UVF quits devolution talks amid claims Government is too close to Sinn Fein

The political wing of one of Northern Ireland's largest loyalist paramilitary groups announced yesterday that it would take no further part in talks aimed at restoring devolution to Belfast.

The Progressive Unionist Party (PUP), which speaks for the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), complained of republican duplicity and an alleged government readiness to provide concessions to the IRA and Sinn Fein.

The move sent a frisson through the peace process, since it immediately raised the question of whether the UVF's ceasefire is about to be abandoned. But the general view was that political frustration was unlikely to spill over into paramilitary violence.

Both loyalist and security sources were quick to say that they did not believe any return to large-scale UVF activity was on the cards. While the UVF and PUP clearly have their complaints about the peace process, both appear to consider it worthwhile.

The UVF and the Ulster Defence Association (UDA) are the two largest loyalist groups. The UDA has been going through convulsions, most of which are blamed on Johnny "Mad Dog" Adair, who was returned to prison on 10 January after security services labelled him a "danger to society".

The UVF has been involved in a number of killings in recent years, most notably during a feud started by Adair, but in comparison with the UDA its record has been positively saintly. It was not involved, for example, in any of last year's deaths. In common with much Unionist and loyalist opinion, however, the UVF and PUP have been affected by a general Protestant angst and sense that republicans have benefited disproportionately from the peace process.

The PUP signalled that it felt excluded from the current negotiations. These principally involve the British and Irish governments together with republicans and David Trimble's Ulster Unionists. David Ervine, the PUP leader said: "It is clear there are things going on in the undergrowth, both political and paramilitary. Unless we have a clear understanding, a clear sight of what those are it would be foolish for the PUP to take its place in the upcoming talks and be used simply for a pat on the head and to rubber-stamp something we have not been party to. We are not prepared to play that game."

The Prime Minister's official spokesman said the decision was "obviously disappointing". He added: "We would underline absolutely that this is not a one-sided process."