In effect throwing claims out about the opposition party into a debate that are so alarming that it diverts the public's gaze from the from issue at hand.
When First Minister O’Neill was recently being grilled at the Executive Office Committee by a collective of halfwits and the witless, veteran MLA Caral Ni Chuilin interjected, on Michelle’s behalf, and harangued the DUP MLAs about their Ministers meeting with members of the Loyalist Communities Council (LCC) describing them as active drug dealers and criminals.
The correctness of Caral’s dead cat, that was thrown into the discourse like a coffee jar (pre-2005), was not debatable: they are criminals and drug dealers, but more able political opponents might have pointed out that New Sinn Fein (NSF) was in a far better place to comment on the LCC than the average DUP member.
A quick glance at the list of the LCC members that met with the DUP Ministers in question would demonstrate, that those in attendance also regularly meet with senior NSF personnel. Convicted murderer Bobby Rodgers can be seen in multiple photographs at meetings with NSF, including Executive Ministers. Jackie McDonald (of the good UDA) is a regular visitor to West Belfast where he has shared public platforms with Spike Murray, Alex Maskey and indeed Gerry Adams. It has now emerged that a senior NSF Minister agreed to meet with the LCC, many years before the DUP did so officially, to discuss educational underachievement.
The dead cat, rather than “clearing the room” was more of a damp squib, and the “mealy mouthed” criticism of the DUP further exposed NSF as churlish and opportunistic bed fellows.
The most valid criticism of the LCC, which was established in 2015, with NSF approval, is that it has taken them much longer to transition Loyalism into community activity and politics than it took the Republican Movement.
NSF and their proxy organisations in the “community” sector in the north have a symbiotic and extremely profitable relationship with the LCC, and this stems from the corruption of the community sector by both since the early 2000s.
The distance of travel for the “movement” to embed themselves into the community sector and to “promote effective interaction between key community groups and the local Party” (NSF 2006) was considerably shorter than the circuitous route that was forced upon Loyalists.
Sinn Fein and the IRA had an honourable track record of supporting and initiating community action. For example, Bobby Sands led a housing campaign in Twinbrook while Fra McCann spearheaded the campaign to rebuild Divis.
While the garnering of support for the struggle was viewed as a welcome byproduct of the empowerment of working-class communities, the primary objective was to bring about positive change within those communities. A change that would benefit everyone including those who did not support the movement. While an eye was always kept open for the opportunity to exploit resources and money for the movement, it was never used for individual profit.
Throughout the late seventies and early 80’s republican activists established community organisation in most areas of Belfast. This was Thatcher’s austerity era, when the heart was ripped out of working-class communities across the UK and the north was not spared the rod. Working in the community sector was not easy. It absolutely wasn’t well paid and there was always uncertainty about when the next pay cheque would arrive. People, including Republicans, working in the sector couldn’t get mortgages, buy cars or go on foreign holidays, they lived from month to month and hand to mouth.
The north had its own war time peculiarities. Given that many community organisations were established by and led by republicans, the British, supported by the SDLP and others, introduced the political vetting of community groups.
Community organisations that were actually delivering real change on the ground were deprived of funding because of vexatious allegations of connections to the movement.
Money from Europe and US was channelled into organisations that were fronts for the SDLP and the Catholic Church. The champion of Ireland's Future and convert to NSF (Brian Feeney) was to the forefront of a McCarthyesque witch-hunt against community organisations that had tenuous links to the movement.
Funding for many community-based organisations was suspended and jobs were lost but given the calibre of the people in the movement and in the community sector at that time, the work to empower communities continued.
A campaign to challenge the British Governments vetting policy, was fought across Ireland, the US and EU to a successful conclusion. In reflection however, the success of the campaign against political vetting probably owes more to the secret, fledgling “peace” negotiations than to the many marches and rallies. As masters of the long game, the British at this stage, would have foreseen the pivotal role the community sector would play in solidifying the peace process as it unfolded.
It was not until the early 2000s that the movement began to realise the strategic importance that the community sector could play in maintaining its dominance in republican areas, but also its potential to become the beach head into areas where the movement was at its weakest. The attitude towards the community sectors transitioned from one of benign indifference to one of control and malevolence.
The funding that previously came to the north via the International Fund for Ireland was being dwarfed by new investments from the USA, the Irish Government, The UK treasury and of course the EU Peace Funds. Hundreds of millions of pounds was targeted for investment in the areas that had borne the brunt of the conflict.
