Mark Hayes I am going to keep this short because I am far too depressed about it to do otherwise. 


The recent tragic death of Henry Nowak at the hands of a knife-wielding maniac, and the inept response of the local police, has created serious inter-racial tension in my city. This is new territory for us. Southampton is a merchant port and racial conflict has been (and is) exceedingly rare. Oswald Mosley’s Fascists got run out of town in the 1930s, the city took in Basque refugees during the Spanish Civil War and I can remember Southampton dockers refusing to handle cargo from Apartheid South Africa. Racism never really gained any traction here (it has a far more natural home in the Royal Navy port up the road).

Recent events have therefore been shocking. Unfortunately, genuine grief and consternation about the dreadful murder of a young man have been exploited (against the explicit wishes of the family) by national far-right figures like Nigel Farage. It was a perfect opportunity for cynical, racist politicians to exploit a tragedy, and their efforts attracted the usual assortment of knuckle-dragging neanderthals (see above). In effect certain politicians gave this social dross a free pass to express their venomous rage at “immigrants”. However, there are a number of interrelated aspects to this event which require some attention.

The first point is straightforward. The perpetrator, Vickrum Digwa, was not an “immigrant” because he was born in Britain and he was punished with a life sentence (minimum 21 years). He deserved it, and more. However, there are many people killed in hideous circumstances every day at the hands of “white” people, but they do not usually precipitate performative posturing in public by the criminal underclass. Those identified above are nothing more than sadistic bullies, jumping on a bandwagon in the hope of inflicting pain on people who cannot fight back. Clearly, these people are part of the despicable detritus who blight working class communities across the country. I hope they rot in jail with Digwa. Good riddance. That part is relatively uncomplicated.

However, there is something far more dangerous at work here because many ordinary people actually sympathise with these cretins. In essence this is because the issue of immigration has become so irredeemably toxic. Reason and clarity have diminished in the context of a moral panic manufactured and manipulated by the far right, aided and abetted by a complicit media. Obviously, the leaders of far-right organisations, like Rupert Lowe (a racist reptile who once owned Southampton FC) are culpable. Calling people “third world savages” and threatening to open “detention camps” is the kind of rhetoric we have not heard since the days of old-style Nazis like John Tyndall and Nick Griffin. The ghosts of the NF and the BNP have returned to haunt us – fascism is now mainstream and racism is respectable.

Diminutive dimwit “Tommy Robinson” is worthy of a mention here too. It cannot be denied that this Zionist grifter has a considerable following. Of course, “Tommy” is (literally) a fraud, and so spectacularly stupid he would struggle to find his own arse with both hands, but it matters not. He touches a very raw nerve, and is now in contact with the Musk family. Once the world’s only trillionaire starts funding the likes of Yaxley-Lennon we should take notice. All “Robinson” needs to do is wave a Union Jack and disparage Muslims in vitriolic tones and the usual drunken cohorts can be relied upon to clap like seals and launch plastic bins at the police. He really has become the pied-piper of the English lumpenproletariat. However, it is unlikely to stop there. The fact is that chancers like “Robinson”, Lowe and Farage are simply exploiting a favourable political environment, but they did not create it. Yes, they are dangerous people, and they fully deserve our opprobrium, but what else would you expect from them?

The reality is that the horrendous troglodytes of the British far-right are not the cause of this particular political conundrum, they are a secondary consequence but its primary beneficiaries. One of the deeper sources of the current crisis actually lies in the fact that the British “left” has completely abandoned the working class. The current Labour government has no intention of dealing with the vast inequalities which now characterise British society. It is capitalism which creates the poverty and division upon which racists and fascists feast. Yet Starmer clings resolutely to his neo-liberal economic orthodoxies. Ordinary people continue to be cast adrift in a storm of free-market chaos, while Starmer’s government focuses on eliminating jury trials and arresting pensioners who protest against genocide. Far from pursuing any kind of egalitarian agenda, the authoritarians in the Labour party are preparing the way for the fascists. This is not an exaggeration. At one time Britain had a strong trade union movement which provided a genuine sense of collective identity for working class people, and a Labour Party that offered an alternative perspective on political possibilities. That seems like a very long time ago. The working class in Britain has never been so atomised and alienated, and they can now be easily radicalised by the far-right on social media.

The fact that this is actually happening at an alarming rate reflects the absolute failure of the “left”. In recent years the “left” has transformed itself from an (albeit imperfect) mechanism aiming to mobilise and manifest working class agency, into a lobby group for a variety of disparate “causes”. It has moved from the council estates and factories to the leafy suburbs and University vestibules. Obsessed by the narcissism of post-modern identity politics, the “left” has not only ditched the meta-narrative of class conflict, it has relinquished any kind of competent plan for practical, progressive social transformation. Of course I am over-simplifying to emphasise a point, but the reality is that this new “left” has been infected with a fatal dose of liberal individualism. It has no effective ideological compass and it is heading for political oblivion.

