BBC Northern Ireland elections page

[ 26 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

[ 26 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

But in all honesty, I (surprise!) was following this via the Sinn Féin website. Glad to know that their fortunes look to improve (I'm skeptical about what they say on their website), as I was worried the opposite would happen.

on the bright side, two things,

one, the single transferable vote system of PR in northern ireland could allow people to concentrate their 2nd, 3rd and 4th preferences on parties that are in favour of the Good Friday Agreement,

quote:

---

But in all honesty, I (surprise!) was following this via the Sinn Féin website. Glad to know that their fortunes look to improve (I'm skeptical about what they say on their website), as I was worried the opposite would happen.

---

Adams and McGuinness, in particular, have been true stalwarts in terms of making concessions, moving towards a resolution, pulling republicans out of the violent circle, etc.

However I appeal that you please don't forget the SDLP...the Social Democratic and Labour Party. They don't get much respect these days as they never had an armed wing..and have never tried to undermine or frustrate the agreement. I would be disappointed if Sinn Féin ended up with more seats than the SDLP. Although SF have made huge strides towards full democratic participation, the SDLP's moderate approach is still absolutely essential to the future of Northern Ireland (and for using the title Ulster, Mycroft, you better make nice and apologise* ;-) ). The SDLP are also affiliated, through the Socialist International, with like-minded parties around the world including the NDP (and the French Socialists, German SPD, Israeli Labor party and Meretz, Fatah in Palestine, the Labor party in Australia...and the UK Labour Party, but sssshhhhh). Sinn Féin maintain links with the likes of ETA in Spain/Basque region and other ne'er-do-wells. I like SF, and respect them, but would still choose the SDLP.

I am not a nationalist-republican; I've seen too much damage done by the IRA to my country to follow them blindly. Peace first; nationalism can be discussed afterwards.

Oh, and screw the DUP. Trimble's trying hard (not hard enough) and I really hope he's not put in a position where he needs to move away from the agreement to protect his base against Paisley. Now his performance around the decomissioning stuff was a shame, but over the campaign weeks he has been standing strong by the agreement and if he keeps that up we will be happy.

It should be an interesting election, and the fact that the undemocratic list system of Scotland is not in use is a plus. Voters can transfer within the moderate or pro-agreement parties, and see their genuine beliefs reflected. However given the small size of the North, and the number of seats in the Assembly, it's gonna be a tense time waiting. Apparently if the ratio was used for Westminister, it would have a few thousand MPs.

quote:

---

(and for using the title Ulster, Mycroft, you better make nice and apologise* ;-) ).

---

I used the name Ulster rather than Northern Ireland not for any political reasons but because I thought the title "Northern Ireland Elections" would be so lengthy as to be cut off on the rabble index pages and no one would know what the thread was about You are right though that Ulster is not properly speaking correct since the entity does not exactly correspond with the ancient Irish province of Ulster and that it's really a term preferred by unionists and loyalists.

Since Northern Ireland is still the appelation used by the British imperium I've seen some insist on using "northern Ireland" (with a lower case so as not to emphasise the term as a geographic one rather than a political one denoting a separate administrative entity) or even "north eastern Ireland" or just the "six counties".

I'll change the title as to not cause offence though

[ 26 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

The provincial identity is still strong in Ireland, numerous cultural, educational and sporting events still have provinces for admin purposes - in particular, the GAA (Gaelic sports) has a championship for each province and then a competition between the winners. The *Irish* counties of Cavan, Monaghan and Donegal still consider themselves as part of historical Ulster, if clearly not part of the UK. Ridings for the European Parliament are Leinster, Munster, Connaught/Ulster, (and Dublin).

quote:

---

Originally posted by meades:
That's what I was thinking. Maybe it was so the government could tamper the boxes?

---

quote:

---

the DUP . . . are very adamant about not sitting in any executive cabinet with Sinn Fein.

---

can we agree that if Sinn Fein and the DUP are the big winners the Good Friday Agreement is as good as dead and shootings, bombings and massacres can only follow??

If you are a decent human being, the only POSSIBLE parties to support in NI are the SDLP if you are Catholic, the UUP if you are Protestant and the Alliance Party or the Women's Party if you are progressive enough to think of yourself in non-sectarian terms.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
I think that only one or two ridings have posted any results and both are strongholds for either SF or the DUP.
.

---

At this point the DUP have elected 5 members, the UUP 4 and SF 2 in the 108 seat assembly.