The movement needed to ensure that this money was not diverted to the “great and the good” who had previously controlled investment into areas such as West Belfast and used it to buttress the position of the SDLP as the dominant nationalist party.
The “Roadmap to the Republic” quoted in part one of this series emphasised the need to “exercise complete political authority” in what were deemed to be “liberated zones”, and that “parallel systems” should be established to take care of “everyday needs.”
The movement in Belfast established a task and finish group under senior leadership. Its purpose was twofold:
Just like the British, a decade earlier, any groups that would not tow the party line were sidelined and jobs were lost. Political vetting had resumed except this time, it was internal. I vividly remember two long serving republican ex-prisoners, who were no longer with the movement, being told not to turn up to work the next day. Effectively their jobs were “spiked” because they were assessed to be “dissidents” while actual members of the LCC were greeted with open arms at public debates and private back rooms.
Plus ça change
In the next section, I will draw no conclusions, but I will reference material that is in the public domain, and comment with both a cynical and critical eye. I ask the reader to make their own assumptions whether “the everyday needs” of working-class communities in Belfast are being met by the projects I have highlighted. All of these projects are based in areas that have been consistently ranked as the poorest in the north and or the UK for generations.
Context.
• The United Nations defines community development as "a process where community members come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems”.
• In the last week a NI Executive plan to tackle child poverty has been described as “characterised by failure”, having no impact on child poverty levels and was not sufficiently funded. 25% of all children in the North continue to live in relative poverty.
• In the last week the NI Finance Minister announced an additional £24 million pounds to build 1,400 new social housing homes across the region. In response to the allocation, housing providers highlighted the fact that “we have a social housing crisis”. The budget to build houses was described as the lowest “in generations” at a time when the housing list was the highest “ever” with more families than “ever “homeless.
Case Study 1: Falls Community Council
Charity: Dedicated to improving the lives and well-being of the entire West Belfast community through programmes, initiatives and assistance.
Assets: £7.4 Million
Income: £1 Million
Salary costs: £600, 000
Supported St James’ Community Farm.
“Local people will enjoy health and well-being benefits through working with animals and growing their own food….”
St Comgall's School
FCC secured £7 million to renovate the building and will be working with their partners in Belfast City Council and the Executive Office to restore the building.
St Comgalls school is now available for weddings and parties and FCC has secured an additional £850,000 to provide tours of west Belfast and an interactive historical exhibition.
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Case Study 2: Black Mountain Shared Space. (A 9-minute bus ride from FCC)
Charity: BMSS project aims to create a welcoming, safe and accessible state-of-the-art building on land between Ballygomartin Road and Springfield Road
Assets: £7 Million
Income: £290,000
Salary costs: £160,000
Phase two of the project has commenced, (building office space).
The USP of Phase one was that 30 metres of the “peace wall” was repurposed into a segregated community centre after 10 years. Using BMSS as a “model of best practice”, the removal of all the “peace walls” in Belfast by the year 3150 would require a modest investment of £7.8 Billion.
BMSS have “empowered the most vulnerable, facilitating a transformative peacebuilding process”.
11 women from the critical engagement group as part of their programme took a historical visit to the Roddy Mc Corley Republican heritage Centre (AKA The Roddie’s).
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Case Study 3: Intercomm (Ireland) Ltd.
Charity: Intercomm Ireland was established to focus on the needs of the community and to move beyond the institutional focus to peace building.
Assets: C.£1million, noted than an earlier incorrect valuation of their property resulted in a c. £400,493 drop in assets.
Income: £800,000. Noted that income dropped while funders “satisfied themselves as to the charities handling of the staffing issue” i.e. a staff member who was also a member of the LCC was arrested on UVF weapons charges.
Salary costs: £362,000 Noted that a further £143,050 was used to discipline a member of staff who was a well-known UVF member for doing UVF things.
Intercomm continue to make “a significant contribution to building and sustaining the peace locally” in a space where “anti-peace process elements” continue to raise tensions.
They do this through their CEO, who continues “to play a significant advisory role on serious peace building matters at the highest level”
Next year Intercomm will focus on having markets and fun days in public parks in north Belfast.
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Case Study 4: Lower Ormeau Road Residents Group (LORAG)
Charity: LORAG is a ‘needs led’, community development organisation, founded in 1987 by the Republican movement to support the residents and community of the Lower Ormeau area.
