Debate contribution: Shared Future: Strategic Framework
Debate contribution by Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly on .
- MLA
- Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 8 April 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Shared Future: Strategic Framework
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4481191
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will try to speak very quickly. I am grateful to be afforded the opportunity to respond to the motion. First, I offer my apologies for being late for the beginning of the debate and for missing Ms Bradshaw's contribution. I was at the North/South Ministerial Council. We tried to get here as quickly as we could, but, unfortunately, we were late. We should never underestimate or minimise the challenges involved in building a truly reconciled future, but I want to start on a positive note by recognising the incredible work that many thousands of organisations, people, workers, youth workers, churches, teachers and schools do in the area of building good relations. It really is incredible. I have had the huge privilege of getting out there and speaking to the many people who deliver those projects, sometimes on behalf of the Executive Office, on behalf of the Peace programmes or other external funds, or with a combination of funding from councils and Departments. It really is incredible. They are doing the work on the coal face, sometimes with the hardest to reach young people and communities, and really producing fabulous and fantastic results. I want to recognise that and recognise how far we have come, and I will get to some of the figures arising out of the key Together: Building a United Community actions. This is an area that I am deeply passionate about. I worked in it for many years. As a special adviser, I had the great privilege of being the policy lead on good relations and had a key role in drafting and supporting the production of 'Together: Building a United Community'. In particular, working hand in hand with officials —
I will in a moment. Working hand in hand with officials, we were able to create the signature projects that have now been rolled out. The T:BUC strategy is under review, and we will, of course, be moving to develop it further.
Absolutely, and T:BUC is not a stand-alone project. To make that absolutely clear, one of our signature projects, for example, was the removal of peace walls. That fell to DOJ, which, then, had an Alliance Minister. It was difficult, I have to say, to get the Department to take it on at that time. The point, which I made directly to the Minister at the time, is that good relations is not only an Executive Office — then OFMDFM — matter. The section 75 duty is on each and every one of us and all public bodies; it is not just a departmental matter. The section 75(2) duty is a separable one and a wide one, and it needs to be recognised by all our public bodies. That said, division, poor relations and lack of acceptance and tolerance all bring costs to our society. They limit potential and hold us back from thriving as individuals and as a society. There are many issues in this space, however, on which we agree. We all want our children and young people to grow up safely and with equal opportunity to achieve their full potential. We want them to be free to embrace and express their own culture while being respectful and tolerant of the culture of others. I am deeply proud of who I am. I always say that culture is not something that I do; it is something that I am. It is about going to the things that express my identity, enjoying the music and the traditions, learning about history and celebrating my identity. A sense of identity and cultural aspects enriches us as individuals, enriches our families and enriches our communities, and it should be celebrated. While I am deeply proud and confident of who I am, and I want to share that cultural identity with others, I also recognise that I ought to and must give that respect to others. It does not take away from who I am, what my identity is or what my heritage and history are to give that respect to others. Likewise, I demand that respect from others. Those agreed principles formed the basis of the Together: Building a United Community strategy, also known as T:BUC, which was published in May 2013. It was significant that, as referenced by Sinéad McLaughlin, from 1998 and the signing of the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement, the institutions here had failed to produce a good relations strategy. It was very difficult to get consensus on that across the parties. In 2007, upon the restoration of the Assembly, there was a keenness from the Ministers in the then OFMDFM to get together and produce the first good relations strategy for Northern Ireland. We had the shared future strategy, and you will be aware that there were criticisms of it. I liked Mike Nesbitt's reference to the big human blender: there was a sense that everything would be thrown in and that what would come out would be beige, and that, in order to get on, we would need to strip away who we are and hide our identities. The Together: Building a United Community strategy marked a significant change in that regard: it contained a sense of respect for the celebration of those identities. I am deeply proud of what we were able to achieve.
I am very conscious of time. Unfortunately, Question Time is at 2.00 pm. I am really proud of what the Together: Building a United Community strategy has achieved. I am not scared to say that, at times, I feel very emotional when I see the incredible benefit and change that it has brought about. Thirty thousand young people have taken part in more than 900 T:BUC camps. Look at how many of those young people have had robust and enduring relationships beyond that programme. That is the legacy of T:BUC. Some Members said that just having photo ops and getting out there and sending out a positive message is not good enough. I absolutely agree that that is not good enough: we want to deliver. T:BUC has delivered. When I speak to young people about what I am proudest of in politics, I tell them that it is the work that I did in that area. It is about the lives that have been changed through that programme, and the resulting relationships and greater understanding across divides. I want us to get to the position where we no longer talk about friendships, relationships and understanding across the divide. We need to just talk about those friendships in a Northern Ireland where our differences are celebrated, and where they can be a strength. That is not something to be intimidated by: our cultural identities here should be celebrated and respected across all aspects, new and old. Other achievements include the establishment of five Urban Villages areas; the building of 2,500 shared homes; 27,000 people taking part in the Uniting Communities programme of sport and creative events; and 7,800 young people participating in the United Youth programme. I could go on. Reference was made to the Limavady shared education campus. That was not a photo call about digging up some ground. It was a celebration of what has been achieved. I sat in that hall and saw young people who were so proud of who they are and their traditions, coming together and respecting each other. That is the very manifestation of what we, as an Executive, need to do, which is to deliver on building the brighter and united shared future that I know that we can have. It is not about denying who we are. It is about celebration through real actions, based on evidence, and making a meaningful change in people's lives.
1,291 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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.87).
- 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 | 0.14 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.09 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.59 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.87 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.12 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.99 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| 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 09:55 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.