Opinion

Peter Robinson missed a chance to reach out to Catholics

Alex Kane

Alex Kane

Alex Kane is an Irish News columnist and political commentator and a former director of communications for the Ulster Unionist Party.

A couple of years it looked as though Robinson was addressing a question which has dogged unionism for decades: why did tens of thousands of Catholics — who, electoral and polling evidence suggested were pro-Union. Picture by Stephen Kilkenny, PA Wire
A couple of years it looked as though Robinson was addressing a question which has dogged unionism for decades: why did tens of thousands of Catholics — who, electoral and polling evidence suggested were pro-Union. Picture by Stephen Kilkenny, PA Wi A couple of years it looked as though Robinson was addressing a question which has dogged unionism for decades: why did tens of thousands of Catholics — who, electoral and polling evidence suggested were pro-Union. Picture by Stephen Kilkenny, PA Wire

IN October 2010 Peter Robinson made what many interpreted as a landmark speech.

He said: "The reality is that our education system is a benign form of apartheid, which is fundamentally damaging to our society.

"I believe that future generations will scarcely believe that such division and separation was common for so long.

"Who among us would think it acceptable that a state or nation would educate its young people by the criteria of race with white schools or black schools?

"Yet we are prepared to operate a system which separates our children almost entirely on the basis of their religion.

"As a society and administration we are not mere onlookers of this; we are participants and continue to fund schools on this basis.

"And then we are surprised that we continue to have a divided society.”

In November 2012, addressing the DUP annual conference, he argued that the ‘left’ and ‘far left’ policies of the SDLP and Sinn Fein “leave many Catholics effectively disenfranchised.

"As the leader of a party that seeks to represent the whole community I’m not prepared to write off over 40 per cent of our population as being out of reach”.

He went further: “The reality is that cross-community government has increased support for the constitutional status quo in Northern Ireland.”

During that couple of years it looked as though Robinson was addressing a question which has dogged unionism for decades: why did tens of thousands of Catholics — who, electoral and polling evidence suggested were pro-Union — refuse to vote for unionist parties?

I’d always suspected it had something to do with the fact that many Catholics were uncomfortable with the ‘God, Ulster and Orange Order’ dimension of local unionism.

Indeed, being able to describe it as ‘local unionism’ sums up the problem.

They didn’t recognise it as a broad-based, inclusive, pan-UK unionism. Instead, they recognised it as an insular, exclusive, parochial unionism.

A unionism which seemed determined to exclude them. A unionism whose leaders were able, unchallenged by their own side, to say they didn’t want a Catholic “about the place,” or that “you can’t trust Catholics.”

A unionism which believed that a Catholic asking for equality of citizenship and equality of civil rights was a potential enemy or fifth columnist.

Terence O’Neill had been hounded out of office in 1969 for treading on the same ground, albeit much more clumsily than Robinson.

His successor, Brian Faulkner, had been hounded out of the UUP and out of the Sunningdale Assembly in 1974 for arguing that “Protestant and Catholic unionists, together,” could build a better future.

How would Robinson fare, some of us wondered? Well, we didn’t have to wonder for long, because the whole ‘reach out’ project fell apart when the DUP — along with the UUP— allowed old-fashioned street politics to derail it after the Union Flag was lowered at Belfast City Hall.

I’m a unionist: an unashamed, unapologetic, unembarrassed unionist. I believe in the geographical and constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom.

I believe in equality of citizenship. I don’t need my beliefs wrapped in a flag or a sash.

I don’t give a damn about the gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, professional status, education or overall background of those who share my beliefs.

I don’t care if they come from the political right or political left. I don’t care if they come from Bangor or Derry.

I don’t care if they are called Fred or Fearghal. All I care about is that there is a pro-Union vehicle (or vehicles) which is capable of recognising their differences and yet still pulls them all together.

The problem with ‘local’ unionism and ‘local’ republicanism too, is that they are often just the corner shop equivalent of the political superstores.

They pretend to be something bigger, something more substantial, yet all too often get bogged down in small town issues and small town own branding.

And for all of the claims that unionism and republicanism are philosophies “open to all,” there is still a sense that Protestant republicans or Catholic unionists are bizarre hybrids.

Indeed, it seems like only five minutes ago that I heard senior Ulster Unionists say: “Sure look at Sir John Gorman, isn’t he a Unionist MLA and a Catholic, too!”

Peter Robinson missed the moment when he was at the top of his game between 2009-12. That’s a pity.

Now, five years away from the centenary of the creation of Northern Ireland, unionism needs leaders who understand and promote a broader version of their core beliefs.

Back in 2012 Robinson talked about “taking tough decisions and abandoning outdated dogmas,” for unionism. That still remains the biggest challenge for a unionist leader.