Assets: £3 Million
Income: £1.2 Million
Salary Costs: £500,000
The opening of the John Murray Lockhouse at the cost of £2.9 million will provide the local community with a café, meeting rooms and a garden with a polytunnel. As an added bonus access to the River Lagan will be improved for locals, their yachts, dinghies and canoes. Hopefully there will also be a vaccination programme for anyone daft enough to swim in the Lagan.
“Up the Lagan in a bubble” appears to be a particularly apt name for this project.
LORAG will continue to provide the services that they are extremely well funded to provide but noted that the increase in electricity prices etc means that cruelly they will have to use some of their unrestricted reserves of £545,000 to meet these costs.
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Conclusion:
These projects were not chosen randomly, they are projects that are reflective of numerous other community groups across the north, who have been allowed to cash in on “peace money”.
There are many organisations, delivering real change on the ground, that struggle to access funding on a par with the chosen few.
Labelling even the most obscure project as having “peacebuilding” value (almost 30 years after the second ceasefire) and being linked with the “relevant people and parties (including the LCC)” will ensure that the funding will flow.
Readers can make up their own minds, I contend that fundamentally, these groups do not tackle the common problems of working-class communities as expressed by those communities.
Pertinent Questions:
Why are funders unwilling to challenge this hegemony, within the community sector?
Is there a fear that if the funders speak out, they will face the wrath of the political overseers of the movement’s strategy?
Is there a corruptness at the heart of the community sector and are funders complicit?
Nothing has changed for the better after almost 30 years of peace funding. Why is good money being thrown after bad on organisations that have failed to deliver?
Has a new elite has been established, whereby community development and community empowerment have been replaced by the imperative to sustain the organisation and control funding?
Mar fhocal scoir
There is no doubt that the money generated by and expended upon these organisations could have and should have funded a home building programme in Belfast. A programme that eradicates the housing waiting lists in Belfast will build more peace than all of these projects put together.
In addition, there would have been enough “spare change” to fund a successful anti-poverty strategy for children in Belfast, which surely would have more peace building impact than segregated office space.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Victory to the Peace Processers.
When First Minister O’Neill was recently being grilled at the Executive Office Committee by a collective of halfwits and the witless, veteran MLA Caral Ni Chuilin interjected, on Michelle’s behalf, and harangued the DUP MLAs about their Ministers meeting with members of the Loyalist Communities Council (LCC) describing them as active drug dealers and criminals.
The correctness of Caral’s dead cat, that was thrown into the discourse like a coffee jar (pre-2005), was not debatable: they are criminals and drug dealers, but more able political opponents might have pointed out that New Sinn Fein (NSF) was in a far better place to comment on the LCC than the average DUP member.
A quick glance at the list of the LCC members that met with the DUP Ministers in question would demonstrate, that those in attendance also regularly meet with senior NSF personnel. Convicted murderer Bobby Rodgers can be seen in multiple photographs at meetings with NSF, including Executive Ministers. Jackie McDonald (of the good UDA) is a regular visitor to West Belfast where he has shared public platforms with Spike Murray, Alex Maskey and indeed Gerry Adams. It has now emerged that a senior NSF Minister agreed to meet with the LCC, many years before the DUP did so officially, to discuss educational underachievement.
The dead cat, rather than “clearing the room” was more of a damp squib, and the “mealy mouthed” criticism of the DUP further exposed NSF as churlish and opportunistic bed fellows.
The most valid criticism of the LCC, which was established in 2015, with NSF approval, is that it has taken them much longer to transition Loyalism into community activity and politics than it took the Republican Movement.
NSF and their proxy organisations in the “community” sector in the north have a symbiotic and extremely profitable relationship with the LCC, and this stems from the corruption of the community sector by both since the early 2000s.
The distance of travel for the “movement” to embed themselves into the community sector and to “promote effective interaction between key community groups and the local Party” (NSF 2006) was considerably shorter than the circuitous route that was forced upon Loyalists.
Sinn Fein and the IRA had an honourable track record of supporting and initiating community action. For example, Bobby Sands led a housing campaign in Twinbrook while Fra McCann spearheaded the campaign to rebuild Divis.
While the garnering of support for the struggle was viewed as a welcome byproduct of the empowerment of working-class communities, the primary objective was to bring about positive change within those communities. A change that would benefit everyone including those who did not support the movement. While an eye was always kept open for the opportunity to exploit resources and money for the movement, it was never used for individual profit.
Throughout the late seventies and early 80’s republican activists established community organisation in most areas of Belfast. This was Thatcher’s austerity era, when the heart was ripped out of working-class communities across the UK and the north was not spared the rod. Working in the community sector was not easy. It absolutely wasn’t well paid and there was always uncertainty about when the next pay cheque would arrive. People, including Republicans, working in the sector couldn’t get mortgages, buy cars or go on foreign holidays, they lived from month to month and hand to mouth.
The north had its own war time peculiarities. Given that many community organisations were established by and led by republicans, the British, supported by the SDLP and others, introduced the political vetting of community groups.
Community organisations that were actually delivering real change on the ground were deprived of funding because of vexatious allegations of connections to the movement.
Money from Europe and US was channelled into organisations that were fronts for the SDLP and the Catholic Church. The champion of Ireland's Future and convert to NSF (Brian Feeney) was to the forefront of a McCarthyesque witch-hunt against community organisations that had tenuous links to the movement.
Funding for many community-based organisations was suspended and jobs were lost but given the calibre of the people in the movement and in the community sector at that time, the work to empower communities continued.
A campaign to challenge the British Governments vetting policy, was fought across Ireland, the US and EU to a successful conclusion. In reflection however, the success of the campaign against political vetting probably owes more to the secret, fledgling “peace” negotiations than to the many marches and rallies. As masters of the long game, the British at this stage, would have foreseen the pivotal role the community sector would play in solidifying the peace process as it unfolded.
It was not until the early 2000s that the movement began to realise the strategic importance that the community sector could play in maintaining its dominance in republican areas, but also its potential to become the beach head into areas where the movement was at its weakest. The attitude towards the community sectors transitioned from one of benign indifference to one of control and malevolence.
The funding that previously came to the north via the International Fund for Ireland was being dwarfed by new investments from the USA, the Irish Government, The UK treasury and of course the EU Peace Funds. Hundreds of millions of pounds was targeted for investment in the areas that had borne the brunt of the conflict.
The movement needed to ensure that this money was not diverted to the “great and the good” who had previously controlled investment into areas such as West Belfast and used it to buttress the position of the SDLP as the dominant nationalist party.
The “Roadmap to the Republic” quoted in part one of this series emphasised the need to “exercise complete political authority” in what were deemed to be “liberated zones”, and that “parallel systems” should be established to take care of “everyday needs.”
The movement in Belfast established a task and finish group under senior leadership. Its purpose was twofold:
- An audit of all community organisations and their staff in Republicans areas of Belfast to ascertain their willingness to work with the movement on the “project”.
- The establishments of partnerships, and close working relationships with those who front the Loyalist Communities Council to facilitate access to peace funding.
Just like the British, a decade earlier, any groups that would not tow the party line were sidelined and jobs were lost. Political vetting had resumed except this time, it was internal. I vividly remember two long serving republican ex-prisoners, who were no longer with the movement, being told not to turn up to work the next day. Effectively their jobs were “spiked” because they were assessed to be “dissidents” while actual members of the LCC were greeted with open arms at public debates and private back rooms.
Plus ça change
In the next section, I will draw no conclusions, but I will reference material that is in the public domain, and comment with both a cynical and critical eye. I ask the reader to make their own assumptions whether “the everyday needs” of working-class communities in Belfast are being met by the projects I have highlighted. All of these projects are based in areas that have been consistently ranked as the poorest in the north and or the UK for generations.
Context.
• The United Nations defines community development as "a process where community members come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems”.
• In the last week a NI Executive plan to tackle child poverty has been described as “characterised by failure”, having no impact on child poverty levels and was not sufficiently funded. 25% of all children in the North continue to live in relative poverty.
• In the last week the NI Finance Minister announced an additional £24 million pounds to build 1,400 new social housing homes across the region. In response to the allocation, housing providers highlighted the fact that “we have a social housing crisis”. The budget to build houses was described as the lowest “in generations” at a time when the housing list was the highest “ever” with more families than “ever “homeless.
Case Study 1: Falls Community Council
Charity: Dedicated to improving the lives and well-being of the entire West Belfast community through programmes, initiatives and assistance.
Assets: £7.4 Million
Income: £1 Million
Salary costs: £600, 000
Annual Highlights
Supported St James’ Community Farm.
“Local people will enjoy health and well-being benefits through working with animals and growing their own food….”
St Comgall's School
FCC secured £7 million to renovate the building and will be working with their partners in Belfast City Council and the Executive Office to restore the building.
