Sinn Féin must support tax increases.

Below is a piece from this weeks An Phoblacht concerning why Sinn Féin needs to support increases in taxes, an issue Sinn Féin has kept way from in the past.

------------------------------------------------------------

Tax rises will be necessary
by Eoin Ó Broin

THE Commission on Taxation is due to complete its work later this week. Established in February 2008, its remit was to “review the structure, efficiency and appropriateness of the Irish taxation system”. Its report was expected to help the government set the framework for tax reform for the coming decade.

Its terms of reference included a commitment to “keep the overall tax burden low” and a “guarantee that the 12.5% Corporation Tax rate will remain”. Sources close to the commission indicate that, while the report will go some way to simplifying the notoriously complex system currently in place, it will keep its word on keeping the tax-take low.

If this proves to be the case, should we welcome the report? Absolutely not!

One of the great myths of our time is that low-tax economies are more competitive. Of course, there is no evidence to support this claim.

A quick look at the World Competitiveness Scoreboard for any recent year demonstrates that there are more high-tax countries in the top ten than there are low-tax countries. In particular, Norway, Sweden and Finland always feature prominently as amongst the world most competitive economies despite their relatively high-tax-takes.

The real determinants of competitiveness are science, technology, education and affordable health and childcare, all of which require investment by the state. And where does the state get the cash to invest? It gets it from taxation, of course. And here’s our problem.

The 26 Counties has one of the lowest tax-takes of any the EU’s 27 member states. In 2007, the total tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was 31%. Only Latvia, Slovakia, Lithuania and Romania took less.

At the other end of the scale, world leaders in competitiveness (such as Sweden, Denmark and Finland) had tax revenues at 44% to 51% of GDP.

You don’t have to be an economist to conclude that if you have Latvian levels of taxation you cannot have Scandinavian levels of investment in job creation or public services.

In the same year, the 26 Counties has the third-lowest level of government expenditure as a percentage of GDP in the EU. Only Lithuania and Estonia fared worse. Again, at the top end of the spectrum, the Scandinavian countries ranged from 49% to 54%.

There is also a clear link between a country’s total tax-take and the levels of inequality. The larger a country’s tax-take, the more money it has to invest in various forms of social protection and wealth redistribution. In 2008, the 26 Counties spent 18% of GDP on social protections compared to Sweden’s 32%.

So what does all of this tell us?

If you want greater competitiveness and less inequality you need to have enough money to invest in research and development, education, job creation, public services and social protection.

If you don’t, then your economy will be weak and your society crippled with inequality.It is time to start making the argument to raise taxes, for the good of the economy and the good of society. If the report from the Commission on Taxation fails to do this then it should be thrown in the bin.

Eoin O Broin's article - a viewpoint from Galway East

This is a piece from Joe Des of Galway East Sinn Féin in response to the two articles I have posted concerning Eoin Ó Broin and in particular the article written by Eoin in the Irish News.

A seperate point Joe made in his e-mail was what he saw as the relatively poor use Sinn Féin activists are making of the internet. He made the point that he was disheartened that comrades seem to be using the internet for trivial matters rather than posting their thoughts or aspirations of Sinn Fein, the Republican Movement or the project at hand. I must say I agree with you Des.

Anyway, back to the article. Des' response to Eoin ÓBroin article

------------------------------------------------------------

I was looking forward to someone getting these debates running so fair play to Eoin for grabbing the nettle. I’ve had a good read of the above http://sinnfeinkeepleft.blogspot.com/2009/07/sinn-fein-needs-to-make-its-republican.html , but the post just doesn’t do it for me. I suppose as a conversation starter it is good, but the debate will have to be much more challenging than this. The content is spot on, but it is bland, academic and unimaginative.

There are too many items that we’ve heard before. “We are in a period of transition and have yet to find our feet”. I’m really sick of hearing that one. It’s sometimes said “we’re on a learning curve”. If it is taking this long it is more of a roundabout than a curve!

