlene Foster, a woman from the UUP and an Anglican. Could we see the emergence, not of a more moderate DUP, but a more secular-leaning DUP where evangelical Christians do not hold the balance of power in the party?
   As for Sinn Fein, in has come a new breed of ‘draft dodgers’. It is no longer an unofficial prerequisite that to be a Sinn Fein candidate, you needed to have served an apprentice in the Provisional IRA and been a prisoner.
   As the centenary of the formation of Northern Ireland rapidly approaches, the Province is steadily moving back to the late 1960s before the Troubles erupted – a potential two-party system at Stormont.
   Instead of the old Unionist Party and Nationalist Party, we have the DUP and Sinn Fein. Long gone are the days when a DUP politician could be booted out of the party for daring to cross the Irish border into the Republic.
   Long gone are the days when Sinn Fein acted as the political apologists for IRA terrorism. The party is merely that one step away from taking its seats at Westminster. It does everywhere else – did I mention this is a row for another day?
   Well, here’s the row. All it takes is a form of words for Sinn Fein MPs to utter, and the ‘Shinners’ – as they are nicknamed – will become a 21st century version of the now defunct constitutional nationalist movement, the Irish Independence Party, which was once headed by Protestant ex-British Army officer John Turnley.
   We could take a negative approach and say this is the lull before the storm as Irish history is littered with rebellions, uprisings, conflicts and Troubles. Is there another fundamentalist firebrand like Paisley senior waiting in the wings? Is republicanism cultivating another Derry IRA commander like Martin McGuinness once was?
   The next Stormont Parliament – assuming there is one, and like its current counterpart in Dublin’s Leinster House – will see new alignments after a future Assembly poll.
   While the DUP and Sinn Fein will retain their coveted positions as the largest parties within their respective communities, the key question of alternatives will arise.
   Will the SDLP take such a pasting at the ballot box that a merger with Sinn Fein or a Dail party is the only way forward? The creation of single nationalist party will prompt calls for Unionist unity and the merger of Foster’s DUP with the Ulster Unionists to form The Unionist Party?
   And what of the genuine centre ground parties, such as Alliance and the Greens? As Ireland becomes more secularist in nature, will Christians form their own political movement?
   Already plans are afoot for an all-island Irish Christian Party to restore Biblical values in Ireland.
   Might the Loyal Orders fill the evangelical and fundamentalist gaps in the pro-Union community if both the DUP and UUP become too secular in ethos and too pluralist in their policies, and the Christian Churches lack the courage to stand up for such Biblical values?
   If Alliance can maintain its local government and European ‘bounce’ and break into double MLA figures at Stormont, and the UUP cannot achieve 20 seats, is a merger of the UUP and Alliance on the cards given the overall liberal leanings of both these parties?
   And in the background, don’t rule out the power of the Protestants-only Loyal Orders and the loyalist marching bands scene. If Unionism generally becomes too liberal in ethos, will the Right-wing Orangeism set up its own candidates?
   There’s much talk about bringing dissident republicans in from the cold. While mainland parties like the Tories and Ukip have fielded candidates, Corbyn’s Labour still needs to give the official green light to contesting elections in Northern Ireland.
   This has sparked a wave of unofficial Labour candidates across many constituencies. Maybe the ‘Twinkles Generation’ should be the official Labour Party?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious discussion show, Call In Coulter, on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 fm radio on Saturdays around 9.30 am, or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com

2019 has seen an upsurge in historical revisionism as both the Unionist and nationalist communities want to massage and amend past events to suit future political agenda, according to political commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column. 

Irish history reminds me of the traditional January sales – rushing to claim the latest bargain. That analogy of ‘grab this for us’ best summarises how the two political communities are locked in a cultural battle to claim events.

It can get to the ridiculous notion that only Protestants were killed on the opening day of the Somme; only Catholics fought in the United Irishmen’s rebellion and Easter Rising; and as the Orange Order prepares to mark the Battle of the Boyne, it was only the Protestants who charged across the Southern river to defeat the Papist Army of King James.

The Shinners will make right tits of themselves if they persist in holding parades in the North to commemorate the failed Easter Rising because it was Northern Irish Volunteers who messed up the coup in the first place!

The latest Rising commemoration next year gives republicans the chance to soak themselves in their favourite hobby – rewriting history to give the spin rebels were always the good guys.

But if there’s one thing which history has proved is that Northern nationalists really know how to screw up a military rebellion.

Let’s not forget that in 1798 during the United Irishmen’s Uprising, it was the Catholic Defenders group, NOT the radical Presbyterians who messed up their battles against English troops.

If the 1916 Easter Rising had been started in the Northern counties rather than Dublin, it would have succeeded.

The big problem was that the elite unit of the Irish Volunteers, namely the Mid Ulster Brigade, refused to participate leaving the Dublin lot to handle the coup by themselves.

It’s the same reason the 1956-62 IRA campaign failed. Republicans could not expand their terrorist activities beyond the border and the B Specials could keep them contained.

The Provos and INLA recognised this failure and when their terror campaigns kicked off in earnest in the Seventies, they murdered and maimed right throughout the North.

This forced the Brits to eventually agree the 1994 ceasefire terms in the same way as Dan Breen and Michael Collins spread their Tan War all over the island in 1920, forcing the Brits to agree the Anglo-Irish Treaty in 1921.

The other minor problem concerning the Easter Rising which the Shinners have to talk their way out of, is that the Irish Volunteers had no mandate from the people of Ireland for a rebellion in 1916.

Over 450 people were killed and 2,600 injured during the Rising before republican icon Patrick Pearse officially surrendered to the Brits.

No doubt Sinn Fein will be over the moon naming play parks and memorial gardens to the 70 plus Irish Volunteers who were killed in the Rising, including those executed at Kilmainham jail in Dublin.

But what about remembering all the Rising’s innocent civilian victims, including some 40 children who died? Or will Sinn Fein churn out the spin these kids were shot by the British for looting?

Surely the deaths of children during the Rising makes a mockery of the Proclamation which Pearse read aloud from the steps of the GPO on Easter Monday in his role as the Volunteers’ Director of Military Organisation.

It stated the supposed new Republic would “pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all of its parts, cherishing all the children of the nation equally …” So much for cherishing the 40 plus kids who died in the Rising!

The challenge to Sinn Fein will be to remember everyone who died in the Rising, and not just the 56 Volunteers killed in the fighting and the 15 later executed.

It makes you wonder why Pearse as one of the key leaders went ahead with the Rising knowing he didn’t have the support from the crucial Northern counties.

Surely it would have made much better sense for the Mid Ulster Irish Volunteers to have begun the coup in Tyrone in the heartland of Northern Unionist territory, suck the British troops into the region, and then spark the attacks in Dublin?

The bitter medicine was that Pearse was a forerunner of the Islamic jihadists. He knew as a military coup, the Rising was doomed, but he recognised the value of a blood sacrifice – including the children – to the republican cause.

The Rising legitimised violence and once this genie was out of the bottle, it could not be put back in.

Just look at the death toll which the Provos’ feared East Tyrone Brigade inflicted on the people of Mid Ulster during the Troubles.

The Rising would have had a different ending had Mid Ulster Irish Volunteers followed Pearse’s ideals in 1916.

As for Orangeism, I wonder how many lodges and bands of parades realise it was the predominantly Catholic elite Dutch Royal Blues in King Billy’s army which were among the first troops across the river Boyne and thus secured the victory.

Likewise, one of the parades which is growing in increasing popularity is the annual ‘Donegal Dander’ in the Southern coastal village of Rossnowlagh. Its a small walk to the beach, along with a purely religious service, and there’s never been a parade stand-off like Obins Street, Drumcree, or the Ardoyne Shops.

Maybe, given the excellent role of the Southern county lodges in supporting and organising the annual Rossnowlagh demonstration from Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan, and Leitrim, the Order should consider organising more parades and annual divine services in the republic?

Follow Dr Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter

Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious discussion programme, Call In Coulter, on Saturdays around 9.30 am on Sunshine 1049 fm radio, or listen online at  www.thisissunshine.com

 

This week sees the traditional Protestant Marching Season shift into top gear ahead of the Twelfth parades. With so much focus on how Unionism and Loyalism views its culture, Political Commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to challenge Nationalism and Republicanism as to how it should define and present their views of culture. 

In 2014, I published an e-book about Republicanism as an outsider looking in. Entitled ‘An Saise Glas (The Green Sash) The Road to National Republicanism.’  It outlined a new ideology I called National Republicanism. The ebook is available on Amazon Kindle.

   From the outset, I must stress that I have never been an Irish Republican, am not an Irish Republican, and – God Willing – will never become an Irish Republican.

One of the specific chapters which I penned for a non-violent new ideology on Republicanism examined how republicanism must address the concept of its own culture, language, identity and the past. The key question which I am now posing in 2019 is – how much of what I wrote in 2014 when the Stormont Executive was fully functioning is now relevant to getting an accommodation between Republicanism and Unionism to get that power-sharing Executive restored? This is the content of that chapter.

National Republicanism’s cultural identity is not about hosting contentious IRA commemoration parades and ceremonies. For example, the 2013 Tyrone Volunteers parade through the mixed town of Castlederg was not about commemoration or a tribute to dead IRA volunteers; it was a two-fingered political gesture to the Unionist community in retaliation for the years of Drumcree stand-offs in Portadown, and the recent Ardoyne Shops controversies in North Belfast.

Republicanism has got to come to terms with the concept that honouring patriotism must go beyond bomb-makers and gunmen. Provisional Sinn Fein – especially since former West Belfast Westminster MP Gerry Adams became a Dail TD for Louth – has been very careful not to alienate the Southern electorate with Castlederg-style marches about dead IRA men, particularly those either killed or executed during the Irish Civil War.

Unlike its more extreme ‘rival’ counterpart – Republican Sinn Fein once fronted by former Provisional Sinn Fein leading light the late Ruairi O Bradaigh – Provisional Sinn Fein under the Adams leadership and presidency has developed from a fan club to the Border counties IRA and 1981 hunger strikers into a credible minority government partner in Leinster House.

While O Bradraigh never shirked from his role on the IRA’s army council and his one-time post as Chief of Staff of the terror group, Adams has been very careful to transform his own hardline image to global ambassador for republicanism.

2014 also marks the centenary of the outbreak of the Great War which saw thousands of republicans and unionists don the same British and Commonwealth uniforms and die together in the trenches of the Western Front and Gallipoli. German and Turkish machine-gunners did not distinguish between the politics of the Allied forces they were either attacking or being attacked by.

The same reasoning also applied in 1917 when American entered World War One with many soldiers having Irish ancestry. Had Archduke Franz Ferdinand not been murdered by Serbian militants, the so-called Irish Civil War could have broken out that year between the pro-Unionist Ulster Volunteer Force and the nationalist militias of the Irish Volunteers and Irish Citizens Army.

But because of a series of interlocking treaties, nationalists and unionists found themselves signing up to famous regiments such as the 36th Ulster Division and the 10th and 16 Irish Division, both of which suffered horrendous losses at the bloody Battle of the Somme in 1916.

One can only speculate as to how many Irish lives would have been lost if there had been no Great War, but Irishmen had locked horns following the imposition of Home Rule for the island. Would Ireland have been divided like Germany after 1945, the current situation between North and South Korea, or the situation which existed in Vietnam prior to the American forces leaving in the early 1970s.

An Irish civil war between the rival Volunteer forces in Ireland could have resulted in a Northern Ireland of around 18 of the 32 counties, as it can be assumed that many British forces would have left their weapons to the unionists. Indeed, would British forces have had no other option but to introduce concentration camps in the same way as such camps were used to crush the zeal of the Afrikaners during the Boer wars in South Africa?

Because republicans have been better at pushing their propaganda than unionists, nationalism has been able to represent many Protestants – such as Wolfe Tone – as militant Catholic republicans. Just as unionists conveniently forget the crucial military role of King William’s elite predominantly Catholic Dutch troops in his victory at the Boyne in 1690, so too, republicans have traditionally created the false stereotype that the only republican patriot is a Catholic who converted to Marxism and used terror to butcher Protestants and British troops.

There has been a running battle over St Patrick and the Irish language. Republicans have tried to claim Patrick as ‘their’ saint, while Orangemen have tried to counter this claim by organising lodges and parades to coincide with each 17 March. While Sinn Fein tries to present the gaelic language as an integral part of republican culture, the republican movement conveniently forgets it was mainstream Irish Presbyterianism which kept the language alive in Ireland for generations. Yet it was many of these same Irish Presbyterians which the IRA maimed and murdered in the Border campaign of 1956-62 and in the Troubles of 1968-98.

Ironically, unionists tried to counter the language battle by re-inventing all north Antrim accent and dialect as a separate European minority language branded as Ulster-Scots. At face value, the so-called Ulster-Scots language is nothing more than a strong Ballymena accent spelt phonetically. Having grown up in the Ballymena locality for most of my early life until I got married in 1989, I regarded myself as a fluent ‘Ulster-Scots’ speaker until elocution lessons and voice-coaching sessions at the BBC ‘cured’ me of that strong accent!

For many years after 1980, republican bands and militant republican speakers paraded through the east Antrim coastal village of Carnlough to commemorate Larne Borough councillor John Turnley, who was murdered by the UDA in the village in 1980.

Turnley had been a former British Army officer and Protestant who had been a key figure in the moderate nationalist SDLP in North Antrim, but who became a leading figure in the now defunct democratic republican Irish Independence Party. Indeed, had it not been for the 1980 and 1981 republican hunger strikes, the IIP not Provisional Sinn, could well now be the leading voice for Northern nationalism in the new Stormont Assembly.

Just as the moderate Social Democratic and Labour Party replaced the old Irish Nationalist Party at Stormont as the leading voice for republicanism under Nobel Peace Prize winner John Hume, so too, has Provisional Sinn Fein replaced the SDLP as the leading voice for republicanism in the North. Because of the Irish Civil War, the Southern electorate has never forgiven Sinn Fein for sparking that war in which hundreds of republicans on both sides of the Treaty debate died.

In spite of electoral gains under the Adams peace agenda, Sinn Fein still remains a minority party in the Republic. Like the Green Party, Irish Labour Party, and the former Progressive Democrats, the best Sinn Fein can hope for is to become a minority partner in a coalition government in Leinster House. Barring an electoral miracle, Sinn Fein will never become a majority government party like either Fine Gael or Fianna Fail. National Republicanism promotes the concept of the board republican family under one political roof. The model for this is the original Unionist Party which dominated Northern Ireland since the formation of the state until it was axed by Tory Prime Minister Ted Heath in 1972.

The success of the Unionist Party was that while it was a single party, many difference factions were represented through pressure groups. The socialists had Unionist Labour; the Right-wing had the Ulster Monday Club; the Orange Order had its delegates, and the border counties of the North enjoyed the support of the West Ulster Unionist Council.

A single republican party would represent all shades of democratic nationalism in the same way as the Scottish National Party has now become a majority government in the Scottish Parliament without the use of a violent struggle. National Republicanism must develop the concept of ‘the model Irish citizen.’ Loyalty to the state must become a key concept.

In the early years of the new millennium, my parents hosted a fund-raising coffee morning for the Ulster Unionist Party at their home. During a private conversation, an experienced Unionist politician who attended that event predicted that republicans would return to a full-blown armed struggle within a decade to 15 years. That prediction is sadly becoming true as a new republican conflict begins to emerge.

The Provisional IRA, Official IRA, INLA, and IPLO may be part of the history of the Irish conflict (1968-98), but there is now a fresh crop of republican armed groups to take their place – Real IRA, New IRA, Continuity IRA, Republican Action Against Drugs, and Oglaigh na hEireann.

During a republican rally in Belfast city centre, Adams responded to a voice from the crowd with his now immortal suggestion that the IRA had ‘never gone away.’ While this may be dismissed as a quip, there is a need for the IRA to transform itself from the Irish Republican Army to an Irish Republican Association.

This was a theme which I addressed in late October 2004 during an article for the blog site, Slugger O’Toole. The idea – which National Republicanism would implement – would be that a future Irish Republican Association would fill the role which the Royal British Legion performs within the British security forces.

This is the article, which a decade later, is still as relevant a suggestion as when it was first penned as a way forward for National Republicanism to address the issue of the past in terms of physical force republicans:

“Here, he (John Coulter) argues the Provisional IRA could get around the disbanding dilemma by restructuring itself as the Irish Republican Association, based on similar lines as the Royal British Legion.

“The Provisional Irish Republican Army needs to copy its arch rivals, the British Army, and form an Old Comrades’ Association to get around the thorny problem of those nasty D words – decommissioning and disbanding.

“West Belfast Westminster MP Gerry Adams, the President of the IRA’s political wing, Sinn Fein, has really landed himself in hot water with the republican hardline activists in East Tyrone, South Derry and South Armagh.

“Adams tried to spike the rival Ian Paisley-led Democratic Unionist Party’s artillery with his perception the Provisionals might have to disband to make way for political progress.

“His remarks exploring a scenario where the IRA might no longer exist have been totally misinterpreted in Northern Ireland Provisional heartlands as: ‘Thanks for the last generation of armed struggle, now bog off and let us politicians work out a deal!’

“However, the high-wire balancing act the Sinn Fein leadership has to perform is to radically sideline the IRA, but at the same time convince the Provisionals’ ruling Army Council that ‘they really haven’t gone away’ – an observation made famous by Adams at a post-ceasefire republican rally.

“Many grassroots republican activists must be privately questioning what they devoted almost 30 years of armed struggle to. Was all that suffering by republican prisoners and families simply to run the education and health departments of Northern Ireland?

“During the time of the brief power-sharing Executive in 2002, Sinn Fein held the ministries of health and education.

“The problem for republicans is that if they are to finally defeat the constitutional nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) at the ballot box, they must capture and hold not just the traditional Catholic working class areas, but the electorally lucrative and growing Catholic middle class in the North.

“With a Westminster election looming within the next 18 months, Sinn Fein is poised to capture the SDLP’s three remaining Commons seats of Foyle, South Down, and Newry and Armagh. Sinn Fein is also on the brink of its biggest electoral achievement in the Republic of Ireland since the post-Great War General Election when it took the majority of Irish seats.

“If Sinn Fein can mirror its European and local government successes in the South of Ireland in next year’s expected Irish General Election for Dail seats, there is a strong possibility the party could become a leading contender for coalition government with the largest Southern party, Fianna Fail … but only if it cleans up the Provos!

“The Provisional IRA needs restructuring. It needs to deliver the double blow of convincing unionism it no longer exists as a terrorist organisation, whilst at the same time providing a network of communications for republican hardliners.

“Urging republicans to copy the British Army model of forming regimental associations may seem the talks of traitors. It could also be interpreted as insulting by organisations such as the Royal British Legion, whose primary aim is to maintain contact between former soldiers of legitimate army units.

“But what would be so wrong in nationalist terms of revamping the IRA into the Irish Republican Association. After all, when the part-time police force dominated by Protestants, the B Specials, disbanded in 1970, thousands of unionists flocked to swell the ranks of the Ulster Special Constabulary Association.

“And in the 1990s, after the merger of the British Army’s Protestant-dominated Ulster Defence Regiment with the Royal Irish Rangers to form the Royal Irish Regiment, an UDR Association quickly emerged. Similar associations have also been formed within the police to mark the Royal Ulster Constabulary and RUC Reserve.

“The Provisionals would also be copying the famous International Brigade which fought the fascist dictator Franco during the Spanish Civil War. Whilst that conflict ended generations ago, the sacrifice of the members of that Brigade is honoured through old comrades’ groups.

“The Provisionals – because they are based in Western Europe – need to distance themselves from the modern-day Middle Eastern Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who use suicide bombers and mass slaughter techniques to further their so-called causes.

“The republican movement needs to urgently convince middle class Northern Ireland it is no longer a threat to society. If Sinn Fein is to be viewed as a truly democratic organisation by Protestants in the same way the African National Congress became trusted by whites in South Africa, then the IRA has got to permanently go away.

“But to totally disband the armed wing without replacing it with some form of disciplined structure will only play into the hands of republican dissidents, such as the Continuity and Real IRAs.

“The republican leadership of Adams and Mid Ulster MP Martin McGuinness need to make a bold statement – not about the disbanding of the IRA, but to restructure republicanism’s physical force volunteers into an Irish Republican Association.”

Likewise, there has always been a tension between the leadership of the Catholic Church in Ireland and the violent republican Marxist/Far Left leadership. National Republicanism does not and never will adhere to the concept of Godless or atheistic Marxism. While Nationalism Republicanism will break the power of the Irish Catholic Bishops on the island’s political structures.

The island’s Church and State relationship will be replaced by the Faith and State concept of National Republicanism. Given that a Catholic priest was indirectly responsible for the Claudy bomb massacre in the Seventies during the conflict, the mythical image of a Catholic priest hearing confessions, giving absolution to IRA volunteers and blessing them as they decide to go out and murder British forces is the kind of Hollywood nonsense portrayed in the blockbuster, The Wind That Shakes The Barley.

Developing the concept of social agenda, National Republicanism will take a strong stance against drug dealing and dealers. The seized assets of drug dealers will be invested into helping those ‘kick the habit’. Convicted drug barons will either be executed or face a life-term in jail of hard labour, similar to the American judicial system.

Convicted child killers will also face the electric chair; other convicted sex offenders will be chemically neutered so that they no longer face a threat to society once they are integrated back into the community after serving their jail terms. Harsh Young Offenders’ Centres will be constructed to tackle the problem of anti-social behaviour in young people, with heavy fines and jail terms for parents and guardians who knowingly fail to take responsibility for the actions of their children.

National Republicanism will lower the voting age in Ireland to 14, with the creation of a Young People’s Parliament to shadow the Dail. With surveys suggesting that Irish voters want a new party, the Ireland First Party can fill this void. National Republicanism will launch a new uniformed, Christian republican youth movement aimed at developing the attributes of faith, responsible citizenship, and loyalty to the party and state. It will be known as Saighdiuiri oga na hEireann De (The Young Irish Soldiers of God).

This organisation will be a mirror image of the Boys’ and Girls’ Brigade movements which promote similar aims, mainly within the Protestant community.

Combatting anti-social activities will enable National Republicanism to form a comprehensive network of trained and armed National Republican Neighbourhood Watch Militia across the island. These will be linked to a similar network of National Republican Residents’ Groups, which will deal with day-to-day problems in communities, such as poor parking and responsible pet owners.

National Republican political societies will be established in every school, college and university in Ireland to promote the concept of patriotic citizenship. Indeed, to combat the growing threat from obesity in our society, every pupil at every level of education from nursery to university will be required to have one weekly session each of physical education and swimming in the curriculum, along with one session of outdoor sport per week. National Republicanism is keenly determined to improve the well-being and morale of the nation through a campaign of improvement in physical fitness.

National Republicanism not only focuses on the education in terms of learning, but also the educational in terms of people of all ages looking after their mental and physical health. Good health, where possible, will be seen as a part of model citizenship.

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter

Dr Coulter also has a show on Sunshine 1049 fm radio on Saturday mornings around 9.30 am entitled Call In Coulter. You can listen online at www.thisissunshine.com.

 