St Comgalls school is now available for weddings and parties and FCC has secured an additional £850,000 to provide tours of west Belfast and an interactive historical exhibition.
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Case Study 2: Black Mountain Shared Space. (A 9-minute bus ride from FCC)
Charity: BMSS project aims to create a welcoming, safe and accessible state-of-the-art building on land between Ballygomartin Road and Springfield Road
Assets: £7 Million
Income: £290,000
Salary costs: £160,000
Annual Highlights
Phase two of the project has commenced, (building office space).
The USP of Phase one was that 30 metres of the “peace wall” was repurposed into a segregated community centre after 10 years. Using BMSS as a “model of best practice”, the removal of all the “peace walls” in Belfast by the year 3150 would require a modest investment of £7.8 Billion.
BMSS have “empowered the most vulnerable, facilitating a transformative peacebuilding process”.
11 women from the critical engagement group as part of their programme took a historical visit to the Roddy Mc Corley Republican heritage Centre (AKA The Roddie’s).
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Case Study 3: Intercomm (Ireland) Ltd.
Charity: Intercomm Ireland was established to focus on the needs of the community and to move beyond the institutional focus to peace building.
Assets: C.£1million, noted than an earlier incorrect valuation of their property resulted in a c. £400,493 drop in assets.
Income: £800,000. Noted that income dropped while funders “satisfied themselves as to the charities handling of the staffing issue” i.e. a staff member who was also a member of the LCC was arrested on UVF weapons charges.
Salary costs: £362,000 Noted that a further £143,050 was used to discipline a member of staff who was a well-known UVF member for doing UVF things.
Annual highlights
Intercomm continue to make “a significant contribution to building and sustaining the peace locally” in a space where “anti-peace process elements” continue to raise tensions.
They do this through their CEO, who continues “to play a significant advisory role on serious peace building matters at the highest level”
Next year Intercomm will focus on having markets and fun days in public parks in north Belfast.
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Case Study 4: Lower Ormeau Road Residents Group (LORAG)
Charity: LORAG is a ‘needs led’, community development organisation, founded in 1987 by the Republican movement to support the residents and community of the Lower Ormeau area.
Assets: £3 Million
Income: £1.2 Million
Salary Costs: £500,000
Annual Highlights
The opening of the John Murray Lockhouse at the cost of £2.9 million will provide the local community with a café, meeting rooms and a garden with a polytunnel. As an added bonus access to the River Lagan will be improved for locals, their yachts, dinghies and canoes. Hopefully there will also be a vaccination programme for anyone daft enough to swim in the Lagan.
“Up the Lagan in a bubble” appears to be a particularly apt name for this project.
LORAG will continue to provide the services that they are extremely well funded to provide but noted that the increase in electricity prices etc means that cruelly they will have to use some of their unrestricted reserves of £545,000 to meet these costs.
This project will improve “peacebuilding”.
Conclusion:
These projects were not chosen randomly, they are projects that are reflective of numerous other community groups across the north, who have been allowed to cash in on “peace money”.
There are many organisations, delivering real change on the ground, that struggle to access funding on a par with the chosen few.
Labelling even the most obscure project as having “peacebuilding” value (almost 30 years after the second ceasefire) and being linked with the “relevant people and parties (including the LCC)” will ensure that the funding will flow.
Readers can make up their own minds, I contend that fundamentally, these groups do not tackle the common problems of working-class communities as expressed by those communities.
Pertinent Questions:
Why are funders unwilling to challenge this hegemony, within the community sector?
Is there a fear that if the funders speak out, they will face the wrath of the political overseers of the movement’s strategy?
Is there a corruptness at the heart of the community sector and are funders complicit?
Nothing has changed for the better after almost 30 years of peace funding. Why is good money being thrown after bad on organisations that have failed to deliver?
Has a new elite has been established, whereby community development and community empowerment have been replaced by the imperative to sustain the organisation and control funding?
Mar fhocal scoir
There is no doubt that the money generated by and expended upon these organisations could have and should have funded a home building programme in Belfast. A programme that eradicates the housing waiting lists in Belfast will build more peace than all of these projects put together.
In addition, there would have been enough “spare change” to fund a successful anti-poverty strategy for children in Belfast, which surely would have more peace building impact than segregated office space.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Victory to the Peace Processers.
⏩Muiris Ó Súilleabháin was a member of the Republican Movement until he retired in 2006 after 20 years of service. Fiche bhliain ag fás.
