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

Debate contribution by Ms Paula Bradshaw on 7 September 2026.

MLA

Ms Paula Bradshaw

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

7 September 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5670561

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. That is the point; that is the reason why I read into the record the examples that are not reaching the threshold for that sort of intervention. We know of the need to tighten. The police have said many times over the years that they would like more seizure powers with regard to flags, and the Crime and Policing Bill should be addressing the proscribed organisations part. However, this is about public property that the Department for Infrastructure has responsibility for maintaining. It is about making sure that the flags on that property are not the more sinister flags. I do not want to keep repeating myself. Anyway, where are we? I will move on, Mr Deputy Speaker. Sorry.

Go ahead while I try to find my place.

Yes, thanks. I just do not want to go over old ground that I have possibly talked about in an intervention. I thank my colleague. Let me be clear on —.

Certainly.

It is primarily DFI property. Are you saying that it could be the like of Housing Executive land or something? Is that what you are intimating?

That is not necessarily the case. If you think that the Bill —.

Let me just answer the Minister. When I talk about railings, for example, I am talking about the railings that are along bridges. When I talk about billboards, I am talking about the like of the billboard that was talked about last year, which was on DFI land. Primarily, the focus is on lighting columns, for which your Department has responsibility. If you feel that that needs to be —.

Mr Deputy Speaker, may I continue? If you feel that there needs to be clarity, come forward with an amendment, by all means, but this is about public property — the street furniture for which your Department has responsibility.

There is greater clarity on that in the explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM), but I am happy to look at it.

Yes. Go ahead, please.

I have no problem with that at all. How I envisage this playing out is that an outside contractor will come in, so it is possible that any Department could bring forward a request for removal.

I want to get finished. Inaction is not an option, and we need to bring this issue to an end. The Bill does not state that the Union flag, a tricolour or an Ulster banner is inherently intimidating. For that matter, it does not state that a GAA symbol, football club badge or any other symbol that is not of a proscribed organisation is inherently intimidating. Nor does it state that community celebration is illegitimate. In fact, the intention of the Bill is clearly the opposite. Instead, it asks what a display is doing, where it is, how long it has been there, how it is being used and what effect it has on the people who share that space. That is why, to repeat the point, in the past, all parties have challenged the presence of even national flags at certain locations on the grounds of their purpose. The question is how we ensure that control over what appears in public spaces rests with the public. Perhaps the ultimate question, however, is whether the Assembly can act, build meaningful consensus, engage meaningfully on delivery and legislate in our mutual interests. The Committee, as my colleague just said, absolutely has the duty and right to look at every single clause and bring forward any proposals for amendments. That is what scrutiny is about, and I have no doubt that the Bill will benefit from such scrutiny and amendment. I look forward to engaging with not just the Committee but the Minister. Consensus and compromise are not dirty words, and we should not treat them as signs of weakness. They are actually how we make progress, especially in a place such as Northern Ireland, and I feel that they are written into the Bill. Originally, as I said, we talked about possibly consulting on a full notification process. I listened to people and removed that, because the Bill reduces bureaucracy, limits costs and intentionally enables legitimate cultural expression to proceed without barriers. Given recent events, I cannot deny that I am rather glad that I made that change in advance. We need a proportionate way forward to provide a framework for how public space is used, because the way in which a space is used tells people who belongs there, who is welcome there and, too often, who is not welcome there. I will leave it there, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I am happy to respond to any concerns that might have arisen as a result of that information.

792 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:13 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification