Debate contribution: Sectarian and Racist Intimidation

Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on 16 September 2025.

MLA

Mr Phillip Brett

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

16 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Sectarian and Racist Intimidation

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5111839

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate. I associate myself with the remarks made by the proposer of the motion. Ms Armstrong eloquently articulated the views and concerns of Members right across the House that sectarianism, racism, Islamophobia and — I add this as a North Belfast representative — antisemitism have no place in our society. However, we do ourselves and the House a disservice when Members make scripted remarks and are selective in the condemnation of sectarian or racist attacks. My constituency has been mentioned in a number of contributions by Members, and factually inaccurate information has been put out. I make it very clear that the people of North Belfast, of all traditions and none, are not a sectarian people. They are not a racist people. Despite facing the worst brunt of the Troubles, they have a remarkable resilience about how they want to make North Belfast a better place for everyone. I wish that the condemnation by Members of sectarian attacks had some consistency. In my constituency, the Felden development of over 100 homes was an Executive flagship project under Together: Building a United Community. As soon as that development started, no Protestants were allowed. Irish tricolours were erected, and the name of the housing officer who was allocating those houses was sprayed on a wall. Unfortunately, there was no cross-party condemnation of those attacks. No cross-party, multi-agency meetings were called under the glare of the media. There were no self-appointed do-gooders going to the media, making up stories about loyalist paramilitaries, to try to electrify one particular community. Therefore, we do ourselves a disservice when we selectively call out sectarianism or racism. We need to be clear in the House that sectarianism in all its forms needs to be called out, not just when it suits our political agenda.

As the debate has gone on, we have, unfortunately, strayed back into the difficult position where anyone who dares raise any issues about immigration is automatically labelled as an extremist or a member of the far right. Let me be very clear: anyone who engages in any form of violence or any form of attack on a minority is absolutely disgraceful. However, if anyone whom I represent comes to me with concerns about a UK-wide immigration policy and wants to protect the borders of their country, I will not allow them to be labelled as a racist or a member of the far right. They have democratic legitimacy to raise their concerns with their elected representatives. It is our duty and moral obligation to articulate those in a democratic setting, and that is what I will continue to do. My party recognises the difficulties that our housing system faces, and that is why my party stepped forward and selected the portfolio of —

I will happily give way.

I will always say that housing should be allocated on the basis of need. Unfortunately, the two members of your party who represent the area, Mr Kelly and Ms Ní Chuilín, did not make comment, but a councillor from a different district was wheeled out to make those comments. I will return to the remarks that I was making about why we selected the Communities portfolio. It was because we recognise the vital importance of ensuring that there is affordable and accessible housing for all members of our community. That is why our Communities Minister has taken action by publishing a housing supply strategy, when other Ministers failed to do so. That is why our Minister has taken action on the allocations policy and, rightly, removed intimidation points, which have been abused right across North Belfast, with problem tenants moving from one part to another. That is why our Minister is championing the reclassification of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive so that it can build houses once again to ensure that land that has lain derelict in my constituency of North Belfast can be used to house those who need it and that houses are allocated on the basis of need. I look forward to those parties in the Executive that have stepped forward here today to say that they support the Minister in meeting those housing targets following through on that by ensuring that, when a budget allocation is made, the Minister is given the funding that he needs, because he has shown that, when he gets his funding, he can deliver.

736 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Second assessment

Jev’s answers did not settle this record, so a second model, claude-opus-5-5, read the same text (without the MLA’s name or party) and gave its reasons on 21 October 2026. How the second assessment works

Verdict

Not flagged

Public interest or divisiveness

Mixed

Against the published rubric

The contribution condemns "sectarianism, racism, Islamophobia" and antisemitism, and says violence against minorities is "absolutely disgraceful". It raises a concrete case of sectarian intimidation at a shared housing scheme, where it says "no Protestants were allowed", and makes substantial housing-allocation points. Against this, it leans on the complaint that condemnation is "selective", and dismisses "self-appointed do-gooders" for "making up stories about loyalist paramilitaries", which carries the communal argument on while complaining about it. On balance the core is a call to condemn sectarianism "in all its forms", backed by policy substance, rather than hostility towards a group, so it falls short of the rubric.

Public interest or divisiveness

Much of the text serves the public interest. It defends constituents of "all traditions and none" against being branded sectarian or racist, documents intimidation, and discusses housing supply, intimidation points and allocation on the basis of need. There is also a substantial divisive element. In a debate on racist intimidation, it redirects attention to one community's unacknowledged grievance, waves away reports of loyalist paramilitary involvement as invented, and takes partisan swipes at other parties. Both strands are significant, so it is mixed.

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:16 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