We have been at this for some time and the Republican movement is full of intelligent and articulate people. It should not be taking this long to get the right people into the right places and working as unified movement. I think much of the talk of alliances’ and coalition strategies have distracted us and undermined our confidence in the ability of our local activists. It may have contributed in the publics’ perception that Sinn Fein is now “just the same as the rest of them”.

The fact that most of our Councilors (a majority of them in their first term) retained their seats in the last election shows that we are producing competent and capable public reps. That is encouraging. Cllr. Teresa Ferris points out that “we need to build the party around our community based councillors”. That makes sense and is practical. And in fairness this is very much in line with your analysis that “The key to our success is what we do locally – being embedded in our communities and empowering local people to take control over the decisions that affect their daily lives.”

But there are failings in the way we operate. This needs to be accepted and addressed.

When you say “We need to build alliances for change…” I don’t think that goes far enough. We need to 'up the ante' in the broader political arena. We need to be confident and display enough conviction to actually set our own agenda rather than mould ourselves to be more palatable to any existing or potential political alignments.

Again, referring to T. Ferris letter “Let’s get clear on who our potential supporters are and give them meaningful reasons to vote Sinn Fein” is a very clear and direct way to begin discussing the party’s position from a ‘solutions based’ approach. It should be employed by all activists and supporters as the starting point for future discussion.

As Republicans are we content with being ‘potentially influential’ in government policy decisions and administration? There may be merit in that. We have gained ground and perhaps should hold it until such a time that public opinion gives us the opportunity to express that influence to a greater degree.

Or do we need to look at our roots as a Revolutionary party, ally ourselves and engage on a deeper level with the social and economic influences that are forcing change within Ireland. I believe that the challenge for the Republican Movement is not to clarify our message, but to clarify our actions. Are we at the core or even openly engaging today’s popularist movements that might bring about dramatic change like education and students movements, employment, agriculture and the fishing industry? And more importantly, if we are, is that involvement serving that particular movement or is it serving Sinn Fein? Are we capable of setting up a de facto government on a 32 counties basis? Even if it means one council at a time. You mention the “progressive coalitions” that would be required to implement real alternatives. Are we courting them or should they be courting us?

Should we be thinking that way? The main government parties have all stated clearly that they do not want us in government. Perhaps we should make it clear that we do not want to be in their type of government. These are the questions of a Revolutionary Party.

Sinn Fein needs to make its republican message relevant

I was contacted by a comrade who pointed out this article in the Irish News.
Does this fit in with what you think? Join in the debate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sinn Fein needs to make its republican message relevant
By Eoin O Broin

In the immediate aftermath of this June’s local and European elections there has been much debate about the future of Sinn Fein. Unfortunately a good deal of the analysis has been widely off the mark.

In some cases, commentators have clearly lost the run of themselves, salivating over their own political fantasies, with talk of crisis, splits and meltdown.

So let’s deal with some hard facts.

Sinn Fein remains the third largest political party on the island of Ireland.

In the European elections we took 331,797 votes, 115,545 less than Fianna Fail.

Despite some high-profile losses, particularly in Dublin, the party broadly held its own in terms of votes and seats.

However, the party did have a poor election. The loss of Mary Lou McDonald as MEP for Dublin and the defection of a number of councillors post-election has forced the party to ask some hard questions.

Writing in An Phoblacht a few weeks ago, Sinn Fein Euro candidate for Munster Toiréasa Ferris struck a chord with many activists when she said: ‘Sinn Fein simply means nothing to the bulk of people in the south’.

Her prognosis that the ‘party is suffering an identity crisis’ may have been harsh but her call for Sinn Fein to clarify what ‘we are trying to achieve in the 26 counties’ was timely.

In the view of this writer Sinn Fein is not suffering an identity crisis. However, in the south we are in a period of transition and have yet to find our feet.

You could call it party political growing pains.