Unionists should box clever and outflank Sinn Fein by throwing their weight behind an Irish Language Act, writes political commentator and author, Dr John Coulter. Follow Dr Coulter on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter
It has become abundantly clear that one of the obstacles preventing the return of a power-sharing Executive at Stormont is the issue of a stand-alone Irish Language Act – viewed as one of Sinn Fein’s thin red lines.
   Tactically, Unionism can outflank Sinn Fein by fully embracing such an act. On first reading of the previous sentence, it might seem that someone like myself, who comes from an evangelical Presbyterian, Ulster Unionist, and Loyal Order family background, has jumped ship to Naomi Long’s Alliance Party roller coaster.
   However, Unionism needs to fully understand the new long war which republicanism has implemented in its bid to achieve a 32-county, all-Ireland, democratic socialist republic as demanded by the 1916 Easter Rising Proclamation.
   Mainstream republicanism is no longer indulging in a violent terrorist campaign, but since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 is attempting to implement a cultural dismantling of Unionism.
   First, it was the parades disputes under the excuse that nationalists now lived along the routes of traditional Loyal Order marches. This plan was intended to drive a wedge between the Unionist middle class and the Loyal Orders.
   Mainstream republicanism fully understood that since the Home Rule crisis of the early 20th century, and especially since 1905 and the formation of the Ulster Unionist Council, the Loyal Orders – and especially the Orange – was the cultural cement which held the various elements of the Unionist family together.
   In an Orange lodge, the rich aristocratic Unionist businessman could sit beside the cash-strapped, working class loyalist and call each other ‘brother’. The Loyal Orders, especially the Orange and the senior Royal Black Institution, were the vehicles of political communication between the various elements of Unionism in Ireland.
   The seeds of the breaking of that bond were sown at Drumcree in Portadown following the rioting which erupted when Orangemen were finally prevented from marching along the mainly nationalist Garvaghy Road in the town on their return journey from their Somme battle commemoration service in Drumcree Irish Church in 1997. The parade had been forced through in 1995 and 1996.
   The sight of Orangemen clashing with the police caused serious unease between the Orange Order and the Unionist middle class. That unease became an open rift in the following year, weeks after the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, the referenda to support that Agreement, and the initial elections to the new Northern Ireland Assembly in 1998.
   During July 1998, three Catholic Quinn brothers died in an arson attack on their home in Ballymoney in the heartland of Dr Ian Paisley’s North Antrim constituency.
   Three senior Orange clerical chaplains – one of them my own late father (Rev Dr Robert Coulter MBE) – issued an appeal for the Orangemen to leave Drumcree Hill as a mark of respect to the three dead brothers.
   The result was a death threat to those three clerics from the Loyalist Volunteer Force – a breakaway, anti-Agreement terror gang formed by leading Portadown loyalist Billy Wright after his expulsion from the Mid Ulster UVF. Wright was shot dead by the INLA inside the Maze Prison.
   Middle class Unionists were disgusted by the threats to the clerics and by scenes of confrontations between pro-Agreement Unionists and the vehemently anti-Agreement Orange pressure group, the Spirit of Drumcree. That rift became formal when the Ulster Unionist Party severed its connections with the Orange Order so that the Order was no longer entitled to send its delegates to the ruling Ulster Unionist Council.
   The culture dismantling campaign was increased with targeting of traditional Eleventh Night loyalist bonfire locations. But the real push against pro-Unionist culture in Northern Ireland has been republicanism’s blatant hijacking of the Irish language.
   Instead of attempting to retake or reclaim the Irish language from republicanism, Unionism attempted to enter the language battle by trying to develop Ulster-Scots as a minority European language.
   However, for people like myself who grew up in rural County Antrim, Ulster-Scots is nothing more than a broad Ballymena accent! At best, in my honest opinion, it is nothing more than a dialect, but not a separate language. No doubt, Ulster-Scots ‘linguists’ will be jumping down my throat at that suggestion.
   It is equally abundantly clear that Unionism has been wrong-footed by republicanism over the Irish language, thereby convincing Unionism to ignore its rich heritage with that language.
   Republicanism has already conveniently airbrushed out of history that it was radical Presbyterians who organised the United Irishmen’s rebellion of 1798. Likewise, Unionism seems to have equally conveniently overlooked the very significant fact that it was Irish Presbyterians who saved the Irish language from total extinction.
   It is rather amazing, too, that the Orange Order’s ruling body, the Grand Lodge of Ireland, has expressed opposition to an Irish Language Act when some of the Loyal Order banners proudly displayed the Irish language.
   Perhaps the most famous of these banners was Ireland’s Heritage from Belfast. However, because one of its members was William McGrath, who was convicted of sexual abuse of young boys in the Kincora Boys Home in east Belfast, the lodge has since been disbanded.
   Given this rich Irish language heritage in the Loyal Orders and Unionism, how should they all react to a proposed Irish Language Act, even if Sinn Fein has made it one of republicanism’s red lines?
   The solution is simple, yet practical. The Loyal Orders and Unionism should forget about trying to combat Sinn Fein with rebranding a ‘Ballymena accent’ (Ulster Scots) as an alternative language.
   The Loyal Orders and Unionism should embrace the Irish language and apply for every penny of funding available to set up Irish language classes. The only reason Sinn Fein has made such a fuss of the Irish language is because it taunts Unionism.
   Sinn Fein would drop demands for an Irish Language Act like a hot potato if every Orange lodge, Royal Black preceptory and Apprentice Boys club applied for funding to launch Irish language classes in their halls. By adopting the Irish language, Unionism and the Loyal Orders would defuse the Sinn Fein cultural cannon.
   Unionism and the Loyal Orders have played smart when it comes to St Patrick’s Day and the Battle of the Somme commemorations. St Patrick’s Day in the past was perceived to be a nationalist festival, but Orange lodges have also used it as a parade and many Unionist branches organise Irish stew social evenings.
   Likewise, both Unionism and the Loyal Orders have publicly acknowledged the role played by British regiments recruited overwhelmingly from Ireland’s nationalist community at the Somme, especially during the July 1st 1916 opening day.
   In Orangeism, 1st July has become known as ‘The Mini Twelfth’, and Unionists need to break the mindset that only the 36th Ulster Division suffered terrible losses that day.
   Perhaps the pro-Union community could also make a start in recognising the role of Protestant nationalists in Irish history and heritage.
Northern Ireland needs a new Liberal Nationalist Party – not a new Liberal Unionist movement – if the Province is to commemorate the centenary of its formation with a stable, devolved government at Stormont and effective, workable cross-border agreements in a post Brexit society, writes political commentator, Dr John Coulter. Follow Dr Coulter on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter
For the third election in succession, Northern Unionism finds itself on the minority back foot politically. If ever Northern Unionism needed a wake-up call, it was Alliance leader Naomi Long’s comprehensive winning of one of the Province’s three European seats.
   This has prompted a huge debate within the Unionist family as to its future direction, with increasing cries that it is the centre ground in Ulster politics which holds the dominant key and that’s where Unionism should redefine itself ideologically.
   There have been calls for a new Liberal Unionist Party, similar to the Liberal Unionists which existed in the Home Rule era of the early years of the 20th century, especially before the outbreak of the Great War.
   However, when the votes and transfers of the European elections are studied in fine details, it was not necessarily tactical voting by traditional Sinn Fein supporters which guaranteed Long’s victory, or even transfers from the SDLP – the key to her victory was the defection of tens of thousands of soft liberal Unionists to Alliance.
   The bottom line for those thinking of trying to revamp another version of the doomed NI21 experiment created by former UUP MLAs Basil McCrea and John McAllister, or even a 21st century version of the late Brian Faulkner’s Unionist Party of Northern Ireland (UPNI) – a Liberal Unionist party already exists; its called the Alliance Party!
   Under Long’s leadership, Alliance has been transformed from a ‘wine and cheese supper brigade’ into a genuine liberal party with a clear ideology.
   If the so-called centre in Northern Irish politics is to be the driving force for the restoration of Stormont, then what Alliance needs is a liberal partner within the nationalist community – hence the need for liberal nationalists to reform the now defunct Irish Independence Party.
   The SDLP has always branded itself as a moderate nationalist party, whereas what is needed is a liberal nationalist party. There is a major difference between a ‘moderate’ direction for nationalism and a ‘liberal’ agenda.
   Under the likes of John Hume, Gerry Fitt and Paddy Devlin, the SDLP was a fusion of democratic nationalism and soft socialism. But there was always the shadows of conservative Catholicism hanging over the SDLP throughout its history.
   While the media loved to describe the SDLP as the ‘moderate nationalist’ party, we should really have branded it ‘the conservative Catholic SDLP’. The recent referenda in the Irish republic regarding support for same-sex marriage, more liberal abortion and divorce laws have clearly demonstrated that Southern Ireland is no longer dominated by the Catholic Irish Bishops.
   Southern parties have had to taken account of the development of the secular society in the Republic’s body politic. In Northern Ireland, the SDLP as it currently exists is sending out mixed messages to its electorate. Is it a party which wants to work closely with Fianna Fail, with Irish Labour, or with Fine Gael?
   Will the real SDLP please stand up? If it cannot, then the fate is that it will join Eddie McAteer’s Irish Nationalist Party from the original Stormont Parliament days in the dustbin of history. What is required is a secular liberal nationalist movement in Northern Ireland which can work hand in glove with Alliance to force the so-called ‘Big Two’ (The DUP and Sinn Fein) to reach an agreement on the restoring of the power-sharing Stormont Executive.
   The foundations of such a liberal nationalist movement were established when the Irish Independence Party was launched in the 1970s. It put down tender political markers in the 1979 Westminster General Elections that there was a credible secular liberal nationalist alternative to the moderate Catholic SDLP.
    But in reality for ‘moderate Catholic’, we must read ‘conservative Catholic.’ The IIP suffered badly because of two terrible events – firstly, the murder of its leading ideologue Larne councillor John Turnly by the UDA in 1980.
   Turnly was an ex-British Army officer, from a Protestant background, who felt the SDLP was too Catholic in ethos and he wanted a liberal secular agenda to achieve Irish unity.
   The second was the 1980 and 1981 republican hunger strikes which launched Sinn Fein as a political movement. As Sinn Fein gained its first seats in the Prior Assembly of 1982, this marked the political death knell for the IIP.
    Former UUP leader Mike Nesbitt recognised the benefit of the need for some form of liberal unionist/liberal nationalist coalition to develop an alternative to the DUP and Sinn Fein dominance of the Stormont Executive. However, the Unionist family – and especially traditional UUP voters – were not ready for his ‘Vote Mike, Get Colum’ agenda.
   Republicans may try to spin the European vote to ensure that two ‘remain’ MEPs were returned as ‘Vote Martina and Colum, Get Naomi.’ But Alliance seems strong enough to now paddle its own canoe politically.
   The key question which the liberal – not the so-called centre – community must now ask in future polls, is ‘Vote Naomi, Get a Liberal Nationalist’.
   Nationalism needs a middle class, secular-based movement in the Catholic community which can counter the myth that Sinn Fein voters ‘lent’ their votes to Alliance to guarantee a ‘remain’ victory. Only a revamped IIP can provide this vehicle.
   There is no point in trying to create yet another direction for the SDLP. It has become nothing more than a ‘sweeper’ party to soak of transfers for Alliance.
   The better medicine which nationalism must face is that it must go back to the drawing board in terms of creating a new party.
   Just as I have been urging Unionism to consider my ideology of Revolutionary Unionism to consider an all-island agenda in a post Brexit Ireland, especially in a ‘no deal’ or hard Brexit era, so too, Alliance and liberal nationalists must prepare for the eventuality that Brexit either can be stopped, or if it goes ahead on 31 October, the consequences will be a dire economic downturn in Northern Ireland.
   A fully functional devolved Executive at Stormont is key to surviving the fallout from a Brexit or No Brexit Northern Ireland. For Alliance to be the key stone of a serious Stormont Opposition to the DUP/Sinn Fein coalition, Long will need the assistance, not of a new Liberal Unionist party, but of a new Liberal Nationalist movement.
   In this instance, Naomi Long has only one option – bring back the IIP! If Alliance MLAs can leave their faith outside the revolving door at Stormont, so too must the liberal nationalist IIP.

 

Northern unionism must develop the all-island identity known as ‘revolutionary unionism’ if it is to be in a strong ideological position come the centenary of the Northern Ireland state, according to political commentator, writes Dr John Coulter. You can follow him on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter.

Following their European election meltdown, it is not just the Ulster Unionists which must map out a new way forward – the entire unionist family must face the reality that it must develop an all-island identity and strategy if it is to have an ideological relevance in a post-Brexit Ireland.

Republicans love to kick around the can that they must become ‘persuaders’ for unionism; that they should ‘persuade’ unionists that their future lies in becoming a significant minority in a united Ireland.

But that was before Sinn Féin suffered an horrendous electoral performance in the recent local government and European polls in the Republic. In short, former Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams’s pet project of ‘a United Ireland via the back door of the Dáil’ has come off the rails.

If Sinn Féin’s council and European results are replicated in the next Dáil general election, there’s no way the party will be considered as a minority government partner by either of the ‘big two’ (Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil) in Dublin’s Leinster House.

To get its United Ireland project back on track, it must breathe new political life into the suspended Stormont Executive. However, the equally searching question which the unionist family must also face is: has it become a minority ideology in Northern Ireland?

Even if the recent European election outcome in Northern Ireland is taken as a benchmark, Unionism must face the bitter medicine that for the first time in 40 years, two non-unionist MEPs out of three have been returned.

There is a real fear among unionists that Brexit – should it really happen on 31 October this year – could signal the start of a border referendum campaign. This fear could be ramped up if there is a Westminster general election before Brexit and the DUP loses its cosy partnership with the poll-battered Tories, no matter who succeeds.

What unionism must do – and do urgently – is to begin a debate about an all-island strategy as opposed to an all-Ireland focus. There is a radical difference between the two political concepts.

In this respect, unionism needs to begin considering the concepts of an ideology I have penned known as ‘revolutionary unionism’, built around the three agendas of one faith, one party, one Commonwealth.

The roots of revolutionary unionism lie in my research for my Masters thesis in the early 1990s at Queen’s University’s School of Politics. Our tutors encouraged us to ‘think outside the box’.

For me, this was about mapping out a new ideology for northern unionism which took it politically beyond the realms of slogans such as ‘Not An Inch’ and ‘No Surrender’ and even beyond the geographical boundaries of Northern Ireland.

Before revolutionary unionism is dismissed as a non-starter, readers should take note that if there is one observation which I have made after 41 years in journalism, it is that Irish politics is about the art of the impossible becoming reality.

As a young cub BBC Radio Ulster freelance journalist in 1981, I covered the Fermanagh South Tyrone Westminster by-election caused by the death of the IRA hunger striker MP Bobby Sands. It was won by Sands’s election agent, Owen Carron.

Imagine what Carron would have said to me if, after his victory speech, I had told him that one day his party, Sinn Féin, would sit in a partitionist parliament at Westminster with the DUP. I’m sure he would have told me to ‘get real’. But Sinn Féin did.

Likewise, in 1985, as a News Letter journalist, I stood feet away from the late Rev Ian Paisley as he issued his ‘Never, Never, Never, Never’ speech at Belfast City Hall at the first Ulster Says No rally against the then Anglo-Irish Agreement.

Again, I could well imagine Dr Paisley’s response if I’d said to him as he came off the platform – one day you and your party will operate a power-sharing Executive at Stormont with the Provisional IRA’s political wing and your deputy will be former Derry IRA commander Martin McGuinness! But Paisley Senior and the DUP did.

So what are the core directions of revolutionary unionism? Firstly, it seeks to re-establish the values of the Christian faith in Ireland; secondly, it believes that unionism is best represented by a single political movement, simply called The Unionist Party, with a series of pressure groups to represent the broad church of pro-Union thinking. This would operate in much the same way as the original Unionist Party had the Ulster Monday Club for hardline Right-wing Unionists, the Unionist Labour group for socialists, and the West Ulster Unionist Council for Unionists living west of the River Bann.

The major plank of revolutionary unionism is the key role for the British Commonwealth and especially the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA).

This new ideology is called ‘revolutionary’ for two key reasons. Firstly, it aims to get unionists thinking outside the box of the six counties of Northern Ireland; it wants unionism to consider a 32-county role. Secondly, the word comes historically from the Glorious Revolution of the late 17th century when the Protestant Ascendancy ruled all of Ireland after the Williamite war.

Revolutionary unionism will become the ‘persuader’ of the Irish Republic that the future of the Republic of Ireland lies with it re-joining the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) to protect the 26 counties from the financial collapse of a suspected ‘no deal’ Brexit.

The backstop only exists to protect the Republic from the catastrophic meltdown which the so-called Celtic Tiger suffered a few years ago when it required millions of euros to bail it out – much of that cash coming from UK contributions.

The bitter reality which nationalists and republicans must face south of the Irish border is that a ‘no deal’ Brexit will herald a second Irish Famine, only this time it will be an economic failure, not a failure of the potato crop.

Post Brexit, Ireland – like the UK – must remain part of a major economic power block to survive. Either the Republic must receive massive cash injections from the EU, or it must join the UK in leaving the EU.

In the meantime, Ireland’s only option to prepare for ‘no deal’ is to re-join the CPA, which represents more than 50 national and regional parliaments throughout the globe, not all of whom were members of the old British Empire.

It should not be forgotten that when the CPA was originally formed in 1911 as the Empire Parliamentary Association (EPA), Ireland was a founder member when the island was then all under British rule. The EPA evolved into the CPA in the late 1940s after the end of World War Two.

Revolutionary unionists must persuade the South that its economic future lies in a more formal political arrangement with the UK, preferably in a new Anglo-Irish Treaty which undoes partition and brings the 26 counties back into a Union of the British Isles.

The foundations of this new Union already exist as the three big Protestant denominations – mainstream Presbyterianism, mainstream Methodism and the Church of Ireland – are all organised on an all-island basis.

Even the fundamentalist denomination founded by the late Rev Ian Paisley in 1951, the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, has congregations in the Republic. One of Ireland’s growing Christian denominations, the Elim Pentecostal movement, was itself founded in Monaghan in 1915 during the Great War.

The Orange Order has thriving county lodges in the Southern border counties of Cavan, Monaghan, Donegal and Leitrim, and the annual pre-Twelfth demonstration at the Donegal coastal village of Rossnowlagh is one of the largest in the Order’s parading calendar.

Like it or not, the unionist family will have to now seriously consider the all-island ideology of revolutionary unionism as its practical way forward rather than the concessions of civic unionism or the surrender approach of liberal unionism.

A ‘No Deal’ or Hard Brexit under a Brexiteer Tory boss and Prime Minister will eventually force Southern Ireland out of the European Union and into the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, according to commentator Dr John Coulter in his latest Ballymena Accent column.

If BoJo replaces Tearful May as the next Tory boss and ultimately British Prime Minister, the fate of the Irish Republic as a separate state will be seriously placed in jeopardy, especially if the UK leaves the EU with either ‘No Deal’ or a Hard Brexit.
There’s been much talk that Alliance’s local government ‘bounce’ was replicated with leader Naomi Long winning the party’s first European seat at the expense of the Ulster Unionists.
However, it should be put in context that in the national UK referendum vote, Northern Ireland voted ‘remain’ and that the Province since 2016 has been represented by two ‘remain’ MEPs and a Brexiteer MEP. Retiring MEP Jim Nicholson of the UUP was a clear ‘remainer’.
While the UUP will hold an urgent political post mortem as to where it goes as a party on the pro-Union spectrum, the real concern is the slump in the Sinn Fein vote in the Republic both in the South’s local government and European polls.
‘Remain’ nationalists and republicans were hoping that two MEPs from Northern Ireland in favour of the Irish backstop could spark a border poll. It seems former Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams’ ‘Southern Surge’ has been derailed.
If current Taoiseach Leo Varadkar decides on a June 2019 Dail General Election, there would be no worry of the Republic’s ‘Big Two’ – Fine Gael and Fianna Fail – having to consider a coalition with Sinn Fein to form a government.
If the European poll south of the border is taken as a benchmark, it could well be the Green Party which returns to coalition government in Leinster House.
If this means that Sinn Fein – under Mary Lou McDonald’s leadership – is once more reduced to a loud fringe status in the Leinster House chamber, then it could prompt Sinn Fein to revamp its Stormont project by agreeing with the DUP to kick-start the power-sharing Executive, which has been in suspension since January 2017.
The success of Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party in the European poll will inevitably prompt the election-battered Tory Party to have to select a leader who can outwit the Brexit Party.
The Conservative party cannot afford to elect another ‘Remainer’ as leader and Prime Minister, otherwise it will face another Brexit mess, such as that faced by Theresa May.
With Farage promising to contest the next British General Election, a future Tory PM must be a Brexiteer prepared to face down the EU’s compromise – even if that means leaving on 31 October with ‘no deal’, or a Hard Border agreement.
The only reason ‘Remainers’ insist on an Irish backstop is to protect the South’s economy from another Celtic Tiger financial collapse which saw the EU (with a lot of British money!) having to bail out the Republic.
A ‘no deal’ Brexit lacking a backstop will inevitable spark the Second Irish Famine, only this time a severe economic one – unless, of course, the EU is prepared to flood the Republic with euros to soak up the economic consequences of ‘no backstop’.
In practical terms, a ‘no deal’ Brexit with no backstop cushion for the Republic will economically starve Southern Ireland into a closer union with the United Kingdom.
It would be somewhat of an irony of the centenary of the formation of Northern Ireland was commemorated by the loosening of the strings of partition with the Republic formally becoming an associate member of the influential Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.
The CPA – of which the Northern Ireland Assembly is a full member – represents more than 50 national and regional parliaments across the globe. While many were part of the original British Empire, not all the CPA members were part of that Empire.
The CPA was formed in 1911 as the Empire Parliamentary Association, with Ireland – then all under British rule – as a founder member. It became the CPA in the years following the end of the Second World War in 1945.
However, for such a scenario to work realistically, it will require Unionism to think on an all-island basis. The foundations for this are already in place. For example, many of the Protestant denominations are already organised on an all-island basis, or have churches in the Republic.
These include the Church of Ireland, mainstream Presbyterian and mainstream Methodist denominations. The growing Elim Pentecostal movement was itself founded in Monaghan in 1915 during the Great War. Even the fundamentalist denomination founded by the late Rev Ian Paisley – the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster – has churches in the Republic.
The Orange Order itself has county lodges in the Southern border counties of Cavan, Monaghan, Donegal and Leitrim. Indeed, the annual pre-Twelfth demonstration in the Donegal coastal village of Rossnowlagh has become one of the biggest-attended events in the Orange calendar.
A ‘no deal’ Brexit gives Northern Unionists the opportunity to persuade Southern Ireland to join the CPA, as the Republic will have to be a member of a significant economic body to survive not having the protection of a backstop.
Before the European poll, there was much talk about republicans and nationalists having to persuade Unionists to consider the prospect of a united Ireland.
If the UK can leave the EU on 31 October either under ‘no deal’ or a deal which does not include a backstop, it was be Unionists who have to persuade nationalists about the benefits of an all-island solution involving a new Anglo-Irish Treaty which brings the 26 Counties back into a formal closer relationship with the UK.
The fact that the Republic has voted to accept same-sex marriage, more liberal abortion and divorce laws, means that the old Unionist fear that ‘Home Rule Means Rome Rule’ no longer applies.
Gone are the days when a Taoiseach had to consult the Catholic Irish Bishops in terms of socially moral legislation.
Indeed, a Unionist ideology already exists which can promote such an all-island identity for Unionism. It is known as Revolutionary Unionism, which is based on the three-point agenda of – one faith, one party, one Commonwealth.
It takes the term ‘revolutionary’ not just from the view that urges Unionists to think outside the political box of Northern Ireland’s six counties, and is based historically and culturally on the Glorious Revolution, which saw the Protestant Ascendancy rule the whole of the island following the Williamite campaign of the 1690s.
Rather than Unionists view a ‘no deal’ Brexit as part of the so-called ‘project fear’, it should be seen as a chance to redefine partition and bring back the South into the CPA.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Half-hearted Christianity will be to blame if voters fail to elect two pro-Union MEPs in Thursday’s election, according to religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest controversial Ballymena Accent column.
With Remainers and Brexiteers locking horns on Thursday for what promises to be the most tense European election since 1979, the real people who will decide the outcome of the three seats is Northern Ireland’s so called Silent Majority – the Christian Church-goers.
   Apart from specific denominations, such as the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster (founded by the late Rev Dr Ian Paisley in 1951), and the occasional theological hardliner from the mainstream Irish Presbyterian Church, the evangelical lobby in Northern Ireland is not known for its outspokenness.
   Indeed, while the LGBTQ+ lobby is a minority community numbers wise in Northern Ireland, its PR and lobby machine has given it tremendous political and organisational clout.
   While several thousands marched in support of equal marriage through Belfast on a recent weekend, those numbers are minuscule compared to the  numbers of evangelical Christians which lobby groups, such as the fundamentalist Caleb Foundation pressure groups claims to speak for.
   The name is taken from the Old Testament Israelite spy, Caleb, and was founded the same year as the signing of the Good Friday Agreement (1998) in a bid to bring Northern Ireland’s evangelical and fundamentalist Christians under the banner of a single pressure group.
   At its most influential, the Caleb Foundation claimed to represent some 200,000 Christians across a range of denominations in Northern Ireland. Now if all those 200,000 were eligible voters and decided to cast their votes for pro-Union candidates on Thursday, the outcome of the election would be in no doubt.
   But one of the big dangers which pro-Union candidates face on Thursday is the stumbling block of half-hearted Christians, especially from the evangelical and fundamentalist wing of Northern Irish Christendom.
   There can be no doubting that liberal Christianity is on the march as demonstrated with the recent so-called ‘Alliance Bounce’ in the local government elections, which saw a massive swing to Alliance not seen since the 1977 council poll which saw Alliance grasp 70 seats.
   Alliance boss Naomi Long has used her leadership to give the party a true liberal ideology and has sought to eradicate the perception that Alliance was only a ‘wine and cheese supper club’ rather than a genuine middle of the road political movement.
   Part of Alliance’s success, especially east of the Bann in traditional Unionist areas, is that there has been a significant mobilisation of liberal Presbyterianism, not just to verbally support Alliance, but to physically go out and vote.
   The real problem for the pro-Union candidates is that the same enthusiasm for mobilisation is not as apparent in evangelical Christianity, hence the fear that half-hearted Christians may play a major role in deciding the fate of Northern Ireland’s third MEP seat.
   Many evangelical Christians will go through the emotions of stating that they support the Union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but they don’t set that emotion in motion by actually voting.
   Too many evangelical Christians are afraid to speak up for their faith, and like theological ostriches, they prefer to bury their heads in the sand rather than come out and support evangelical candidates. It would be a terrible blight on democracy and evangelical Christianity if apathy decided the fate of the third European seat in Northern Ireland.
   Okay, so the anti-Christian lobbies in Northern Ireland are well-organised and highly vocal. The time has come on Thursday for all and every evangelical and fundamentalist Christian in Northern Ireland to take a stand for what is right, face their fears, and go to the polling booths and vote for evangelical Christian candidates.
   One of those ‘born again’ Christian candidates, Jim Allister MLA, the leader of the Traditional Unionist Voice party, called on all Unionists to do their duty. ALL evangelical Christians need to also do their duty and vote for such Christian candidates, such as Danny Kennedy of the UUP and Mrs Diane Dodds of the DUP as well as Mr Allister.
   Many in the secularist lobby groups are very competent at portraying those of us who profess to be evangelical Christians as ‘eejits’. Well, its time to show the secularist lobby how big an eejit we evangelical and ‘born again’ Christians can be by getting into the polling booths on Thursday and casting our votes for candidates who support traditional Biblical values.
   There’s much talk too from parties about sending a clear message to Brussels and Westminster from Northern Ireland from the local electorate. It is time to show practical evangelical Christianity in action on Thursday.
   Surely, there must be 200,000 evangelical Christians eligible to vote on Thursday? A small act of courage such as going out to vote can change the course of history; that one act of courage can change a kingdom.
   Many evangelical Christians see their problems as perceptual – they see the supposed rise of the secular state as inevitable and unstoppable. They reduce both God and their faith to the size of these problems.
   But many evangelical Christians need to read the Old Testament book of Isaiah Chapter 55 and verses 8 and 9 from the King James Version: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”
   So evangelical Christians, do you dare to be dangerous on Thursday and go out and vote for Christian candidates who will defend Biblical values? Or will you sit at home as either a half-hearted Christian or a grasshopper Christian who is afraid to be seen walking into a polling booth, or has adopted the unChristian apathetic view of ‘why bother’.
   Given the torrents of secularist propaganda against the evangelical Christian faith in recent years, many Christians from that faith lobby prefer to keep their heads down, mouths shut, in the hope they will not be targeted by secularists.
   But ALL evangelical Christian voters have a duty to show faith, courage – and take a risk for God by ensuring they vote on Thursday. This is not a time for a separatist agenda of avoiding voting.
   Remember, if when the votes are counted next Monday and only one evangelical Christian is on their way to victory, we evangelical Christians cannot moan about the secular state – we only have ourselves to blame if we allow that to happen.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com 

As the days tick down to the European poll on 23 May, religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, analyses how the Free Presbyterians will have to rethink their strategy to ensure that DUP runner Diane Dodds tops the poll ahead of Sinn Fein’s Martina Anderson.

The fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster should tactically focus more on ensuring that as many evangelical Christians vote for pro-Brexit and Unionist candidates on 23 May’s European elections if it wants to regain the moral high ground as Northern Ireland’s most influential Christian denomination.

   After its founder, the late Rev Ian Paisley, was ‘toppled’ as Moderator of the Free Church because of his power-sharing ‘Chuckle Brothers’ Stormont routine with Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness, the influence of the Free P’s on the Christian stage began to steadily wane.

   The Free Church was recently back in the headlines after footage emerged of one of its ministers, Rev John Greer from the Ballymena Church, appearing to take a side swipe from the pulpit at the DUP selecting an openly gay council candidate.

    For many years, since the DUP’s formation in 1971, to become a candidate, the person needed to have been a member – or at the very least a worshipper – of the Free Church. While the surge in Alliance support at the council poll earlier this month has sparked massive hype in the supposed need for parties to capture the so-called ‘centre ground’ in Northern Ireland politics, little seems to have been said about mobilising the Christian Church vote.

   This is an area where the Free Church, indeed all Christian denominations and fellowships, can play a vital role – mobilising the Church vote to turn out on 23 May. With most pundits comfortably predicting – based on the council results – that the DUP and Sinn Fein will hold their respective MEP seats, all the attention has now been focused on the battle for the third European seat, which has traditionally gone to the Ulster Unionists since 1979.

   That could be decided, not by the liberals of the centre ground, but by Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists either by that lobby voting or remaining at home.

  While much has been made of the need for the DUP to ditch or mute the influence of the Free Church in its ranks, the Free Church could reinvent a new role for itself within the Unionist family by mobilising existing Christian voters to continue voting on 23 May, and encouraging any Christian voters among the 48 per cent who did not vote in the 2 May council poll to get out of their pews and into the polling booths come 23 May.

   Pundits should not be too fast out of the commentating boxes to scream about the development of the liberal secular society in Northern Ireland, when in reality what is needed is a champion to mobilise the Christian vote.

   The fundamentalist denomination will celebrate its 70th birthday in 2021 on St Patrick’s Day as it was founded on 17 March, 1951 by former DUP boss and ex-First Minister Ian Paisley senior, the late Lord Bannside.

   The staunchly fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church was a breakaway from the mainstream, more liberal leaning Irish Presbyterian Church, which in the 1950s was the North’s largest Protestant denomination.