There are 18 constiutuencies each electing 6 members. Of the 18 we've heard first preference votes from 7.

[ 27 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

The DUP are leading the popular vote with 26.24% followed by the UUP with 23.26%, Sinn Fein with 22.55% and the SDLP with 17.13%. The cross community Alliance Party has 3.89% This means Ian Paisley's DUP are the leading Unionist party and will claim the First Minister's position and Sinn Fein is the leading nationalist party and is in line for the Deputy First Minister's position (meaning it'll be virtually impossible for a government to function).

Seatwise, of the 31 (out of 108) seats so for declared:

DUP 15
UUP 10
Sinn Fein 5
SDLP 1

(Edited in order to update results)

[ 27 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

The issues separating the two sides in NI are like 2+2=4 compared to the Israel/Arab conflict and yet it still never gets solved.

Hard to be optimistic about the world when Northern Ireland collectively slit their own throats like this.

This is how the parties stack up percentage wise according to first preference votes:

DUP 25.71% (up 7.49%)
Sinn Fein 23.52% (up 5.89%)
UUP 22.67% (up 1.43%)
SDLP 16.98% (down 4.98%)
Alliance 3.68% (down 2.82%)
PUP 1.16% (down 1.39%)
NI Women's Coalition 0.83% (down 0.77%)
UKUP 0.82% (down 3.69%)

Seats 35 of 108 allocated
DUP 15
Sinn Fein 6
UUP 11
SDLP 2
Independent (Unionist) 1

[ 27 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

quote:

---

Stockholm, your criticism of Sinn Féin is hardly fair. They've been supporters of the Good Friday Agreement and will continue to be.

---

They claim to support it while refusing to give up their huge arms caches. While Ian Paisley may be comparable to Ariel Sharon, Sinn Fein is the counterpart of Islamic Jihad or Hamas. There is no way that the Protestant majority in NI will ever compromise with a Catholic side that is represented by a bunch of ex-IRA gunmen.

What is wrong with the SDLP?? Why can't Catholics in NI do the right thing and vote for a nice moderate party that is part of the Socialist International, that renounces violence, that all the Protestant parties are willing to deal with and that is led by respected statesmen like John Hume.

The Progressive Unionist Party, a "working class" group loyalist group linked with one of the paramilitary Ulster Volunteer Force but, nevertheless, a supporter of the Good Friday Agreement will also be shut out of the legislature.

At this point, with 41 of 108 seats allocated:

DUP 16
Sinn Fein 11
UUP 11
SDLP 2
Independent 1

The Independent is interesting, his name is Dr. Kieran Deeny and he campaigned on a non-sectarian basis for the retention of acute care services at Omagh hospital.

quote:

---

"This is quite a significant message from West Tyrone that people demand things other than green and orange politics," Dr Deeny said.

---

The DUP are at this stage by no means assured of being the largest unionist party - at this stage there is a lot of media speculation but already transfer patterns have been unpredicable at times. The real results will come tomorrow (this is the antidote to results in fifteen minutes - alas the exit pollers (aka the horrible modern disease of impatience) have been at work already).

In any case, there could possibly not be a First Minister if the DUP do take control - as there must be cross-community support under a weighted system. Potentially a similar issue with Sinn Féin.

It's fairly safe to say now, however, that the smaller unionist parties (with the exception of the PUP, generally anti-agreement) are disappearing - some only got a hundred or so votes. If the DUP gains come from these parties only, it may not be that bad of a result.

The Independent candidate elected is not a unionist candidate. His name is Kieran Deeney and he ran on a local hospital issue.

The Alliance party may yet get a couple of seats...e.g. Naomi Long in East Belfast (not a sitting member) is very well placed, but it depends on how transfers go.

PARTY TOT
DUP 19
SF 11
UUP 12
SDLP 2
AP 1
PUP 1
Ind. 1
(47/108 seats)

[ 27 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

Another constituency has just finished counting for the night - Newry & Armagh - went from 2 SDLP, 2 SF and 1 each DUP and UUP to 3 SF, 1 SDLP, 1 UUP, 1 DUP. RTÉ (Irish radio) had a report suggesting that the SDLP will struggle to hold their seat in the next Westminister election. This is one of their strongholds.

Jane Morrice's election in 1998 was a miracle that shows how PR/STV works.