Toiréasa Ferris is right when she says that Sinn Fein means little to the bulk of people in the south. The challenge, therefore, is to clarify our left republican message and to ensure that it is relevant to people in their everyday lives.

So what does Sinn Fein stand for? We are a left republican political party committed to ending partition, creating a national democracy and building a society based on social and economic justice and political and cultural equality.

However, we have to constantly ask ourselves whether the tools we are employing are fit for the job and whether we are using those tools to their best effect.

The key to our success is what we do locally – being embedded in our communities and empowering local people to take control over the decisions that affect their daily lives.

Only through such local activism can we convince a growing section of the electorate that Sinn Fein is committed to delivering real political, social and economic change.

We also need to acknowledge that Sinn Fein alone does not have the political strength to achieve the degree of change Irish society requires. We need to build alliances for change with other political, social and civic forces locally and nationally.

In the north, this demands that we build a real and sustained working relationship with civic and political unionism. In the south it means ending the political dominance of both Fianna Fail and Fine Gael.

In both jurisdictions it will eventually require progressive coalitions in local and regional government implementing real alternatives to the failed right-wing social and economic policies that are the cause of our current economic malaise.

It will also require a vibrant and independent civic society, bringing together the community and voluntary sector, trade unions and concerned citizens, acting as a social guarantee for any progressive coalition’s promise of change.

Irish society needs change.

The challenge for republicans is not only to build an alliance for change with others but to demonstrate that social and economic change goes hand in hand with political and constitutional change.

The challenge for republicans is not only to build an alliance for change with others but to demonstrate that social and economic change goes hand in hand with political and constitutional change.

Notwithstanding the poor election in the south this writer is optimistic about Sinn Féin’s immediate future. We have a lot of hard work to do and a lot of weaknesses to correct. But the strength and relevance of Sinn Féin’s left republican message of social, economic, political and constitutional change, north and south, is as relevant today as ever before.

Na Fianna Éireann - New Book - 100 Year Anniversary of Na Fianna Éireann

100 Year Anniversary of Na Fianna Éireann
Na Fianna Éireann- New Book

Eamon Ryan has contacted Sinn Féin Keep Left and asked that we publicise a new book on Na Fianna Éireann. I have not read the book, but I am happy to put it up. If anybody wishes to write a short review of the book then that would be great.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A new book on the history of Na Fianna Éireann entitled 'Na Fianna Éireann and the Irish Revolution- 1909 to 1923' written by Damian Lawlor has been published. At present it is available in a number of bookshops in Dublin, Belfast and the midlands.

If you can't get any of these shops you can get it from the author - just email jflalor@gmail.com It costs ten euro plus postage and packaging which costs four euro fifty cent in Ireland and five euro fifty for all other locations. Na Fianna Éireann was founded on August 16th 1909 in an old run down hall at 34 Lower Camden Street. A committee which included Countess Markievicz and Bulmer Hobson had called the meeting in order to recruit boys in Dublin to a new nationalist body. The hundred or so young Irish lads who attended determined to create an organisation which would offer a suitable alternative to the growing Baden-Powell ‘Boy Scout’ movement. What developed over the next fourteen years was a veritable boy’s army which played a crucial role in the Irish Revolution.

This book is unique in telling the history of Na Fianna Éireann. It charts its growth and development from 1909 to 1923, giving for the first time access to the stories of individual members. The book also analyses its expansion into a truly national organisation with over 30,000 members spread throughout Ireland’s 32 counties. Significantly the involvement of the Fianna Éireann in the following events is described in detail:

• The development of Na Fianna Éireann in its early years

• A history of the flag, badge, uniform and song of Na Fianna Éireann

• The launch and growth of the Irish Volunteers

• The Howth and Kilcoole gun running operations

• The Fianna circle of the IRB

• The Fianna involvement in 1916 Rising

• The reorganisation of the Fianna in the aftermath of 1916

• The Fianna participation in the ‘Tan War’

A view from 2007 about what was going to happen to Sinn Féin- Was it accurate?