One of the most egregious consequences of this process has been the complete inability of this new “left” to have an honest conversation about immigration and its consequences. And the far right has filled this void. The fact is that many of the deepest concerns that ordinary people have about immigration are rooted in resource-scarcity rather than racism. People are understandably anxious about the implications for their own future welfare. The “left” does not seem to have a serious impulse to discuss this let alone a plan to resolve it. Rather than recognising these concerns, allaying fears and mobilising against racism within the relevant local communities, the field has been left open to the fake radicals of the far-right. Apparently access to toilets and the debate over whether a woman can have a penis are pressing problems that require urgent attention. There has been a systematic perversion of priorities here. It would be funny if it wasn’t so fucking tragic.

I would also like to add a note, if I may, about recent events in Belfast. Loyalists have always constituted a nasty parochial version of fascism. They are racist by definition, and their recent paroxysm of rage, which was orchestrated by thugs, produced scenes reminiscent of Bombay Street. This has surprised absolutely no-one who possesses a Republican cast of mind. Loyalists be loyalist. Let’s face it, anyone actively supporting the genocidal fanatics in Israel must be pretty comfortable with the idea of slaughtering innocent people. In fact, many of them openly celebrate Zionist barbarism. This fact does precipitate a couple of pertinent observations. The idea that armed Republican resistance was not necessary to confront their nasty sectarian state is completely exposed as utterly absurd (it always was). Given the opportunity, those ignorant gobshites burning houses last week would undoubtedly do far worse to their Catholic neighbours (and of course those of similar ilk have done so in the past). Those Republicans who resisted such evil are owed a debt of gratitude which should never be forgotten. Moreover, that kind of resolve will undoubtedly be required in the future struggle against “Irish fascism”. That phrase should really be an oxymoron, and anyone on the far-right using Republican iconography to promote their poisonous political ideology should have manners put on them. No exceptions! It is always worth remembering that fascism doesn’t start with the camps – that’s where it ends. Fight them now, before it’s too late. No pasaran!

 Mark Hayes has published widely on a variety of subjects. He is a republican and a Marxist, unapologetic on both counts.

Regarding Recent Events In Southampton

Enda Craig ⬟ Governments aggressively chase inward investment through Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) because it creates jobs, drives technological advancement, and boosts tax revenues.
 
To attract global capital, national and regional authorities offer highly competitive incentives, including tax breaks, streamlined regulatory approvals, and financial grants.

Governments use a variety of aggressive tactics to secure this investment.

Financial Incentives
 
State and national agencies frequently offer direct cash grants, subsidized land, and infrastructure development to lower the upfront capital costs for large corporations.

Tax Relief

Many regions utilize corporate tax exemptions, reduced tariffs, and specialized economic zones (such as enterprise zones or freeports) to guarantee higher long-term profit margins for investors.

Dedicated Investment Agencies
 
Entities such as Select USA act as concierge services for multinational corporations, helping them navigate local labor laws, fast-track building permits, and bypass bureaucratic red tape.
 
Workforce Subsidies

Governments often fund custom training programs or directly subsidize employee wages during a company’s initial launch phase to ensure a ready and skilled local workforce.

While this aggressive pursuit generates substantial economic activity, it can also create "bidding wars" where governments offer increasingly expensive packages of subsidies, occasionally leading to intense international rivalries over major manufacturing or tech projects.

⏩ Enda Craig is a Donegal resident and community activist.

Stormont MLAs And The Part They Played In Enticing Dalradian To Mine The Sperrins

Caoimhin O’Muraile ⚽ I have been a football fan all my life as far back as I can remember, though international football has never carried the same level of interest as the football league. 

Even though my support for international football is at best lukewarm, in the past I have looked forward to the World Cup and have great memories of top-class competitions. I remember very vaguely the 1966 competition and the well-deserved England victory, beating the then West Germany in the final 4-2. I will not claim to recall the football in that competition, I was only five years old, but I do recollect the street parties which became a natural progression of the tournament. The grown-ups celebrated to a greater or lesser extent England’s victory as some of them over exaggerated their joy using the event as an excuse to remain permanently pissed despite never having attended a football match in their lives. 

My memories of football became clearer two years later when Manchester United won the European Cup in 1968, having lifted the league championship in 1967. Those two years between 1966 and 1968 made a huge difference as I was developing. The 1970 World Cup I remember very well and by this time I was welded to the game, its culture, and, in particular Man Utd. One outstanding moment on the 1970 tournament was the great Brazilian, Pele, meeting a cross to head down to the bottom of the lefthand post, as he looked, in a game against England the holders. Gordon Banks, the English keeper, got down to the ball at his righthand post as he looked, a world-class save from a world-class keeper against the world’s number one, Pele. Argentina 1978 and the performance of Mario Kempes of Argentina is another competition I recall greatly and who can ever forget Italia 90 and the Irish team marching onto the top eight on the planet? I was in Dublin for the Irish team’s homecoming which was electric to say the least.

