Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .

MLA
Mrs Naomi Long
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
27 October 2022
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Assembly Business
Heading
Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4178143

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I intend to keep my remarks short. Given what we have heard already, I think that there is little to be said in the debate. We will, no doubt, throughout the debate rehearse the impact of the failure to elect a Speaker today on our public services, our public finances, individual's lives, with the cost-of-living crisis, and these institutions and public confidence in them. To be clear, Mr Acting Speaker, the vote that will take place at the end of the debate is not a vote on who will sit in the Chair that you currently occupy. No one outside the Chamber and few of us in the Chamber actually care one way or the other who that will be. We care only that someone will occupy that Chair in order that we can do business and the jobs that we were elected to do and that we can serve the public to the fullest of our ability. The Question that we will vote on at the end of the debate, therefore, is not whether we know that the people of Northern Ireland are suffering. We all know that they are as a result of there being no institutions here. It is not whether we know that our public finances are in a parlous state. We all know that already, and it has been rehearsed many times. It is not about whether we know that our public services are on their knees. We all know that they are on their knees, and those that are not already on their knees are teetering on the brink. It is not whether we know, to quote Paul Givan in previous conversation:

"All paths lead back to the Assembly".

It is whether we care about those issues and whether we care enough to prioritise them over party political interest. I think that the previous Member to speak gave us an insight into what that party's answer is going to be. As in every other sitting, I am clear what our answer is. The people of Northern Ireland and their needs and interests come first, and what is in their interests is a functioning Assembly, a functioning Executive, sustainable institutions and power-sharing. Let us talk about power-sharing. Let us talk about respect for mandate. It is ironic that a Member would get up and hold forth on those issues whilst entirely disregarding those of us who sit in the Chamber with a mandate to be something other than unionist or nationalist.

They entirely disregard our right to define ourselves and, instead, through heckles from the Back Benches and the one-seat wonder behind me, we are told what we are through the lens of nothing more than prejudice rather than from the people who recognise what we stand for and our values and put their confidence in us in May. I will take no lectures from the DUP on issues of respect. I will take no lectures from the DUP on issues of reform and the unpicking of these institutions. The DUP is being hoist by a petard of its making in St Andrews. Had it not changed the rules then as a demand to come back into government — there is always a demand before coming into government — it would hold the office of First Minister now. Think on that. Think on that. Neither will I take advice from the DUP on whether or not we should have reform. I simply caution its members, before they hold forth on the issues of majoritarianism, to look at the history of their party, their 2011 manifesto where they would quite happily have had a voluntary coalition and their 2016 manifesto where they would have had a voluntary coalition and where nobody else's mandate would have been respected. Our modest reforms respect not only the DUP's mandate —

I will.

I absolutely agree. To be clear: the DUP has argued for reform. We are arguing for reform that respects its mandate to be in government and gives it the right that we, the Ulster Unionists and the SDLP have — we confer those rights on the main parties in the Chamber — to walk away if it wishes to but confers the right on the public to have an Executive of their choosing. I will also not take lectures on the cost-of-living crisis. Let me just remind the DUP that Sammy Wilson is probably the only human being alive who is still championing the Liz Truss mini fiscal event. Reflect on that when you try to pay your mortgages. That is what I would advise people.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.42 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.66).
  • Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
  • The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.29No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.22No
Cultural grievance politics0.07No
Dog-whistle messaging0.49No
Controversy escalation0.40No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.22No
Overall judgement0.42Between thresholds
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing0.19
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it (chosen)0.66
Adopts it0.14
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.79
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.14
Another identity-related subject0.05
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:32 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