Debate contribution: Enhancing Accountability and Trust in Government
Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on .
- MLA
- Mr Robbie Butler
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Enhancing Accountability and Trust in Government
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4773941
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The Ulster Unionist Party has an unwavering commitment to ensuring that Northern Ireland has stable and credible government. That is not in question. At a time when we were emerging from a dark and challenging period in our history, the Belfast Agreement was a seismic shift for the people of this special part of the United Kingdom and, indeed, the island of Ireland. It was built on generosity, compromise and the fundamental belief that democracy should work for all. We must also acknowledge that it is now 2025 and we have not travelled as far as we should have done, but we need to be clear that we are not where we once were. Progress has been made, and, while challenges remain, we must move forward with determination and vision. Review and improvement should always be at the heart of good governance, but let us not pretend that all so-called reforms have served the people well. The changes made at St Andrews and at Stormont House stripped away much of the original spirit of the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement, replacing it with some siloed political ambition. Those changes rubber-stamped the dominance of Sinn Féin and the DUP, which, despite Mr Harvey's contention, has led to stagnation and a lack of progress. The motion, while well-intentioned, does not tell the full story. Yes, there is no doubt that the Executive are struggling, but much of that is down to the fact that, yet again, we are operating within a compressed legislative time frame. Five years out of the past nine without a functioning Government has left Northern Ireland's health service in crisis, our education system under strain and our public services starved of direction. That must never happen again. We welcome the call in the motion for a firm commitment from the First Minister and deputy First Minister not to collapse the Assembly. The people of Northern Ireland deserve stability, not political brinkmanship, but let me go further. If we are to talk about real reform, let us commit to ensuring that any substantive change has, like the Belfast Agreement, the confidence of the people whom we serve. Let us put any significant proposals to the people of Northern Ireland, because political stability cannot be built on deals done behind closed doors or on a political wish list from the Alliance Party. It must be rooted in public trust. The Ulster Unionist Party stands ready to work constructively —.
One second, please. The Ulster Unionist Party stands ready to work constructively for a Northern Ireland that governs effectively, that delivers for all and that earns back the trust of the people. I will let the Member come in very briefly, because I will get no additional time.
In proposing the amendment, the Member for Lagan Valley admitted to it being a bit of a wish list from the Alliance Party's asks. From the New Decade, New Approach negotiations and subsequent talks that I have been involved in, the party to my left will know how difficult it is to get those things over the line. If we are to get them over the line, we will need the will of the people, not just the will of the people in the Chamber.
540 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: 0.13 (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 (0.96).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- 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 | 0.21 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.05 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.15 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.49 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.13 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.96 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.04 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.47 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.23 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.20 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.07 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:52 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.