   Although the Free Presbyterian Church, commonly called the Free Ps, has only about between 11,000 and 16,000 worshippers on a Sunday (according to figures given to me by Free P’s themselves!) out of a Northern Protestant population of well over one million, for many years it was regarded as ‘the DUP at prayer’.

    When the Free Ps celebrated their half-century in 2001, the commemorations became the launching pad for the DUP to overtake the rival Ulster Unionists as the largest Unionist party in the 2003 Assembly poll.

   As liberal propagandists push the concept of the ‘secular society’ as we progress into the third millennium, it would be easy to dismiss the Free P Church as a bunch of irrelevant Tub Thumpers. That would be both a huge inaccuracy politically and religiously.

   In 1970, by the time Paisley senior became both a Stormont MP and Westminster MP, his Free P Church had existed for almost two decades. Free Presbyterianism gave a voice to two politically muted voices in liberal Unionist-controlled Ulster – evangelical Protestants and working class loyalists.

   The Free P Church’s real power was its tremendous ability to mobilise Unionist voters of whatever denomination or class on polling days. This was the secret behind Paisley senior’s 230,251 first preference, poll-topping performance in the 1984 European election; the overtaking of the UUP in 2003 at Stormont, and again two years later in the Westminster General Election.

   During the Paisley senior era, to progress up the ranks of the DUP, many figures also needed to be ‘born again’ Christian fundamentalists in Free Presbyterianism. As well as the late Paisley senior, another high profile DUP cleric is the Gospel-singing, ex-South Antrim MP, Rev William McCrea – now a member of the House of Lords.

   While Sinn Fein spin doctor Danny Morrison masterminded the republican movement’s concept of the ballot paper in one hand and the Armalite in the other, Paisleyism’s Free P’s equally developed the rival Unionist concept of the Bible in one hand and the ballot paper in the other.

   Small in quantity the Free P Church may be, even in relation to other fundamentalist Protestant denominations, but its political quality was its ability to send its tentacles of influence right through every Protestant denomination and social class.

   Although the Free Presbyterian Church was central to mobilising the DUP core vote, rifts began to emerge after Paisley senior signed the St Andrews Agreement in 2006.

   The unease turned into open rebellion the following year after Paisley senior entered a power-sharing Stormont Executive with Sinn Fein, leading to the jibes that he and deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness were ‘the Chuckle Brothers’.

   Coming myself from a mainstream Irish Presbyterian background where my late dad was an Ulster Unionist politician and Presbyterian minister, I was naturally regarded with tremendous suspicion as a journalist by Free Presbyterianism.

   But in the weeks and months after the signing of the St Andrews Agreement and the DUP’s 2007 Stormont election victory, I was amazed by the significant number of Free Presbyterians who confidentially opened their hearts to me at the unease with which they viewed the developing peace process.

   While I still got ‘the odd earful’ from the hardened Paisley loyalist, even senior and influential Free P’s privately voiced their concerns about ‘The Doc’ being Moderator of the Free Presbyterian Church and sitting in a power-sharing Executive with Sinn Fein.

   Several months later, Paisley senior was initially forced to quit as Moderator – or leader – of the Free Presbyterian Church; a post he had held for more than 50 years. Weeks later came the news he was stepping aside as both First Minister and DUP leader, the latter post he had held since the DUP was launched in 1971.

   Many of those who followed ex-MEP Jim Allister out of the DUP to form the hardline, anti-power sharing Traditional Unionist Voice party were Free Presbyterians.

   Under the St Andrews Agreement, the party with the largest number of MLAs has the right to select the coveted First Minister’s post.

   If the current talks to kick-start the peace process succeed and devolution restored, which has been moth-balled since January 2017, Sinn Fein could follow its best-ever Dail showing since the formation of the Republic by becoming the largest Assembly party (assuming there is yet another snap Stormont election!) if the Free Presbyterian Church does not rally Unionist voters behind the Arlene Foster-led DUP.

   Protestant voter apathy – especially among Church-going Christians – has been increasing in recent elections. Some political sources estimate around 150,000 Christians – many of whom would be sympathetic to the DUP – did not vote in the snap Westminster General Election.

   The Free Ps’ 60th commemorations in 2011 also coincided with celebrations to mark the 400th anniversary of the King James Version of the Bible, the translation most favoured by many Protestant fundamentalist churches.

   If Free Presbyterians do not play their leading role in mobilising Protestant voters behind the DUP, but instead either plump for the TUV or ignore the ballot box, this could give Sinn Fein a narrow advantage in the battle to become the top Assembly party.

   Okay, critics of this view could say that the Free P’s only make up a small slice even within the overall Christian political cake in Northern Ireland. True, but the Free P’s still hold the mantel of being the most vocal of the Christian denominations.

   In the past, there has been open criticism from some in the Free Presbyterian Church of then First Minister Peter Robinson suggesting he would be prepared to attend a Roman Catholic funeral – an act severely frowned upon during the Paisleyite era in the DUP.

   For years, Paisley senior retained a leading role in the Free Ps, particularly through its monthly journal, The Revivalist, in which he and his wife – fellow peer Baroness Eileen Paisley – had regular columns.

   Free Presbyterians have also been highly active in other fringe fundamentalist groups such as the Evangelical Protestant Society, the Caleb Foundation, and the Independent Orange Order.

   It is expected the Free Church would be one of the leading protest groups during any planned visit of the Pope to Northern Ireland.

   Republicans and nationalists should not dismiss the tensions within the Free Presbyterian Church and the DUP as yet another internal Protestant religious squabble.

   These same republicans would do well to see Free Presbyterianism as a vital pulse within political Unionism. Nationalists ignore developments in the Free P’s at their peril – especially if secularists beat the pluralist drum so hard, it sparks a massive mobilisation of evangelical Christians, even to the point where they form their own Christian Party.

   Of course, the secularists and liberals can say the Free P’s are small in number – but what happens if their evangelical religious fervour for voting spreads to other traditionally politically quiet Christian denominations and fellowships? If every evangelical and fundamentalist Christian of voting age was registered and voted, what shape of an Assembly would be created?

   JOHN COULTER’S TOP TEN MOST INFLUENTIAL FREE P’S IN THEIR HISTORY:

Rev Ian Paisley senior – founded the church in 1951. Now dead, but his religious legacy still has a strong behind the scenes influence.

Rev Kyle Paisley – Paisley senior’s son and at one time the leading cleric to succeed his dad as minister of the most famous Free P church, the Martyrs Memorial in Belfast. Has spent much of his ministry in Britain. Brother of Ian Junior, who succeeded Paisley senior as North Antrim MP.

Rev Ivan Foster – Ran one of the church’s Christian schools. Former leading light in the Fermanagh Third Force loyalist vigilante group. Thought to be one of the main opponents of Paisley senior entering the Executive with Sinn Fein.

Rev Willie McCrea – Has been one of Paisley senior’s right hand men for many years. Leading Gospel singer who has made numerous albums. Former Westminster MP for South Antrim and Mid Ulster.

Rev Jim Beggs – Paisley senior’s brother in law. Former minister of Ballymena Free P Church and was Paisley’s election agent in North Antrim for many years.

Rev Ron Johnstone – former missionary and immediate successor to Paisley senior as Moderator of Free P Church.

Rev David McIlveen – former minister of Sandown Free P Church in east Belfast and at one time, the main media spokesman for the denomination.

Rev John Douglas – senior minister at Lisburn Free P Church and one of the denominations top theologians.

Rev William Beattie – long-time political colleague of Paisley senior who was based in South Antrim and Lagan Valley. In 1970, he won Stormont seat for Protestant Unionist Party, the forerunner of the DUP.

George Dawson – died from cancer a few months after retaining his Assembly seat, but as Grand Master of Independent Orange Order, founding Chairman of Caleb and East Antrim MLA, was highly instrumental in rallying other evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants behind the DUP.

Follow religious commentator Dr John Coulter on Twitter    @JohnAHCoulter

Listen to Dr Coulter’s weekly religious show, Call In Coulter, on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 radio on Saturday mornings around 9.20 am, or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com

 

 

Secular society? What secular, liberal, progressive society in Northern Ireland? Religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to warn that the Christian Churches have only themselves to blame for allowing Northern Ireland to become ‘secular’ by default. 
‘For God and Ulster’, and ‘In God We Trust’ were two historic battle cries of Unionism during the 20th century. But this is the second decade of the 21st century and a false perception exists after the recent local government elections that Northern Ireland has suddenly been transformed from a Christian country to a mythical secular society.
   Presumably, the assorted bunch of liberals championing this mysterious secular Utopia are basing their delusions on the recent surge in popularity for Alliance where the centrist party clinched over 50 council seats, with a massive jump of 65 per cent in the party’s support and with it topping the poll in many of Northern Ireland’s DEAs.
   Unfortunately, those of us of nearly pension age are old enough to remember a previous electoral surge in the 1977 council elections when Alliance notched up 70 seats under the old boundaries.
   The Alliance surge must be recognised for what it really is – a protest vote against the establishment parties’ political intransigence. 2019 is merely 1977 repeating itself.
   In this May’s council elections, we had suffered political stalemate at Stormont for over two years. Remainers who suck up to the European Union had managed to delay Brexit well beyond when the United Kingdom should have been leaving the politically bankrupt EU in a blatant ‘up yours’ to the outcome of the democratic referendum.
   In 1977, the Unionist family had walked Northern Ireland into a similar stalemate. Three years earlier, Unionists had marched the streets of Ulster until the then power-sharing Sunningdale Executive collapsed under the weight of the Ulster Workers’ Council strike.
   But Unionists failed to put a workable alternative in Sunningdale’s place, relying instead in the demographic safety net that Unionism could always win the numbers game.
   A year after the collapse of the Sunningdale Executive, the then Labour Government launched the ill-fated 78-seater Northern Ireland Constitutional Convention. Like Sunningdale, the Convention was workable on paper, and like Sunningdale, Unionists decided it would not work. It collapsed in March 1976.
   Republicans and Right-wing Unionists can indulge in the historical blame game that it was the Provisional IRA and hardline loyalism which sparked the collapse of both Sunningdale and the Convention. Frustrated with the stalemate, a year later the electors took that frustration out in the ballot box – a massive protest vote using the Alliance Party.
   But the current Alliance surge is only based on a 52 per cent turnout at the council poll this month. So where did the other 48 per cent of eligible voters go? Why did they stay at home, and more importantly, how many of the disillusioned 48 per cent were evangelical Christians?
   No doubt the Christian Churches will moan that the Alliance surge represents evidence that Northern Ireland is turning away from traditional Christian values. Many Alliance supporters, especially east of the River Bann, would poo-poo my analysis, pointing to the strong radical Presbyterian traditional in modern-day Alliance.
   The election of an openly gay DUP councillor has been heralded by the assorted bunch of atheists, agnostics, humanists, secularists, pluralists, progressives and anyone else who likes to classify themselves as trendy or liberal, that Northern Ireland has dramatically changed.
   Theres’s much talk that all parties have to go fishing politically in the small pool of the centre. There’s also much talk that we are now in an era of so-called Civic Unionism and that all you need to classify yourself as a Unionist is a belief that Northern Ireland is better off in the United Kingdom than a united Ireland.
   It was a former leader of the Ulster Unionist Party, the late Jim Molyneaux, who is credited with inventing the term that Unionism is a ‘broad church’. But the Alliance surge should herald a firm wake-up call to traditional Christian Unionism which saw the birth of the Ulster Unionist Council in 1905 to combat Home Rule in Ireland.
   In political practical terms, the Christian Churches need to stop pussy-footing with the misinterpretation of Biblical separation. The Christian Churches, especially those which call themselves evangelical and fundamentalist, need to face up to their responsibilities and get their flocks registered to vote – and actually step up to the mark and go out and vote on polling day.
   Too many so-called Christians are ignoring the ballot box. Perhaps the perception that Northern Ireland is an increasingly secular society is based on the view that attendances at services of the so-called ‘Big Four’ Christian denominations on the island – Catholic, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian and Methodist – have been steadily falling in recent decades.
   But such secularists tend to ignore the increasing number of people – especially the youth – attending the Pentecostal, evangelical, independent and Baptist denominations. At one time, a fundamentalist group, known as the Caleb Foundation (named after the Old Testament Israelite spy) claimed it spoke for around 200,000 evangelical Christians in Northern Ireland.
   Taking these figures at face value, how many of these 200,000 were eligible to vote in the council elections – and didn’t? How many evangelical Christians make up the 48 per cent of voters who ignored the ballot box on 2nd May?
   All Christians need to follow the example of Jesus Christ Himself in the temple when he took positive action against the moneychangers by overturning their tables. He did not simply sit at the back of the temple and hypocritically tut-tut at the activities of the moneychangers.
   Now that the European elections have been confirmed for 23rd May, evangelicals need to reassert Christian Unionism. They need to ensure that as many of the 48 per cent who did not vote back Christian candidates on 23rd May. If that 48 per cent pull off another ‘ignoring the ballot box’ on 23rd May, there is the very real danger that the outcome could be that Northern Ireland is represented by two Remain MEPs and a Leave MEP.
   The Churches need to perform their civic duty and ensure that we have a resurgence – not of liberal secularism – but of Christian Unionism. If evangelical Christians demonstrated the same enthusiasm for the ballot box as Alliance, the perception that Northern Ireland is turning secular will be put to rest once and for all.
   If 23rd May sees a bitter blow against Christian Unionism, the Churches have only themselves to blame. Roll on the day when we have a system of compulsory voting in Northern Ireland as exists in Australia. Maybe then, Christians will finally get out of the pews and into the polling booths.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Vote early, vote often! Religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, urges Christians across the UK to adopt this traditional republican slogan and ensure they vote in both the local council and European elections this month.
At first reading, me, as a supposed born again Christian, encouraging my fellow Christians to ‘vote early, vote often’ could be misinterpreted that I am egging on believers to break the electoral law.
   Nothing could be further from the truth! The phrase, ‘vote early, vote often’, is usually attributed to the militant republican concept of voter impersonation.
   But in my case, I want every Christian – especially in Northern Ireland – who is eligible to vote to go to the polling booths as soon as possible on 2nd May and 23rd May for the local government and European elections respectively.
   If there’s one bad habit which we Christians are notorious for, its moaning! However, what is the point of Christians complaining about the actions and decisions of politicians and parties if they are not prepared to engage in the democratic process?
   Unfortunately, there are many Christians who when they become born again believers and supposedly leave their past lives behind, that includes voting or taking part with democratic political movements.
   The time has come for all Christians eligible to vote to go on an electoral rampage and take part in the 2nd and 23rd May elections. In doing so, they will be following the example of Christ Himself.
   Politically speaking, and regretfully, many Christians act passively when it comes to electoral matters. They very much favour the ‘turn the other cheek’ and ‘love your enemies’ pussy-footing image of Jesus Christ.
   For such Christians, being passive over politics emphasises the ‘come ye out from amongst them’ separatist attitude which strangely many on the evangelical and fundamentalist wings of Christianity seem to favour.
   Ironically, this stance seems at odds with the attitude of the fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, founded by former First Minister, Dr Ian Paisley, in 1951 because of the liberal leanings of the mainstream Irish Presbyterian Church.
   When Paisley senior launched the DUP in 1971, there was the clear perception that to climb through the ranks of the party, you needed to be a member of the ‘Free Church’. Indeed, one jibe from the conflict days was that the Free Presbyterian Church was merely the DUP at prayer!
   During the Ulster Says No campaign in the mid 1980s against the then Anglo-Irish Agreement, the Unionist MPs decided to protest by holding a by-election referendum campaign by resigning their Westminster seats.
   One of the Unionist MPs with a wafter-thin majority at that time was the UUP’s Enoch Powell in South Down. To ensure Powell held the seat as part of that campaign, negotiations were held with the Brethren fundamentalist denomination to ensure their members and supporters turned out to vote for the MP.
   Traditionally, many of the Brethren abstain from voting. If that is the way in which the Brethren or other fundamentalist denominations choose to interpret separation from the world, that is their right. But is this stance Biblical?
   What about the actions of Jesus Christ as outlined in Matthew’s Gospel Chapter 21 about the ‘cleansing of the temple’ – surely that is a battle cry for Christians to action?
   Verses 12 and 13 from the King James Version state: “And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of thieves.”
   This clash in the temple is perhaps the most famous of Christ’s ‘righteous anger’ issues when He came into the temple and found it full of moneychangers and animal sellers. He was clearly furious at this sacrilege, but He simply didn’t just get angry and ‘tut-tut’ from the back seats; He acted, flipping over tables and knocking over chairs.
   And Jesus then went further – He stood guard at the door of the temple to make sure no hypocrites came in on non-worshipping business. During His time on earth, Jesus clashed many times with such hypocrites, known as the Scribes and Pharisees.
   As May’s two polling days loom nearer, Christians need to face up to their moral duty and responsibility and ensure they vote.
   As they stand in the privacy of those polling booths, just ask one simple question before marking your ballot papers – which candidates will best stand up for true Biblical values? Then you vote according to your preferences.
   Indeed, like Christ Himself, you also need to take that additional step as He did in the temple. Christians should get physically involved in political parties and campaigns. Sometimes, Christians will moan to me when I urge them about the necessity to vote – but there are no pro-Christian candidates, they say.
   If this is their excuse for not voting, then it strengthens the case for more Christians to get practically involved in political parties. By becoming members of whatever party they chose, they can influence the political process from within by being in a position to select candidates, and even become candidates themselves.
  We Christians are often reminded to take the beam out of our own eyes before we start to take the mote out of the eyes of others.
   So before we begin commenting on any sad state of politics, let us as a Christian community of people simply ask ourselves – what more as Christians could  we do to improve the state of politics in our land? If we start moaning again about the ‘same old, same old’ after the council and European elections, then we only have ourselves to blame.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

 

Christian Churches need to fully embrace the digital revolution and consider the concept of virtual places of worship if they want to see their influence grow, according to religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column today.
Supposed falling numbers in church pews has thrown down a major challenge to Christianity, especially in Ireland, in the third millennium – how do we make worshipping more appealing so that we Christians can actually encourage more people to come to church?
   While statistics for Sunday church attendance for Ireland’s ‘Big Four’ – Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist, and Anglican – denominations would suggest a steady decline in church membership, do these figures take account of growing numbers attending the Pentecostal movement’s churches across the Emerald Isle?
   I’m throwing into the attendance mix, the number of people now worshipping at places such as the Vineyard church, Green Pastures in Ballymena, The Journey church, and the various Elim Pentecostal churches.
   But the key question may be – where should ‘church’ be? After all, if we take the instructions from Jesus Christ Himself as He stated in the New Testament account in Mark’s Gospel Chapter 16 and verse 15: “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.” (King James Version)
   Do we now necessarily need a physical building for this instruction from our Lord to work practically?
   After all, another portion of advice from Christ comes in Matthew’s Gospel Chapter 18 verse 20: “For where two or three are gather together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (KJV)
   Taking these two verses together, is there too much focus on getting people into an actual church building for the act of Christian fellowship to take place?
   Given the technological advances in the digital revolution, has the time now come for Christian denominations to consider the communications tool of ‘the virtual church’?
   This virtual church would be built on the fact that many churches already stream their services live online, have podcasts on their church websites, or record the services on either CD or DVD. Primarily, these outlets are aimed at people who physically cannot make it to a service, perhaps because of illness, care duties, or their occupation.
   It would also be a way of side-stepping the influence of the so-called ‘Tut-tut brigade’ which have polluted our places of worship for generations.
   These are people who are set in their traditions like tablets of stone, and have no intention of shifting their practices. Examples would include churches which insist that women only attend worship if they wear hats, do not have excessive make-up, do not wear trouser suits, and only speak when spoken to.
   Menfolk are also targets of the Tut-tut brigade – men should not wear loud ties with their suits, and must not remove their blazers in church during hot summer Sundays. As for the use of musical instruments, only the piano and organ are permitted – modern guitars, whether electric or acoustic, are banned!
   Many churches are increasingly adopting a more casual dress code at Sunday worship and other church events. For quite a few people, jeans and a sporting top are common, but the Tut-tut brigade love to criticise such people.
   Put bluntly, why would you want to attend a place of worship where a bunch from the Tut-tut brigade are sitting with faces like a bulldog chewing a wasp criticising the dress codes of folk? For a person to be spiritually challenged in church, they first need to feel physically comfortable.
   Maybe for some of the holy covens of fundamentalists which rule some churches with Puritan-style rods, this may work at maintaining a strict discipline, but does it lay the foundations for a new generation of worshippers, especially among today’s modern youth?
   In trying to attract more people to physically attend Sunday worship or the mid-week Bible study and prayer meeting, has the Tut-tut brigade turned people away because of their man-made draconian rules?
   Ironically, we could amend a statement attributed to the late Provisional IRA hunger striker and former Fermanagh and South Tyrone Westminster MP Bobby Sands: “Our revenge will be the laughter of our children.”
   Churches could state: “Our victory will be the laughter of our children.” Practically, the more children churches can attract into their fellowships, then a new generation of worshipper has been created – hence the vital importance of the Sunday schools and Bible classes in the life of churches.
   This leads naturally to the role of the virtual church. The main difference with a virtual church is that the people watching can actively participate in the worship. With live streaming of church events, people can use the comment box to pass remarks.
   The virtual church would work along the same lines as Skype or a virtual classroom where the participants can chat to each other. This form of communication would be ideal for discussion forums as part of a virtual Bible study.
   It could also mean that a cleric or evangelist could set their own virtual church to spread the Gospel. The only ‘down side’ is that a virtual church form of communication could be open to misuse by the more extreme fundamentalist sects, such as a church or evangelist akin to the notorious Westboro Baptist Church in the United States.
   However, on the positive side, the virtual church can be used as a tool to create the ideal of Christian fellowship in nations and regions where Christians face severe persecution.
   For Christians in these regions of the globe, merely being seen at a place of worship could be enough to condemn that person to death or a lesser punishment.
   But through the vehicle of the virtual church, these persecuted Christians can maintain contact via a larger online fellowship, yet keep their safety intact.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s show, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com 

Christian women in Irish Churches need to step forward and help Ireland survive the Brexit debacle, according to religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column.

Embattled British Prime Minister Theresa May and myself have one thing in common – we are both preacher’s kids!
   We, hopefully, share another common view. Just as we fully support the increasing role of women in politics, we want to see Christian women take on more roles and have more influence – and have more equality – in our various Christian denominations.
   Factions in both the Remainers and Brexiteers camps have been quick to blame Prime Minister May for the current Brexit chaos, while just as much of the mess in the House of Commons has been caused by male MPs.
   In Ireland, while two of the major parties in the Brexit debate – the DUP and Sinn Fein – are both led by women, the time has surely come for Christian women in the various Irish denominations to have the courage of their convictions and step forward and try and provide Christian leadership.
   At first glance, this may sound that I’m trying to revamp an Irish Christian version of the now defunct Northern Ireland Women’s Coalition party, which played a major role in both the 1996 Northern Ireland Forum for Political Dialogue, the talks which led to the Good Friday Agreement, and the first Stormont Assembly mandate in 1998.
   What could nudge the Brexit deadlock forward would be a mass mobilisation of Christian women across Ireland in the form of an Irish Christian Women’s Coalition.
    Perhaps to understand the seeming reluctance of Christian women to form such a pressure group, we need to consult Scripture to see how women have had their equality denied by menfolk in the Churches over the generations.
   In a column I penned earlier this year, I reflected on how many women have been viewed as second class citizens:  http://www.thepensivequill.com/2019/02/the-ladies-will-leave-now-and-make-us.html
   Could it be the reluctance of Christian women to now take a leading role in getting the parties to come to some agreement in Ireland over Brexit is because they think they are still being blamed by the Churches for Eve succumbing to the temptation of the devil in the Garden of Eden as outlined in the Old Testament book of Genesis. The Fall of Man is blamed on the woman who encouraged Adam to eat the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge.
   Even in many modern churches, women are still subservient to men, in spite of there being excellent women Sunday school teachers and women missionaries. Indeed, in my own spiritual journey, my first two Sunday school teachers were women.
   I also recall as a young child during my dad’s early years as minister of Clough Presbyterian Church, near Ballymena, in County Antrim, I shared my pew on Sundays with Miss Nancy Alexander, a retired Presbyterian missionary to Africa who would chat to me about her experiences.
   Indeed, it was those conversations with Miss Alexander which prompted me to seriously consider becoming a missionary myself after I became a ‘born again’ Christian believer in January 1972. Ironically, it would be a campaign of bullying from fellow Presbyterians which would condemn that notion to the dustbin of history in my life five years later.
   However, in the modern 21st century Christian Church, many women are still kept in secondary positions. For some menfolk, its okay for women to be Sunday school teachers, missionaries, hold posts in the youth club or Girls’ Brigade movement, but never to serve as women deacons, elders or pastors.
   While this is not true of all Christian denominations, as a general rule, while women may speak at Christian Ladies’ Fellowship meetings, they cannot become pastors of their own churches.
   The men who like to implement this ruling will inevitably base their Biblical doctrine on the New Testament text of 1st Corinthians Chapter 14 and verse 34. Quoting from the King James Version (KJV), it states: “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.”
   This is supported by another New Testament text frequently used by the anti-women lobby in Christian churches: 1st Timothy Chapter 2 and verse 11: “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.” (KJV).
   And from the Old Testament, that lobby will refer to Proverbs Chapter 27 and verse 15: “A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.” (KJV). Indeed, throughout the Bible as a whole, there are some 15 verses of Scripture relating to women needing to be silent.
   The male dominance over the women in the modern Church is further cemented with verses relating to women needing to have their heads covered when at worship in churches, commonly known as the ‘hat brigade faction.’
   For generations, this was how male-dominated churches, halls, and denominations maintained their rule over women. Even today in 2019, some churches would frown on women who attended worship without a hat.
   The so-called ‘hat rule’ is based on the New Testament text of 1st Corinthians Chapter 11 and verses five and six: “But every woman that prayers or prophesied with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head; for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered let her also be shorn; but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.” (KJV)
   In some churches, women will not be admitted into membership of that particular fellowship unless she wears a hat to church. In some denominations, this public welcoming into membership is known as the Right Hand of Fellowship. But when the ‘hat rule’ is applied, it becomes a question of ‘no hat, no handshake!’
   This could also apply, too, to the husband of a wife who chooses not to wear a hat to church. There was once a case where a husband was refused the Right Hand of Fellowship on the grounds that his wife dared to come to church not wearing a hat!
   In some of the more fundamentalist churches, the woman may even have to be put through an intense spiritual interview by male elders to see if she is Biblically suitable to become a member of that specific fellowship.
   Such cultish-like behaviour by hardline fundamentalists concerning the ‘hat rule’ seems to fly in the face of another verse in 1st Corinthians Chapter 11 which many of these fundamentalists choose to conveniently ignore.
   In verse 15, it states: “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given her for a covering.” (KJV)
   For many modern Christian women, their ‘hair-do’ is the Scriptural covering, but equally many of the male fundamentalist hardliners will not accept the Biblical legitimacy of this verse.
   Indeed, male domination over women in the Church has even extended to dress code, with male fundamentalists using Scripture to criticise a woman’s dress sense and even make-up. Such fundamentalists use the 1st Timothy Chapter 2 verse nine as their Biblical banner.
   It states: “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shame fastness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array.” (KJV)
   Some churches could be accused of operating their own fashion police to ensure women do not appear at worship as ‘painted Jezebels’.
   But perhaps the political turmoil over Brexit has produced a window of opportunity for women in the Christian Church, especially in Ireland. In the Seventies, it was women who came together to form the Peace People.
   Surely the time has come for Christian women across this island to grab the Brexit bull by the horns and show leadership; let’s hear three cheers for the Irish Christian Women’s Coalition!
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com    

Religious commentator DR JOHN COULTER poses the controversial view that a new theologically ecumenical liberal Unionist party could be the solution to outwitting the growing Presbyterian influence within the Alliance Party. 