The surprise second NIWC member managed to win in the least diverse area in Ulster. The posh suburban and seaside North Down stretches from Belfast to Bangor. The only area where Sinn Fein did not run, it is only 8% Catholic, although Catholics provided Jane's crucial victory margin. North Down had sent five men to the earlier Forum (two UUPs, one Alliance, a Paisley man, and the "well-tailored suburban extremist" Bob McCartney), but this time it saw four serious women candidates pull 21.3% of first-count votes.

A former BBC journalist, Jane had been head of the European Commission Office in Belfast. Perhaps she had made a better impression than she realized when she got 3% of the vote running for the UK Parliament in 1997 against McCartney. She and Alliance's Eileen Bell, a District Councillor, both got in. Jane not only stole the fifth seat from Paisley, but Trimble's UUP picked up the sixth seat. McCartney even tried another woman District Councillor, Elizabeth Roche, as his running-mate, almost getting a second seat. Yet in the end McCartney's home sent five pro-agreement members to the Assembly with him, reversing the trend in most other parts of Ulster.

Jane's chances looked very slim on the first count. She had only 1808 votes (4.8%), running 7th, behind even the SDLP's Marietta Farrell. Worse, a Paisley man was bound to overtake her once one of their two men dropped. On the second count she picked up only 28 votes from Bob McCartney's surplus, and saw his partner Elizabeth only 38 behind her. On the third count Jane got 82 votes from five minor candidates. On the fourth count she fell to 9th place, picking up only 19 votes as the second Paisley man dropped. His transfers put the remaining Paisley man well ahead of her, and even put Elizabeth 61 votes ahead of her.

Jane's tide began to turn on the 5th count. Brian Wilson was a very popular independent member of the District Council from Bangor, polling even more votes for Council than Eileen Bell. A moderate, 45% of his voters made Alliance their second choice. Only 26 of them went to Elizabeth. Jane got a crucial 118 transfers from him, edging 30 ahead of Elizabeth. On the 6th count, after the working-class PUP man dropped, 47% of his transfers went to the UUP. However, 182 (14% of his transfers) went to Jane, finally putting her 38 votes ahead of Marietta, in 7th place again. On the 7th count another very popular independent local councillor, Alan Chambers, who was in 10th place, had finally been eliminated. His supporters were more unionist, and 162 of them transferred to Elizabeth, but Jane got 228 of them. On the 8th count she got 18 from UUP surplus votes.

On the 9th count, the second Alliance candidate had dropped, and most of his 1972 votes transferred to his running-mate Eileen, electing her, but Jane got 242. On the 10th count she got 308 votes from Eileen's surplus, but still trailed Paisley's man by 185 votes. Jane, however, got only 58 transfers when Elizabeth dropped, with 2265 votes to transfer into the 11th count. If Paisley's man had got the rest, Jane would have been toast. However, Paisley's man got only 1253, while 472 went UUP and 474 had no further choices.

Finally, on the 12th count the SDLP's Marietta had dropped. Most of her 2458 voters would have named Eileen their second choice, and 470 of them refused to transfer farther. However, 1812 of them ranked Jane ahead of the unionists, putting her 413 ahead of Paisley's man, although still 475 short of a quota.

To Jane's original 1808 votes, she had added 3090 transfers, about 74% of them transfers from women: 1812 SDLP, 550 Alliance, 346 from the two independents, 182 from the PUP, and 205 others. She even stood fifth, 105 ahead of the third UUP man.

On to this year.

"How do you vote?

You must put a "1" against your preferred candidate, a "2" against your second preference, and so on for as many or as few candidates as you wish.

Can you explain how Proportional Representation actually works?

The Single Transferable Vote (PR) method of election ensures that there is the widest possible representation of the views of the electorate in that all their preferences are taken into consideration during the counting process.

Should I just vote 1, 2, 3 or should I vote for them all?

You can vote for as few or as many candidates as you wish, although the PR process is more effective if you express a preference for as many of the candidates as you can."

But the Guide for Candidates and Agents says:

11.14 The Deputy Returning Officer shall sort the ballot papers into parcels according to the candidates for whom the first preference votes are given. The numbers of first preference votes given to each candidate shall then be recorded, along with the total number of valid ballot papers.

11.15 The total number of valid ballot papers will then be divided by a number exceeding by one the number of members to be elected. As there are to be six members to be returned to each constituency, the total number of valid ballot papers will be divided by seven. The quota, ie the number of votes sufficient to secure the election of a candidate, will be equal to this number, increased by one.

11.16 At any stage in the count, where the total number of votes for a candidate equals or exceeds the quota, the candidate in question will be deemed to be elected.

