Conservative backbenchers this week called on Theresa May to replace Karen Bradley as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Most of us may well support such calls — it really is very difficult to see what, if anything, she has achieved during her tenure — but, surprisingly, these calls stem not from her total failure as a minister but from the supposed breakdown in her relationship with the DUP.

Suffice to say it is not the job of the Secretary of State to manage the government’s relationship with its confidence and supply partner. Indeed, the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) itself describes its key purpose as “to ensure the smooth working of the devolution settlement in Northern Ireland” whilst also “representing Northern Ireland at Westminster and the hear of Government.”

In this, Karen Bradley has utterly failed. But for her to be removed to make way for someone even more keen to please the DUP will clearly move the NIO even further away from its own professed goals. Once again the British government will have given in to the DUP in its desperation to pass Theresa May’s Brexit deal.

Such developments come as the latest polling from LucidTalk indicates just how far the DUP has wondered from majority opinion in Northern Ireland.

According to the poll, 55% of people in Northern Ireland would vote Remain if there was a poll tomorrow, whilst a further 8% would either want a different deal closer to the EU, or to accept the UK government’s deal. 34% would reject the deal — the DUP’s stated position — but are divided on whether they would prefer to leave without a deal or with a different deal. When all other options are stripped away, 64% would prefer to Remain whilst only 36% would seek to leave without a deal.

Looking at the issue in more depth, LucidTalk asked respondents specifically how they felt about Northern Ireland remaining closely tied to the EU whilst Britain had a more arms-length arrangement. 35% of the population said they would oppose this kind of arrangement — though this represented a considerable 69% of unionists. Conversely, 65% of the population would welcome such a divergence between Northern Ireland and GB — including 98% of nationalists, 88% of “other” voters and 31% of unionists.

LucidTalk also found that 54% of respondents agreed that business organisations such as the Ulster Farmers Union were correct to back the UK Government’s deal (with 37% in disagreement) whilst a large majority of the population (65%) felt that the DUP’s tactics in the Brexit discussions were wrong with only 26% (including only 51% of unionists) supporting the DUP’s stance. Voters were generally more supportive of the Irish government’s contribution with 48% agreeing that they had been helpful and 41% disagreeing.

What these figures reveal is that the DUP is now, at best, speaking for 34–37% of the country. An overwhelming majority of nationalists, “others” and a significant minority of unionists reject both the DUP’s tactics and its arguments whilst being amenable to both Mrs May’s deal and an even closer relationship with the EU — even if that means diverging from the rest of the UK. In this, Northern Ireland’s preference is clear.

Armed with these figures, isn’t it time for the Prime Minister to, finally, stand up to the DUP? Hitherto, the Prime Minister has repeatedly allowed the DUP to humiliate her (after the 2017 election, in December 2017 and again with the “non-deal” in January 2018) — and has time and time again accepted the DUP’s arguments that any divergence between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would be bad for Northern Ireland.

Does the Prime Minister not realise how much of the DUP’s rhetoric is empty bluster founded on severe vulnerability? Even now the DUP continue to insist that they can vote down her deal whilst maintaining the confidence and supply deal — an insistence born out of desperation not to have to make a choice between their own rhetoric on the Union and the money that Northern Ireland so badly needs. They have backed themselves into a corner only for the Prime Minister to consistently offer them a way out.

In allowing this to continue the Prime Minister is only endangering herself and kowtowing to the DUP in a way David Cameron never did with the Liberal Democrats. If she wants to survive she should take a leaf from Tony Blair’s book and turn the screws on the DUP. She needs to make it far more difficult for them to reject this deal than it is currently.

In so doing, Theresa May should replace Karen Bradley, not with someone more amenable but with an individual far less so. The new Secretary of State should then inform the DUP that they are appointing an independent chair to oversee negotiations over the formation of the assembly. They should make it clear that new elections to that assembly are in the pipeline.

In the meantime, the UK Government should legislate for equal marriage and abortion rights in Northern Ireland — reforms likely to pass the House of Commons with large majorities — and threaten to withhold the remainder of the supply and confidence money.

Ultimately the DUP have an electorate to face in Northern Ireland — the Prime Minister does not. And for as long as the DUP continue to neglect the majority they are sowing the seeds of their own downfall — whether it be in the next election or a border poll yet to come. If the Prime Minister is to survive, she needs to learn that lesson fast.

Originally published at Northern Slant.

On Saturday I received a text from a friend alerting me to the fact that a number of new History teaching jobs had just been made available through the Department for Education’s, ‘Investing in the Teaching Workforce Scheme’. This is an innovative new scheme that encourages teachers over the age of 55 to retire — and guarantees their jobs to recent teaching graduates.

This sort of scheme is very necessary in an environment where only 2% of Northern Ireland’s newly qualified teachers will find a full-time, permanent job at the end of their PGCE — a number that rises to 19% if one includes part-time or temporary work. Indeed, on the last day of my PGCE we were asked if anyone had found any work whatsoever — and only two out of 130 had. In both cases, they were planning on leaving Northern Ireland.

Low employment rates are a by-product of a system that over-produces teachers every single year. A 2013 report by the Department for the Economy showed that there were around 1,500 registered teachers who graduated between 2008 and 2013 who were not employed within the teaching profession — representing almost 60% of those who had trained during that period. That report also indicated that up to 50% of a single year group could still be without employment in the teaching profession five years after their graduation.