In the 1980s, the Alliance Party was nothing more than a ‘wine and cheese brigade’, just as the Ulster Unionists were branded ‘the fur coat and no knickers brigade’.
   But that is no longer the case under the leadership of Naomi Long, the former East Belfast Westminster MP. For many politicians, losing their seat could mean demotion politically to the wastelands.
   But not in the case of Naomi Long. She has remodelled Alliance from a glorified supper club, to an ideologically clear liberal movement.
   The power base behind this evolution has been a staunch clique of liberal Irish Presbyterians.
   Just as moderate nationalists have ‘invented’ my idea of merging Southern Fianna Fail with the rapidly dwindling SDLP, so too, Naomi’s Presbyterian dominated Alliance has plans to overtake the Ulster Unionist Party as the third biggest party in Northern Ireland behind the DUP and Sinn Fein.
   Ever since high-profile MLAs Basil McCrea and John McCallister quit the heavily under-fire Ulster Unionists at that time, a number of questions have remained unanswered.
   It is not so much a question as to why their liberal Unionist movement, NI21, flopped, but more of ‘could another liberal Unionist party be the solution to halting the Alliance’s dominance of the supposed moderate ground within the broad pro-Union movement in Ireland?
   Equally relevant; can the already heavily fragmented Unionist family sustain yet another Unionist Party? Secondly, will any new future liberal Unionist party actually survive, or will it join another liberal Unionist movement – the Unionist Party of Northern Ireland  (UPNI) – in the dustbin of pro-Union history?
   For the purposes of this article, I will refer to the liberal Protestantism new Unionist movement as the New Party. My conclusions are based on private conversations with various ‘moderate’ politicians.
   I have also known both Macs – McCrea and McAllister – whom I have since they entered the Assembly. I recall conversations which both men had with my late father, Rev Dr Robert Coulter MBE, of North Antrim.
   Ironically, it was a relative of mine who first introduced Basil McCrea to the Unionist politics of the UUP.
   I have never hidden my own desire for the ideal way forward for the pro-Union community. It is for a single Unionist Party to represent the entire Unionist family, with the various factions represented within that party by a series of pressure groups.
   This would operate in the same manner that pressure groups have existed successfully within both the Conservative and Labour parties in Britain.
   Bearing this in mind, it might seem a little strange for an overtly Radical Right-wing Unionist like myself suggesting there was a role for a separate liberal movement, the New Party.
   Firstly, we need to recognize that there has always been a liberal Unionist strain among Northern Protestants. You need only look at the membership of the current Alliance Party to see the number of Protestants in their ranks and elected members.
  Even during the Home Rule crisis of a century ago, there was a strong liberal Unionist hotbed of support in Co Antrim, the supposed heart of the modern Unionist Ulster Bible belt.
   In the eventual creation of a single Unionist Party, the Alliance Party will have to be permanently eradicated from the electoral map. The current UUP is not in a position to accomplish this feat.
   In fact, the unthinkable is actually the bitter medicine of present politics – Alliance is slowly, but surely taking over the centre ground once occupied by the UUP. That is, whatever centre ground once held by the UUP which has not been snatched by the DUP under Paisley senior, Peter Robinson and current DUP boss Arlene Foster.
   The UUP should not underestimate the threat posed by Alliance. Ulster Unionists should equally never dismiss the determination of Protestants associated with Alliance to maintain the Alliance position.
   I went to school at Ballymena Academy and served in the Boys’ Brigade with John Alderdice, now Lord Alderdice, a former Alliance boss. During my time as a weekly newspaper editor in Carrickfergus, I reported regularly on the political activities of Stewart Dickson, now an East Antrim Alliance MLA.
   I was left in no doubt about one clear conclusion – the determination of Protestants like John and Stewart to make liberal politics and their party work for the benefit of the electorate.
   So the threat posed by the Alliance Party to whatever is left of the UUP will not be combated by sending the election-battered UUP into battle again against Alliance. A new Unionist champion is needed to wipe the polling floor with Alliance – now step forward the New Party.
   Both McCallister and McCrea would have the personality, experience and profile to build a pluralist liberal movement which can fulfill this important primary goal of wrecking Alliance once and for all.
   But both men have left the political stage, so who within liberal Unionism could lead such a visionary movement?
   Like all parties, Alliance has had its good and bad times. One of the lowest points in its history – in fact, its last low point – came in the 1999 European poll when it ran its new leader, Sean Neeson from East Antrim, and scored only 2.1%
   Since then, Alliance has never looked back. It once boasted two Stormont Ministries, its first Westminster MP and opinion polls predicting it will eclipse the UUP in any future Assembly election.
   If the party can survive the Union flag dispute, Alliance could be around as a major third force in Northern politics for generations to come.
   Many Alliance elected representatives get and hold their seats because of transfers from Unionist voters.
   The key question Alliance must address is – in a future election, will the anti-Alliance sentiment so apparent after the fateful Belfast City Hall flag decision a few years ago manifest itself in a polling booth boycott of Alliance on 2nd May’s council elections?
   If Unionists continue to transfer to Alliance tactically to keep nationalists and republicans out, then the Union flag controversy has eased; if Alliance struggles, it will be a clear indication that a Unionist boycott has been developed.
   So enter the New Party stage left! Just as Jim Allister’s Traditional Unionist Voice party dented the DUP, the New Party can severely dent Alliance.
   The New Party will not last, but it could last long enough to fatally injure the Alliance Party and see it either permanently removed from the Northern Ireland electoral stage, or reduced to fringe status, like the Progressive Unionist Party or Irish Republican Socialist Party.
   Such a tactic has worked before in Unionism in the late 1980s and early 1990s when the first Tory Party experiment came to Northern Ireland under the then guidance of North Down’s Dr Laurence Kennedy.
   He was the brain child behind the development and recognition of a series of constituency associations across Northern Ireland.
   In the run-up to the 1992 Westminster General Election, there was the real possibility that the intervention of Tory candidates could take enough votes off the UUP to see previously safe Ulster Unionist seats swing to the DUP.
   To avoid the potential loss of Commons seat in 1992, a number of UUP activists infiltrated their local Tory associations with the simple purpose of influencing the outcome of the Westminster candidate selection process.
   An example of this infiltration process was in East Antrim, where sitting UUP MP Roy Beggs senior was facing a strong challenge from DUP runner Nigel Dodds (now the North Belfast MP and the party’s king player Westminster leader).
   The East Antrim Conservative Association was then viewed as one of the most Right-wing of the new Tory associations. It was abundantly clear if a Right-wing Tory candidate split the traditional UUP vote, either Dodds or Alliance’s Sean Neeson could snatch the seat as Beggs senior had originally done in 1983 when the Commons seat was created.
   In 1983, Beggs senior had defeated the DUP’s Jim Allister (now TUV leader and North Antrim MLA) by only 367 votes, making it one of the most marginal seats in the entire UK.
   A UUP member in East Antrim managed to get on the Tory selection panel for the 1992 election and pushed the association to select a more liberal Conservative candidate rather than an overt Right-winger. The aim was to pitch the Tory Party in a head-to-head with Alliance for the centre vote.
   The end result was that the Tory candidate polled almost 3,500 votes. Dodds pipped Neeson by around 400 votes, but more significantly Beggs senior held the seat with a majority of almost 7,500. Ironically, the East Antrim seat was lost some years later to the DUP’s Sammy Wilson.
   If the DUP and UUP leaderships want to put Alliance in its box, the tactic is not to attack it directly with statements in the media. The best way to upset the Alliance apple cart is to pitch a new liberal alternative to that section of the electorate, hence the important of the New Party in this exercise.
    The real aim of the New Party should be to ensure that Alliance does not become the real third or fourth force in Ulster politics behind the DUP and Sinn Fein. Those two parties look like holding their positions within their respective communities for the next few years.
   This could leave a three-way battle for third place in the Stormont Executive between what is left of the UUP, the SDLP and Alliance. Set aside how a Unionist Unity ticket could guarantee the UUP’s survival in the short term. The New Party, ironically, could spell its long term existence.
   Rather than the UUP going back into the polling front line against Alliance, the pro-Union community should encourage the New Party to take up the electoral cudgels of giving Alliance a massive battering at the polls.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Christian Churches need to reintroduce the traditional Sunday afternoon Sunday school if they are to have a relevant future in society, according to religious commentator, Dr John Coulter.
With political turmoil the order of the day, maybe the Christian Churches can bring some level-headed calmness into the Brexit equation by restoring the Bible to its proper place in society.
   The latest sexual abuse scandal has rocked the Vatican to its very core. Those events may have unfolded thousands of miles away in Australia and Rome, but the impact in Ireland will be to further undermine the Catholic Church’s influence – and ultimately the entire Christian faith’s role – in an increasingly anti-Christian society.
   On paper, Ireland is still a majority Christian island, but the massive challenge which the Churches – of whatever denomination – have to radically address is how to make ‘being a Christian’ meaningful and relevant.
   It is not a case – yet – that Ireland has been converted into a militantly secular unchristian island whereby to publicly admit to being a Christian is tantamount to suggesting there is something sexually deviant about you.
   The census findings still show the island to be Christian – but Christians have become the silent majority. However, if the Churches do not sit up and take note, a time may come where Christians face as much persecution on the island of St Patrick as they would if they openly preached the Gospel on the roads and streets of North Korea.
   As a teenager in the Seventies, I would hear horrific tales of physical persecution of Christians in communist China and Soviet Russia. Even in Africa, there was the terrible episode of the rape and murder of Elim missionaries at the Vumba in what was Rhodesia.
   Whatever happened to morning assemblies in schools? Have we become such a ‘snowflake society’ that some sections are even offended at the mention of the very word ‘Christian’? How long will it be before Christians are being hounded for wearing symbols of their faith at work, at social events, and even in the street?
   In days gone by, the bedside table Bible was common place in many hotel rooms and bed and breakfast establishments. But how many owners have decided to discreetly remove the Bible for fear of offending customers? But maybe its a case that the Silent Majority of Christians have made a rod for their own backs.
   Look at how Christian clergy are portrayed in drama. As a youth (and still is!) my favourite television sitcom is Dad’s Army, which has the camp vicar who is always moaning. In the late Sixties and early Seventies, the Church of England was the subject of ridicule in the ‘All Gas and Gaiters’ TV sitcom.
   The Catholic Church was constantly jibed at by the late comedian Dave Allen, and this ridiculing reached a peak with the ‘Father Ted’ series. Women clerics got a lambasting, too, in ‘The Vicar of Dibley’; then there was the smoking and drinking cleric in ‘Rev’, not to mention the portrayal of the gay vicar in the soap ‘Coronation Street’.
   While many would dismiss these portrayals as harmless fun, the underlying trend is that the Christian faith is fair game for comedians and satirists.
   But I wonder would the script writers be so keen to write a sitcom which poked fun at radical Islam? Why is the Christian faith seemingly always the butt of jokes?
   Could it also be that we Christians are suffering the consequences of the old maxim – there’s too much religion in Ireland and not enough Christianity!
   Those critical of Christianity or campaigning for ideals which run contrary to Biblical teaching have got their acts together and are really vocal. Look at how successful the campaigns to recognise same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion laws have been in the Republic.
   Many of these activists have now set themselves the agenda – the North is next. If same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion legislation does become law in Northern Ireland, it will not be because the Province has become more secular, it will be because the majority Christian community have remained silent.
   The bitter reality is that too many of us Christians are too afraid to stick our heads above the social parapet for fear of being branded racists, bigots, extremists, homophobes, islamaphobes and all the other ‘phobes’ you can imagine.
   True, the Christian faith faces a lot more competition for activities – even on Sundays – than it did 40 years ago. In the Seventies, the independent Sunday afternoon Sunday schools were the order of the day.
   Sundays were reserved for the worship of God – no TV, no secular music, no reading of print comics such as the Beano, Dandy or Victor; the only book to be read was the Bible.
   Spool the clock forward four decades and ask the question – how many homes have a time of daily devotion with the families? Indeed, how many of us Christians have a daily time of devotion with our families? Bible study and prayer time revolves around the TV soap schedules or the sports channels.
   Has my own attendance at the mid week Bible study and prayer meetings on Wednesdays increased because my beloved Gunners are not in the Champions League, but play in the Europa League which is screened on Thursdays? That’s a key personal question I’ve had to ask myself as a Christian!
   In the coming months and years, we Christians will have to box very clever if we are to restore Biblical values and principles into Northern Ireland society.
   This situation will become even more challenging if Stormont collapses totally and Direct Rule from Westminster is restored – especially if there is a General Election and Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour forms the next Government.
  Ironically, parents in England can have the luxury of sending their children to faith schools, especially those run by the Church of England. In Northern Ireland, if Christian parents requested that their children be excused from lessons which pushed evolution instead of Creationism, they would be privately – maybe even publicly – branded as fanatics.
   I still recall the “Gud Auld Dayes” in the mid Sixties when I was a primary school pupil at Clough in Co Antrim when a local Presbyterian minister, the late Rev Robert Dalglish of Newtowncrumlin, would come into the school and take us for a religious education exam.
   Sunday school prizes in the Sixties and early Seventies for reciting the Catechism or Biblical verses were seen as major awards, and winning a Ballymena and District Boys’ Brigade Battalion Scripture Award was seen as a huge triumph.
   Perhaps a start could be the Churches indulging in better marketing of their Sunday schools. It would also be beneficial if more Christian parents got actively involved in school parent-teacher associations so that they have a direct influence on getting Biblical lessons included as part of the curriculum.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.20 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
Christian unity – now there’s a thorny theological topic which sparks more feuds among Christians than heals wounds, yet it is an absolute necessity the Churches reach a solution as Brexit ticks closer, according to religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column.  
Mention the words ‘Christian’ and ‘unity’ together in a single sentence, let alone a Gospel sermon, and on many occasions, you would have thought I had burned down your nearest place of worship.
   To push the case for Christian unity is viewed in some religious circles as being just as ungodly as saying that Lucifer should be given a second chance following his initial rebellion in heaven which saw him thrown out.
   Perhaps one of the problems which Christians have faced in Ireland is that over the centuries, we have endured too much religion and not enough true Biblical Christianity.
   We are witnessing votes on same-sex marriage and abortion laws that would have been unimaginable a generation ago. The original Suffragette movement campaigners of a century ago would have been proud to see that in some Christian denominations, we even have women ministers.
   However, the Christian faith in Ireland is now facing challenges it would not have even dreamed about a decade ago. Like it or not, Irish Christendom will have to address the issue of unity in the coming months – especially with the economic challenges of Brexit breathing down our necks.
   But what form should this unity take? Are we talking about simply working together, merged denominations, shared places of worship, theological agreements, joint worship? What would be common sense unity to some Christians, is downright heresy to others.
   So let’s consult Scripture as a basis. We have some sterling Biblical advice in the New Testament in the first epistle of Paul the apostle to the Corinthians, especially Chapter 12 and verses 12 and 13.
   Its a section in Scripture usually entitled by some theologians as dealing with unity and diversity in one body.
   The verses state: “For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one spirit we were all baptised into one body – whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free – and have all been made to drink into one spirit.”
   What Paul is talking about here is the concept of a unified church. But mention that in 2019, and it will immediately spark the, at times, vicious debate – which is the one true church? Have we become selfish Christians in this new millennium taking the solid stance that our specific denomination, and even our specific place of worship within that denomination is ‘the chosen church of Christ on this earth’?
   The reality of the situation is that Irish Christianity has undermined its own position and relevance in society because the denominations have worked in competition with each other so that we have missed the rewards of co-operation.
   Would there be so much poverty in Ireland with so many individuals and families living on the financial breadline if the churches had all worked together? Many evangelicals and fundamentalists, especially from the Protestant tradition will view that previous sentence as reeking of the ecumenical movement.
   In theory, the ecumenical movement was a solid Biblical idea, but in practice it became a disaster as it was based, not on effective co-operation between places of worship for the benefit of people, but on denominations trying to find theological compromise in beliefs.
   In attempting to find a common ground on which to work together, core principles of belief would be diluted so as not to offend the other denominational partner.
   Catholics believe that Rome represents the one and only true church of Christ on earth. But the ecumenical movement saw Catholics working closely with Protestant denominations which were based on the Reformed Faith as originated by Martin Luther.
   Does any section of Catholic opinion still believe the Reformation sparked by Luther’s thinking represents one of the greatest heresies which Christianity has faced?
   When Protestant denominations enter an ecumenical relationship with Catholicism, does this mean a dilution of the Salvationist principle enshrined in the New Testament of St John 3 and verse 16? Do such ecumenical partnership lend theological weight to the view that a person can book their place in heaven purely by good works, ignoring the doctrine of Salvation?
   In this increasingly ‘snowflake society’, has it become inappropriate to talk about core Biblical topics, such as hell, judgement day, eternal damnation and the lake of fire for fear of offending people and being branded a bigot?
   It would be somewhat ironic if the Christian Churches radically shied away from warning about the dangers of hell, and left it to the heavy metal bands, such as Black Sabbath and AC/DC, to talk about the place known as hell.
   Even evangelicals and born again Christians who tried to share their faith with people seen to be ‘unsaved’ were at times condemned for doing so. My late father was at one time co-chairman of the Evangelical Prayer Breakfast Movement.
   This is where born again believers, like my dad, would have met with people over breakfast and shared their testimonies with other people of how they became born again Christians.
   But because ‘unsaved’ Catholics and Protestants were present at these events, it brought the wrath of fundamentalist protestors and the hotels hosting the Movement’s breakfasts had to endure the fundamentalist pickets outside.
   Reality will have to be faced. There will never be theological unity between the various Christian denominations because it is in human nature to argue. Even Protestants cannot reach a workable consensus on whether women who don’t wear hats to worship can be admitted into membership of churches.
   The only workable solution to Christian unity is a practical one by addressing how the denominations can co-operate to tackle the issues and challenges which face the community.
   Surely an agreed plan can be reached as to how Christians of any denominations can work together to help the homeless, those living in poverty, those dealing with addictions, with mental health challenges, those feeling suicidal, those facing terminal or long-term illnesses?
   Your Christian beliefs will not be compromised in any way if you help a homeless person find a meal and bed for the night.
   If the Christian Churches in Ireland focus on a practical-based unity, rather than arguing over a belief-based system, then the true meaning of 1st Corinthians Chapter 12 verses 12 and 13 can be achieved.
   This will herald a new era of Biblical ecumenism in Ireland, a practical ecumenism which liberals, evangelicals and fundamentalists can even sign up to. When Christ was on earth, He did not ask the people He helped which theological faith they adhered to.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

Can Irish Republicanism be Biblically Christian? That’s the challenging question which religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, poses in his latest Ballymena Accent column.

A few years ago, I attempted to write a new ideology for Irish Republicanism which was influenced by Biblically Christian values rather than James Connolly’s communism. It took the form of an ebook entitled ‘An Saise Glas (The Green Sash).

   With the countdown to Brexit now well under way, there will certainly be a political realignment in Irish politics on both sides of the border. Republicanism may have to redefine its aspirations and objectives for the sake of the people of Ireland.

   As well as a political debate, there will also be a religious debate as the Christian Churches – many of whom are organized denominationally on an all-island basis – come to terms with the impact of Brexit.

    To spark this religious debate, I am reproducing Chapter Two from the ebook, which is entitled: Putting Christ Back Into Republicanism.

Former Blanket columnist and Unionist commentator DR JOHN COULTER gives us chapter two from his e-book, An Saise Glas (The Green Sash) The Road to National Republicanism. This chapter is entitled ‘Putting Christ Back Into Republicanism’.

National Republicanism needs to spark a revival of the concept of Holy Mother Ireland instead of becoming swamped in a secular sea of atheism, agnosticism, pluralism, humanism and especially Marxism.

   Old-style republicanism has always enjoyed some sort of partnership with the Irish Catholic Church. This Church/State bond was at its most influential when Eamon de Valera was President of Ireland.

   However, while the republicanism which led to the Treaty in the 1920s, and the republicans who ran the old Irish Free State, even the republicans who secured full status for the 26 Counties as a full-blown republic developed the concept of Holy Mother Ireland, the republican movements which emerged after the defeat of the IRA in the 1956-62 Border campaign seemed to want to permanently scrap the ethos of Church and State.

   During the conflict known as the Troubles, the Official republican movement of the Official IRA and Workers’ Party, and the various factions of the republican socialist movement (such as the IRSP and INLA) had an exceptionally fractious relationship with the Irish Catholic Church and leadership.

   The republican movements which evolved in the late Sixties onwards developed at a time when Left-wing revolutionary politics was becoming a world phenomenon.

   The modern republican movements wanted to see themselves as part of a global revolutionary organization, rather than a sectarian anti-Protestant movement on a tiny island on the fringe of the European continent.

   The root cause of how republicanism has got itself bogged down with the secular movement goes back to the failed Easter Rising of 1916. In the immediate aftermath, Britain had the high ground. The Irish Volunteers had been defeated, and even spat upon by some Dublin Catholics as they were marched into captivity.

   If Britain had boxed clever in 1916, it would have given the leaders a jail term and told them to grow up politically. Instead, it allowed General ‘Bloody’ Maxwell to take charge of ‘mopping up’ the aftermath of the failed Rising.

   It was Maxwell who insisted that the Rising leaders be executed. At that time, because Britain was bogged down in the an equally bloody trench campaign of the Great War, the British political leadership agreed to Maxwell’s assertion that the Rising leaders should be executed by firing squad.

   By giving the leaders a soldier’s death, he immediately and substantially raised their status from troublesome rebels to international anti-colonial martyrs. James Connolly’s death was particularly gruesome. Although wounded in the Rising, he was strapped into a chair for his execution as he was unable to stand.

   Until those British bullets dispatched him into eternity, Connolly was not a republican hero, but a largely insignificant Scottish communist dabbling in Irish politics. Connolly was first and foremost a Marxist, not a Catholic nationalist.

   But his execution elevated his writings, beliefs and actions to a new level in Irish nationalism. Connolly’s communism became a significant factor in the rapidly emerging Irish Republican Army which fought the War of Independence a few years after the doomed Rising.

   The fallout from the Treaty meant that the Irish Catholic hierarchy largely supported the Free State forces rather than the anti-Treaty IRA. The images as portrayed in the hit 2006 film, The Wind That Shakes The Barley, of the priest hearing IRA confessions and blessing the terrorists before they left to attack the British in the War of Independence, had long since faded into mythology and folklore.

   It should not be forgotten that more IRA prisoners were executed by the Free State forces during the Irish Civil War than killed by the Black and Tans during the War of Independence. When republican goes to war against republican, the ensuing bloodshed can be even more sadistic than republican terror campaigns against the British state.

   The Free State victors and subsequent Dails for generations to come guaranteed the Irish Catholic hierarchy a central role in the political life of the 26 Counties.

   Clerical sex abuse, whether by individuals or by institutions, went unchecked and unpunished. On this point, how much did the modern day Provisional republican movement know about the activities of paedophile priests? The Provisionals were very quick to expose – and punish – people it deemed to be ‘guilty’ of informing, or anti-social behavior.

   But is there any known record of the Provisionals ‘knee-capping’ a Catholic priest or nun suspected of known sexual abuse against children? Surely the Provisionals must have known about allegations of clerical abuse in their republican heartlands? If they did, why did the Provisionals remain silent over these generations?

   Connolly’s atheistic Marxism within republicanism became a viable alternative to the sexual crimes of Irish Catholicism’s institutionalized religion. For many Catholics in Ireland, the Catholic Church came to symbolize Christianity.

   Connolly’s atheistic Marxism became a vehicle to challenge the previously unquestionable power of the Catholic priests. This naturally led to friction between republicans loyal to the Connolly tradition and the Catholic hierarchy, especially during the Eamon de Valera years. It was he who maximized the concept of Church and State.

   It has become a matter of some debate that Connolly recanted from his atheistic Marxism in the hours before his brutal execution.

   The main ethos of my National Republicanism is to re-introduce true Biblical Christianity, especially the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself, back into republican ideology.

   A major stereotype which National Republicanism will seek to eradicate is the false perception that Biblical Christianity is the institutionalized litany of the Catholic Church and bishops under another name.

   Biblical Christianity is not the priests trying to shake off the stigma of the clerical abuse scandals. Biblical Christianity is precisely what its title states – the true Christian beliefs as stated by Jesus in the Bible.

   National Republicanism will dismantle the structures of the Irish Catholic Church in Ireland and establish a Biblically-based Christian Church which is free of Vatican control. This new Church will be based on Biblical principles.

   A perfect example of this type of new Church sweeping the 26 Counties is the Pentecostal denomination, which was founded in Co Monaghan in the early 1900s. In spite of a fall in attendances at mainstream Christian denominations throughout Ireland north and south, the Pentecostal movement is bucking the trend and is increasing in numbers, especially in the Dublin area.

   This is not a case of Catholics converting to Protestantism, but a case of Catholics – disillusioned with their Church and the sexual abuse scandals – looking to a new expression of their Christian faith.

   National Republicanism will revise the concept of Church and State in Ireland – north and south. Instead of the bond of Church and State, National Republicanism seeks a rebirth of the concept of Holy Mother Ireland through the strategy of Christ and State. National Republicanism wants to see a revival of Biblical Christianity – which our patron Saint, Patrick, introduced to the Emerald Isle – as our national personal faith.

   I emphasise the term ‘personal faith in Christ’ as opposed to ‘institutionalized religion’, which the Catholic Church represented.

   The modern republican movement, especially those who see themselves as republican socialists, want to see the development and expansion of a pluralist and secular society in Ireland under the supposed banner of a democratic socialist 32-county republic.

   In reality, many modern republicans despise the Catholic Church hierarchy, seeing many clerics and nuns as the modern-day equivalents of the Biblical Pharisees.

   National Republicanism seeks to restore republican confidence in the Biblical Christian faith. Ironically, the same crisis is facing modern loyalism. One of its most famous slogans is ‘For God And Ulster.’

   Yet many loyalists were influenced in prison by the writing and words of the late Gusty Spence and David Ervine, who followed a progressive socialist path. Many loyalist prisoners found themselves in jail because they followed the ‘blood and thunder’ sermons of Protestant fundamentalism, a fundamentalism which largely deserted them once those loyalists found themselves on the wrong side of the law.

   Just as loyalism abandoned the Christian God in ‘For God And Ulster’ so too, many republicans turned their back on the Catholic concept of Holy Mother Ireland.

   Modern loyalism and republicanism are – ironically – both trying to cut religion out of their respective ideologies. Both seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet that Marxism and extreme socialism hold the keys to the future development of the respective communities.

   This is a huge error of judgment, especially for republicanism. Having read Karl Marx’s ‘Das Capital’ from start to finish, I can only conclude there is a startling similarity between the type of ideal society which Marx is trying to create, and the Biblical Christian society which Jesus wished to create.

   National Republicanism is seeking a return of Biblical Christianity as a central core of republican thinking by getting republicans to focus on the New Testament account of the Sermon on the Mount by Jesus Christ as told in St Matthew’s Gospel Chapter Five.

