Figure 1 – Conceptualisation – Pulling it all together

[Source: Steve Nimmons]

If you’ve not yet seen this video from Friends School in Lisburn (FSL), take 8 minutes or so and peruse now.

It could be argued that such ventures are highly indulgent, but I find this interesting, and depict above why this has real merit:

1. The concept / vision needs to be defined, articulated and agreed across multiple stakeholder groups (a great life lesson)
2. Selling the concept to over 1,000 students and staff is non-trivial (stakeholder communications and evangelism in action), as well as dealing with trust and reputation protection complexities (particularly at the governance levels of the school)
3. Planning, scripting, rehearsals, casting and dealing with associated tensions is challenging
4. Choreography and co-ordination – many businesses dream of collaboration at this level, few achieve it
5. Execution of the vision (direction, collaboration, mechanics of filming and arrangement), copyright restrictions etc.
6. Editing and post-production – skills learned in packaging and streamlining the end product
7. Viral marketing and exploitation of multiple distribution channels. Is this now an entirely ‘natural ability’ of the Web Native?
8. Analysis of the results of viral marketing and sentiment (positive, negative and neutral feedback) – exposure to the realities of tough and cynical audiences/markets

The video is only a few weeks old, but what is its ‘legacy’?

• Will the school repeat this exercise (periodically) to refresh the concept and participation?
• Has there been an increase in collaboration in other areas?
• Has there been an increase in ‘school pride’ / morale?
• Has there been any disaffection / fall-out?
• How will the management/governance functions of the school measure benefit, risk and ‘return on investment’?

My view: Kudos to Friends School. The greatest gift of education is teaching people to think. Cynics come and cynics go, “speaking of Michelangelo.”

The Official FSL LipDub Video

[source: YouTube]

UUP leader Tom Elliott was in London last week for discussions on the future UUP / Conservative ‘pact’ with senior Conservative Party officials. An evening event chaired by former Ulster Unionist MP and MLA, David Burnside was held at Westminster.

Historic Links

Alistair Cooke OBE, political historian, author and former Deputy Head of the Conservative Research Department spoke on the historic links between the Ulster Unionist and Conservative Party. Naturally this turned to the eventual divisions between the two, punctuated by the low points of Sunningdale and Anglo Irish Agreements.

Current Thinking

Tom Elliott responded to Alistair’s historical narrative, placing the day’s discussions and May’s election in context. His view is quite categorical, and I summarise (and paraphrase with some poetic license):

• The Ulster Unionist Party is and will remain an autonomous political entity in Northern Ireland
• The joint branding used in the May election confused the electorate
• A franchise model is his view of the way forward. This means the UUP brand remains, elected UUP members would take the Conservative whip at Westminster
• As a franchise, local Conservative competition is counterproductive – this presents a challenge for symbiosis with established local Conservative associations
• There is complexity within the UUP itself as not all members are natural Conservatives. David Cameron’s pro-Union stance helps to mitigate this as the British government moves from a position of (in my opinion unfortunately) stated neutrality. This arguably assisted moving the debate forward to the 1993 Downing Street Declaration, but was at the same time injurious to Unionist relations.

Two key points therefore spring to mind for further rumination:

Two Immediate Challenges

The Local Challenge

How best to integrate Conservative grass roots (and established associations) into the UUP in Northern Ireland as part of a franchise and ultimately move to the absence of political competition between the two? There are ‘challenging’ personalities involved, although some indication of self-implosion may be at play. Either way, Tom has made clear statements of his wishes. I fear further acrimony leading to prolonged indifference within the Conservative camp in the Province. I do not see them rush to embrace the franchise under the UUP banner. In fact the local Conservative Associations may well present the most significant barrier to real progress (locally). Cameron needs to act decisively in this regard.