As soon as I heard this World Cup, 2026, would be played in the USA – as well as Mexico and Canada – with Trump in the White House I knew immediately it would become a farce. The United States under Trump who, in my view is deranged, should never have been given the tournament. Ask yourself, would the sycophants of FIFA have used Germany in 1942 - a would have been World Cup year - as a venue with Hitler in charge? Perhaps don’t answer that question because nothing them half-wits come up with would surprise me. The USA are in a state of war, unless they have altered the definition of war, with Iran. The US were holding talks with the Iranians over that country’s nuclear programme when Trump, along with the other war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu, began bombing the crap out of the country. It was unnecessary and in all probability illegal under what remains of ‘international law’. From then on the US should not have been considered as a venue and things could and have, from a footballing point of view, get worse. There are those who, not unreasonably, demand that politics should be kept out of sport which is, unfortunately, not really possible because politics is a wide and deep subject. Parliamentary politics and geopolitics maybe should be kept out of sport but Trump has just smacked that theory right down.

The modern game, such as it is, has already been systematically degenerated by the ‘International Football Association Board’ (IFAB) with their daft rule changes and the detested, by fans, VAR. The IFAB have made it virtually impossible for defenders to tackle in the once time-honoured way without being in danger of sending off. The England team who conquered in 1966 would have stood no chance today with defenders like Jack Charlton Centre Half, Nobby Stiles, shifting from fullback to defensive midfield, and was described as a “tough tackler”. Today the likes of these players would be sent off within the first twenty minutes so downgraded has the game become. The price gauging at this World Cup has attracted criticism from supporters particularly those of England and Scotland. English players are reportedly being given priority to purchase up to 1,000 tickets per game which has angered many fans and understandably so. Despite all these negatives imposed by the so-called powers that be within the game the White House has also thrown its arse into the ring. They have made it almost impossible for an impartial competition to take place as teams representing a country the egotistic Trump does not like receive special treatment.

Iran, the USAs adversary in the middle eastern conflict, have been told they cannot enter the US except on the day of their match immediately returning to their base in Mexico after the final whistle. The Iranians must therefore commute on matchdays to and from their venue in the US. They must train and sleep in Mexico or any other country apart from the USA. This is discriminatory treatment on a par with that received by Jewish Athletes by the Nazis at the Berlin Olympics of 1936. I would imagine such discrimination against one team is against FIFA rules, putting the Iranians clearly on a different disadvantaged playing field from the rest in the competition. To rub salt into the wound the Trump gang have refused visas for at least fifteen of the Iranian backroom team, trainers, kitmen and others. Why did FIFA allow the USA to continue being a venue with this administration at the helm? They could argue, with some justification, that fans had already booked up accommodation and it would cost them a fortune to relocate to another country. That is true but when did the supporters become of any concern to FIFA? Why are the world governing body not showing the same support for fans over ticket gauging? When Trump was elected to the Presidential Office FIFA knew an unstable nutter would be in charge in the White House for the tournament. At that point, knowing what an unpredictable entity Trump is, and while time still permitted, they should have pulled the rug on the USA as a venue, possibly using Mexico and Canada without the USA. However logistical problems in this plan are obvious, the USA lies between Mexico and Canada. Therefore a completely new venue or venues could have been selected, England and Ireland for example, or Scotland, Norway and Iceland maybe. FIFA, if they had any balls at all, which they have not, should have organised a relief scheme to assist fans who had already coughed up inflated amounts for accommodation in the US. Back in 2024 that number should have been minimal because the qualifying games were still on so fans expense would not really have been a valid excuse for not relocating.

The Trump gang have stuck the boot in again this time with a match official. Somali referee Omar Artan has been denied a visa to enter the US according to early reports. The US authorities, Trump and his cronies, have raised concerns over vetting, citing “derogatory information, including association with suspected members of terror organisations” which, they claim, made him a “national security threat”. Further reports say Artan was stopped at Miami International Airport on his way to a mandatory, under FIFA rules, pre-World Cup training camp. This was despite the referee “holding a valid visa and FIFA accreditation” so reports he was denied a visa cannot be true because he already had one. This makes the interference worse because it now, visa or no visa, means any person can be denied entry at the whim of Trump or one of his cowboys. FIFA required all match officials to stay at the Florida training hub and because Artan cannot fulfil this he was “completely removed from officiating at the tournament”. It is, of course, the US governments right to refuse entry as it would be any government but knowing the likelihood of the deranged Trump, if for no other reason than he could do it, would take this to extremes FIFA should have pulled out back in 2024.