   In this aspect, Christ outlines a series of attributes, commonly known as The Beatitudes. There is a school of ideological thinking – to which I personally belong – which maintains that Marx based ‘Das Capital’ on The Beatitudes and his overt criticism of religion was merely a tactic ploy to disguise the fact that he had pinched his ideas from the Bible, and the words of Jesus Himself.

   In reality, Jesus Christ was the first real communist – not Karl Marx. National Republicanism’s Christ and State ideology is, therefore, based on St Matthew’s Gospel chapter 5, verses 1 to 12. Many of the Beatitudes begin (using the Authorized King James translation) “Blessed are …”

   However, when the words of Jesus are taken in a modern context, they make the basis for a realistic political agenda for National Republicanism. Here are the key points which the Beatitudes highlight:

  The poor in spirit (verse 3) – the need to restore national pride in society;

  Those who mourn (verse 4) – the need to remember and help the victims of the conflict in Ireland;

   The meek (verse 5) – the need to help the working class, and for the rich to invest their wealth in helping those less well off in society;

   They which do hunger (verse 6) – the need to combat growing poverty in society, and also provide a sound educational and health system for all;

   The merciful (verse 7) – the need for a fair and accountable justice system;

   Pure in heart (verse 8) – the need to restore the moral fabric of society, to encourage family values and implement the concept of society’s conscience;

   Peacemakers (verse 9) – the need for compromise and respect of people’s views based on the concept of accommodation, not capitulation;

   Persecuted (verse 10) – the need for National Republicans to have the courage to stand up for their beliefs;

   When men shall revile you (verse 11) – the need for a free press with responsible regulation.

   National Republicanism is about the creation of the concept of Christian citizenship. Under this concept, compulsory voting – as exists in the Commonwealth nation of Australia – would be introduced to Ireland.

   A key emphasis of National Republicanism is Christian pride in the nation under the banner of ‘Ireland for the Irish’. National Republicanism wants to combat the so-called ‘Brain Drain’ where Ireland’s young people feel the need to leave the nation and not return.

   National Republicanism would not only seek to keep this generation on the island, but to encourage those who have emigrated to return with their skills to the island.

   In this respect, all Irish citizens would complete a two-year compulsory National Service in the nation’s armed forces, during which time they would also learn a vocational trade.

   The Christian Churches would have a role in encouraging people of all ages to develop a community service role.

   In conclusion, it must again be emphasized that National Republicanism is not seeking to re-establish the rule of the Catholic bishops. Readers of National Republicanism must not confuse having a personal faith with Jesus Christ with those who want to implement a draconian form of institutionalized, ritualistic worship. There is no role for a pope in National Republicanism.

   In chapter three of An Saise Glas, I examine how National Republicanism will define its relations with Ireland’s Unionists, Protestants, loyalists and Loyal Orders.

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter

You can hear Dr Coulter discuss and debate the latest hot topics on religion on Saturdays mornings around 9.15 am on Belfast’s Sunshine 1049 FM radio on the Call Coulter slot. Or listen online at   www.thisissunshine.com

With elections in both the Southern Dail and Northern councils this year as well as the clock ticking down to Brexit in a matter of weeks, the Christian Churches – of whatever denomination – need to get their act in gear and use their pulpits to persuade their flocks to leave the pews enter the polling booths if a totally secular Ireland is not to become a reality. Religious commentator and journalist, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to explain why time is not on the Christian Churches’ side.

The Christian Church in Ireland, north and south, is facing a theological relevance problem as it loses society’s support on core Biblical issues, such as abortion, homosexuality, divorce, assisted suicide and relations with Islam.
   If the Churches cannot hold back the secular, pluralist, agnostic, atheist tide sweeping the island – or maybe it’s just apathy in religion – by getting pro-Christian candidates elected in various parties, then perhaps the Church should grab the demon by the horns and form its own movement.
   After all, forming an independent group seems to be the ‘in thing’ politically at Westminster as the debate over a deal/no deal Brexit rages on – and still 29 March looms ever closer.
   If the political parties on this island have no workable and viable contingency plans for a post Brexit Ireland, then this island urgently needs the formation of an Irish Christian Party to combat the potentially fatal crisis which has befallen many churches.
   Yes, I did say ‘churches’ as Brexit could have a major impact on many places of worship if Brexit turns into an austerity nightmare. Churches could find themselves in the front line against poverty; indeed, churches themselves may have to close as buildings because the flocks cannot pay financially to run them.
   Maybe the time is nigh for Christians of all denominations to set aside their theological differences, launch the ICP as an interest group and get candidates elected to the Dail (whenever that election takes place!) and to the 11 local councils in Northern Ireland in May.
   ICP activists must show the same zeal to succeed in getting elected as their forefathers in the Spanish Inquisition and the Puritan Witchfinders.
   The ICP is not a movement for pussy-footing whimps, who seem to dominate many churches in modern Ireland.
   The depth of the crisis facing Irish Christianity cannot be swept behind the pulpit.
   If the slide continues, within a generation there will be more people in Ireland who are non-Christians or non-worshippers than currently exist in the pews.
   Practically, when – not if – this becomes a religious reality, Catholic chapels will close and the smaller Protestant denominations will cease to exist.
   The clerical abuse scandals within Catholicism have created the false stereotype that only predator homosexuals and child molesters want to become priests or join Holy Orders.
   At one time, Ireland was one of the Vatican’s beacons of Catholicism in Western Europe. Families saw it as a badge of honour when they proudly declared a son was entering the priesthood or a daughter becoming a nun.
   Has it become a case that folk who feel called to religious orders prefer to conduct their vocation overseas away from Irish eyes for fear of being falsely branded a pervert?
   Many Protestant churches find themselves in an equally precarious position.
   There are more than two dozen different denominations all claiming to be the one, true Protestant faith!
   The Irish Catholic Bishops got a right kick in the theological teeth when the Republic voted both in favour of same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion laws.
   The island’s largest Protestant denomination, the Church of Ireland, is at war with itself over same-sex marriage.
   The gay debate has already split Presbyterianism as liberals and evangelicals lock horns, with some clerics supporting same-sex marriage; others vehemently opposing it.
   Some clerics in many churches need to get a large dose of sensible courage when it comes to dealing with the problems of young people, as they are more interested in their image in the community than helping folk.
   Among the fundamentalist churches, they are more interested in fighting over types of worship, women’s hats, men’s ties, what translation of the Bible to read, going to the cinema, heavy metal, and when, where and how to have sex!
   Christians of whatever faith need to face the bitter reality that to survive as an influential community in Ireland, they must unite and organise politically. The IPC must copy the tactics and zeal of their opponents.
   In less than a generation, the gay community has gone from having homosexual acts branded as a crime to being the most vocal and powerful lobby on the island.
   The IPC must adopt this strategy. It must dispel the myth that it is a bunch of fringe religious nutcases to becoming the majority voice of order, reason and control in parliament and council chambers.
   The IPC must instil in its membership the same discipline for Christian devotion as Islam has created among moderate muslims.
   Just as thousands now flock to gay pride events across Ireland, the IPC must sell its message through a series of massive Christian Pride Festivals.
   The IPC must rekindle the spirit of the famous 1859 religious Revival which swept across Ireland.
   Forget denominational rituals and traditions. When Catholic and Protestants get together under the banner of the Irish Christian Party, they will find there are more issues which unite them than divide them.
   The island’s largest Christian denomination – Catholicism – faces the biggest challenge if its voice is to be heard in the corridors of Dublin’s Leinster House, Belfast’s Parliament Buildings – amen maybe even in the council chambers across the North.
   The Catholic Church in Ireland needs to be reborn spiritually – otherwise it will become a meaningless fringe cult in less than a decade.
   The abuse scandals, coupled with a secular society, have rocked confidence in the Church leadership, with Mass attendances collapsing nationwide.
   Ireland was once the great bastion of the Church-State relationship, especially in the Eamon de Valera era.
   But now Irish Catholics need a new set of beliefs, which will see the pews overflowing as they did in the Swinging Sixties.
   The Vatican is even holding an emergency conference in Rome as it how it tackles the fallout from the world-wide clerical abuse scandals. Rome is a Church in retreat, and there is the danger it could become a religious rout.
   That represents the depth of the rot. And the calls to quit for any Catholic clergy suspected of being allegedly involved in sexual abuse or allegedly covering up sexual abuse will not go away.
   But there is light at the end of this very dark tunnel for Irish Catholics. The question is, do they have the faith and conviction to follow that path?
   A new faith – Pentecostal Catholicism – is slowly, but surely sweeping across the island. If Irish Catholics take this spiritual route, their faith will blossom as never before.
   This should not be misinterpreted as Catholics converting to Protestantism. But it does mean Irish Catholicism institutionally cutting its Vatican ties.
   Even in the Protestant community, the mainstream and many fringe churches are faced with falling attendances. And Pentecostal Protestantism is on the rise, too.
   The power of the Pentecostal movement is that it does not distinguish between Catholics and Protestants. All are what is classified by faith as ‘born again believers’.
   In worship terms, a Pentecostal Catholic can feel just as comfortable at a gathering of Pentecostal Protestants.
   The perfect example of this growing Pentecostal Catholic movement can be found in West Belfast.
   It’s in the Falls Community Fellowship church, based near the Royal Victoria Hospital.
   Another benefit of the new Pentecostal Catholic movement has for any Catholic male wanting to become a pastor – celibacy is optional.
   The general Irish Pentecostal movement began in Monaghan in 1915 at the height of the Great War, but such was the Vatican’s grip on Catholicism in Ireland that bishops have always been able to cleverly dismiss Pentecostalism as Protestantism under another name.
   The modern-day Pentecostal Catholic movement is taking the Biblical Old Testament text of Ezekiel chapter 36, verse 26 as its inspiration: “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.”
   The Irish Catholic leadership, as well as dumping Vatican rule and going independent, should also follow the words of Jesus when He told people to sell their riches and give to the poor.
   With austerity cuts biting deep across Ireland, the Church has vast riches in its chapels, monasteries, convents and cathedrals.
   Poverty will be the social scourge of the next decade and the Irish Catholic Church must sell, sell, sell to help the poor and needy. It should immediately cut its funding to the Vatican.
   But money will not buy salvation for the Catholic Church as an institution. It must turn to Pentecostalism as a faith, otherwise Catholicism in Ireland as a religious influence will be dead in a decade, too.
   Likewise, if the Catholic and Protestant Churches can become politically relevant, the Christian faith will flourish, but do clerics have the courage of their convictions to save the faith or are they quite content to become religious ostriches and bury their heads in the social sands and pretend the rot is not happening?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com
The prayer house is the power house, so Christian Churches need to get down on their knees if they are to rise up tall spiritually, according to religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column. 
Mention the need for prayer time in churches, and many people will roll their eyes and say its the most boring part of worship. But our modern churches need to get into their heads that time spent in prayer is perhaps the most useful and beneficial of any activity in the Christian life.
   The New Testament text of Ephesians Chapter 6 verse 18 emphasises the power of prayer in terms of the Christian’s spiritual armour: “Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints.”
   In the Seventies, Prayer Unions were the order of the day across Northern Ireland, where Christian would meet on average once a week to prayer earnestly for various issues. In the modern digital era with all its attractions, the Prayer Unions have all but vanished.
   However, many clerics will point to how prayer is integrated into both worship and Bible study. A number of churches will have nights of prayer. During the Irish Troubles, communities would organise Days of Prayer for peace.
   Christ Himself emphasised the power of prayer when at His cruxifixction, He urged: “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.”
   Clerics often use the analogy that during the Great War when the troops were sailing to the battlefields of Europe, there was much cursing and misuse of God’s Name during the voyage. But when the reality of trench life sunk in, those same troops for praying to God for protection as they prepared to go ‘over the top’ – or to put it bluntly, there were no atheists in the trenches before the attack whistle signal was blown.
   Prayer can be of great comfort in times of sickness and death. It should not be dismissed as simply some kind of psychological comfort blanket when the stresses and strains of life hit us.
   Prayer can also be a time of praise and thanks to God for things in life that have gone well. With so much uncertainly concerning Brexit, the Churches have been handed a gift horse on a plate in terms of re-instating prayer into people’s lives.
   The verse I quoted earlier comes from that section of the Bible which urges us to don the whole armour of God; but prayer is the cement which makes our whole armour fit together. Each piece of armour in the spiritual battle must carefully be put on with prayer, drawing up God’s divine resources.
   This type of prayer should be Holy Spirit-energised, Holy Spirit-enabled, and Holy Spirit-directed. Put directly, praying in the Spirit is an admission of a Christian believer’s ignorance and dependance of God.
   So many churches have either being distracted by converting their churches into wannabe social clubs whereby the bowling club and Saturday car boot sale become more important than evangelism and prayer meetings.
   Do not underestimate the power of prayer as we politically tumble towards 29 March and the UK leaving the EU. I wonder if everyone who has a basic faith made it their desire to say a daily wee prayer to God for a sensible outcome to Brexit between today and 29 March, would God listen?
   To show the way in this plea, I wish all the churches in Ireland would open their doors for a few hours each week to allow people to pray for a workable solution either as individuals or as teams of people. When a people genuinely pray, great things happen.
   Hopefully, some people in the various Church leadership will heed my appeal and start organising their flocks into prayer armies. Time will tell.
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com 

 

Praise the Lord! – literally! Religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his latest Ballymena Accent column to urge Christian Churches to focus on their worship if they want to see an increase in the numbers coming into their pews.

Boring, boring! That’s the cry you hear when many folk are asked why they don’t attend church services. Could it simply be that many denominations – and especially individual churches – are stuck in a Victorian time warp when it comes to actually praising God through music?
   Okay, I know the Christian faith has been blessed with many great hymn writers and there’s nothing like a dose of that ‘Auld Tyme’ religious singing to lift the spirits.
   However, the statistics show – that with a few notable individual church exceptions – attendances at the mainstream Christian denominations in Ireland (Catholic, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian and Methodist) are falling.
   Then again, take a look at the churches which are growing – especially among the Pentecostals – and you will note that they all have one attribute in common; a heavy focus on worship.
   After all, listen to the advice given to us in the Old Testament book of Judges chapter 5 verse 3 (known theologically as the song of Deborah): “Hear, O ye kings: give ear, O ye princes; I, even I, will sing unto the Lord; I will sing praise to the Lord God of Israel.”
   Singing is a major part of worshipping God, so could many services become a massive ‘turn off’ because of a lack of meaningful or enjoyable worship?
   Perhaps many traditional churches would frown on modern-day, Pentecostal-style expressions of worship with their electric guitars and drum kits.
   Throughout the Fifties to the Seventies, the mission halls and tent missions run by organisations such as the Faith Mission had a major influence on Sunday worship. Hymns and psalms were sung to the sound of the piano or organ, but no guitars, percussion or any instrument which made too much of a din.
   The perception can be created that if the music is boring, then the message of the Christian faith is equally boring. The opposite of this has been the major attraction, especially to a younger generation, of the Pentecostal movement.
   They place a lot of emphasis on the formation and role of their praise bands or music teams in their overall services, and quite a lot of time is devoted to musical praise in the service timeframe.
   As a Presbyterian preacher’s kid growing up in the heart of the north Antrim Bible belt, it probably was not the wisest attribute to be an openly heavy metal fan, especially when the minister who was in charge of the congregation before my dad was there for 40 years and had no children.
   Given the reaction of some people in the community, when I converted one of the upstairs bedrooms in the Presbyterian manse into a mini recording studio, you would have thought that I’d built a satanic temple!
   I was to take my love of heavy metal and punk music a stage further and in 1979, I set up Budj Recordings – one of Northern Ireland’s few music Christian recording labels devoted to the genres of punk and metal.
   By the time I went into full-time journalism in 1981, Budj had released three albums with me as producer. At first reading, this could be seen as a two-fingered salute to the fundamentalists who see any musical genre other than Country Gospel as ‘the devil’s music’.
   But the ethos behind Budj was evangelical outreach. Music is a central core to the culture of punks and heavy metal fans. I had noticed during Christian outreach events that I had participated in that when it came to ‘the musical bit’, the punks and heavy metal supporters simply walked away.
   When I asked them what the issue was, their answers were blunt but enlightening. The music was boring, therefore the message of the Gospel was boring! Budj was an attempt to communicate the Gospel message through a musical medium which punks and metal fans could relate to.
   We were not changing the Gospel message of salvation as outlined in the famous New Testament text of St John 3 verse 16; merely adapting the communication platform so that that message made sense to punks and rockers. Some fundamentalists obviously did not share that opinion!
   I’m not suggesting churches introduce rock nights into their weekly schedule of events. My advice is to look at their respective communities and simply ask – could modern music genres be the key to increasing interest in church attendances?
   Not every church is suited to modern genres. One of the most popular of the modern Gospel musical genres is called Hill Song. It is exceptionally popular among the Pentecostal fraternity, particularly the teens and twenties.
   Pensioners from a traditional religious background in mainstream or fundamentalist denominations would certainly not appreciate a Hill Song type of worship.
   There was even an unsubstantiated report that when young people started to perform at one evangelical church a few years ago using acoustic guitars, hardline fundamentalists loyal to a very traditional form of worship staged a walk-out. And we wonder why many young people don’t have time for church!
   Some church have ignored the issue of worship and tried to build the numbers in the pews by almost converting their churches into glorified coffee bars, where ‘church’ becomes nothing more than either a pub with no beer or a social club.
   Praise is a significant part of the Christian life. Perhaps as a starting point is we get the praise time right, along with an appropriate prayer time, we will get the people back into the pews.

The photograph with this column shows John in the recording studio mixing the first album on his Budj Recordings label in 1979 with the Christian punk band, What Of The Night

Sunday January 27 marks the anniversary of the liberation of the Nazis’ most horrific extermination camp – Auschwitz Birkenau. It is also International Holocaust Memorial Day. Religious Commentator DR JOHN COULTER, tells of his own nightmarish trip to the notorious camp in Poland and how the trip became a personal pilgrimage. 
Just imagine the 3,500 people who died in the Irish Troubles being slaughtered in 30 minutes – that’s what the Nazis had perfected in their death camp in Poland, Auschwitz Birkenau.
   January 27 marks the anniversary of the liberation of the camp by the Russians in 1945 during the final months of World War 2.
   Although it was only operational for a handful of years during that war, an estimated one and a half million men, women and children were slaughtered in at Auschwitz using gas, firing squad, torture, horrific medical experiments, hanging, starvation and illness.
   In terms of the Nazis Final Solution to eliminate Europe’s Jews, Auschwitz was Hitler’s jewel in the crown of his murder machine.
   Hitler’s SS thugs set up two types of concentration camps – a labour camp to supply slave workers, and a death camp, which had only one aim; mass murder.
   The tour of the Auschwitz camp lasts around four hours. It will be a roller coaster emotional journey to hell and back again.
   Having covered the Irish conflict as a reporter since 1978, I wrongly believed this experience would prepare me for visiting Auschwitz.
   I even watched blockbuster movies on such camps, such as Schindler’s List, starring Irish screen legend Liam Neeson; The Boy In The Stripped Pyjamas, as well as the renowned documentary series The World at War.
   Our hotel was an hour’s drive from the camp, but I became engulfed by a dreadful uneasiness as we approached it. Then it hit me.
   As I walked through the gates with the notorious metal sign – Work Shall Set You Free – in German, I had to run out again to vomit in the visitors’ centre. My own personal Auschwitz nightmare was underway.
   It was a bright, sunny day and thousands of people were visiting the camp. But this is not a tourist attraction; this is a memorial to man’s inhumanity to man. Indeed, a visit to the camp is more like a pilgrimage to gain a clear feeling of the depths to which man can sink when it comes to the slaughter of fellow humans.
   Out of respect for the murdered, we don head sets to enable us to hear the whispers of the tour guide as we visit the various areas of the camp.
   No one shouts; no one even talks loudly. Every building is a piece in a jigsaw of mass murder. And the emotional turmoil for the visitor deepens as we visit each cell, each room, each corridor, and each execution yard.
   Even inside the buildings I wear my sunglasses to prevent people see me weep are I walk the corridors lined with photos of the victims. Then I realise many others are weeping too at the horrors which out tour guides unfold to us.

   It is not merely words – it is clear images; the suit cases of the victims piled high; the hair cut from the victims; the execution wall where people were shot.

Prison hair – a memorial of hair of many of the 1.5 million slaughtered at Auschwitz.

Execution wall – floral memorials now stand at the notorious execution wall beside the Nazi officers’ quarters where victims were murdered by firing squad.

Shoes – Religious Commentator Dr John Coulter stands inside one of the Auschwitz buildings where a memorial composed of the shoes of many of the camp’s 1.5 million victims has been erected.
   Eventually I am composed enough to get my photo taken with the shoes of tens of thousands of victims behind me.

   Worse follows. We travel to the Birkenau section to see the beds where victims were held before slaughter.

Beds – the beds in the Birkenau section where dozens of people were crammed into small spaces before being transferred to the gas chambers. 

The Nazis tried to cover their tracks by blowing up some of the gas chambers. We see the ruins as they have been left – alongside the ashpit where the remains of the dead were dumped.

Ashpit – the ash pit memorial at the Birkenau site where the Nazis dumped the ashes of their victims after they had been gassed and cremated.
   Even worse follows. We are taken into a gas chamber. Although it contains a massive memorial wreath, I look skywards to the vents as if I was expecting people to drop the poison gas pellets down.
   Then the door slams behind me and for a few terrifying seconds, I experience the petrifying sensation that this is not a shower room, but a room of death. Thankfully, the door is opened and we walk out to see the crematoriums – except the victims’ bodies would have been carried out.
   Only one aspect of the camp is off limits – the house of the camp commandant for fear it could become an iconic symbol for neo-Nazis.
   But unlike one and a half million other humans, I walk out of Auschwitz. In spite of the warm afternoon, my gentle dander becomes a steadily hurried rush as I almost race towards the bus to take me back to the hotel.
  And unfortunately, for some neo-Nazis, a trip to the gas chamber has an inhuman meaning. During the time I was there, two young men had their photos taken beside the crematoriums – complete with sick thumbs-up gestures and beaming grins.
   But I had been given a glimpse of a man-made Hell. I still have nightmares every January around the commemoration of International Holocaust Memorial Day.
   In spite of the nightmarish experience, it is one pilgrimage which I recommend everyone takes at least once in their lives. It will leave you in no doubt about the evils of racism.
The Christian Churches need to mobilise and organise their flocks if the political impasses at Stormont, Westminster and Brexit are to be solved, according to religious commentator and journalist, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column. 
Chaos is the order of the day when it comes to how Brexit will unfold and Northern Ireland voters could potentially be facing five elections in 2019 as a result of this confusion.
   Not even hardline Brexiteers know how the political landscape will be shaped as the leaving date looms ever closer.
   In this respect, it is time for the Christian Churches and Christian denominations across Ireland to mobilise their flocks, fellowships, parishes and congregations and speak with one voice to get the island back on an even political keel again.
   The recent defeat of Theresa May’s Brexit deal in the Commons saw rival politicians set aside their ideological differences to inflict that historic defeat on the Prime Minister. This is an example the Christian Churches can follow.
   For the sake of the people of this island, the various Christian denominations should set aside their theological differences and mobilise people to register and vote and send a clear message to elected representatives.
   Biblically, the Churches and denominations have Scripture on their side. They can quote from the epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians in the New Testament. In Chapter 2, verse 10 it is written: “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”
   Practically, this is a wake-up call to the Churches to mobilise their flocks and prove their still have relevance in what is perceived to be an increasingly secular island. This perception is based on the fact that in the republic, the Catholic Church lost both votes on the introduction of same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion legislation.
   There can be no doubting that Brexit will affect both parts of Ireland, and the so-called ‘Big Four’ denominations – Catholic, Presbyterian, Church of Ireland and Methodist – are all organised on an all-island basis with flocks on both sides of the current border.
   Even the growing Elim Pentecostal movement was founded in Monaghan in 1915 in pre-partition Ireland during the height of the Great War. The denomination once viewed as the leading light in Christian fundamentalism, The Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster founded by the late Rev Ian Paisley in 1951, even has churches in the republic.
   So tactically, how should the Churches interpret Ephesians 2 verse 10 as a plan of action.
   Put bluntly, the Churches must recognise the potential for five elections this year and ensure that everyone in their respective denominations who is eligible to vote, not only is registered to vote, but actually makes to the effort to go to the polling booths and cast those votes.
   If the Churches are true followers of Christ, they have a spiritual and moral imperative as well as a pastoral duty to put Ephesians 2 verse 10 into practice.
   The scale of the task facing the Churches cannot be underestimated – such is the political instability and chaos over Brexit in Europe, Westminster and Stormont that the constituency’s electorate could potentially be facing up to five polls in 2019. With so many potential polls on the cards, the Churches must warn against voter apathy.
   This warning must be hammered out even more loudly by the Churches after a series of historic votes at Westminster which saw Prime Minister Theresa May heavily lose her Brexit deal vote, yet defeat a ‘no confidence’ motion from Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.
   Corbyn is essentially imitating the late Maggie Thatcher in terms of persistence and will probably put down further ‘no confidence’ motions at Westminster until he wins and that will trigger a General Election. Vote 1.
   There is also the possibility that supporters of a second referendum on Brexit could get that referendum on a future deal. Vote 2.
   Likewise, some parties, such as the Ulster Unionists, are equally strongly favour the extension of Article 50 beyond the 29th March deadline for Brexit to give more time to negotiate a satisfactory deal. If this became the case, it could see voters back at the polls for a European election. Vote 3.
   There could also be an Assembly election on the cards to co-incide with 2nd May council elections. Votes 4 and 5.
   Politically, whilst many Christians would see themselves as devolutionists, Stormont is a gloomy place at the moment and the only way to put people first in Northern Ireland is for Direct Rule to be imposed so that we can get ministers in place to take decisions.
   Christians can scream their lungs out about combatting poverty, but until we have ministers in post to make effective decisions, we might as well be screaming at brick walls.
   That is perhaps one way the Churches can put pressure on political parties to get things moving for the benefit of people in Northern Ireland – if you can’t get Stormont sorted, then we need Direct Rule!
   Many Churches would also view that Sinn Fein has not moved one inch since it collapsed the Assembly in January 2017. Sinn Fein clearly wants an Irish Language Act before talks even begin to re-establish the Executive. It is clear by this that Sinn Fein does not want Northern Ireland to work.
   What is equally clear is that the former Sinn Fein DUP Executive allowed scandals to become commonplace. We’ve had ‘cash for ash’, and now there’s talk of more scandals dubbed ‘bung for dung’ and ‘spin to win’!
   We do not want a return to the same old cycle whereby the DUP and Sinn Fein divide up this country to serve themselves.
   As a Christian electorate, we cannot allow the Sinn Fein DUP carve-up and disfunctionality seep into our council chambers after 2nd May when the local government poll takes place.
   The Christian Churches’ message to the electorate must be – don’t let them wreck it; you deserve better. Christians should only vote for candidates they can trust, irrespective of party affiliations.
   The chat in many pews is that Northern Ireland Secretary of State Karen Bradley is not really interested in the Province, and that NIO civil servants are totally fixated with Brexit.
   And its not just in Northern Ireland that the Christian Churches must mobilise its voters. There is the real danger as the republic prepares for a ‘no deal’ Brexit, that Southern Ireland will become a small part of Europe, quickly forgotten as the European Union expands to the East.
   Its not the back stop Christian Churches need enacted – its a practical outworking of Ephesians 2 verse 10. Don’t say you haven’t been warned!
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter

Stop ignoring the Loyalists! You cannot assume they can be bought off as ‘community workers’, grow too old to be of any influence, or be making so much cash from criminality that they couldn’t care less if there is a united Ireland or not. This is the stark warning from Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical Christian commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column today. 

