Debate contribution: Legacy: Holding the Irish Government to Account
Debate contribution by Mrs Linda Dillon on .
- MLA
- Mrs Linda Dillon
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 23 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Legacy: Holding the Irish Government to Account
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5129214
Read the official Assembly record
Text
No, I will not. Allow me to go on further. I will let you back in. The DUP agreed to that. It was far from a perfect mechanism, but, at least, it had buy-in from many victims. At least, they had a say in it and had input to it and were consulted on it. Seventeen and a half thousand people responded to that consultation. There are not many consultations that we can say that about. As I said, victims have told us that they want a process that they can trust. They need a process that commands their confidence and does not simply re-litigate old political arguments but seeks to meet their needs: truth recovery, justice, where possible, and recognition of the harm done. That is why any legacy —.
Am I OK to move on?
That is why any legacy framework must be victim-led and have broad support. It cannot be imposed by London or Dublin or even by the Assembly. As I said, it is worth remembering that we have been here before. We had the Stormont House Agreement, which had the endorsement of the Assembly. The DUP supported it, and both Governments were involved in it. The agreement envisaged a role for the Irish Government, who were very involved in the conversations around it.
A process that fails to include cooperation from both Governments would fail all victims.
I share concerns about the British Government's approach to the unilateral passage of the Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 and the amnesty provisions that have undermined confidence across the board, but the answer is not to walk away from engagement. The answer is to insist on a process that victims can trust, that compels disclosure, that has investigative powers and truth recovery processes, and that puts victims at the centre. I ask that everybody in the Assembly works together to that end, not scoring political points but securing a process that commands confidence, deals with the past comprehensively and allows victims to finally get the answers that they have been denied for too long. I am asking that Members in the Chamber today support our amendment because, truthfully, I think that the original motion is political posturing and has little or no focus on the victims' needs or asks. Legacy is not about whataboutery; it is about families all across our community. I could name many, just as the Member across the Chamber did, but I do not think that they want us to name them; they want us to deliver for them. They lost mothers, sons, daughters, fathers, brothers and sisters during the conflict. They come from all backgrounds and lost their loved ones at the hands of those from all backgrounds. They all, without exception, deserve to know the truth and have the justice that they require for their loved ones. I hope that we will get some of that, but it remains to be seen what will be in the legislative text following the announcement by the two Governments on Friday. Let me be very clear: as a party, we will listen to all victims, as I have done over many years. From as far back as 2016 and 2017, I have been meeting victims and families from all backgrounds, who were killed and injured by all actors in the conflict, whether republicans, loyalists or state actors. They will decide on the process that meets their needs. The DUP does not get to decide who a victim is. The definition of a victim is outlined in the Northern Ireland Act 2006. You do not get to decide it, I do not get to decide it, nobody in this Chamber gets to decide it. The definition of a victim is there. I would like us all to accept that, move on and understand this: every single family that lost a loved one feels the same pain; every single family that lost a loved one deserves the same truth; and every single family that lost a loved one deserves the same justice. That is it. There is no equivocation and no nonsense. Every person who died is a loss, and every person who has gone is missed and loved by the people who lost them. Let us just stop this nonsense in the Chamber. I know that people in the Chamber have lost loved ones — right across the Chamber, from all backgrounds. We cannot ignore that. I am one of the very lucky people who did not. I understand that, so I do not speak for victims. That is why I listen to them.
769 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: 0.11 (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 (0.89).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.50).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- 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 | 0.09 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.11 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.50 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.50 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.97 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.03 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:10 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.