11.17 Where the first preference votes for any candidate exceeds the quota, all ballot papers on which first preference votes are given for that candidate will be sorted into sub-parcels, grouped according to the next available preference given on those papers for any continuing candidate. Where no further preference is given, these papers will be grouped as a sub-parcel of nontransferable votes.

11.18 Each sub-parcel of ballot papers will then be transferred to the candidate for whom the next available preference has been given on those papers. The value of these votes, the ‘transfer value' will be calculated so that their total value is not greater than the surplus of the elected candidate. The total number of votes for each remaining candidate is recalculated, and where the number of votes for any candidate exceeds the quota, the candidate in
question will be deemed to be elected.

11.19 This process is repeated in a series of stages, continuing until all surplus papers have been transferred. If one or more vacancies remain to be filled, candidates with the least votes are excluded in turn, and consequential surpluses are transferred as they arise until the desired number of candidates has been deemed to be elected.

11.20 On the exclusion of a candidate, or transfer of a consequential surplus, any candidate attaining or exceeding the quota is deemed to be elected. Each transfer of a surplus or exclusion of a candidate constitutes a further stage in the count.

11.22 Although the attainment of the quota secures election, it is not essential for election. Indeed, if many papers have become non-transferable, it may not be possible for each of the desired number of candidates to attain the quota.

11.23 If at any stage, as the result of a proposed exclusion of one or more candidates, the number of continuing candidates would equal the number of places remaining unfilled, then such continuing candidates are deemed elected and the proposed exclusion is not effected.

You rank each candidate. A loyal Sinn Fein voter will list the SF candidates 1, 2, & 3, then the SDLP candidates, then the Alliance and NIWC candidates, then the UUP pro-agreement candidates, then anyone else in sight, and at the bottom of the list the anti-agreement UUP candidates and the DUP candidates.

number of votes divided by (number of seats + 1), plus 1.

So with 100 votes and 4 seats, you need 21 votes to take a seat.

If a candidate gets 30 votes, the extra 9 are not wasted - the "chips" are transferred to other candidates. As Wilfred has explained in his post above, there are various reasons for transferring. There are two versions of how you transfer - one involving fractions and one involving a representative sample - but it's a point of little interest to those who are not voting system junkies. But anyway, the successful candidate's surplus is passed on.

If no-one reaches 21, and there are still seats left to be distributed, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated. Their "chips" are then reassigned to the next preference, and their pile is left empty. This repeats until either all the seats are allocated, or there are just two candidates left for one seat - obviously then the candidate with the most votes takes the seat.

This is simplified but should give an idea of how it works in practice. Here's an example with easier numbers - actual results often involve too-big numbers to comprehend if you're unfamiliar with it.

100 votes - 3 seats. So the quota is 26 - (100 / (3+1)) + 1.

First count:
Adam 36
Barbara 22
Conor 16
Donna 4
Esther 11
Fredrick 11

So Adam is elected, and has a surplus of 10. His votes are transferred like this.

Adam 26 (i.e. elected)
Barbara + 3 = 25
Conor + 3 = 19
Donna + 1 = 5
Esther + 2 = 13
Fredrick + 1 = 12

OK, so now no-one's reached 26, so we eliminate the lowest candidate - Donna. And so it might happen like this. Her 5 votes are passed on.

Adam 26 elected
Barbara + 1 = 26
Conor + 1 = 20
Donna 0 eliminated
Esther + 3 = 16
Fredrick + 0 = 12

Barbara's elected but has no surplus. So now we have to eliminate another candidate, that's Fredrick. And maybe he's from the same party of Esther...so it might be like this.

Adam 26 elected
Barbara 26 elected
Conor + 2 = 22
Donna 0 eliminated
Esther + 10 = 26
Fredrick 0 eliminated

Esther's now elected - so Adam, Barbara, and Esther take the seats.

Hope it makes sense. The system is strange in that you either see it as completely natural and the only way (as I mentioned on a previous thread, we wouldn't dream of not using this system for something even as small as picking a class rep) or as totally baffling.

[ 28 November 2003: Message edited by: 4t2 ]

DUP 26, UUP 24
expected 29, 26
at dissolution 22, 26

SF 23, SDLP 16
expected 25, 19 (basically flipped over)
at dissolution 18, 24

Alliance 4
predicted 5
previous 6

Women's Coalition 1, PUP 1, Independent 1
expected as above
at dissolution: WC 2, PUP 2

Other anti-agreement unionist parties 0
predicted 1
at dissolution 8

This could still be very interesting, as the two main unionist parties remain close together.

