Political Bromance between Dublin and London essential to progress on Legacy issues

Sam McBride, Sunday Independent and Sunday Life, March 30th, 2025

Amid the chaos and fear of an old world collapsing, there are those in Britain and Ireland who have some optimism.

They're not blind to the global chaos relished by Donald Trump or the realisation that Europe's defence looks weaker than at any time since the Cold War, or that a trade war could upend the global economy.

The reason for some optimism? It's that partly because of those developments — and partly for pre-existing reasons — they see ­London and Dublin coming together to rebuild a relationship shattered by years of Brexit ­bitterness.

In an era of hyper-nationalism, what's happening here is aberrative, even if it's partly founded in self-interest.

Just over a week ago, Keir Starmer turned part of 10 Downing Street into a Guinness pub for a few hours. Hosting the first St Patrick's Day party in the famous working residence could be dismissed as meaningless gesture politics.

If that's all it was — a few hours of craic between Dermot O'Leary, Daniel Wiffen, the Irish ambassador and an assortment of others with Irish links — then it would be of little consequence. But this is the public manifestation of what matters more — government to government summits, the movement of significant capital and a shared ideological objective in seeing each other prosper because they believe that means both nations win.

Some of this is about willing into existence realities which cannot be summoned by sentiment alone. The Windsor Framework has salved the problem of the Irish Sea border but has not solved it. The DUP's dishonest claim that it had swept away the sea border leaves it acutely vulnerable — and with it, Stormont itself — to its supporters' fury as that border relentlessly hardens.

But for now, after years of backbiting and fury, the idea that Ireland and Britain are led by men who are respectable and respectful is not inconsequential. As Starmer and Micheál Martin embark on this new era, there is one point in history to which they both look back.

Many British and Irish leaders have got on surprisingly well: Major and Reynolds, ­Cameron and Kenny, even Thatcher and FitzGerald in patches. But the zenith of ­British-Irish relations came under Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern. Never since partition had London and Dublin been so close.

Yet newly-declassified British government files I've been examining in London's National Archives reveal an aspect of this period which is both surprising and instructive.

Speaking ill of each other

Privately, there remained deep distrust. Even as David Trimble fought for his political life — and for the life of the Agreement — almost three years after that 1998 deal, senior NIO figure Bill Jeffrey wrote to Downing Street: "Yesterday afternoon was the Irish at their worst, with no pretence that they were doing anything other than pressing for the best possible terms for Sinn Féin, and something close to indifference to Trimble's problems.”

In response, Britain's ambassador in Dublin, Ivor Roberts, said of Ahern's officials: "There is no indication that they are in any way engaged in putting pressure either on Sinn Féin over decommissioning and the fragility of the institutions...”

A Downing Street note said senior Irish official Dermot Gallagher "admitted that the Irish were not pressing the SDLP or Sinn Féin on policies ('no point damaging our credibility with them')”.

In April 2001, a British diplomat in Dublin said Irish diplomat Ray Bassett "reported openly on the previous day's meeting of senior officials in Downing Street” to a room full of EU diplomats. London's representative added: "The total lack of any mention of the need for movement on decommissioning in Bassett's ­initial presentation speaks for itself.”

In response, Jeffrey expressed dismay, ­saying: "This illustrates why I was a bit wary of a trilateral meeting with Sinn Féin later this week. I was too polite to say so, but it was the Irish I was worried about rather than Sinn Féin.

"What they are either trying to do, or will do inadvertently through incontinence, is to build up a sense of impending concessions on policing... if the press get hold of the idea that we are already cooking up policing concessions with the Irish and Sinn Féin, it will be disastrous for Trimble.”

I had to read that again. The NIO's top official was more worried about Irish officials than about a republican movement other files show they knew was linked to massive criminality, up to and including murder?

Yet, intriguingly, the British believed Ahern was different. The British ambassador met the taoiseach in Dublin in January 2001. In a confidential despatch, he said Ahern had told Sinn Féin that if it didn't agree a major deal on decommissioning it would be a disastrous mistake.

When Sinn Féin responded negatively, Ahern "told them that if that was the way they wanted to play it, the next time he went to south Armagh and was asked about the towers and why they were not being demolished, he would say that it was because the IRA refused to decommission”.

Overcoming latent hostility

Ahern said he "couldn't give a shite” about Sinn Féin's policing agenda.

After Ahern-Blair talks in February 2001, the prime minister's private secretary said the taoiseach was "clearly pretty fed up with Sinn Féin”. But the Downing Street man said: "We shall see if this toughness survives subsequent meetings with his officials.”

In a phone call with Blair the next day, Ahern said they'd "wasted five weeks” trying to woo republicans — "he believed that we could do no more and had instructed his people to take the weekend off… let Sinn Féin sweat it out.”

These are British files, which present the British version of events. Other Irish files have shown a belief the British were constantly overstating the peril facing Trimble.

Yet Blair and Ahern demonstrated how political leaders can overcome this latent hostility as Starmer and Martin might manage to do.

However, that will involve recognition that the disputes between London and Dublin are deep and genuine — and while Northern Ireland is largely at peace, there are now greater and more complex areas of dispute due to the two countries being on opposing sides of an EU border now partly in the Irish Sea.

The rough and tumble of politics should never extend to cruel personal attacks

Suzanne Breen, Sunday Life, March 30th, 2025

ABUSE OF WOMEN IN PUBLIC LIFE IS ACROSS BOARD. PARTIES CAN DO MORE TO CALL IT OUT

EVEN as Carla Lockhart spoke out against the horrendous, misogynistic abuse she receives, the online bullies continued to target her.

