William Grant had been a shipwright (he rose to be minister for labour in the Andrews administration). In 1927 he declared to Stormont that he was one:No they were not.
There were far more Catholics elected to Stormont than there ever were Protestants elected to the Dail.
The lack of knowledge of the NI electoral system,pre 1969 is quite astounding given the willingness to give opinions on it.
I assume that excludes all those claiming "no religion", a cohort almost identical to the Protestant decline whilst Catholic numbers have been static for years?
I figured you would latch onto this post - seen as it's almost the 12th I was trying to throw you a line saving you from drowning in the ocean of facts about the NI goverment before the civil rights movementI assume that excludes all those claiming "no religion", a cohort almost identical to the Protestant decline whilst Catholic numbers have been static for years?
I did.You can check those stats for yourself.
The first past the post system had the same effect on parties to this day.it was and is the UK way. They had a referendum to change it and it failed. Go figure.I did.
There's a nice little list here.
To prove what a corrupt little place it was under the unionist regime, I'll take the Labour party stats.
1933. 8.5% of the votes, 2 seats (4% of seats)
1945. 18.5% of the votes, 2 seats (4% of seats)
1949. 7.1% of the votes, 0 seats (0% of seats)
1962. 25.4 of the votes, 4 seats (8% of seats)
1965. 20.4% of the votes, 2 seats (4% of seats)
These are just some of the starkest results.
While unionism mightn't have wanted any catholics around the place, it is clear that Labour was an equally big enemy and in parliamentary terms came off even worse.
I wonder what your justification for this would be, given that Labour was not an "enemy of the state"?
I was running through my mental list of NILP and lefty MPs at Stormont, until boredom set in: