When does seeking equality equal special pleading? - When you ask the TUV

Today Fermanagh's Impartial Reporter was holding a Q&A session with the TUV's Jim Allister via twitter. I threw my hat into the ring to see if my question would get used, it was. See below:

 

It was a straightforward but at the same time loaded question. Neither the DUP, UUP or TUV have voted for any advance in LGBT equality in Northern Ireland. The LGBT community in Northern Ireland is not split along traditional lines but crosses them.

You will notice that I am asking for equality. First equality with other citizens and second equality within the UK with other LGBT citizens.

So somehow from the fact that we do not have equality within Northern Ireland, nor with the rest of the UK Allister considers that somehow we have greater protections under the law than anyone else. Yet we are still awaiting a Sexual Orientation Strategy to be published, still have Departments appealing progress that has been awarded through the courts not the Assembly. 

So when has asking to be treated equally even been considered special pleading?

Prison reform should be free of partisan political control and Robinson threats

The First Minister Peter Robinson seems to think that throwing his toys out of the pram is the way to go to enable an inclusive prison service in  Northern Ireland. The issue arose in the debate on the Prison Review: Final Report at Stormont yesterday. The thing that seems to concern him most is the issue of the emblems used by the Northern Ireland Prison Service and most noticeably on the sign for the prisons themselves.

The Justice Minister, David Ford made remarks in his summation particularly in response to Jim Allister of Traditional Unionist Voice who had earlier said:

We also know that the reform of policing involved a name change. Are we going to have a name change of the prisons? Are they no longer going to be Her Majesty’s prisons? Perhaps the Minister, in replying, will confirm to us most robustly that that will not happen. I will listen with interest to see whether he does. Like the reform of policing, is the badge of the Prison Service to be changed? Is the crown to go? Let us hear from the Minister a robust denial that that will be any part of the agenda. When we read that the reform of the Prison Service must be like the reform of policing, alarm bells ring very loudly indeed. We wait with interest to see whether that is part of the machinations that are afoot.

The Minister's response to that particular issue and the interruption is recorded in Hansard as follows:

Mr Ford: Jim Allister referred to some extent to symbols and titles as they apply to the Prison Service. Those are operational issues for the Prison Service, but I believe that if NIPS is serious about fundamental and end-to-end structural and cultural reform, it cannot fail to consider the symbols and emblems that are visible signs of the organisation’s culture and focus. That is one of a range of operational issues that I will be expecting NIPS to consider as part of the change process over the coming months. NIPS has to deliver a transformation of its culture and it cannot move forward unless it addresses those sorts of issues along with others relating to staffing and estates, and so on.
Mr Allister: So that we are absolutely clear, is the Minister saying that he anticipates an end to our prisons being called “Her Majesty’s prisons” and that he anticipates an end to the crown being part of the symbol of the Prison Service? Will he be clear on that? If he is saying those things, I want to tell him that there are many in the unionist community who will be appalled at the direction in which he is taking us.
Mr Ford: I think that it is a pity that we are getting hung up on symbols. It is the only issue that anybody has wanted to intervene on during my speech this afternoon. I said that we are looking at a process of fundamental and end-to-end reform that will affect every part of the working of the Prison Service and its culture. In those circumstances, although these issues are operational matters for the Prison Service, it has to consider them as it looks for the appropriate way to run in the years ahead.

It was indeed rather telling that people who talk the talk of being inclusive (Mr Allister excepted) decided that symbols were so important, with the First Minister deciding today that he is even prepared to resign over the issue and force an election.

This ignores the fact that as can been seen at the top the Northern Ireland Prison Service already have adopted a post-devolution emblem that doesn't include the crown or the Queen's moniker. This isn't a new issue as the emblems have been moving forward anyway. Of course when the RUC (GC) was rebranded as the PSNI this all took place before policing and justice was devolved. But I turn once again to The Belfast Agreement which 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 as a country need to acknowledge that some of the clinging to past emblems and structures is partisan politics, is not going to he acceptable to the entire community. It does not mean that we totally forget the past, but that we move on to a future that is truly shared.

Maybe it is time for Mr Robinson to get this into perspective and look at the main thrust of the final report and the crux of the issues that prison reforms need in Northern Ireland rather than focus on the cosmetics.

We need sexual orientation strategy because of bigots like Allister

This was asked in the Northern Irish Assembly on Monday:

"As there is already a plethora of statutory protections for the so-called gay community and generous financial provision from the junior Minister’s Department for various organisations therein, why do the junior Minister and the First Minister, who once campaigned to save Ulster from sodomy, now want to introduce a sexual orientation strategy? Why do they now think it necessary?"

The person asking the question was Jim James* Allister MLA for Northern Antrim. Now to be fair the when in points of order he did ask:

"If a Member asks a supplementary question that is patently not answered, as with the question that I asked Mr Bell, is that question also answered in writing subsequently?"

He was right the answer didn't cover any of his points.

For a start there is hardly a plethora of statutory protections, the OFMdFM website does list what has been brought forward and what is still to come. The point of a strategy is to protect the "sexual orientation sector" (this is OFMdFM parlance for the LGBT community) from prejudice that still exists around them here in Northern Ireland. For an example of such ignorance or why that is required look no further than Mr Allister's question.

First up he calls the LGBT sector a so-called community. Now either he is denying that people of non-heterosexual persuasion do not exist in Northern Ireland, or he is denying that such people have community spirit. If it is the former as the co-ordinator of LGBT Lib Dems here in Northern Ireland I'd better get together with the similar groups in other Northern Irish parties and start to work on a strategy ton contact all the poor deluded people on Grindr or other gay dating sites looking for same sex relationships. If it is the later maybe we should invite Mr Allister to Pride in Belfast at the end of July, to let him see the community spirit there.

