Debate contribution: European Future for Northern Ireland
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 2 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- European Future for Northern Ireland
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4981522
Read the official Assembly record
Text
In the surreal world of Stormont, I rise to speak after a speech that included references to Mystic Meg, thrush and dandruff. I will try my best to continue. I do not have long to speak, so I will get straight to the point. Our place is in Europe. The motion from the Opposition is important, because it offers us a moment to consider not just where we are but who we want to be — who the majority want to be. If we truly want to be back in the European Union, with the many benefits that that would bring to us in trade, movement of people and developing communities, we need to be honest with ourselves that that road now runs through a new Ireland. To be direct, anyone who believes that we will re-enter the EU as part of the UK is either naive, fooling themselves or just wilfully blind to the reality of where we find ourselves. Our re-entry will not happen as part of the United Kingdom: that is the hard truth. If the Members who tabled the amendment were entirely honest with themselves, they would accept that the UK is not moving back towards Europe; it is drifting further away from Europe and doing so at disturbing speed. When far-right voices like Reform are gaining ground, when schools are used as political weapons and when the rich are given bigger breaks while people who are struggling are left to fend for themselves, we can no longer pretend that re-entry to the EU will come from that direction. The British state has made its choice, but we must be allowed to make ours. I do not say that in anger or bitterness; rather, I say it with a sense of hope for the future. The truth that gives me strength every day is that Northern Ireland has shown the world what peacebuilding looks like. We have shown that history does not have to define us. Rather, it is our choices that do so. Now, we have a new challenge and a new opportunity to set a new course as one nation: a new Ireland that would take us back into Europe. In that single market of over 440 million customers, there would be stability for businesses, free movement for our young people, the rights of all and the rule of law would be enshrined, and we would be rejoining a larger family of nations. I believe in that future. I believe in it because I have seen it first-hand in our communities. I have seen people in Downpatrick, Newcastle, Warrenpoint and further afield working hard for their communities and looking out for their neighbours. That, to me, is what the EU is about. That is not something that any of us has to fear. We have lived through a century when we have seen our world become smaller. We now live in a global neighbourhood. People such as Trump, Farage and Putin — imperial isolationists — will struggle and ultimately fail. Our neighbourhood and our future could be more welcoming, inclusive and prosperous. I urge Members to think of the future — think of their children and grandchildren and their future. If the UK will not take us back into Europe, we must ask this: what or whom will that take us towards? The United Kingdom is no longer united, nor will it act in our best interests. Let us choose a future that will look after us.
I am on my last two words of "thank you", but, if you want, I will let you in.
An arms struggle — just what our world needs at this exact time. Maybe it is that mentality that we need to try to challenge. I hope that we can challenge that as part of Europe and not as part of the disunited United Kingdom.
647 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: 0.40 (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 (0.49).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
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 | 0.59 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.15 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.44 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.21 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.23 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.40 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.49 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.28 |
| Adopts it | 0.23 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.89 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.10 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:46 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.