There is a petition going around demanding that, like the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland should have a referendum to bring about marriage equality.
I and the majority of LGBT+ groups in Northern Ireland are opposed to the idea, which was first muted by Sinn Féin in the run up the the referendum in the republic and here are the reasons why.
1. There is not need for a referendum to bring about marriage equality in any part of the UK. In the Republic of Ireland there had to be a constitution change to recognise marriage equality. The only way to do so, based on that constitution, was to hold a referendum. In Scotland a simply Bill was required in Holyrood and for England and Wales a Bill before Westminster was enough to bring about such change. Such a bill would still need to be brought before the Northern Ireland Assembly to bring about any change.
2. A referendum is not legally binding in the UK. A referendum does not necessarily have legal binding on UK legislators to bring about change. Admittedly often they do bring about the change or endorse the decision of the referendum but there actually is nothing to prevent the legislative body with responsibility. Indeed if such a referendum were to come about in Northern Ireland there is nothing to prevent a petition of concern being used, by let's say the DUP, the prevent subsequent legislation coming into effect.
3. Public debate is not as mature on this issue in NI as the RoI. Despite legalising homosexuality later than the North the Republic of Ireland is at a far more mature level of debate on this issue than the North. Yes there are some stupid and ridiculous comments made by some of those opposed in the Republic, but the level of the political debate between the politicians, even those who disagreed with their parties stance, was far more civil and factually based than the largest party in Northern Ireland has shown again the recent election and aftermath to be able to carry on over issues of LGBT equality.
4. Both the two biggest parties are viewing LGBT equality as a political football. I'm sorry to say this but since it was first mooted that NI should have equal marriage Sinn Féin's support has become as much of a political football as the DUP's opposition to it has. This is no more evident than the poor timing of the last debate in Stormont and the call for this referendum now. Most LGBT activists were certain that the time to strike next in Stormont to seek marriage equality should have been after the referendum result in the Republic was known. But Sinn Féin decided that the 28th April (ie during the short campaign for Westminster) was the time to put the motion before the Assembly for the fourth time. This timing was poor and could only have come from a party that did not consider Westminster elections to be important. Most LGBT activists with party affiliation outside Sinn Féin were too busy with the election to lobby MLAs and get into a big campaign on this occasion. While the DUP have in the past picked on Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams saying that equality is a Torjan Horse by which to beat the DUP I would say that recent actions overlooking the views of the LGBT community shows they do not really understand the nature of this equality.
The DUP meanwhile use their opposition to LGBT equality as a means to shore up their core vote, although having lost Antrim South to a pro-marriage equality Unionist and seen the Alliance vote pick up a great deal of the UUP vote in East Belfast it would appear it is a tactic that only has limited appeal.
5. Should a socially conservative majority have a say on minority rights? In the Northern Ireland Act we actually have a statutory requirement for the public bodies to allow equality of opportunity for various groups, this includes marital status and sexual orientation. Would such a referendum actually fit within the statutory obligations of our public bodies? I do not feel it does. Even though recent opinion polls are showing that there is now a majority in favour of supporting marriage equality here, there is a danger that the most socially conservative part of the UK could be ground down in a particularly heated campaign to vote no on the day. Also many LGBT people already know the sort of vitriol that some politicians or campaigners already direct towards us when our rights aren't the focus of a campaign, we can only envision it getting ugly if they were the sole focus. Also if the social conservatives were to squeak a narrow majority, it would set back any hope of reform for 10-20 years, when we are only trailing a couple of years behind the rest of the UK and Ireland at present. People's rights for equality should not be placed in the hands who have privilege to determine the extension of those rights.
Showing posts with label Sinn Féin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sinn Féin. Show all posts
Sunday, 31 May 2015
Friday, 23 January 2015
Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics: The DUP number game
The DUP are claiming that their 9 MPs being greater than the SNP's 9 and Plaid Cymru's 3 puts them in a position to be at the leaders' debates ahead of these other regional parties.
But look at it another way the DUP will be fielding between 16-18 candidates (the number is variable as they are still talking about possible deal(s) with the UUP), this is against the SNP who will be standing 59 and Plaid who will be standing 40.
Of those 59 and 40 they will all face a Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat and a high proportion also facing a Green and UKIP candidate. Of the DUP candidates there may be a handful who face Conservatives, UKIP and Green candidates. Not one will face a Labour or Lib Dem candidate (although they may be facing a member of one of those parties under a different label).
So does the DUP on the numbers game they are playing deserve a podium at the debates? In my opinion no.
However, I would love to see Peter Robinson up there as to actually debate real issues would show up how backward the DUP actually are. I've long been of the opinion that even many third and fourth placed candidates in the rest of the UK have a greater grasp on reality, people and working for all people than the DUP. So I dreamt last night of Peter Robinson having to face questions for the other UK party leaders having to justify the conscience clause and his parties anti-LGBT and anti-abortion agenda while claiming they wanted to be British.
Of course both Sinn Féin, the SDLP and Alliance are now all saying that they too have as much right for representation with the inclusion of two parties who don't stand across all of the UK in these debates. And the DUP are saying that Naomi Long of the Alliance is represented by the Lib Dems, when she is not on my membership list and has said she is not a Liberal Democrat many times and the SDLP by Labour.
But look at it another way the DUP will be fielding between 16-18 candidates (the number is variable as they are still talking about possible deal(s) with the UUP), this is against the SNP who will be standing 59 and Plaid who will be standing 40.
Of those 59 and 40 they will all face a Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat and a high proportion also facing a Green and UKIP candidate. Of the DUP candidates there may be a handful who face Conservatives, UKIP and Green candidates. Not one will face a Labour or Lib Dem candidate (although they may be facing a member of one of those parties under a different label).
So does the DUP on the numbers game they are playing deserve a podium at the debates? In my opinion no.
However, I would love to see Peter Robinson up there as to actually debate real issues would show up how backward the DUP actually are. I've long been of the opinion that even many third and fourth placed candidates in the rest of the UK have a greater grasp on reality, people and working for all people than the DUP. So I dreamt last night of Peter Robinson having to face questions for the other UK party leaders having to justify the conscience clause and his parties anti-LGBT and anti-abortion agenda while claiming they wanted to be British.
Of course both Sinn Féin, the SDLP and Alliance are now all saying that they too have as much right for representation with the inclusion of two parties who don't stand across all of the UK in these debates. And the DUP are saying that Naomi Long of the Alliance is represented by the Lib Dems, when she is not on my membership list and has said she is not a Liberal Democrat many times and the SDLP by Labour.
Friday, 12 December 2014
Parties cancel trip to brewery
Find out more here.
Wednesday, 28 May 2014
Never in the history of Northern Irish politics...part 3
...have the pick three not dominated in European quota collection.
Many have passed comment on the length of time this European election has taken. But unlike in previous elections no candidate or pair of candidates has dominated enough in first preferences to make the transfer of their surplus more or less decide the election.
In 1979 Ian Paisley was elected on first preferences of 1.19 quotas, John Hume was second on 0.98 quotas and was swiftly elected with the exclusion of the various independent and smaller nationalist/republican votes in the third stage. The UUP actually had 0.87 of a quota in the first round but this was split between two candidates which had them sitting 3rd and 4th on first preferences and it wasn't until his running mate Harry West's vote pushed John Taylor over the quota.
In other words the big three had 3.04 quotas between them.
In 1984 Paisley sailed in with 1.34 quotas and the UUP putting up just one candidate this time also saw John Taylor in with 1.08 quota on first preferences. Hume for the SDLP was slightly further away this time with 0.88 of a quota, but was soon elected no the fourth stage with the exclusion of Alliance and UPUP.
However, the three who got elected had ensured that 3.3 quotas were theirs from first preference.
1989 saw Paisley in first with 1.20 quotas and Hume also sneaked in on first preference with 1.02. Jim Nicholson replacing Taylor on the UUP ticket was on 0.89 which was close enough to see him elected on the transfers of Paisley's surplus at stage 2. Between then the 3.11 was enough to ensure they were all elected without the elimination of another candidate.
In 1994 Paisley and Hume again sailed through on first preferences with 1.17 and 1.16 of a quota respectively. Nicholson was just under with 0.95, but once again it was enough for his election on the surplus of Paisley. The 3.28 quotas was just behind the peak of 1984 for centralising the vote within the big three.
Paisley's last European election in 1999 saw him once again top the poll with 1.14 quota. Hume also facing his last Euro electorate also was safely in with 1.12 and Nicholson posted at the time the poorest showing for one the big three with only 0.70 of a quota. It was still a respectable 2.96 of a quota. The elimination of all four of the lowest candidates made it a two person run off for the last seat, but it was only when Paisley's surplus was distributed in stage 3 that Nicholson was elected.
In 2004 we saw new faces for all but the UUP of the big four.But Jim Allister then still with the DUP carried on the Paisley legacy securing 1.27 of a quota to be elected top, Sinn Féin's Bairbre de Brún was also over the threshold with 1.05 of a quota. Nicholson faired worse still with only 0.66 of a quota which meant that the Allister surplus didn't see him over the line but the elimination of all bar the SDLP candidate did.
The top three parties were still polling 2.98 quotas. But there had been a shift in the nationalist vote and now the SDLP found themselves just behind the UUP in 4th.