A natural solution to this would be to cut the number of new teachers graduating each year. Short of that, the ‘Investing in the Teaching Workforce Scheme’ seems like a positive step in helping new graduates find employment.

Yet the scheme, first announced by John O’Dowd in 2015, has already been delayed due to a failed legal challenge — one where a more experienced teacher claimed he was being discriminated against in not being able to apply for the new jobs made available by the scheme. In that instance, the court found that “there exists a real need to promote access to employment for younger graduates in the teaching profession” and that the scheme was a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.”

With that in mind, one might have thought the Department would be more careful in the design of the scheme when it was finally revealed earlier this year. And yet, bizarrely, the Department have today confirmed that 2018 graduates will not be included within the scheme as they “had not experienced difficulty in obtaining meaningful employment.”

This response defies belief. In an environment in which 50% of graduates who graduated up to five years ago are struggling to find employment, it is a nonsense to suggest that this year’s graduates are not experiencing difficulties. The Department have created a ladder but removed the very first rung.

Moving forward, this retrograde step needs to be challenged. We may no longer have an Assembly but the Department for Education must be held to account. There are hundreds of newly-qualified teachers out there just itching to get into the classroom. It’s time to let them teach.

Today the Supreme Court in London ruled that there was no discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in the long-running Ashers Bakery ‘gay cake’ case. The Court ruled that Ashers was not obliged to decorate a cake with the message “Support Gay Marriage” — overturning the earlier decisions of both the Belfast High Court and a court of appeal. Specifically, the court found that the decision to reject Gareth Lee’s order had not been made on the basis of his sexuality and that Ashers’ right “not to express an opinion which one does not hold” is guaranteed within Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Ultimately, the delight that Ashers, the Christian Institute, the DUP and many others will be feeling today stems from a tension that has long been building in churches across Northern Ireland. As equality laws have been expanded, and the debate rages over abortion and equal marriage, Christians increasingly argue that they are now the ones being discriminated against. Indeed, I myself have heard ministers claim, time and time again, that Christians are now the most persecuted minority in the UK.

In Ashers then, the faithful found a champion and today the Supreme Court found in their favour. Whilst the judgement does argue that discrimination is “an affront to human dignity”, the justices must have known the very real political consequences that would flow from this decision. Already some DUP politicians have returned to their familiar trope about a Conscience Clause — a bill that would enshrine the right to discriminate on the basis of conscience. Meanwhile some within the UUP — a party that has long claimed to be more progressive on social issues — have criticised the Equality Commission (ECNI) for taking up the case in the first place.

These developments point to the very real dangers of today’s ruling. Whilst the Ashers case may have had its merits, this outcome will only embolden those whose ultimate desire is to see equality legislation done away with altogether. Equality laws will continue to be challenged and tested in the coming months whilst the ECNI — one of the few bodies to which minority communities can turn in confidence — may be reluctant to take on any more cases of this magnitude. A Conscience Clause, unlikely due to the current paralysis at Stormont, has the potential to do even more damage, creating a multitude of circumstances where minorities could find themselves disadvantaged due to the conscience of a retailer, hotelier or employer.

The irony is that it really needn’t be this way. There are many — myself included — who consider themselves to be part of both the LGBT community and the faith community. There are also men and women of faith who have long been allies of the LGBT community — including the Chief Commissioner of the ECNI, Michael Wardlow. These two communities may never see the world in the same way, but there is a lot of work to be done to sooth the hurt and division that this case and the debate around marriage equality have caused. Such healing starts with an acceptance that rights are not a zero sum game where one group’s gain is another’s loss — both groups, both so nervous of losing freedoms, should stand together to see rights advanced for everyone.

In that regard, those who are rejoicing today should take time to reflect on just how little the nuances of this case matter to most observers. For many, regardless of the philosophical and legal underpinnings of this ruling, Ashers has become a litmus test of an individual’s stance on equality. Faith groups, their numbers in steep decline, won’t have won over a single soul through this process, whilst the Unionist parties have once again moved in lockstep with a hardcore base whose numbers are depleting. If either group cares to expand they’ll find inclusivity is key.

In all of this I am reminded of the virtues extolled at the front of my parents’ church in Saintfield — Temperance and Charity. I have always understood these to represent a slowness to anger and a willingness not just to give charitably but to be charitable in how one treats others. Today’s outcome won’t have pleased everyone — not by a long shot — but if all of us, whether religious or not, chose to live by these values, we’d probably never have heard the term ‘gay cake’.

Related stories:

Marriage Counselling

Originally published at Northern Slant.

It seems that whenever Stormont’s Special Advisors (SpAds) are in the news something has gone badly wrong.

Despite the fact that SpAds were, up until recently, some of the best paid in Northern Ireland — in 2015 the average salary for a Special Advisor was £75,105 with a top rate of £91,809 — these individuals have been at the centre of almost every political scandal to hit Northern Ireland in recent years.

Few people would have heard of SpAds prior to 2012 when a row broke out over Sinn Féin’s decision to employ Mary McArdle as Special Advisor to the then Culture Minister, Carál Ní Chuilín. Ms McArdle’s appointment was controversial due to a previous conviction for her role in the 1984 murder of Mary Travers.