All the DUP has really done is swept up the votes of the smaller unionist parties (some of which were only created in the lifetime of the Assembly) so the story is not too bad for the UUP. Sinn Fein and the SDLP have swapped places.

In South Belfast, Monica lost on the final count, 127 votes behind the sixth place man. Five male MLAs plus the SDLP's Carmel Hanna. Sinn Fein gains a seat at Monica's expense. The other annoying thing is that three of the riding's six MLAs were elected with less than quota. Each South Belfast MLA is supposed to represent 4,476 voters -- that's the proportional aspect -- but if too many ballots are "exhausted" because, for example, Paisley supporters refused to rank Monica ahead of Sinn Fein, then Sinn Fein picks up a seat by default without having 4,476 votes. In other words, they won by being first past the post on the final count. This is PR?

DUP 28 (+7)
SF 24 (+6)
UUP 25 (-1)
SDLP 18 (-5)
AP 4
IND 1 (+1)
PUP 1 (-1)
NIWC 0 (-2)
UKUP 1 (-2)

I believe at least two of the UUP MLAs are anti-Agreement so it looks like a majority of Unionist MLAs are opposed to the Good Friday Accord.

If the Alliance wins one or two more seats (a possibility) and decide to sit as unionists (which they are by default) then there could still be a unionist pro-agreement majority though it depends on Trimble's ability to whip his backbenchers.

[ 28 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

The nationalist community side has a Sinn Fein majority. (I assume the independent is a nationalist.)

The unionist community side has, on paper, pro-agreement UUP 27, Alliance 6, PUP 1, total 34. Anti-agreement DUP 30, UKUP 1, total 31. But if two UUPs defect then the anti-agreement side has a majority of 33 to 32. Not too stable. Although Jeffrey Donaldson may find it perfectly stable. He holds the balance of power, so he should be Prime Minister, right?

[ 28 November 2003: Message edited by: Wilfred Day ]

I better explain. Under the Agreement, certain decisions (including the election of a First Minister and a Deputy F.M.) must get cross-community support.

There are two ways of doing this: either a majority of members and a majority of both unionist and nationalist members; or 60% of members and 40% of both nationalist and unionist members. Correction after checking further: only the former (50% of both communities) is applicable for the initial election of the two Ministers. The choice between the 50/50 and 60/40 method applies thereafter.

So for Trimble to be elected as First Minister, without the Alliance re-designating (which they don't like to do, as the very point of the party is that they are cross-community), he needs amended: 50% of 59, or 30 votes. However, his party only has 27 (and the PUP has 1) - but will enough of them vote? FM and Deputy FM are selected together so if there's a Sinn Féin proposal for Deputy, will Trimble and the Alliance even make 30?

The d'Hondt allocation of ministerial roles kicks in after the election of the two leaders. Need to do the calculations on this. I've now done this draft calculation, see new post below

Side point to Wilfred: failure to exhaust is a problem. However it's fairly rare that the final candidate does reach the quota, so it's not something that just happened for the NIWC in this election. I think most people get the point of voting all the way down (although my ballot in the last general election had 16 names on it, and that was short), but voter education is still necessary. Elections in the Republic will be fully electronic from next year so perhaps that might help. We will see.

[ 29 November 2003: Message edited by: 4t2 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by 4t2:
Point of information. There are actually three designations - unionist, nationalist, other. The Alliance party are not default Unionist. In fact, they designated as Other (along with the NIWC). At one stage, they temporarily redesignated as Unionist in order to increase the Unionist vote.

---

Yes, I realise they are designated as "other". My point regarding being "default Unionists" is that since they don't favour a change in constitutional arrangements (ie joining Ireland) they are, by default, in favour of remaining in the UK and therefore unionists by default - very, very soft unionists but unionists neverhteless. I'm sure they'd object to that characterisation though.

Anyway, the final count is in and the Alliance kept all of their six seats (bravo to 4t2 for predicting that). If they do redesignate as unionists (and I expect there will be a lot of pressure for this) they can create a unionist majority for the agreement and deny Paisley the first ministership.
DUP 30 (+10)
SF 24 (+6)
UUP 27 (-1)
SDLP 18 (-6)
AP 6
IND 1 (+1)
PUP 1 (-1)
NIWC 0 (-2)
UKUP 1 (-4)

[ 28 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

quote:

---

SDLP leader Mark Durkan, whose party was the driving force behind power-sharing, said the damage from Wednesday's election could take years to repair.

