The ACT Initiative responds to Sunday Life article

According to the ‘Sunday Life’ newspaper and one of its journalists, Ciaran Barnes, as reported in the article ‘UVF peace group on last legs’ (10-03-13), the UVF/RHC conflict transformation programme Action for Community Transformation, ‘The ACT Initiative’, is in serious trouble. The author asserts that his source within ACT informs him that after the imprisonment of Bobby Rodgers, a vital ACT participant, following an HET-led enquiry into a political murder in 1973, other key participants within ACT are withdrawing their support. As someone with a healthy respect for the profession of journalism, I have come to enjoy the writings of some, particularly those who present some investigative factual truths, or who offer a critical analysis underpinned by their own opinion. Unfortunately, Mr Barnes does neither. Instead, similarly to the usual descriptive conjecture ‘parceled up’ and masqueraded as journalism each week in the ‘Sunday World’, he presents a series of half-truths and innuendoes.
For example, he claims that ACT is suffering from a lack of funding which had originally been secured from tax-payers’ funds. This is factually inaccurate. Never has ACT been collectively funded from tax-paying sources. The International Fund for Ireland was its main contributor from 2008 – 2011. However, such inaccuracies shouldn’t be a surprise given that the newspaper Mr Barnes writes for seems to be developing a trend as they did something similar in May last year when reporting on The ACT Initiative’s visit to Israel. On that occasion they also wrongly claimed it was with tax-payers’ money which funded ACT for this visit. Of course the furore which followed had the gullible MLA, Jim Allister, claiming outrage at such a notion.
Irrespective of whether the funding for ACT is from tax-payers or not, why should this be a problem? Nowhere in society do we ‘starve’ a marginalised, segregated, disenfranchised group of citizens from resources which help them integrate into civic life. Would Mr Barnes suggest we withdraw funds from organisations which work with the homeless, drug addicted, alcoholic, unemployed and such? Why then should those within ACT be treated differently given that any research ever written about those perceived as being ex-combatants or former political prisoners are experiencing similar factors?
Apart from the funding inaccuracy, the author also claims Bobby toured the country in ACT roadshows. Of the 26 we conducted, Bobby attended one to outline his ideas about the development of our youth engagement programme. And whilst his presence is sorely missed, he has left a legacy and structure within ACT, in addition to contributing to the development of others, which ensures its sustainability for his return in two years’ time.
The author leads to a conclusion in his article with what can only be described as a ‘throw-away’ comment when he qualifies his inclusion of the roles of Tom Winstone and Robert Campbell by labeling them as two convicted killers. In doing so, there is an inference that their past renders them less worthy of playing any meaningful role in the transformation of others or within civic society, thus ignoring the considerable contribution both men have made, and continue to make, to peace-building and reconciliation. Would Mr Barnes rather they adhered to the negative connotation he affords them by constructing some loyalist dissident faction, similarly to how some former mainstream republicans have allegedly done, and live up to what he is inferring?
On Saturday last, 42 ACT volunteer participants gave up their time, usually spent at their workplace, with their families or socialising, to attend an all-day seminar exploring the development of ACT in one locality, the greater Shankill. Given that ACT has programmes of work in 7 additional localities doing likewise across the province, Mr Barnes would be better placed unearthing the truth and something worth reading about or shift his focus on to the positive attempts he briefly refers to of the PUP in partnership with ACT and live up to what should be his journalistic civic duty and report accurately.. Whether he would work to have such material printed or not is questionable. His article, particularly in the absence of any funding, only reinforces the desire of all ACT volunteers to prove him wrong thus ensuring Bobby Rodgers’ absence isn’t in vain.