The DUP has smartened up its act. But underneath it's the same party - with the same fears

In order to present a more modern image that reflects its new role in national politics, the DUP conference has changed significantly over recent years. Before the Democratic Unionists agreed to support the Conservative government through a ‘confidence and supply’ arrangement, their annual gathering culminated with gospel singer and one-time MP, the Reverend Willie McCrea, warbling “there’ll always be an Ulster,” as delegates waved paper Union and Northern Ireland flags.

This ostentatious display encapsulated a confused mixture of little-Ulsterism and cartoon Britishness that reflected the party’s Paisleyite origins. To their credit, modernisers were savvy enough to realise that this spectacle would not project an image of reliability or professionalism to London-based journalists, newly interested in the DUP thanks to the deal with the Tories. As an added incentive, the folksy singalong alienated and embarrassed moderate and middle-class voters, upon whom the party increasingly relies since it replaced the UUP as the dominant force in Northern Irish unionism.

This year, despite its deteriorating relationship with Theresa May’s government, the chancellor of the exchequer spoke at the DUP’s pre-conference dinner.

On the main stage on Saturday, the party had ditched its East Antrim MP, Sammy Wilson, who is the event’s perennial comic turn, in favour of Boris Johnson’s more erudite one-liners. The former foreign secretary’s robust rejection of the Brexit backstop assured him of a warm reception from the DUP faithful, who view the draft withdrawal agreement as an attempt to divide the UK and place Northern Ireland under the control of the EU.

If that document is implemented, in the future, goods made in Northern Ireland may have to be labelled UK (NI), to distinguish them from products manufactured in Great Britain. Boris riffed on this provision, claiming “we are witnessing the birth of a new country called Ukni.” “Ukni is no longer exclusively ruled by London or Stormont,” he continued, “Ukni is in large part ruled by Brussels and Ukni will have to accept large swathes of EU regulations now and in the future.”

Johnson’s speech certainly spoke to fears, across all shades of unionist opinion in Northern Ireland, that the backstop will “hive off” the province from the rest of the UK. However, he may (or may not) remember that the DUP once entertained the idea of creating a new country rather seriously. At its conference in 1991, Peter Robinson, who back then was deputy leader, gave a speech in which he expressed the belief “that an independent Ulster is an alternative to a united Ireland or to a mutation between Dublin rule and direct rule (from London).”

His preoccupation with independence illustrated vividly the conditional nature of the DUP’s loyalty to the British state at the time.

In 1991 the party was a vociferous minority voice in unionist politics. In subsequent years, it came to represent a much broader coalition of interests and it absorbed several waves of defections from the more moderate Ulster Unionist party, including figures like Arlene Foster and Jeffrey Donaldson, who rose to key positions in the party leadership.

Despite these changes, the old Paisleyite wing of the DUP remains influential and the party has maintained its traditional opposition to reforming Northern Ireland’s laws on social issues, like same-sex marriage and abortion. For that reason, there are serious concerns that the DUP will alienate younger generations of voters, who may even associate support for the Union with attitudes they see as old-fashioned. In addition, the party has been linked to a number of scandals, like Ian Paisley junior’s failure to declare holidays paid for by the Sri Lankan government, and the RHI affair, where half a billion pounds was wasted on a botched green energy scheme.

During Arlene Foster’s leader’s speech, she tried to address this image problem, by apologising for the party’s handling of the Renewable Heat Incentive. “Some of our past decisions and actions have left a lot to be desired,” she admitted. She stopped short of taking personal responsibility for these failures, but the tone was more humble than voters are accustomed to hearing from the DUP.

Mrs. Foster went on to suggest that RHI justifies considering whether Northern Ireland’s civil service, which has been independent since Northern Ireland’s creation in 1921, should be brought under the auspices of Whitehall. It’s the kind of integrationist proposal that would have been unthinkable under Ian Paisley or Peter Robinson, who were much more suspicious of ‘interference’ from central government.

It also reflects the prevailing fear of abandonment by London that informed many of the conference speeches. The DUP’s Westminster leader, Nigel Dodds, predicted that the withdrawal agreement would mean Northern Ireland was placed under “swathes of EU laws with no say for anyone in Belfast or London.” He accused Theresa May of abandoning ‘provisos’ to the backstop that the DUP insisted she add to the initial text of the ‘joint report’ between the UK and the EU, last December.

On this point, the DUP is not speaking for a narrow or hardline section of unionism. Anger about the draft Brexit deal is echoed by even the most liberal representatives of the Ulster Unionist party, which campaigned for ‘remain’ in the EU referendum.

With its speakers from the Conservative party, fringe events organised by London think-tanks and national themes, the DUP conference has certainly moved on from the raucous songs, dodgy jokes and Union Jackery that prevailed under Ian Paisley and Peter Robinson. Yet, the spectre of Theresa May’s deal has revealed deep uncertainty in the party.

The DUP will hope that its votes in the House of Commons will be decisive in ensuring that the draft Withdrawal Agreement is defeated. Otherwise, it will have presided over a crushing defeat for unionism in Northern Ireland.