DUP selective British rights: The Driver's Licence Clause

Yesterday DUP MP for Lagan Valley Jeffrey Donaldson said:

"British Citizens in Northern Ireland deserve the same rights as the rest of the UK."

However, this was not about the rights of NI LGBT people to have the right to marry whom they choose. Nor is it to defend the Equality Act in full, in face of his colleague Paul Givan's conscience clause. Nor it is a freeing up of abortion legislation, no a whole gamut of rights issues that the people of Northern Ireland are the only ones in the UK to have equally with the rest of the UK.

No. This was about the change in driving licence design that in England, Wales and Scotland will not display the Union Flag alongside the European Union Flag, but in Northern Ireland will retain just the flag of the EU.

Of course this comes mere weeks after once again the main parties failed to come to any agreement on symbols and flags (amongst other issues) once again, and merely passed this on to another commission. So it is hardly surprising that flag controversy once again hits Northern Ireland when it is an issue that after over 16 years of talking we have yet to reach a consensus on.

But once again the argument from Donaldson shows the duplicity of the DUP. They use the argument of British Citizens having the same rights as the rest of the UK when it suits them, but with the other hand will argue that Northern Ireland is different from the rest of the UK when it comes to things like LGBT rights, abortion and other issues if it suits them politically with their base.

Sorry Jeffrey I'm not going to let you, or any member of the DUP, get away with playing the British rights card when you deny me the same rights as I would experience elsewhere in the UK because of my sexual orientation. Especially in light of Cllr Maurice "gays caused Hurricane Katrina" Mills becoming a Member of the British Empire in the New Year Honours, while LGBT British citizens are seen as less than full UK citizens with the same rights by the DUP I shall continue to hold institutional homophobia from Mr Donaldson's party to account.

DUP and the Death Penalty Part II

The DUP MPs David Simpson, Sammy Wilson, Jim Shannon, Gregory Campbell and Jeffrey Donaldson say they are backing a motion to discuss the return of the death penalty. They say this issue was last discussed in 1998 in Westminster in 1998 and that it was now time for the debate to be reopened.

Indeed Mr Donaldson had earlier said that he wanted it brought back for convicted terrorists. Time I think to republish a certain photo.

The issue had of course been debated in each parliament since the abolition of the death penalty up until 1998 when it was last put to the house. Ironically the last time it was amended removing the death penalty for treason, piracy and mutiny were all removed from the statute book. Of course for the Death Penalty was removed in 1965 for most of the UK except Northern Ireland when it came to an end in theNorthern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Act 1973.

The Belfast Agreement contains the following statement on policing and justice (emphasis mine):

The participants believe it essential that policing structures and arrangements are such that the police service is professional, effective and efficient, fair and impartial, free from partisan political control; accountable, both under the law for its actions and to the community it serves; representative of the society it polices, and operates within a coherent and co-operative criminal justice system, which conforms with human rights norms. The participants also believe that those structures and arrangements must be capable of maintaining law and order including responding effectively to crime and to any terrorist threat and to public order problems. A police service which cannot do so will fail to win public confidence and acceptance. They believe that any such structures and arrangements should be capable of delivering a policing service, in constructive and inclusive partnerships with the community at all levels, and with the maximum delegation of authority and responsibility, consistent with the foregoing principles. These arrangements should be based on principles of protection of human rights and professional integrity and should be unambiguously accepted and actively supported by the entire community.

We were basing a Northern Ireland that was based on norms, ironically in the same week that the final death penalties were being removed from the statute book, in July 1998.

So does Donaldson's statement indicate a unilateral removal of Northern Ireland from the EU and the European Convention on Human Rights in Protocol 6, Article 1 states:

The death penalty shall be abolished. No one shall be condemned to such penalty or executed.

There are exceptions in time of war, but the DUP are talking about a shared future therefore a peaceful future so hard to find where the war is.

The DUP are saying that one of the reasons they want the debate is "because [they] want to hear the contrary arguments." Interesting that at Stormont quite a lot of the time they refuse to hear the contrary argument (eg The Blood Ban) and make their own decisions without consultation with a contrary position to their own. Curious that the DUP are supporting the 25,000 strong petition to bring back the death penalty and not the contrary reaction based 30,000 strong petition to keep it off the statute books.

