Debate contribution: Towards a Shared Island
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Towards a Shared Island
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4774721
Read the official Assembly record
Text
First, I will state a fact and a truth, which is that we share this island. We absolutely share this island. The two states share this island. Many peoples share this island, and so it should be. That is the way that it is meant to be. That is the way that you would want to be treated by your neighbour in your development, and that is how you would want to treat your neighbour in your development. It is the same thing with states. We live on such a small island that, surely, it should not be that hard, but, of course, knowing our history, I can say that it has been hard. That is a real shame. Back in the 1920s, we had an opportunity to share the island, and strides were made. However, that was undermined on many occasions. Collins, when he faced down the anti-treaty republicans, received support from, of all people, Winston Churchill and Britain, and he was armed. What did he do with those arms? He used the surplus to arm Frank Aiken to terrorise Northern Ireland. He undermined the state of Northern Ireland at every opportunity. There was the border campaign of the 1950s and the Provo campaign euphemistically called "the Troubles", which caused great despair and harm to all peoples, including the Catholic population of Northern Ireland. When you learn from our history, you can understand why we are not in the healthy place that we should be. The mood and trend of the motion can be equally attributed to sharing these islands. The Opposition are not necessarily opposing or scrutinising the work of the Executive. Basically, they are pushing their constitutional position and philosophy into the amendment, which is OK. The Opposition have the right to put down motions as they see fit, but I would love to see them using more of their energy to convince the Westminster Government to understand this place better — all its arts and parts and all its people — so that, when we talk about sharing, we talk about sharing understanding throughout these islands. Believe it or not, even the British Isles are a small place, let alone the island of Ireland, so more work must be done in that regard. We would get a far better bang for our buck if we could convince Westminster to understand this place and all its diverse parts much better.
403 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: 0.27 (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 (0.59).
- 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 | 0.38 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.09 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.06 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.22 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.20 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.12 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.27 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.59 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.28 |
| Adopts it | 0.12 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.81 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.12 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.05 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.02 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:55 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.