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

Debate contribution by Mrs Deborah Erskine on 22 September 2026.

MLA

Mrs Deborah Erskine

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

22 September 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5739790

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Let me begin by saying something that, I hope, should be uncontroversial in the Chamber: there is a responsibility on all of us to ensure that people can live in Northern Ireland with respect for one another regardless of their nationality or cultural identity. We should oppose intimidation and threats, but I have significant concerns that the Bill goes beyond dealing with genuinely threatening or criminal behaviour and creates a framework that could place legitimate cultural expression at risk. That is why I cannot support the Bill.

As some of my colleagues have said, the Department for Infrastructure will become the flags police as a result of the Bill. I assure the House that, in my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, I have more people battering down my door asking for potholes to be fixed, roads to be made safer and public transport to be expanded than I have people asking for DFI or the police to take action on flags. The Bill gives the Department for Infrastructure a statutory duty to remove flags or emblems attached to public street furniture where it considers that removal to be in the public interest. On the face of it, that sounds straightforward, until we look at what the Bill means by "public interest". Under clause 1, there is a mandatory duty when the Department considers that a flag or emblem is:

"intimidatory or threatening ... likely to stir up hatred, or arouse fear ... or ... invites support for, or is the flag or emblem of, a proscribed organisation."

At the start of my contribution, I said that I have no difficulty with the principle that genuinely threatening or unlawful displays should be dealt with, but the Bill goes considerably further than that. There is a presumption in favour of removal where, in the "opinion of the Department", a flag or emblem is:

"offensive, abusive, or insulting ... is displayed in the vicinity of a sensitive place ... is antagonistic, or not conducive to good community relations ... demarcates that place as belonging exclusively to persons with a particular national or cultural identity, or ... is a public hazard."

Those are serious powers, and some of the language is inherently subjective. What one person regards as offensive another may regard as an important expression of their identity. What one person considers antagonistic another may regard as an entirely legitimate expression of their culture. What exactly constitutes a display that demarcates an area, particularly when "vicinity" is not defined? That is referred to in clause 1(3)(b). What is an "excessive period of time", as outlined in clause 1(4)(d)? What does it mean for a display to be:

"not conducive to good community relations"?

Those are not minor questions. Rather, they go to the heart of whether people can have confidence that the legislation would be applied fairly. The Bill's explanatory and financial memorandum (EFM) acknowledges that flags and emblems are:

"displayed regularly ... for a range of purposes"

and that legitimate cultural expression must be recognised. I welcome that acknowledgement in the EFM. Recognition in the EFM is not enough, however. The protection must be clear in the legislation itself. As we know, Northern Ireland has a complicated history, with a range of traditions and identities. Flags are used for national celebrations, cultural events, sporting occasions, commemorations and community activities. We all differ in how we feel about the flags that are used for those events.

Yes.

Yes. Given Northern Ireland's history, commemorations are important to many people. I will come to clause 3 later, but the one thing that I will say at this juncture — I will probably repeat myself later — is that commemorations for the likes of hunger strikers and terrorist organisations that glorify terrorist actions that resulted in people in my community being murdered and maimed are not fully dealt with in the Bill. Take the example of the online portal in clause 3. The people who erect such flags are not going to log on to a portal to give reasons for why they are putting them up. I do not think that they will do that.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:35 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