The European governing body, UEFA, have stepped in with a sop. They have offered the highly qualified Somali referee the 2026 UEFA Super Cup played between the European Cup winners and the UEFA Cup winners on 12th August in Saltzburg, Austria. Omar is regarded as the best referee on the African continent and has reportedly returned to Somalia, fuck knows how he must feel! All FIFA President, Gianni Infantino, told critics was to “chill and relax” when he was asked about FIFAs failure to resolve the situation “to enable Artan to enter the US”. Instead of saying the obvious that it was a mistake to use the US under Trump as a venue and admitting he is shit scared of the tyrant, he tells everybody to “chill and relax”. There have been no reports of evidence backing up the Trump administration’s claims about Artans links to terrorists but, like the Nazi SS, they do not need evidence to expel people on the grounds, if they are honest, of race and/or ethnicity. Before the 1936 Berlin Olympics the German Olympic committee selected one Jewish athlete to draw attention away from their anti-Semitism, then, citing a dip in the athlete’s form, dropped the Jew from their Olympic team. This was despite the Jewish athlete, Gretel Brgmann, performing some of her personal bests and equalled the German women’s high jump record. Nazi officials dropped her from the team. This was a nonsense excuse by the Nazis just as the reasons behind Omar Artan’s connections to terrorism is an opportunistic excuse to refuse a Somali entry to the US. This is in common with most of the dangerous political fantasies emitting from the White House these days.

The regime governing Iran is little if any better than the Trump Gangsters. Like Trump who has people shot for anti-government protests in the street so too do the authoritarian religious autocracy in Tehran. Perhaps the major difference is the scale of the murders carried out by both. The Trump Mafia tends to gun down individuals, whereas the regime in Iran do the same thing en masse. The religious gang in Iran kill people demonstrating against them and their authoritarianism in the name of Allah, Al Malik, God , call it what you wish and Trump also invokes God from time to time to justify his actions. 

The sympathies here are not with the Iranian administration but the country’s footballers, backroom team, and supporters who have worked hard to get to the World Cup Finals and have had treatment meted out to them which is undeserved. FIFA and their President, still no doubt ‘chilling and relaxing’ could and should have done more to counter Trump and his unsporting actions. The truth is Gianni Infantino is terrified of Trump or, perhaps more apt, the money which upsetting the tyrant could cost not only FIFA but business in general. What a fucking state of affairs this once great game is in, tragic!

The US authorities have under a sweeping travel framework restricted nationals from 39 countries from entering the country. Visa processing has been paused or heavily limited for officials from another 75 countries, significantly reducing the number of people able to enter the USA. There has, however, been some protests though not from FIFA or its “chill and relax” President. At the open ing ceremony in Toronto Canadians booed the USA flag, showing their disapproval at the ruination of what could and should have been a great tournament. 

For the next six weeks or so the FIFA President will be probably seated on the toilet, “chilled and relaxed”, crapping himself in case he says the wrong thing and upsets Trump! All things considered this tournament instead of being a classic (by today’s standards) is turning more and more by the day into a farce. The main motivator in this competition is not the game, but money. Once again, the interests of football have been “sacrificed on the altar of big business” and geopolitics, according to Donald Trump.

Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist.

World Farce 2026

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Two Thousand And Six

 

A Morning Thought @ 3179

Jim Duffy writing on the demise of The Phoenix magazine.


Its standard of journalism was poor, its fact-checking almost non-existent. 

It might have a kernel of truth somewhere but would drown it in biases and the prejudices of its owner and writers.
 
I featured in it a few times. It might have one correct line but drown the rest is falsehoods and bile. It trotted out its owner's prejudices as facts. One of the most laughable ones was hinting I was the grandson of Éoin O Duffy.

1. O'Duffy never married and never had children, so how could I be his grandson?
2. As was known in the circles the people in the publication moved in, Éoin O Duffy was gay. One of his lovers was Micheal MacLiammoir, a fact Micheal was open about.
3. There was a clue in the name. He had an O in his name. I don't.
4. He was from Monaghan. I have no relations born in Monaghan.
 
All they had to do was ask and I could have told them, but fact checking was an inconvenience with it.
It also wrote that my father was a "major landowner in Meath". Lol He had thirty acres. It was that size because my real great grandfather, Patrick Duffy, inherited his first cousin's next door farm that first cousin was unmarried and the McDonagh family had all died unmarried so the farm was inherited by his closest living relative, his next door neighbour. Arthur McDonagh's mother, Mary Duffy, was the sister of Patrick's father, Thomas. By no stretch is a thirty acre farm major.
 
They also used the story to trot out the falsehood that O'Duffy led the Blueshirts to fight for Franco. He went to Spain in 1936. The Blueshirts had been disbanded in 1934. O'Duffy led the Greenshirts, the paramilitary wing of his National Corporate Party, to fight for Franco. The rag couldn't even get basic history correct.
 
I stopped reading The Phoenix when I realised it was a poisonous unreliable rag. About the only thing I will miss is its front pages. They were often funny, much funnier than the front pages of Private Eye.
 
One front page embarrassed a friend of mine. He had been chubby and had dieted and lost a lot of weight. He was proud of his new thin figure - only to find a picture of his chubby self appearing on the front page of the magazine as he was in a photo beside a politician. He was furious at seeing his old self on the shelves of all newsagents.

