Debate contribution: Racist Incidents
Debate contribution by Mr Brian Kingston on .
- MLA
- Mr Brian Kingston
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 12 November 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Committee Business
- Heading
- Racist Incidents
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4658352
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The motion has been brought to the Assembly by the Committee for the Executive Office, through its Chair. I rise, as a DUP member of the Committee, along with my colleague Harry Harvey, in support of the motion. The racially motivated attacks witnessed over the summer were shocking, unacceptable and unjustifiable. We support the proposal for a comprehensive and rapid review of how and why it transpired. The proposal for a review, as has been mentioned, was raised with the Committee by the Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime. The Democratic Unionist Party is committed to building a safe and inclusive society in Northern Ireland. No one should have to live in fear because of where they were born, the colour of their skin or their religious beliefs. The targeting of homes, businesses and places of worship is and always has been absolutely wrong. In this matter, the focus is, rightly, on the actions of a minority who spread misinformation, anonymously called for protests and orchestrated violence and wanton destruction. However, let us not lose sight of the fact that the vast majority of people in Northern Ireland do value and appreciate the positive role that members of newcomer communities play in our society, in our public services, including health, and in a host of vital sectors in our economy, including manufacturing, IT services, agri-food and the fishing industry. I thank them for their contribution. Northern Ireland is becoming more ethnically diverse. We can see that, statistically, in the census figures and in our workplaces, our schools, local communities and on our streets. In some areas, the rate of change has been challenging for some people. The scale and nature of immigration into any country is a legitimate topic of political and public debate. However, without question, some people with a racist agenda have exploited other people's concerns, and we saw the tragic and destructive outworking of that this summer. Those who come to Northern Ireland ought to be welcomed and supported. Many voluntary groups assist with that, but so, also, should the full apparatus of government. It is equally important that the needs of people who have lived in an area for generations should continue to be met. Ensuring that that balance is struck is key to ensuring that there is community cohesion and good relations. As we said during the recall debate on those disturbances on 8 August, the DUP wants to see meaningful dialogue with affected communities. Violence is never justified; nor should it be an excuse for public bodies and politicians to ignore concerns that are legitimately expressed. Any review led by TEO must meaningfully explore community relations in areas where there is, currently, significant ethnic diversity or, indeed, where demographics are projected to change. That includes issues of access to housing and public services.
We need to be able to identify areas where tensions exist at an earlier stage as part of existing tension-monitoring processes.
Acts of hate crime must have consequences for those who are responsible for them. However, just strengthening hate crime laws will not resolve all the challenges that we face where tensions have arisen due to increasing ethnic diversity. Let us remember that race is already a protected characteristic under hate crime legislation. Of course, the PSNI and the courts must have adequate powers to crack down on racially motivated crime, but that alone will not be the silver bullet for the challenges that we face. Elected representatives have a responsibility to promote tolerance, good relations and the rule of law, but not just to preach from afar. We have a responsibility to engage with local communities and to work with them and with statutory and voluntary agencies to address local needs and concerns. Ultimately, we must do all that we can to address these issues proactively and not just rely on the criminal justice system. This will include challenging and changing attitudes and mindsets in families, in workplaces and at community level. For many years, good relations in Northern Ireland has, understandably, focused on our sectarian divisions. I hope that the review will provide an additional focus on the need to support community cohesion and awareness in areas and communities where ethnic diversity has increased.
705 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: 0.11 (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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.86).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.80).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- 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 | 0.23 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.04 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.11 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.86 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.11 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.09 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.80 |
| Adopts it | 0.11 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.98 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| 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 11:32 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.