Debate contribution: Appointment of the First Minister and deputy First Minister
Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on .
- MLA
- Ms Claire Sugden
- Party at the time
- Independent
- Date
- 3 February 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Assembly Business
- Heading
- Appointment of the First Minister and deputy First Minister
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4255143
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Speaker, and congratulations on your appointment. I wish to pay tribute to your predecessor. I always felt that he was fair in giving smaller parties and independent Members their rightful voice, and I hope that you will continue in that vein. I congratulate Michelle O'Neill on becoming First Minister and Emma Little-Pengelly on becoming deputy First Minister. I am pleased for Michelle and Emma: both are capable, strong women who have worked in politics for a long time, and they will, despite the misogyny, continue that work. I wish all new Ministers success in their roles, because we need you to step up. We have heard our First Minister describe herself as the First Minister for all, and I welcome that. Indeed, I encourage you all to work towards that goal, because today is not about one person or one political party; it is about the people of Northern Ireland, and we need to start serving them. The constitutional question is important and will remain so. It is absolutely valid to be a unionist, nationalist or not to have made your mind up. Having an opinion on the context in which we deliver our public services is absolutely relevant. It is fundamental. Let us stop conflating this issue with orange and green. That is cultural, which is also important to many, but it is certainly not sectarian. We are not neutral. We are wonderful and varied people. Let us embrace that instead of tearing lumps out of each other. Let us stop excluding people because of their constitutional preference. Sadly, we are formally doing that again today by not putting the Department of Justice into the d'Hondt process. My appointment, a number of years ago, was not a failure. It was progress, and I welcomed and appreciated Martin McGuinness doing that. If a unionist can be a Justice Minister, that paves the way for a nationalist to be a Justice Minister. However, today, it seems that it can be neither. Apparently, the courage that was displayed in 2016 is gone. I respect that Michelle O'Neill, the leader of nationalism, is our First Minister. I am pleased for her and for the people whom she represents, because, as a confident unionist, they are my people too. I love Northern Ireland, and it breaks my heart to see us not reaching our potential, but we can change that, starting today. We need to reconcile, and we need to do that by not remaining apart and hiding who we collectively and individually are. We do it through integration, commonality, acceptance and respect — always respect. All of the above is an acknowledgement of who we are, but this institution needs to get on with the business of improving public services, hospital waiting lists, childcare, trust in our police force and preparing infrastructure, our skills and our economy for the opportunities that will now come our way. By focusing on these issues, we will give confidence back to the public, who desperately want this place to work. The numbers who marched for fair pay in Belfast city centre last month and those standing outside today calling for restoration far exceed the numbers who opposed it. It is their lives, the lives of their families and the life of my baby girl, Indy, that we are responsible for changing for the better. I look forward to working with you all.
568 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: 0.13 (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 (0.90).
- 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 | 0.30 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.08 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.18 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.35 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.13 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.10 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.90 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.74 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.26 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
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.