Member's statement: Irish Passports
Member's statement by Mr Philip McGuigan on .
- MLA
- Mr Philip McGuigan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 7 May 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Irish Passports
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4487846
Read the official Assembly record
Text
In February, I raised and highlighted the need for an Irish passport office to be located in the North. I was disappointed to hear last week, in response to questions from my colleague and TD from Donegal Pádraig Mac Lochlainn, the Tánaiste respond by saying that such an office is not needed. I disagree.
There is a massive need for an Irish passport office to be located in the North. Around 20% of adult first-time passport applications are made by citizens living in the North, many of whom come from my North Antrim constituency. According to the most recent figures, over 45,000 passport applications have been made from the North in the first few months of this year. I expect that number to grow considerably as we enter the summer months. As the number of applications increases, so will the number of issues that arise and problems that occur with applications. Delays, backlogs and difficulties in obtaining information cause panic and worry for individuals and families as their travel date gets closer. It is not good enough that those Irish citizens cannot speak to someone over the counter in a local passport office to discuss their application, should a problem arise. The Tánaiste implied that a low number of issues was raised through the new MLA portal and that there was therefore no issue and no need for an office in the North, but he used figures from the first three months of this year. He will know that, historically, those months do not provide a good example. I will detail my experience. My office or I used the MLA portal on behalf of constituents nine times in the first three months of this year, but I have used it 39 times in the past five weeks. I have used it four times this morning already. If the experience of the past number of years is to be repeated, assisting constituents with passport applications by raising queries about delays on their behalf will be the greatest issue that my office will deal with every week over the summer between now and September. I am currently dealing with passport applications that were submitted at the end of January — over 14 weeks ago — but have not been processed. The delays and worries for applicants are getting bigger. Whilst I appeal to people to apply for their passport in good time, I see, every year, families and children in particular miss out on dream holidays — in my view, needlessly — over issues that could have been dealt with. I can tell the Tánaiste that I use the MLA portal, that I contact the passport office online and by phone and that I email his office, but I know that, if we had an office in the North to which applicants could go to make their applications or deal with issues as they arise, those problems would arise less often or be resolved much more quickly. The whole process would therefore be streamlined and become more efficient for everyone. I do not agree with the assessment of the Tánaiste. We need a passport office in the North, and we need it sooner rather than later.
534 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.55 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.27 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.10 |
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.06 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:21 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.