Whilst Ms McArdle was eventually removed from that position, the furore led to the passing of TUV MLA Jim Allister’s Civil Service (Special Advisors) bill in June 2013. This bill prohibited ministers from employing any persons with a serious criminal conviction as a special advisor and, for the first time, forced the then Department of Finance and Personnel to publish a code for appointment of special advisors, a code of conduct for special advisors and an annual report about the number and cost of special advisors.

The ink had barely dried on this bill when Stephen Brimstone, then Special Advisor to the then Minister for Social Development, Nelson McCausland, became the focus of the scandal over Red Sky.

Mr Brimstone was accused of telling Jenny Palmer (then a DUP Councillor with a vote on the Housing Executive) to change her vote in relation to the Red Sky contract. Ms Palmer alleged that Mr Brimstone, acting on behalf of the minister, had insisted that she change her vote out of loyalty to the party, telling her: “the party comes first — you do what you are told.”

A subsequent investigation by a Stormont committee quickly became a bad-tempered affair as the DUP’s Gregory Campbell and Sammy Wilson accused MLAs of attempting to bully Mr Brimstone during his appearance before it. Despite this, few were impressed by Mr Brimstone’s answers and none were surprised when the committee determined that Mrs Palmer’s evidence was “compelling, consistent and convincing” whilst Mr Brimstone was “deliberately evasive in his answers to the point of obstructing the committee.”

Special Advisors were in the news again the following year, 2015, when Peter Robinson made the controversial decision to replace the outgoing DUP MLA for South Belfast, Jimmy Spratt, with Emma Little Pengelly. Mrs Little Pengelly had served as a Special Advisor for almost nine years when she was co-opted and went on to receive a £45,000 severance payment.

This decision was made all the more controversial when Mrs Little Pengelly joined the Finance Committee which was then investing the NAMA scandal. The fact that Mrs Little Pengelly’s husband, Richard Pengelly, was a senior civil servant in the Department for Finance and Personnel up until December 2012 created a potential conflict of interest which Mrs Little Pengelly herself acknowledged — yet she declined to absent herself from the committee’s investigation on NAMA stating that she and her husband “were both adults”.

However, all of these scandals pale in comparison to the allegations that have been made about SpAds since the RHI “Cash for Ashes” scandal broke in December 2016.

I will not repeat the lengthy list of allegations made by former DUP MLA and minister Jonathan Bell, but they are incredibly serious should any of them be proven to be true. (It is worth noting that to date Mr Bell seems to have struggled to substantiate a number of his more alarming allegations.)

But regardless of the ultimate outcome with regard to the RHI enquiry, it is clear that SpAds have found themselves at the centre of yet another Northern Irish political scandal. It’s time to take action.

The simple reality is that we need to know a lot more about Special Advisors, their work, their interests and their performance. The most straightforward way to do this would be to update the codes of employment and conduct already legislated for in the Civil Service (Special Advisors) bill. How?

Firstly, the powers and functions of Special Advisors should be laid out in writing to ensure that civil servants, ministers and MLAs know precisely what role SpAds should play — especially with regard to the running of departments. A review should also take place to determine a more appropriate remuneration for this work — presumably a lot less than SpAds have been paid in the past, and definitely less than MLAs get paid.

Secondly, the appointment of Special Advisors should be subject to confirmation by the corresponding committee at Stormont. Committees would have the power to determine if an individual is qualified and would also have the power to call Special Advisors before them on a regular basis to hold them to account.

Thirdly, in order to restore public confidence, Special Advisors must be required to publish a full and comprehensive register of interests in line with those already published by MLAs.

These (simple) measures will go some way towards restoring public confidence in our politics by introducing greater transparency and accountability to a powerful position within our institutions. That said, it is difficult to imagine the DUP and Sinn Féin either agreeing to or prioritising these measures anytime soon. This lack of interest underlines the importance of the people’s voice being heard in whatever future negotiations take place to get Stormont back up and running.

Every time we have a crisis the parties make new, sometimes radical, changes to our institutions without any input from the public at large. After the 2017 elections, called under such pitiful circumstances, it befalls us to find a mechanism for ensuring that our voice is heard. We must use it to demand the transparency and accountability that is the bedrock of good governance.

Originally published at Northern Slant.

Northern Ireland prides itself on being a friendly place. We’re kings of banter, all about the craic and always willing to give visitors a proper Northern Irish welcome — unless of course that visitor is of the canine variety. For the truth is that Northern Ireland, or at least its councils, the National Trust and businesses, have quietly been waging a war on dogs and dog owners for quite some time now. It’s time it was brought into the open.

Take our beaches as an example. It used to be perfectly fine to take your dog to the beach and allow him/her a little bit of freedom — provided you made sure to clean up any mess! Sure, the dog may wander up to folk or take a sniff at the occasional barbeque but by and large owners were trusted to decide for themselves how best to control their pets. Provided dogs showed no sign of aggression this was OK — but recently councils have taken it upon themselves to severely limit this freedom.

For instance, if you take your dog off the leash on Newcastle promenade, the council will fine you £80 — regardless of whether the dog is well-behaved or not. This fine extends to the grassed areas and even the beach close to the promenade. Newry, Mourne and Down Council calls this “taking pride in your district” — as if somehow my well-behaved and strictly trained Labrador walking to heel is somehow equivalent to my insulting the community.