Stuff the lack of a devolved power-sharing Executive, any future Stormont Budget cuts, Brexit and even the threat of Direct Rule from Westminster; what are we going to do about the Loyalists?

This key question seems to have slipped under the political radar in Northern Ireland as the various parties draw up strategies to ensure they are not blamed for the billions of pounds of cuts about to rock the Province if devolution cannot be restored at least before Christmas, or at worst the parties let the deadlock drag on for months after Brexit next March.

Privately, parties across the religious divide, but especially those in the Assembly, are more interested in spinning ‘Don’t blame us for the Stormont impasse’.

It would have been a tremendous memorial and tribute to those murdered and injured during the 1998 Real IRA massacre in Omagh if the recent 20th anniversary of that dreadful slaughter had been marked with the news from the PSNI Chief Constable that the threat from dissident republican terrorists was ‘nil’.

But the reality from the security forces is that the overwhelming majority of the steadily increasing tensions about terrorist attacks across Northern Ireland has been laid at the feet of the various factions which comprise the so-called dissident republican movement, especially the so-called New IRA group.

In an exclusive interview with me during this decade with a spokesman for the terror group Oglaigh na hEireann (ONH), he said it would continue its campaign of violence until it smashed the Stormont power-sharing Executive.

Ironically, ONH’s aim – on paper at least! – has been achieved as a result of the fallout between Sinn Fein and the DUP in January 2017 when the Executive collapsed. Stormont has fallen!

But never mind the Assembly, how will the local parties prepare for Brexit in March 2019 as well as local council polls which could take place in May 2019.

Well before New Year’s Day, many parties may well have their council candidates selected and the first sneezes of election fever may have already been felt before St Valentine’s Day.

During that chilling ONH interview, the source said the group was set to fight a violent “three to four year campaign” to topple the Assembly.

“By fair means or foul means, we will bring down Stormont. There are people who would push politics, but we are not political.”

Despite the severe budget cuts, the North’s policing chief constable wants to ensure he has all the cash to combat the dissident threat. There have also been a series of rumours the London and Dublin Governments have been holding secret, back-channel talks with dissidents in a bid to end the terror campaign.

Perhaps one sign of this process was the decision of the Northern Ireland Office to rebrand dissident republicans as Residual Terror Groups – RTGs.

This was because dissident terror gangs, like ONH and others, do not see themselves as dissenting, but view their campaigns as descending from 1916 Martyrs executed by British firing squads after the failed Dublin Easter Rising.

Throughout the United Kingdom, even MI5 regards the threat from dissident republicans as higher than that posed by Islamic radicals.

But with so much focus on the republican camp, the real danger looms that disillusionment within the hardline Loyalist community could see groups previously on formal ceasefire since 1994 “go back to war”.

A series of bloody, internal American gangster-style ‘turf wars’ among loyalist paramilitaries in recent years has witnessed the threat posed to Stormont’s stability from loyalist terror gangs opposed to the peace process all but evaporate.

Dissident loyalist activity has been largely contained to graffiti and arson attacks on Catholic Church property and buildings belonging to the predominantly nationalist Gaelic Athletic Association.

However, remember the fallout when a top loyalist was shot dead in the working class Belfast Unionist heartland of the Shankill Road. The broad daylight murder was blamed on the banned Ulster Volunteer Force – the most bloody of the loyalist death squads during the Troubles.

The killing prompted the then Stormont Assembly member Dawn Purvis of the Progressive Unionists (PUP) to resign as PUP boss. The PUP gave political advice to the UVF and its ‘wee brother’ terror organisation, the Red Hand Commando.

That move effectively left the hardline loyalist community without an Assembly voice. Northern Ireland’s largest terror group was the Ulster Defence Association/Ulster Freedom Fighters (UDA/UFF). It was represented politically by the Ulster Political Research Group (UPRG). The UPRG has been unable to secure a Stormont seat since the Assembly was created in 1998.

Without elected representatives at the centre of devolved power in Northern Ireland, the loyalist community is effectively rudderless – and dissident republicans know this, too. That loyalist drift becomes even more severe given there has been no working Executive for coming on two years.

Direct Rule, even delays in devolution returning, will inevitably see Budget cuts drawn up by Westminster or Northern Ireland civil servants  and these cuts will bite very hard throughout the coming years and the blame game for the economic pain will decide the make-up of future Commons and council chambers.

On their own, dissident republicans can only maintain a short-term ‘terror tap on/terror tap off’-style campaign – what the British Government during the Thatcher era once referred to as “an acceptable level of violence”.

But the equally bitter medicine which Assembly members and Westminster must face is that there is an element within the loyalist community which the various terror groups’ leadership cannot control.

That faction is already believed to be targeting people it perceives to be responsible for using Brexit as a smokescreen to create a united Ireland.

Financially, a tit-for-tat sectarian conflict would push Northern Ireland to the verge of bankruptcy. There has even much private speculation in security circles of a re-introduction of the notorious supergrass system to combat any renegade loyalist gangs before they can unleash their brutality.

The Unionist political family is already deeply divided going into next May’s expected crucial council election showdowns.

The internecine warfare which claimed many lives in loyalism during the first decade of this new millennium was partly caused because the UDA/UFF and rival Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF) lacked its own political representatives and mainstream Unionist parties wanted nothing to do with loyalist terror gangs.

There can be no doubting that budget cuts – as with the rest of the UK and the Republic – will leave Northern Ireland severely limping along economically for much of the next decade.

However, if urgent action is not taken to bring hardline loyalism in from the cold politically at Stormont, elements within the UVF, UDA/UFF and smaller Orange Volunteers could slowly tip Northern Ireland back onto a slippery slope which could see the Province descending into the Troubles Mark 2.

Even if the existing terror gangs lack the stomach for such a violent campaign, would the changing nature of global terrorism spawn a new series of terror gangs in loyalism?

 

Throw the DUP a Stormont lifeline in case the Dail gamble doesn’t come off! That’s the controversial advice given to Sinn Fein from Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical Christian commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column today.

The republican movement, and especially its political wing Sinn Fein, must box clever to halt any internal DUP coup to topple its leader – former UUP MLA Arlene Foster – dead in its tracks as a result of the potential Paisley Junior crisis in North Antrim.
If Foster is politically shafted, she will be replaced by a new hardline leadership which will adopt a Jim Allister-style approach to Sinn Fein in any debate to get the power-sharing Stormont Executive restored.
Sinn Fein does not seem to have grasped the reality that the DUP, as a Unionist movement, has a supposedly secret ethos of putting party before political personnel in its ranks.
Sinn Fein needs a stark reminder of what happened to both Paisley senior and another DUP First Minister Peter Robinson.
While pondering the eventual political demise of both DUP leaders, the republican movement should do so against a backdrop that its Dail gamble of winning enough TDs in the next Leinster House showdown to guarantee Sinn Fein seats as a minority partner in a future coalition government is not a 100% political certainty.
Let me give the republican movement a little legacy history lesson. Almost a decade ago, just before Christmas, the DUP’s upper echelons held an ‘away day’ to discuss strategy. It deteriorated into a gutting match.
Then slowly, but steadily, Sinn Fein watched while Robinson took his eye off the Stormont ball as the DUP chief had to deal with the fallout from triple whammies at that time.
These were persuading his missus Iris to quit politics before she lost her super-safe Strangford Commons seat, keeping the hawks in his party rallying round East Derry hardliner Gregory Campbell from launching a public leadership bid, and trying not to do anything which boosted the credibility of TUV boss Jim Allister.
Clear proof at that time the anti-Robinson faction was planning to unleash its coup against the DUP boss was Robinson’s delay in issuing sympathy at the death of Cardinal Cahal Daly in 2009, and more importantly – not attending his Requiem Mass in Armagh.
Forget any spin about having to deal with family problems around Iris Robinson; his appearance at the Daly funeral would have been a red rag to the Orange bull.
Robinson must have recalled the political turmoil which ex-First Minister and Orangeman David Trimble sparked when the then UUP boss attended a funeral mass in Donegal for victims of the Real IRA’s Omagh massacre in 1998.
Unionism’s influential Orange vote abandoned Trimble, leading to the Commons meltdown in 2005. To dismiss the Loyal Order vote in Unionism as merely an ageing ‘bowler hat and gloves brigade’ would be a huge tactical error.
Remember how the early Paisleyite supporters used to taunt the so-called ‘Fur coat and no knickers brigade’ within the Ulster Unionists? Eventually, these middle and upper class UUP activists quit going to meetings for fear of the heckling from Paisleyite supporters.
Mind you, those were the days when Ulster Unionists required tickets ti attend party events and ultra-Right-wingers used to ‘leak’ their tickets to Paisleyite supporters so that meetings of O’Neill and Chichester-Clark could be disrupted.
The Loyal Orders tap into the marching band fraternity and silent majority in the Protestant Christian Churches; lose those three pillars, even in modern Unionism, and any movement will be reduced to fringe status within the pro-Union community in Northern Ireland. Note how the liberal Tory movement never gained any significant ground in Northern Ireland.
After the bad scare which the DUP got in the 2009 European elections, there was the real fear the Orange vote was seeping away rapidly from the Robinson camp and either back to then so called New Force of UUP and Tories, or to the fledgling TUV.
Thankfully, the DUP managed to halt any significant drain back to either the UUP or TUV, but we should remember what the Chuckle Brothers political routine eventually cost Paisley senior – his leadership of the party he founded, his moderatorship of the denomination he founded, and ultimately his post as First Minister.
So, as the political clock ticks rapidly towards the autumn of 2018 and the run-in to Brexit in March 2019, it is in the best interests of both current DUP boss Arlene Foster and Sinn Fein for republicans to stop gloating over the DUP’s misfortunes and feed Arlene some concessions of comfort.
Could the suspended Assembly limp on in full pay until well after Brexit has occurred, or will Westminster strike hard before Christmas and shut Stormont once again as it did in 1972.
Okay, almost a decade ago, the Shinners backed Robinson into a tight corner over policing, but republicans did not bury him. Nor should they bury Arlene over RHI and Stormont, or take advantage too much of the DUP’s dilemma over a potential Westminster by-election in North Antrim.
Robinson was then facing what Foster could face later this year when the signatories of the Recall Petition are totted up.
Way back in 2009, Robinson had to tackle the additional threat from pro-Paisley loyalists who simply want to topple the DUP chief in revenge for their messiah, Paisley senior, having to quit as Free Presbyterian Moderator after more than half a century in the post.
No matter what your political persuasion, never underestimate the wrath from Unionism’s fundamentalist fraternity once it shifts into top gear!
Such Paisleyite fanatics have no interest in either who succeeds Foster as party boss or what system of government runs the North – just as long as Foster’s regime collapses irreparably.
Sinn Fein needs to keep a DUP leadership it can manipulate, not one it intends to politically eradicate.
Given the political kick in the stomach the Southern electorate gave Sinn Fein in a past election, republicans must restore a workable government in the North to keep their party viable.
Republicans should not rely on their political laurels that McDonald can build on the TD gains achieved in the Dail under Adams.
No seats in a Stormont Executive and still refusing to take Commons seats – Direct Rule would be a disaster for the Shinners and could become a massive recruiting tool for dissident republican death squads, even when the tears of the 20th anniversary of the Real IRA’s Omagh massacre have been wiped away.
Slowly, but surely, there is the emerging danger the DUP is losing its grip on the Orange and Black Orders. Just note the warning from the Orange Order over a stand alone Irish Language Act.
If the DUP was to lose its grasp on the Protestant churches and evangelical Christian vote, a modernising DUP leadership could become a political Titanic – sunk without a trace.
Its high time Sinn Fein sent Foster a series of life boats – unless the current DUP leadership can promise a secure hand-over of power to a restored Stormont Executive.
What are Sinn Fein’s alternative potential partners – DUP political hawks under Campbell; TUV no-dealers under Allister; a liberal rainbow coalition of Alliance, Greens and the SDLP, or even a new more extreme Bible-bashing, Paisley-style DUP, the kind that will never meet a pope!
And speaking of a forthcoming papal visit, we Irish Christians demand a new Holy Grail!
This island urgently needs to find a Christian political champion to replace the irreparably spiritually tarnished past ‘champions.’ If the question was posed, who is the leader of conservative evangelical Christians in Northern Ireland, whose name would pop up?
The coming weeks in our Christian calendar will see churches across Ireland unveil their activities begin to coincide with the new school year and leading up to the Christmas celebrations.
However, many Christians – especially in the churches’ evangelical and fundamentalist wings – have been left numbed by the impact of the Catholic Church’s pervert priest scandals and scandals within Protestantism.
With a snap Westminster poll if PM May loses her Commons majority and possibly another Assembly clash looming, who are Northern Christians going to look to for political guidance?
Thanks to past sins of Christians, being both a politician and a born again Christian could be viewed as a poisoned chalice. For example, Paisley senior and Robinson were both open born again believers.
Remember the drama of Irisgate? With Mrs Robinson’s self-confessed adultery plastered all over the media, was it any wonder other openly born again DUP supremos were less than hesitant ever wanting to become party leader?
Born again Christians are human like anyone else. But it seems when they make mistakes in life, they seem to suffer more.
The DUP was founded to give the Bible-bashing vote a clear voice. Before Paisley senior launched his Protestant Unionist movement in the late Sixties, liberal church goers dominated the ruling Unionist Party.
Paisley senior’s successive huge personal European votes stressed how the Free Presbyterian Moderator had mobilised the born again or saved lobby in unionism.
The spiritually saved are now leaderless, lacking direction with no voice they can trust.
The next few weeks will be crucial for the DUP, especially in the heart of the North Antrim Bible Belt if there is to be a Commons by-election. It will be crucial in determining if evangelicals and fundamentalists decide to desert the party and condemn it to an electoral Sodom – destroyed by Christians in a hail of protest votes.
The secret of David Trimble’s downfall was how the DUP used the churches and mission halls to mobilise Christians against the UUP and the Belfast Agreement.
If Northern Christians abandon the DUP in their tens of thousands, they will seek a new Noah’s Ark – but where? What are the political options for conservative evangelical Christians if they abandoned the DUP?
Indeed, if the Orange and Black Orders walked away from the DUP, too, is there a chaplain who could mobilise the Christian vote behind a single party?
If Northern Christianity’s new political messiah does not emerge in the next coming months, church goers may decide to remain in the pews and abstain from the polling booths.
Protestant apathy will certainly allow many republicans and nationalists to gain seats which were previously Orange bastions.
Even the DUP’s central plank – the Free Presbyterian Church – became badly split over power-sharing.
One glimmer of hope is if the various unionist parties form a pan unionist front to build electoral confidence in the Christian churches.
Evangelical Catholics could rescue the spiritual reputation of the Irish Church and spark a similar political revival for the SDLP?
But what born again Christians must not do is allow Unionism to be represented by liberals, humanists, atheists and other assorted non-believing weirdoes.
And there’s one way the main unionist parties can prevent Christian voter apathy – agree a solution with the Shinners and get the devolved institutions restored as soon as possible.
Then again, could that split the DUP, making the party implode as leading former Paisleyites queue up to join the TUV – or yet another Unionist party – in the biggest shake-up in Unionism since 1998?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

Become a Catholic party for a Catholic people – that’s the realistic path the SDLP must take if it is to overhaul the Shinners in next year’s crucial council poll in Northern Ireland. That’s the controversial advice given by Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical Christian commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column.

What’s left of the SDLP needs to rebrand itself as a Catholic Party for a Catholic people.
Before you start screaming “sectarian bigot” at me, just put your political correctness on hold and ponder the logic of my sound advice to middle class nationalists.
I’m sure my former Coleraine university tutor, ex-Stormont minister and North Antrim MLA, Dr Sean Farren, would go buck daft if he heard his old student saying this.
A few years ago, Dr Farren penned an excellent history of the SDLP to coincide with the party’s 40th anniversary.
The Hume-Adams talks certainly brought Sinn Fein in from the political cold and contributed substantially to the ending of IRA violence and the Shinners eventually sharing power with the supposedly hardline DUP.
But the SDLP made a serious tactical error. Middle class Catholics who normally voted SDLP plumped for the Shinners to get republicans firmly on the path to peace.
The problem for the SDLP was, those same middle class Catholics never came back from Sinn Fein.
Sinn Fein has sewn up the overwhelming majority of republican working class voters. Forget any electoral threat from dissident republican candidates. Their campaign will be as relevant as a chocolate fireguard.
If the SDLP is to make serious inroads into Sinn Fein’s power base, it must rebrand itself as an overtly Catholic religious party.
Even the late John Turnley, a Protestant nationalist, recognised the value of a Catholic party for a Catholic people when he launched his short-lived Irish Independence Party as a rival to the SDLP.
There’s a lot of nonsense flowing around about the need for a pluralist, secular, religion-free state in the North.
This is a gross insult to the hundreds of thousands of dedicated Catholics who still attend Mass on a regular basis. The SDLP must deliberately and openly target middle class Catholic worshippers as being their only political voice.
In spite of the threats from dissident republican terror gangs and the economic crisis surrounding Brexit, the SDLP must guard against Catholics suffering from the same political cancer which has infected the unionist family – voter apathy.
An estimated 300,000 pro-Union voters – half of them Protestant church goers – have abandoned the ballot box over the years.
Imagine the crisis which would hit nationalism if 300,000 Catholics joined the ranks of the ‘stay at home brigade’?
Thousands of Southern Catholics once abandoned Sinn Fein in a past Dail poll because the Shinners did not present themselves as the party to defend Catholicism.
Ironically, the opposite is now the case as Southern Sinn Fein threw its political weight behind the successful campaigns to allow same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion laws in the republic.
But how much of this Sinn Fein support is really a two-fingered salute to the Irish Catholic Church’s failure to adequately deal with the issue of alleged child sex abuse by its clergy and nuns?
And if the SDLP became overtly Catholic, it could actually throw a lifeline to the Catholic Church’s hierarchy.
The Irish bishops look set to get the mother of all kickings from the pope over their handling of the clerical abuse scandals.
Irish Catholicism doesn’t need a revival in its pulpits. It needs a political solution which will see the Church restored to the same level of influence which it enjoyed in the South under Eamon de Valera.
It’s not a case of the SDLP becoming sectarian and indulging in anti-Orange or anti-Prod bashing – just standing proudly for all things Catholic.
Just as any Right-wing lurching faction of Ulster Unionists can never ‘out DUP the DUP’, the SDLP cannot ‘out green’ the Shinners.
The SDLP is one of the few nationalist parties not to have been borne from a paramilitary wing.
The party must swallow the bitter pill that to beat Sinn Fein in the next super council poll, it must sell itself as the true defenders of the Catholic middle class, not some trendy brand of Brit-bashing, Leftie republicanism.
If the SDLP fails to blatantly play the Catholic faith card, it could spend its next 40 years being second fiddle to Sinn Fein – that’s if the SDLP survives for another 40 years.
And speaking of a religious agenda, sell up and give to the poor – that’s what Ireland’s next President should order the Christian Churches to do to combat the credit crunch following the Presidential election later this year.
The Churches need a reality check. In a previous Westminster mandate, Dave Cameron’s Tories and their Liberal buddies tried to stick the boot well and truly into this island.
Don’t assume that Northern Ireland – especially after March’s Brexit – will benefit substantially from the millions promised by the Tories to the DUP in return for the party’s Commons support in key votes.
Child benefits are top of the hit list. Forget about terms such as upper, middle and working classes. There will be only two types – the filthy rich and the poverty class.
Ireland needs a President who will force Churches to do their Christian duty, not mutter pious and empty rhetoric from their lofty pulpits.
Churches should remember the Biblical words of Jesus Himself in the New Testament Gospel of St Luke Chapter 18 when He warned of the fate of the rich young ruler.
Jesus told this ruler in verse 22: “Sell all that thou hast, distribute unto the poor and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come, follow me.”
Sounds a simple solution, but not one the ruler wanted: “And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful for he was very rich.”
Ireland’s banks of Christian denominations are loaded with properties. When the Tory cuts bite, particularly if Direct Rule returns, let the Churches follow the words of Christ and help the poor and needy by selling all this land and buildings and giving them the dosh.
How many hospitals and schools would remain open and how much child benefits could be maintained if Catholic and Protestant church property was sold?
The Protestants will argue they are split into too many different types to make any difference.
The Irish Catholic Bishops will maintain they need to sell their properties, not to help the poor, but to pay compensation to alleged victims of clerical abuse over the generations.
Clerics of all faiths need to get their fingers out and start encouraging their flocks to follow the Biblical command of tithing as outlined in the Old Testament.
In Genesis Chapter 29, verse 22, Biblical hero Jacob says to God: “And of all that thou shall give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.”
Imagine how the island’s cash crisis would be cleared up if every Christian citizen gave a tenth of their income to the state?
The new President should pass a decree ordering all the cash Fat Cats and so-called banks who have landed us in this fine mess to give a tenth of their earnings back to society.
Even if banks on both sides of the border gave a tenth of their assets back to the state, it would still help the poverty stricken.
Any new President must also surrender Ireland’s nuclear neutrality. During the Cold War, this island was central to the defence of the West and NATO.
Ireland should rent itself to the highest nuclear bidder which wants to park its submarines, warheads and any other nuke processing operations on the island.
Just because there is a vibrant Irish American community, that does not mean we have to go cap in hand to the Yanks.
If the Russians, Chinese or Arabs want to pay vast sums of cash to have their nukes planted on the Emerald Isle, then the new President should be open to offers.
And if Moscow and the Middle East can pump millions of pounds into English soccer clubs, they may be interested in renting a few Irish ports for their nuclear submarines and missile storage silos.
That thought might send a few people hopping mad at MI5’s plush £20 million Hollywood headquarters.
But if the old KGB can get Ireland out of any potential Brexit debt and put both north and south on a sound economic footing, who is complaining?
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

The Shinners must follow the example of republican icon, Dev The Long Fellow, and finally take the British Oath of Allegiance, ending its totally daft political dinosaur policy of abstentionism. That’s the unusual advice coming from Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical Christian commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column today.

To Sinn Fein Northern leader and party vice president Michelle O’Neill and your party’s Westminster MPs, my message is simple – you can spike dissident republican guns by taking advantage of the Commons dilemma over the very shaky Tory/DUP ‘partnership’ in Parliament.
Sinn Fein is still the largest Northern nationalist party for now, but SDLP boss Colum Eastwood will outflank republicans by taking his Commons seat – and negotiating a good deal for the North before Brexit hits next March – so why not parachute him into any potential North Antrim Westminster by-election sparked by the suspension of Ian Paisley junior.
Sinn Fein needs to view the Oath as its ace card in 2018, the centenary of its historic Westminster General Election virtual clean sweep across Ireland when it scooped over 70 of the then 105 Commons seats when Ireland was still entirely under British rule.
Dev also played smart in 1927 and asked his TDs to take the Oath of Allegiance to the Dail, branding it “an empty formula”.
Many of Dev’s fellow republicans were executed or killed by the pro-Treaty nationalists of Michael Collins.
But if their deaths were not to be in vain, Dev had to tactically take the meaningless Oath.
It was a stark choice – stubbornly snub the Oath and become an irrelevant movement, or take the Oath and be right at the very heart of the Irish government. Dev chose correctly.
Whatever deals may have to be cut over the coming weeks regarding the future of the Stormont Executive, Sinn Fein has a golden opportunity to be at the heart of British politics.
Southern voters could still abandon the Shinners, confining plans to become a coalition partner in the next Dail to the political dustbin.
That’s the nightmare card the party faces if rival parties play the ‘RA card, highlighting Sinn Fein’s role as political apologist for one of the island’s most vicious terror gangs, which as one former Sinn Fein President once noted: “They haven’t gone away!”
The party may have lost a number of individual councillors across Ireland since ‘The Big Push’ into the Republic. But the real Achilles Heel for Sinn Fein is victims of the IRA warning voters about the atrocities of the IRA.
Look at the impact which the poignant RTE interview with a survivor and victim of the notorious Kingsmill massacre during the conflict had on the future of the then West Tyrone MP Barry McElduff? The party concluded such was the political backlash against the republican movement in the Republic, Mr McElduff would have to quit as MP.
While Sinn Fein gave the MP a mild slap on the wrist with a brief suspension, the party was smart enough to recognise the propaganda disaster for Sinn Fein with the incredibly moving interview with a Kingsmill survivor in which 10 Protestant workmen were murdered by the Provisional IRA.
Sinn Fein’s main path forward is to negotiate a cash deal for Stormont which will help it sustain the six counties through the expected cuts from the next Westminster Government.
Surely, this is a price worth paying for Sinn Fein given that Northern Ireland local government elections are less than 12 months away – as is Brexit!
Sinn Fein must also recognise that any fall of Mrs Foster and Mrs May as party bosses, and the collapse of the Tory/DUP pact will bring the unionist leaders to their senses on the need for a single Unionist Party.
The Shinners are hoping they will eventually clinch the coveted post of First Minister in any future Stormont poll in the event of a restoration of devolution and the power-sharing Executive. But this is based on Unionists maintaining their three-way split of DUP, UUP and TUV.
Republicans need to realise that Unionist grassroots want a single Unionist Party and have effectively relegated both the UUP and TUV to the political sidelines.
Current Unionist leaders may be replaced by a new DUP and UUP leadership who will put the process of merging the two parties into operation.
Unionists don’t want a coalition, pact or partnership – they have finally become sick of infighting and splitting.
This could also force SDLP boss Eastwood – whether he likes it or not – into an all-Ireland merger with Fianna Fail.
What a sickener for Mary Lou and the Shinner peace-makers, if a merged SDLP/FF movement took their Westminster seats and used Commons votes to secure a super package for the North.
This package could also well see an SDLP/FF revival – or a moderate nationalist revival, at least- in the Assembly. The negotiations have already begun to set up a workable SDLP/Unionist Unity power-sharing Executive without the DUP and Sinn Fein!
If the Shinners don’t want to be frozen out, they must adopt Dev’s “empty formula”.
And what about a Northern women’s pact in the Commons between Unionist and moderate nationalist female MPs?
In spite of Mary Lou and Michelle running the political Shinner wing of the republican movement, how would the Shinners’ aging male Westminster MPs explain it to the Ard Fheis that the new women’s coalition of nationalists, unionists and centrists had outgunned the supposedly most secure political female leadership in Ireland?
A single, agreed republican Northern party is the only way a united Ireland will be achieved by nationalists’ self-imposed 2021 deadline, given that they have missed the Easter Rising centenary in 2016.
Fermanagh South Tyrone nationalists agreed with my pre-election advice, and voted tactically for the republican candidate best placed to beat the Unionist unity runner.
Ex-Stormont farming boss Michelle Gildernew’s victory margin is proof nationalists have mastered the art of tactical voting.
But it still leaves the fundamental question. With the Provos off the scene for the time being, do republicans need three parties now that Fianna Fail is organising in the North?
In spite of holding their seven Commons seats, Northern nationalism is starting to suffer from the same voter apathy which has afflicted Unionism.
Think of how the electoral map would have changed if the estimated 150,000 Protestants who abandoned the ballot box or spoiled their votes in past polls had made an effort to vote responsibly.
Unionist plots to hatch a new, properly registered, united party in time for next year’s crunch local council poll could rob republicanism of the coveted border poll.
At long last, Protestants have finally grasped the concept of Unionist unity after 40 years of gutting each other at the polls.
But until the SDLP’s Colum Eastwood and Sinn Fein’s Mary Lou McDonald embrace the concept of one Irish Nationalist Party, Irish unity will remain the empty rhetoric of election manifestos.
Although heavily outnumbered in the original Stormont Chamber, the late Eddie McAteer’s Nationalist Party provided a united platform for Northern Catholics.
Catholic voters now face a real dilemma over Irish unity. Sinn Fein is by far the biggest Northern party, but has no Southern base in a coalition government in Leinster House – as yet!
The moderate nationalism has influence at Westminster by its supporters in Labour, the SNP and Welsh nationalists taking its seats, but equally has no effective base in Northern Ireland – but FF MPs would.
McAteer also had to endure the ‘why bother voting’ attitude of Northern Catholics.
The one lesson Eastwood and McDonald should take from the Commons debacle is that the nationalist community is developing its own version of the so-called ‘Garden Centre Prods’.
Republicans have to come to terms with a new breed of political Catholic – the ‘Garden Centre Papist’.
These are middle class Catholics who are nationalist in name only, and who are quite comfortable to live and work in a Northern state under the Union.
The other challenge facing comrades Eastwood and McDonald is to mobilise both the Catholic working and middle classes behind a single nationalist movement.
And don’t say such mergers cannot come about. If The Chuckle Brothers can run a power-sharing Stormont Executive, The Slasher Brothers, Cameron and Clegg, once ruled Britannia, and May and Dodds run the UK, then Eastwood and McDonald can launch a rebranded Irish nationalism.
The Tories are fighting the myth they are virtually an ‘England Alone’ party; the Liberals sold their political souls to oversee sweeping Conservative cuts under Cameron and may not be able to retake the mantel of the minority Government partner from the DUP.
What we are witnessing is the break-up of the Union. That break-up will be the tonic which finally unites all shades of Protestants, Unionists and Loyalists.
But are Northern republicans ready for what will effectively be Irish unity by default?
The late former South Down UUP MP Enoch Powell once branded the DUP ‘the Protestant Sinn Fein’
Given the political upsets and surprises which Mad May has already thrown up, wouldn’t it be funny if Northern Unionists began stealing nationalist clothes?
Perhaps if devolution is restored to Stormont and to keep Sinn Fein out of the First Minister’s Office, Comrade Colum may even consider forming an Ulster National Party with Unionists in the Assembly.
After all, at one time Unionists in Foyle and South Down tactically voted for Durkan and Ritchie to keep the Shinners at bay – until Sinn Fein outwitted both parties by selecting candidates who could eat substantially into the electorally lucrative middle class Catholic voter base.
Follow Dr Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

With all the talk about Fianna Fail seriously heading north, spelling the demise of the SDLP, Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical Christian commentator Dr John Coulter wonders if a merger is also needed to save the Ulster Unionist Party? This is the political teaser he poses in his latest Ballymena Accent column.

