• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Change the Oath of Allegiance to help Sinn Fein, says Tory

#1
It just gets worse, first back door allowances and now this!!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...ath09.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/09/ixhome.html



Change the Oath of Allegiance to help Sinn Fein, says Tory
By Tom Peterkin, Ireland Correspondent and George Jones
(Filed: 09/02/2006)

The Oath of Allegiance to the Queen sworn by MPs should be reviewed to encourage Sinn Fein to take up its five seats in the House of Commons, David Lidington, the Conservative Northern Ireland spokesman, said yesterday.



He suggested the five absent Sinn Fein MPs, including Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, who represent the political wing of the Provisional IRA, could take an "alternative" oath with references to the monarch removed.

His proposal caused outrage among Unionists, who were already infuriated by the restoration of Sinn Fein's parliamentary allowances.

The Ulster Unionist peer Lord Kilclooney of Armagh said he was "shocked" that a Conservative MP and shadow cabinet spokesman could make such a suggestion.

Last night MPs voted to hand over allowances worth £800,000 a year plus a new annual payment of up to £86,000 even though Sinn Fein's five members still refuse to take the oath, which means they cannot receive their MPs' salaries or speak in parliament.

The votes came at the end of a bitter five-hour debate in which ministers came under fire from all sides but insisted that the measures were necessary to encourage further progress in the peace process after IRA decommissioning.

MPs last year suspended Sinn Fein's allowances after the £26.5 million Northern Bank robbery and the murder in Belfast of Robert McCartney - both of which were blamed on IRA members.

But last July the IRA declared an end to its armed campaign and in September carried out a final act of weapons decommissioning.

Geoff Hoon, Leader of the House, struggled to defend the plan against protests from Tory, Unionist and some Labour MPs. The allowances were approved by majorities of 100 and 151.

Theresa May, his Tory opposite number, asked: "Why should a party that doesn't attend this House, doesn't vote, doesn't debate in this chamber, does not engage or undertake parliamentary duties or business, receive additional money to support its parliamentary activities?"

All MPs and peers are required to "swear by Almighty God to be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth" or make a solemn affirmation of loyalty to the Crown.

Sinn Fein claims its Irish republican ideals prevent MPs from swearing allegiance to a "foreign" Queen and sitting in a British parliament. Mr Lidington said Sinn Fein could be accommodated by an "alternative form of words" that would not compromise their beliefs.

"There is already a choice between an oath and an affirmation," Mr Lidington said. "I think that if we were in a situation where mention of the Queen caused a problem to somebody whether they were Sinn Fein or a Labour backbencher, who believed in a republican rather than a monarchist form of governments, the Commons should look at it on an all-party basis."

Instead of promising to be faithful to the Queen, Mr Lidington said republicans could pledge to support law and democracy.

But he acknowledged that Sinn Fein's continued refusal to recognise the police in Northern Ireland would even make that wording difficult for them to "swallow".

Mr Lidington said his comments were "hypothetical" given that the Oath of Allegiance was not the sole reason Sinn Fein MPs did not participate at Westminster.

Republicans' desire for a united Ireland means they believe that Dublin should be the seat of power for the whole island. They oppose Britain's jurisdiction over Northern Ireland and claim that sitting at Westminster would undermine their principles.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#2
What a complete moron. He should be drop kicked off the front bench and back to his constituency, there to be torn apart by the little old ladies who originally selected him. You can guarantee that if this was introduced for Sinn Fein, within a couple of months half the Labour Party would have followed suit and we would beliving in a republic by default.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#5
If Adams et al don't want to swear or afirm allegiance to a 'Foreign' Monarch, why do they stand for the 'Foreign' parliament and ask for money from this bunch of, in their view, Johnny Foreigners'?!

Let them put up or shut up. The money comes from British taxpayers and the rules of their governing body should be followed not changed. What next, will the French have people standing in the Kent consituencies and demanding allowances from parliament to keep them in the lifestyle they have become accustomed to while continuing to live in Calais and not even visiting Westminster.

Is this a case of MPs saying that the IRA scum are now decent chaps because they are titular MPs and therefore one of their club? "We look after our own don'tcha you know"

Quite sickening. :cry:
 
#8
Airey Neave must be spinning in his grave.
Never mind Airey, I'm spinning on my puter chair. The tories started to make a little sense of certain things happening recently and this baffoon puts them right down again with the likes of Bliar and gang :evil:
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#9
I'm afraid that I agree that the rules should be changed to 'allow' Adams etc to take thier seats and represent thier constituants.

As repulsive as they are, and its harder to think of more more degraded humans, they have been elected by a democratic vote and should be in Parliament. Thats democracy, we cannot censure who is elected because we don't like them.

I understand why they are unable to swear allegiance to HM and indeed would be the height of hypocrasy if they did. The pictures of the late Tony Banks crossing his fingers while swearing allegiance bring the whole process into disrepute. At the moment Sinn fein / IRA occupy the 'moral high ground' on this one and the system appears petulent and anti democratic.

