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

Debate contribution by Mr Jonathan Buckley on 7 September 2026.

MLA

Mr Jonathan Buckley

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist 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 5670611

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. As the very freshly appointed Chair of the Committee for Infrastructure, which is destined to scrutinise the Bill, I look forward to working with all the members of the Committee and, indeed, with the Department and the Minister to ensure that we can make some progress. It is fair to say that flags, rightly, are not the usual subject of Committee discussion. The Bill provides regulations on the hoisting of flags on street furniture that belongs to the Department for Infrastructure and on the removal of flags that are deemed offensive or illegal. The Department would, therefore, be required to remove offensive flags, decide what is a sensitive place, establish a procedure for the display of flags and issue a code of practice on the same.

It will be an offence to obstruct anyone who removes a flag or emblem on behalf of the Department, and the Department may call the police in the event of a breach of the peace or the obstruction of the removal of such an item.

It is clear that issues around flags and symbols are controversial and that their display is a contested space. I am pleased to say that the Committee for Infrastructure has maintained a collegial approach to the issues within its remit. While aspects of the Bill, such as which flags should be allowed to go up and which should be taken down, may be contentious, there are also entirely practical considerations, such as who will take flags down, who will protect those who take them down, what happens if the flags are put up again straight away and how much it will all cost. Those may be themes that the Committee will explore should the Bill land in its midst. The Committee heard from the Bill sponsor on 1 July and subsequently agreed to issue a call for evidence over the summer prior to Second Stage to give the Bill every opportunity to complete its passage by the end of the mandate, which is coming fast upon us. The Committee will play its part in ensuring that thorough scrutiny of the Bill is carried out and that the Assembly is suitably informed in its deliberations at later stages. Going by the volume and nature of the responses so far to the call for evidence, to which there is another week to respond — it will not surprise anybody to learn this — the subject is one on which there are many and varied views. Those views will be considered in the Committee's deliberations on the Bill. I thank the Bill sponsor, Paula Bradshaw, for her early engagement with the Committee and for giving way extensively in the debate. It is an approach that, I hope, many of us can follow and that the Committee welcomes for its work. The Committee looks forward to getting its teeth into the questions as the Bill progresses. I will now make remarks in my individual capacity as a DUP representative on the Infrastructure Committee. Let me be clear from the outset: there are legitimate issues surrounding the display of flags and emblems. There are circumstances in which certain flags can be used to intimidate, glorify terrorism and to promote proscribed organisations. Those legitimate issues must not be underestimated, but the Bill is not the answer. The fundamental question that I want to put to the Bill sponsor is this: what problem does the Bill solve that cannot be dealt with under existing legislation? I will give way if the Member wants to speak directly to that point.

I thank the Member for her answer. In summarising, I say to her that there is law to deal with the exact issues. The problem that has been highlighted is not the problem that the Bill seeks to deal with. The problem is enforcement, not the absence of legislation. Before creating a new law, government should demonstrate why the existing laws are insufficient. The existing legal framework already allows public authorities, including the Department for Infrastructure and the PSNI, to intervene where there is a suspicion that an offence has been committed or where intervention is necessary to prevent harm or public disorder.

701 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