Donaldson says he makes no apologies for engaging with other unionists
The DUP leader is facing questions about the extent of discussions he had with the UUP last year about potentially rejoining a party he left in 2003.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson has said he will make no apology for engaging with other unionists, but has again insisted he never contemplated rejoining the UUP last year.
Sir Jeffrey was addressing claims he was involved in discussions with Ulster Unionist Party leader Doug Beattie about potentially joining his party in May 2021 following his defeat in a DUP leadership contest.
The Lagan Valley MP, who weeks later ultimately became DUP leader when Edwin Poots was ousted after less than a month at the helm, has said he was approached by the UUP on the issue but insists he never had any intention of rejoining a party he left in 2003.
He has portrayed the exchange with the UUP as more of a conversation on achieving greater cooperation among unionists in Northern Ireland.
Sir Jeffrey faced questions about what unfolded between him and his erstwhile party last year as he participated in an online discussion hosted by the Dublin-based think tank the Institute of International and European Affairs (IIEA).
“I am very clear, I had no intentions or plans to re-join the UUP,” he said on Thursday.
“I was approached, it was made clear I would be made welcome in the UUP and I politely declined their invitation.
“But, to be clear, I will continue to engage with all unionists, I want to see greater cooperation within unionism, because I believe a stronger more united unionism is good for Northern Ireland and it gives nationalism a partner that they can work with.
“I believe that the political process is stronger when both sides are more cohesive and more coherent in putting forward their views and their arguments.
“So I make no apology whatsoever for engaging with other unionists, talking about the future of unionism, talking about the future of Northern Ireland, talking about our relationships, whether it’s within Northern Ireland, with nationalists, whether it’s on this island or between these islands. I’ll continue to engage with others to build a better future for Northern Ireland. That’s my objective, that’s what I’m focused on and on finding solutions.”
Sir Jeffrey’s appearance at the IIEA was primarily focused on the DUP’s stance on Brexit’s Northern Ireland Protocol. Earlier this month, he removed DUP First Minister Paul Givan from the powersharing executive at Stormont in protest at the Irish Sea trading arrangements.
I was approached, it was made clear I would be made welcome in the UUP and I politely declined their invitation.
However, the DUP leader has faced scrutiny from hardline unionist rivals this week amid suggestions his party might be willing to contemplate arrangements that stop short of completely axing the protocol and would instead see Northern Ireland continue to retain unfettered access to the EU single market.
The so-called “best of both worlds” aspect of the protocol gives traders in Northern Ireland dual market access to sell freely within the UK internal market and into the European single market.
Advocates of the protocol insist this would give Northern Ireland businesses a competitive edge over companies in Great Britain and in the EU.
They argue that advantage should be protected in any deal that might emerge between the EU and UK over the more contentious aspects of the protocol – the economic barriers and checks on the movement of goods moving from GB into NI.
However, at Thursday’s IIEA event, Sir Jeffrey made clear that he did not think the protocol delivered the best of both worlds.
“Independent reports have concluded that the protocol doesn’t at the moment deliver the best of both worlds because it creates a major barrier to trade within our biggest market, the United Kingdom,” he said.
“As a proud Ulster man I make no apologies for refusing to confine Northern Ireland and its people to what some might describe as the worst of all worlds.”
He added: “People just blandly describe the protocol as giving us what they describe as the best of both worlds and completely ignore the multitude of evidence that shows that companies and businesses are experiencing real problems with this protocol.”
Sr Jeffrey said reducing the volume of physical checks on goods crossing the Irish Sea was not in itself sufficient to address his party’s concerns about the protocol.
He said the associated paperwork also needed to be slashed and said the only logical way of resolving the dispute was to limit checks to only goods travelling onward to the Irish Republic, with GB goods remaining within Northern Ireland exempted.
“I think we need to go further than just addressing the question of checks in the Irish Sea, I think we need to look at goods that are exempt completely from the EU’s arrangements because they are not entering the EU single market and they’re staying within the UK internal market and that’s why I think we need to devise systems that negate the need for goods moving within and staying within the UK internal market to meet these requirements for additional paperwork, never mind the checks on the Irish Sea,” he said.
“So I don’t think that just simply stopping particular checks means that the concept of the Irish Sea border is removed.”