FROM THE ARCHIVES:In his Northern Notebook David McKittrick reviewed the state of the SDLP on the eve of its 10th annual conference and the first under new leader John Hume. – JOE JOYCE
When Gerry Fitt left the SDLP and John Hume took over as leader, a lot of people in the party were worried. Their concern was not so much about Mr Fitt’s departure – that left curiously few ripples – but about how Mr Hume and his new deputy, Seamus Mallon, would get on together.
They are both men of substance, with obvious political and personal strengths. They had been known to disagree: you couldn’t call them enemies, but they knew their own minds and there was apprehension about how they would adapt to each other in the close relationship between a leader and his deputy.
There have been scrapes over the months, but in general it has worked out well. As a senior colleague put it: “The potential for things going wrong in that relationship was very strong. I think it’s a tribute to both of them – and a relief to the rest of us – that it’s worked out OK.”
Most people in the SDLP make light of the loss of Mr Fitt, just as they did when Paddy Devlin left a couple of years ago. Perhaps the departure of individualists is a sign of political maturity, as some argue: but it’s undeniable that the party is not as much fun anymore. In the old days, if you had a party meeting attended by Mr Fitt, Mr Devlin, Ivan Cooper and Paddy O’Hanlon, there was volatility, a colour, an unpredictability, an excitement about it all.
That has gone. On the other hand, the party now has a solidity and a permanence undreamed of in its early days. This weekend, at its tenth party conference, delegates can reflect that it has no close rivals as the political voice of the minority.
Its survival – minus a few personalities, but with its basic structure intact – is surprising, given that it was formed for the purpose of negotiating with the Unionists, and the British government. There has been little genuine negotiation, certainly in the past five years. The achievements claimed by party members are negative ones: helping prevent the reincarnation of Stormont, and providing an alternative to the violence of the Provisionals. You could argue that’s achievement enough. Still, there has been some slippage in the British position from the days when William Whitelaw and Ted Heath agreed with the SDLP arguments that powersharing and an Irish dimension were not options but necessities. And there was a particularly black moment last spring, when Humphrey Atkins seemed to favour building a settlement around Ian Paisley as a new prime minister.
That particular SDLP nightmare has been banished, but British intentions remain unclear. The party – like the Northern Ireland Office – is still looking for a Unionist leader who is prepared to negotiate with them. Clearly, Mr Paisley is not that man; nor is Jim Molyneaux .
http://url.ie/dfh6