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 5740090

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Yes. The unintended consequences of the legislation are manifold. We talk all the time about the need for good community relations. I genuinely believe and fear that community relations could suffer as a result of implementing and imposing the legislation; not negating the fact that it could also place local DFI staff and police officers in a very difficult situation, because community tensions will have risen as a result of the legislation and how it will be implemented. Mr Deputy Speaker, you will be glad that I am going to make some progress with the rest of my contribution. At a time when public services are under financial pressure, we need to be certain that this is an appropriate use of public money. As I have said throughout my contribution, where a flag or emblem is genuinely threatening or intimidating, is associated with a proscribed organisation or creates a public safety problem, there are already laws and powers that can be used to deal with it. Where there is criminal behaviour, it should be dealt with as a criminal behaviour issue. Where there is intimidation, it should be dealt with as intimidation. Where there is a breach of the peace, the police have responsibilities. I question whether we need a new statutory framework that gives a Department such broad discretion over cultural displays in public places. We should instead look at an approach that protects communities from intimidation whilst giving proper protection to legitimate cultural expression. I say it again: that is done through the dialogue that happens almost monthly or weekly on some of the issues that arise with flags and emblems in our constituencies. It means having clear definitions; it means having consistency; and it means ensuring that no community feels that its identity is being singled out or treated differently. Northern Ireland has made enormous progress in learning how to live with difference. That does not mean that we should ignore the very real sensitivities around flags and emblems, but neither should we create legislation that risks turning cultural expression into a matter for bureaucratic judgement. Is there a genuine public safety issue? If the answer is yes, there should be action. However, if the answer is simply that somebody finds a particular expression of identity offensive, we need to be extremely cautious before giving the state the power to remove it. Freedom of expression includes expression that some people may dislike. Cultural identity must be respected across the community, and legislation designed to improve community relations — as, I think, the Bill sponsor intends — should not inadvertently create a new source of division. The Alliance Party has spent years telling us that it is about creating a shared society. We want people to live side by side together, and that is why I said that there has been enormous progress. Yet the mechanism that it has chosen is one that gives civil servants the power to decide which expressions of identity are acceptable in public spaces.

The real test of the legislation is not whether Alliance can identify a flag that it dislikes but whether it would be equally comfortable with exactly the same powers being exercised against a symbol that it supports, such as an LGBT flag or a transgender flag. Such flags may be offensive to me and to some people who live in my community, and, as such, they would be subject to the legislation. When I was a councillor, Alliance did not like Fermanagh and Omagh District Council's flags and emblems policy, because it could not fly the Pride flag. We therefore have to ensure that there is consistency in the argument. I want Alliance to answer this one simple question: would it be equally comfortable if a departmental official were to apply that very same subjective test, decide that a symbol of importance to its community was "offensive" or "antagonistic" and order its removal?

I am happy to give way.

Alliance would also hit out at the people objecting to those flags.

Yes, you would. I have seen it happen before. I therefore have significant concerns about the Display of Flags and Emblems Bill as drafted. I have spoken at length today. I have allowed a lot of time for interventions, and I am grateful for all those interventions. I appreciate the information that has come back to me, but, for the reasons that I have outlined today, I cannot support the Bill in its current form.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:21 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