Debate contribution: Legislation Programme 2025-26
Debate contribution by Miss Nuala McAllister on .
- MLA
- Miss Nuala McAllister
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 13 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Legislation Programme 2025-26
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5176097
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I will speak first about a number of pieces of Health legislation that are in the programme and some that are not in the programme but which have previously been outlined to Members, particularly those on the Health Committee, as part of our first-day brief. I echo the sentiments expressed by Members, particularly my colleagues on the Health Committee, about the safe and effective staffing Bill. It is very important that we have a health workforce that is able to carry out its duty without fear that its members do not have the appropriate help on hand to deliver the job. It is long overdue, having been initially proposed by Minister Swann for nursing staff in 2020 and expanded to all professional groups in 2022. The consultation closed a year ago, so we are eager to see the report and a summary of the responses to it. What will be most important, as with a lot of the Bills, is its implementation: what it actually means on the ground for the people who are affected. Another Bill that we wanted to see come to the Assembly before the mandate ends is the minimum unit pricing Bill. It is very unfortunate that we will not see it any time soon. It was stated in the first-day brief that it was in the pre-drafting stage for introduction early next year. I am disappointed that it seems as though that will not happen. It has been stated numerous times at Committee that the duty of candour Bill is being progressed by the Department. However, we have learnt that it has been paused. Although the Hillsborough law is being moved through Westminster, there is still an element of playing catch-up. That comes in the organisational duty of candour meeting the individual duty of candour. It is important that we continue to engage on those issues. There is no point in making promises that cannot be kept, or which you had no intention of keeping from the very beginning. I am looking forward to seeing elements of a number of other Bills, particularly around Charlotte's law. The disclosure of the location of victims' remains is so important to everyone in society, despite the fact that, thankfully, it affects only a very small number of people. We cannot overestimate the effect that it has. I look forward to seeing Charlotte's law introduced here in Northern Ireland. I am also particularly looking forward to the later stages of the Justice Bill. I will table amendments to the Bill that have already been consulted on at the Policing Board and by the Department. It is really important that all Members participate eagerly in all pieces of legislation so that we can improve them where necessary and can also bring our ideas to the table. Something that I am proud to be part of in a working democratic Assembly is the passing of legislation. I will touch for a moment on the independent environmental protection agency. Alliance completely supports an independent environmental protection agency. Minister Muir has taken decisive action to see that delivered.
The Member can laugh and smirk. It is not churlish to point out the hypocrisy of the SDLP. When it comes to an independent environmental protection agency, Minister Muir has delivered more in a short mandate than the SDLP did in the five years that it held the post.
Yes.
I did not say that he had delivered the independent environmental protection agency; I said that he had taken steps to do that. I think that you misheard me. We know that it has not been finalised yet, but we look forward to the finalised report's coming out. I am sure that the Minister can give an update on that. The interim recommendations in the report that was commissioned by Minister Muir highlighted the fact that an independent environmental protection agency should be established. Many parties in the Chamber missed the opportunity to vote that into the Climate Change Bill in the previous mandate. I welcome the many elements of animal welfare legislation from Minister Muir. It is an issue that all Members across the Chamber are contacted about every single day. We know how passionate people are. We are passionate about protecting animals, which cannot speak up for themselves. I look forward to the many pieces of animal welfare policy that will be implemented through legislation from the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. Another Member mentioned Members' Bills. Another opportunity that I welcome as an individual MLA is to bring forward legislation in the House, because it is not only about the Executive's programme but about using our powers as individual MLAs to change issues. I hope to pursue a Member's Bill on private cemeteries and burial grounds. I know that I am diverging from the subject of the debate, but it is important that we use all the power that we have as MLAs in the power-sharing Executive, in opposition and as individuals —
— to progress legislation.
837 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: 0.08 (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 (0.87).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.05 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.12 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.11 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.08 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.62 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.30 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.03 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
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 reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.