Last time out in 2004 was the first time after 4 cycles that only person achieved the quota on first preferences. It was Bairbre de Brún who managed it with 1.04 of a quota a drop in the share she had last time. Nicholson rallied slightly to 0.68 but Diane Dodds replacing the defected Jim Allister only secured 0.73 enough to be ahead of the UUP but the DUP's worst ever showing in the European elections. The reason for this was the 0.54 that Allister himself secured for his new TUV party.
However, the net result was the that big three only had 2.45 quotas between then and only 0.04 of a surplus from first preferences. However, elimination of the Green and Alliance for stage 2, followed by the TUV in stage three soon saw the UCU-NF candidate safely over the threshold, and Dodds deemed elected due to the small surpluses not being enough to get the SDLP above her.
Which leads to this year, Martina Anderson of Sinn Féin was elected first round but with only 1.02 of a quota the smallest winning quota ever in Northern Irish European elections. Diane Dodds improved to 0.84 but Nicholson only just sneaked over half a quota on 0.53, the SDLP weren't far off with 0.52.
It meant that the three largest parties had dipped even further down to 2.39 and the battle was entered to secure almost double their first preference between the UUP and SDLP. Allister for the TUV had 0.48 of it and would not be eliminated until stage 7 and the three non-designated parties (Alliance, Grenn, NI21) had 0.42 of their quota their highest ever. This is why the election went so deep, there wasn't masses of other naturally unionist votes to be transferred until a late stage.
Many have passed comment on the length of time this European election has taken. But unlike in previous elections no candidate or pair of candidates has dominated enough in first preferences to make the transfer of their surplus more or less decide the election.
In 1979 Ian Paisley was elected on first preferences of 1.19 quotas, John Hume was second on 0.98 quotas and was swiftly elected with the exclusion of the various independent and smaller nationalist/republican votes in the third stage. The UUP actually had 0.87 of a quota in the first round but this was split between two candidates which had them sitting 3rd and 4th on first preferences and it wasn't until his running mate Harry West's vote pushed John Taylor over the quota.
In other words the big three had 3.04 quotas between them.
In 1984 Paisley sailed in with 1.34 quotas and the UUP putting up just one candidate this time also saw John Taylor in with 1.08 quota on first preferences. Hume for the SDLP was slightly further away this time with 0.88 of a quota, but was soon elected no the fourth stage with the exclusion of Alliance and UPUP.
However, the three who got elected had ensured that 3.3 quotas were theirs from first preference.
1989 saw Paisley in first with 1.20 quotas and Hume also sneaked in on first preference with 1.02. Jim Nicholson replacing Taylor on the UUP ticket was on 0.89 which was close enough to see him elected on the transfers of Paisley's surplus at stage 2. Between then the 3.11 was enough to ensure they were all elected without the elimination of another candidate.
In 1994 Paisley and Hume again sailed through on first preferences with 1.17 and 1.16 of a quota respectively. Nicholson was just under with 0.95, but once again it was enough for his election on the surplus of Paisley. The 3.28 quotas was just behind the peak of 1984 for centralising the vote within the big three.
Paisley's last European election in 1999 saw him once again top the poll with 1.14 quota. Hume also facing his last Euro electorate also was safely in with 1.12 and Nicholson posted at the time the poorest showing for one the big three with only 0.70 of a quota. It was still a respectable 2.96 of a quota. The elimination of all four of the lowest candidates made it a two person run off for the last seat, but it was only when Paisley's surplus was distributed in stage 3 that Nicholson was elected.
In 2004 we saw new faces for all but the UUP of the big four.But Jim Allister then still with the DUP carried on the Paisley legacy securing 1.27 of a quota to be elected top, Sinn Féin's Bairbre de Brún was also over the threshold with 1.05 of a quota. Nicholson faired worse still with only 0.66 of a quota which meant that the Allister surplus didn't see him over the line but the elimination of all bar the SDLP candidate did.
The top three parties were still polling 2.98 quotas. But there had been a shift in the nationalist vote and now the SDLP found themselves just behind the UUP in 4th.
Last time out in 2004 was the first time after 4 cycles that only person achieved the quota on first preferences. It was Bairbre de Brún who managed it with 1.04 of a quota a drop in the share she had last time. Nicholson rallied slightly to 0.68 but Diane Dodds replacing the defected Jim Allister only secured 0.73 enough to be ahead of the UUP but the DUP's worst ever showing in the European elections. The reason for this was the 0.54 that Allister himself secured for his new TUV party.
However, the net result was the that big three only had 2.45 quotas between then and only 0.04 of a surplus from first preferences. However, elimination of the Green and Alliance for stage 2, followed by the TUV in stage three soon saw the UCU-NF candidate safely over the threshold, and Dodds deemed elected due to the small surpluses not being enough to get the SDLP above her.
Which leads to this year, Martina Anderson of Sinn Féin was elected first round but with only 1.02 of a quota the smallest winning quota ever in Northern Irish European elections. Diane Dodds improved to 0.84 but Nicholson only just sneaked over half a quota on 0.53, the SDLP weren't far off with 0.52.
It meant that the three largest parties had dipped even further down to 2.39 and the battle was entered to secure almost double their first preference between the UUP and SDLP. Allister for the TUV had 0.48 of it and would not be eliminated until stage 7 and the three non-designated parties (Alliance, Grenn, NI21) had 0.42 of their quota their highest ever. This is why the election went so deep, there wasn't masses of other naturally unionist votes to be transferred until a late stage.
Wednesday, 2 April 2014
Equal Marriage for Northern Ireland: Take 3
Mark the 29th April 2014 in your diaries.
Yesterday Sinn Féin lodged yet another motion with the Northern Irish Assembly that will be debated one month on from the date that the first same-sex marriages took place in England and Wales. The motion is rather more robust that the one that tried to bring to the house after the Irish Constitutional Convention decided that they would hold a referendum on the matter in the Republic of Ireland. It reads:
This motion allows the freedom of religion that everyone will no doubt go on about, allow freedom of the individual and bring about parity that was lacking from the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act. of course it leaves us a month to try and lobby unionist politicians that have thus far voted overwhelmingly against any legal advances for the LGBT community.
Yesterday Sinn Féin lodged yet another motion with the Northern Irish Assembly that will be debated one month on from the date that the first same-sex marriages took place in England and Wales. The motion is rather more robust that the one that tried to bring to the house after the Irish Constitutional Convention decided that they would hold a referendum on the matter in the Republic of Ireland. It reads:
That this Assembly notes that other jurisdictions on these islands have moved forward with equal marriage rights for same-sex couples; believes that all couples, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, should have the same legal entitlement to marry and to the protections, rights, obligations and benefits afforded by the legal institution of marriage; supports freedom of religion by allowing religious institutions to define, observe and practise marriage according to their beliefs, granting them the freedom whether or not to conduct same-sex marriages; calls on the Minister of Finance and Personnel to introduce legislation to guarantee that couples of any sex or gender identity receive equal benefit; and further calls on the First Minister and deputy First Minister to ensure that all legislation adheres to the Executive’s commitments to protect equality for all.
This motion allows the freedom of religion that everyone will no doubt go on about, allow freedom of the individual and bring about parity that was lacking from the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act. of course it leaves us a month to try and lobby unionist politicians that have thus far voted overwhelmingly against any legal advances for the LGBT community.
Monday, 29 April 2013
'For Everyone' caveats may apply
In my humble opinion when you say you stand For Everyone you'd better make the right adjustments to make sure you do stand for everyone.That is what I think the Alliance Party's amendment so today's motion on the constitutional convention and equal marriage aimed to do*. However, it appears that three of the Alliance Party's own MLAs couldn't even do this (Trevor Lunn voted against his party's amendment and Keiran McCarthy and Judith Cochrane abstained by voting in both lobbies). You may recall back in October that these three either voted the same way or were strangely absent. To do so once voters can excuse to do it twice on the same issue loos like a habit.
I have no issue with the three Alliance MLAs who then, after the amendment was defeated, abstained on the substantial motion. However, with Cochrane and McCarthy joining Lunn in the No lobby it makes we wonder if all of the Alliance Party is for everyone, or whether some add too many caveats. As many will know from my past the reason I hadn't up until December last year joined the Alliance was because as I said too often they weren't liberal enough for me, but don't panic I'm going anywhere just yet (well not apart from being the member from Kirkwall).
But then there was the party that brought the motion Sinn Féin. Unfortunately they had ignored one important fact in putting that motion before the Assembly this time around. You need to bring with you those of faith who are on your side, by ignoring part of the motion from October that did that they were not going to get as much support as October, all other things being equal. That is why there were only 42 votes for this time.
When the Liberal Democrats formed their motion which subsequently became party policy and the skeleton of the policies in the rest of the UK, we made sure that faith groups were not compelled to do anything, but also recognised that some were ready right now to carry out same-sex marriage and that others may follow after dialogue within themselves. But you cannot oppose church government from government and the same should be true in reverse.
However, whatever the outcome of today let us not lose sight of the true villians of the piece the Unionist MLAs. With only one exception, East Belfast's Michael Copeland, from the biggest two groupings all the rest voted no. You would imagine that there were no LGBT people in the protestant/unionist/loyalist population the way this group carried on, thank goodness for Copeland along with Basil McCrea and John McCallister.
