Member's statement: Scarva Protest
Member's statement by Ms Diane Forsythe on .
- MLA
- Ms Diane Forsythe
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 8 June 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Scarva Protest
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5600170
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On this day last week, I spoke about the disgraceful Parades Commission decision, disregarding Scarva residents, on a contentious parade. On Saturday past, the outworkings of that decision, and the spectacular failure of the PSNI in policing the determinations, were on full display. High-level decisions put front-line police in a shocking position. Many political opponents have jumped on the bandwagon of attack and gaslighting, smearing others without any facts, but I was there, and here are the facts, if anyone wants to listen to them. At 9.30 am, I arrived in the small rural village of Scarva to a police checkpoint, dozens of police Land Rovers and over 200 police. It was completely over the top. There was also helicopter and drone presence. It really upset the residents. The Parades Commission determined that the residents' peaceful protest was to be at Scarva bridge, but the police completely blocked the bridge and prevented those conducting their protest from actually doing so in accordance with the determination. After negotiation over where they were supposed to conduct their protest, the police finally said that they would close the road, and that the protest could be held on the road. A short time later, over a dozen police Land Rovers powered into the crowd, demanding that they clear the road and stating that, if they did not, they would be removed. Excessive force arrived, with water cannons, tactical support group (TSG), the dog unit and dozens of riot police lined up in the road to face a peaceful crowd. They would not speak to anyone. No one understood what was happening. There was no communication, and they antagonised everyone. Repeatedly, our MP, we as MLAs and our councillors tried to communicate with police, but to no avail, as they provoked the crowd. Then, without warning, the riot police, with their weapons in hand, ran towards the crowd. We, as elected representatives, stood between the police and the crowd. The police must have thought that we would move as they shoved into us. They thought that we would stand aside and let them ram the crowd of our people, but we did not: the DUP and UUP representatives stood shoulder to shoulder along that line. Clearly, once somebody senior in the police saw how the optics of their physically attacking two female elected representatives on the front line would look, they paused, and, finally, spoke to us. They were determined to ram into a crowd and start a riot on Saturday. We negotiated and agreed with the police that our elected representatives would stand amongst the people on the side of the law and peace. We did that, right along the line of the canal at the water's edge, but the media zoomed right in on our MP and vilified her for manning that front line. The two-tier policing was on full display when the Palestine walk appeared: people on that walk unfurled banners and chanted at the crowd, but that was not policed at all. There were clear breaches of the determination. Those protesting rightly chanted back, because nothing was being policed.
I called on the police there and then, "What are you doing to police them? You rammed a peaceful, innocent protest". It was an absolute disgrace on the ground. I have never seen anything like it. The DUP unashamedly stands firmly —
— with the unionist and loyalist community in Scarva and across Northern Ireland.
573 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations
Jev’s structured answers met every documented threshold for flagging as culture-war activity.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.73 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- Criteria met: Cultural grievance politics (0.81).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.60).
- Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
- All thresholds for flagging were met.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.55 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.15 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.81 | Yes |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.32 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.40 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.44 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.73 | Above flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.13 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.26 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.60 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.62 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.38 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:48 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
A second, larger AI model can read this record again, without being told the MLA’s name or party, against the same published rubric. It also asks whether the activity mainly serves the public interest or mainly advances division. Its verdict replaces the current one, whichever way it goes, and its reasons are published here. Each record can have one second assessment.
If you still think the record or its classification is wrong after that, or the record itself has a factual error, you can challenge it. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.