Jeffrey get your facts right about cafés, the bible and LGBT in this country

Today in PMQs the DUP's MP for Lagan Valley, Jeffrey Donaldson, asked David Cameron the following question:

Q8. [76635] Mr Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP): The Prime Minister has warned African countries that unless they improve gay rights, he will cut their aid, yet in many African countries where we pour in millions of pounds of aid, Christians face great persecution and destruction of churches, lives and property. Here in the UK, anyone who displays a Bible verse on the wall of a café faces prosecution. Was Ann Widdecombe right when she said that in the 21st century hedgehogs have more rights than Christians?

Now me being curious wanted to take a look at just how many cafe owners had faced prosecution for the offence of displaying a bible verse as I know a few of them around Northern Ireland that do so. Though I do know that potentially there are a few that are on permanent display on roadsides in Northern Ireland that could cause offence to certain sections of the community under section 75 (1) of the Belfast Agreement and I have yet to hear of anyone or any LGBT group protesting or prosecuting their existence.

It appears I wasn't the only one to want to do a fact check, read this piece by full fact check.

The Ann Widdecombe reference comes from this article in her Express column. But she doesn't mention anything about Cafes.

No that honour goes to the Fail on Sunday (again I have to apologise to readers for the link). After 24 paragraphs of reporting in which it is said that

• the cafe owner was threatened with arrest
• that he was told to stop playing his DVDs of the New Testament
• that he faced and intensive inquisition for over an hour after the police arrived unannounced
• that he was being bullied by the police
• that he feared being put into handcuffs
• that the Christian Institute (yes them again) are preparing a complaint on the cafe owners behalf

We get to this statement from Lancashire Constabulary after it says that they turned up to look into a complaint from a member of the public under the Public Order Act 1986 (which also for the record states that criticism of sexual conduct shall not in itself be deemed threatening or to stir up hatred):

"At no point did the officer ask the cafe owner to remove any materials or arrest the man and we took a commonsense and objective approach in dealing with the complaint. We believe our response and the action we took was completely proportionate and our officers are always available should the cafe owner want to discuss the matter or need any advice in the future. 

"The Constabulary is respectful of all religious views. However, we do have a responsibility to make sure that material that communities may find deeply offensive or inflammatory is not being displayed in public. 

"No complaint has been received about the conduct of the officer in question and we are satisfied that they performed their duties professionally."

Yeah it is another non-story in the Fail.

Maybe Jeffrey should look at some of the activity within his own party. Of course there is the former chair of the Health Committee who said that homosexual should see her little Christian psychiatrist friend for a cure. Or the current deputy chair who says that all those who take part in Pride are repugnant. Even those it would seem who offer counselling to suicidal LGBT young and not so young people, those who offer sexual health advise to all whether LGBT or straight, those who are men/women of the cloth, those who sit with them in Stormont or council chambers across Northern Ireland.

In America the so called family group, the American Family Association (AFA), have this week attacked the Trevor Project, a helpline for suicidal prevention among LGBT teens. So clearly they don't want people to tell these LGBT teens, who are five times more likely to take their own lives that straight teens, not to commit suicide. Sadly that is not so far removed from the actions and words of many in the DUP and indeed the tone with which Mr Donaldson asked his question. The figures for homophobic bullying of teens in Northern Ireland are as bad as in the USA where the AFA operate are just as bad.

Those of us who have been through those feelings in the past want to tell Northern Ireland LGBT teens, young people and not so young that it gets better, but how can we when our leaders fail to get their facts right about issues of homophobia real or alleged.

Death knell for the progressive DUP continues

Jeffrey's former NI Assembly picture

The first Northern Irish MP to support the restoration of the death penalty, even partially, is from that supposedly progressive new DUP we're heard so much about, yet in recent days appears to be notable in its absence.

It is Jeffrey Donaldson who is the first to raise his head over this particular parapet. He has said:

"We (the DUP) have stated consistently that in cases of terrorist murder, we believe that there should be the death penalty.


"One of the reasons why I think it should be debated is because I want to hear the contrary arguments.

"We haven't as parliamentarians debated this issue now for 30 years.

"A lot has happened in that time, terrorism has become much more sophisticated, much more deadly and I think it is time parliament debated this issue again." 