The DUP have signed up to the St Andrews Agreement adjustments to the Good Friday Agreement. They are still meant to promote equality of opportunity to all, without prejudice to sexual orientation. The more they continue to deny any advance to the LGBT community the more we have to consider that they are not fulfilling their obligations under Section 75 of the Belfast Act.
The conclusion of today is that all parties in Northern Ireland are somehow or other signed up to equality of opportunity for all, yet each is bringing their own caveats to the table on what is, no matter what Sammy Wilson says, a matter of equality.
* However, our churches are exempt from certain areas of equal employment legislation. No woman has ever challenged the Roman Catholic Churches right to not ordain women, and churches are at liberty not to employ LGBT people should they so choose.
I have no issue with the three Alliance MLAs who then, after the amendment was defeated, abstained on the substantial motion. However, with Cochrane and McCarthy joining Lunn in the No lobby it makes we wonder if all of the Alliance Party is for everyone, or whether some add too many caveats. As many will know from my past the reason I hadn't up until December last year joined the Alliance was because as I said too often they weren't liberal enough for me, but don't panic I'm going anywhere just yet (well not apart from being the member from Kirkwall).
But then there was the party that brought the motion Sinn Féin. Unfortunately they had ignored one important fact in putting that motion before the Assembly this time around. You need to bring with you those of faith who are on your side, by ignoring part of the motion from October that did that they were not going to get as much support as October, all other things being equal. That is why there were only 42 votes for this time.
When the Liberal Democrats formed their motion which subsequently became party policy and the skeleton of the policies in the rest of the UK, we made sure that faith groups were not compelled to do anything, but also recognised that some were ready right now to carry out same-sex marriage and that others may follow after dialogue within themselves. But you cannot oppose church government from government and the same should be true in reverse.
However, whatever the outcome of today let us not lose sight of the true villians of the piece the Unionist MLAs. With only one exception, East Belfast's Michael Copeland, from the biggest two groupings all the rest voted no. You would imagine that there were no LGBT people in the protestant/unionist/loyalist population the way this group carried on, thank goodness for Copeland along with Basil McCrea and John McCallister.
The DUP have signed up to the St Andrews Agreement adjustments to the Good Friday Agreement. They are still meant to promote equality of opportunity to all, without prejudice to sexual orientation. The more they continue to deny any advance to the LGBT community the more we have to consider that they are not fulfilling their obligations under Section 75 of the Belfast Act.
The conclusion of today is that all parties in Northern Ireland are somehow or other signed up to equality of opportunity for all, yet each is bringing their own caveats to the table on what is, no matter what Sammy Wilson says, a matter of equality.
* However, our churches are exempt from certain areas of equal employment legislation. No woman has ever challenged the Roman Catholic Churches right to not ordain women, and churches are at liberty not to employ LGBT people should they so choose.
Friday, 7 December 2012
Hillary comes as do the death threats
Today Northern Ireland is welcoming Hillary Clinton.
The first time she turned up death threats were a common occurrence to our elected representatives and other people who had got on the wrong side of the paramilitaries. Therefore it is with shame that all three levels of local representative today have announced that they have received death threats.
The Alliance MP for East Belfast Naomi Long spoke very calmly on The Nolan Show this morning. She was talking about those who had taken to the streets claiming that their rights were being chipped away at, but then came the telling statement:
People claiming that they will fight for their rights while denying the right to live at home, or visit someone's own office is an attack on rights.
After Naomi the leader of the Sinn Féin group on Belfast City Council, Cllr Jim McVeigh, said that both he and North Belfast MLA Gerry Kelly has also received death threats.
The First Minister has this time reacted with alacrity in issuing a response:
All death threats against the people's elected representatives are repugnant. They are an attack on our democracy as well as an attack on the people who voted for those representatives.
This morning the leader in The Belfast Telegraph appears on the front page under the headline "Today we all vote for the Alliance Party". Today we also stand for democracy, the rule of law and the right of our elected representatives to go about their business free of intimidation and threat. The ballot box and peaceful protest and discourse are where we should make out points.
We need to end the bullying on social media.
We need to end condemnations of the violence which end with a but. The but negates everything before it as it is given half heartedly.
It is time for a recall of Stormont. There has been a further escaltaion not a calming of the tension since yesterday. We the people of Northern Ireland cannot wait until Monday morning for our politicians to discuss this matter, there is a weekend in between and that is a bad time to leave things in limbo.
The first time she turned up death threats were a common occurrence to our elected representatives and other people who had got on the wrong side of the paramilitaries. Therefore it is with shame that all three levels of local representative today have announced that they have received death threats.
The Alliance MP for East Belfast Naomi Long spoke very calmly on The Nolan Show this morning. She was talking about those who had taken to the streets claiming that their rights were being chipped away at, but then came the telling statement:
"My right to life is also protected in law. But it is being played fast and loose with today"
People claiming that they will fight for their rights while denying the right to live at home, or visit someone's own office is an attack on rights.
After Naomi the leader of the Sinn Féin group on Belfast City Council, Cllr Jim McVeigh, said that both he and North Belfast MLA Gerry Kelly has also received death threats.
The First Minister has this time reacted with alacrity in issuing a response:
"Such threats are an affront to democracy and an attack on us all. As someone who in the past has been visited many times by the police to be told of death threats issued against me, I know how difficult and testing a time this is. My thoughts and prayers are very much with Naomi at this time and I would call upon all concerned not to allow themselves to be used by those who have very sinister motives. Regardless of political difference, public representatives should not be attacked or threatened in anyway."
All death threats against the people's elected representatives are repugnant. They are an attack on our democracy as well as an attack on the people who voted for those representatives.
This morning the leader in The Belfast Telegraph appears on the front page under the headline "Today we all vote for the Alliance Party". Today we also stand for democracy, the rule of law and the right of our elected representatives to go about their business free of intimidation and threat. The ballot box and peaceful protest and discourse are where we should make out points.
We need to end the bullying on social media.
We need to end condemnations of the violence which end with a but. The but negates everything before it as it is given half heartedly.
It is time for a recall of Stormont. There has been a further escaltaion not a calming of the tension since yesterday. We the people of Northern Ireland cannot wait until Monday morning for our politicians to discuss this matter, there is a weekend in between and that is a bad time to leave things in limbo.
Thursday, 18 October 2012
How did the Northern Irish parties respond to adoption judicial review
I'm leaving this blog post largely in the words of the various parties in their own words as to how they have responded to today's judicial review on adoption here in Northern Ireland.
The DUP have nothing on their own website but speaking to the BBC the Health Minister Edwin Poots has said:
Sinn Féin said:
Sinn Féin MLA Sue Ramsey said she is disappointed by the Health Minister’s decision to appeal a High Court ruling that a ban on gay and unmarried couples is unlawful.
The West Belfast MLA and Chair of the Health Committee at the Assembly said:
SDLP Health Spokesperson Conall McDevitt has welcomed this morning's ruling that the current bar on unmarried couples and civil partners adopting is unlawful and has called for a legislative remedy.
The South Belfast MLA was speaking after Mr Justice Treacy's decision to grant the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission a judicial review into current arrangements regarding adoption.
He said:
The Alliance Party said:
Alliance Health spokesperson Kieran McCarthy MLA has welcomed the court ruling that stated that the ban on unmarried couples from adopting was illegal. He said that this was great progress and would allow unmarried and same sex couples to adopt.
Kieran McCarthy MLA said:
Commenting on Treacy J's ruling in favour of same sex adoption, TUV Leader Jim Allister said he was disappointed with the outcome and hoped the Attorney General and Department would appeal.
The Ulster Unionist have said nothing on their website.
The DUP have nothing on their own website but speaking to the BBC the Health Minister Edwin Poots has said:
"It is my intention to urgently appeal this judgment and I am taking this action with a heavy heart.
"I have already publicly declared my intention to reform Northern Ireland adoption law because reform is much needed and long overdue.
"This judicial review has already delayed plans to introduce a new Adoption and Children Bill in the Assembly and I fear that this will lead to further delay."
Sinn Féin said:
Sinn Féin MLA Sue Ramsey said she is disappointed by the Health Minister’s decision to appeal a High Court ruling that a ban on gay and unmarried couples is unlawful.
The West Belfast MLA and Chair of the Health Committee at the Assembly said:
"This is a disappointing decision by the Health Minister Edwin Poots considering that our laws on adoption where out of date and not reflective of modern society and life-styles.SDLP said:
"The primary focus when it comes to adoption has to be the welfare of the child. It has to be the determining factor and guiding principle when it comes to anyone adopting a child.
"A single person or unmarried couple should be able to adopt a child, regardless of their sexuality, providing they can provide a stable, caring home with the child’s best interests at the heart of that decision.
"This extension of the eligibility criteria in line with modern society will significantly reduce the number of children in care."
SDLP Health Spokesperson Conall McDevitt has welcomed this morning's ruling that the current bar on unmarried couples and civil partners adopting is unlawful and has called for a legislative remedy.
