Debate contribution: Legislation Programme 2025-26
Debate contribution by Mr Declan Kearney on .
- MLA
- Mr Declan Kearney
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 13 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Legislation Programme 2025-26
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5176054
Read the official Assembly record
Text
To strike a positive note, I welcome the legislative programme that has been outlined and today's debate on it. As legislators, we must grasp every opportunity to improve the lives of the people whom we represent. In the Executive legislation programme for 2025-26, there is very worthwhile legislation from every Department. The Executive Office's proposed race equality Bill, for example, is much-needed legislation. It must be conscientiously progressed at a time at which we face increased racial and sectarian tensions in some parts of society. As Sinn Féin's workers' rights spokesperson, I particularly welcome the proposed 'good jobs' employment rights Bill, which the Minister for the Economy will introduce in the Assembly in January. My party has consistently advocated for stronger workers' rights. That Bill will be the most progressive workers' rights legislation ever introduced in this state. Its strong workers' rights provisions will protect the most vulnerable workers, among them young people, women and citizens with disabilities. It is designed to support workers who find themselves bearing the brunt of unfair and unequal employment practices. They are those whom we describe as the "precariat": those who endure precarious working conditions. That progressive legislation promises to transform workplaces positively through proposals that will bring tangible benefits not only for workers and families but for employers and businesses. The legislation will come at a time when cross-border and all-Ireland economic activity increases to record levels. In that context, the need to build a well-paid, secure and highly skilled workforce to support that continued economic growth is key. Stronger trade union organisation is a foundation on which to maximise productivity and shared prosperity. The 'good jobs' legislation will address fair play in benefits, terms of contracts, leave entitlements, flexible working arrangements and protections from redundancy, thus strengthening union organisation and improving collective bargaining arrangements. The proposed Bill is premised on four key themes: terms of employment; pay and benefits; voice and representation; and work-life balance. It will, for instance, allow workers on zero-hours contracts to move to banded-hours contracts. It will tackle fire-and-rehire practices, ensure that tips are passed on in full to the workers who earned them and give workers a right to disconnect from workplace demands. It will also expand trade union membership rights, strengthen collective bargaining, provide better leave entitlements for carers and implement neonatal pay and leave entitlements for the parents of newborn children. Those elements are among the proposed legislative improvements to modernise our workplace and our economy. The legislation is focused on improving the lives of all our workers and families across our entire community. It is so important that we get it right. I hope that, in the months ahead, the legislation will be scrutinised in a non-partisan way and, moreover, that its focus on strengthening the economy and making life better for workers and families will be supported right across the Assembly.
478 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.86).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.77).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.86 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.77 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.22 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.80 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.10 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.07 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:28 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.