At Groomsport and Ballyholme beaches it’s fine to let your dog enjoy the beach for some of the year but not between June and August. During these months dogs must be kept on a leash — presumably because the councils believe that those who use the beach all year round should give way to those who come once in a blue moon and leave used barbeque kits all over the beach. Signs proudly proclaim that £24,825 worth of fines have been issued for people breaking this rule in the past year. Presumably most of this is for people not picking up after their dogs — but I have seen individuals being caught and fined for letting their dogs off the lead too. I also know of local residents who avoid the beach altogether during the summer for this reason.

For rate-paying dog owners keen to let their dog chase a ball, run into the sea or just have a proper frolic, this simply isn’t acceptable. A well-behaved dog should be allowed to enjoy the beach in this way but these rigid, catch-all rules prevent that and clearly demonstrate a lack of trust in the majority of dog owners who are more than capable of keeping their dogs under control. Meanwhile councils rake in the dough through fining those owners for using the very facilities their rates pay for.

Meanwhile, not to be outdone, the National Trust has a near universal ban on dogs being allowed off the lead on their properties. At Rowallane Gardens, Mount Stewart and Murlough beach for instance, staff have previously insisted on me placing my dog on the lead — grimacing when I demand to know precisely why these rules exist or what behaviour he has exhibited that necessities such a policy. This is particularly galling when the National Trust expect me to pay for the privilege of walking my dog there — something I have vowed not to do again.

This pattern is repeated across the country and some — such as the Cuilcagh mountain trail where dogs are prohibited altogether — have gone even further. This lack of welcome is echoed across almost all of Northern Ireland’s pubs, cafes and restaurants where dogs and their owners are usually cast outside (even in winter) or not permitted at all. On a recent trip to the North Coast I was unable to locate a single restaurant or cafe that would allow me and my dog to sit down for lunch — and I was unwilling to leave him in the car on a hot day whilst I ate.

For dog owners who live here — and especially those of us who live in the countryside — this is unbearable. The number of places where we can take a dog and let them be truly free, even for a few minutes, is decreasing all the time. I live in the middle of the countryside and yet, unless I am willing to take my dog to the Mournes, there really isn’t much space available to me.

Visitors meanwhile look on in bemusement — especially those who come from Scotland. In the five years in which I lived in that country, I never came across these kinds of restrictions. Indeed, on most of the occasions when I left my dog outside fearing he would not be allowed in, I had bank managers, florists, barbers and restaurant owners urging me to bring him in for a cuddle and a treat. Meanwhile in the great outdoors, dogs were fine to roam as they pleased, provided they didn’t hassle other people or animals. I was trusted, as an adult, to keep control of my own dog in accordance with his training — and he never bothered a soul.

In all of this, perhaps unsurprisingly, we find Northern Ireland to be a little behind the times compared to elsewhere. Yet the 26% of us that own a dog need to find our voice. Our doggos, the vast majority of whom are friendly and well-behaved, offer loyalty, companionship and love — and we must insist on our councils, the National Trust and businesses changing unreasonable rules. That is not to say that owners should be free to take their dogs absolutely everywhere — there’s clearly a balance to be struck. But perhaps it’s time to unleash the debate and find a balance that allows dogs a little more space to roam.

Originally published at Northern Slant.

This week LucidTalk have revealed the results of their February tracker poll. This is the first national poll to be conducted in Northern Ireland since October and, given all that has occurred in the past two months, it is unsurprising that the poll has picked up a sharp movement in public opinion. Yet the changes in party political support, headlined earlier this week, are just one indication of a deep change within our society.

Today Northern Slant can reveal the results of two key polling questions asked by LucidTalk — who agreed to what in February and what do the people of Northern Ireland want to see happen next?

In terms of the collapsed February deal, Lucidtalk found that 47.1% of the population believe that there was a full agreement document in place, accepted by the DUP and Sinn Féin negotiating teams. A further 11% of the population aren’t sure or don’t know if there was a full agreement, meaning that 41.9% believe the DUP’s claims that there was a document but that it hadn’t been accepted by them.

It is unsurprising perhaps, that a breakdown of these headline figures suggests that these beliefs are closely correlated to constitutional preferences. This is particularly evident amongst Nationalist voters — 81.6% of whom believe Sinn Féin ’s claim that a deal had been accepted by both parties. 52.1% of ‘other’ voters also believe this but only 14.9% of Unionist voters concur. The majority of Unionist voters (67%) believe the DUP — but there a sizeable minority (33%) who either don’t know or who believe Sinn Féin . The disparity here should be of concern to the DUP who have clearly not managed to convince their own voters to the same degree that Sinn Féin has theirs.

LucidTalk also asked what people thought should happen next — a variant on a question that it asked back in September. Back then 53% of respondents wished to see the Executive re-formed with 19.7% preferring temporary direct rule, 6.7% wanting longer-term direct rule and 20.6% wishing for joint authority.

Today we can reveal that there has been a dramatic shift in those figures with only 19% wishing to continue talks about re-forming an assembly — a decrease of 34% since September. Support for all other options has increased but the most popular option is now joint authority at 36.6% — up 16% in just five months. Support for temporary direct rule is at 31.6% (up 12%) and for permanent direct rule is now at 12.7% (up 6%).

