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

Debate contribution by Miss Deirdre Hargey on 7 September 2026.

MLA: Miss Deirdre Hargey
Party at the time: Sinn Féin
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 5670750

Text

When I wrote my speech, I was going to say that I welcome the opportunity to speak at Second Stage of this Member's Bill but, over two hours in and with only two Members having spoken, I do not know whether I do. Dealing with flags and emblems is an important issue. That was recognised in the FICT report, which sought to establish a pathway towards dealing with these difficult and sensitive issues. Unfortunately, that work has stalled. The DUP's continued refusal to support the establishment of the working group has prevented the FICT process from progressing and delivering the work that was intended. As a result, we are now considering this Member's Bill. Sinn Féin recognises the policy intent behind the Bill, and, importantly, the concerns that it seeks to address within and across communities. We want to approach the Bill constructively, because these are not abstract issues. It is important that we deal with those issues as we have seen concerns highlighted in recent weeks and months with the erection of Billy Wright flags; racist and anti-Irish language flags; and, of course, hate displays on bonfires. We know that community tensions rise when those items are deliberately placed in interface and mixed areas with the aim of causing intimidation and provocation. Nobody should underestimate the impact that that can have on people and communities, so we need a mechanism that allows the issues to be dealt with properly, consistently and fairly. We believe in finding a mechanism for dealing with such displays, and that is why Sinn Féin supports the Bill at Second Stage. The Bill should progress to Committee so that the necessary scrutiny can take place and the Bill can be tested and, where necessary, strengthened. While we support the intent of the Bill, we believe that there are important gaps that need to be addressed. The first is that this is clearly a cross-cutting issue, yet the Bill places significant responsibility on the Department for Infrastructure alone. That does not reflect the reality of where displays occur or the responsibilities that exist across government and in respect of other public land and buildings. We need to ensure that the legislation provides a coherent approach rather than creating different processes depending on which organisation owns or manages the land. There is also a concern around the proposed arrangements for notification, consultation and the development of a code of practice. Again, those responsibilities cannot simply sit within one Department when a number of Departments have a role to play. The Department of Justice, the Department for Communities and, indeed, the Executive Office all have responsibilities that are relevant to this issue. If we are serious about tackling the problem, we need a genuinely joined-up approach across the Executive, local government and relevant arm's-length bodies. We need clarity around responsibilities and a consistent process. Most importantly, we need legislation that is robust, workable and capable of making a real difference on the ground.
We need to ensure that any framework strikes the right balance, addressing displays that are deliberately used to intimidate, threaten or provoke, while recognising the complexities and sensitivities that surround flags and emblems in our society. We must respect the right of people to express their culture and to mark cultural, historical and sporting events, but we must also recognise that that right is not absolute, and, as has been stated, attempts to deliberately provoke, threaten and offend through the erection of flags and emblems should be addressed through their removal by the appropriate authorities. That is precisely why Committee Stage is so important: the Bill provides an opportunity to have that detailed discussion and, indeed, to improve the legislation before us. Sinn Féin will engage constructively with colleagues across the political spectrum to see how we can strengthen the proposals. We cannot continue to allow the issues to be kicked down the road. Our communities all deserve better. They deserve a system —
Yes, go ahead.
That shows the importance of allowing the Bill to go to Committee Stage rather than trying to cut the process at Second Stage, which is about the policy intent of the Bill. It is not a perfect Bill. I reflected on the fact that there is much work to be done, and there are gaps in the Bill. If we are serious about addressing the issues, and everybody has suggested that they are, that is all the more reason to allow the Bill to go to the next stage. If Members are still not content at that point, they can vote. We are happy at this point: we agree with the policy intent — what the Bill is trying to do — because it is reflected in communities and across constituencies. We are keen to work with all parties at that stage, when all the issues can be addressed in the round. That was the ambition of the FICT process, and it is unfortunate that political obstruction has prevented that work from progressing sooner, but, through the Bill, we have the opportunity to move the issue forward. That is why Sinn Féin supports the Bill's passing at Second Stage. We look forward to its progression to Committee, where we can work constructively to address the gaps and, importantly, strengthen the proposals and develop a framework that is coordinated, effective and capable of making a meaningful difference in our communities.

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

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

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

Challenge this classification