In Theory. Northern Ireland Power Sharing Executive survives in 1974

nezza

The power sharing executive that was created in Northern Ireland in 1974 was the first attempt to bring both sides of the "troubles" in Northern Ireland together. It collapsed after 6 months due to a loyalist strike and the Labour government's belief that that the collapse of the executive was a good thing.


(NB the executive was set up by the Conservatives)

However I believe that the executive could have survived if two things had occurred:

First in the February 1974 general election the pro-executive parties had banded together and formed a more coherent pro-executive voice in Westminster.

Second the pace of devolution was slowed down. Instead of rushing through the Council Of Ireland the executive took a gentler pace by gaining acceptance from most of Northern Ireland.

Obviously there would have been implacable enemies such as Paisley but I feel that the above steps may have been successful.

Has anyone any thoughts?
 

sparky42

I'm not sure that it could survive, for example part of the Loyalist Strikes shut down the power station that supplied Belfast and Eastern NI so the level of public issues might still be too much.

As for getting SDLP and the UUP to operate as a coherent band would be extremely difficult, arguable that's still to happen today.
 
V-J

V-J

The Council of Ireland was a bloody stupid thing to include and was a red rag to a bull for Unionists. Cut that out, and it would have a better chance of survival.
 

nezza

V-J said:
The Council of Ireland was a bloody stupid thing to include and was a red rag to a bull for Unionists. Cut that out, and it would have a better chance of survival.
Click to expand...

Ok,lets continue down this road. The council of Ireland is kicked into the (very) long grass, The executive continues beyond May 1974 and slowly starts to build momentum.
 

sparky42

Without the Council of Ireland how do you convince the Nationalists that it isn't the same old same old with new window dressing? How do you convince them that real change will happen, that their issues will be dealt with, that it will be a power sharing executive and not just a Unionist dominated bloc?

By this stage they didn't trust the Unionist and I can't see them agreeing to deal without some kind of allowance of Dublin involvement.
 

The Oncoming Storm

What might have helped was if it hadn't been called The Council of Ireland which for Unionists invoked memories of the final Home Rule Bill, giving it its current name of North-South Ministerial Council then it mightn't have been so contentious. However as mentioned above that may cost Nationalist support, IIRC the SDLP was split over the issue, Belfast based politicians such as Gerry Fitt and Paddy Devlin were sympathetic to Unionist concerns but the "Derry Wing" led by John Hume, who had been on the worst excesses of Unionist rule were uncompromising in their insistence on the Council and their view prevailed. It also didn't help that when being barracked by Republicans in a debate in Dublin, SDLP Assembly member Hugh Logue said the Council was. "A vehicle to trundle the Unionists into a United Ireland..." Fitt later said, "The next day that was on the front of the News Letter and I knew we were finished!" :eek:

The best way to get a political settlement in the 1970's is to have Heath listen to the Army in 1971 and refuse to introduce internment as requested by Stormont, or at least make it a very tightly conducted operation aimed at capturing leading IRA commanders instead of the shambolic mass round up of OTL which included people who hadn't been active in the IRA since the 1920's, and make sure a lot of senior Loyalists are also brought in so it can't be portrayed as an anti-Catholic crackdown. It was internment that inflamed the situation driving hundreds of Nationalists to support the IRA and led directly to Bloody Sunday which further enraged Nationalists, 1972 was the closest NI ever came to collapsing into all out civil war without those events the political temperature won't be as highly charged. You may then have an opportunity to reform Stormont with the restoration of PR and other measures to give Nationalists fair representation, with PIRA not getting the swell of support it did IOTL their armed campaign won't be as extensive and it may peter out by the late 1970's. This is very much a best case scenario and given how volatile NI was in the 1970's it would still be at the mercy of events but it would have a far better chance than Sunningdale did.
 