However, the other thing about his question is in the language of Mr Allister, just as he refers to the Sinn Féin members of the Assembly with "terrorist" additions to their titles, party name etc, his comments are laced with vitriol to the LGBT community. He brings up the "save Ulster from sodomy" campaign, which is the equivalent to the troubles to the LGBT community here in Northern Ireland. This was were LGBT people were largely afraid to be open about who they were, were they skulked away, giving the impression that they did not exist, because putting their head over the parapet was too dangerous a thing to do.

Yes we still have people who think that way, they will be present at the Pride parade, although last year I counted more Christians in the parade for Foyle Pride than were protesting in such a way against it. However, this small group are very good at dragging their feet. Indeed it wasn't that long ago that DUP members themselves stopped using derogatory and non-inclusive language to the LGBT community in the chamber. Indeed they stopped calling Sinn Féin "IRA/Sinn Féin" long before that happened.

Later on in business looking at Government structures, Mr Alister said that the Belfast Agreement "is a living history and a living act that [the MLA who wrote to Newsletter on Saturday], as the Whip of his party, implements and enforces every day of the week". Yes it is also the first document, see Section 75, that specifically mentioned LGBT as one of the minority groups in Northern Ireland that should be recognised by public bodies, something that a sexual orientation strategy first consulted on back in 2006 would fully bring about. The fact that we are now 5 years on and still have at least another year to wait is yet another example of the heel dragging that is going on at the Assembly over this. Neanderthals like Mr Allister only emphasis the need for this.

Being almost at the point of committing a hate crime while talking about one of the recognised minority groupings in Northern Ireland in the chamber of the Assembly perfectly illustrates just why a sexual orientation strategy is needed in Northern Ireland to match the strategies in place for the other section 75 groupings. As the representative for North Amtrim he has to represent the people, even the LGBT people (and yes there are some of them there too Jim James*), so let's stop dragging our heels or digging up their past hurts and wrongs.

* We are at his behest only using proper names.

Allister hoisted by his own hyopcritical naming petard

Jim Allister really had better be more careful of what he asks for when he wants Northern Ireland to be called "Northern Ireland", and not "the North", "North of Ireland" of "Six Counties", in matters pertaining  to the Northern Irish Assembly.When he said:

"In light of that ruling, I invite you to consider the logical and necessary extension of that approach to references in this house to the state of Northern Ireland so that the proper name - namely that of Northern Ireland - is used on all occasions."

So I thought I'd look at his own record reciprocating that with the Republic of Ireland (Poblacht na hÉireann if referring to its official title in its native tongue). I thought this would be a shared precedent that he would follow and one that the Speaker William Hay MLA might like to consider in making his judgement. After all if Jim is wanting this to happen out of principle and integrity what better place to look that his own experience (see the slogan on his poster pictured).

On his own website I found his own response to the St Andrews Agreement Review of North/South Implementation Bodies and Areas for Co-operation. As there are plenty of references there to the Republic of Ireland and indeed Northern Ireland there.

Would you be surprised to learn that Mr Allister isn't consistent (I'll highlight references to the Republic in Green, Northern Ireland in Red and misnaming of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland or Great Britain in Blue:

Page 10 yet another unwelcome layer of Southern interference in the affairs of this part of the United Kingdom

Page 15 There is provision in the South for similar arrangements in relation to the Oireachtas 

Page 16 In truth, there is a mutual veto which can be exercised by Nationalists as well as Unionists. And an analysis of Sinn Fein [sic]/IRA controlled ministries shows that what the DUP described as “freelance cooperation” with the Republic continues apace. (editor's note I may be being a bit mischievous here, but surely The Republic is a truncation of The Republic of Ireland just in the same way as The North  is a truncation of Northern Ireland.)

Page 17 However, if Northern Ireland is marketed as a single entity with the Irish Republic obvious
complications arise when a disease arrives in the Irish Republic of which Northern Ireland and Mainland UK are free. (editor's note again mischievous perhaps but the official name is The Republic of Ireland not The Irish Republic.)

Ibid Why did the Republic get off so lightly? (see also pages 18, 19 and 20 on numerous occasions)

Ibid Like her party college [sic] Ms Gildernew, Caitríona Ruane has displayed an enthusiasm for all things south of the border 

• In December 2007 Ms Ruane and her southern counterpart Cornor [sic] Lenihan 

Page 19 I would suggest that the bias of the DRD minister* – a convicted terrorist who is working to see the destruction of Northern Ireland's place in the Union** – provides an answer. 32 It suites the Irish Republican agenda to see to it that Northern Ireland’s transport links with the South are maintained and kept in pristine condition while those with GB mainland are neglected.

Note I've ignored all the mentions of North/South as this was the title of the paper that he was referring to.

So so get this right on all count.

Antrim, Armagh, Down, Fermanagh, Londonderry and Tyrone = Northern Ireland, Tuaisceart Éireann or Norlin Airlann
The remaining 26 counties on this island = The Republic of Ireland or Poblacht na hÉireann
England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales = The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
England, Scotland and Wales = Britain
Mainland England, Scotland and Wales (without any islands) = Great Britain (being the largest of the British Isles)

Although also to be fair shouldn't we be calling Mr Allister by his proper name of James?
 
* I elongated this quote to illustrate the point which Mr Allister got pulled up on in nothing new.
** I'm assuming here he means the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland but is using a truncation for his own devices.