“What's Shergar yapping about now?” tweeted one X user who doesn't have the guts to put their name or face on their profile.

The public is entitled to robustly challenge Lockhart, and every single one of our politicians, on their views.

Over the past week she has expressed her strong opinions on a range of issues. There are people who agree with her, and people who don't.

The latter can confront and question her arguments, but she is not an open target for abuse. The offenders think they are humiliating her. They are really degrading and demeaning themselves.

I first met Lockhart in 2016 when she was a local councillor running for the Assembly in Upper Bann. She confided then about the vile comments about her on social media.

She didn't want to go public and make a big deal of it. Nine years later, she's an MP and it's much, much worse.

It took courage for her to disclose the highly personal nature of some of the abuse she's received about her appearance. A quick social media search shows she's not exaggerating the extent to which she's being targeted.

Ripple effect

Her decision to call out the bullies had a ripple effect across politics here. BBC journalist Darran Marshall interviewed over a dozen MLAs about their experiences for The View.

It was a powerful piece of TV. One after one, politicians from across the spectrum described the abuse they've received.

Sinn Fein's Cathy Mason revealed she'd been sent sexually threatening messages privately and publicly. Now her daughter is old enough to be on social media, the South Down MLA is worried about how she'll shield her child from what's being said to her mother.

Alliance's Sian Mulholland has been subjected to appalling abuse. A hashtag 'big fat Sian' was used by people she'd never met when she stood for council in 2014.

When she was pregnant, someone said they wanted to take her to an island with a gun loaded with two bullets. The inference was that one bullet was for her and one was for her baby.

The North Antrim MLA has been called a “walking advert for diabetes”. The result is she doesn't put herself forward for TV interviews.

Just like DUP representatives, Sinn Fein and Alliance MLAs can have their political positions scrutinised and challenged. But the rough and tumble of politics should never extend to cruel and callous personal abuse.

It's always the same old story when it comes to women with strong opinions. It happens to female journalists too. The online bullies find it far easier to say 'you're fat' or 'you're ugly' than counter your arguments. Their aim is to silence you.

Lockhart tagged First Minister Michelle O'Neill in a tweet highlighting what she was being subjected to. “Dozens of the accounts that send me abuse on a daily basis are followed by some SF MLAs,” she wrote.

“Some names crop up more than others. Happy to send you the details. If you are really serious about standing up for women, then perhaps they can have a word.”

The DUP MP was absolutely right to do so. Mouthing platitudes isn't enough. Our parties must challenge their own supporters on this issue.

Lockhart identified a pattern in what was happening to her, and hopefully those with influence in Sinn Fein will do their all to help end it. O'Neill rightly branded the abuse “disgraceful and unacceptable”, and contacted Lockhart directly.

Serious and obscene

Some Sinn Fein MLAs like Sinead Ennis haven't conducted themselves well on social media historically, although Ennis apologised for her actions.

The DUP hardly covered itself in glory in relation to its Belfast councillor Ian McLaughlin who was previously involved with the UDA-linked political group the UPRG.

In 2023, it was alleged he ran the West Belfast UPRG Twitter account which engaged in sectarian, racist and misogynist abuse.

McLaughlin denied any link to the anonymous account. It disappeared around the time that council election candidates were selected. Journalist Patricia Devlin was among those subjected to “serious and obscene” abuse from the account.

When Jeffrey Donaldson said he'd no knowledge of McLaughlin's involvement in it, Devlin publicly asked him to contact her.

She said she had relevant information. I don't recall the DUP quickly chasing it up.

Every party in Northern Ireland must walk the walk when it comes to tackling the evil of online abuse.

Statement from Twelfth bonfire groups calls for ‘respect and understanding’ at pyre sites

By Conor Coyle, Irish News, March 30th, 2025

A joint statement on behalf of bonfire groups in east Belfast has urged those involved in building pyres to ensure Twelfth celebrations are carried out with “respect and understanding”.

The statement is from organisers of sites at Avoniel, Pitt Park, Clonduff and several other bonfire sites in the east of Belfast.

The groups said they “stand united against vandalism, fly-tipping and any actions that undermine our celebrations”.

Bonfires are erected in many areas across the north as part of annual Twelfth of July celebrations.

Joint statement from Twelfth bonfire groups calls for ‘respect and understanding’ at pyre sites

The Twelfth is the most important date in the calendar for members of the Orange Order and many from the Protestant, unionist and loyalist communities, with tens of thousands participating in events celebrating the victory of King William of Orange over King James II in the Battle of the Boyne in 1690.

However, concerns have been raised in the past surrounding the safety of some bonfires, anti-social behaviour and sectarianism, with effigies of politicians being burnt on the pyres and sectarian slogans appearing.

“We reaffirm our commitment to safe, well-maintained bonfire sites, free from anti-social behaviour,” the joint statement said.

Desire for dialogue

“We stand united against vandalism, fly-tipping, and any actions that undermine our celebrations. The bonfire tradition is one that should unite our community, not divide it, and we are committed to protecting its integrity.

“We are dedicated to educating the wider community, particularly younger generations, about the historical significance of bonfires and the role they play in shaping our local culture. This understanding is crucial for cultivating pride in the tradition and making sure it is celebrated with respect and understanding.”

The statement added that groups organising bonfire events must take responsibility “to make sure these celebrations are safe, respectful, and contribute positively to the community.”

“We are dedicated to working with local agencies, community groups, and residents to address challenges through collaboration and ongoing dialogue.

“We want to place on record that for any issues that arise in future, we are determined to approach these challenges with an open mind, through collaboration and ongoing dialogue.”