Debate contribution: Display of Flags, Emblems and Banners

Debate contribution by Mr Brian Kingston on 30 April 2024.

MLA: Mr Brian Kingston
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 30 April 2024
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Private Members' Business
Heading: Display of Flags, Emblems and Banners
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4487354

Text

Let me say at the outset that we in the Democratic Unionist Party seek to promote the celebration of culture. We will always defend the dignified display of the flag of our country. However, we will never make excuses for the display of anything that could be associated with a paramilitary organisation or that otherwise glorifies terrorism and violence. We have deep reservations about the direction that is proposed in the Alliance Party motion and will set out our reasons for those in the course of the debate. It is important to state that those who display flags, symbols and emblems should, of course, act in a manner that is responsible and respectful. There are principles that I hope we can all support when it comes to the display of flags in public spaces: they should not endanger the safety of road users; no national flag should be defiled or burned; flags should not promote proscribed organisations or glorify violence; they should not be displayed with malicious or illegal intent; they should not be flown in a damaged condition; and they should be flown, where possible, with local agreement.
Yes, I will.
I thank the Member. Indeed, that is my point. None of that would require new legislation or regulations that criminalised the act of displaying a flag. Let us be clear that, as others have said, the FICT report does not recommend changing the law to provide for a specific right to fly a flag. Nor does it recommend a code of practice that would fetter that right with a suite of new conditions and a specific authorisation process. The commentary contained in the final report was intended to inform future discussions, with a recognition of the fact that any solution must command cross-community support. Sadly, in the absence of political agreement, the Alliance Party has chosen to short-circuit that process. A decision to move to a blanket ban on the display of our national flag outside specific dates unless authorisation is secured would have a significantly detrimental impact on good relations in communities across Northern Ireland. It would increase —.
I do not have time, sorry. It would increase the potential for conflict whilst unjustly fettering a number of fundamental freedoms. The Police Service of Northern Ireland has consistently said that the most effective solution to this issue is negotiation, mediation and engagement within and between local communities. That engagement includes communities working with agencies, including the police, to find locally agreed solutions. Elected representatives may well be able to influence that process. In contrast, an imposed, top-down legislative approach would undermine agreements that have been established in a number of areas across Northern Ireland, setting back relations and damaging opportunities for influence. Just because some elected representatives think that they would not have influence in those communities does not mean that they should resort to pursuing a legislative approach. The DUP acknowledges that there is a need to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the various public authorities on which those issues have an impact, whether that is DFI, councils or the PSNI. However, adding more confusion by imposing a new authorisation regime for flag-flying and moving from the current permissive enforcement powers to prescriptive enforcement powers that confer a proactive obligation on agencies such as the police to intervene would not be a silver bullet. The suggestion that the police should be compelled to intervene to remove or prevent the erection of flags following every reported incident of flag-flying that is deemed to be contentious or unlawful is fanciful and unworkable. It is more than that: it is entirely at odds with what the Justice Minister and Chief Constable have said about the need to alleviate resourcing pressures in policing in the current budgetary climate. The focus should be on addressing concerns through voluntary action and agreement, not imposing a draconian set of laws that runs contrary to the principle of mutual respect. The sort of system that the Alliance Party advocates would hand public authorities significant power to adjudicate on what constitutes a lawful display of a flag or emblem.
No, I do not have time, sorry. How would that test remain free of political interference in councils? How would public authorities be held accountable for the unjustified pursuit of those who express or seek to express their identity in a manner that does not incite or invite violence?
The danger in all this is that public authorities would feel compelled to adopt a precautionary approach to authorising displays outside the exempted periods, meaning that flags and bonfires would be categorised as hate expression and would be caught up in efforts to stymie those with more malicious intent. As you will have gathered, we will not support the Alliance motion.

795 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification