To be honest, I'm not quite sure what to make of the latest 'open letter' from what's sometimes described as the 'civic' sector in Northern Ireland; other than the fact that it seems to have been written as a standalone response to the letter written to Leo Varadkar a few weeks ago by 200 or so people representing civic nationalism.
What makes it odder is that these two groups - or elements within them - appear to have been in conversation beforehand.
According to a source behind this week's letter: ''Over the past few years a group of Northern Ireland civic unionists, greens, socialists and non-aligned have engaged in both difficult and constructive conversations with Sinn Féin and other sections of civic nationalism. Via these conversations we gained the impression that we were equals in terms of the expression of rights, equalities, civil liberties and reconciliation. It was therefore puzzling when our nationalist neighbours were to lobby Taoiseach Leo Varadkar via correspondence and not mention those with an alternative constitutional allegiance or identity who share similar or related concerns about rights, reconciliation and civil liberties. We assume we were referred to as '...everyone living here.'
The source continued: ''This suggests that people, such as the signatories of this letter, are passive as concerns the debating of issues around rights and civil liberties. We are neither passive or defensive but instead actively engaged in positive interventions and debates. Therefore, we take this opportunity to remind all this desire to debate the issues of equality, inclusion and ultimately reconciliation is not the exclusive preserve of only one section of our divided society.''
In an Irish News column on December 15 - responding to the Varadkar letter - I wrote: ''I'm surprised that, even though they describe themselves as Irish citizens living in the north of Ireland (which embraces all of those with an Irish passport) the list doesn't include one Remain unionist (the letter had mentioned the 'impending reality of Brexit') who also happens to be the possessor of an Irish passport.''
It was as if the civic nationalists couldn't even bring themselves to acknowledge that there were civic unionists who shared their concerns about the impact of Brexit; let alone the equality, human rights and 'the rights of all citizens' which were also mentioned in the letter.
A politics student I know summed it up quite nicely: "If even the supposedly non-shouty people can't seem to agree, it doesn't really offer much hope." And she's right. My experience of the 'civic' sector is that they tend to think they're just that little bit more sophisticated, measured and capable than those of us who spend our time in the everyday rough and tumble of politics. They favour 'civilised engagement' rather than 'eye-rolling confrontation,' believing that that's the only way of reaching compromise. Yet when it comes to what are supposedly joint concerns they end up sending separate letters to separate places. Go figure.
Anyway, I remain to be fully convinced that civic nationalism or civic unionism (and I'm not even sure what the terms ever mean - other than that the people concerned tend to be unelected, non-mandated and from mostly professional backgrounds) has anything to offer. What's the point of writing to Leo Varadkar? What's the point of an open letter to the media? What's the point of tea, buns and supposedly difficult conversations?
The truth is that they need to be talking to both the DUP and Sinn Féin, because they are winning over 60 per cent of the vote between them. They need to be building post-conflict electoral vehicles and providing new choices and voices. They need to be knocking doors in every constituency. They need to know what's actually exercising the minds of most people in Northern Ireland, rather than what they think is exercising those minds.
And instead of platitudes about personal commitments and commonly shared values and beliefs - the sort of platitudes we hear from the political parties every day - it would help if they actually set out what it is they're after. Better still, let's see the hard evidence of what changes they would make and how they would deliver them. All I've seen is a few letters, signed off by a few hundred people: nicely put together, mind you, but saying very, very little.
Pockets of what we now call civic unionism and civic nationalism have, in fact, been around for decades. From time to time they raise their heads and voices; sometimes, as in the run-up to the Good Friday Agreement, making a very useful contribution to key debates. Mostly, though, they lack the passion and commitment for what is, in essence, active politics. And, in fairness to many of those I've met along the way, it is a genuine pity that we haven't heard something more substantial from them.