"It is, frankly, depressing. The Democratic Unionists have got the result they wanted," Mr. Durkan said. "They wanted themselves on top on the Protestant side, and they wanted Sinn Fein on top on the (Irish) nationalist side, so that they could declare the agreement a bust."

---

"And if they try again in six months, the turnout will be 25%. People are fed up."

This is a method for calculating seats - it's used in some elections, but here it's just to work out how the 10 ministerial posts in the Northern Executive are allocated. This is one of the key provisions of the agreement - instead of a traditional parliamentary model where a majority party or coalition becomes the Executive, all parties are supposed to participate in it.

The figures from this election would mean that the parties could "pick" ministries in the following order:

DUP, UUP, SF, SDLP, DUP, UUP, SF, DUP, UUP, SDLP

or in total (this is apart from First Min and Dep First Min): 3 DUP, 3 UUP, 2 SF, 2 SDLP.

The previous Executive was constituted as follows:
3 UUP, 3 SDLP, 2 DUP, 2 SF.

The reason for the "extra" unionist seat this time around is that the seats held by smaller parties are now held by the DUP, so they are seen as a "bigger" party. THere hasn't been much media comment on the new executive as of yet, probably because it's unlikely that we will get this far. The Exec can't be chosen until a First Minister and Deputy are appointed. And pulling that one off is going to be hard enough.

quote:

---

50.94% voted for unionist parties as their first preference (51.17% if you include the Conservative Party which is pro-Union but not unionist).
40.7% voted for nationalist or republican parties

---

Okay, my ignorance of Irish and Northern Irish politics is vast (although I'm at least willing to admit to it).

So could someone explain the distinction between being pro-Union, and being unionist?

quote:

---

Originally posted by 'lance:

Okay, my ignorance of Irish and Northern Irish politics is vast (although I'm at least willing to admit to it).

So could someone explain the distinction between being pro-Union, and being unionist?

Also, I'd thought "nationalist" and "republican" meant more or less the same thing. What are the important distinctions there?

---

Of Catholics, 57% want an all-Ireland state and would therefore vote nationalist (Sinn Fein or SDLP.) ("Republican," by the way, means miltant nationalist, that is, supporter of the IRA/Sinn Fein.) Another 23% want Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK and would likely vote Alliance or Ulster Unionist Party. The other 20% don't know and might vote Alliance or, if they are saying that isn't their main issue, maybe for the Women's Coalition, or more likely not vote at all.

Among Protestants, 93% want to remain in the UK, 2% want to be part of Ireland, and the other 5% don't know.

The other very interesting question was "Which party would you give your second vote [second preference] to in the Assembly elections on November 26th?" You will see 47% of Paisleyites had no second choice, which is typical rejectionist thinking and counter-productive. Of Sinn Fein supporters, 36% could not bring themselves to say "SDLP" (the official party answer) and 26% had no second choice, again militants rejecting conciliation.

But the fascinating thing is how UUP voters were split. Only 8% gave the SDLP as their second choice, but that's okay if their second choice was a moderate or cross-community party, as 23% said, and their third choice might have been SDLP. But 34% preferred the DUP or another rejectionist group, which I think Trimble officially said they should do (but did he mean it?) That leaves another 34% who couldn't say, which is odd, when only 5% don't know if they want to be part of the UK. A very frustrated group.

Analogy #1. In Canada we have gone through the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords, trying to conciliate those who wish to leave Canada, as the Good Friday accords try to conciliate those who wish to leave the UK. In Canada, those who prefer the hard-line stance of the so-called Clarity Act would say that conciliation only encourages the bastards. Paisley's voters feel similarly. I can almost hear the "Big Man" saying "A referendum with a clear question would show that the great bulk of the people of Ulster have no wish to leave the UK. That will settle things for a generation, and those parliamentarians who don't respect the verdict can have the choice of taking an oath of loyalty or refusing to take their seats as honest republicans used to do."

quote:

---

Originally posted by 'lance:
how many Protestants support pro-republican, non-sectarian parties?

---

"Unravelling mysteries of single transferable vote
Mastering system can bring more poll success

By Chris Thornton
[email protected]
29 November 2003

GERRY Adams got too many votes for Sinn Fein's liking. "We tell them not to do it," said one party worker, "but they don't listen."

Welcome to the one of the inner mysteries of the single transferable vote. There can be too much of a good thing.