Anybody want to merge with the Ulster Unionists?

Maybe when the latest round of political talks and the summer recess have calmed down, what remains of the UUP could form a new Centre Left party with the rapidly dwindling SDLP. Oh wait, that type of pact was already tried and exploded like the disastrous UUP/Tory link a couple of elections ago.

Then again, how come the DUP deal with the Tories is working financially when the UUP/Conservative pact crashed and burned? Could it be the DUP managed to get a cash deal for its arrangement while the UUP jumped into the pact without any promises of cash from then leader David Cameron?

What is becoming abundantly clear is that the UUP has moved away from its traditional base on the Unionist Right-wing and has headed off towards the centre or middle ground.

Unless both the Irish and British Labour Parties are really serious about organising in the North and contesting elections, there is now a gap in the political market for a sensible soft socialist party.

The Shinners and Arlene’s DUP will stay as Stormont top cats provided they firmly hold onto the North’s middle ground.

Like it or lump it, the hard reality of ‘stable’ Northern politics is that Sinn Fein and the DUP have unofficially adopted the joint motto – ‘The working class can kiss my ass!’

Apart from the personality votes of some of their big guns, the SDLP is a spent force in Northern politics.

In spite of Comrade Colum becoming the new Stoop supremo, there is just so much petty bitterness in its ranks that stopping the Shinner bandwagon is impossible.

Like the election-battered UUP, the Stoops need a merger with someone to hold their core vote together. If the SDLP cannot find a Southern party to merge with, Fianna Fail could sweep up if the latter is serious about contesting polls in Northern Ireland.

The UUP tried a deal with the Tories. It flopped. Now, some Ulster Unionists want to climb into bed with the DUP now that that latter party has a whole load of ex-UUP members in key positions. I’ve often wondered if the late Jim Molyneaux secretly believed that one day his UUP would be eclipsed by the then Paisley-led DUP and so began a process of integrating UUP folk into the DUP.

After all, when you compare DUP2018 to UUP1988 what’s the difference?

I always remember when former Strangford MLA David McNarry was in the UUP and a really vicious war of words erupted. You had to go back to 1998 and the Trimble era to see such blood-letting.

McNarry – when he was in the UUP – wanted what I want – a single Unionist Party to represent all shades of Unionism.

I’ve known Big Davy for many years and he’s definitely not the Unionist politician to shoot from the lip.

What Unionism needs is one party with a number of pressure groups to maintain what former UUP boss Molyneaux once branded ‘the broad church’.

Revamp the Ulster Monday Club to keep the Right-wingers happy, and re-launch the Unionist Labour Society to keep all the working class loyalists sweet.

But true to form, once Unionism gets a politician with some brains what happens – it sacks him from a post!

And the Stoops are just as bad. When former North Antrim MLA Dekki O’Loan unveiled what was my idea of a single nationalist party to represent all shades of republican opinion, he got banished to the Stormont back benches.

If the Shinners and Stoops combined to form the United Nationalist Front, the border would be rubbed out well before the centenary of partition.

And if Unionists could reform former Northern PM Terrence O’Neill’s single Unionist Party, they would have a voluntary, majority rule government back at Stormont before you could sing ‘The Billy Boys’.

But when Davy and Dekki proposed sensible ways forward for their respective camps, instead of a pat on the back, they got a right kick in the nuts!

Makes you wonder who is next for the chop in the Ulster Unionists and Stoops?

The pro-life camp must be looking over its shoulder in the SDLP, while in the UUP, Loyal Order members would be wise to choose their words carefully in case they become victims of any liberal hit list.

If the Southern parties are not hot on the idea of merging with the Stoops, and no one wants to touch the UUP, then the sensible way forward is for both parties to form a new Centre Left coalition at Stormont – provided the DUP and Sinn Fein can get our beloved Parliament up and running again.

So here’s the unthinkable – what happens if the DUP/Tory deal falls apart in the event of Theresa May being dumped out of Number 10, should the UUP and SDLP cosy up to Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour to form this Centre Left coalition in Northern Ireland?

But that would require all parties to show political initiative. Hark, I hear my phone ringing. Is it Comrade Colum or Comrade Corbyn telling me I actually have a cunning plan?

Speaking of cunning plans, I wonder what is happening in my native North Antrim, and more significantly, I wonder what The Big Man would have made of all the shenanigans in a Westminster constituency which a Paisley has held since 1970?

Ian Paisley senior will always be to me the firebrand family man and Unionist leopard who changed his spots.

I grew up in the old Co Antrim Stormont constituency of Bannside, the place where Paisley launched his elected career and the title he took when he entered the Lords.

His rise to power was built on bringing two voiceless sections of the Unionist community together under one banner – Christian fundamentalists and working class Protestants.

During his 1970 election campaigns, I remember the good-hearted banter in Clough Primary School as a devout middle class Plymouth Brethren pupil and a working class Anglican student waved Vote Paisley posters and sang ‘Paisley is our leader!’

As the son of the President of the village’s Ulster Unionist branch, my chants of ‘Make Your Mark For Henry Clark!’ were quickly drowned out.

While the O’Neillite Unionists ‘tut-tutted’ about the atrocious housing conditions of working class Protestants in North Antrim, Paisley went a step further and got these families their inside toilets.

It should not be forgotten that Paisley was first and foremost a Gospel preacher, founding his fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church two decades before he launched the DUP.

As a religious affairs correspondent, I sat in meetings listening to Paisley gently outline the poignant message that Jesus Saves. Yet in 1985, I stood inches from Big Ian as he boomed out his notorious ‘Never, Never, Never, Never’ speech against the Dublin accord.

In many sections of nationalist and loyalist opinion, the Paisley legacy is the man who stoked the flames of sectarian hatred in Ireland with his confrontational rhetoric. For me, I remember him as the Man of Opposites.

On one hand, he publicly heckled the pope in the European Parliament and protested against my dad and other Protestant ministers and Orangemen attending the annual Evangelical Prayer Breakfasts because Catholics were present.

Yet thousands of Catholics voted for him because of his tireless constituency work on bread and butter issues and his firebrand stances on gays, abortion and divorce.

While I never saw Paisley himself lift a hand in anger, some of his hothead supporters were nothing but violent thugs who took his ‘Ulster Will Fight’ rants literally.

My father was a UUP MLA for 13 years, and now in his eighties, still bears the scars from the beating he received in 1983 while canvassing in Ballymena.

Ten years later, during the 1993 council election campaign, a DUP woman set her dog on dad.

Paisley once rang my dad to demand he pull out of an election, shouting so loudly on the phone my dad had to hold it away from his ear. Even I could hear the conversation.

Yet years later, Big Ian quietly confided in my dad about those plotting in the DUP to depose him as First Minister and party leader.

In spite of my UUP family background, I got some tremendous scoops from the Big Man, including the launch of both the Third Force and red-bereted Ulster Resistance paramilitary movements.

Religious firebrand and hardline loyalist he may have been. But for me his lasting legacy will be as a family man.

As a young cub reporter, I was late to the lunch break when covering a DUP conference in Ballymena. Paisley invited me to sit at the spare seat at his family table.

During the 1982 Assembly count, his wife Eileen banged her head in the Ballymena Town Hall. I recall the very worried look on his face as she was treated. It was the only occasion on which I saw the ‘hardman Unionist’ image slip.

In 2003, he was upset with an article I had penned. Rather than challenge me personally, he asked my dad to “have a wee word with John … Robert, he’s your son!”

One question I will always ponder – if Paisley had kept out of politics, could he have become another global Billy Graham – the late world famous evangelist who preached to American Presidents? Those are my abiding memories of Paisley senior. I just wonder, though, when the annals of history are written, how will his son, Ian Paisley junior, be remembered?

 

Find your faith! That’s the contentious advice given to Sinn Fein by controversial Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his latest Ballymena Accent column. 

Sinn Fein needs to find its faith in the coming weeks as more Catholics become disillusioned with the Church over the clerical abuse scandals.

There has always been friction between the Catholic Church and the republican movement, especially over thorny issues of IRA emblems on coffins inside chapels and the excommunication of convicted IRA or INLA terrorists.

This runs contrary to tales of hunger striker Bobby Sands dying clutching a crucifix given to him by the Pope, and 1916 icon Padraig Pearse’s prayers before he was executed.

But it never ceases to amaze me the number of modern republicans who openly boast about being Godless atheists. Irish Nationalism without a religious faith is meaningless rhetoric.

One such Godless atheist was Dan Breen, the IRA man blamed with sparking the War of Independence with his murder of two policemen during the Soloheadbeg ambush in January 1919.

Breen came to epitomise the modern Irish terrorist. Gone would be the tactics of 1916 when uniformed members of the Irish Volunteers and Irish Citizens Army took on uniformed soldiers of the British Army.

Breen was to introduce the concept of ‘hit and run’ IRA terrorism, a tactic which the British responded by unleashing the notorious Black and Tans on the ordinary Irish population.

The ordinary non-violent nationalists suffered for the terrorist atrocities of the IRA during the so-called Tan War, and so too, began the significant rift between the republican leadership and the Irish Catholic Church.

With support for the Catholic Church on this island at an all-time low, and with more inquiries set to unearth alleged clerical child abusers, the Shinners have a golden opportunity to replace the Church as the true Defenders of Holy Mother Ireland.

Even the visit by Pope Francis to Ireland later this year may not be able to turn the religious tide in favour of the Irish Catholic Church. Parts of the west coast of Ireland may well become the last bastions of loyal Catholicism on the island.

Unionism is also plastered with links to the Christian faith. You need only read the Scriptural texts on Loyal Order banners on 12 July and Black Saturday to see the bond between faith and politics.

That bond was reinforced in 2012 which saw the centenary of the formation of Edward Carson’s original Ulster Volunteers, whose motto was ‘For God and Ulster’.

The Shinners have plenty of slogans and phrases, but no religious mottos.

It has been suggested the late deputy First Minister Marty McGuinness had some deeply religious chats with the late firebrand preacher Paisley senior during the Chuckle Brothers era at Stormont.

The Shinners need to rekindle the kind of religious Irish Nationalism espoused by Protestant patriots, such as Wolfe Tone, Robert Emmet, Charles Parnell and ex-soldier turned founder of the Irish Independence Party, murdered councillor John Turnley.

Parts of the SDLP may also see themselves as defenders of the Christian faith, but with the party about to implode, you might as well back a blind beach donkey to win the Irish Grand National, especially with the party split over same-sex marriage and abortion law.

Under Gerry Adams, the Shinners successfully tapped into anti-Fianna Fail feeling in the South to return 20 plus TDs in the last General Election.

But if the Shinners under Mary Lou McDonald are to stand any chance of becoming coalition partners in a future Dail, they have to attract the Christian vote.

Sinn Fein would point to the fact that the Republic is becoming an increasingly pluralist and secular society, giving the two-fingered salute to the Irish Catholic Bishops on referenda on same-sex marriage and abortion.

Okay, you could argue this was evidence of increasing secularism in the 26 Counties, but surely there must be an element of protest against the Catholic Church and allegations of clerical sex abuse which seem to surface on an almost monthly basis.

There is still a thriving conservative evangelical Christian movement developing south of the Irish border, although it may not sing its praises as loudly as it should.

A ‘Bash The Irish Bishops’ campaign might work in the South, but the Shinners have a legacy of slaughter to overcome in the North.

What about the Remembrance Sunday massacre in Enniskillen? What about the murder of Mary Travers as she left Mass with her judge dad in Belfast?

Republican socialists have an even worse legacy to deal with. What about the three church elders massacred by the INLA posing as the South Armagh Republican Action Force at the Darkley Mission Hall as Sunday evening worship began? Rumours and conspiracy theories abound as to why republican gunmen would attack Protestant worshippers.

Was it simply a case of ‘Any Prod will do’ and Darkley was a convenient gathering of Protestants to attack? Was the INLA trying to spark a sectarian bloodbath in the same way as the KKK attacked Afro-American Southern Baptist Churches during the civil rights era?

Did they mistake the Pentecostal Church at Darkley for one of Ian Paisley senior’s Free Presbyterian Churches? Was it part of a Maoist-style terror campaign to create so-called ‘liberated zones’ which had been ethnically cleansed of Protestants?

Is there any chance Sinn Fein could put the Bible into modern nationalism? Christians point to how one of the notorious killers of Christians in the Bible, Saul of Tarsus, became the Apostle Paul – one of the faith’s greatest evangelists.

Is there any one, or group of people in Sinn Fein, who might find a Saul-style Road to Damascus spiritual conversion and lead the party into becoming one of the island’s major defenders of the Biblical Christian faith?

With Christian values under such attacks across the island, it would be one of the great ironies of Irish history that Sinn Fein – the one-time apologist for Ireland’s most bloody terrorist gang – became a more vocal standard bearer for the Bible than the Scripture-quoting Orange Order. Miracles never cease!

Speaking of legends, while penning this latest Ballymena Accent column, I’ve been taking the occasional slurp of tea from a Daily Mail mug bearing an image of former PM Maggie Thatcher with the slogan she uttered at the start of the 1982 Falklands War – ‘Defeat? I do not recognise the meaning of the word!’

That legendary quote reminded me of another legend – Hollywood screen legend Meryl Streep.

She will have to made a second blockbuster flick about Thatcher entitled The Real Iron Lady.

While the current film featured numerous scenes with Maggie chatting to her hubby’s dead spirit, Denis, it is the Irish ghosts which are sadly lacking in this masterpiece.

In reality, the Iron Lady is just a cheap publicity stunt simply to get Streep more recognition.

The 1981 hunger strikes are briefly glanced over, and especially Maggie’s secret talks with the IRA to end the death fast.

While republicans demonise Thatcher for the deaths of the 10 Maze inmates, it is becoming clear the Provisional leadership of the time deliberately sacrificed a number of the hunger strikes simply to milk the propaganda for Sinn Fein to the maximum.

A scene was needed in which Maggie’s contacts put the prisoners’ demands to the Provo command and they were snubbed by the IRA bosses.

Another scene required Maggie confiding in her security chiefs that she could not afford to let the late Ian Paisley senior and the Unionist community know that she was secretly talking to the IRA behind their backs, otherwise the loyalist death squads would go on the rampage, sparking a second Irish Civil War.

But the real disappointment with The Iron Lady was the pathetic treatment of the INLA murder of Maggie’s right-hand man and Colditz war hero Airey Neave.

Neave died in a booby trap car blast at the Westminster carpark a matter of weeks before the Tories election win which saw Maggie swept to power.

Had he lived, Neave would have become the ‘no-nonsense’, hardline, Right-wing Northern Secretary, implementing a security policy built heavily on ‘shoot to kill’ which would have left a legacy of nationalist bitterness lasting for another 800 years.

There was no mention of any of the conspiracy theories surrounding Neave’s assassination.

Given Neave’s enthusiasm for a military crackdown on the IRA, he was certainly the key Conservative politician who could throw a spanner in the works of secret deals with the Provos.

The person tasked to organise Neave’s assassination was INLA leader Ronnie Bunting, the Protestant son of former Paisley political lieutenant Major Ronald Bunting.

On the surface, Bunting junior was a committed republican socialist who had turned his back on his dad’s fundamentalist Unionist politics. But he was always suspected of being a British plant within the INLA.

That suspicion was intensified after he was murdered by undercover soldiers under the banner of the UDA. Bunting junior’s death was necessary to plug any leak that British establishment figures had secretly plotted Neave’s removal.

At Bunting junior’s funeral in a Protestant cemetery, the ageing Major Ronald – once the loyalist hardnut who provided muscle for Paisley’s fledgling political movement – publicly wept uncontrollably.

This was clearly not the behaviour of a staunchly Unionist dad who should have disowned his son, the INLA’s Director of Intelligence.

Bunting junior had outlived his usefulness as a spy within the INLA and in the Irish ‘dirty war’ had to be disposed off.

A number of other republican socialists who had been Bunting’s comrades also died in mysterious circumstances to cover up the Bunting murder.

These included IRSP members Noel Lyttle and Miriam Daly and IIP boss John Turnley.

While Streep’s acting gained her a bucketful of credits, if Hollywood continues to produce lily-livered portrayals of key people in the Irish Troubles, then the real truth of the ‘dirty war’ will never be unmasked.

Imagine doing a Hollywood blockbuster on the life of Paisley senior which ignored his links with the Ulster Protestant Volunteers, Third Force and Ulster Resistance vigilante movements?

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter

Bottoms up for Unionist Unity! Controversial Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical Christian commentator, Dr John Coulter, is not recommending a massive drinking binge to bring all elements of the pro-Union community together in his latest Ballymena Accent column. Rather he is suggesting the formation of a grassroots New Vanguard Movement to build Unionist unity from the bottom up. 

Unionist infighting – that is a term which always caused me to squirm throughout my career in journalism, making me wonder if the concept of Unionist Unity is politically achievable, or whether it has become as big a myth as a 32-county democratic socialist united Ireland.

Unionists have had to bond together in the past when faced with a political crisis. For many years since the formation of the Ulster Unionist Council in 1905, the Unionist family had the Loyal Orders – especially the Orange – as the cement to bind Unionism together.

In 1974, in spite of there being political fragmentation with numerous Unionist parties, the United Ulster Unionist Council, commonly known as the Unionist Coalition or Treble UC, brought together the Ulster Unionist Party, Democratic Unionist Party, Vanguard Unionist Party, and United Ulster Unionist Party in an election pact which saw Unionist candidates scoop up 11 of the 12 Westminster seats in the February General Election with only Gerry Fitt’s West Belfast bolthole out of reach.

In 1985, following the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the Ulster Clubs Movement was launched to galvanise Unionists behind the Ulster Says No campaign.

While Unionists faced different threats in 1905, 1974 and 1985, there was one clear factor – indeed, the crucial lynchpin – in Unionist opposition, the role of ordinary, but organised, grassroots Unionist opposition. While the political leaderships of Unionism may have been making the key Press statements, it was the Unionist grassroots which called the directional shots.

In 1905, it was the Loyal Orders; in 1974, it was the then legal Ulster Defence Association; and in 1985, it was the Ulster Clubs movement (based on the Unionist Clubs which organised grassroots opposition to Home Rule).

However, the failure of the Ulster Clubs Movement in 1985/86 to overturn the Anglo-Irish Agreement compared to how the Unionist grassroots forced the end of the power-sharing Sunningdale Executive in 1974 reveals the root cause of the current lack of Unionist clout or cohesion in Northern Ireland. In essence, the Unionist grassroots have lost control of Unionism to the Unionist political leaderships.

The success of the original Vanguard Unionist Movement of the 1970s was that it was a grassroots pressure group to mobilise ordinary Unionists to rally to the defence of the Union, but equally significantly, it was a movement of the people which the leadership could not afford to ignore.

Vanguard’s greatest mistake was to copy the UUP and DUP and become a political party, thereby further fragmenting the Unionist vote. Once one of its key founders, Bill Craig, went to the Ulster Unionists and then lost the safe UUP Westminster seat of East Belfast to a youthful Peter Robinson, there was no coming back for Vanguard.

Any New Vanguard Movement must never make that same mistake of eventually becoming yet another Unionist political party.

And it must never adopt a Neville Chamberlain-style ethos of ‘peace in our time’, as a core sentiment of Unionism is ‘fear of the enemy’. For Unionism to remain as a significant force, it must educate its voters to ‘fear something’.

The post peace process era has made Unionism too comfortable. Unionism needs to be moved out of its political comfort zone; basically, it must learn to fear the potential long-term consequences of Brexit – that Northern Ireland leaving the European Union with the rest of the United Kingdom could eventually lead to a united Ireland.

Given the massive rallies against the anglo-Irish Agreement at Belfast City Hall in 1985 and 1986, how come the Belfast Accord lasted so long before it was eventually replaced with the 1998 Good Friday Agreement?

The core theory of the Ulster Clubs in the 1980s was to fuse the power of the Loyal Orders with the Unionist grassroots. Orange and non-Orange alike would mobilise behind the banner of the Ulster Clubs. Indeed, one of its key spokesmen in the late 1980s also a leading member of the Portadown Orange District.

But the Ulster Clubs strategy contained one politically fatal flaw – it could not find a cohesive role for the loyalist paramilitaries, and it could not control the actions of those paramilitaries during the notorious Day of Action in 1986, which ended in loyalist street violence.

Before the Day of Action, the Unionist middle class was prepared to support the Ulster Says No and Ulster Still Says No campaigns; it even supported tentatively the Unionist campaign of civil disobedience against the Agreement.

But once the street violence erupts, that Unionist middle class support largely evaporated, leaving the Ulster Clubs a largely muted force within Unionism.

The New Vanguard Movement must firstly get the Unionist grassroots to re-engage with the political process. Practically, this means getting the pro-Union community not simply registered to vote, but to actually turn out in very significant numbers on polling days.

The New Vanguard Movement should be organised into chapters or branches based in Loyal Order halls, church halls, and band halls. These three once influential core elements of the pro-Union community generally feel their political parties have deserted them – they are the Loyal Orders, the Protestant denominations, and the marching band fraternity.

One of the strengths of the original Ulster Unionist Party was the public meetings which it organised in Orange halls, which enabled the grassroots to hold public discussions on the political topics of the day.

Such meetings became an accurate pulse on the heart and soul of Unionism, and enabled the Unionist leadership to make policy judgement calls based on the feedback from these debates and discussions.

The New Vanguard Movement can become a political vehicle to allow Unionism to begin talking to and about itself again. And once the grassroots has become both motivated and mobilised, the Unionist leadership of the DUP, UUP, TUV and PUP will have to listen.

In practical terms, the various chapters or branches of the New Vanguard Movement would function in the same way as the Conservative Policy Committees operated in constituencies in the early 1990s.

Conservative headquarters would select a topic for discussion, which the Tory grassroots would debate under the CPC banner and send their constituency opinions back to head office.

In the New Vanguard Movement, a central co-ordinating committee would compile the discussion conclusions of its various branches, formulate a policy on the pulse of the Unionist grassroots and firmly convey those views to the political leadership of Unionism.

By adopting this strategy, Right-wing Unionism will once again be in the ascendancy and the scourge of liberalism will be eradicated once and for all from the pro-Union thinking.

 

If you can’t beat them, form an alternative to outwit them! In his latest Ballymena Accent column, Radical Unionist and conservative evangelical Christian commentator DR JOHN COULTER poses the controversial view that a new Liberal Unionist party could be the solution to outwitting the Alliance Party. 

How can the trendy Liberal Left bandwagon which is Alliance under Naomi Long’s leadership be stopped from eating even further into Unionism?

As we get closer to Brexit in March 2019, and with no prospect of even a solution to the Stormont impasse, the traditional and social media seem jam-packed with spokespeople and politicians playing the so-called ‘middle ground’, ‘centrist’, ‘moderate’ and ‘liberal centre ground’ tickets.

Unfortunately, the reality is that the so-called middle ground in Northern Irish politics does not exist. It is merely the Alliance Party putting ideological meat on its previously decades-long (no pun intended!) of fluffy bunny politics.

The Ulster Unionists have certainly fallen into the pitfall of trying to develop a liberal agenda – in practice, that merely saw the party slip even further behind the DUP in the polls.

Even hard core UUP activists now fear if there was another Stormont poll, it would see the party slide into the unthinkable – returned to Parliament Buildings with only single figure MLAs.

There are even suggestions the once rock-solid Right-wing DUP is even considering dabbling with liberalism in a post-Paisleyite era.

So how can this Alliance bandwagon be stopped before it finally wrecks the UUP and a substantial section of the traditional mainstream Irish Presbyterian Church?

Ever since high-profile former MLAs Basil McCrea and John McCallister quit the slowly dwindling Ulster Unionists to form the doomed NI21 experiment, a number of questions have remained unanswered.

Primarily, can the already heavily fragmented Unionist family sustain yet another Unionist Party? Secondly, will any new future Liberal Unionist party actually survive, or will it join another liberal Unionist movement – the Unionist Party of Northern Ireland  (UPNI) – in the dustbin of pro-Union history?

For the purposes of this specific column, I will refer to the new movement as the New Party. My conclusions are based on private conversations with liberal politicians and activists, whom I have known for a number of years.

Ironically, it was a relative of mine who first introduced Basil McCrea to the Unionist politics of the UUP.

I have never hidden my own desire for the ideal way forward for the pro-Union community. It is for a single Unionist Party to represent the entire Unionist family, with the various factions represented within that party by a series of pressure groups.

This would operate in the same manner that pressure groups have existed successfully within both the Conservative and Labour parties in Great Britain.

