DUP says Foster’s future as party leader is ‘internal matter’
The DUP has insisted questions over Arlene Foster's future as leader are an internal matter as it responded to reports of a coordinated move against her.
The party said its democratic electoral processes were a matter for the membership amid reports that a significant number of elected representatives have signed a letter of no confidence in Mrs Foster.
Earlier, Mrs Foster played down suggestions her position as party leader was under threat. "Stories on leadership come up from time to time, and it's one of those times," said Stormont's First Minister.
Responding to the mounting speculation around her leadership, the DUP statement said: "The Democratic Unionist Party conducts its business in accordance with its constitution and rules.
"The Officers of the Party oversee the conduct and
organisation of its internal democratic electoral processes. Whilst understanding that there will be from timeto-time public interest in party processes, these issues, in the first instance, are matters for members of the party."
There has been growing discontent among DUP members about Mrs Foster's leadership in recent months.
The primary source of concern is her handling of the Brexit process. The DUP is facing anger from the wider loyalist and unionist community for the introduction of an Irish Sea border.
Critics have accused Mrs Foster of failing to use the party's influence at Westminster – particularly during its confidence and supply deal with the Conservatives – to secure a Brexit deal that saw Northern Ireland leave the EU on the same terms as the rest of the UK.
Poor polling numbers have exacerbated the discontent within the party faithful.
Mrs Foster's decision to abstain in a vote on gay conversion therapy last week appears to have further agitated sections of the party's grassroots.
Yesterday, the Belfast News Letter reported that several DUP constituency associations have written letters expressing concern at Mrs Foster's abstention on a motion that called for a ban on gay conversion therapy but did not incorporate a specific mention of protections for religious practices.