DOCSLIB.ORG

Voting at the Northern Ireland Assembly Election, 2003

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Voting at the Northern Ireland Assembly Election, 2003 Voting at the Northern Ireland Assembly Election, 2003. Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher Local Government Chronicle Elections Centre University of Plymouth This report for the Electoral Commission considers the second election to the Northern Ireland Assembly (NIA) held in November 2003. The election uses the 18 Westminster Parliamentary constituency areas for voting purposes but six Assembly members are elected for each of these constituencies using the Single Transferable Vote (STV) method of voting. Election results are those supplied by the Chief Electoral Officer for Northern Ireland. Those interested in the details of transfers at both the 1998 and 2003 should consult the relevant sheets published by the Chief Electoral Officer. The report is divided into two sections. The first section examines the elections in terms of support for parties and candidates and the distribution of seats, and is structured as follows: • Distribution of votes and seats across Northern Ireland • Proportionality and the electoral outcome • Comparison of vote and seat shares, 1998-2003 • Parties and candidates • Women candidates • Incumbents seeking re-election • Candidates and the electoral system • Party competition • Party quotas and the allocation of seats • The personal vote A second section focuses upon electoral registration, methods of voting and voter turnout and is structured as follows: The impact of new electoral registration procedures Change in electorates, 1998-2003 Methods for calculating electoral turnout Turnout in 2003 Changes in turnout, 1998-2003 Constituency characteristics and election turnout Postal voting and turnout Rejected postal votes and turnout In-person voting Rejected in-person votes and turnout Reasons for rejecting votes Comparing rejected votes 1998-2003 Some Tables are included in the body of the report but others are attached in the Appendix and are labelled with the prefix A. Party abbreviations are mainly used in the text but a full list may be found in the Appendix, Table A15. Section 1: Support for candidates and parties and the distribution of seats Distribution of votes and seats across Northern Ireland Slightly fewer than 0.7 million valid first preference votes were cast in the Northern Ireland Assembly (NIA) election of 2003 (Table 1; but see also Table A1 for the constituency results and Tables A2-A3 for summary data for each party in each constituency). This is approximately 120,000 fewer votes than were recorded at the first NIA election in 1998. The most popular choice was the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), whose candidates received more than one in four first preference votes. The second largest party in vote share was Sinn Fein (SF) with 23.5% of the vote. It finished fifteen thousand votes behind the DUP. Overall, fewer than six thousand votes separated SF and the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP), which received 22.7% of first preferences. The fourth largest party was the Social and Democratic Labour Party (SDLP), which polled 17% of first preference votes. The four main parties (DUP, UUP, SDLP and SF) were separated by a mere sixty thousand votes, with less than a nine percentage point gap separating the DUP and SDLP. Combined, these four parties captured 88.9% of the vote, compared with the 79% share that they obtained in 1998. The difference between the two main unionist parties, at just over twenty one thousand votes, was half that separating SF and SDLP. Votes for all unionist parties combined comprise 50.9% of the total (49.9% in 1998) while the combined share for SF and SDLP is 40.5% (39.6% in 1998). Table 1: Result of the Northern Ireland Assembly Elections, 2003 1st pref votes Share % Cands (N=) Seats Seat % A 25,372 3.7 21 6 5.6 Con 1,604 0.2 6 - 0 DUP 177,944 25.7 40 30 27.8 Green 2,688 0.4 6 - 0 Ind 19,328 2.8 22 1 0.9 NIUP 1,350 0.2 2 - 0 NIWC 5,785 0.8 7 - 0 PUP 8,032 1.2 11 1 0.9 SDLP 117,547 17.0 36 18 16.7 SEA 2,394 0.3 2 - 0 SF 162,758 23.5 38 24 22.2 SP 343 0.0 2 - 0 UKUP 5,700 0.8 6 1 0.9 UTW 16 0.0 1 - 0 UUC 2,705 0.4 2 - 0 UUP 156,931 22.7 43 27 25.0 VFY 124 0.0 3 - 0 WP 1,407 0.2 8 - 0 Total 692,028 256 108 2 The largest number of Assembly seats was won by DUP, whose 30 seats comprise 27.8% of the total (Table 2 and Table A4). The second largest party in the new Assembly is UUP, which won three fewer seats than the DUP. Although SF received a larger percentage of first preferences than did UUP, the party won three fewer seats, and six fewer than DUP. The fourth largest party, in terms of both votes and seats is SDLP, which now has 18 Assembly members. Table 2: Seats by party at the Northern Ireland Assembly Election, 1998-2003 2003 1998 change seats seats seats A 6 6 - DUP 30 20 +10 Ind 1 - +1 NIWC - 2 -2 PUP 1 2 -1 SDLP 18 24 -6 SF 24 18 +6 UKUP 1 5 -4 UUP 27 28 -1 Others - 3 -3 The most successful party, measured by the ratio of successful to unsuccessful candidates, was DUP. Three-quarters (0.75) of its candidates were elected compared to 0.6 for both UUP and SF and 0.5 for SDLP. The four main parties returned 99 of the Assembly’s 108 members, 91.7% of the membership. Among the smaller parties, the Alliance party performed