Opinion

Patrick Murphy: Hard for any centenary celebration not to be divisive

Stormont seems set to mark the Northern Ireland centenary by engaging in another phoney war over flags and self-perpetuating historical myths and legends
Stormont seems set to mark the Northern Ireland centenary by engaging in another phoney war over flags and self-perpetuating historical myths and legends Stormont seems set to mark the Northern Ireland centenary by engaging in another phoney war over flags and self-perpetuating historical myths and legends

THIS column is disappointed that it has not been invited to join the Centenary Forum. You must have heard of the Centenary Forum.

It will advise Her Majesty's government on how to celebrate next year's 100th anniversary of the formation of the northern state.

Sadly, the opportunity has passed to advise Boris Johnson on how best to celebrate the birth of one of the world's most dysfunctional administrations.

Indeed, two opportunities have passed, because Boris is also establishing a Centenary Historical Advisory Panel. (How can you advise on history? Do you say things like, "Go easy on the history there, it might offend someone"?)

So despite the absence of an invitation, perhaps we can advise Boris from a distance. We might suggest that the state's history has three phases: one-party maladministration; sectarian war; two-party maladministration.

The one-party phase lasted for 50 years. It implemented political repression, anti-Catholic discrimination and the denial of civil rights to both Catholics and Protestants.

The repression was enforced through the Special Powers Act (once envied by South Africa's apartheid regime) which banned publications, outlawed political expression and regularly used internment without trial.

It was followed by 25 years of sectarian war, aimed at destroying the state. (When you can't destroy a dysfunctional state, maybe you are going about it the wrong way.) The war ended when those trying to destroy it decided that they should govern it instead.

This led to today's two-party maladministration. It differs from the one-party system in that it generates a vastly superior form of administrative incompetence and has introduced unprecedented levels of scandal, ranging from RHI to Nama and beyond.

Its intermittent existence is based on sectarian interdependence, which guarantees electoral success for both parties and allows them to govern in their conflicting interests.

Two common themes have pervaded all three phases: the interfering hand of Britain has never been far away and there has been an appalling level of social and economic deprivation among both Protestants and Catholics.

Child poverty levels have consistently been the highest in the UK. The north has been a sectarian state for sectarian opportunists.

Attitudes to the centenary will reflect that history. It will be enjoyed, fudged or rejected. Unionists will enjoy it, although Arlene Foster's claim that it will bring people together displays a certain isolation from reality.

Jim Allister's TUV would like to see the Queen addressing the Assembly (a chore which should not be inflicted on anyone); the Downing Street cabinet meeting here (as if we haven't suffered enough) and a "large scale" garden party. (400,000 in poverty and the TUV wants a garden party.)

Nationalists will argue that there is little to celebrate, although Michelle O'Neill may have jumped the gun (if you'll pardon the phrase) by saying it is not something she would ever celebrate.

Conscious of the Dublin government's tenuous grip on power, Sinn Féin may opt for a northern fudge. (They may attend some minor events, but they will not inhale.) It will be hard for any form of celebration not to be divisive.

But surely, you say, there must have been something good in the past 100 years. Yes, there was: the introduction of the welfare state by Westminster in the 1940s created state support for all citizens from the cradle to the grave.

It established the NHS and introduced massive housing investment, universal social security, free higher education and state involvement in job creation.

Today much of that has gone, sidelined by sectarianism and diluted by the two main parties' history of putting politics before people.

You may disagree, but where was Stormont's commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the creation of the welfare state? They ignored it, because it meant nothing to them.

Instead they are about to engage in another phoney war over flags and self-perpetuating historical myths and legends.

Which suggests that we might reasonably leave commemorations to the politicians, while the rest of us get on with our lives, amid the social and economic inequality they have created for us.