The South Belfast MLA was speaking after Mr Justice Treacy's decision to grant the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission a judicial review into current arrangements regarding adoption.
He said:
"Mr Justice Treacy's ruling is very welcome and a positive move forward towards creating uniform equality on adoption across these islands.
"This ruling, however, is only one step forward. If full adoption equality is to be achieved and Northern Ireland’s arrangements are to be made lawful, in line with Britain, a legislative framework must be drafted and brought forward for ratification without delay."
The Alliance Party said:
Alliance Health spokesperson Kieran McCarthy MLA has welcomed the court ruling that stated that the ban on unmarried couples from adopting was illegal. He said that this was great progress and would allow unmarried and same sex couples to adopt.
Kieran McCarthy MLA said:
"This is a tremendous victory and a great day for progress. The ban on unmarried couples adopting was illogical and wrong. The only issue that should matter is the needs of the child and not a blanket ban on certain groups from adopting. This is an issue of equality, so I am glad that the correct decision was reachedTraditional Unionist Voice have said:
"The previsous rules did not make sense. Only one member of an unmarried couple could previously have legally adopted a child which could have resulted in the other partner having no rights to the child if the legal parent died.
"We have far too many children waiting to be adopted for us to be picking and choosing who we think should be able to adopt.
"This ruling will obviously result in unmarried and same sex couple being able to adopt which I fully support. I would urge any unmarried or same sex couple who believes that they would be able to provide a stable home to a child to consider applying to adopt a child."
Commenting on Treacy J's ruling in favour of same sex adoption, TUV Leader Jim Allister said he was disappointed with the outcome and hoped the Attorney General and Department would appeal.
"There was, in my view, inadequate attention to the paramount benefit to the child of adoption within a regular family unit of a father and a mother and unwarranted equivalence of such to the unnatural setting of a same sex relationship. Once more we see the human rights mantra being exploited to further divorce the law from the moral expectations and norms of the society it exists to serve."
The Ulster Unionist have said nothing on their website.
Friday, 17 August 2012
Is UUP Councillor against disabled people marrying?
Yet another UUP member has called homosexuality a disease, but unlike Lord Maginnis this one is an elected representative*, Magherafelt councillor Jackie Crawford. Two other DUP members also spoke in the chamber calling homosexuality an abomination.
Cllr Crawford's comments came before, during and since a Council Meeting on Tuesday which discussed Sinn Féin's proposal supporting Same Sex Marriage. Speaking in today's Irish times he said:
Wow!
There is rather a lot there. In saying it is like being born with a disability at least the member bizarrely recognises that being gay is not a choice, though it is not a disease. However taking his comments about people like that not getting married does that mean he is against people born blind, deaf or with a physical disability getting married to?
Looking at the context of what he says surely that is implied.
However, the UUP Councillor may notice in the Paralympics coming up there is no category for Gay sportspeople, although there are some gay people such as equestrian Lee Pearson in the GB team. There was also his opposite number Carl Hester also gay in the same event in the Olympics. You see being gay isn't a disability. No medical board will recognise it as such, so if Cllr Crawford, who is not a medical professional, were to have done his research he would have found that out.
It's a pity for him that is clearly ignorant on such matters.
It is a pity on the LGBT people in Magherafelt that one of their councillors considers them disabled.
The DUP use one of the 67 biblical uses of abomination (KJV), yet I don't see them attack Magherafelt's pork producers as the eating of swine is an abomination (Is 66:17), of those gormet Ostrich burgers (Lev 11:16) that come with continental markets, or of course prawns, or muscles or whelks (Lev 11:10-11). Do they stop their wives dressing in trousers, or their daughters looking like young men (Deu 22:5). Or how about all the lies that they themselves have told (Pro 12:22), or the discord they spread maybe by insisting on walking a certain route on the 12th (Pro 6:19), and I could go on.
Mike Nesbitt is going to speak to his councillor, I doubt that Peter Robinson will be doing the same to his. Indeed while the UUP leave it up to individual members as a matter of conscious the DUP say they are opposed to equal marriage and are allowing their members to quote whatever scripture they want even to argue against civil law. But while unionists continue to use archaic medical definitions or biblical language out of full context to protest against the groundswell of support for marriage equality they are failing to be representatives but merely reactionary zealots who are not fit for purpose as public representatives of a non-homogenised community.
* Apologies as this link is now no longer available, I hope the NewsLetter are merely updating the story, it was a software upgrade that has moved the link to here.
Update I notice that David Vance takes a hardly surprising alternative view on this issue, but he does raise four points that he says need sorting out.
First off, is gay marriage the pressing issue for this Council? Really? I would have though lack of jobs, a run down town centre and high rates would have registered before "gay marriage". The utter banality of local Government.
First off I recently had an argument on Facebook with the Alliance's MP about the pressing nature of this debate. The words used as to why they had not taken a position on marriage equality before it was discussed in Belfast City Council in June was that it was a pressing issue. Yet with Scotland having said they will introduce legislation and England and Wales also about to announce their plans, there are issues about freedom of movement of same sex married UK couples that will be arising, so Northern Ireland do need to discuss these sooner rather than after legislation comes in elsewhere in the Union.
Second, homosexuality is patently NOT a disease. The Councillor concerned chose his words badly but then again he is a Councillor so perhaps that explains it!
Wow! Apart from Vance saying that homosexuality is not a disease there is a lot wrong here. If the words used were a one off they were chosen badly. Thing is he was asked by the Irish News to explain himself and dug deeper. Being merely a Councillor is no excuse, he is still a public representative speaking in a public domain. Such uninformed misunderstanding of some of those he actually represents and apparently has met is totally unacceptable. If he really is merely a Councillor who knows nothing about this issue (which is a fair point for Councillors on any number of issues) he is more than capable of staying quiet, or saying I need more time to research this. The thing is he did not do that and spoke his mind, not matter how uninformed or outdated what is in his mind happens to be.
Third, what about the DUP Councillors who reckon gayness "an abomination"? No media focus on them. Oh my, our Pravda media playing up to Peter and Marty, again?
DUP elected representatives calling homosexuality an abomination is hardly news. It is something I have heard from that party since my teens. It is something that the First Minister's own wife was heavily slated for saying in a Radio Ulster interview a few years ago. However, what I do agree upon is that even though it is nothing new it is still something that we should not let slip under the radar, as indeed I haven't above.
Lastly, I notice this was a Sinn Fein motion. Once again we witness THEIR total detachment from reality and their self serving selection of topics to pursue even as the country goes down the drain!
Actually David I think it is your total detachment from reality that is the issue here. You have missed the point that Equal Marriage NI is up and running. That they have recognised that within the devolved powers Stormont stands alone as not introducing any home grown LGBT equality legislation and therefore is working with whoever is prepared to take things forward. Steven Agnew of the Green Party has tried, and so far failed, to get this discussed at Stormont and now Sinn Féin are getting this unto the agenda in various council chambers. As the LGBT community is neither nationalist nor unionist that means we can work on a shared future with whoever is prepared to stand up with us.
Update 2: Sam McBride, political correspondent for the Newsletter has tweeted two updates at 2:37pm.
UUP has just released a statement from Cllr Jackie Crawford saying that he regrets using the word "disease" when referring to homosexuality
Mike Nesbitt says he is happy that Cllr Crawford has "retracted the term ‘disease’" but he "affirms" his right to oppose gay marriage
But 90 minutes after he tweeted this the UUP Website has yet to publish this statement on their own website or on Twitter so it looks like they are hoping to bury the story.
Cllr Crawford's comments came before, during and since a Council Meeting on Tuesday which discussed Sinn Féin's proposal supporting Same Sex Marriage. Speaking in today's Irish times he said:
"I'm not against gays, it's a pity for them.
"It’s a pity they have that disease and they can't help it. It's the same as you being born with a disability. They can't help what they are.
"I know gay people and they are nice people and not bad people but they should not be getting married."
Wow!
There is rather a lot there. In saying it is like being born with a disability at least the member bizarrely recognises that being gay is not a choice, though it is not a disease. However taking his comments about people like that not getting married does that mean he is against people born blind, deaf or with a physical disability getting married to?
Looking at the context of what he says surely that is implied.
However, the UUP Councillor may notice in the Paralympics coming up there is no category for Gay sportspeople, although there are some gay people such as equestrian Lee Pearson in the GB team. There was also his opposite number Carl Hester also gay in the same event in the Olympics. You see being gay isn't a disability. No medical board will recognise it as such, so if Cllr Crawford, who is not a medical professional, were to have done his research he would have found that out.
It's a pity for him that is clearly ignorant on such matters.
It is a pity on the LGBT people in Magherafelt that one of their councillors considers them disabled.
The DUP use one of the 67 biblical uses of abomination (KJV), yet I don't see them attack Magherafelt's pork producers as the eating of swine is an abomination (Is 66:17), of those gormet Ostrich burgers (Lev 11:16) that come with continental markets, or of course prawns, or muscles or whelks (Lev 11:10-11). Do they stop their wives dressing in trousers, or their daughters looking like young men (Deu 22:5). Or how about all the lies that they themselves have told (Pro 12:22), or the discord they spread maybe by insisting on walking a certain route on the 12th (Pro 6:19), and I could go on.