⏩ Jim Duffy is a writer-historian.

In The Ashes

Walter Ellis I've been reading a lot of persuasive, beautifully written, well-informed commentary in the last week on the subject of the massive corruption at the heart of the Trump administration.

The sums of money involved are staggering, running into many billions of dollars, much of it accruing to the President and his family. Just today, I was struck by the revelation in the Financial Times that not one penny of the $17 billion pledged to Trump's so-called Board of Peace has thus far been received by the World Bank, which was supposed to oversee the accounts. Instead, money is said to have poured into a previously undisclosed account with the New York bank JP Morgan, beneficiary unknown.

All of the plump, well-fed commentators I follow are agreed that the extent of the corruption goes far beyond anything previously experienced. Trump is stealing not only from taxpayers, but from foreign governments, while at the same time extracting cash for pardons as if he were a medieval bishop flogging indulgences. And he doesn't care who knows it. He glories in his crimes.

The broadcasters, podcasters and columnists might as well be pissing in the wind.

Continue @ Walter Ellis.

Trump 🪶 Like A Medieval Bishop Flogging Indulgences

Louth For Ever ★ writing on 9-May-2026

A note from a moment when the political ground in Britain shifted: on what the DUP is choosing, what it is leaving, and what it has learned not to do. 

Photo by Johannes Plenio on Unsplash

What happened on Thursday

Friday morning the political class on these islands woke up to the news that Reform UK had gained more than 1,400 council seats in England, that Labour had lost nearly as many, that Plaid Cymru had become the largest party in the Senedd for the first time in its history, that Welsh Labour had been reduced to 9 seats after 99 years of dominance, and that the Scottish National Party had been returned for a fifth term with a renewed argument for an independence referendum by 2028. 

By Friday evening the BBC’s senior election analyst Sir John Curtice had named the result with the word fragmentation. By Friday night the Sinn Féin First Minister of Northern Ireland had posted on social media that there could now be three pro-independence First Ministers across these islands for the first time. By the time Saturday’s first newspapers reached Belfast, The National in Edinburgh had put Michelle O’Neill’s words on its front page in inch-high capitals, A future beyond the constraints of the Union, alongside images of Plaid Cymru and SNP victories. The Holyrood election had become a story about the dissolution of British political assumptions that had held for a century.

The fact in the room is that the British political reorganisation has now produced concrete constitutional results. England is reorganising around an English nationalist project that did not exist in any serious electoral form four years ago. Wales has elected a nationalist-led Senedd. Scotland has confirmed its nationalist trajectory and added the Greens to it. Three of the four jurisdictions of the United Kingdom are now governed or to be governed by parties whose constitutional positions are at variance with the framework that was built to contain them. The fourth jurisdiction is divided. The constitutional-nationalist parties of the Six Counties are publicly aligning with the parties of Wales and Scotland on what the political moment means. The unionist principal party is denying that the political moment has constitutional implications at all. What this essay is about is the unionist denial.

The franchise

The DUP has spent the past eighteen months making its strategic alignment publicly visible. In June 2024, when Nigel Farage replaced Richard Tice as Reform UK leader, his first significant Northern Ireland intervention was to personally endorse Ian Paisley Jr in North Antrim against the Reform-TUV electoral pact that the parties had only recently negotiated. Paisley Jr lost the seat anyway, defeated by Jim Allister of the TUV by 450 votes in a constituency that had been held by the Paisley family for fifty-four years. Allister took the Reform whip in the Commons. In March 2026, Reform’s Treasury Spokesperson Robert Jenrick travelled to Belfast for a multi-day visit. He attended a DUP dinner in Strangford on Thursday evening. He recorded the DUP’s party podcast with Gavin Robinson. He walked the Shankill Road with Robinson, Michelle McIlveen and Frank McCoubrey. He visited Harland and Wolff. The DUP’s official accounts celebrated the visit, with particular emphasis on Reform’s opposition to net zero. On the same day Reform MP Danny Kruger spoke at the TUV’s annual conference. Both unionist parties were being courted simultaneously. Both were responding.

The pattern that has emerged from these encounters is not that the DUP has chosen Reform. It is that Reform has chosen Northern Ireland unionism as a political market and the DUP has accepted the position of regional franchisee. Jenrick’s framing during the Belfast visit was that Reform was not picking sides in the Unionist cause. Farage himself has said publicly that Reform will not stand candidates in Northern Ireland because the priority is to see Unionists elected in Northern Ireland, to keep the unionist vote unified rather than splitting it. This is the language of a party that has decided what it wants from Northern Ireland politics and is making the local players compete for the privilege of supplying it.

