A forum to discuss new ideas and perspectives on Unionism…
« Newer Older »
October 5, 2010 • 11:13 pm
Here’s Paula Bradshaw’s take on things following her resignation… « From the Front Line.
Filed under: UUP, week in politics, Paula Bradshaw, resignation, selection
I think in comparison to earlier defections from the party (think Donaldson and Co.) both Ms Bradshaw and Ringland have, with their departures, conducted themselves with dignity. Compared to what they could (and justifiably) have said they have been quite restrained
Hopefully, both haven’t now been lost permamently to politics
I take a lot of self satisfaction (Alex Kane style) that I predicted these events a mile off. With none of the MLAs in unionist constituencies going for Westminster selection it was obvious that they were letting the no-hopers take a pasting and then freeze them out at Assembly level where there is real money and real jobs at stake.
Congrats to McGimpsey. The ruthlessness, the alacrity and the totality of his screwing Bradshaw is remarkable. With Bostock embedded in Laganbank, Bradshaw is totally ruined. How could she walk into a selection meeting after presumably working her selectorate for over 12 months and not see the writing on the wall?
Paula’s ‘reasons’ for leaving are interesting. I think she fundamently misunderstands how the UUP is run. Did she really believe her own myth? Patronage and gender were never going to see her through all the way.
When Martin Smyth stood down in 2005, almost 100 people voted on his successor. In 2010, it seems that only 24 people voted in the Westminster selection. That is a stunning collapse in 5 years.
The smaller an Association, the greater the opportunity for manipulation of the voting process in favour of individual interest.
I’ve asked Paula Bradshaw on her blog whether she considered that the selection process was fair.
It’s also the question the media should be asking, although, judging by Gail Walker’s piece in the Bellylaugh, it’s easier to file cheap copy about the poor UUs being stuck in the 1950s than doing some proper journalism.
Carrie… I suspect Gail Walker’s stuck-in-the-50s critique is shared fairly widely among the voters.
It’s terrible the UUP have lost both Trevor and Paula. Tom Elliott didn’t lift a finger to support either of them.
From listening to Trevor it’s clear that if Tom had merely said he’d pop along to a sporting match he would have saved one of the highest-quality members the UUP has. But he didn’t. And why hasn’t he lifted a finger to save Paula? If he wanted a shared UUP in which moderates were included, Tom could easily have made his views known to South Belfast members. But he didn’t.
I didn’t support Tom Elliott but when he said he didn’t want a ‘cold house’ for progressives I took him at his word – perhaps I should have taken him literally.
Perhaps he doesn’t want a ‘cold house’ for progressives, perhaps he wants to set fire to the UUP progressive house and burn it down entirely?
If not, he needs to act fast and prove me wrong.
The voters will have their say next May.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 24 other followers
Here's the history of the UUP.
Here's the history of the DUP.
Follow this link for a great slideshow from the UUP flickrstream.
Follow this link for a great slideshow from the DUP flickrstream.
Blog at WordPress.com.