If we break these figures down it is clear that support for devolution has nosedived across the board. Other voters are most supportive at 27% but that represents a drop of almost 34% since September. Nationalist support for devolution has fallen from 54.8% to 22.8% in the same period whilst Unionist support has fallen from 44.5% to just 14.2%. These really are very significant changes indeed.

And once again Unionist and Nationalist voters appear to be polarised in terms of their preferences. With support for devolution at a record low, Nationalist support for joint authority is now at 73.5% — up 32% since September. On the other side, 83.3% of Unionists would prefer temporary or permanent direct rule — an increase of just under 30%. Interestingly 39.8% of Other voters selected Joint Authority — up 20% since September — whilst 33% supported Direct Rule in one form or another.

All this makes for particularly sobering reading. For months now, as the negotiations continued to make little headway, the polls indicated that public support for devolution remained steadfast — a statistic that could be used to cajole our wayward politicians into staying around the negotiating table. Yet now, with the public at large no longer supporting the talks or devolution itself, that pressure has been lifted.

It seems that this has already dawned on the DUP and Sinn Féin . In keeping with the wishes of their voters the two parties will likely continue to focus on agitating for direct rule and joint authority respectively and will face little pressure from their bases to do otherwise. Indeed the polarisation of voters will likely continue as the dying embers of devolution fade and the remaining supporters of devolution change their preferences. Other voters in particular will be interesting to observe — will they continue to move towards supporting joint authority or direct rule? Only time will tell.

Ultimately there is a real sense that we reached a very significant moment in Northern Ireland’s history — a month shy of the 20th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement. The hopes and aspirations of our people, expressed in the referendum of 1998, appear to have been replaced by suspicion and frustration, whilst the fudged constitutional compromise represented by devolution has been torn apart. Brexit, SpAds, RHI, crocodiles, collapsed deals, a lack of respect and a tendency towards cynicism and whataboutery all carried us towards this point — but now there’s no telling where we go from here.

For further coverage of LucidTalk’s latest poll, see ‘Why the DUP and Sinn Féin don’t want to compromise’ by Jamie Pow.

Methodology, and more on LucidTalk

Polling was carried out by Belfast based polling and market research company LucidTalk.

Polling was carried out by Belfast based polling and market research company LucidTalk. The project was carried out online for a period of 80 Hours from 1pm 23rd February 2018 to 9pm 26th February 2018 (80 Hours). The project targeted the established Northern Ireland (NI) LucidTalk online Opinion Panel (10,387 members) which is balanced by gender, age-group, area of residence, and community background, in order to be demographically representative of Northern Ireland.

3,131 full responses were received, and a data auditing process was carried out to ensure all completed poll-surveys were genuine ‘one-person, one-vote’ responses, and also to collate a robust and accurate balanced NI representative sample. This resulted in 2,079 responses being considered in terms of the final results — the results presented in this report. All data results have been weighted by gender and community background to reflect the demographic composition of Northern Ireland resulting in 2,079 responses being considered in terms of the final results. All data results produced are accurate to a margin of error of +/-3.0%, at 95% confidence.

LucidTalk is a member of all recognised professional Polling and Market Research organisations, including the UK Market Research Society (UK-MRS), the British Polling Council (BPC), and ESOMAR (European Society of Market Research organisations).

For more information, visit www.lucidtalk.co.uk and follow @LucidTalk on Twitter.

Time and time again Unionist politicians have failed to widen the unionist coalition beyond the traditional bulwark of voters that have hitherto been numerous enough to secure the maintenance of the United Kingdom.

This traditional voting block — overwhelmingly white, heterosexual and Protestant — was enough to ensure a Unionist majority until the elections in March 2017.

But it is now clear, the results of this June’s General Election notwithstanding, that unionist politicians have erred in missing the many opportunities they have had to reach out to non-unionists and unionists outside the traditional mould.

Whilst it is true that a majority — 55% — would vote to remain in the United Kingdom, it is the growing gap between old and young voters that should cause unionist politicians to pause and think about the futility of all this.

“Should Northern Ireland REMAIN a part of the United Kingdom or LEAVE the United Kingdom and join the Republic of Ireland as one nation state, Ireland?” 2,080 responses (weighted); displaying preferences by age group.

Amongst older voters (defined as those over the age of 44) support for remaining in the UK is at 60% with a mere 28.9% supporting a united Ireland. Yet younger voters (those aged 18–44) now prefer a united Ireland by 45.9% to 43.8% — a small, but not insignificant margin.

There could be many factors behind this startling result — in the past unionist politicians have pointed to differential birth rates, the brain drain to the rest of the UK and immigration from the EU as a means of explaining such changes.

However, it seems evident to this writer that the conservative social attitudes of many Unionist politicians have also contributed to this — a University of Liverpool report published in August found that many young Protestants in particular feel that unionist politicians fail to represent them and their socially liberal views.

In this context it’s not hard to imagine liberal young Protestants turning away from Northern Ireland’s old-fashioned, parochial and often, angry, unionist politicians towards the moderates within Nationalism and parties such as Alliance who speak to their issues and share their views on social issues.

Regardless of the factors behind this statistic, one thing is clear — unionism is facing a demographic crisis and unless Unionist leaders act quickly the Union could be lost. And this poll reveals that Brexit is just one issue that could help determine how much of an uphill struggle unionism will face.