What Reform wants from Northern Ireland is straightforward. It wants the unionist vote organised around the project Reform represents in England, which is an English nationalist movement built on the politics of immigration, anti-EU sentiment, and what Farage calls the end of left-right politics. The Northern Ireland material that gets foregrounded by Reform’s interventions is consistent with this. The DUP’s X celebration of the Jenrick visit emphasised opposition to net zero. The Kruger speech at the TUV conference engaged immigration and British sovereignty. The Robinson-Jenrick walkabout took place on the Shankill Road, a constituency the project frames as authentically working-class and authentically British in ways that the Sinn Féin-voting parts of Belfast supposedly are not.

What Reform wants does not include the Union as the unionist tradition has historically understood it. Farage himself told the Irish Times on tape in 2023 that there will be a united Ireland. The Reform UK donor base, the Reform UK voter base, and the Reform UK English nationalist project are all structurally indifferent to whether the United Kingdom continues to include Northern Ireland in its present form. The franchise the DUP has accepted is a franchise of a movement whose English base does not value the territorial integrity the franchise is supposed to defend.

The structural mismatch is not abstract. In 2016 Northern Ireland voted 56% to remain in the European Union. The unionist parties at the time were divided. The UUP supported Remain, the DUP campaigned for Leave, but the population of the territory the DUP claims to represent voted decisively for the position the party opposed. Across multiple polls since, EU rejoin sentiment in Northern Ireland has consistently shown majority support. The most recent European Movement Ireland poll, conducted through the LucidTalk Northern Ireland Opinion Panel and published in April, found 73% of Northern Ireland respondents would vote to rejoin the EU if a UK-wide referendum were held tomorrow. The democratic position of the Northern Ireland population on Europe is not in doubt. The DUP has aligned with a movement that represents the structural opposite of that position.

The franchise relationship is therefore not just a tactical drift. It is a strategic alignment with a project that is structurally indifferent to the Union, structurally opposed to the EU position the Northern Ireland population holds, and structurally unable to deliver on the commitments to unionism that the franchise relationship is supposedly secured by. This is what Reform wanted. This is what the DUP has accepted. The local franchisee provides the foothold. The English project provides the political weather. The unionist constituency in Northern Ireland is, in this arrangement, a market rather than a constituency to be served.

Paisley’s lesson

The DUP did not support the Good Friday Agreement. The party campaigned against it in the 1998 referendum. They did not sign it. They were not part of the negotiations that produced it. For the first nine years of the Agreement’s existence, they refused to participate in the institutions in any sustained way and worked to undermine them. The settlement that became the post-1998 architecture of Northern Ireland’s governance was built without them, against their wishes, and over their public objections.

The shift came at St Andrews in October 2006. The St Andrews Agreement was the negotiated framework that brought the DUP into power-sharing with Sinn Féin for the first time. Ian Paisley, who had spent his political career organising opposition to the structures the GFA had created, became First Minister in May 2007, with Martin McGuinness as Deputy First Minister. The press called them the Chuckle Brothers. The two of them governed together for fifteen months.

Photo by K. Mitch Hodge on Unsplash

The DUP base read it as betrayal. By 2008 the party had moved to remove him. The Free Presbyterian wing, the wing that had sustained Paisley’s career for forty years, withdrew its support. Senior figures briefed against him. He announced his retirement from the First Minister role and from the leadership of his church on the same day in March 2008. He left office in May. He was eighty-two. The people he had spent his life leading destroyed his career for governing too cooperatively with the people he had spent his life describing as the enemy.

This is the lesson every DUP leader since has been calibrating against. Robinson, Foster, Poots, Donaldson, now Robinson again. Each has known what happened to Paisley. None has been willing to be the next Paisley. The pattern of the post-2017 period; the RHI collapse, the Brexit alignment, the Protocol rejection, the 2022–2024 Stormont boycott, the Reform UK courtship, is what governing without governing actually looks like in practice. The base will not accept genuine power-sharing with Sinn Féin as a permanent settlement. It accepted St Andrews because Paisley sold it. When Paisley turned out to actually mean it, the base destroyed him.

The Reform alignment is therefore not a recent strategic drift. It is the visible form of an underlying political reality the GFA framework has never resolved. The framework was built to manage power-sharing between two principal parties whose constitutional positions were to be contained inside the institutions. The unionist principal party has, since 2008, been systematically demonstrating that the framework cannot contain its base’s actual constitutional position. The DUP is doing now what it did in 1998, refusing the framework while operating around its edges. The fifteen-year period when it appeared to be doing something different was the aberration.

What the franchise costs

The franchise relationship imposes three specific costs on the north east of Ireland. None of them is theoretical. All of them are now operating.

The first is the institutional cost. Stormont’s continued dysfunction is the price the political system pays for one of its principal parties being primarily oriented toward an external movement. The Lough Neagh nutrients action programme is blocked. The anti-poverty strategy has been watered down to incoherence. The Irish-language place-name project was defunded last week by DUP Communities Minister Gordon Lyons, in a move that mirrors precisely the 2017 cut to the Líofa bursary that triggered the McGuinness resignation and the three-year collapse that followed. The institutions perform their procedural functions while the substantive functions they were built to deliver are systematically obstructed. This is what an institutional architecture looks like when one of its principal parties has decided that the architecture is a stage rather than a workplace.