best. It won six seats, slightly less than one in three fought by the party. Proportionality and the electoral outcome The electoral system, the Single Transferable Vote (STV), helped to ensure that there was a strong correlation between vote and seat shares. The largest party in vote share, DUP, also won the largest share of seats. This had not happened in 1998. Then, SDLP won the most first preference votes with UUP in second place, but these positions were reversed when seats were allocated. The combined vote share of minor parties, which did not win a seat and excluding Independents, was just 2.7%. One useful method for assessing the operation of the electoral system is to measure the ratio between votes and seats for each party. When that ratio equals one, a party’s seat and vote shares are identical; when the ratio is above one then the party is relatively advantaged by the system, and when it falls below that figure it is disadvantaged. The seats to votes ratios for the four main parties were very close in 2003. Both the DUP and UUP had ratios of 1.1, but each of these parties benefited from transfers from among other unionist candidates. Although both SF and SDLP had seats/votes ratios 3 below one (0.94 and 0.98 respectively) the difference from equality was negligible. The Alliance party was the biggest beneficiary of the electoral system. Although it won 3.7% of first preference votes the party won six seats, 5.6% of the total. This is a seats to votes ratio of 1.5. A second useful measure for assessing the impact of the electoral system upon the Assembly’s composition is to use an index of proportionality. The most commonly used measure of proportionality is referred to as the Loosemore-Hanby index. The index is calculated as follows: for any election the absolute values of the differences between vote and seat shares for each competing party are summed, with that total then divided by two. Thus, if every party’s seat share is an exact reflection of its vote share then the value of the index would be zero; the outcome would be proportional. As a general rule of thumb an election result that has a Loosemore-Hanby index of above 10 is regarded as having an outcome that is disproportional. In the case of the 2003 Assembly result the calculated index is 6.4. This compares with an index score of 6.1 for the 1998 election outcome. For comparative purposes, the Loosemore-Hanby index scores for the last two UK general elections were 21.1 and 21.9 respectively. Comparison of vote and seat shares, 1998-2003 A comparison of vote shares with 1998 shows that the two parties that advanced most were DUP and SF. The vote of the former rose by 7.6 percentage points whilst there was a 5.9 point rise for SF. Although the overall result for UUP was considered by some to be disappointing the party’s vote share rose, albeit by a modest 1.4 percentage points. The biggest loss of vote share was that for the SDLP. Its vote, measured as a share of first preferences, declined by five percentage points. There was a drop in support also for UKUP, from 4.5% in 1998 to just 0.8% in 2003, although the party fielded half the number of candidates than it had done so in 1998. Another party in decline was Alliance whose vote fell by 2.8 percentage points. That said, Alliance did succeed in retaining all of its seats – an achievement given the size of its vote. Undoubtedly, this outcome followed the receipt of transfer votes from those whose first preference was for another party. The DUP increased its share of seats by half (from 20 to 30) whilst SF’s share increased by a third (from 18 to 24).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "Third Way" Republicanism in the Formation of the Irish Republic Kenneth Lee Shonk, Jr
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects "Irish Blood, English Heart": Gender, Modernity, and "Third Way" Republicanism in the Formation of the Irish Republic Kenneth Lee Shonk, Jr. Marquette University Recommended Citation Shonk, Jr., Kenneth Lee, ""Irish Blood, English Heart": Gender, Modernity, and "Third Way" Republicanism in the Formation of the Irish Republic" (2010). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 53. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/53 “IRISH BLOOD, ENGLISH HEART”: GENDER, MODERNITY, AND “THIRD-WAY” REPUBLICANISM IN THE FORMATION OF THE IRISH REPUBLIC By Kenneth L. Shonk, Jr., B.A., M.A., M.A.T. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2010 ABSTRACT “IRISH BLOOD, ENGLISH HEART”: GENDER, MODERNITY, AND “THIRD-WAY” REPUBLICANISM IN THE FORMATION OF THE IRISH REPUBLIC Kenneth L. Shonk, Jr., B.A., M.A., M.A.T. Marquette University, 2010 Led by noted Irish statesman Eamon de Valera, a cadre of former members of the militaristic republican organization Sinn Féin split to form Fianna Fáil with the intent to reconstitute Irish republicanism so as to fit within the democratic frameworks of the Irish Free State. Beginning with its formation in 1926, up through the passage of a republican constitution in 1937 that was recognized by Great Britain the following year, Fianna Fáil had successfully rescued the seemingly moribund republican movement from complete marginalization. Using gendered language to forge a nexus between primordial cultural nationalism and modernity, Fianna Fáil’s nationalist project was tantamount to efforts anti- hegemonic as well as hegemonic.
