Mr Phillip Brett: Assembly records

All of Mr Phillip Brett’s imported questions, contributions and motions in this mandate, newest first, including those assessed as not flagged, uncertain or not yet analysed.

2,566 records match, page 7 of 103.

  1. Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

    • Private Members' Business

    It is worth making the point that there are other flaws in the Bill. It does not define "commemoration" or "celebration", so those terms would have no legal effect. It also does not state what a reasonable period for a flag to fly is. For example, Mr McReynolds may think that the Somme commemoration flags should fly…

    Not flagged

  2. Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

    • Private Members' Business

    When we read the Member's Bill, we see that it completely contradicts what she has just said. It has already been read into the record, but clause 2(3)(d) says: "any ... place that persons of all national and cultural identities could reasonably be expected to have access to." That is not just furniture that is owned…

    Not flagged

  3. Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

    • Private Members' Business

    Does he agree that it is telling that not only does the Member's Bill outsource most of the hard lifting to the Department for Infrastructure but in no way does it put any duty or workload on her colleague the Justice Minister? The Member seems to be OK with legislating for other Ministers to do things, but she does…

    Not flagged

  4. Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

    • Private Members' Business

    I appreciate the Member giving way. He raises a very valid point that I will mention in my contribution later. You do not need the Bill sponsor to answer you. All you need to do is read paragraph 45 of the Bill's EFM, which clearly states: "The Bill could have potentially discriminated on the grounds of religious…

    Not flagged

  5. Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

    • Private Members' Business

    I could not quite pick up the answer from the Member, but I think that I can pick it up from the Bill. Subsection (2) of clause 1 sets out that, ultimately, there will be a test to assess whether: "it is in the public interest to remove a flag". The only way in which local residents' views will ever be sought is in…

    Not flagged

  6. Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

    • Private Members' Business

    I appreciate Mr Gaston's giving way. Before he moves to clause 3, it is worth his focusing on the end of clause 2, which is probably the most dangerous part of the Bill. Subsection 3(d) provides that flags cannot go up in: "any ... place that persons of all national and cultural identities could reasonably be expected…

    Flagged Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials Criteria met: Identity framing, Cultural grievance politics, Controversy escalation.

  7. Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

    • Private Members' Business

    I appreciate the Member's giving way. He talks to the more fundamental point that is missed in the Bill. The Terrorism Act 2000 specifically states that the flags of proscribed organisations should be removed. That was strengthened recently in legislation through Parliament. The Bill would not have the ability to…

    Not flagged

  8. Debate contribution: Artificial Intelligence Strategy

    • Opposition Business

    Normally, the SDLP says that it is those of us on these Benches who do not want to look to the future, but perhaps they are taking on that mantle today. It is not a new phenomenon, but I struggle to understand the point of the motion. We are calling for the introduction of a moratorium on something that is not, as far…

    Not flagged

  9. Debate contribution: Summit on the Break-up of the United Kingdom

    • Matter of the Day

    Before I get into my contribution, I have to respond to some of the remarks that have been made here today. The Member for Mid Ulster Ms Sheerin said that the people of Northern Ireland want to see progress and move forward, yet she is the very Member who went to celebrate and speak at a commemoration of Thomas…

    Flagged Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty Criteria met: Identity framing, Sectarian or communal antagonism, Dog-whistle messaging, Controversy escalation.

Download all records matching these filters (up to 100,000 rows): CSV · JSON