“You indicated you are UNDECIDED in terms of your vote at a NI Border Referendum — Today, but you would vote in such a referendum. Please choose the option below that is closest to your current thinking, and closest to the way you think you would vote, on this issue today.” Based on the 9.8% of respondents (in the 2,080 weighted sample) who said they were undecided on their preference, but who would still vote in any Irish unity referendum.

Consider the 9.8% of all voters who considered themselves undecided as to Northern Ireland’s constitutional future: this poll found that 58% of these voters would consider voting leave if the UK negotiated a ‘Hard Brexit’ whilst 34% would consider voting remain if the UK negotiated a ‘Soft Brexit’ or abandoned Brexit altogether.

This means that were Brexit negotiations to result in a ‘Hard Brexit’ over 90% of these voters could end up voting to leave the UK, adding just over 8% to the 33.7% who currently support this option.

“You indicated you would vote REMAIN at a NI Border Referendum — Today. What type of ‘Remain’ voter are you?” Based on the 55% of respondents (in the 2,080 weighted sample) who said they would vote to Remain in the United Kingdom.

This poll also found that 9.5% of those currently planning on voting to remain within the UK would consider changing their minds if the UK negotiated a ‘Hard Brexit’. With this in mind one would imagine that Unionist politicians would do everything in their power to bring about either a ‘soft Brexit’ or to see Brexit abandoned altogether — yet to date they have seem more preoccupied with preventing a ‘special status’ and telling the Taoiseach to mind his own business.

Meanwhile, prominent unionist politicians such as Nelson McCausland have made headlines for revealing that they would happily accept any cost if it meant Northern Ireland leaving the EU — one can only imagine how this went down with these swing voters.

This is unfortunate — but it is not surprising. Brexit is merely the latest issue where Unionist politicians have failed to show leadership. Consider how different the demographic picture might be if only Unionist politicians had shown some leadership and led the way on equal marriage, abortion reform or any other rights issue.

Instead they have handed their opponents a series of wedge issues with which to attract young voters and spend their days complaining that these issues have been “politicised” by Nationalists and other parties.

In all of this, whilst it is always hard to predict precisely how any referendum would play out — the Scottish independence referendum is a very good case in point — these are trends that should concern all those who support Northern Ireland’s place in the UK. Even were Brexit to be abandoned, or a ‘Soft Brexit’ to be negotiated, unionists clearly face a very real demographic challenge — and Nationalists a very real opportunity.

These are opportunities that will only increase the longer unionist politicians fail to act — as the demographic situation continues to tilt away from them and the march towards a ‘hard Brexit’ continues. Ultimately, this means that if unionists really do want to strengthen and maintain the Union, it’s time to show real leadership.

It’s time to represent young Protestants and their values.

It’s time to stand up for Northern Ireland and to oppose a ‘Hard Brexit’.

It’s time to start building the biggest possible coalition Unionism can pull together.

If Unionist politicians make the hard decisions now — regardless of what it might cost them in the short term — they may well still be able to save the Union they profess to love.

For the UUP in particular, on the ropes after a shellacking at the hands of the DUP back in June, this may well be the only way for them to remain relevant. As a unionist party that campaigned against Brexit, and where a majority of MLAs are socially liberal, they may well be the only party capable of helping change the trends this poll has revealed.

Trendy, young unionist MLAs should be in the vanguard of such change and are well capable of leading it. But they had better get to work soon.

Methodology, and more on LucidTalk

Polling was carried out by Belfast based polling and market research company LucidTalk.

The project was carried out online for a period of 80 Hours from 1pm 20th October 2017 to 9pm 23rd October 2017 (80 Hours). The project targeted the established Northern Ireland (NI) LucidTalk online Opinion Panel (10,417 members) which is balanced by gender, age-group, area of residence, and community background, in order to be demographically representative of Northern Ireland.

3,813 full responses were received, and a data auditing process was carried out to ensure all completed poll-surveys were genuine ‘one-person, one-vote’ responses, and also to collate a robust and accurate balanced NI representative sample. This resulted in 2,080 responses being considered in terms of the final results — the results presented in this report.

All data results have been weighted by gender and community background to reflect the demographic composition of Northern Ireland resulting in 2,080 responses being considered in terms of the final results. All data results produced are accurate to a margin of error of +/-3.0%, at 95% confidence.

LucidTalk is a member of all recognised professional Polling and Market Research organisations, including the UK Market Research Society (UK-MRS), the British Polling Council (BPC), and ESOMAR (European Society of Market Research organisations).

For more information, visit www.lucidtalk.co.uk and follow @LucidTalk on Twitter.

Originally published at Northern Slant.

Northern Ireland has now gone three months without an election and that feels like progress of a sort. If we continue like this we might actually make it a whole year without going back to the polls.

Yet the issue of how we are governed and by whom hasn’t gone away. The negotiations continue and the civil service continue to run Northern Ireland — making quite a few controversial decisions along the way.

Consequently we have been treated to the sight of elected politicians from all parties campaigning against the decisions made by the civil service they themselves were elected to direct.

Anywhere else this would be completely unacceptable. To explain it to a visitor to this place, as this writer recently had to do, is an exercise in humiliation.

One would assume therefore that support for the re-forming of the Executive and continued devolution would have fallen drastically. Yet an opinion poll by LucidTalk underlines just how determined the people are to have local people make local decisions.