The second is the strategic cost. The DUP has invested its political capital in a movement whose English base will not return the investment. Reform UK’s voter base in England is animated by immigration, anti-EU sentiment, and the rejection of the metropolitan political class. None of these are positions that have anything to deliver to unionism in Northern Ireland. Farage himself told the Irish Times in 2023 that there will be a united Ireland. The party is structurally indifferent to the Union. The franchise the DUP has accepted is a franchise of a movement that has named, on the public record, the long-term outcome the DUP exists to prevent. The strategic position is therefore not just precarious. It is incoherent.

The third cost is democratic. On Friday afternoon, the day after the British political reorganisation began producing concrete constitutional results in Wales and Scotland, the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland gave a press conference at the North-South Ministerial Council in Armagh. “I do think that this is an indication of a desire for change”, Emma Little-Pengelly said:

but I don’t think that that is on the constitutional question. I think it’s a sense of, parties have had the opportunity to try to implement and to deliver, and there’s a frustration with that.

Standing at the same press conference, Michelle O’Neill said the British political reorganisation was “seismic” and that it sent a strong message about people being “tired of the shackles of Westminster.” O’Neill named common cause with the SNP and Plaid Cymru on what she called “national self-determination.” The First Minister and the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland, co-hosting an institutional meeting at which their incompatible readings of the political moment were being given on the public record at the same time, is what the democratic cost of the franchise relationship looks like. The institutional architecture is performing its rituals while the political reality it was built to govern is dissolving inside it. The political principals at the table are giving press conferences saying mutually exclusive things about the political reality the meeting is operating inside. Both cannot be true. One of them has to be.

Where the conversation is

The propositional question, what should be done about the DUP’s resumption of its pre-2007 position, is being engaged in parallel by other writers in the discourse. Brian Feeney’s column in the Irish News this week proposes a specific answer. Sinn Féin should stand in the 2027 Stormont election, renew its mandate as the largest party, and refuse to enter an executive unless and until the British government publishes its criteria for calling a unity referendum and the Irish government begins preparations starting with the publication of a green paper on reunification. The proposition places the strategic burden on the two governments rather than on Sinn Féin walking out unilaterally. It is the kind of proposition the political moment requires. Feeney is making it in the most-read nationalist commentary venue in the Six Counties, and other writers will follow.

The Sinn Féin leadership has, in the past twenty-four hours, made its own positioning public. Mary Lou McDonald has named the Welsh and Scottish results as a landmark day for a future beyond the Union, and has named what that future means for Ireland. Michelle O’Neill has named common cause with the SNP and Plaid Cymru on national self-determination. The SDLP’s leader of the opposition at Stormont, Matthew O’Toole, has named the framework as a new Ireland back inside the EU. The constitutional-nationalist parties of the Six Counties, the Republic, and Wales are publicly aligned on what the political moment means.

This essay does not propose its own version of what should be done. The structural work it has tried to do is upstream of the propositional question. The DUP has chosen the franchise. The choice has been made publicly. The institutional architecture that Northern Ireland was supposed to use to govern itself is now being shaped by an external political project whose English base does not value what the institutions were built to protect. Sir John Curtice has called the British result fragmentation. The fragmentation has produced different outcomes in different jurisdictions. In three of them, political forms representing the constituencies that were waiting have begun to assemble. In the fourth, those forms exist too. The unionist principal party is denying what they are naming. A Deputy First Minister stood at a North-South Ministerial Council press conference and declared, in front of the institutional partners with whom she co-hosts the council, that the political moment is not what they say it is. Both cannot be true. The work of settling which is true is the work that the political class on these islands, the writers proposing what should be done, and the population that has been waiting will all be doing for the next several years. The franchise has been chosen. What is built on it from here is the next chapter.

References

Primary commentary engaged in this essay

Feeney, Brian. “It’s time for Sinn Féin to give up on this failing Assembly.” The Irish News, 30 April 2026.

Feeney, Brian. “Sinn Féin must refuse to re-enter an executive until London and Dublin move on border poll.” The Irish News, 7 May 2026.

Curtice, John. Analysis cited in “Election results show politics in the UK has fragmented.” BBC News, 9 May 2026.

Public statements engaged in this essay

McDonald, Mary Lou. Statement on @MaryLouMcDonald, 8 May 2026, on the Welsh and Scottish election results.

O’Neill, Michelle. Statement on @moneillsf, 8 May 2026, on the Welsh and Scottish election results.

O’Neill, Michelle, and Little-Pengelly, Emma. Press conference at the North-South Ministerial Council, Armagh, 8 May 2026. Reported by McCormack, Jayne, “NI leaders differ in views to GB election results,” BBC News Northern Ireland, 8 May 2026, and across Press Association wire syndication.