Not a popular view and I just want to say again that I find Adams etc repulsive and degraded.
 
#10
Sorry but I completely disagree with you, sknn. We are talking about HER MAJESTY'S Government. Every member of it should quite rightly swear allegiance to her as they run the country ON HER BEHALF. IMHO, whether their views are rupublican or not, the fact of the matter is the UK is a constitutional monarchy with Liz as head of state and an oath to serve the country IS, de facto, an oath to serve her. You can not have one without the other unless HMQ is actually deposed.
 
#12
The answer is simple in my eyes. If those elected refuse to take their seats in parliment, then the position should by handed to the runner-up in the election. This may upset the electorate, but then again what right minded person would vote for someone who is not prepared to represent them in parliment. Wasted vote in my view. Why should the UK change the oath of allegiance to suit men and women who murdered people in cold blood. Mind you anything is possible in this day and age under this or any future government.
 
#13
Quote:

The pictures of the late Tony Banks crossing his fingers while swearing allegiance

slightly off-track, but doesn't this highlight just how juvenile and moronic the people who decide our everyday lives are.
It's something I'd expect of my children, but not an elected politician.
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#14
Sinn Fein / IRA are not and will never be part of HM Government, they are in opposition to it. In a democratic society you have to allow people to have views which differ from your own. However much you dislike them. Constitutional settlements are there for good historical reasons, but at the end of the day they are there to serve the people if they are not doing that then they need to be changed.

Sinn Fein / IRA should not be allowed to hold the moral high ground - which is why its time for change.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#15
One way round this for the future is that every person who wishes to put him/her self up for election should take the Oath at the same time as they pay their deposit, thereby acknowledging at the very outset, whose Government they are proposing to join (or oppose) in Parliament. This Oath could then be renewed in entering the House. Obviously the Oath would also have to be in writing and signed by the candidate and witnessed by the returning officer or other officer of the voting system.

In this way we would not have people spuriously standing for our Parliament, effectively leaving large elements of the population without representation (but still with the taxation).
 
#17
AAAAARRRRGGGHHH! :evil:

The British Parliament is exactly that, British! It governs the UK on behalf of the head of state HM Queen and acts in her name and with her approval!

We can't be in a position where elected officials use the House as a political battle ground on the soverenty of a province of the UK, that's not what its for. Its supposed to be a place where this kind of issue is debated in an ordered and sensible ( 8O ) manner so that a democratic decision can be reached.

A change of this nature will effectively mean that they've finally succeeded in their aims to bring the system down from within, and why not? I wouldn't be like they were breaking their oath! :?

This smacks of Convervative pandering to score points in a "Look how cool we are, and how much we'll do if we get back into power" way. :evil:

If Sinn Fein members do not recognise the soverenty of Britain and legitamacy of the British Parliament then they should be expelled from their positions as MPs. :x

I have no problem with their representing the views of their electorate and also have no problem with the people electing them in the first place, that's their right, but an elected representative is no use unless he is representing his electorate's views in Parliament. If Sinn Fein are not willing to participate in the process of Government because they don't recognise its legitimacy then Parliament should cease recognising them as a credible political party!

If they don't want to be a part of the UK political process then they should move South, stand for office in the Republic and then lobby for the North to join them, at least then they would be achieving something!
 
#18
sknn said:
Sinn Fein / IRA are not and will never be part of HM Government, they are in opposition to it. In a democratic society you have to allow people to have views which differ from your own. However much you dislike them. Constitutional settlements are there for good historical reasons, but at the end of the day they are there to serve the people if they are not doing that then they need to be changed.

Sinn Fein / IRA should not be allowed to hold the moral high ground - which is why its time for change.

How do you work out that Sinn Fein/IRA hold the moral high ground?

Endorsing murder isn't moral.
Asking for amnesty for terrorists isn't moral. (Neither is granting it Mr Blair)
Standing for Parliament and then not representing your constituents isn't the act of aresponsible politician.
I note that Sinn Feins objections don't extend to refusing HMG's cash and perks.
 
#19
I think Sknn is right.

We can't be in a position where elected officials use the House as a political battle ground on the soverenty of a province of the UK, that's not what its for.
I'd much rather see them using the House as a battleground than anywhere else...

Sure you could get MPs to swear allegience when they place their deposit - but it'll only play into the hands of SF/IRA. It'll only help them to paint themselves as oppressed people... we need to be a little savvy this...

I'm a bit surprised at the Tories for bringing this up now. It hasn't been an issue of late so why bring it up unless you just want to say something to look clever. The status-quo seems to be working ok.

Tricam.
 
#20
tricam said:
The status-quo seems to be working ok.

Tricam.

Hmmmm, what status quo would that be? The one that allows an unconstitutonal group of (former) terrorists,
who have ben universally derided and pilloried in the country they profess to represent, to dictate their own
anti-democratic agenda to the rest of us? And get tax payers money for it? When the Dail accepts them in their house,
you can start lecturing the rest of us.
 

Latest Threads