Bearing this in mind, it might seem a little strange for an overtly Radical Right-wing Unionist like myself suggesting there was a role for a separate liberal movement, the New Party, especially given the disastrous end of NI21.

Firstly, we need to recognize that there has always been a liberal Unionist strain among Northern Protestants. You need only look at the membership of the current Alliance Party to see the number of Protestants in their ranks and elected members – and especially the party’s infiltration of the Irish Presbyterian Church.

Even during the Home Rule crisis of more than a century ago, there was a strong liberal Unionist hotbed of support in Co Antrim, the supposed heart of the modern Unionist Ulster/DUP/TUV Bible Belt.

In the eventual creation of a single Unionist Party, the Alliance Party will have to be permanently eradicated from the electoral map. The current UUP – and even a more socially Left-leaning DUP – are not in a position to accomplish this feat.

In fact, the unthinkable is actually the bitter medicine of present politics – Alliance is slowly, but surely taking over – and expanding – the centre ground once occupied by the UUP. That is, whatever centre ground once held by the UUP which has not been snatched by the DUP under both Paisley senior and Robinson, and even to a certain degree by Arlene Foster since 2003.

The UUP and DUP should not underestimate the threat posed by Alliance. Ulster and Democratic Unionists should equally never dismiss the determination of Protestants associated with Alliance to maintain the Alliance position.

I went to school at Ballymena Academy and served in the Boys’ Brigade with John Alderdice, now Lord Alderdice, a former Alliance boss. During my time as a weekly newspaper editor in Carrickfergus, I reported regularly on the political activities of Stewart Dickson, now an East Antrim Alliance MLA.

I was left in no doubt about one clear conclusion – the determination of Protestants like John and Stewart to make liberal politics and their party work for the benefit of the electorate.

Now Naomi Long has taken up that political cudgel and fashioned Alliance into a clear Liberal Party, not just a trendy wine and cheese supper club for moderates.

So the threat posed by the Alliance Party to whatever is left of the UUP as well as progressive elements within the DUP will not be combated by sending the election-battered UUP into battle again against Alliance. A new Unionist champion is needed to wipe the polling floor with Alliance – now step forward the New Party.

We need a batch of Garden Centre Prods who have the personality, experience and profile to build a pluralist liberal movement which can fulfil this important primary goal of wrecking Alliance once and for all.

Like all parties, Alliance has had its good and bad times. One of the lowest points in its history – in fact, its last low point – came in the 1999 European poll when it ran its new leader, Sean Neeson from East Antrim, and scored only 2.1%

Since then, Alliance has never looked back. It chalked up two Stormont Ministries, its first Westminster MP and opinion polls predict it will eclipse the UUP in any future Stormont election, with Alliance holding on to its eight seats, and the UUP returning five MLAs at best.

If the party can survive the Union flag dispute, as well as any future loyalist flag or Protestant bonfire disputes, Alliance could be around as a major Liberal third force in Northern politics for generations to come behind both Sinn Fein and the DUP

Many Alliance elected representatives get and hold their seats because of transfers from Unionist voters.

The key question Alliance was able to successfully address – in a future election, will the anti-Alliance sentiment so apparent after the fateful Belfast City Hall flag decision a few years ago manifest itself in a polling booth boycott of Alliance?

The answer is simple – it didn’t. In spite of Unionist-bashing, Alliance not only survived, it thrived.

Indeed, If pro-Union voters continue to transfer to Alliance tactically to keep nationalists and republicans out, then the Union flag controversy has evaporated. For Alliance to struggle in the future, it won’t be because of a Unionist electoral boycott, but because its voter base has been split by a rival Liberal party.

So enter the New Party stage left! Just as Jim Allister’s Traditional Unionist Voice party dented the DUP, the New Party can severely dent Alliance.

The New Party will not last long-term, but it could last long enough to fatally injure the Alliance Party and see it either permanently removed from the Northern Ireland electoral stage, or reduced to fringe status, like the Progressive Unionist Party or Irish Republican Socialist Party.

Such a tactic has worked before in Unionism in the late 1980s and early 1990s when the first Tory Party experiment came to Northern Ireland under the then guidance of North Down’s Dr Laurence Kennedy.

He was the brain child behind the development and recognition of a series of constituency associations across Northern Ireland. In the run-up to the 1992 Westminster General Election, there was the real possibility that the intervention of Tory candidates could take enough votes off the UUP to see previously safe Ulster Unionist seats swing to the DUP.

To avoid the potential loss of Commons seats in 1992, a number of UUP activists infiltrated their local Tory associations with the simple purpose of influencing the outcome of the Westminster candidate selection process.

An example of this infiltration process was in East Antrim, where sitting UUP MP Roy Beggs senior was facing a strong challenge from DUP runner Nigel Dodds (now the North Belfast MP).

The East Antrim Conservative Association was then viewed as one of the most Right-wing of the new Tory associations. It was abundantly clear if a Right-wing Tory candidate split the traditional UUP vote, either Dodds or Alliance’s Sean Neeson could snatch the seat as Beggs senior had originally done in 1983 when the Commons seat was created.

In 1983, Beggs senior had defeated the DUP’s Jim Allister (now TUV leader and North Antrim MLA) by only 367 votes, making it one of the most marginal seats in the entire UK.

A UUP member in East Antrim managed to get on the Tory selection panel for the 1992 election and pushed the association to select a more liberal Conservative candidate rather than an overt Right-winger. The aim was to pitch the Tory Party in a head-to-head with Alliance for the centre vote.

The end result was that the Tory candidate polled almost 3,500 votes. Dodds pipped Neeson by around 400 votes, but more significantly Beggs senior held the seat with a majority of almost 7,500. Ironically, the East Antrim Westminster seat was lost some years later to the DUP’s Sammy Wilson.

If the DUP and UUP leaderships want to put Alliance in its box, the tactic is not to attack it directly with fluffy bunny liberal statements in the media. The best way to upset the Alliance apple cart is to pitch a new liberal alternative to that section of the electorate, hence the important of the New Party in this exercise.

The real aim of the New Party should be to ensure that Alliance does not become the real third or fourth force in Ulster politics behind the DUP and Sinn Fein. Those two parties look like holding their positions within their respective communities for the next few years.

This could leave a three-way battle for third place in the Stormont Executive between what is left of the UUP, the SDLP and Alliance. Set aside how a Unionist Unity ticket could guarantee the UUP’s survival in the short term. The New Party, ironically, could spell its long-term existence.

Rather than the badly-wounded UUP going back into the polling front line against Alliance, the pro-Union community should encourage the New Party to take up the electoral cudgels of giving Alliance a massive battering at the polls.

As an amended version of the old maxim states – if you want to beat them, undermine them with an alternative. Remember in mainland Britain how the old Social Democratic Party (SDP) sliced the then Liberal Party?

Any takers for the post of Chairman of the new Northern Ireland Liberal Party?

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter   @JohnAHCoulter

Don’t give to the freewill offering and we’ll starve them out! Controversial political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses a quote from a row in a Presbyterian Church 40 years ago to put the currently unthinkable case that a Hard Brexit could force the Irish Republic back into the United Kingdom. This is the path he outlines in his latest Ballymena Accent column. 

Four decades ago, during a row in a rural Presbyterian church, a worshipper at that church trying to force out the clergyman uttered this advice to his henchmen – don’t give to the freewill offering and we’ll starve them out!

This was a crude reference to withholding funding to the church collection, known as the freewill offering, and by doing so it would seriously affect the stipend – or salary – which that church could give to its minister. With a substantially reduced salary, that cleric would have to leave the church!

With the clock ticking rapidly towards Brexit in March 2019, and still no agreement on a Hard, Soft, or Pliable border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, the key question remains – what financially is the Republic really afraid off?

Those who maintain Brexit, and even some kind of Soft Border, will pave the way towards a united Ireland are merely sabre-rattling. The bitter reality is that the South cannot afford the North. Even in basic health terms, and even without a functioning Stormont Executive, Northern Ireland still enjoys the luxury of free prescriptions. In the Republic, if you need to make a medical or dental appointment, you need to splash out a basic 50 euros.

And let’s not forget when the once-vibrant Celtic Tiger economy collapsed a few years ago, it was UK funding as part of an EU multi-million euro rescue bailout which saved the Republic’s economy.

Are all the republicans in Northern Ireland who are enjoying the privileges of ‘benefit street’ seriously wanting to abandon these for a 32-county democratic socialist republic where social security benefits will evaporate?

The Hard Brexit Border is feared by republicans and Southern politicians  alike because such a scenario will in the long-term force the Republic to abandon its ‘republic status’ and re-negotiate a new Anglo-Irish Treaty which will see the South rejoin a closer formal relationship with the UK.

A Hard Brexit, if worked properly by Northern Ireland Unionists and hardline Brexiteers in the Tory Party, will not see an end to the Union of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but a long-term extension of that Union.

Whether by the DUP dealing at Westminster, or by a reconvened Stormont Executive, Brexiteers must look to the increasingly powerful Commonwealth Parliamentary Association if they are serious about inward investment and bringing much-needed jobs to Ulster in a post Brexit Ireland.

While Northern Ireland voted ‘remain’ in the EU referendum, it should not be forgotten that there is a strong history of Euro scepticism across the geographical island of Ireland, north and south.

Be it the Stormont Executive or a Westminster group of DUP MPs and Tory Euro skeptics under Rees Mogg, such a clique must get its act in gear and begin negotiations with Commonwealth nations and beyond to fill the jobs black hole which has devastated both my home town of Ballymena and the wider Northern Ireland.

Several months ago, hundreds of people braved the cold weather to protest at the Rally for a Future, thereby sending a clear message to the then Stormont Executive that the time for fancy rhetoric is over and jobs have to be delivered for Ballymena.

The Executive (if it can be returned) or Westminster can no longer sit idly by and allow Ballymena to systematically become an economic wasteland and a jobs wilderness.

In practical terms, either the Executive or Westminster needs to urgently get its act in gear and look to our partner parliaments in the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) and beyond to bring much-needed new employment, not just to Ballymena, but right across Ulster.

If Sinn Fein and the DUP, which dominate the Stormont Executive, can get devolution back in place, both parties need to set aside their petty party differences and start working for the people. The speakers and public at the Rally for a Future all those months ago sent a loud demand to the Executive – Ballymena wants to work, and Ballymena needs work!

The CPA was formed in 1911 as the Empire Parliamentary Association with Ireland as a founder member when the island was united under the Union.

It now represents more than 50 national and regional parliaments throughout the globe. The Executive or Westminster needs to speak to many of these parliaments to see if firms can be encouraged to locate in Ulster, thereby creating the much-needed employment.

The Executive or Westminster needs to think far beyond the United Kingdom’s partner states within the European Union. The bitter economic reality we must face is that many of our EU partner states can provide products at a cheaper rate than us in Northern Ireland.

We need to develop our links with rapidly developing economies in nations, such as India, China, Brazil and even Russia.

However, on the dark side of this argument, if under Arlene Foster’s watch the DUP lost the First Minister’s post to Sinn Fein, it could spark further fragmentation within the unionist community as the various unionist movements vent their anger against the DUP.

And there’s no way Sinn Fein will want anything to do with the CPA. So what should Arlene’s answer be in this situation? Unionists must begin thinking outside the box – this means persuading the Republic to engage with the CPA.

The South has witnessed the Celtic Tiger slowly but surely crawling back onto its feet; when the UK leaves the EU, it will leave the Republic isolated on the fringes of Europe politically and geographically – even if under a second referendum, Scotland votes to leave the UK, but remain in the EU.

At the same time, Arlene can use her Westminster team headed up by Nigel Dodds MP to get hard Left Labour Jeremy Corbyn to persuade Sinn Fein to ditch its traditional policy of abstentionism at Westminster and take it Commons seats, thereby sucking Sinn Fein even further into the democratic process and British establishment.

Even if Sinn Fein becomes a minority government partner in the next Dail coalition in Dublin, the voters of Southern Ireland will never forgive the republican movement if it puts historic principles before putting people first.

Sinn Fein did this almost a century ago when it rejected the Anglo-Irish Treaty, split republicanism and sparked the very bloody and brutal Irish Civil War which saw republican butcher republican.

Dr John Coulter has been a journalist working in Ireland for 40 years. Follow him on Twitter.  @JohnAHCoulter

Would the real Hard Right of Unionism please stand up?

Contentious political commentator, Dr John Coulter, uses his inaugural Ballymena Accent column to challenge Unionism’s Radical Right to get its act in gear.

The Protestants-only Orange Order officially welcoming a gay Catholic nationalist Taoiseach to its East Belfast museum; the leader of the DUP attending Muslim, LGBT and GAA events as part of a political ‘love in’ with minority groups – what has happened to the so-called Hard Right of Unionism?

  Ironically, liberal Unionism poses the single biggest threat to the actual Union itself than anything which Sinn Fein could achieve.

  Liberal Presbyterians within the Alliance and Ulster Unionist parties have ripped up the maxim – ‘sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.’

  The constant secularist-style propaganda being pumped out by their so-called liberal unionists from both camps is doing more to undermine the Union than the IRA and INLA bombing and shooting campaigns.

  Why has the leader of the party whose founders once pelted a Taoiseach with snowballs decided to ‘go liberal’? Is it a publicity stunt to combat the rival Ulster Unionists’ ‘radical moderate’ agenda?

  I very much doubt it given the consistent electoral drubbing which the DUP has inflicted on the UUP since the 2003 Stormont poll. Unionism is having to chase these minority groups in Northern Ireland because it has been lured away from its traditional voters bases – the Loyal Orders, the marching band fraternity and the Christian Churches.

  Unionism seems incapable of guiding itself along the political parallel lines which the IRA’s ruling Army Council has pushed Sinn Fein. Sinn Fein has been able to eat substantially into the electorally lucrative Catholic middle class (the natural voter base of the SDLP) while at the same time, firmly holding on to its traditional republican heartlands.

  The days of the traditional Hard Right in Unionism are long gone into the annals of history. Could we see a return to the days of 1974 when the UDA muscle caused the collapse of the Sunningdale power sharing institutions? Not a chance.

  Could we see again the days when the Bill Craig-led Ulster Vanguard movement marshalled thousands of loyalists in Nuremberg-style rallies? No chance.

  Will we ever see the hundreds of thousands of Unionists who jammed the streets around the Belfast City Hall in the mid-Eighties to protest at the Anglo-Irish Agreement? That’ll be another ‘no’.

  Will we ever see a DUP dominated by the party’s Free Presbyterian fundamentalist wing? Not if the leader is courting both the Islamic and LGBT communities.

  Will we ever see a rebirth of the Right-wing pressure group, the Ulster Monday Club, which dominated the UUP during the leadership of the late James Molyneaux? Not if the liberal clique in the UUP topple Orangeman Robin Swann’s traditional Ulster Unionist leadership.

  The annual Drumcree debacle is proof positive that nationalists and republicans have been able to outwit Unionism in terms of street marching.

  The Hard Right needs to get back to basics both in terms of mobilising Unionist opinion and picking its battles. The days of ‘Smash Sinn Fein’ when the Troubles were raging in the 1980s will not work.

  Jim Allister’s Traditional Unionist Voice party is essentially a one-man band and does not have the party machinery to mount an effective challenge to the DUP.

  The New Hard Right of Unionism must copy the initial structure of Vanguard, but must not fall into the pitfall of launching itself as a separate political party.

  Unionism’s New Hard Right must organise from the bottom up by becoming a grassroots pressure group aimed at getting Unionism’s core traditional support to register as voters. Social conservatism around opposing both same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion reform will be the battle cries of the New Hard Right, particularly in the Christian Churches.

  The mainstream Irish Presbyterian Church is having to soak up a lot of flak, especially from liberals in its own ranks following the recent General Assembly vote to ban same-sex couples from becoming communicant members, and refusing to baptise the children of same-sex couples, as well as cut its formal ties with the increasingly theologically wet Church of Scotland.

  Under the banner of ‘Defend The Faith’ – almost Cromwellian style – the New Hard Right must mobilise all the Christian churches, denominations and independent fellowships to the cause of opposing both same-sex marriage and liberal abortion reform.

  The battle grounds will not become the streets and roads, but the pews and the pulpits.

  While secularists point to the drop in numbers attending the main denominations in Northern Ireland, they are not taking account of the thousands of people who worship regularly at Sunday services and mid-week Bible studies of many of the smaller Christian denominations, such as the Brethren, Baptists, Elim Pentecostalists, Church of God, Church of the Nazarene, the Vineyard Church, as well as independent churches such as Green Pastures in Ballymena and Whitewell Tabernacle in north Belfast. Taken together, these worship groups represent a voting bloc of tens of thousands – but are they organised electorally?

   The Loyal Orders have a major role to play in the workings of the New Hard Right. For generations, the Orange Order was the communicative cement which held Unionism together, whereby the rich businessman could sit in the same lodge room as the window cleaner and refer to each other as ‘brother’.

  Using the Loyal Orders as their initial vehicles, the New Hard Right must use annual divine services, Twelfth parades, Royal Black parades, Apprentice Boys marches, and band parades to ensure that all those who participate and watch are registered to vote.

  Just as the Southern Baptists Churches in the Deep South of America mobilised the Afro-American vote during the 1960s civil rights era, so too, the Loyal Orders and Christian Churches can mobilise its pro-Union base.

  The New Hard Right can join party political branches and use its membership to either vote in candidates who oppose same sex marriage and liberal abortion reform, or de-select existing elected representatives who are pro-choice and pro-same-sex marriage.

  While legacy issues and the Irish language can be seen as important battles, the social conservative agenda is the one route which the New Hard Right can win.

  There has been much talk of the need for a new Christian Party because of the liberal drifts in some Christian denominations. In reality, the secular society has not yet got such a grip on the body politic that a Christian Party is now needed.

  Nor should the New Hard Right of Unionism be seen as a ‘Prods-only’ movement along the lines of the old Protestant Reformation Party. There are many socially conservative Catholics who would spiritually oppose same-sex marriage and liberal abortion in Northern Ireland.

  Yes, the New Hard Right’s day has come to flex its political muscle. Pro-choice activists in the republic brandishing ‘The North is Next’ banners may well be the taunts which mobilise the New Hard Right into top gear.

  There is a place for the New Hard Right in Northern Ireland, let alone Unionism. As with other nations in Europe, such as France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Austria – if a New Hard Right is not organised, the Far Right will fill the gap.

  This throws up the frightening possibility that groups such as Britain First, Generation Identity, and other more sinister groups on the Extreme Right will plug the void.

Dr John Coulter has been a journalist working in Ireland for 40 years. Follow him on Twitter.  @JohnAHCoulter

Any takers for the poisoned chalice of leader of conservative Catholic  nationalism, or is it a case that the SDLP has finally thrown in the political towel in its battle with Sinn Fein for the heart and soul of ‘republicanism lite’? Religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, is on a mission to save the SDLP from oblivion.  

As a no-nonsense religious commentator and openly conservative evangelical Christian, it might seem I’ve succumbed to the sins of the ‘liberal-left’ by suggesting that I want to save the SDLP! And by saved, I don’t mean the theological definition of being ‘born again’.

Like it or not, Unionism needs to recognise that it must save the SDLP from being electorally obliterated by the Shinners. Unionists need to learn the lessons from the 1974 Ulster Workers’ Council strike which crippled the then power-sharing Sunningdale Executive.

That venture was a working power-sharing project involving liberal Unionism under Faulkner and moderate nationalism under Gerry Fitt’s SDLP.

If Right-wing Unionism had allowed Sunningdale to work, would we have witnessed the situation where a generation later, Sinn Fein was in government at Parliament Buildings?

Even when Sunningdale fell, Right-wing Unionism relaxed on its political laurels and did not have a replacement for Direct Rule. It relied on the numbers game.

Unionism can no longer rely on that numbers game as an increasingly number of Protestants are abandoning the ballot box. Northern Protestantism does not automatically translate politically into the phrase ‘Vote Unionist’.

Unionism seems to be on a mission that it must appeal to Catholic Unionists or attract transfer votes from moderate Catholic nationalists.

But the root cause of Unionism’s woes is that as a movement, it has wandered away from its natural voter bases – the Loyal Orders, the marching band scene, and more importantly the Protestant Churches and denominations.

Think how the political map of Northern Ireland would be altered if the Unionist parties could persuade everyone in these three traditional groups not just to register, but to ensure that they came out on polling days?

But let’s have a reality check; what are the chances of Unionism getting its act together and mobilising its traditional bases in time for May’s local government elections?

If Unionism is to stop the Sinn Fein bandwagon dead in its tracks, it has to encourage nationalists to return to a moderate alternative, not simply persuade Protestants to vote again in significant numbers as well as attract important moderate Catholic transfers. But who will lead such a movement within the nationalist community?

In the past, the SDLP has had some hard-working leaders – Margaret Ritchie, Alasdair McDonnell, and Mark Durkan. But still the slide continues for Northern moderate nationalism.

We’re not even well into 2019 and already sources are hinting that tough battle lines have been drawn in a potential leadership coup as to who will guide the mainly Catholic Social Democratic and Labour Party into the next Westminster General Election – whenever that may come!

Current boss and Foyle Assembly member Colum Eastwood may need to step aside if a merger with Fianna Fail (or even Fine Gael if there is a grassroots rebellion against an FF merger!) is on the cards, but where would SDLP delegates find future ‘big hitters’?

In one corner, is the party’s former leader Dr Alasdair McDonnell, who represents old-style, traditional moderate nationalism – the kind which saw joint Nobel Peace Prize winner and former boss John Hume dominate the Irish nationalist agenda for almost a generation. Could the ‘Big Al’ faction and thinking make a comeback in moderate nationalism?

McDonnell’s greatest triumph was to snatch the supposedly ultra-safe Unionist Commons seat of South Belfast in the 2005 Westminster poll. He capitalised on the growing fragmentation within the pro-Union family.

South Belfast was a seat previously held by leading Orange clerics Rev Martin Smyth and Rev Robert Bradford, the latter murdered by the IRA in 1981. But as we all know, South Belfast is now a DUP stronghold.

Then there’s another awesome trend to the SDLP. Ms Margaret Ritchie was a Stormont Executive Minister who demonstrated her leadership qualities by putting the brakes on funding destined for hardline loyalist areas. But her supposedly safe South Down Westminster seat fell to Sinn Fein.

In her time, Ms Ritchie enjoyed the support of the SDLP’s youth wing and had predicted a united Ireland within her lifetime. She was viewed as the standardbearer of middle class Catholic respectable Irish republicanism. Could there be another ‘Wee Maggie’ in the SDLP or moderate nationalist ranks?

Both were dynamic leaders in their time, but the crunch question which will decide who emerges as a future leader in moderate nationalism is – who is best poised to rescue the party from electoral oblivion by Sinn Fein?

The Provisional IRA’s political wing has virtually eclipsed the SDLP by concentrating on the moderate nationalist party’s core vote – middle and upper class, well-educated Catholics.

In Commons polls and Northern Assembly elections, this traditionally core SDLP vote deserted the party in their tens of thousands for the darker green republicanism of Sinn Fein.

Tactically, any new SDLP leader can outgun Sinn Fein by throwing the party wholeheartedly behind a merger with the Republic’s largest nationalist coalition party, Fine Gael, led by Southern Prime Minister Leo Varadkar. The SDLP needs an all-Ireland identity, so don’t dump a merger or coalition with Fine Gael into the dustbin simply because its trendy to talk about a merger with Fianna Fail.

Did I say Fine Gael? Why not Fianna Fail? The FF movement is already organised in Northern Ireland and a merger would set the Southern-based party back in its campaign to overhaul the influence of Fine Gael, especially with Brexit officially looming in March 2019.

A merged SDLP/FG can market itself as an alternative all-island party to Sinn Fein. The new merged organisation could position itself as a Centre Right movement, publicly contrasting with the Hard Left Sinn Fein agenda.

Sinn Fein’s main Northern problem is its lack of progress with its Stormont power-sharing partners, the Democratic Unionists. To halt the slide in any support to the more hardline Traditional Unionist Voice movement or a revitalised Ulster Unionist Party, the DUP has to shift further to the Unionist Right-wing.

This is placing a ‘near breaking point’ strain on hopes to restore the DUP/Sinn Fein Stormont Executive.  No one knows when the next Stormont poll will take place, so supporters of any new nationalist movement or a revived SDLP will want their policies for an alternative government in place and before the electorate in time.

However, jungle drums at Stormont are beginning to thump out rumours Sinn Fein is also potentially planning a St Valentine’s Day Massacre on Unionism – politically, of course – by suddenly restoring the Executive and forcing a snap Assembly election in February 2019.

And that’s coming hot on the heels that if May cannot get her Brexit deal through the Commons later this week, then a snap Westminster General Election could be on the cards – even if Mrs May has pledged she will not call one. And if the political brakes are put on the 29 March Brexit, Northern Ireland could be back at the polls electing three MEPs.

Given the severe splits in the pro-Union community, as with the last Commons poll, Sinn Fein looks set to emerge as the largest Assembly party following any future Stormont election– a feat which would guarantee it the coveted First Minister’s post.

Even if Theresa May can hang onto power until April or May 2019 before any future Commons poll in the event of her losing a confidence motion, a snap Assembly election could allow Sinn Fein to enter that Westminster battle as still the lead nationalist party before any new SDLP leader can settle in.

Sinn Fein has seven MPs to the SDLP’s none! But the republican movement still refuses to take its Commons seats, making it a virtually insignificant Westminster force.

But Sinn Fein needs to be aware of the impact of either Fianna Fail or a merged SDLP/FG MPs taking their Commons seats. Such a tight make-up in the Commons could either propel Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn into 10 Downing Street, or even spark a second EU membership referendum.

Under the Theresa May administration, the Tories have all but guaranteed seats in a future national government for Northern Irish MPs or peers.

If a new SDLP/FG leader was to enter an ‘arrangement’ with the Conservatives, there is the strong chance Theresa May, or even Boris Johnston, could also give a junior government post in the Northern Ireland Office to an SDLP/FG MP. Sinn Fein can shout in the corridors of Westminster, but its votes in the Commons chamber which count.

But Sinn Fein has also suffered a couple of political bloody noses in the Republic, especially in a past Southern General Election where it lost a seat, and in a past Lisbon Treaty defeat for the No camp.

Okay, pundits can point to the increase in Sinn Fein TDs under Gerry Adams and the winning of the referenda on same-sex marriage and more liberal abortion laws.

Now that Sinn Fein has supposedly formally ‘dumped’ the Provisional IRA, it is trying to rebrand itself as a new millennium version of the now defunct constitutional republican outfit, the Irish Independence Party. But anyone who believes the IRA Army Council does not have an influence on the republican movement is living in a fantasy world.

Likewise, in the murky world of Irish political mergers and back channels, do not rule out those who want to see an amalgamation of Sinn Fein and the SDLP. This would see a return to the late 1960s scenario when a single party spoke for the vast majority of republicans, the now collapsed Irish Nationalist Party.

And before people collapse themselves in hysterical laughter at such a merger, remember those who laughed in 1981 in the teeth of the republican Hunger Strikes at the prospect of republicans running a partitionist parliament at Stormont; remember those who laughed in 1985 at the prospect of the Rev Ian Paisley in a power-sharing government with Sinn Fein.

In the ever-volatile world of Irish politics, remember the maxim, change is always in the wind. So don’t be surprised if any new Centre Right SDLP/FG leader climbs into bed with a Centre Right British Tory Party.

Follow religious commentator Dr John Coulter on Twitter  @JohnAHCoulter