UUP: Clear policy grounded in a strategic direction would increase the possibility that commitment will follow

A lot of cheap shots are being taken at the Ulster Unionist Party as its latest travails are exposed.

Previous comments of ‘warring tribes’, ‘impossible to lead ‘, of pseudo religious, cultural and political powerplays, all of which present, are mined to dismiss the UUP as a serious political party; incapable of providing constructive, creative and competent leadership even within its own membership.

For too many years, it has struggled, often in a meandering fashion to do so. Its internal tensions and changes of leadership have become something of a spectator sport. As a result, it has gifted initiative to its main pro-Union rivals.

The consequences of this speak for themselves; not least in declining electoral success and loss of the right to hold the post of First Minister.

As the UUP licks its wounds in damage limitation mode once again, there are surely some adults in the room, strong enough to say: “Enough is enough”; with the leadership skills to not just close this latest chapter but write a more constructive narrative.

In an attempt to accentuate the positive, is it not the case that the resignation of Doug Beattie, MLA has opened up this space; provided any new leader works from the premise that the UUP has always been a party, easier to lead than command?

In the manner of his accepting the current situation with a commendable display of  the necessary grace and dignity which at one stage seemed to be missing in action, the MLA, who now joins the ranks of former leaders, appears to be accepting that when you assume a leadership position you are in the last instance accountable for the leadership you provide; that the first person any leader has to lead is him or herself.

Within a political party the leader has to build and keep the trust and respect of the members who themselves must be prepared to accept that they are bound by a code of ethics, public service and self-discipline; not self-interest or loyalty to another organisation to which they may give and parade their allegiance.

Members cannot be expected to be consulted on every decision, to micro-manage the leader, but if policy is clear and grounded in transparent strategic direction, communication and deliberative processes embedded in mutual respect, there is a greater possibility that commitment and support will be forthcoming.

There is an opportunity now to learn from what has gone awry.

The comment, echoed by others, shared with me by a strong advocate of the direction in which Doug Beattie seemed to wish to take the party, that there ‘were too many solo runs coupled with a failure to consult and take advice ‘cannot be repeated.

You may never win everyone but, in a party, you need the support of an overwhelming majority and may have to weed out dissenters who would be more at home in a different party, otherwise you will not build consensus and falter.

This has been the case in the UUP since 1998. Doug Beattie MLA is not the first but he needs to be the last to be cast aside. The failings cannot be his alone.

Within the structures of the party, there are roles, wherein the office bearers can ensure that the situation which has developed should never reach this point. If this is not the case then the processes need to be updated to embed teams with the strategic and operational skillsets to lead and manage a modern political party.

To invest total leadership in one person is obsolete. There is a need for the modern and pluralist pro-Union movement which David Trimble advocated in the early 2000s.

Prompted by press reports of former DUP leader and current Speaker of the NI Assembly, Edwin Poot’s remarks on BBC Redlines calling for ‘Unionism to reach out’, I listened to the full podcast. He did indeed speak as reported but he also said that he had been a Paisley-ite and was still a Paisley-ite.

He is either trying to face in two directions or is deluded. The tepid response of his party the DUP to the recent racist riots and continuing attacks on immigrant properties and businesses is fairly conclusive.

The only contribution of the DUP to any pro-Union future is to cancel it. A growing number is being persuaded by the unchallenged messaging of Ireland’s Future and other groups that the end of the Union is inevitable: “It is just a matter of time.”

Buoyed by tribal anticipation of exaggerated demographic possibilities, the promised land is (they would have it) already in sight. The misguided politics of the DUP and the TUV are likely to deliver this by default.

The only alternative is a re-energised, re-invigorated and rebranded UUP. It needs to abandon the politics of inner partition and mediocrity, its self-indulgent mission and identity drift; to pause, reflect and insulate the party and Northern Ireland from the past, recent and otherwise.

Putting Northern Ireland and all its people first, the challenge is to re-imagine what it can look like through a 21^st Century lens and build a community grounded in its best and diverse qualities.

Since 1998, progress has been messy and piecemeal; lacking any continuity and consistency. Unionism has allowed itself to get carried along in the flow, becoming more divisive than restorative. This has been a particular flaw within the DUP largely seen in the behaviour, attitudes and poor disagreement of individuals; and corporate policy-making.

Political Unionism has been rendered toxic.

Too often, the UUP has allowed itself to get drawn into the ruts; allowing tradition to speak louder than the needs of the future and failing to disturb an increasingly stubborn sectarian status quo.

Under Doug Beattie’s leadership there was talk of progressive unionism and inclusion but from the outside there appeared limited evidence of gateways to a new and diverse membership with fresh thinking and strategic actions to deliver the desired transformation.

In the absence of these enablers, slogans and straplines presented as borne of tactical electoral necessities rather than deeply-held conviction. At best, they appeared merely aspirational. It is as if the UUP has been like a fisherman wanting to fish in a particular pool but lacking the correct equipment.

If it is unfair to suggest this, there are many in the pro-Union, non-voting constituency, lacking in any political home, who will be delighted to be proven wrong. A new chapter is indeed needed from the UUP. Either that; or close the book.

Terry Wright is a former member of the UUP who, in addition to inter- and intra-community activities works independently to promote Civic Unionism.