Opinion

Tom Kelly: Loyalism needs another David Ervine, not today's empty vessels

Tom Kelly

Tom Kelly

Tom Kelly is an Irish News columnist with a background in politics and public relations. He is also a former member of the Policing Board.

The positive influence of David Ervine, who died in 2007, on loyalism is badly missed today
The positive influence of David Ervine, who died in 2007, on loyalism is badly missed today The positive influence of David Ervine, who died in 2007, on loyalism is badly missed today

Forgive my bluntness.

Last week, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland announced that he may consider a loyalist talks proposal.

As Forrest Gump would say, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

Northern Ireland is 25 years on from the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) and the loyalist ceasefires declared by the late Gusty Spence and David Ervine.

Having met both men and enjoyed their company, I was never in any doubt about their past. Behind the benign pipe smoking grandfatherly image, Spence had steely cold eyes.

To their credit he and Ervine were both earnest about peacemaking. They were conscious that future generations of young loyalists shouldn’t suffer as they had done by wasting away their best years in prison.

Ervine was prescient when he said: “This society believed it was looking towards a new future, and we consistently find ourselves being dragged backwards."

He was also in no doubt about those unionist leaders who egged on loyalist paramilitaries for their own self aggrandisement. Ervine said he knew the colour of the wallpaper in their living rooms.

Some loyalists didn’t accept the analysis of Ervine and murderously broke the ceasefires to undermine confidence in Ervine’s leadership.

Had David Ervine lived, loyalism would be in a much better place and would be less inclined to be led like donkeys by political agitators.

There is and has been no loyalist successor to Ervine.

The current loyalist leadership is far from united, other than managing their respective turfs. The fringe elements of loyalism are like empty vessels making much noise and spouting even more nonsense.

They cram small numbers of mainly old men and young Turks into even smaller rooms in Orange Halls and call it a rally. These are the political Luddites of loyalism.

Since the ceasefires, the UVF and UDA continued to recruit members to their ranks. It’s not some kind of old boys network. These are all too active. Too active running drug cartels, organised crime, racketeering and loan-sharking.

These are not political organisations. They speak for no-one. They dabbled in politics and were comprehensively rejected by the unionist electorate. Their resentment stems from their isolation by what they see as an ungrateful unionist community.

It’s these paramilitary leeches who are holding back working class loyalist communities. They have no interest in relaxing their vice-like grip.

The Loyalist Communities Council is not fit for purpose. In fact, it should not even exist – let alone be regularly platformed by the media.

Loyalist paramilitaries have already declared they have “temporarily" withdrawn their support for the Good Friday Agreement.

The GFA is a peace agreement. Paramilitaries who don’t support the continuation of peace – whether loyalist or dissident militant republicans – have no entitlement to engagement unless they remove their threats to peace and stability. Loyalists have already threatened to reconsider their ceasefires.

Working class loyalists who feel disenfranchised look with envy at the growth of Sinn Féin. Unlike the IRA, the UDA and UVF have made only a few feeble attempts to transition. The whiff of cordite and the lure of filthy lucre was too hard resist.

Some may ask why would loyalist paramilitaries disappear when their power base is only secured by their enforcement of some communities.

In their short dalliance with politics, loyalist paramilitaries learned once they eschewed violence and their nefarious criminal enterprises, they become irrelevant to an indifferent electorate.

Better then to be an irritant in the body politic than a participant. Better to a critic and carper than being constructive and conciliatory.

The door is always open for loyalist paramilitaries to come in from the cold. To date, they have shown little appetite for doing so. They won’t be rewarded electorally for winding down their organisations, so they are looking for a trade off.

The government will call it chequebook diplomacy. To the communities under the cosh of these paramilitaries it will look and smell like ransom money. Transitioning is a dirty process.