Debate contribution: East-West Council: Second Meeting

Debate contribution by Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly on .

MLA
Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
30 June 2025
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Ministerial Statements
Heading
East-West Council: Second Meeting
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5042880

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Member for his question. He will be aware that 'Safeguarding the Union' is a White Paper that was produced by the UK Government. That followed a series of negotiations and set out the framework for restoration of this place. The commitments made in that paper are critical to the continued stability of this place. Of course, the UK Government should step up. At the heart of that, of course, is a commitment by the UK Government, supported by the shadow Labour Government of the time, to ensure unfettered trade across and within the United Kingdom. That is not happening. That promise was made not just to the political parties in Northern Ireland but to the people of Northern Ireland. The UK Government must step up and remove any existing barriers to internal trade across the United Kingdom.

I thank the Member for her question. She will be aware that this is a body that looks exclusively at the internal relationships of the UK. There was a gap, in my view, in what arose from the various negotiations. We had the British-Irish Council, which deals with all the jurisdictions, including the Republic of Ireland, and we had the North/South Ministerial Council, which deals with Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, but we did not have a body that looked at Northern Ireland's particular place within the United Kingdom. Over the course of the Brexit negotiations and discussions, we, sadly, saw how carelessly Northern Ireland's place within the internal market of the UK was treated by the then UK Government. We had a determination that that should not happen again, hence this formal structure to raise, in a formal way, issues pertaining to Northern Ireland within the UK context. The Member is correct that there is an element of the terms of reference, particularly with the work of Intertrade UK, that involves attracting foreign direct investment to Northern Ireland. While our international relationships are not devolved per se, we have a role in the international space. Some of that is about attracting international investment — foreign direct investment — and part of that is around the soft diplomacy piece and reaching out through our bureaux, making sure that there is awareness of Northern Ireland, be that through sport, golf or our businesses, and taking part in those trade missions. That is a critical element of the draft international relations strategy that is under development in the Department. We are hopeful of having sight of a final strategy very shortly and aim to have it agreed, presented and published early in the autumn.

I thank the Member for her question. There is a huge amount of possibility here. Hopefully, we will be able to see some of that through the Connect Fund, as it rolls out. Very often, many of the challenges that we face here are common across the rest of the UK, be that around trying to increase productivity, attract foreign direct investment or the challenges of tackling educational underachievement. We know that, for example, we have an exceptional third sector in Northern Ireland. We want that sector to be given opportunities to connect with other community and third-sector organisations across the rest of the UK to share that learning. Over the past number of weeks, it has been hugely disappointing to see disorder and racism on the streets of Northern Ireland. That is not unique to Northern Ireland, sadly; it has happened elsewhere, including across communities in the UK. That is another example of where, through coordination, be that from the various police forces, civic organisations, youth intervention or education, there could be really good opportunities to find solutions by working together in a collaborative way to benefit ourselves, but there could also be opportunities for our organisations to benefit others, be they in Scotland, Wales, the north of England, London or wherever they may be.

I thank the Member for her important question. There are two elements to that. First, all the companies that withdraw from our market do so because they do not understand the current trading relationships or believe them to be more complex than they are. Intertrade UK will have an important role in trying to bust some of those myths to encourage that trade to continue. That is what is best for our businesses, and that is what is best for our consumers. There is also an opportunity for Intertrade UK to promote our excellent goods to the rest of the UK, particularly in the agri-food sector and other sectors. We are also seeing another real problem. I am sure that, like myself, the Member is continually contacted by companies about the unnecessary bureaucracy that people are facing with the internal market of the UK. The internal market of the UK is important to Northern Ireland — not just to our businesses but to our consumers when it comes to consumer choice. Over the past week, we have seen even more bureaucracy come in. We have heard already today about agricultural machinery coming back from the Royal Highland Show and being stopped because of tightened requirements, and we have seen tweets from the head of Marks and Spencer in which he has talked about 300 to 400 additional lines having to go through the red lane and about the additional bureaucracy, which, in his view, is entirely unnecessary. I agree with him. I have said this before, and I will say it again very clearly: the UK Government promised in what they set out on the Windsor framework in 'Safeguarding the Union' that there would be unfettered internal UK trade. They are not delivering on that. In fact, there is even more paperwork and bureaucracy, regardless of the recently announced UK-EU agreement. The paperwork and bureaucracy are not acceptable, proportionate or necessary, and they need to be removed. The UK Government need to step up and deliver on the promise of unfettered internal UK trade that they made to the people of Northern Ireland.

1,003 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: 0.07 (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 (0.83).
  • The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.79).
  • Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
  • 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 framing0.06No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.03No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.07No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.83Yes
Overall judgement0.07At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing0.21
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it (chosen)0.79
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers0.48
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.39
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.12
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:58 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