“Discussions are currently taking place about re-establishing the NI government institutions. Which outcome would you say is the best result for the government of Northern Ireland?” 2,080 responses (weighted)

This latest poll, carried out from the 8th-11th September, shows that 53% of voters in Northern Ireland still see devolved government as the best way forward. This is down from 60% in June but, given all that has transpired since then, it is positive to note that the majority have faith in devolution.

The 7% who have changed their minds since June have split almost evenly between Joint Authority and temporary Direct Rule with support for both options up by just under 4%. Meanwhile, support for permanent Direct Rule has fallen by (a statistically negligible) 1%.

On the surface this is a relatively positive result given the ongoing political stalemate. Yet a breakdown of these figures by ethno-national identity reveals a far more fascinating picture.

“Discussions are currently taking place about re-establishing the NI government institutions. Which outcome would you say is the best result for the government of Northern Ireland?” 2,080 responses (weighted), displaying results for for unionist, nationalist and ‘other’ party supporters

Support for continued devolution for instance is highest amongst Alliance/Green/Other voters at 62% with Nationalist voters not far behind on 55%. However only 44% of Unionists support this option — the only group where a majority does not support the immediate re-forming of the Executive.

Instead a sizeable number of Unionists, 37.4%, prefer temporary Direct Rule, an option that only 3.7% of Nationalists selected but which 17.9% of Other voters also supported. This makes for a considerable contrast between the different groups of voters.

There is also a notable contrast in support for permanent Direct Rule with around one in six unionists (16.5%) preferring for Westminster to permanently take back control of Northern Irish affairs. Support for this option is at 0.2% amongst Nationalists and at a mere 2.2% amongst Other voters.

Unsurprisingly. support for Joint Authority is highest amongst Nationalist voters with 41% preferring this option, and lowest amongst Unionists with only 2% preferring this form of government. Interestingly support for this option is relatively high amongst Other voters with support at 17.7%.

All in all there are some interesting pieces of data here. Support for joint authority is higher than expected amongst Other voters and a majority of Unionist voters prefer an option other than the immediate re-forming of the Executive. Meanwhile more than 95% of Nationalists preferred either immediate devolution or joint authority.

This leaves Northern Ireland in a relatively precarious place. If a devolved government cannot be established soon then a decision will have to made as to what form of government replaces it. In this context it would be fascinating to see what the second preference of those who supported devolution would be — would they then support Direct Rule, Joint Authority or something else?

In the meantime the onus remains on our politicians to get back around the negotiating table and to work hard to deliver the devolved government the people of Northern Ireland want — before support for devolution ebbs any further.

Methodology, and more on LucidTalk

Polling was carried out by Belfast based polling and market research company LucidTalk. The project was carried out online for a period of 80 Hours from 1pm 8th September 2017 to 9pm 11th September 2017 (80 Hours). The project targeted the established Northern Ireland (NI) LucidTalk online Opinion Panel (10,103 members) which is balanced by gender, age-group, area of residence, and community background, in order to be demographically representative of Northern Ireland.

3,104 full responses were received, and a data auditing process was carried out to ensure all completed poll-surveys were genuine ‘one-person, one-vote’ responses, and also to collate a robust and accurate balanced NI representative sample. This resulted in 2,080 responses being considered in terms of the final results — the results presented in this article.

All data results have been weighted by gender and community background to reflect the demographic composition of Northern Ireland resulting in 2,080 responses being considered in terms of the final results. All data results produced are accurate to a margin of error of +/-3.0%, at 95% confidence.

LucidTalk is a member of all recognised professional Polling and Market Research organisations, including the UK Market Research Society (UK-MRS), the British Polling Council (BPC), and ESOMAR (European Society of Market Research organisations).

For more information, visit www.lucidtalk.co.uk and follow @LucidTalk on Twitter.

Originally published at Northern Slant.

In August 2014 the British establishment was shaken when, for the first time, an opinion poll showed the Yes vote moving ahead of the No vote in Scotland’s referendum on independence.

Whilst the Better Together campaign was still confident of a win, it was decided that it was time to demonstrate to Scottish voters, the vast majority of whom supported enhanced devolution, just how and when the British government would extend the powers of the Scottish Parliament were Scotland to vote to stay in the UK. This would fly in the face of suggestions that a No vote would see the Scottish Parliament limited or curtailed.

The “Vow” as it became known was a game changer in the referendum campaign. Supported by Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives, this document is credited with bringing thousands of wavering voters back into the No camp and helping to secure Better Together’s 10% margin of victory.

This cleverly deployed strategy is one which would surely serve the UK government well in dealing with the current impasse at Stormont. Months of talks and deadlines have now passed and the two sides seem to be moving backwards. Perhaps it’s time to take this out of their hands.

That is not to say that the time has come for direct rule from Westminster. Northern Ireland can and should govern itself even if local politicians cannot get us through this current crisis. With crises in our health and education systems and the Brexit process continuing there has never been a more important time to have local decision making. But the UK government needs to act to get Northern Ireland over this hump and that’s precisely what it should do — by calling Sinn Féin’s bluff, just as it called Yes Scotland’s.

