Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers

Debate contribution by Mr Mark Durkan on .

MLA
Mr Mark Durkan
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
27 October 2022
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Assembly Business
Heading
Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4178350

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the opportunity to speak and not only represent the SDLP's views, but, more importantly, relay the pleas of, and recount the desperation that faces, so many of my constituents in Derry and households right across the North. It is shameful that, at a time of such acute need, we have been prevented from doing our jobs, effecting positive change for people and sheltering people from the worst that this winter will bring. It is an indelible stain on even the DUP's dubious record that, when people need an Executive more than ever, that party's siege of Stormont continues and is starving people. It is frustrating that, as Members, we stand here regurgitating — yes — similar pleas demanding an end to yet another painful purgatory that achieves nothing but, if ended, could change a lot. People are anxious and angry, and justifiably so. That anxiety and anger are palpable in every parent who is struggling to feed their children, in every patient who is waiting for care and in every family member who is worrying about how they will keep a roof over their family's head. The impact on the well-being of our people is starkly evident. We have a much-needed mental health strategy that is largely unfunded. Our communities are still reeling from the pandemic and have been hit by a cost-of-living crisis while caretaker Ministers have, largely, sat on their hands and done barely the minimum — that I am convinced of. When the unprecedented challenges of the last few years unfolded on our shores —.

Certainly.

I thank the Member for the intervention. There are many Ministers who have refused, in my opinion, to take the action that they were able to take, even in the absence of an Executive, that would ameliorate the suffering that people here are going through. When the unprecedented challenges of the last few years unfolded on our shores, there was a collective will across society to step up to the plate. How would our shared home place have coped if the likes of our heroic health force, our teachers, our postal workers, the housing sector and so many more public servants refused to do their job and brought our society to a standstill? The difference is that, if and when those beleaguered, shamefully undervalued workers are not paid, they will have no alternative but to strike. The DUP does have an alternative. That said, I in no way want to undermine the work that is ongoing in constituency offices, which are busier now than ever. The demands on office staff and across the advice sector at this time are evidence of the huge need that is out there, and they highlight just how desperate people are. Every day, we hear that things have never been so bad. That sentiment is echoed across every sector, from healthcare to housing and from education to the economy. Services and their workforces are stretched beyond their limits, with an elasticity that is waning and a spirit that is set to snap. Ultimately, my job, and the job of all of us, is to change policy and legislate in order to reduce the numbers of constituents who are seeking our help to create a fair and effective society that works for everyone. That is why I do this job. I know that many Members across the Chamber are hearing similar or the same problems, and, presumably, they once shared our desire to make things better. Is that not why we all got into politics in the first place? I ask the DUP this: how does it feel to wilfully make things worse and to make life harder not only for the poor, for children, for the vulnerable, for nationalists, for others and for those who do not share its vision of a Brexit that it vociferously campaigned for and a protocol that it now rails and rallies against, but for everyone, whose life it is making more difficult? I do not know how those in that party sleep at night. The hypocrisy of the DUP is a bitter pill to swallow. When Sinn Féin brought the institutions down for three years in 2017, the DUP representatives told us then, and they have repeated it during the last session and again today, how futile, costly and irresponsible that was.

"The blockade of our institutions by one party is not democratic".

Those are not my words; they are Sir Jeffrey Donaldson's. That begs this question: what is different now? The one and only thing that is different now is that things are even worse. The last thing that people need is another election that will cost millions and change nothing. I implore those across the Chamber: for the future of public services —

— and for the welfare of our people, do the right thing. End this chaos and allow us to get on with the work that people put us here to do.

828 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: 0.33 (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 (0.55).
  • Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
  • The overall probability was moderate at most and none of the culture-war criteria was close to being met.

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 framing0.17No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.12No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.27No
Controversy escalation0.12No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.52No
Overall judgement0.33Between thresholds
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.55
Reports or questions it0.02
Criticises or condemns it0.04
Adopts it0.39
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.47
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.42
Another identity-related subject0.05
No identity-related subject0.04
Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)0.02

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:33 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