Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 14 February 2023
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Assembly Business
- Heading
- Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4178856
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On behalf of the SDLP, I associate myself with the earlier remarks to Alex and his family at this dreadful time for them. I thank you, Mr Acting Speaker, for presiding over today's proceedings, but, respectfully, it should not be you in the Chair temporarily. By this stage, we should have our Speaker, elected by all of us to be able to conduct the business that we need to conduct in this place. The mandate for undertaking that business was granted to each and every one of us last May, and the fact that so many of us are being prevented from carrying out the most basic democratic process, that of electing a Speaker, is an absolute embarrassment. The business that we are here to address today is not about party politics. It is not about me, the SDLP, Sinn Féin or the DUP. It is not about any of us. Rather, it is about the 134 families whose loved ones are watching us today while waiting on an urgent organ transplant and who have placed their faith in us to be able to make that possible. A little over a year ago, I stood in this place and was proud to speak in support of the then Organ and Tissue Donation (Deemed Consent) Bill. It was a good day for this place. In putting aside our differences and acting in the best interests of all the people, we saw politics — the art of the possible — at its best, yet that legislative journey is incomplete. We have statutory rules and instruments that need commencement, and, without a Speaker, we have no Assembly and are thus unable to do that work. We lost three years of the previous Assembly, when it was vital to get this really important legislation across the line. We have lost a year of this Assembly to try to complete the process. How many more times does this place have to say no when it should be saying yes? SDLP MPs are working with other parties to explore every possible route to get the necessary legislation passed at Westminster, but the truth is that we are all here today and could therefore get this done today. We could set aside our differences and, for once, use the power and potential of this place to be able to help the people whom we represent. Waiting for Westminster is the second-best option. Everyone who is on the transplant list deserves so much more than the second-best option. We can and should do better than that, because we understand the value of this place. If legislation can be enacted, it should be enacted here, and that legislation can be enacted here this week. There is an urgency to doing so, because up to 15 people on the organ transplant waiting list die each year needlessly. Today, 134 people are waiting on an organ transplant. For those people, every minute counts, and every day that we delay the legislation does not help their odds of getting a proper organ match. I hasten to add that one of those people, and who is very near and very dear to many of us, is in the Public Gallery today. I am, of course, referring to Dáithí. In the past few years, Dáithí has taught each of us a valuable lesson in strength, resilience and superhuman will to overcome obstacles previously thought impossible to scale. He and his family have campaigned tirelessly to get this legislation. He has done all of that while, at six years of age, having had to wait four years on a heart.
Last year, we saw politics at its best. What will we see today? We have the power to act. We could elect a Speaker, lay the necessary motion, finish the legislation and help to save Dáithí's life and the lives of the other 133 people. What in the name of humanity is stopping us?
659 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: 0.06 (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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.86).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.86 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.98 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.02 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.46 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.33 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.08 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.06 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.05 |
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.