Vote management is an art that every major party in Northern Ireland tries to use to help them sail through the intricacies of proportional representation's multiple counts. All of them try it, but on the evidence of the past two days, none of them have completely mastered it.

Sinn Fein are undoubtedly the best at vote management, in large part because they do not tend to get transfers from other parties.

The DUP, who were among the sloppiest managers, appeared to have tightened up considerably in this election - although old bad habits may have cost them a seat.

Sinn Fein's repulsion of transfers appears to be changing, but the dearth is still costly for them. Their candidate Martin Meehan finished fourth in south Antrim's first preference votes, but saw three other candidates pass him on transfers to get elected. When SDLP candidate Donovan McClelland was eliminated, only 467 of his 2,802 votes went to the former IRA prisoner.

Sinn Fein's skills in vote management almost delivered them five out of six seats in west Belfast - which would have been an astounding achievement in a proportional representation election.

They fell short in the end, and sitting MLA Sue Ramsay became a victim to the party's ambitions - as did former MLA Gerry McHugh, who lost out in the party's quest for a third seat in Fermanagh and south Tyrone.

Part of Sinn Fein's frustration came from Mr Adams high personal vote. Ideally a candidate should finish close to the quota, because if he or she attracts too many first preferences, their transfers are not as helpful to other members of their party.

Sinn Fein did an admirable job trimming Mr Adams' high vote from 1998 and distributing it to other candidates, but it wasn't good enough. Although they cut him down from more than 9,000 votes to just above 6,000, he still came in at 1,500 over the quota - and that cost them in the pursuit of the elusive fifth seat.

Sinn Fein did better in mid-Ulster, spreading their votes just enough to get their candidates to finish second, third and fourth in first preference votes.

The DUP showed previously unseen skills in vote management.

In east Antrim, where they won one seat in 1998, they marshalled votes with spectacular success - capturing three seats even though they faced a serious vote split from two disgruntled former candidates and other parties.

However, their deputy leader - and director of elections - Peter Robinson attracted too many first preferences in east Belfast. He got almost 5,000 votes above the quota, which appeared to cost his party a third seat later.

So although the party attracted almost three full quotas in first preference votes, they blew it in the later stages. Their third candidate, Harry Toan was eliminated before the last Ulster Unionist, missing out on the possibility of transfers that should have delivered the seat.

quote:

---

For the moment, though, it is difficult to disagree with the sombre observation of Professor Paul Bew that the Good Friday agreement has not generated the dialectic of compromise that its authors hoped, but instead has generated a dialectic of antagonism that has not yet run its course.

---

quote:

---

??cO¯riginally posted by 'lance:


Also, I'd thought "nationalist" and "republican" meant more or less the same thing. What are the important distinctions there?

---

It's really more a matter of history (particularly since 1969) and what people prefer to call themselves. In practice these days there really is no difference, it's just the SDLP prefer to call themselves "nationalist" and Sinn Fein (and its splinters such as the Workers Party and IRSP) prefers the label "republican". It's not unlike the terms "social democrat" and "democratic socialist", in theory there's really no difference between the two, in practice softer elements prefer to use one term and harder elements the other.

Both nationalists and republicans support a united Ireland. Nationalist was traditionally used to refer to those who wish to achieve this through parliamentary means, ie the SDLP and it's predecessor the Nationalist Party. Sinn Fein and it's various splits and offshoots prefer the term "republican" if, for no other reason, than it distinguishes them from the softer nationalists so you could say that "nationalists" are those who are gradualists and prefer parliament and "republicans" are those who want immediate change and have traditionally employed violence (though there was a Republican Labour party in the 1960s which would be "nationalist" by the above definition and also, in recent years, Sinn Fein is really more "nationalist" than "republican" if one uses the above definition.

On the Unionist side the hardliners who employ violence often prefer the term "Loyalist".

[ 30 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilfred Day:
Another 23% want Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK and would likely vote Alliance or Ulster Unionist Party.

---

I think the election results show that most Catholics who prefer to stay in the UK actually vote SDLP ( and some would vote Alliance) either out of community loyalty because the SDLP is the "Catholic" or because they don't trust any of the unionist parties to defend the rights of Catholics and ensure Catholics get their fair share of jobs, housing etc or because they perceive Unionists, even the UUP as sectarian and anti-Catholic (the UUP is, after all, the official party of the Orange Order). If 1/4 of Catholics voted Alliance or Unionist the combined percentage of all NI voters voting for SF and SDLP would be around 26% rather than the 40% they got this election.