Mike Nesbitt is going to speak to his councillor, I doubt that Peter Robinson will be doing the same to his. Indeed while the UUP leave it up to individual members as a matter of conscious the DUP say they are opposed to equal marriage and are allowing their members to quote whatever scripture they want even to argue against civil law. But while unionists continue to use archaic medical definitions or biblical language out of full context to protest against the groundswell of support for marriage equality they are failing to be representatives but merely reactionary zealots who are not fit for purpose as public representatives of a non-homogenised community.
* Apologies as this link is now no longer available, I hope the NewsLetter are merely updating the story, it was a software upgrade that has moved the link to here.
Update I notice that David Vance takes a hardly surprising alternative view on this issue, but he does raise four points that he says need sorting out.
First off, is gay marriage the pressing issue for this Council? Really? I would have though lack of jobs, a run down town centre and high rates would have registered before "gay marriage". The utter banality of local Government.
First off I recently had an argument on Facebook with the Alliance's MP about the pressing nature of this debate. The words used as to why they had not taken a position on marriage equality before it was discussed in Belfast City Council in June was that it was a pressing issue. Yet with Scotland having said they will introduce legislation and England and Wales also about to announce their plans, there are issues about freedom of movement of same sex married UK couples that will be arising, so Northern Ireland do need to discuss these sooner rather than after legislation comes in elsewhere in the Union.
Second, homosexuality is patently NOT a disease. The Councillor concerned chose his words badly but then again he is a Councillor so perhaps that explains it!
Wow! Apart from Vance saying that homosexuality is not a disease there is a lot wrong here. If the words used were a one off they were chosen badly. Thing is he was asked by the Irish News to explain himself and dug deeper. Being merely a Councillor is no excuse, he is still a public representative speaking in a public domain. Such uninformed misunderstanding of some of those he actually represents and apparently has met is totally unacceptable. If he really is merely a Councillor who knows nothing about this issue (which is a fair point for Councillors on any number of issues) he is more than capable of staying quiet, or saying I need more time to research this. The thing is he did not do that and spoke his mind, not matter how uninformed or outdated what is in his mind happens to be.
Third, what about the DUP Councillors who reckon gayness "an abomination"? No media focus on them. Oh my, our Pravda media playing up to Peter and Marty, again?
DUP elected representatives calling homosexuality an abomination is hardly news. It is something I have heard from that party since my teens. It is something that the First Minister's own wife was heavily slated for saying in a Radio Ulster interview a few years ago. However, what I do agree upon is that even though it is nothing new it is still something that we should not let slip under the radar, as indeed I haven't above.
Lastly, I notice this was a Sinn Fein motion. Once again we witness THEIR total detachment from reality and their self serving selection of topics to pursue even as the country goes down the drain!
Actually David I think it is your total detachment from reality that is the issue here. You have missed the point that Equal Marriage NI is up and running. That they have recognised that within the devolved powers Stormont stands alone as not introducing any home grown LGBT equality legislation and therefore is working with whoever is prepared to take things forward. Steven Agnew of the Green Party has tried, and so far failed, to get this discussed at Stormont and now Sinn Féin are getting this unto the agenda in various council chambers. As the LGBT community is neither nationalist nor unionist that means we can work on a shared future with whoever is prepared to stand up with us.
Update 2: Sam McBride, political correspondent for the Newsletter has tweeted two updates at 2:37pm.
UUP has just released a statement from Cllr Jackie Crawford saying that he regrets using the word "disease" when referring to homosexuality
Mike Nesbitt says he is happy that Cllr Crawford has "retracted the term ‘disease’" but he "affirms" his right to oppose gay marriage
But 90 minutes after he tweeted this the UUP Website has yet to publish this statement on their own website or on Twitter so it looks like they are hoping to bury the story.
Monday, 2 July 2012
Belfast City Council Supports Equal Marriage - sort of
There was an historic moment in Belfast City Council this evening. Mary Ellen Campbell of Sinn Féin brought a motion before full council to support equal civil marriage. It was passed without any votes against, making Belfast the first council in all of Ireland to support same-sex couples seeking to have a marriage.
But that isn't all the story. All the Unionist Councillors walked out, except for the Lord Mayor Gavin Robinson (no relation to the first minister) while Ms Campbell presented her motion and did not return to vote. The Alliance party sat through the entire thing and then failed to vote either way on the proposal, because apparently they do not have a policy on the issue (correction one of their six Councillors Catherine Curran did vote in favour). The SDLP did have a couple of councillors who spoke in favour of the motion Tim Attwood and Nicola Mallon and those of their members who were still in the chamber voted for the motion.
The shame of the Unionist members not even waiting for the conclusion of business while not surprising is still shameful. But the action of the Alliance Party is what really shocks me. Last year in their party election broadcast they said that they were the party to help see society cherish and respect diversity. The said if we wanted change for a shared and properous future to vote for them. However, by sitting on their hands this evening they have show they are not really leading change at least not in all areas. If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got. A vote for the Alliance councillors in Belfast has this even was surely merely to keep things as they always were on this issue of LGBT equality.
I'll be seeking answers for the Alliance Party as to why this motion wasn't supported by them, Why the party has not yet got around to discussing this issue and coming up with a policy on it when the rest of the UK and many of the other parties here clearly already know why they stand. But most of all it they truly stand for a diverse society why are they hindering true equality, merely because it doesn't seem to cover the usual divisions which appears to be the only sense of shared future that they seem to know where they stand on.
I've long held doubts about how truly liberal the Alliance Party here is. I've felt they need division politics to survive as much as the Unionist and Nationist parties do. This evening seems to show me that I have been right not to join them, it appears that there isn't a natural liberal instinct in a lot of them when it comes to matters outwith the historic divisions in Northern Ireland.
It is a shame.
But I don want to end on an upbeat note and thank Mary Ellen Campbell and all those from Sinn Fein and the SDLP who did vote in favour of equal marriage tonight. There are only four words that are appropriate "go raibh maith agat". For those of you not fluent in Gaelic I'll summate that in two words "thank you".
But that isn't all the story. All the Unionist Councillors walked out, except for the Lord Mayor Gavin Robinson (no relation to the first minister) while Ms Campbell presented her motion and did not return to vote. The Alliance party sat through the entire thing and then failed to vote either way on the proposal, because apparently they do not have a policy on the issue (correction one of their six Councillors Catherine Curran did vote in favour). The SDLP did have a couple of councillors who spoke in favour of the motion Tim Attwood and Nicola Mallon and those of their members who were still in the chamber voted for the motion.
The shame of the Unionist members not even waiting for the conclusion of business while not surprising is still shameful. But the action of the Alliance Party is what really shocks me. Last year in their party election broadcast they said that they were the party to help see society cherish and respect diversity. The said if we wanted change for a shared and properous future to vote for them. However, by sitting on their hands this evening they have show they are not really leading change at least not in all areas. If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got. A vote for the Alliance councillors in Belfast has this even was surely merely to keep things as they always were on this issue of LGBT equality.
I'll be seeking answers for the Alliance Party as to why this motion wasn't supported by them, Why the party has not yet got around to discussing this issue and coming up with a policy on it when the rest of the UK and many of the other parties here clearly already know why they stand. But most of all it they truly stand for a diverse society why are they hindering true equality, merely because it doesn't seem to cover the usual divisions which appears to be the only sense of shared future that they seem to know where they stand on.
I've long held doubts about how truly liberal the Alliance Party here is. I've felt they need division politics to survive as much as the Unionist and Nationist parties do. This evening seems to show me that I have been right not to join them, it appears that there isn't a natural liberal instinct in a lot of them when it comes to matters outwith the historic divisions in Northern Ireland.
It is a shame.
But I don want to end on an upbeat note and thank Mary Ellen Campbell and all those from Sinn Fein and the SDLP who did vote in favour of equal marriage tonight. There are only four words that are appropriate "go raibh maith agat". For those of you not fluent in Gaelic I'll summate that in two words "thank you".
Sunday, 17 June 2012
Poots taking his lead from Dublin not London on blood donations
Today is Father's day.
About 24 years ago just after I had turned 18 my father took me somewhere that in our family was somewhat of a right of passage, to the Good Templar Hall on Hamilton Road for a cup of tea and a biscuit. Of course before that I had to give a little something in return a unit of my O- blood. Like my father and grandfather I then had a little book showing that I was a blood donor. The last little piece of paper that was placed in that book shows that I gave blood in the week after the Omagh bomb, though I shouldn't have given it as I'd forgot to check the small print.
There was a question that I said no to, probably because my dad was with me and he did not yet know that the answer was yes. The question:
But it is also the day that Edwin Poots finally announced that he was going to maintain the lifetime ban on men who have had sex with men giving blood, rather than as the rest of the UK allowing a 12 month deferral period.
But he then went further to say that anybody who engages in risky behaviour should be treated the same. His listed two examples people who have sex with prostitutes who who have sex in sub-Saharan Africa.
Now it may surprise Mr Poots that there are already restrictions in the later two categories, on the Blood Transfusion Service website it says:
So there you have it these other 'risky' sexual practices are subject to as referral period of 12 months both here and in the rest of the UK already. The lifetime MSM blood ban ranks up there with people who have worked as a prostitute, injected themselves with drugs, or have ever had syphilis, HTLV (Human T - lymphotropic virus), HIV or hepatitis C.
