Debate contribution: Shared Future: Strategic Framework
Debate contribution by Ms Emma Sheerin on .
- MLA
- Ms Emma Sheerin
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 8 April 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Shared Future: Strategic Framework
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4481158
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I support the motion, and I congratulate the Alliance Party on tabling it. It is a really important conversation, and, as Members have said, it is useful that we take stock of where we are in the North, as we are a post-colonial, post-conflict society. We have to acknowledge that sectarianism exists and that we will deal with it only if we have a conversation about it, so I totally support the motion. Unity and unification are, obviously, fundamental to my politics; I am an Irish republican. We have just celebrated Easter, and at Easter we reflect on the words of the proclamation to the Irish people of 1916, which clearly stated that the Irish nation was for Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter. That is the politics to which I align myself, the basis of my political activism and the reason why I am here in the Chamber. We know that the costs of division are multiple, visceral, visible and tangible. They are very real. Unfortunately, in the past, people have paid the ultimate price because of division and sectarianism. We are not in that place any more, but we want to move very much away from it. Today's motion and this conversation are helpful in that, because we need to govern for everybody. I note that Ms Egan referred to the bill of rights, on which we did a lot of work in the previous mandate. I chaired the Ad Hoc Committee on a Bill of Rights, and it was regrettable that, at that point, the two unionist parties blocked the delivery of a bill of rights. I would like to see that —
Yes, I will.
I thank the Member for his intervention.
I refer the Member to a body of evidence on the Assembly website that clearly points to the meeting at which your colleague Alan Chambers provided a document and said that he did not believe that a bill of rights was necessary for the North. You can reflect on the Hansard report, which will show that clearly. My point is that we have to govern for everybody, and ensuring rights for everybody is helpful. That is the space that we need to be in and the conversation that we need to have. The inclusion of everybody, regardless of their background, is important, as is acknowledging those differences and that we all have different lived experiences. As others have referred to, there has been a change in attitude during this mandate. That is welcome. When people participate in other people's cultures, embrace the fact that we all have differences and take the opportunity to enjoy things that we may not have been brought up with, it is a richer experience for everyone. Nobody is hurt by that. That needs to be perpetuated and built on during the mandate. I hope to see more of that. I congratulate the First Minister and deputy First Minister for their example of doing that thus far, because we need to see an end to segregation in our hearts and minds. Other Members, particularly those from different parts of this city, have referred to the peace walls and the real divisions in their communities. As I have said before in the Chamber, I am from a farming family in the country. Where I come from, when a cow was sick during calving or somebody needed help with lambing a sheep, it did not matter what their background was. Nobody asked at the gate, "Where did you go on Sunday?". Everybody chipped in. That is still the situation at home. We need to see an increase in that and reflect on the fact that, although people may have different cultural practices, political beliefs and views about the constitutional position of the North of Ireland, that does not mean that they do not have the same worries and concerns. We all want to see the same thing for ourselves, our families, our friends and our constituents. We want to see people being able to have a full and proper life and to access healthcare. We all have the same struggles. At the end of the day, that is what life is about. I congratulate the proposers of the motion. I hope to see it receive cross-party support. It is a good basis on which we can all work together for all the people whom we represent.
732 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: 0.12 (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 (0.54).
- Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
- 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 | 0.27 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.06 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.18 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.48 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.12 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.43 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.54 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.95 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.04 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:55 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.