Aspirant Ulster Unionist Party MP David Burnside last night experienced the type of punches David Trimble must deflect or roll with since he signed the Belfast Agreement.
The Westminster electoral scrap between the London-based public relations consultant Mr Burnside and DUP Mid-Ulster Assembly member, the Rev William McCrea, isn't due for a couple of months. But the pair engaged in an eyeball-to-eyeball weigh-in on BBC's Hearts and Minds programme last night, ahead of the real contest for South Antrim in the autumn.
Billed by one observer as the Singing Cleric versus the London Sophisticate, it was combative and bruising by times. Mr McCrea doesn't always play by the Marquess of Queensberry's debating rules. Having learned from the master, Ian Paisley, he is a difficult politician to interrupt
Straight jabs from Mr McCrea. He argued the orthodox No line, accused Mr Burnside of seeking to have feet in both camps, while his opponent spoke of his ambition to unite Ulster unionism, whether for, against or undecided on the Good Friday accord.
Mr Burnside's tactics require a slightly more complex political style. And while these certainly aren't as intricate as those Mr Trimble must of necessity employ when challenging the No unionist camp, Mr Burnside learned it won't be easy out-foxing Mr McCrea.
Earlier yesterday Mr Burnside, speaking to The Irish Times without fear of interruption, outlined how he hopes to win South Antrim. It won't involve too many head-to-heads with Mr McCrea. "He can do what he wants. I will promote my policies and the Ulster Unionist Party's policies," Mr Burnside says.
He is aware that this will be a battle of styles as well as policies, and that there is little merit in verbally brawling with Mr McCrea. There is a "middle Ulster" vote to be won that would be happier with the UUP than the DUP, he believes. He comments on how Mr McCrea has called him John Taylor Mark II, meaning he seeks to be all things to all brands of unionism.
"But that is sloganising. That is not real politics. That is throwing cliche. I am my own man. How does that add to debate? Whether it insults me or John more I don't know. That is not a debate, calling people names. I don't think that will work in South Antrim."
Mr Burnside supported the Belfast Agreement but still believes the party should never have deviated from its no guns, no government policy. He thinks Sinn Fein should be excluded from the Executive until there is decommissioning.
He opposes constant appeasement of IRA demands. "They will continue to use the democratic process and the threat of violence," adds Mr Burnside. The IRA has pledged, in what it calls the proper context, to put its arms completely and verifiably beyond use. But that is too broad for Mr Burnside. His definition of decommissioning is that IRA arms must be "incapable of being used, ever . . . You put arms into a dump they do not rust. You can cover them with grease and take the springs out. They can be used in 10 years' time."
And what does the proper context mean? A united Ireland? wonders Mr Burnside.
Mr Trimble appears to be operating on a policy that necessary fictions distasteful to unionism must be observed to find a way out of the decommissioning blockade, that eventually the arms issue will be resolved to most people's satisfaction. And in the meantime politics will gradually grow and flourish.
Neither does that satisfy Mr Burnside. There are basic principles such as holding arms being incompatible with democracy that cannot be diluted or sacrificed. He is dismissive of the notion that failure to accept the Hillsborough deal would have led to direct rule and a form of joint authority with the Republic. "Mandelson is not going to go back to London to run an election campaign and leave a disaster here," he says.
MR Burnside is even stronger on policing. It was he who, against the wishes of Mr Trimble, forced the motion at the Ulster Unionist Council meeting in March demanding that the retention of the RUC name must be linked to any return of the Executive. "I think we have weakened our leverage on the Police Bill and decommissioning by jumping first."
He hates the Patten report. "I am disgusted with the treatment of RUC . . . the changes are humiliating and disgraceful."
But what of the nationalist argument that without Patten it will be impossible to create a police force representative of the entire community? "Representing the Provisional IRA? I don't want a police force representing the IRA," Mr Burnside interjects.
But whatever about republicans the SDLP and the Catholic Church make the same argument, and they hardly represent the IRA. "The SDLP should be ashamed that they don't even support the police at the minute."
But didn't Patten contend that the only way to establish an acceptable police service was to create a neutral policing environment which reflected neither the British nor Irish states.
"Patten was wrong," says Mr Burnside. No give here.
Mr McCrea claims Mr Burnside effectively is campaigning on the same platform as the DUP. While he denies that accusation, there is no doubting he is following a hardline policy that lacks the nuance of Mr Trimble's leadership.
Mr Burnside says he has no regrets about his involvement in the right-wing Vanguard grouping of the 1970s that was partly instrumental in bringing down the Sunningdale power-sharing government of 1974. "Sunningdale was an imposed solution without consent."
He does regret that Vanguard's subsequent policy of seeking to share power with the SDLP the next year was wrecked by the DUP.
He doesn't hold with the argument put by some in the UUP that now is the time to find common ground with nationalism because otherwise the population changes in future years will leave unionism in a minority, sidelined and friend less.
"There are demographic changes, but the unionist position is still very, very strong . . . I see nothing in the foreseeable future that would change the pro-union opinion away from around the 60 per cent figure," says Mr Burnside.
The big enemy of unionism is apathy. He says those unionists in the prosperous classes who opted out of politics "should be ashamed of themselves. They talk politics all the time. They criticise politicians, and they don't even bother to vote. I am going to use the shame factor on that one."
All this is not the precursor to a leadership heave against Mr Trimble either now or in the future, he insists, despite the obvious and serious tactical differences between the two politicians.
He says that he has acted honourably at all times with David Trimble. "I have always told David that I will not be involved in any front-of-scenes or behind-thescenes leadership issue. I am not interested in it."
At any stage?
"No."
He is emphatic.
Mr Burnside has influential media and business friends in London which has been his main base for over 20 years, although he also has a home in Co Antrim near Ballymoney. He wants to use these friends to bring business and jobs to South Antrim.
He says he has nationalist friends but that they never discuss politics. Eyeing the wider Westminster scene, he believes there is a lot "of superficiality about Tony Blair" and that William Hague may give him a close run in the next election. "Hague's problem is that he has not enough heavyweights around him. He needs a Norman Tebbit type of character in his prime about him."
HE says he has a lot less confidence about devolution in Scotland and Wales than has Mr Trimble, and believes a wiser policy would have been some form of federalism "where there would be a lot more checks and balances between federal parliaments and central parliament".
Mr Burnside may be playing a tactical role in sounding so staunch in his views - playing it both ways, as Mr McCrea jeers - or maybe what you hear is what South Antrim, Northern Ireland and Westminster is going to get if he wins the by-election. He is going to continue playing it both ways.
"I want to campaign on uniting the Yes and No sides. That will be my main slogan. Yes people are not good people or bad people. No people are not good or bad. They both have genuine concerns. They are both principled positions, and I think I can unite them," says Mr Burnside.
Ulster Unionism has been taking a bit of a beating but he sees better days ahead. He wants to be central to a turnaround for unionism.
"I think we are at our lowest because of the divisions and the problems and the strains over this whole process. I think we are at a low point. But I think there could be quite a recovery. If we give it a push and with a good turnout in South Antrim we will achieve that recovery. It is amazing how success will get more people to join the party and get involved."