So is Mr Poots saying that all gay men are as risky as those three?
For a start many gay men regularly get blood tests from the diseases mentioned in the final exclusion. Even in the medical examination performed before a donation a gay man could be asked when he was last tested. Seeing as one of the questions at STI testing is how many sexual partners you have had since the last test this is on the patient records of that individual. A failure for a gay man to have had a blood screen in the last 12 months could be a reason to deny them to donate blood, even though all blood donated is tested.
Is he seriously comparing the many gay men in monogamous relationships with prostitutes? Or intravenous drug users?
It does look as Sue Ramsey, the Sinn Féin chair of the health committee, suggests that he is pandering to his own prejudices and not making the decision based on facts.
Mr Poots did say that he had received two bits of correspondence in the last week. One came from his Irish counterpart informing him that Ireland did not have any plans to lift their lifetime ban. The other advising the the majority of the EU maintained a life time ban. Although Hungary, Italy, Norway, Poland, Spain and Sweden are like the rest of the UK operating a maximum of the 12 month referral period and not a lifetime ban, as do Australia and New Zealand (5 years).
Indeed Poland has a rather sensible policy based on sexual practice rather than orientation. There people of any sexual orientation involved in any kind of sexual activity are welcome to donate blood, if they are confident that their sexual behaviour is safe and does not expose them to sexually transmitted diseases by i.e. unprotected sex with non-trusted partners, whether homo-, bi- or heterosexual.
There is an cruel irony that the Democratic Unionist health minister is siding with Ireland on this issue while the Sinn Féin chair of his assembly committee wants the UK policy expanded to Northern Ireland. Just who is the unionist?
Update I've done a little further reading since yesterday. In the USA there are calls in congress to look at alternatives to their MSM gay blood ban (Poots cited the example of the USA as one he was following in keeping the ban). France one of the EU's largest countries by population is about to lift its blanket ban on MSM blood donation, looking not at "nature of sexual relations or sexual inclination" but on the "multiplicity of partners" as the way to deal with risky behaviour.
About 24 years ago just after I had turned 18 my father took me somewhere that in our family was somewhat of a right of passage, to the Good Templar Hall on Hamilton Road for a cup of tea and a biscuit. Of course before that I had to give a little something in return a unit of my O- blood. Like my father and grandfather I then had a little book showing that I was a blood donor. The last little piece of paper that was placed in that book shows that I gave blood in the week after the Omagh bomb, though I shouldn't have given it as I'd forgot to check the small print.
There was a question that I said no to, probably because my dad was with me and he did not yet know that the answer was yes. The question:
Have you ever if you are man had sex anally or orally, either with or without a condom?Today is one of those days that I remember that father who gave enough blood through the Northern Ireland Blood Transfusion Service to earn his gold badge 100 units. Something he was in the Belfast Telegraph for as he did so at Hunterhouse College along with some of his pupils giving their first donation.
But it is also the day that Edwin Poots finally announced that he was going to maintain the lifetime ban on men who have had sex with men giving blood, rather than as the rest of the UK allowing a 12 month deferral period.
But he then went further to say that anybody who engages in risky behaviour should be treated the same. His listed two examples people who have sex with prostitutes who who have sex in sub-Saharan Africa.
Now it may surprise Mr Poots that there are already restrictions in the later two categories, on the Blood Transfusion Service website it says:
You should not give blood for 12 months after sex with:
A man who has had sex with another man (if you're a female).
A prostitute.
Anyone who has ever injected themselves with drugs.
Anyone with haemophilia or a related blood clotting disorder who has received clotting factor concentrates.
Anyone of any race who has been sexually active in parts of the world where AIDS/HIV is very common. This includes countries in Africa.
So there you have it these other 'risky' sexual practices are subject to as referral period of 12 months both here and in the rest of the UK already. The lifetime MSM blood ban ranks up there with people who have worked as a prostitute, injected themselves with drugs, or have ever had syphilis, HTLV (Human T - lymphotropic virus), HIV or hepatitis C.
So is Mr Poots saying that all gay men are as risky as those three?
For a start many gay men regularly get blood tests from the diseases mentioned in the final exclusion. Even in the medical examination performed before a donation a gay man could be asked when he was last tested. Seeing as one of the questions at STI testing is how many sexual partners you have had since the last test this is on the patient records of that individual. A failure for a gay man to have had a blood screen in the last 12 months could be a reason to deny them to donate blood, even though all blood donated is tested.
Is he seriously comparing the many gay men in monogamous relationships with prostitutes? Or intravenous drug users?
It does look as Sue Ramsey, the Sinn Féin chair of the health committee, suggests that he is pandering to his own prejudices and not making the decision based on facts.
Mr Poots did say that he had received two bits of correspondence in the last week. One came from his Irish counterpart informing him that Ireland did not have any plans to lift their lifetime ban. The other advising the the majority of the EU maintained a life time ban. Although Hungary, Italy, Norway, Poland, Spain and Sweden are like the rest of the UK operating a maximum of the 12 month referral period and not a lifetime ban, as do Australia and New Zealand (5 years).
Indeed Poland has a rather sensible policy based on sexual practice rather than orientation. There people of any sexual orientation involved in any kind of sexual activity are welcome to donate blood, if they are confident that their sexual behaviour is safe and does not expose them to sexually transmitted diseases by i.e. unprotected sex with non-trusted partners, whether homo-, bi- or heterosexual.
There is an cruel irony that the Democratic Unionist health minister is siding with Ireland on this issue while the Sinn Féin chair of his assembly committee wants the UK policy expanded to Northern Ireland. Just who is the unionist?
Update I've done a little further reading since yesterday. In the USA there are calls in congress to look at alternatives to their MSM gay blood ban (Poots cited the example of the USA as one he was following in keeping the ban). France one of the EU's largest countries by population is about to lift its blanket ban on MSM blood donation, looking not at "nature of sexual relations or sexual inclination" but on the "multiplicity of partners" as the way to deal with risky behaviour.
Friday, 13 April 2012
Let's celebrate the Queen's birthday with the Tricolour
So what are the 16 days that the Union Flag flies from all Government buildings in Northern Ireland?
Well there is one Saturday in June that will mark HM the Queen's official birthday, along with the 10th to mark HRH the Duke of Edinburgh's birthday and the 21st April for her actual birthday and the 20th November to mark their wedding anniversary. There is also 6th February to mark the Queen's Accession to the throne and 2nd June to mark her coronation.
Then we have the 19th February, 10th March, 15th August and 14th April to mark the birthdays of her children HRH The Duke of York, HRH The Earl of Wessex, HRH The Princess Royal and HRH The Prince of Wales in that order. Plus 20th January and 17th July for the Countesses of Wessex and Duchess of Cornwall.
The 2nd Sunday of November of course marks Remembrance Sunday and the 2nd Monday in March for Commonwealth Day.
So while none of the above seem to be days that Sinn Féin would want to see the tricolour flying I suspect it must be for the other two days that they are so adamant that the green, white and gold of the tricolour to fly on top of Stormont as well. So obviously it is for the other two days that are such pressing importance.
17th March St. Patrick's Day a given
and
9th May Europe Day.
So I say no give and take Sinn Féin you want it to fly we'll let you fly it on all the dates listed above.
And while we at it can Unionists keep to flying the flag on these days unless there is a member of royalty present that necessitates further days, and make sure that they only fly the Queen's standard when she is actually in the building. I doubt she is in some of the housing estates or shops that I've seen her standard fly outside throughout the summer months.
Saturday, 11 February 2012
Boris Johnson hands St. Patrick's Day to Sinn Féin
Dear Boris,
I spent 7 St. Patrick's days in London.
On the first while in the Student Union I helped to set up Kingston University's Irish Society, which is still going strong 23 years later. On every single once of them apart from that one I was doing something Irish, sometimes in one of the centres of Irish population, but not necessarily. But always in London.
I was a member of London Irish and when I returned there after 1992 hoped to be able to represent them in Athletics though I never competed again. I also took part in Gaelic Football when I was there as a local team in Kingston was looking for players, so I merely transposed by football and rugby skills to a different sport for a couple of years.
Therefore to condemn all the London Irish who attend a gala dinner on St. Patricks day as part of Sinn Féin and the event as being "lefty crap", and the people being "lazy and stupid" is offensive and racist. You wouldn't call all the London Scots who attended a Burns Supper last month as being members of the SNP, nor call them tight and drunkards. But then knowing your record of stupid sayings offending cities, peoples and nations maybe you would.
Yours a proud Liberal Democrat, former London Irish man, whose eyes are more on Rome than Paris this afternoon and that for the rugby and not the Pontiff.
I spent 7 St. Patrick's days in London.
On the first while in the Student Union I helped to set up Kingston University's Irish Society, which is still going strong 23 years later. On every single once of them apart from that one I was doing something Irish, sometimes in one of the centres of Irish population, but not necessarily. But always in London.
I was a member of London Irish and when I returned there after 1992 hoped to be able to represent them in Athletics though I never competed again. I also took part in Gaelic Football when I was there as a local team in Kingston was looking for players, so I merely transposed by football and rugby skills to a different sport for a couple of years.