Wider Relationship Challenges

With a significant churn in Conservative MPs in the last Parliament, coupled with a depletion of Northern Ireland’s centrality to the political agenda there is a risk that this pact will simply become a ‘non-entity’. Due to geographies and complexity of relations in Northern Ireland (refer point 1) I see little potential for grass roots cross-pollination. There may be useful discussions at ‘Secretary of State’ level, but this does little to build truly integrated and collaborative political structures across all tiers of both Parties. On the flip side, the UUP have such limited presence on the mainland (save some very astute UUP Peers), that cross-pollination is again hugely stifled. I would like to see more exchange visit activities, particularly in building relationships across the Conservative back benches. The political agenda in Northern Ireland has changed, but education (particularly of new MPs) is crucial. I would therefore like to see Tom Elliott and the UUP sponsoring social, political, educational and business exchanges – particularly where there is natural synergy with the region or constituency. We also need more fringe events at each others Party Conferences, and ideally a few more shared speaking slots and keynotes.

Owen Paterson MP, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland unfortunately was unable to attend due to other commitments at a N. I. Grand Committee meeting (happening in parallel). Other notable attendees included Lord Laird, Lord Maginnis and Lord Brooke (former Conservative Party Chairman and Secretary of State for Northern Ireland).

Finally, congratulations to Alistair on his elevation to the Peerage.

UUP Peer and Ulster Scots supremo Lord Laird of Artigarvan launches his book "A Struggle to be Heard" at the House of Lords. Peppered with anecdotes, historical / political narrative and an occasional ‘tall tale’, are there overtones of Heaney’s "A Sofa in the Forties?"

Lord Laird in characteristic “chalk stripe”

I popped along to the House of Lords a week or so back for Lord Laird’s book launch “A Struggle to be Heard – by a true Ulster Liberal”. Lords Rogan and Eames were in attendance, I also had a fascinating conversation with Baroness Onora O’Neill, mostly about books on the hunger strikes and the trials faced by her cousin Terence O’Neill, in the latter days of his tenure as Northern Ireland Prime Minister.

(Lord) John Laird is a well-known and very popular Ulster Unionist politician and former Chairman of the Ulster Scots Agency. His book is semi-autobiographical in nature, a fluid, entertaining chronicle of his early life, struggling with dyslexia and perceived lack of academic prowess (now resolutely disproved)! The sad and very untimely demise of John’s father Norman thrust him into a very challenging political role in early life (at the height of a savage IRA terror campaign in Northern Ireland). His role in the Stormont government, the Sunningdale Agreement and the ensuing Ulster Workers’ Council Strike clearly had a profound effect on his political outlook and mistrust of the “apparatus of the southern state.” The book develops in a triumphant crescendo – the personal journey of overcoming tragedy, development of a successful political and latterly entrepreneurial career in Public Relations to ultimate elevation to the Peerage. An incredible life and incredible achievement no doubt fuelled by his adherence to the tenets of “New Light Presbyterian thinking”. At its most “weighty” the narrative questions the ethos of nationalism (in all forms) drawing parallels with fascism and mono-culturalism. Freedom is not about mythical “Mother Ireland” but freedom of mind and spirit (traits extolled by the Ulster Scots pioneers in the New World). Whimsical reminiscences about childhood train journeys (and his love of stream railway) and how these would be enacted in early play, evoked thoughts of Heaney’s “A Sofa in the Forties”.

John has produced a splendid and charming book, packed full of anecdotes and frank observations. My favourites (I admit this with a sense of Machiavellian glee) surround the exasperation of the Dublin administration and his dogged (Ulster Scots Presbyterian) resolution to have fair play and parity applied to development of Ulster Scots culture. A renewed interest and understanding of Ulster Scots culture is now highly developed in Northern Ireland and the work of the Ulster Scots Agency (greatly advanced by John’s efforts) has corrected revisionist ‘Irish American’ history that conveniently ignored the Scots Irish and their incredible contribution, particularly to formative American history.

The tone of the book is characteristically conciliatory, with praise given where it is due (even to political opponents and ‘cultural opposites’). The Ulster Scots simply want fair play and fair treatment. No more, no less. No culture exceeds another in importance. If this sounds reminiscent of the American Constitution, then be assured that the Ulster Scots had more “than a hand in it”.

I commend to you “A Struggle to be Heard” to be read at your earliest convenience.