About us
Membership of the Union Group is drawn from the broad Unionist tradition. We are not necessarily members of any Unionist Party.
We have come together together from the Unionist tradition to promote healing and reconciliation between Unionists, Nationalists, Loyalists and Republicans, and the peoples of Great Britain and Ireland.
We stand for the Union; inclusive democratic institutions; individual rights and responsibilities; stability; social inclusion; prosperity; and mutual celebration.
(Published 16th March, 2006)
The Unionist Group represents
an informal coming together of members of the Ulster Unionist Party
since 2003. Initially a few of us met with members of Coiste na n-Iarchimí,
a republican ex-prisoners group at Clonard Monastery. We also met with
loyalists on the Shankill Road, with members of the SDLP and Alliance as
well as with the Official Republican Group, the IRSP and with Ministers
of both Governments. Many of us have worked in other contexts with
people from diverse traditions and parties north and south.
While we have never formally defined our aims and objectives we are
committed to healing and growth in this society and to better
understanding within and between all parts of these islands. We want to
see societies at peace with themselves and with their neighbours and
would like to see the many constructive activities that took place
across the Northern Ireland border before 1969, resumed and increased.
When considering mechanisms to help draw a line under the past, we gave
prior consideration to the idea of a truth commission. The core of such
an endeavour, as in the South African model, is laudable and has clearly
brought benefits to that country. However in order to attain success and
healing in Northern Ireland – surely the goal of seeking to draw a line
under the past – the model needs to be adapted to our particular
circumstances. What must be avoided at all costs in this divided society
is the presentation of opportunities that could be exploited to rake
over the coals of past grievances.
Many people who lost close relatives and friends wish to talk about
their experiences. They want to be frank, open and confident with people
around them but this is only possible when the setting and context are
carefully and sensitively established. Truth is subjective, as we all
know, and there is a serious risk that enquiries seeking forensic or
objective truth would prove partial, inconclusive and unlikely to
seriously address the hurts in society.
A semi-judicial commission, if not established in the right way, could
even stimulate rivalry and discord based on conflicting perceptions. It
might cause wounds to fester and extend hurt into future generations. We
understand why the Presbyterian Church, the largest Protestant church in
Northern Ireland, was unable to endorse such a Truth Commission at this
point in time. There are well founded fears that this could, like the
Bloody Sunday Inquiry, gather a mass of information at tremendous cost
but shed limited light on the matter under investigation and bring
little healing capacity. The Agencies of the State would be expected to
tell the whole truth but neither the British or Irish Governments nor
the IRA and Loyalist paramilitaries or others are likely to do this. Yet
if the perception was to be created that ‘truth’ was being fabricated or
distorted for whatever purpose, more harm than good might result.
But this is not to say there should be no quest for truth or for greater
knowledge and insight. Facilities and support should be provided to
encourage people’s ongoing search for truth and schools could play a
greater role in facilitating understanding. But any search for a
singular agreed historical narrative will, we believe, prove illusory.
Present understandings are limited, influenced by very significant
cultural differences and sometimes in flux and people tend to interpret
limited facts in terms of their own predispositions. Any attempt to come
up with final answers could leave some people feeling their story had
been misrepresented or neglected. It is in any case impossible to draw a
single line under the past for all time whereas healing can take place
when people relate to each other and reflect together on their
narratives in private, in small inclusive groups and before respectful,
responsive and challenging audiences drawn from both major traditions
and their subcultures.
The aim is to acknowledge, empathise and increase mutual understanding
among participants, but not necessarily to agree with people’s
narratives. While the presence of counsellors is desirable, most
participants should be drawn from ordinary walks of life. Such an
exercise, to be successful, must reflect a bottom up approach and take
place in free and safe spaces. Less dramatic accounts of ordinary people
would be a vital ingredient. The sensitivity required if the exercise is
to bear fruit means meetings should be conducted in private and without
cameras. As confidence grows some may wish to face the cameras and this
has its own value, but media encounters are on the whole likely to prove
counter-productive and intrusive. Their presence changes the dynamics of
the interaction in perhaps subtle but significant ways, however, audio
recording, provided storytellers are in agreement might be a helpful
means of retaining stories for future generations.
The exercise needs to be in the hands of communities all over Northern
Ireland and led by local people, although the Secretary of State could
quietly facilitate. At some stage a common act led by the Sovereign and
President might also be appropriate. We gave some consideration to Days
of Reflection, Memorials and Oral History Projects. Such exercises
should coincide with extensive and widespread opportunities for personal
narrative telling. It was also suggested that a shared space be created
in every town and village. There a small copse of trees could be planted
by local communities in order to reinforce a sense of hope and to bring
communities together. Such projects could be co-ordinated to finish on a
set date when samples of recorded personal histories would be
symbolically buried in a time capsule underneath the trees symbolising
new life and hope springing from the earth.
As a separate exercise it might be helpful if a representative group of
academic researchers drawn from both major traditions could develop, as
far as is possible, a common understanding of the main features of our
historical conflict drawing upon the experiences of ordinary people on
the ground.
Finally we would draw attention to Sir Kenneth Bloomfield’s report, “We
Will Remember Them” issued in April 1998 and accessible at:
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/violence/victims.htm.