So if the MP for Lagan Valley is right the DUP will all not only want a debate but will be supporting a partial at least restoration of the death penalty.

The death penalty was abolished in 1969 in England, Wales and Scotland but not until 1973 in Northern Ireland. The last executions for murder in the UK occurred in 1964. Not surprisingly therefore the last person to see the judge don a black cap in a UK court was William Holden in 1973, he was removed from his death cell in May of that year before the abolition in Northern Ireland on 25 July.

On 20 May 1998 the UK Parliament voted to ratify the 6th Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which prohibiting capital punishment except "in time of war or imminent threat of war." On the 10 October 2003, effective from 1 February 2004 the UK acceded to the 13th Protocol, which prohibits the death penalty under all circumstances. Whilst the UK adheres to the ECHR it can no longer legislate for a death penalty. The Conservative Party were the only party to campaign on a withdrawal from the ECHR at the last election.

Strangely on the first of these there was vote in Parliament. However, Mr Donaldson (then with the UUP) and all of the other Unionist MPs, with the exception of Martyn Smyth (UUP), were absent from the chamber and unable to take part in the debate or cast a vote.

Of course the main point here is to look at the nations where the death penalty is still in force. China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Syria are all prime examples of where capital punishment still persists and quite regularly. Also people cite the USA as a country where capital punishment is still allowed in the 'western world', however in states which practice capital punishment incidents of homicide are higher than US states which do not. Also the cost of keeping in a death row and the legal costs of petitions against the sentence lead to higher cost of capital punishment compared to life imprisonment.

The death penalty isn't the easy or cost effective alternative to our current system. Indeed when you look at some of those who are campaigning for its reinstatement you can see them as opponents of the ECHR which has a lot of  good protectionist points to it. There are also a large number of people campaigning for the reinstatement who want us out of the European Union altogether.

I think it is time to look at the motivation behind the people who want the death penalty back. Are they stirring up emotions on the back of the Norway tragedy to get their own ulterior motives fulfilled?

As a Liberal Democrat I believe that no-one should be enslaved by poverty ignorance and conformity, nor for that matter should they be hung or otherwise killed for it. Even if Mr Donaldson only wants it returned for terrorism let us not forget that the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six where two high profile cases where terrorist murder sentences were later overturned.

Are Mr Donaldson and the DUP prepared to have the possibility of innocent blood on their hands by supporting such a motion? What now of the new progressive DUP?

Now Sinn Fein are Threatening the SNP Tactic

Yesterday I blogged about the bankers at RBS using the SNP tactic of not just taking the ball away, but themselves out of the game if their bonuses of £1.5 bn (25% of profits) are turned down by Government. Today I see that Martin McGuinness the Deputy First Minister in Northern Ireland is threatening, in coded language, that the same may happen in Northern Ireland over the timing of devolution and justice to Stormont.

I say coded message so let me decipher, McGuinness says that the institutions are unsustainable without a date for devolution of policing by Christmas. You may think so what if you are not Northern Irish, but that is code for all the institutions of devolution, not just cross-border agencies but also the Assembly and the dual mandate of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister. Devolution of policing has always been one of the major stumbling blocks in fully implementing the Good Friday Agreement. After all Sinn Féin and their military were never going to be likely to be on friendly terms with the force that was arrayed against them throughout the Troubles. So this has been the longest, hardest and most painstaking march towards a peaceful, settled Northern Ireland there has been.

However, it is one of those rare occasions that I agree with the DUP Jeffrey Donaldson. I quite often have found the man objectionable in the past, but he is correct when on the BBC this morning I heard him say that setting deadlines in stone was something that should never be done in Northern Ireland politics, but that the best settlement for all sides should be worked out. If that is done by Christmas then that is fine, however if it is not Sinn Féin should not arbitrarily walk away from all the progress that has been made.

There are signs that a consensus is almost settled on the first Justice Minister under this period of devolution. David Ford the Alliance party leader looks set to gain the cross-community support to take on that role. Now the politicians need to reach agreement over policing and McGuinness is right in that it has to cover equality issues. But with only three weeks to Christmas and probably less that two of those productive setting a Christmas deadline for a resolution is ludicrous so close to that date. Even Tony Blair over ran on his deadline to get the Agreement signed off initially.