    [Show full text]
  • A Year in Review, the Year Ahead
    2018: A YEAR IN REVIEW, 2019: THE YEAR AHEAD Foreword from Rt Hon Patricia Hewitt, Senior Adviser, FTI Consulting 2018 was the most unpredictable and tumultuous year in politics … since 2017. Which was the most unpredictable and tumultuous year in politics … since 2016. And there’s no sign of let-up as we move into 2019. The unresolved questions of Brexit - how? when? whether at all? - will inevitably dominate the coming year. Even if Theresa May brings back from Brussels a new political declaration sufficiently compelling to command a majority in Parliament - a highly unlikely prospect at the time of writing - the end of March will mean the start of a fresh, complex round of negotiations on a future trade deal, conducted under the shadow of the Irish backstop. For most people, that would be preferable to the collapse of Mrs May’s deal and, almost inevitably, the collapse of her government and a subsequent constitutional crisis. Faced with the choice between revoking Article 50 or leaving the European Union (EU) without a deal, the Commons could well produce a majority for a new referendum. Under the pressure of a leadership contest, the personal and political rancour in the Conservative Party could finally break apart Europe’s hitherto most successful party of government. A no-confidence vote that would be defeated today could command enough votes from the Brexiteers’ kamikaze tendency to force another General Election. And Labour - with most of its moderates MPs replaced by Corbynistas in last-minute candidate selections - could win on a ‘cake and eat it’ manifesto of a Brexit that would end free movement but provide frictionless trade (Irish backstop, anyone?).
    [Show full text]
  • The Irish Left Over 50 Years
    & Workers’ Liberty SolFor siociadl ownershaip of the branks aind intdustry y No 485 7 November 2018 50p/£1 The DEMAND EVERY Irish left over 50 LABOUR MP years VOTES AGAINST See pages 6-8 The May government and its Brexit process are bracing themselves to take the coming weeks at a run, trying to hurtle us all over a rickety bridge. Yet it looks like they could be saved by some Labour MPs voting for the To - ries’ Brexit formula. More page 5 NUS set to gut BREXIT democracy Maisie Sanders reports on financial troubles at NUS and how the left should respond. See page 3 “Fake news” within the left Cathy Nugent calls for the left to defend democracy and oppose smears. See page 10 Join Labour! Why Labour is losing Jews See page 4 2 NEWS More online at www.workersliberty.org Push Labour to “remain and reform” May will say that is still the ulti - trade deals is now for the birds. mate objective, but for not for years Britain will not be legally able to in - to come. troduce any new deals until the fu - The second option, which is often ture long-term treaty relationship John Palmer talked to equated with “hard” Brexit, is no with the EU has been negotiated, at deal. That is a theoretical possibil - the end of a tunnel which looks Solidarity ity. But I don’t think in practice cap - longer and longer. ital in Britain or elsewhere in The job of the left, the supporters S: You’ve talked about a Europe has any interest in that, and of the Corbyn leadership of the “Schrödinger’s Brexit”..
    [Show full text]
  • MANIFESTO GENERAL ELECTION 2019 PARTY MANIFESTO Let’S Get the UK Moving AGAIN
    Let’s Get the UK Moving AGAIN MANIFESTO GENERAL ELECTION 2019 PARTY MANIFESTO Let’s Get the UK Moving AGAIN Leader’s Message he Democratic Unionist Party has set The outcome of this election is not assured. This out our 12-point plan to deliver on the manifesto and our 12-point plan for a brighter Tpeople’s priorities on health, education, future would be the basis on which we would jobs, childcare and protecting the vulnerable negotiate with those seeking our support. We through having a working Assembly back and will talk to both Conservatives and Labour but an All-Party Executive in place. we are clear we will not support Jeremy Corbyn We are now offering our manifesto for the United as Prime Minister. Kingdom, the sister document for our plan to get Others seek a mandate to do nothing in this Northern Ireland moving again. election – nothing in the Assembly and nothing in For Northern Ireland to truly flourish then it needs Parliament. The DUP seeks a mandate to turn up, a the United Kingdom to succeed and likewise for mandate to work, and a mandate for: the UK to truly flourish it needs all its constituent • Working with others to get things done for parts and regions to succeed. This can be aided by Northern Ireland. a strong and unified voice for Northern Ireland in • Our plan to get Northern Ireland Parliament. The DUP is that voice. Moving Again. The UK needs to do much more to fulfil its true • Protect Northern Ireland’s place in the Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorist Speech and the Future of Free Expression
    TERRORIST SPEECH AND THE FUTURE OF FREE EXPRESSION Laura K. Donohue* Introduction.......................................................................................... 234 I. State as Sovereign in Relation to Terrorist Speech ...................... 239 A. Persuasive Speech ............................................................ 239 1. Sedition and Incitement in the American Context ..... 239 a. Life Before Brandenburg................................. 240 b. Brandenburg and Beyond................................ 248 2. United Kingdom: Offences Against the State and Public Order ....................................................................... 250 a. Treason............................................................. 251 b. Unlawful Assembly ......................................... 254 c. Sedition ............................................................ 262 d. Monuments and Flags...................................... 268 B. Knowledge-Based Speech ................................................ 271 1. Prior Restraint in the American Context .................... 272 a. Invention Secrecy Act...................................... 274 b. Atomic Energy Act .......................................... 279 c. Information Relating to Explosives and Weapons of Mass Destruction............................................ 280 2. Strictures in the United Kingdom............................... 287 a. Informal Restrictions........................................ 287 b. Formal Strictures: The Export Control Act ..... 292 II. State in
    [Show full text]
  • A Democratic Design? the Political Style of the Northern Ireland Assembly
    A Democratic Design? The political style of the Northern Ireland Assembly Rick Wilford Robin Wilson May 2001 FOREWORD....................................................................................................3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................4 Background.........................................................................................................................................7 Representing the People.....................................................................................................................9 Table 1 Parties Elected to the Assembly ........................................................................................10 Public communication......................................................................................................................15 Table 2 Written and Oral Questions 7 February 2000-12 March 2001*........................................17 Assembly committees .......................................................................................................................20 Table 3 Statutory Committee Meetings..........................................................................................21 Table 4 Standing Committee Meetings ..........................................................................................22 Access to information.......................................................................................................................26 Table 5 Assembly Staffing
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnicising Ulster's Protestants
    Ethnicising Ulster’s Protestants Tolerance, Peoplehood, and Class in Ulster-Scots Ethnopedagogy Peter Robert Gardner Jesus College, The University of Cambridge This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Contents Figures and Tables iv Abbreviations and Short Forms v Acknowledgements vi Word Limit and Plagiarism Statement vii Abstract viii Chapter One: Introduction 1 1.1 Research Questions, Methods and Chapter Overview 5 1.2 Tolerance, Peoplehood, Dignity 7 Chapter Two: Protestantism, Unionism and Consociational Ideology 11 2.1 Shifting Peoplehoods 12 2.1.1 From British Rule to Unionist Rule 12 2.1.2 From Multiplicity toward Britishness 15 2.1.3 Defeatism and the Cultural Turn 18 2.2 Consociationalism, Normativity, Power 21 2.3 Ulster-Scots 26 2.3.1 Ethnic Peoplehood 26 2.3.2 Who are the Ulster-Scots? 30 2.3.3 “Revival” 35 2.4 Conclusion 38 Chapter Three: Communal Segregation and Educational Peace-Building 39 3.1 The Current State of Segregation 39 3.2 Segregated Education 45 3.3 Education and Peace-Building 55 3.4 Conclusion: De-segregating the Mind 63 Chapter Four: Methods 65 4.1 Research Design and Methods 65 4.1.1 Educational Materials 66 4.1.2 Interviews 67 4.1.3. Primary School Survey 69 4.2 Analysis 70 4.2.1 Euphemism, “Telling” and Reading Silences 72 4.2.2 Reflexivity, Stickiness and Power Dynamics 75 4.3 Conclusion 78 Chapter Five: The Development of Ulster-Scots Education 79 5.1 Processes of Peoplehood-Building 79 5.2 Three Phases of Development 81 5.2.1 Phase One: Grass-Roots Education, Elite Lobbying
    [Show full text]
  • Women in the General Election in Northern Ireland 2015
    Research and Information Service Briefing Paper Paper 48/15 11 May 2015 NIAR 261-15 Michael Potter and Anne Campbell Women in the General Election in Northern Ireland 2015 1 Introduction This paper briefly summarises the results of the UK General Election 2015 in Northern Ireland by gender. The paper is written in the context of the approval by the Northern Ireland Assembly on 9 March 2014 of the report of the Assembly and Executive Review Committee on Women in Politics and the Northern Ireland Assembly, which recommends that political parties consider measures to increase the representation of women in politics. This paper supplements a previous paper on candidates for the election, General Election 2015: Gender Representation1. 1 Research and Information Service Briefing Paper 43/15 General Election 2015: Gender Representation, 14 April 2015: http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/publications/2015/exec_review/4315.pdf. Providing research and information services to the Northern Ireland Assembly 1 NIAR 261-15 Briefing Paper 2 Women and the General Election 2015 Constituency Candidates Elected Votes Share M F Belfast East 4 2 Gavin 19,575 49.3% Robinson (DUP) Belfast North 5 1 Nigel Dodds 19,096 47% (DUP) Belfast South 6 3 Alasdair 9,560 25.5% McDonnell (SDLP) Belfast West 9 0 Paul Maskey 19,163 54.2% (SF) East Antrim 6 2 Sammy Wilson 12,103 36.1% (DUP) East 4 3 Gregory 14,663 42.2% Londonderry Campbell (DUP) Fermanagh and 2 3 Tom Elliott 23,608 46.4% South Tyrone (UUP) Foyle 6 1 Mark Durkan 17,725 47.9% (SDLP) Lagan
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Engagement: Irish Republicanism, Memory Politics
    Critical Engagement Critical Engagement Irish republicanism, memory politics and policing Kevin Hearty LIVERPOOL UNIVERSITY PRESS First published 2017 by Liverpool University Press 4 Cambridge Street Liverpool L69 7ZU Copyright © 2017 Kevin Hearty The right of Kevin Hearty to be identified as the author of this book has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication data A British Library CIP record is available print ISBN 978-1-78694-047-6 epdf ISBN 978-1-78694-828-1 Typeset by Carnegie Book Production, Lancaster Contents Acknowledgements vii List of Figures and Tables x List of Abbreviations xi Introduction 1 1 Understanding a Fraught Historical Relationship 25 2 Irish Republican Memory as Counter-Memory 55 3 Ideology and Policing 87 4 The Patriot Dead 121 5 Transition, ‘Never Again’ and ‘Moving On’ 149 6 The PSNI and ‘Community Policing’ 183 7 The PSNI and ‘Political Policing’ 217 Conclusion 249 References 263 Index 303 Acknowledgements Acknowledgements This book has evolved from my PhD thesis that was undertaken at the Transitional Justice Institute, University of Ulster (TJI). When I moved to the University of Warwick in early 2015 as a post-doc, my plans to develop the book came with me too. It represents the culmination of approximately five years of research, reading and (re)writing, during which I often found the mere thought of re-reading some of my work again nauseating; yet, with the encour- agement of many others, I persevered.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Capital's Imagined Benefits in Ardoyne Electoral Ward 'Thesis
