What we now know for certain about former DUP leader Jeffrey Donaldson is that he is a paedophile, presently in prison awaiting what is likely to be a lengthy sentence for the abuse of two very young girls; a drunk, who wandered around Westminster slugging from bottles of wine and who “projectile vomited” over the mayor of Beijing during a visit to China; a sex pest – at least one case was brought to the attention of senior members of the DUP while, on another occasion, and in a drunken state, he sat on the knee of a woman MLA and tried to kiss her; a thoroughgoing hypocrite who, while cloaked in evangelical Christianity, condemned homosexuality, frequented gay saunas, added the purchase of porn films to his parliamentary expenses claim form, and had a number of extramarital affairs (one of which led to his wife bugging his car).
Two questions come to mind. How did this tsunami of depravity, deception, dishonesty and horror manage to remain under the radar for so long, particularly when Donaldson appeared to be both reckless and very public in his behaviour? He had been an MP since 1997 and yet there hadn’t been any red flags about his behaviour.
Fair enough, most of it wasn’t criminal in nature, yet regular drunkenness and hypocrisy is the sort of stuff that tends to be noted and tucked away by party colleagues. A more worrying question, though: is it possible that there were people who were aware of the Mr Hyde side of his nature and who used that knowledge to push him down a path that suited the particular interests of the British government?
Jim Allister, an MP and leader of the Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV), a party that opposes powersharing with Sinn Féin and also the Northern Ireland Protocol, which keeps Northern Ireland partly within the EU, raised the question in his initial statement after Donaldson’s guilty verdict. “However, for unionism, a very chilling and troubling issue arises, namely how far did his troubles give rise to his sell-out on the protocol? To me it is inconceivable that the government was unaware of his proclivities and the idea of such being used as leverage is far from fanciful. Was he on a mission of attempted self-preservation in the hope, no matter how deluded, he could stave off the fate that has now befallen him?”
READ MORE
The PSNI chief constable Jon Boutcher has dismissed the speculation as “wild” and “ridiculous”. He said there was “no surveillance” on Donaldson and there was no “blackmail against him by the government”.
But I can understand why Allister thinks that way. In September 2021, the four main parties of unionism – the DUP, UUP, TUV and PUP – agreed in an anti-protocol pact that they would not “facilitate” the working of the Assembly until the protocol had either been removed altogether or changed to their satisfaction. Five months later the DUP withdrew the first minister from the Executive, triggering the collapse of the institutions.
An election three months later, under the leadership of Donaldson, was catastrophic for the DUP. Its vote fell by 7 per cent and it was eclipsed by Sinn Féin as the largest party, which was now entitled to the post of first minister. The DUP refused to nominate a deputy first minister, leaving the institutions in limbo. For the next 18 months the DUP seemed determined not to budge until the protocol issue was resolved and Donaldson’s speeches, along with DUP policy statements, were viewed by the British government as cemented into position.
Which is why it came as such a shock when Donaldson, in return for guarantees contained in the government’s Safeguarding the Union command paper, published in January 2024, led the campaign to return the DUP to the Assembly and reboot the Executive. Elements within the DUP, along with the TUV and most of loyalism, accused him of betrayal and being just another “rollover unionist”. The paper left the protocol in place, while offering what I described at the time as “very flimsy” promises that the union would be prioritised and protected.
At the time, Allister wondered what had changed Donaldson’s mind. Now he thinks he has his answer. Donaldson was blackmailed. I’m not convinced. In March 2023, the British government and the EU agreed the Windsor Framework, which passed through parliament with a majority of 515-29. In essence the Protocol remained much as it was, meaning that NI still remained partly in the EU. The choice then for unionism was to reject it or boycott the Assembly permanently. I wrote that the DUP did not want permanent direct rule rather than devolution and would “find a path back to the Assembly and Executive”. Which is precisely what it did in January 2024.
But what if, despite the denials, Allister’s analysis is the correct one and Donaldson had been monitored by the intelligence services and then blackmailed by the British government? If true, then it is a very uncomfortable truth for unionism generally, for it means that there are no ends to which a British government would not go to get its way and safeguard the Belfast Agreement and the assorted institutions – even if that meant undermining all of political/electoral unionism.
It might also mean that if Donaldson had become an intelligence/government “asset” he would have deployed others, albeit unknown to them, to play a part. He was certainly authorising some close to him (not always in the party) to push a much harder line to other audiences while he was preparing his allies in the DUP to back the Safeguarding the Union paper. Until the last few days there were still people on his side who were insisting that he would not be returning the DUP to Stormont.
We may never know the full truth about Donaldson. But the DUP is likely to be badly damaged in Assembly and council elections due next May. If the TUV – the most obvious beneficiary of a DUP collapse – continues to play the blackmail card it could have a significant impact on the already growing numbers within unionism who have long been unsettled by powersharing, the protocol and a Sinn Féin First Minister.
Allister may have no specific answer to those problems, yet that doesn’t mean that a lot more unionists than expected may now be prepared to reward him for his purist and consistent approach since he resigned from the DUP in 2007.
In that case, the blackmail, if that’s what it was, will have failed. What does the British government do then?
