Doug Beattie: ‘very personal’ spat between DUP and TUV is damaging unionism

Speaking to the News Letter, the UUP leader said both parties disagreed with his party’s approach to the NI Protocol – but its position had prevailed since the DUP returned to Stormont.

Mr Beattie said: “It wasn’t that we disagreed that we wanted rid of the protocol, but just disagreed how we go about it.

“In the end, the Ulster Unionist Party position prevailed, as the boycott failed and our society suffered because of it. Unionism also suffered as it fractured further with apathy taking hold, with an already disheartened electorate bombarded with more negativity.

“Disagreement is not a bad thing, all voices on this very divisive issue should be heard and heard respectfully. The dog whistle debate that is presently taking place within unionism, promoted by the TUV and DUP disagreement, is already replicating the negativity created by the charges levelled at the Ulster Unionist Party of being traitors, Kapos or Lundies. It is time to stop this self-harm, return the debate to one of policies and not one of personal attacks.

“The Ulster Unionist party have said many times that unionism needs to be more positive, confident and optimistic. Our collective position must be the protection and promotion of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom, the question therefore is how?

“We have been clear that it is best achieved by making Northern Ireland work within the United Kingdom, using the mechanisms of that kingdom to deal with the many issues that we face.

“By focusing on our place in the Union, our people who live, work or visit here. Working to improve prosperity, both financial and physical, with world-class public services that allow for opportunity for everyone under the umbrella of peace.

“That is the premise under which the Ulster Unionist Party will stand when the general election is called, it will offer leadership, stability and a clear path to a stronger Northern Ireland within the UK.

“That’s what unionism needs, not the divisive infighting that is characterising the present discourse.”