Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Debate contribution by Mr Doug Beattie MC on .
- MLA
- Mr Doug Beattie MC
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 27 October 2022
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Assembly Business
- Heading
- Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4178159
Read the official Assembly record
Text
There is an awful lot of anger in the Chamber today, and I understand that, but the anger being shown on the Floor today is nothing compared with the anger on the streets and in the towns and villages of Northern Ireland. We are all going to feel a little bit of that anger in the next six or seven weeks. It will be fun. I will start with a little bit of good news. I give a big shout-out to the campaign to save the Craigavon lakes and parks. They have worked for six years and finally got the decision overturned so that the park in central Craigavon will no longer be destroyed. I shout out to them, "Well done". The next one to deal with is Knock Iveagh, and we all know that I have championed that. I also want to take a moment, please, to thank Robin Swann, our Health Minister, for all that he has done in the last two years. It has been exceptional in exceptionally difficult times and in the middle of COVID. He has been fantastic. It is only right and fair —
Yes, of course.
Absolutely, Mr Acting Speaker. I have said it now, so it hardly matters. Interestingly, when the new Prime Minister became the Prime Minister, the first thing that he did was to call the leaders of the Welsh and Scottish Governments to pass on his vision for the United Kingdom. He has not phoned the Northern Ireland First Minister or deputy First Minister because we have neither. He spoke about the intergovernmental relations forum, which is the four nations coming together to talk about the issues that affect all corners of this United Kingdom that we are part of.
We will not be part of that, because we do not have a Government running at this moment. We are being put on the windowsill of the United Kingdom, and that concerns me as a whole-UK unionist and as an Ulster Unionist. Of course, that is because of the protocol, and the protocol is absolutely an issue. People have changed on that issue from demanding "rigorous implementation" to saying, "Actually, there are fundamental problems here" —
I will not, Jonny — "There are fundamental problems here, and we have to deal with those fundamental problems". There are, and we do. We cannot ignore it. We have been arguing the case since 2019 that we need to fix those problems, but fixing those problems should not be done to the detriment of stable government. They can be done at the same time. They are being done at the same time. They are being done as we speak. Things have moved, and conversations have changed, but it is our people who are suffering. As we get into this place where we have nothing — we do not have even the basis or foundations of any form of government in Northern Ireland because the last vestiges of it go at midnight tonight — I am really concerned that people are going out of their way to unpick the Belfast Agreement. The language that is being used is not helping. "Joint authority": nobody is defining what that is. It is just not helpful. It is not going to happen. We know that it does not happen. The Belfast Agreement does not allow for it. We are just using that language because we have to poke each other in the eye. It is what we do all the time. I will always stand up and promote the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. I will always stand up to say that we need government up and running. I will always say that it is better to have the arguments in this place and provide for the people out there. I am happy with that, and I think that most of the people here, regardless of where they sit in this place, want to do exactly that: provide for the people out there. We have to fix the issues around the protocol, and we can do that if we come together, and we can come together if we have an Executive. We need to get back to work. We need to get back to work to support our economy. We need to get back to work to support people's jobs. We need to get back to work to deal with the nurses' pay claims because it will focus minds in the middle of December if our nurses are on a picket line and we are going out asking for votes. It will focus all our minds. We need to get together to find a solution and get the Government to start moving on the replacement for the European social fund. People will lose out because it is not there, and we will lose jobs. We need to get back to work to promote for all our people, who are suffering as we speak. I said before that all that they are getting out of here from leadership is silence, except for the arguments and rants that they will get today. Of course, I am part of that because I am just as angry. We need to get back to work now. We need to find a mechanism to get back to work. The Secretary of State needs to listen. An election will not be good. What I want is the parties coming together for talks: something to try to come up with some sort of a deal or compromise needs to be put in place. I want to get back to work. I would be back in here today. I would be back in here tomorrow. The Ulster Unionist Party wants to serve.
955 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.20 (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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.74).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.21 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.05 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.04 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.10 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.12 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.54 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.20 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.74 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.04 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.10 |
| Adopts it | 0.12 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.97 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
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.