Below is a comment and an article I received to the Post "Can Sinn Féin change from within?"  Once again I felt the contribution was too valuable to leave as a comment so I've posted it as an article.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I came across the article below and it was printed in the Socialist Voice in July 2007. This paper is the mouth piece of the Communist Party and I feel the article should be dusted down and looked at again today.

The article more or less predicted what was going to happen to Sinn Féin following the results of the 2007 election. It predicted that we would be squeezed out of the media and our strategy of over reliance on electoral success, and our elected representatives, would lead to decline or stagnation.

We are all aware of the debate going on at present within the party and personally I think we need to look at things in terms of what works and what doesn't. Radicalism reformism, it's all a load of bolox! The objective is a 32 county socialist republic and that essentially means the destruction of two corrupt states and helping to create a new Europe. Therefore our intent is clearly radical. The means of how we get to that object is however not clear at all.

However, the article below is written by somebody from outside the party and its analysis of what would happen to Sinn Féin should be looked at by all those people interested in advancing the ideals of Sinn Féin and helping us get to the creation of a 32 county socialist republic.

Remember this was written in 2007

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Republicanism tripped up by the national question

The fall-out from the failure of Sinn Féin to make an electoral breakthrough and the loss of an important Dáil seat in the Dublin area continues to rumble on and to cause much debate within the republican movement.

Sinn Féin had hoped to capitalise on the momentum following its success in the Northern Assembly elections and the re-establishment of the Executive. The peace process provided Sinn Féin with great photo opportunities for leading individuals, particularly Southern personalities. They had easy access to the Taoiseach’s office, as well as to Downing Street and the White House.

They now find themselves in a situation where the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive continue to take root and are bedded down, leading to fewer political crises that could propel them into the limelight and give them the opportunity to appear to be central to any solution.

Their strength in Dáil Éireann is reduced, and the technical group that gave them a platform in the last Dáil is now obsolete. Fianna Fáil was clever enough to mop up the independents to make sure that minority parties will have little or no say.

Sinn Féin will now have to operate in a more hostile corporate media environment, with photo opportunities becoming few and far between and with less access to the Taoiseach’s office and Downing Street. There is the likelihood of becoming just another small party, receiving little publicity and with invitations to appear on television beginning to dry up.

As we have pointed out many times in Socialist Voice, the political establishment, both in Ireland and Britain, was not unduly concerned about republican weapons and their decommissioning but was more concerned about securing the decommissioning of radical republican politics.

The comment reportedly made by Pat Doherty, that there was “too much ideology” in Sinn Féin, will come as a surprise to many within that party. The leadership are clearly attempting to circumscribe the nature and the extent of the debate allowed and the conclusions and lessons to be learnt from the debate now under way.

Judging by some statements by leading republicans, they would have settled for a similar deal to that secured by the Green Party, with a “green paper” on Irish unity thrown in. In the majority of constituencies where Sinn Féin did badly, left-wing independents polled well. Many working people were not impressed by talk of being “ready for government.” They have had the experience of the Labour Party being ready for government for years, promising everything and delivering little.

People understand politics from their own immediate experience and demands. What may be a priority for one person or group or a particular section of the population may not automatically translate itself throughout the Irish countryside. Nor can one political strategy cross over where there is a different set of problems and demands that require a different political strategy. The national question is more than just partition, and progressive forces need to take a much broader approach to its resolution.

Simply having a strategy for getting into and staying in government, regardless of what you stand for or do while in government, will lead only to growing opportunism, demoralisation, and defeat. The left has to get back to radical street politics, with the mobilisation of working people, uniting them on clear demands and goals.

Republicanism is a limited ideology if it is not connected to the transforming of society and the empowering of working people. It is empty if it does not address both political and economic democracy. Fianna Fáil can call itself a “republican party,” but we know that there is little of republicanism within its ideology.