O’Toole, Matthew. Public statement on the UK election results and a new Ireland inside the EU, 8 May 2026.

Farage, Nigel. Reform UK leader, statements following the local elections, 9 May 2026, including framing of “complete reshaping of British politics in every way.”

Farage, Nigel. On-record interview with The Irish Times, 2023, in which Farage stated there will be a united Ireland.

Jenrick, Robert. Belfast visit, 19–20 March 2026, including the Robinson-Jenrick Shankill Road walkabout, Strangford dinner, and DUP party podcast appearance.

Kruger, Danny. Speech at the TUV annual conference, March 2026.

Empirical sources

European Movement Ireland. Island of Ireland EU Poll 2026. Conducted through the LucidTalk Northern Ireland Opinion Panel using Amárach Research’s questionnaire systems, 26 to 31 March 2026; published April 2026.

UK local elections, 7 May 2026. Results coverage from ITV News, BBC News, The Guardian, The National, and Wikipedia’s compiled record.

Welsh Senedd election, 7 May 2026. Results coverage from Europe Elects and Election Maps UK.

Scottish Parliament election, 7 May 2026. Results coverage from ITV News, The National, and YouGov MRP modelling.

Louth For Ever writes on Irish politics and constitutional change. Follow for analysis of Ireland’s democratic future as it’s constructed by those actually engaged in the work.

The Franchise

Lynx By Ten To The Power Of Two Thousand And Five

 

Hate Theology @ 3

 

A Morning Thought @ 3178

Gary Robertson ⚽ It’s that time of year again when newspapers are filled with stories and speculation re transfers, managerial appointments and in some cases club take overs.
 
At Celtic the long overdue announcement of Martin O’Neill as permanent manager finally put to rest the fears that Dermot Desmond had actually lost the plot and was ready to appoint Zionist rent boy Robbie Keane as manager. 

A collective sigh of relief among fans, podcasters, YouTubers and other Celtic affiliated media, the smiles returned to their faces. Of course with all things even tenuously linked to Israel not everyone was delighted with Keane being told to “trot off.” Billionaire Sylvan Adams Canadian-Israeli Zionist and President of the World Jewish Congress was appalled at the protests and demands for anyone but Keane, calling Celtic fans “bigots” and proclaiming they were “practising pure unadulterated bigotry dressed up as virtue.”
 
I note with interest he’s listed as a philanthropist pumping money into projects in Canada and of course Israel, the same Israel that celebrates the bombing of Palestinian refugee camps, the same Israel that celebrates rapists and child murderers, the same Israel who are guilty of numerous war crimes. This from a man who calls peaceful pro Palestinian protesters “terrorist supporters.”
 
So if his cage is rattled - Good. Celtic once again upsetting the right people.
 
Whilst O’Neill's appointment has been met with positivity in most quarters. While former players such as Chris Sutton and John Hartson have praised the club and Martin himself others have been less than impressed. Some claim it’s a sticking plaster covering the cracks which are becoming more evident by the day and in some ways I can sympathise with them.
 
A club the size of Celtic can surely attract a top manager. I’m not expecting Klopp or Guardiola but we really should be moving forward and looking for a young proven manager (is that an oxymoron? I don’t know) Sure, Martin will create stability and build a team ready to compete but where’s the long term vision?
 
Martin O’Neill is a Celtic legend. He’s part of the bricks and mortar, the history and the highs and lows of Celtic. His blood runs green,white and orange and his heart beats to the tune of the Celtic faithful. He was never going to say 'no' when asked “help us out Martin” but his appointment - whilst celebrated because well Martin O’Neill - does leave us asking where the boards long term vision lies or if they have any whatsoever.
 
We all accept that the appointment of Wilfred Nancy was a disaster and yes the club needs to get it right but look at the big clubs, massive clubs south of the border, Liverpool sack Slot, within days they have their new man in place, Chelsea too. Then there’s Man City. Again I’m not suggesting Celtic are perhaps as big a name as these but this is how football clubs should be run, not reliant on former managers deputising until a permanent manager can be secured.
 
Celtic need a forward thinking plan or soon our rivals will be racing ahead while we remain firmly rooted in the here and now.
 
Finally, before anyone says “O’Neill is permanent manager”, I’m aware, for a year. If you think that’s good enough then I’m delighted for you, but in my book it’s a quick fix by a vision less collective of custodians.

Til next time ….

🐼 Gary Robertson is the TPQ Scottish football correspondent.

The Merry Go Round

Fintan Drury 🔖will see his book on Palestine launched at two County Dublin events this month.


Genocide: Sponsoring The Destruction Of Palestine.


Venue: Hodges Figgis, Dublin

Date: 18-June-2026

Time: 1800

With: Frances Black

Venue: Dunlaoighre

Date: 23-June-2026

Time: 1830

With: Dion Fanning


Book Launch 📚 Fintan Drury