Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Debate contribution by Mr Daniel McCrossan on .
- MLA
- Mr Daniel McCrossan
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 7 December 2022
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Assembly Business
- Heading
- Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4178728
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It is extremely disappointing that we find ourselves here for the fifth time since each of us was democratically elected in May. What is even more depressing is watching some of the antics across the House, particularly some of the language used by Members of the DUP. In May, I was democratically elected as an MLA to the Northern Ireland Assembly to represent the constituents of West Tyrone. My democratic right as an elected Member of the House is being blocked by one party alone: the DUP. It is preventing me and others from representing and standing up for the needs of our constituents across every constituency in Northern Ireland. It would serve some Members well to remember why we stand for election to begin with. We stand for election, I would hope, to better the lives of our constituents in whatever way is possible. How on earth is this situation in any way improving the lives of any of our constituents? The DUP knows, as does anybody in Northern Ireland with ears and eyes, that it has no influence over the negotiations between the EU and the British Government. Zero.
I will give way.
I thank the Member for his intervention. Duplicity —.
It is no surprise that the first three letters of the word "duplicity" spell "DUP". It is never found wanting when it comes to that narrative.
Our colleagues across the Benches have talked about reality: the reality is that people are starving. They cannot heat their homes. They cannot afford to travel to their work. People who are working tirelessly in our hospitals, schools and public domain every day cannot afford to live, and you know it. I would like to think that you are hearing the exact same things as I hear from our constituents; either that or your office doors are locked or your phone lines are disconnected. The people who ring me and other Members are absolutely sick, sore and tired of being failed by this place. I am ashamed to stand in the House, prevented from exercising my democratic right to stand up for every citizen. I have heard the Member say that the constitution comes first. He would do well to follow me to Altnagelvin hospital, stand in the A&E and look at people suffering with mental health issues who cannot get a bed in the facilities in Derry or anywhere else. The Member would do well to look at the person who is dying on a hospital seat because they cannot get a bed. Perhaps Mr Poots wants to go to the A&E in Altnagelvin and say, "Folks, it's constitution first. You can all die". That is the message that you are sending.
I will not give way. You have said enough, Mr Allister. The real leader of the DUP has spoken. That is where your narrative comes from. This is about real life. I am frustrated; it can be heard in how I speak and what I am saying today. People in our constituencies are suffering incredibly. I appeal to the Members opposite to search within themselves and ask whether they really think that it is appropriate to allow people to suffer or to use them as leverage to get what they want, when the reality is that the Members have no influence whatever. In fact, they truly destroyed that bridge when they propped up Theresa May's Government and polished the red bus. I have heard the session today being called "a farce". My democratic right as an elected Member of the House is not a farce. My right to represent my constituents is not a farce. I ask Mr Lyons whether it is a farce to suggest that children are starving. We could resolve that issue in the House. I hear members of the DUP continually say on radio, "But we really couldn't do anything about it if the Assembly were here". Why stand for election? Where is your sense of hope or aspiration? If that is the vision for this place, young emerging unionists will not want to be a part of it. I represent every citizen in my constituency — every one. I have yet to hear one of them say that the protocol is their biggest issue. It is not. The DUP does not like the truth. I appeal to the people of Northern Ireland to knock on the doors of the DUP. Ring their phones. Email them. Bombard their social media. Tell them that your children are starving. Tell them that you cannot heat your home. Tell them that you cannot fund your business. The reality is that the DUP knows it. You are in a bad position, you are wrong, and you are failing people. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland would do well to remember that MLAs —
— have not failed; the DUP has failed. It has failed every citizen in Northern Ireland.
823 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: 0.37 (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 (0.84).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.22 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.30 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.45 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.21 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.34 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.37 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.84 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.04 |
| Adopts it | 0.12 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.79 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.14 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.03 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 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.