Republicans are faced with a dilemma. You can’t be in government in the Northern Executive implementing conservative policies while in the South be engaged in making radical demands and taking radical political actions. Is not the point of being in government fighting for and, more importantly, implementing people-centred policies, providing the means to broaden out the struggle and building the potential forces for progress? It is not less ideology that we need but a deeper understanding of the nature and course of the struggle.

The national question, as the CPI has argued for decades, requires a more sophisticated political strategy, centred on the interests of working people. This will require the unity of all progressive forces, united in joint action. It will take time and patient political coalition-building.

The over-emphasis on electoralism fosters a false sense of politics and in many instances disempowers people and reduces them to mere election fodder. Republicans need to address the nature of opportunism and what gives rise to it.

No excuses - Dublin Sinn Féin has the chance to lead the way forward for Sinn Féin as a whole

Some good news this week for Sinn Féin in Dublin. Eoin O Broin has been elected as the new chairperson of the Dublin Sinn Féin Cuige. Now the man who has been one of the main voices for left republicanism within Sinn Féin has been given a position of real power and responsibility and has the chance to really show to everybody that Sinn Féin is a republican socialist party.

In my opinion all left wing republicans within Sinn Féin should redouble their activities over the coming period and give Eoin our full support. Let the left of the party show that the message we have for he people of Ireland is indeed the message the people wish to hear. Let us demonstrate that the republican socialist message has an audience and that the left in Irish politics has the answers to the problems that are faced by Dublin and Ireland as a whole.

Below is an article from An Phoblacht regarding Eoin's appointment.


Ó Broin new Dublin Sinn Féin Chairperson

THE Dublin Sinn Féin Cuige unanimously elected Eoin Ó Broin as their new chairperson last week. The election came following the decision of current chair, Aengus Ó Snodaigh TD, to stand down to focus on his constituency and the forthcoming general election.
The cuige also elected Daithí Doolan as the new education officer.Speaking after the meeting,

Eoin Ó Broin said:

"Dublin Sinn Féin faces big challenges in the time ahead. If we are to meet these challenges, we need to refocus on the core political objectives of our party and develop new strategic direction for the city. We also need to reinvigorate our party organisation.

"Sinn Féin is a republican socialist party. We want an end to partition and the creation of a national democracy based on principles of social and economic justice and political and cultural equality. We want to end poverty, inequality, discrimination and marginalisation in our communities and across the city, to effect change that improves the quality of people’s every day lives.

"To do this, we have to build our political strength organisationally and electorally in every community, ward and constituency in the city. We also need to build and drive an alliance for change, in communities and across the city, to advance our political objectives."

CAMPAIGNING PARTY

Sinn Féin must once again be embedded in our local communities, the new cuige chair said "empowering people through campaigning on the streets and in the media and through assertive representation in the councils and Leinster House".

He said that Sinn Féin must be the campaigning party, radical and credible, offering local communities a real alternative to the failed politics of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael.

Sinn Féin are simply Catholic politicans - what do you think?

This week the Pensive Quill wrote a piece regarding his use of the term "Catholic Politicans" to describe Sinn Féin. This was in response to a comment I had left on his site in which I questioned the use of this term.

In the piece he wrote he has also mentioned this site and offered me the chance to respond, but as he rightly says I only manage the blog. This site is dedicated to debate within the party so I would ask people to read the piece and give their own opinion on how appropraite it is. Are Sinn Féin simply catholic politicans?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://thepensivequill.am/2009/07/catholic-politicians.html

Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Catholic Politicians



In recent days a comment appeared on the Pensive Quill in response to the article ‘Wrong Tune’. The poster, ‘Starry Plough’, manages a promising blog, Sinn Fein Keep Left. While constructed from the perspective of someone who feels Sinn Fein can still deliver the goals that initially defined it, the blog has survived the howls of those who protest the washing of dirty linen in public. Soiled linen is anything that does not depict the leadership in halos. Keep Left is a brave attempt to swim against the tide of party orientation which would readily see the leadership lurch gleefully to the right if the Blueshirts of Fine Gael were in a position to extend an invitation to join them in government. The one downside of the blog, which is not a criticism of Starry Plough or any of those who take the time to run it, is that 15 years ago its value would have been greatly magnified. Regrettably, at a time when debate and probing may have salvaged something from the republican project, there was so little of it able to emerge in the face of concerted leadership attempts to discourage it. Few then were thinking of blogs. Most of us were unaware of the existence of the internet.