Pangur

Pangur

Donor
sparky42 said:
Without the Council of Ireland how do you convince the Nationalists that it isn't the same old same old with new window dressing? How do you convince them that real change will happen, that their issues will be dealt with, that it will be a power sharing executive and not just a Unionist dominated bloc?

By this stage they didn't trust the Unionist and I can't see them agreeing to deal without some kind of allowance of Dublin involvement.
Click to expand...

It is hard to come up with a viable scenario to counter the above. However I will give it a go.To get creditability the following would have to happen. Disband the RUC and all other local military forces. Short term the British army pick up some of the slack and get as many police from the England and Wales to fill the gap. Keep them unarmed - that's vital to make this work. If you need the the heavies, use the Brit army. Have every council examined for sectarism - if they come up guilty, disband them and bar the councillers for life from politics. Mean while start a fresh with the police. do what ever you have to get a decent % of nationalists into the ranks.
 
V-J

V-J

sparky42 said:
Without the Council of Ireland how do you convince the Nationalists that it isn't the same old same old with new window dressing?
Click to expand...

And with it, how do you convince the Unionists that this isn't part of a slippery slope, heading towards the kind of termination of the issue which top pols like Harold Wilson were already openly talking about? ("If good men have nothing to work towards, bad men will have something to shoot for", was Darlin' 'Arold's beautifully forensic assessment of the issue)

Perhaps this problem was intractable and unresolvable - and I suspect TOS is right when he suggests the mistakes had already been made by then in the shambles of internment and the like.
 
Last edited:
Pangur

Pangur

Donor
V-J said:
And with it, how do you convince the Unionists that this isn't part of a slippery slope, heading towards the kind of termination of the issue which top pols like Harold Wilson were already openly talking about? ("If good men have nothing to work towards, bad men will have something to shoot for", was Darlin' 'Arold's beautifully forensic assessment of the issue)

Perhaps this problem was intractable and unresolvable - and I suspect TOS is right when he suggests the mistakes had already been made by then in the shambles of internment and the like.
Click to expand...

It is rather simple, with out justice there is no peace. Thanks for the reminder about internment - opening the camps would be a must to sort this out.
 

nezza

First Many thanks for the replies.

I'll try and answer your points one by one

Firstly with the COI. That name alone was silly. Perhaps something like the "Anglo-Irish Committee for Common Issues" (AICCI) would have been better.

As regards the police. There may have been some merit in the local force being frozen but English and Welsh police may have had sentiments in either Loyalists or Nationalists

With the councillors, banning extremism may not work because of the strong level of partisanship.

Please continue to comment:)
 

sparky42

nezza said:
First Many thanks for the replies.

I'll try and answer your points one by one

Firstly with the COI. That name alone was silly. Perhaps something like the "Anglo-Irish Committee for Common Issues" (AICCI) would have been better.

As regards the police. There may have been some merit in the local force being frozen but English and Welsh police may have had sentiments in either Loyalists or Nationalists

With the councillors, banning extremism may not work because of the strong level of partisanship.

Please continue to comment:)
Click to expand...

At the end of the day the name of the Council was "unimportant", it could have been called the "overpaid muppets collection":D and it still wouldn't have been acceptable, it was Dublin having any say in NI that was the issue, from memory one of the reasons the GFA was acceptable was otherwise the UK would allow Dublin greater say anyway.

The fundamental issue I think is that by 1974 the fabric of society had to a great degree disintegrated in NI, neither side trusts the other no respects many of the symbols of the other side (ie the RUC). Trying to get a political agreement or cross community politics isn't going to work if both sides thinks the other is oppress the other.

Even today neither side are truly "happy" or "trusting" in the other or anything they see as favouring one side or the other (see Unioinist claims about the Parades Commission/PSNI/NI Judges or SF's stirring up border poll issues or playing politics over the Flag) and that's 15 years after the GFA and years of talks before hand. All of that happened in times that were much more favourable compared to the height of post Bloody Sunday Northern Ireland.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top