With this in mind the UK government should immediately legislate for both a language act — along the lines of the Scottish Parliament’s language act, passed by a Scottish Labour government — and for equal marriage — using the legislation passed in England and Wales. It should also approve measures to make Stormont more transparent and establish a civic forum to allow the voters of Northern Ireland a more direct say on ongoing contentious issues including rights and the past conflict. All of this should be done in cooperation with the Labour party and in consultation with the Irish government.

Naturally this would be extremely controversial. Yet it may well be the only way to save devolution and, significantly, to allow all sides to save face. The UK government could argue that it was doing what was best for devolution, and most importantly, delivering on these issues on their own terms. Protection for the Irish language and LGBT equality, delivered by a British government — how better to show the Union delivering for everyone in Northern Ireland?

The DUP meanwhile wouldn’t have to vote in favour of any of this should Labour support the UK Government — and it could always assure its core vote that it opposed these decisions vigorously. Meanwhile two issues that have the potential to split the party will have been bypassed and the prospect of a return to government beckons.

In all this Sinn Féin would be put on the back foot. They would undoubtedly be unhappy at such heavy-handedness but having succeeded in securing so many of their objectives they would then face a choice. Would they sign up to the Northern Ireland Executive now that their demands had been met? Or would they confirm unionist suspicions that they are no longer truly interested in governing by making new demands? If nothing else, such an approach would oblige Sinn Féin to reveal whether they are truly interested in making Northern Ireland work.

This approach is clearly not ideal. It flies in the face of twenty years of devolution and rewards our local incalcitrant politicians for their obstinate behaviour. It would be better were they to resolve this crisis together without the involvement of British or Irish officials.

Yet at this late stage a UK government intervention may well be the only way to save devolution and after so much time, shouldn’t the UK government do something before reaching for the direct rule lever?

Originally published at Northern Slant.

When Theresa May called for a snap election on April 18th the Conservatives had good reason to feel confident. An ICM poll that day showed the Tories with a lead of 21 points over Labour and in the following days that lead widened to an eye-watering 25 points in one poll.

Conservative confidence was buoyed not just by strong national polls but by a series of polls in Wales and Scotland that showed the party advancing across the British mainland. One poll in Wales showed Theresa May’s party on 40% of the vote there with Labour languishing behind on 30% — an unprecedented position for the Conservatives in Wales. Meanwhile in Scotland, one poll showed Ruth Davidson’s Scottish Conservatives on 33% — just 11 points behind the SNP.

The growing sense that this election had already been won was only added to by the local election results in May. The Conservatives gained 161 councillors in Scotland, 80 in Wales and 319 in England whilst Labour slumped to a 27% share of the vote. All the indications were that the Conservatives were on course for a landslide. With a majority all but certain, focus turned to the question of how large the Conservative majority might be.

Yet polls are fickle beasts and since something has clearly changed since the local elections.

Gone are the Conservative leads of 20% or more as the opinion polls have increasingly shown the Labour vote moving upwards. Since the May 15th not a single poll has shown Labour falling below the 30% they garnered in 2015 and their vote share is increasingly in the high thirties. On Wednesday night Yougov released a poll showing Labour on 39%, just 3 points shy of the Conservatives on 42%.

This change has been picked up in Scotland and Wales as well. In Scotland, an Ipsos-Mori poll suggests that Labour have caught up with the Conservatives with both parties sitting on 25%, with the SNP eighteen points clear on 43%. In Wales the Conservative lead has been reversed with Labour now 10 points ahead on 44%.

That said, the polls do not agree on the extent of Labour’s recovery. On the same day that YouGov suggested Labour were only 3 points behind the Conservatives, Kantar and Panelbase predicted Tory leads of 10% and 15% respectively. Whilst the pollsters all agree that the race has tightened, how are we to know which pollster to trust? Will the Tories lose their majority (as YouGov has suggested) or will they return with a majority of over 100?

This is not the first time that pollsters have sent mixed signals. In the lead up to the 2015 General Election many polls indicated a very close race with several actually indicating a tie just days before the vote. As it happened, David Cameron’s Conservative Party won 36% of the vote and a majority in the House of Commons with Labour slumping to just 30%.

The British polling industry was also unable to unanimously predict the outcome of the EU referendum in June 2016, with some pollsters showing the Remain side 10 points ahead just days ahead of a vote that Leave won 52–48. They also suggested that the margin of victory for the No campaign in Scotland’s Independence Referendum would be much smaller than it was with a number of polls even putting Yes ahead — in the end the No campaign won by 10 points.

The pollsters themselves argue that they have attempted to change their models to make them more accurate. An inquiry into the industry after the 2015 General Election found that they had included too many overly-engaged young people in their samples and most pollsters have now responded by altering the weights given to certain respondents and by altering turnout models.

Yet even with these changes many pollsters are noting a sudden uptick in voters aged 18–25 saying that they’ll definitely vote and definitely vote for Labour. The biggest question facing pollsters right now is whether these respondents will actually do what they say they will. Generally speaking, those that think they won’t are showing the Conservatives further ahead, those that think at least some of them might are showing a tighter race. Come election night one or both models will be shown to be flawed.

In all this, it is worth pointing out that not a single poll has yet shown Labour ahead. And the surge in support for Labour will no doubt help motivate Conservative voters to go out and vote in record numbers. Ultimately these polls themselves could be the very thing that guarantees a Tory win. Yet one thing is for sure — young people will help decide this election simply by turning up.

Originally published at Northern Slant.