Part of the comment Starry Plough made to the Pensive Quill had this to say.



One point I am struggling with in your posts though is the term catholic politician. The church is dying, many if not most people who vote SF, or any party for that manner, are no longer church going. So why the use of this phrase? I simply find it grabs my attention and deflects from other things you write.

That it grabs the attention of the poster is an achievement in it itself. It may have done so because it had a certain shock or annoyance property or alternatively because – as it seems to be for Starry Plough – it rings so far off the mark that it distorts the wider argument being made.

There are a number of defensible reasons for describing Sinn Fein elected representatives as Catholic politicians, none of which have anything to do with the religious persuasion of the people involved or the church that they might attend. Primarily, in as far as they stand for something other than their own power, the political project of Sinn Fein politicians, regardless of the discourse, is strategically driven by the impulse to advance the position of the Northern Catholic populace in a communitarian as opposed to a religious sense. Sinn Fein demand better schools not better church run schools. While people like Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness openly admit their religious preferences Gerry Kelly seems never to express any religious sentiment whatsoever. So when the term ‘Catholic politician’ is employed it delineates a political community not a religious one. The terms Protestant and Catholic in the North are widely assumed to be interchangeable with Unionist and Nationalist. The concept ‘political Catholic’ is not to be misunderstood as, or confused with a religious Catholic.

Sinn Fein is essentially a Northern Catholic party. This results less from the ideological orientation of the leadership – vote chasers rather than ideology sponsors – than it does from the structural location within the political grid of that insurrectionary energy which brought Provisionalism into being and has played no small part in sustaining it since. Provisionalism is shaped more by constraints than opportunities. Brian Faulkner long ago made the observation that were it not for the Catholics of Belfast there would be no discussion of a united Ireland or a Provisional IRA to push it. Sinn Fein’s only consistent hardcore support base is located in the Catholic North. Elsewhere it tends to be more transient. This goes some way toward explaining its declining relevance in the South. Whether left or right, it is not viewed as a party that has answers to the problems that beset the South, just something up North that endlessly chatters in a strange Northern language called peace processery. Its abysmal failure to be recognised as a left alternative when cities like Dublin clearly moved to the left all militate against positioning it within a socialist framework. Its strategy of expansionism throughout Ireland has come off the rails and it is now being contained within the North where it plays second fiddle in a DUP led and dominated government. As unpalatable as it appears to those of us who saw comrades die and who spent long times in prison in pursuit of something vastly different from what Peter Robinson stands for, his pronouncements leave little room for confidence:


Nobody is boasting about Irish unification by 2016 anymore … on all fronts and at every level we have rolled back the nationalist agenda and are following our unionist agenda. We have re-moulded Government to our vision. Every impartial observer of the political scene agrees that the DUP is the driving force in Stormont.

This points to a Catholic minority and its political representatives accepting the balance of political forces and deferring to their outworking, not a republican constituency and its political representatives following a republican agenda that undermines that balance of forces and destabilises the concomitant political arrangement that it gives rise to.

Be that as it may, it does not follow that seeing Sinn Fein politicians as little other than political Catholics is self-evident. The case for that has to be demonstrated rather than assumed. Personally, there is a measure of discomfort in describing Sinn Fein as republican, socialist, revolutionary – all terms it would prefer over Catholic. The first three terms, once said leave a bad aftertaste in the mouth. There is a certain psychological comfort to be drawn from finding a term that intellectually and emotionally smoothes those jutting and jagged edges that come with employing another term that does not seem to fit quite as well. The term Catholic politician is not made to measure but one that is purchased straight from the rack. As such it is never a perfect fit, is a matter of taste and must at all times coexist alongside the view of others who think it does not fit at all.