    1 Social capital’s imagined benefits in Ardoyne electoral ward ‘Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy by Michael Liggett.’ May 2017 2 3 Abstract Social capital’s imagined benefits in Ardoyne electoral ward Michael Liggett This study examines how access to social capital impacts on the daily lives of residents in an area of Northern Ireland ranked as one of the most deprived areas in the UK but equally, one that is rich in social networks. The thesis challenges social capital paradigms that promote social dividends by highlighting the role of power brokers in locally based social networks. The research uses grounded theory to deconstruct the social capital paradigm to show its negative and positive attributes. Survey and interview data is used to show how social capital contributes to social exclusion because social capital depends on inequitable distribution to give it value and that distribution is related to inequitable forms of social hierarchy access that are influenced by one’s sense of identity. This thesis challenges normative assertions that civil society organisations build trust and community cohesion. The research is unique in that it is focused on a religiously segregated area transitioning from conflict and realising the impact of post industrialisation. The research is important because it provides ethnographic evidence to explain how social capital functions in practice by not only those with extensive participatory experience but also with those excluded from social networks. 4 Table of Contents Chapter 1 - Challenging social capital paradigms ……………..……. 9 1.1 - Definitions of terms …………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • February 2004
    Nations and Regions: The Dynamics of Devolution Quarterly Monitoring Programme Northern Ireland Quarterly Report February 2004 The monitoring programme is jointly funded by the ESRC and the Leverhulme Trust Devolution Monitoring Programme Northern Ireland report 18 February 2004 • Assembly election ends in triumph for DUP, SF • Result means continued suspension of devolution • Review of Belfast agreement opens amid low expectations • Ministers continue business-as-usual decision-making 2 Contents 1. Summary Robin Wilson ..............................................4 2. The ‘peace process’ Rick Wilford & Robin Wilson ..................5 2.1 The post-election scene ......................................................................................5 2.2 The review...........................................................................................................5 2.3 Prospects ...........................................................................................................13 3. Devolved government Robin Wilson ............................................16 3.1 Does it matter? .................................................................................................16 3.2 Programme for Government ..........................................................................16 3.3 Community relations .......................................................................................17 4. The assembly Rick Wilford & Robin Wilson ................20 5. The media Robin Wilson ............................................21
    [Show full text]
  • <Election Title>
    Electoral Office for Northern Ireland Election of Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly for the FERMANAGH AND SOUTH TYRONE Constituency STATEMENT OF PERSONS NOMINATED and NOTICE OF POLL The following persons have been and stand validly nominated: SURNAME OTHER NAMES ADDRESS DESCRIPTION(if any) SUBSCRIBERS Cox Pat 18 Largy Road, Largy, Independent ESTHER FRANCES BREEN, Tempo, Enniskillen, Co CATHERINE MARY SMYTH, Fermanagh, BT94 3BH SHEILA MARIE LOVE, ANN JOSEPHINE MAGUIRE, WILLIAM MARTIN McBRIDE, BERNARD JOHN BOGUE, MARY CONCEPTA BREEN, ARTHUR PATRICK BRADLEY, ANNE COLETTE BRODERICK, NORA KATHLEEN INGRAM Donaldson Kenny 15 Derryraughan Road, Ulster Unionist Party MARGARET JOAN CARSON, Coa, Ballinamallard, Co WILLIAM HENRY PRENTICE, Fermanagh RAYMOND CECIL GILLESPIE, ERIC JOSEPH CUMBERLAND, VICTOR McNICKLE, PETER EDWARD MURRAY, ROBERT JOHN LYONS, LISA SARAH WILLIAMSON, GERTRUDE COULTER, BASIL RICHARD JOHNSTON Elliott Alex Address in Fermanagh Traditional Unionist Voice MARGARET ELIZABETH VEITCH, and South Tyrone - TUV GEORGE WILLIAM DAVIS, ERNEST FREDERICK WATT, RUTH MARY BOYD, DENIS BOYD, NOEL ROBERT ARMSTRONG, ABRAHAM JOHN HOBSON, DOREEN PATRICIA McCLENAGHAN, STEPHEN JOHN BOYD IRWIN, BLANE ALEXANDER BAILEY Elliott Tom 2 Tullyrain Road, Ulster Unionist Party LORD ALAN HENRY Ballinamallard, Co BROOKEBOROUGH, ROBERT Fermanagh, BT94 2JW LOUIS MULLIGAN, GEORGE ALEXANDER LATIMER, HERBERT ALEXANDER KERR, ARCHIE ANDERSON WILSON, VICTOR EMERSON, ELIZABETH ANN KERR, RAYMOND FARRELL, SAMUEL ALEXANDER BAIRD, LYNDA MARTHA MORROW Flanagan Phil Tullymore, Garrison, Co Sinn Féin THOMAS MAGUIRE, TERENCE Fermanagh, BT93 4EZ BAXTER, BARRY VINCENT DOHERTY, JAMES PATRICK SLEVIN, STEPHEN FREDERICK HUGGETT, ROBERT JAMES HOY, BETTY JEAN MARY SLEVIN, PATRICK JOHN McCABE, STEPHEN MULLIGAN, KEVIN SYLVESTER McCARRON Foster Arlene Address in Fermanagh Democratic Unionist Party ROBERT WILFRED DONALDSON, and South Tyrone - D.U.P.
    [Show full text]