Some Catholics vote Unionist but very, very few and even fewer are members of Unionist parties (the DUP doesn't even allow Catholics to become members).

Frankly, if the UUP were smart and capable of "thinking outside the box" they'd develop a strategy to appeal to Catholic voters and make a special effort to run Catholic candidates. If they were able to get Catholics who are not keen on joining Ireland to vote UUP they would easily become the largest party in Northern Ireland (assuming, of course, that their Protestant voters aren't so sectarian as to abandon any party seen as "too soft on the Taigs".)

[ 30 November 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mycroft:
The system should be designed so that a candidate can have his or her over quota votes "transferred" to another candidate.

---

quote:

---

"Non-sectarian" misses the mark. The conflict in Northern Ireland is very marginally about religion. At root it's an ethnic conflict ...

---

Well, I'm aware of this. Still, don't people even in Northern Ireland use "Catholic" and "Protestant" as shorthand for "descended-from-'native-Irish'" and "descended-from-'Scotch-Irish'", respectively?

Anyway... it was Mycroft who first used the word "sectarian," here... Mycroft, I tell you!

quote:

---

"Scotch-Irish" (a term common 150 years ago, now used, oddly, only by their American descendents...

---

quote:

---

That's why members of the two communities usually have different accents, often look different, and often even have distinctive names.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
In Ireland parties on the left barely get 10% of the vote while the other 90% vote for the tweedle dum and tweedle dummer Fianna Fail and Fine Gael . . .

---

This is wrong. Other points in Stockholm's post are more subjective. I will refrain from debating the current extent of church domination in the Republic, because I don't really know. But Fianna Fail and Fine Gael got 64% of the first preference votes last year, not 90%. Labour did get only 10.8% but the other independent left candidates, the Greens, and Sinn Fein (if you consider them left as most do) got a lot more. I have no way of totalling the first choices for the independent left candidates, and they aren't well labelled anyway. But the final result, after left voters hung together with second and third preferences, was between 21.7% and 24.7% left deputies, depending how you count 5 semi-left independents. Of the 166 deputies, 21 are Labour, 6 Green, 5 Sinn Fein, and 4 independent socialist or left, plus about 5 more independent semi-left. Since the conservative Fine Gael got only 31 seats and the three left parties got 32, the Labour leader claimed after the election that the left were the real Opposition.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

BTW: Where do people who are neither Protestan nor Catholic tend to stand in terms of the Unionist/Nationalist divide? I was told that the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and various expats in NI who have no automatic affiliation tend to be 100% unionist (kind of like the way allophones in Quebec tend to be 100% federalist). cvan anyone confirm this?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mycroft:
. . . on the topic of Jews in Northern Ireland . . .

---

quote:

---

The Observer has learnt that five leading figures from the SDLP in Belfast have decided not to stand on the party's ticket in future elections. Instead they are writing to Fianna Fail this week urging the Irish Prime Minister's party to allow the SDLP to evolve into Fianna Fail in Northern Ireland.

None of the five who spoke to The Observer was prepared to to be publicly named. But all insisted they wanted full merger with Bertie Ahern's party, an idea first floated publicly by Tom Kelly, a former SDLP director of elections, in this newspaper 11 months ago.

'I'm a nationalist, I'm in favour of a united Ireland so why would I not want to join an All Ireland party,' one senior SDLP member in Belfast said yesterday.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mycroft:
What would be the point of SDLP merging with Fianna Fail?

---

An article last August 31 "Labour needs a strategy" in a southern Irish newspaper gives the answer:

Of course, the primary aim of every political party is to exercise power, and the Irish Labour party is no different. But in its 90 years of existence, it has never come close to electing a taoiseach and running the country . . .

The catalyst, one way or the other, may lie in Labour's biggest and most consistent problem: the North.

Despite Connolly's declaration that, "The cause of Labour is the cause of Ireland, the cause of Ireland is the cause of Labour", the party has always had a problem with the 'national question'.

Even now, many Labour TDs -- and one or two of those presumed to be candidates for the leadership -- are 'two-nationists', who do not regard the North as part of their country.

But in the decade to come, the North will prove far more difficult to ignore. The census results, due in January, are likely to show that the North no longer has a unionist majority; we are into the countdown to a united Ireland.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Why would the SDLP have any affinity with Fianna Fail which I always thought was the most most narrow minded conservative party in Ireland.

---