BBC presenter Mark Simpson has annoyed the TUV by describing Gavin Robinson as “in effect, the leader of unionism”.
Ron McDowell, deputy leader of the TUV, responded on Twitter: “Get it right. The leader of the DUP. Certainly not my leader.”
Simpson was correct by convention and McDowell may have been expressing routine party rivalry, yet there is no doubt unionism lacks a clear leadership figure to a historically unusual degree.
“Who do I call when I want to call Europe?” Henry Kissinger famously asked.
You could now ask the same about unionism, thanks to its attitude to Europe.
There were times when the UUP had weak leaders overshadowed by others but this was offset by the party’s electoral dominance. On the only occasion when unionism has switched its dominant party, in the run-up to the St Andrews Agreement, the baton passed between strong figures: from David Trimble to Ian Paisley, with Peter Robinson in the wings.
Get it right. The leader of the DUP. Certainly not my leader. https://t.co/7MErq9VL1b
— Cllr Ron McDowell (@CllrRonMcDowell) July 12, 2024
The question of who leads unionism today has been brought to a head by this month’s general election, with the DUP retaining five of unionism’s eight seats and 51% of its total vote. The latter figure is especially striking and would be far more noticeable in a Westminster or council PR-STV election.
Gavin Robinson already lacked the authority of his predecessors. Acquiring the leadership suddenly due to the resignation of Sir Jeffrey Donaldson is a recoverable problem in itself. Robinson secured his position within the party by holding his seat with a slightly increased majority. However, he has inherited the messy legacy of Donaldson’s game of musical chairs in Lagan Valley, with unionism led at Stormont by a co-opted deputy first minister.
While it is not unusual for parties to split the roles of leader and Stormont leader, it is rare for unionism and unprecedented for the Stormont leader to lack a personal mandate. Emma Little-Pengelly cannot acquire such a mandate until the next assembly election, scheduled for 2027. The drop in the DUP’s vote in Lagan Valley this month has hardly bolstered her position.
Despite the DUP’s losses and the UUP’s gains, there is no sense of unionism switching its lead party again. The UUP is hapless and hollowed out behind the scenes. It demonstrated a flash of the ruthlessness required to win in South Antrim, while leader Doug Beattie faced down DUP demands to stand aside in Fermanagh and South Tyrone. However, the UUP missed an open goal in East Antrim and its campaign in North Down was an eccentric misjudgment. By doing well enough to save his leadership, Beattie has doomed the party to more years of his leadership.
Asked on the night of the election count if the DUP should have stood aside for the UUP in Lagan Valley, Gavin Robinson replied “that’s not a question for us”. He appeared genuinely bemused by the suggestion
Nor does it seem likely the DUP will regain its dominance. Three of its four Westminster seats have become marginals, extremely so in the case of East Londonderry. The spell of holding the first minister’s post has been broken; unionist voters have decided it is not sufficient reason to forgive the DUP its sins.
The DUP may have suffered enough setbacks to realise it must change to recover. The departure of Ian Paisley removes a perennial thorn in the leadership’s side. Yet there is little sign so far the DUP has been shocked out of its entitlement and complacency. On the night of the election count, as the disastrous results rolled in, Robinson complained about “divided unionism”. Asked by a BBC journalist if his party should have stood aside for the UUP in Lagan Valley, he replied “that’s not a question for us”. He appeared genuinely bemused by the suggestion.
Even if the DUP was determined to change, it would not know which way to turn due to the splintering of the unionist vote into four blocs: DUP, UUP and TUV, plus those defecting to Alliance. Quasi-independent unionist Alex Easton’s win in North Down is a further confusing signal of voter revolt.
Electoral pacts, other forms of cooperation or an agreed realignment of the unionist party system are implausible for the same reason.
None of this is necessarily fatal to unionism. Its total vote is up, presumably assisted by choice of parties. In Scotland, the cause of the union appears to have benefited from having a range of parties lined up against one dominant nationalist party.
Parallels with Scotland should be treated with care but one seems safe to make. There is nothing inevitable about the symmetrical system of two dominant parties we have come to expect in Northern Ireland. Our new lop-sided system could last for many years.
