Debate contribution: First Minister's Recent Statements

Debate contribution by Ms Michelle O'Neill on .

MLA
Ms Michelle O'Neill
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
7 October 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Questions for Urgent Oral Answer
Heading
First Minister's Recent Statements
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4579434

Read the official Assembly record

Text

First, let me address directly the issue of confidence in my office, which has been posed in this question, and let me be crystal clear on this point: I am absolutely and totally committed to ensuring that the strongest and most robust child protection and safeguarding processes and policies are in place. Everything that I do as First Minister is guided by that fundamental commitment. As a mother and as a grandmother, I assert my absolute determination, political and personal, to protecting all children and all other vulnerable people. In my work in the Executive Office, I have prioritised and focused attention on the needs and rights of victims and survivors of childhood abuse, and of children and young people more generally. The issues that have arisen over recent days result primarily from the actions of two former press officers who have now resigned from their employment and from Sinn Féin. I now want to set out clearly and comprehensively the circumstances surrounding the departure of those two press officers. In that regard, Mr Speaker, I am asking for your indulgence to allow me the space and time to do so.

It is important that I set out and address the legitimate concerns that are being raised, because it is an important matter of public concern. It is important, first, to state that Michael McMonagle's actions are utterly reprehensible, and he is being held fully accountable under the law. His crimes have inflicted significant harm on his innocent victims, and there is nothing more reprehensible than the abuse of a child. In August 2021, when Michael McMonagle informed Sinn Féin of his arrest and questioning concerning serious criminal offences, the party took decisive action. In line with our child protection policy and human resources handbook, he was immediately suspended from party membership and his position as a press officer, with his employment terminated in June 2022 when his contract ended. I was made aware of his suspension, and I had no further contact with him. On 14 February 2023, I attended the event in the Great Hall in support of the Donate4Dáithí campaign, hosted by the British Heart Foundation. My sole focus was on Dáithí and supporting the family to raise awareness for the campaign. I was not aware that Michael McMonagle was at that event, and I had no knowledge either that he had gained employment with the British Heart Foundation. On Wednesday 25 September 2024, Sinn Féin and I were informed that two press offers who were former colleagues of Michael McMonagle had provided employment references for him. I am absolutely appalled and horrified that that occurred. Those references were given without the knowledge or authorisation of the party, and under no circumstances would the party have provided a reference, for work or otherwise, for McMonagle. The party took immediate action against both individuals, and their actions constituted gross misconduct, which would have resulted in their dismissal. However, as the party process was ongoing, both individuals resigned their positions and terminated their party membership with immediate effect on Saturday 28 September. On behalf of Sinn Féin, I apologise for the hurt and distress caused by their actions. I have since also established, on Thursday of last week, that, in August 2023, following media reports of charges against McMonagle, the British Heart Foundation contacted Sinn Féin's former HR manager to verify the email address and identity of the senior press officer who had provided the reference the previous year, to which the HR manager responded. That contact from the British Heart Foundation was not brought to my attention nor to the attention of the Sinn Féin leadership at that time. That was a serious omission. Members will know that I spoke with Fearghal McKinney, head of the British Heart Foundation here, to discuss the situation. That organisation does sterling, excellent work to provide support, research and advocacy services. I am deeply sorry for the reputational damage that has been caused to the British Heart Foundation. I regret that this has happened, and I apologise for it. I look forward to a constructive working relationship with the British Heart Foundation in promoting heart health. Finally, Mr Speaker — thank you for the latitude — I want to be very clear that the issue of child safeguarding is of paramount importance to me. I will do everything that I can to ensure that a situation like this never arises again.

I welcome the fact that I have the opportunity to set the record straight. As Members will know, I tried to do that on Saturday with a comprehensive statement that set out exactly what I knew and when I knew it. I take my responsibility as a political leader seriously. I want to set the record straight because I want the public to be assured that safeguarding is of paramount importance to me, particularly when it comes to young children. I wanted to take the opportunity today to be clear about what I knew and when I knew it. I hope that I have been able to provide that information. I assure you that, had I known that references had been requested for Michael McMonagle, they would not have been given. I would never have given permission for that. The two former press officers took that action and provided the references without my knowledge. Had I known, I would have stopped it. It would not have happened because I would not have tolerated that. I have no tolerance whatsoever when it comes to child protection issues. I want to set that out. Let me also say this about the photographs that appeared last week of me attending the British Heart Foundation event in Stormont: I understand how people have taken it in the way in which they have, but I was solely focused on going to see that wee man. I was solely focused on going to support the campaign, and I was not aware of everybody else who was around me. I just want to make that clear again, but I also understand how people might take it a different way. I can only set out and account for my own actions. I want to be clear about that today.

I want to give a full account, as I said, of what I knew and when I knew it. Today gives me the opportunity to do so. I tried to do that in a written statement on Saturday, and I want to do it again today because I take my responsibilities seriously when it comes to safeguarding. I am a mother and a grandmother. Of course, the issue is right up there on my list of priorities and concerns. I have set out my account of what I knew and when I knew it. I hope that that provides some assurance to the public about my role, what I understood and when I understood it. I have been as factual as I can be about everything that I now know. That is what I have put out very publicly.

I assure the Member that I took all the precautions that he does when he employs a member of staff in the Assembly. I employed him many years before this occurred. I do not make any secret of that. It is all on public record, and anybody can inspect it. The same processes that apply to the Member's staff apply to my staff.

1,242 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.10 (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 (0.99).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.04No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.07No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.34No
Overall judgement0.10At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.99
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.01
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.47
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.27
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.18
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.03
Another identity-related subject0.03

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:22 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.

Challenge this classification