Therefore to condemn all the London Irish who attend a gala dinner on St. Patricks day as part of Sinn Féin and the event as being "lefty crap", and the people being "lazy and stupid" is offensive and racist. You wouldn't call all the London Scots who attended a Burns Supper last month as being members of the SNP, nor call them tight and drunkards. But then knowing your record of stupid sayings offending cities, peoples and nations maybe you would.
Yours a proud Liberal Democrat, former London Irish man, whose eyes are more on Rome than Paris this afternoon and that for the rugby and not the Pontiff.
Friday, 16 September 2011
***Breaking*** Martin McGuinness to stand for Irish Presidency
It has literally just been confirmed from Sinn Féin that Martin McGuinness the Deputy First Minister in Northern Ireland is to go forward as their candidate for the Irish Presidency.
His name will join that of Fine Gael's Gay Mitchell, Special Olympics boss Mary Davis, buisnessman Sean Gallagher and Labour's Michael D Higgins throwing his hate into the ring. The absence of a Fianna Fáil , for long seen as the natural party of government in Ireland until the elections earlier this year saw their vote and TDs reduced considerably, is noticeable as the other main parties will be fielding candidates, including now Sinn Féin.
Just yesterday when the Fianna Fáil executive gathered to try and endorse one of the independent candidates they failed to do even that. This is despite one of the parties own senators Labhrás Ó Murchú offering to put his name forward for the challenge.
If Martin McGuinness does enter the race to be Irish President, he like Gerry Adams before him is likely to have to resign his Westminster seat of Mid Ulster to allow him to contest the election in the republic. Ironically such a move would mean that Sinn Féin will have held both the Steward of the Manor of Northstead (Adams) and it would seem Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds which is due next when McGuinness has to resign his Westminster seat.
Looking at the field I would hazzard that McGuinness has the most charisma. The question is will the people vote for them. In recent Presidential election in Ireland the people have voted not necessarily the same way they vote for the Dail Éireann, so who can tell.
His name will join that of Fine Gael's Gay Mitchell, Special Olympics boss Mary Davis, buisnessman Sean Gallagher and Labour's Michael D Higgins throwing his hate into the ring. The absence of a Fianna Fáil , for long seen as the natural party of government in Ireland until the elections earlier this year saw their vote and TDs reduced considerably, is noticeable as the other main parties will be fielding candidates, including now Sinn Féin.
Just yesterday when the Fianna Fáil executive gathered to try and endorse one of the independent candidates they failed to do even that. This is despite one of the parties own senators Labhrás Ó Murchú offering to put his name forward for the challenge.
If Martin McGuinness does enter the race to be Irish President, he like Gerry Adams before him is likely to have to resign his Westminster seat of Mid Ulster to allow him to contest the election in the republic. Ironically such a move would mean that Sinn Féin will have held both the Steward of the Manor of Northstead (Adams) and it would seem Steward of the Chiltern Hundreds which is due next when McGuinness has to resign his Westminster seat.
Looking at the field I would hazzard that McGuinness has the most charisma. The question is will the people vote for them. In recent Presidential election in Ireland the people have voted not necessarily the same way they vote for the Dail Éireann, so who can tell.
Tuesday, 13 September 2011
The Padre, the Pastor, the Political quagmire
This weekend, apart from the wedding, one thing has been burning on my blogging sensitivities that I have to blog. It is my thoughts on the former army chaplin, now minister in my late father's home congregation and his decision to attend the Sinn Féin Ard Fheis on Friday. Everywhere I ahve turned over hte last week there has been mention of him, in the newspapers, on the television, on radio on Sunday Sequence and then on Monday on The Nolan Show guest hosted by Sunday Sequences William Crawley.
On Friday the Rev Dr David Latimer TD, BSc (Econ), DipTh, MA, minister of First Derry Presbyterian (pictured) appeared before Sinn Féin delegates at their Ard Fheis in the Waterfront Hall. As the minister for a markedly divided city this was a very symbolic gesture. For those of you who don't know the geography of the Walled City just across the road in front of the church are the city walls. From a postion there you look straight down over the Bogside, the scenes of Bloody Sunday and Free Derry Corner. As a church goes First Derry, and St Augustine's just up the road, know the history of Northern Ireland's divisions as well as any.
However, the recent re-opening and redidication of First Derry a process in which the Deputy First Minister played an important role means that they also know the progress that has been being made, especially cross community.
It was the weekend of the tenth anniversary of 9/11 and on Sunday morning back in his day job Dr. Latimer was hosting the RAF Association Londonderry Branch thanksgiving service to mark the anniversary of the Battle of Britain. In his sermon that day he touched upon the juxtoposition that the commemoration of that event opened up old wounds just as his attending the Ard Fheis would do as well. But he said that the only people who could know if there was true repentance was between man and God, whether than man was Martin McGuinness or David Latimer because we all have a past. All he could go on was the outward outworkings of what was happening. It was something he re-emphasised at the end of his Nolan Show spot.
The bitterness from some of the callers was still there on Monday morning. In one case a Presbyterian Minister from the Shankhill and a Sinn Féin delegate who was in the Waterfornt Hall had adebate heated discussion on Monday's Nolan Show. Although all the heat seemed to come from Dr Latimer's clerical colleague, the Sinn Féin representative quite rightly pointed out to him that the escalation of some of the language he was using would keep us rooted forever in the past. It was only by moving on and extending the hand of friendship as Christ would have done that we can create a peace.
There is still a lot of rancour across the communities here in Northern Ireland. There are still probably many people who would not walk down the hill from First Derry Church and through Butcher Gate and down the hill to Free Derry Corner. Just as there are people in Belfast who may not walk on the 'wrong side' of a peace line. But until more of us do, until we embrace all of us in our Britishness, Irishness, Ulsterness, Northern Irishness or whatever we wish to respresent ourselves and others as, we can only stallingly move on. What David Latimer did on Friday was merely a public act which many people in Northern Ireland, the North or whatever have been doing privately for some time.
Dr Latimer, as he admits himself, is not a politician but they have acted especially Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley when they agreed to work together in the best interests of all (though sometimes others need to remember that first step). Many people are crossing those divides forging new friendships, especially in the younger generations. Sometimes it is merely those that complain, and complain the loudest that assuage others that their internalised sectarianism is alright and they don't need to step over that threshold.
 |
| First Derry Presbyterian Church |
However, the recent re-opening and redidication of First Derry a process in which the Deputy First Minister played an important role means that they also know the progress that has been being made, especially cross community.
It was the weekend of the tenth anniversary of 9/11 and on Sunday morning back in his day job Dr. Latimer was hosting the RAF Association Londonderry Branch thanksgiving service to mark the anniversary of the Battle of Britain. In his sermon that day he touched upon the juxtoposition that the commemoration of that event opened up old wounds just as his attending the Ard Fheis would do as well. But he said that the only people who could know if there was true repentance was between man and God, whether than man was Martin McGuinness or David Latimer because we all have a past. All he could go on was the outward outworkings of what was happening. It was something he re-emphasised at the end of his Nolan Show spot.
 |
| Dr Latimer addressing the Ard Fheis |
The bitterness from some of the callers was still there on Monday morning. In one case a Presbyterian Minister from the Shankhill and a Sinn Féin delegate who was in the Waterfornt Hall had a
There is still a lot of rancour across the communities here in Northern Ireland. There are still probably many people who would not walk down the hill from First Derry Church and through Butcher Gate and down the hill to Free Derry Corner. Just as there are people in Belfast who may not walk on the 'wrong side' of a peace line. But until more of us do, until we embrace all of us in our Britishness, Irishness, Ulsterness, Northern Irishness or whatever we wish to respresent ourselves and others as, we can only stallingly move on. What David Latimer did on Friday was merely a public act which many people in Northern Ireland, the North or whatever have been doing privately for some time.
Dr Latimer, as he admits himself, is not a politician but they have acted especially Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley when they agreed to work together in the best interests of all (though sometimes others need to remember that first step). Many people are crossing those divides forging new friendships, especially in the younger generations. Sometimes it is merely those that complain, and complain the loudest that assuage others that their internalised sectarianism is alright and they don't need to step over that threshold.
Tuesday, 31 May 2011
Maybe Gregory Campbell should look to the future
 |
| Sean McGlinchey |
"It doesn't lend itself towards a party committed to looking to the future whenever Sinn Féin keep appointing people who are a very stark reminder of the past."
He goes on to say:
"If we saw some remorse, regret or apology for what they did in the past that would be a start but we haven't seen any of those things."
Now surely keeping raking up someone's past is just as much clinging to it as a stark reminder for those who are looking to a future. We have
Take it back 4 years and you see that McGlinchey actually spoke to the Sinn Féin Ard Fheis in 2007 in favour of the policing of Northern Ireland by the PSNI.
Now McGlinchey did serve 18 years for his part in the 12 June 1973 bombing at Railway Road, Coleraine, which killed Francis and Dinah Campbell, Elizabeth Craigmile, Nan Davis, Robert Scott and Elizabeth Palmer. But surely ex-prisoners are allowed the same opportunities as others. Ex-terrorists are just that, ones who have given up bombing, some of them have taken up democratic means to pursue their goals. If they are to be denied the right to take up any elected office we are living in the past and not striving for the future just the same.