For some time I have not felt comfortable in employing the term ‘republican politician.’ It bestows legitimacy on actions which are demonstrably anything other the republican. Apart from all the other republican sacred cows sacrificially offered up to the great god Peace Process, to equate republicanism with a strategy of touting to the British is so anathema to republican sentiment – on a par with terming someone who supports the Ku Klux Klan, a black civil rights activist– that it simply fails to compute. It sticks in the craw to confer the status of republican on anyone who would endorse touting, no matter how useless, self-referential, abhorrent or counterproductive the actions of physical force republicans.

‘Nationalist politicians’ would be a term more appropriate than ‘republican politicians’ but in many senses the SDLP got their first and were always termed nationalists by Sinn Fein. So the term Catholic politician allows for a convenient demarcation line between the two sets of politicians, Sinn Fein and the SDLP. And because Sinn Fein has been more inclined to beat the sectarian drum in terms of appealing to the instincts of its constituency the label political Catholic is more appropriate to it than to the SDLP. Moreover, ‘Catholic’ rather than ‘nationalist’ tugs at Sinn Fein’s sleeve each time it makes a claim to have advanced nationalism as a 32 county phenomenon. In that sense it is subversive of the party’s proclamations. Any sense that Sinn Fein is involved in a struggle for national liberation has long since evaporated. As Fionnuala O Connor, frequently quoted in recent articles on the Pensive Quill, tellingly asked:


Hijackings certainly would not advance the cause of Irish unity, said one youngish Belfast Sinn Féiner indignantly on Tuesday. Behind closed doors, does anyone in her party profess to believe that taking part in Stormont debates is bringing Irish unity a day closer?

The term Sinn Fein politician would be adequate but it is merely descriptive and not critically interpretive. Benign and neutral, it would hardly ‘grab the attention’ of any reader, apart from members of RSF who might demand that the Provisionals relinquish the title deeds to the name Sinn Fein. The term Catholic politician is interpretive in as much as it suggests what Sinn Fein is, by exclusion it also implies what it is not. In that sense the term ‘Catholic politician’ is a subversive term, aimed at challenging and eroding the view that Sinn Fein is a republican party.

Use of the term ‘Catholic’ also draws on the thinking of Peadar O’Donnell, a republican of substantial pedigree and firmly established left wing credentials, who pointedly made the observation of the IRA in Belfast that it was a battalion of armed Catholics. So there is historical precedent within the republican tradition for its usage.

Finally, the internal power-sharing solution that Sinn Fein has accepted is an answer to a problem that could only have its explanatory roots in the model of internal conflict that throughout the Northern political instability constituted the main definition of the conflict and which the Provisional republican narrative sought to challenge at all points before effectively succumbing to it. The internal conflict model allows the British state to stand back, benignly hold the ring in which Catholics and Protestants are instructed to solve their differences, and behave like a convenor or arbiter rather than a malign participant.

Sinn Fein, no longer armed with a serious republican, socialist, revolutionary or all-Ireland nationalist ideology has long since vacated the primal ground of republicanism. There is no ideological centre of gravity which acts to prevent it becoming a catch-all party. But the structural limitations that contain it both to the North and within the Catholic community within the North mean that its catch-all catchment area is the Catholic population of the six counties. Sinn Fein growth in the North is not the consequence of creating more republicans than ever before – that is like saying Tony Blair and New Labour created more socialists than ever before. It is a growth fuelled by greater numbers of Catholics not opposed to the British presence per se but who feel the British can be made to run the Northern state more fairly so that Catholics can improve their chances within a British political system.

Sinn Fein - a Catholic party for a Catholic people.