Debate contribution: North/South Bodies: Funding

Debate contribution by Ms Sinéad McLaughlin on .

MLA
Ms Sinéad McLaughlin
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
27 May 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
North/South Bodies: Funding
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4972236

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I support the motion's premise but not without serious reservations about those who tabled it. Let us be honest: if you read the motion in isolation, you might reasonably conclude that Sinn Féin is a party of opposition, not the largest party in the Executive and the one that holds the most powerful Ministries in the devolved institutions. The text of the motion is so detached, vague, hollow and bereft of real proposals that it reads like a grievance from a powerless Back-Bencher, not a motion from the leadership of a dysfunctional Government. That kind of behaviour has become all too familiar in the Chamber. We have seen it before with the DUP walking out of Executive meetings only to reappear with a motion condemning the very crisis for which it was collectively responsible. It is deeply frustrating and, frankly, shameful that Sinn Féin now follows the same pattern: tabling a motion that is full of noise but devoid of responsibility, as though it has no say in the decisions that are being made at the Executive table. The truth is that you cannot abdicate your duty to government only to pop in here with a gesture motion, pretending that you are on the sidelines. I welcome the motion's focus on all-island funding, which my party and I have long advocated for. As a representative of the north-west, I have seen first-hand the real benefits of that kind of cooperation. The expansion of the Magee campus in Derry — long delayed, still unfinished but moving forward — would not have happened without financial support and political will from the Irish Government. The A5 road upgrade, a life-saving project that has languished for years, would not have made it this far without funding and encouragement from Dublin, albeit it is still to progress while lives are still being lost. Those investments are not just symbolic but transformational. They will deliver economic and social benefits for all generations and, in the case of the A5, will save lives. That is the power of cross-border cooperation that is real, meaningful and grounded in need. The Taoiseach recently made it clear that North/South partnerships are essential for our shared economic future. Referencing the Economic and Social Research Institute's (ESRI) 'Sharing the Island' report, he highlighted the need for us to work together to attract foreign direct investment. He pointed out the enormous potential of the border counties to become hubs for very significant economic growth, but only if we act together. That is an opportunity that the Executive should be moving heaven and earth to secure, yet what has this place's purpose been? It has been division, delay, dysfunction and, in this motion, a wee bit of deflection. The Irish Government have offered increased funding to the six North/South bodies at no cost to the Executive. Instead of grabbing that offer with both hands, however, the deputy First Minister has said that, unless the contributions are strictly balanced, the deal cannot proceed. What kind of short-sighted, bean-counting mindset is that?

Surely what matters most is the outcome: better services, better infrastructure and better jobs for our people.

While austerity has undoubtedly wreaked havoc across our economy and society, we cannot continue to fall into the trap of blaming every problem on Westminster while taking absolutely no responsibility for our own failures. Yes, austerity is a political choice, but so is passivity and so is indecision. We have devolution, so we have the tools to lead, but we lack ambition, urgency and courage. Sinn Féin currently holds three of the most important Ministries in the Executive: Finance, Economy and Infrastructure. If it truly believes that this region has been short-changed, why is it not demanding the devolution of tax and spending powers with the full force of government? Where is the campaign led by the Minister of Finance to secure fiscal powers so that we can properly invest in our public services? Why has that not been prioritised? I am tired of hearing that things are someone else's fault. We are more than a year into this Executive, yet the problems feel exactly the same; in fact, in many cases, they are getting worse, because the governing mindset has not changed. Let us take a sober look at the facts: our public services are on their knees; our National Health Service is under unbearable strain; our education system is stretched to breaking point; and our community and voluntary sector hangs by a thread. All of that is happening while the Executive's well-being dashboard shows that only 14 out of 51 key indicators are moving in the right direction. That is a damning indictment of the Executive's failure to govern with purpose. Behind those statistics are real people: people who are watching their income stagnate while prices soar; people whose winter fuel payments have been slashed; and people with disabilities who have been told they must accept less support because that is the price of political choices in London. What about here? What choices are we making? We cannot pretend that additional funding from Dublin — welcome though it may be — will paper over the deep cracks in how this place is run. We need serious, systematic reform that ends the cycle of political walkouts and suspended devolution. In 2017, it was Sinn Féin; in 2022, it was the DUP. Every time that a party throws in the towel, our health system suffers, our schools suffer, our economy suffers and our people suffer. When we have devolved government, we are trapped in a model of siloed Departments that rarely collaborate, even in a crisis. Just last week, former First Minister Arlene Foster told the COVID inquiry that she did not believe that test, trace and isolate was a cross-cutting issue: that speaks volumes. It is not a one-off but the mindset that infects decision-making in this place and across the Executive. Childcare is siloed, climate change is fragmented and regional balance is probably ignored. We must build a system that promotes shared outcomes, not turf wars. The offer of additional North/South funding is a threat to no one. It is an opportunity. It is an invitation to build partnerships based on need, not on tribal balance sheets. It is time to stop viewing cooperation through the lens of us versus them, because it is not about green or orange but about delivering public services, tackling poverty and building an economy that gives hope to young people in Derry as much as it does to young people in Dublin or Drogheda. Let us stop wasting time on vacuous motions and get serious about reform. Let the Executive act as though they want to govern, and not as a collection of parties trying to out-grieve one another.

1,135 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: 0.23 (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 (0.81).
  • The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.52).
  • Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
  • 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 framing0.11No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.06No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.23No
Controversy escalation0.09No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.81Yes
Overall judgement0.23At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing0.43
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it (chosen)0.52
Adopts it0.04
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.64
No identity-related subject0.19
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.08
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.04
Another identity-related subject0.03

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:35 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