Gerry Kelly MLA last week speaking on the point of an ex-prisoner being appointed a special adviser to another ex-prisoner now Minister for Culture, Arts and Leisure Carál Ní Chuilín MLA said:
"Almost half our [Sinn Féin] Assembly team are former political prisoners.
"Many more ex-prisoners have played critical and positive roles in bringing the political process to where it is now and will continue to do so."
Forgive me it I'm naïve but during the troubles we were told if only the paramilitaries would put away their weapons we could start to talk with them. Now that those that have put away weapons are now achieving high office some of those same people refusing to talk to them.
Isn't that just living in the past on old rules, not looking to the future?
* Only proper names to be used, as per Mr Allister.
Thursday, 26 May 2011
Comhghairdeas Ard-Mhéara Béal Feirste
The last time I saw the newly elected Lord Mayor of Belfast Niall Ó Donnghaile was at the verification process for the East Belfast votes on May 6th. I was in Newtownards for the Yes! campaign and it was a veritable who's who of local poliltics who stopped by to chat to me that day.
On of them was fellow Tweeter and Blogger Niall, he was one of a number of mini tweet ups that were happening that day. So many of the political activists who tweet follow each other but in the heat of campaigning we rarely get to meet up apart from the stage managed events or at hustings. Of course on the day after the election we all are concerned but our own little piles of papers but there is very little you can do but stand around and observe once the verification process is out of the way.
As a pupil of Regent House in the town, less than 5 minutes from the Leisure Centre which was the count centre talking in a group with a someone about to be elected as a DUP Councillor and the next Sinn Féin Lord Mayor of Belfast, but that is what happened that day.
Therefore I want to say Comhghairdeas Niall. I hope that you year with the Mayoral chain of office is good for all of the people of Belfast/Béal Feirste.
On of them was fellow Tweeter and Blogger Niall, he was one of a number of mini tweet ups that were happening that day. So many of the political activists who tweet follow each other but in the heat of campaigning we rarely get to meet up apart from the stage managed events or at hustings. Of course on the day after the election we all are concerned but our own little piles of papers but there is very little you can do but stand around and observe once the verification process is out of the way.
As a pupil of Regent House in the town, less than 5 minutes from the Leisure Centre which was the count centre talking in a group with a someone about to be elected as a DUP Councillor and the next Sinn Féin Lord Mayor of Belfast, but that is what happened that day.
Therefore I want to say Comhghairdeas Niall. I hope that you year with the Mayoral chain of office is good for all of the people of Belfast/Béal Feirste.
Sunday, 8 May 2011
Putting the Yes! detracters straight - initial thoughts from Northern Ireland
 |
| Well okay only 43.87% did |
Some of it was justified and some it ignored the fact that many of us involved in the campaign were fighting for some of the things and failings they mentioned. The eyes and ears on the ground my fellow regional/organisers were pointing stuff out since our first meeting together in November and on every conference call weekly meeting we had since then. There were even times in our monthly meetings in London that we did speak as one against the way things were done. But too often we were astounded about things that weren't happening or going to be happening or were happening too late.
Personally I'd like to give a big round applause to all the Regional and National Organisers Iestyn in Wales, Neil in Scotland, John, Jamie and Jane in NW and NE England, Yorkshire and Humberside, Richard and Michael in West and East Midlands, the other Stephen in East of England, Deborah, Becky, Jack, Tariq and Jon in London Tim, Ollie and James in the South West, Central and East. Together we knew what we were pressing for to happen, we may have heard the Yes! campaign say no too many times, yet we carried on pushing and sometimes got the answer changed and action taken. I'm sure all of them will carry on leading sucessful campaigns in the future, that group certainly knew what they needed to get done, just was frustrating that many times all those years of experience and knowledge was overlooked.
I'd also like to thank the excellent team that we did have in Northern Ireland, too numerous to mention but especially to Laura and Michael who were with me from the first meeting of the Northern Ireland team and stayed there to the end. Also to the many excellent interns who came through the door at Carnegie Buildings and many of them ended up going unto good jobs in fields they wanted. We may not have turned around years of Ulster saying No, but 43.87% of Northern Ireland did say yes.
To all my new friends in the Alliance, SDLP, Labour Party NI, Greens Party, UKIP, Ulster Unionist Party, Sinn Féin, Socialist Party, Dawn Purvis (sadly no longer and MLA), David McClarty MLA, plus my fellow Lib Dem NI members and many from no party background who said Yes! it has been a pleasure. I look forward to working with many of you on continuing to build a better future for Northern Ireland.
I may take on the specific points raised on a number of blogs over the last few days, but I'm going to calm down from my initial reading of most of them to give them due consideration in a balanced way in the cold light of day.
Friday, 15 April 2011
Petrol Bombs and Bricks Shall Not Stop Our Democratic Shared Future
The fact that election campaigners in Northern Ireland are going door to door canvassing in something to be applauded. Indeed it is something that all to recently would have led to some candidates setting foot in certain parts of the area they were seeking to represent.The fact that twice in the past 24 hours on two separate incidents SDLP canvass teams have been attacked is a shame to those who carried out such attacks.
Last night a petrol bomb aimed at the car of election volunteers and today when a brick was thrown at the windscreen of Delores Kelly seeking re-election in Upper Bann. This is not how this election campaign, or how the last assembly or the next one, is going to get along. There is consensus that things now will be done through the ballot box, this anti-social and indeed anti-democracy attacks on candidates are something that nobody involved in politics should condone, we should all stand together and condemn such actions. Thankfully nobody has been seriously hurt in either incident, although people could so easily have been.
However, all is not light an consensus in Northern Ireland right now. Tom Elliot along with the leaders of all the parties attended the funeral of PSNI Constable Ronan Kerr last week (an event that united the majority of the population with only a few dissenters). However, a group of fundamentalist Orangemen have called on the UUP leader to be expelled from the Loyal Order.
People outside Northern Ireland may not know what the fuss is about. Well yesterday as I was reading the DUP council candidates profile as they came through my door the one thing that I did notice was the mention in three of the four of involvement in or with the Loyal Orders, it is shorthand to the Unionist base to vote for them they're one of you. However, as myself and few others have expressed we don't see the point of such emphasis when we are talking about a shared future. In fact the DUP recently were actually asking Catholic economic liberals to vote for them based on their right leaning economic policies rather than the left leaning of the SDLP and Sinn Féin.
So while Northern Ireland parties are talking up a game of sharing over the airwaves, through the doors there is still a little of the politics of separation coming through from some quarters. It is not what I have been used to the last 9 years in Scotland and I will taking serious consideration over how I place my preferences on May 5th.
 |
| Not Delores Kelly's windscreen but an example |
However, all is not light an consensus in Northern Ireland right now. Tom Elliot along with the leaders of all the parties attended the funeral of PSNI Constable Ronan Kerr last week (an event that united the majority of the population with only a few dissenters). However, a group of fundamentalist Orangemen have called on the UUP leader to be expelled from the Loyal Order.
People outside Northern Ireland may not know what the fuss is about. Well yesterday as I was reading the DUP council candidates profile as they came through my door the one thing that I did notice was the mention in three of the four of involvement in or with the Loyal Orders, it is shorthand to the Unionist base to vote for them they're one of you. However, as myself and few others have expressed we don't see the point of such emphasis when we are talking about a shared future. In fact the DUP recently were actually asking Catholic economic liberals to vote for them based on their right leaning economic policies rather than the left leaning of the SDLP and Sinn Féin.
So while Northern Ireland parties are talking up a game of sharing over the airwaves, through the doors there is still a little of the politics of separation coming through from some quarters. It is not what I have been used to the last 9 years in Scotland and I will taking serious consideration over how I place my preferences on May 5th.
Wednesday, 6 April 2011
Gerry Adams Statement on Ronan Kerr
It's not everyday that I link to a video clip of Gerry Adams, but having listened to his statement in the Dáil Éireann yesterday, I am moved to do so.
He talks about the feelings in the North as a result of the murder on Saturday. He talks about the need to take things forward in a democratic matter and through the peace process.
One thing I am shocked by the the emptiness of the majority of the chamber with only the Sinn Féin benches being full. This is something that does affect all of Ireland and I praise Sinn Féin for actually bringing this to the floor of the Dáil, but the lack of support from the rest of the elected representatives is shocking, I hope it was not political point scoring at Sinn Féin without thinking about the wider consequences of a peace together. Sadly it did look like Sinn Féin were themselves largely alone at a time when they were actually reaching out for the good of the many.
He talks about the feelings in the North as a result of the murder on Saturday. He talks about the need to take things forward in a democratic matter and through the peace process.
One thing I am shocked by the the emptiness of the majority of the chamber with only the Sinn Féin benches being full. This is something that does affect all of Ireland and I praise Sinn Féin for actually bringing this to the floor of the Dáil, but the lack of support from the rest of the elected representatives is shocking, I hope it was not political point scoring at Sinn Féin without thinking about the wider consequences of a peace together. Sadly it did look like Sinn Féin were themselves largely alone at a time when they were actually reaching out for the good of the many.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)