Debate contribution: Illegal Immigration: Impact in Northern Ireland
Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 20 May 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Illegal Immigration: Impact in Northern Ireland
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4964303
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I commend the Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone on her excellent contribution. Well, well, it did not take long for the insults and abuse to be heard across the Chamber. As I predicted yesterday, they would rather fight with insults than speak to the facts that are before them today.
The people whom we speak for are not far right, are not extremists and are not fascists, but, given the language used in the discourse from the Benches opposite, it is no wonder that members of the public feel unheard, unvalued and that politicians do not care what they have to say.
I want to respond to some of the issues that the leader of the Opposition raised. I will put my record, my commitment and the commitment of my party to working-class communities against anyone's in the House. I would not dare challenge any Member's commitment to their constituents, and I do not expect or appreciate his attempting to quantify my commitment to the people whom I am honoured to represent. He described these Benches as containing "young right-wingers". I do not think that I am particularly young or right wing, but, if standing up and speaking up for the people who put their trust in me makes me a young right-winger, I will wear that badge with honour. My party and I will take no lectures on political extremism from the Benches opposite. This party never justified political violence, this party never supported the murder of people based on the sole fact that they were Protestants, and this party never attempted to inflict genocide on the Protestant population of this country. That was your party opposite. The Alliance Party's contribution —.
Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. The only party, of course, that raised the issue of skin colour and religion — it is not included in our motion — was the Alliance Party. That party thrives on division. It thrives on looking down on those who do not subscribe to their woke nonsense and liberal elitism. This party has a right to bring forward the issues that matter to the people whom we represent, and that is exactly what we are doing today. Just as the Alliance Party is more interested in policing the flying of our flag from lamp posts than illegal immigration, we will stand up for those who voted for us.
I will happily give way.
That brings me on to why this party will oppose the amendment. First, removing the lamentation about illegal immigration does a disservice to the tens of thousands of wonderful people in every corner of Northern Ireland who have gone through the proper process to come to Northern Ireland, who have invested in this country, who nurse our sick and who look on in absolute disgust that the process that they went through is not being followed by others. The leader of the Opposition said that we are not interested in the issue of HMOs, so I want to touch on that. It is absolutely destroying parts of my constituency of North Belfast. Inner cities are unrecognisable from what they were many, many years ago. Pensioners who come into my office are concerned because they have seven or eight males moving into the house next door. That is not extremism or fascism; that is someone who wants to live in peace in a house that they bought 40 years ago. They paid taxes and should be looked after. The issues that face the people of North Belfast are no different from those that face all Members and all our constituents, but people seem to struggle with the basic fact that two things can be correct at the same time. Yes, we need to see more investment in housing, and, yes, we need to see more investment in the NHS, but having uncontrolled immigration continues to stress and strain a system that does not have the capacity. This party tabled the motion in the face of the hurling of abuse and mud-slinging that we knew would come, but, ultimately, we are not accountable to those who sit on the other Benches. We are accountable to the people who voted for us. I know where the people of my constituency stand, however, and that is firmly behind the motion that we have brought to the House today.
727 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers
Jev’s structured answers met every documented threshold for a qualifying culture-war activity.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.74 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.65); Dog-whistle messaging (0.83).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.90).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- The text adopts an antagonistic or dog-whistle framing, which qualifies even alongside legitimate scrutiny.
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 | 0.65 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.56 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.18 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.83 | Yes |
| Controversy escalation | 0.57 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.43 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.74 | Above qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.04 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.06 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.90 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.74 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.14 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.11 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:33 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.