Debate contribution: Audit and Re-imaging of Memorials
Debate contribution by Miss Deirdre Hargey on .
- MLA
- Miss Deirdre Hargey
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 11 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Audit and Re-imaging of Memorials
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5349715
Read the official Assembly record
Text
These are important issues that we are discussing here today. The FICT report states:
"The process of remembering can be a crucial part of people's culture and identity. Social groups draw upon the past to tell them who they are."
The motion rightly acknowledges that people should have the right to remember the dead. That approach was recognised in the FICT report, which stated:
"Remembering the dead is a human and sensitive process that all communities have in common."
We see that across our society, whether it is in memorial gardens or on plaques or cenotaphs that are in public spaces, government buildings or our communities. In republican areas, as in others, there are memorial gardens located in communities that have an emotional attachment to, and acceptance of, them, as those who are being remembered were often from those very communities. Those areas provide a space for remembrance and reflection, particularly for relatives, friends and the local community. They are often community initiatives that are financed, constructed and maintained by the community. Of course, that act of remembrance and reflection takes place right across our community, and those spaces often provide a sense of acknowledgement and reflection to those communities that have been impacted on by our recent conflict. As I said, those spaces can take many forms, such as gardens, cenotaphs, statues and plaques. They are located across all our neighbourhoods. They also reflect the diverse narratives around the cause of, and factors that sustained, our conflict. They are a recognition that we have a contested past that emanates from that conflict. People who have been impacted on by the conflict can often have different, as well as shared, lived experiences. We may not agree with each other on the narratives and perspectives, but we can listen and understand others' narratives and the impact of the conflict as we attempt the process of understanding and reconciliation. I will give the example of City Hall in Belfast, which Ciara Ferguson touched on. I was directly involved in looking at the memorabilia in that building, which, because of the building's history, came from a predominantly unionist perspective. The DUP, UUP, Alliance, the SDLP and Sinn Féin all sat in on that process. We had a historic centenaries working group, and work was done on the display of memorabilia. I was directly involved in each of those groups. Through that work, we came up with a set of principles and an agreement, which the five political parties signed up to, to recognise the different narratives that pertained to the conflict and the impact that it had on our history. That meant that we could mark those occasions, and when we looked at the decade of centenaries — from 2010 to 2020 — we did so in an inclusive manner that respected all the different perspectives and traditions. That did not mean that you had to agree with a perspective that you found difficult, but that perspective had a place and it was represented, and the approach was inclusive. I believe that that can be done now. All the parties in Belfast City Hall marked key occasions, including the centenaries of the signing of the Ulster covenant, the First World War, the Battle of the Somme and the 1916 Easter Rising. Do you know what, folks? The sky did not fall in. People came together and marked those occasions, and then we moved on to the next process, which was about re-imaging.
I will, if I have time at the end, Phillip, no problem. I am just conscious of my time. The need for inclusivity, and to rebalance and represent, can be satisfied. The Housing Executive's re-imaging scheme has been mentioned, and it was successful. It was involved in my community, and the re-imaged murals that depict the history of the Market are still there today. That scheme assisted many communities. What made it work and what was unique about it was that it was a voluntary process that engaged communities and built capacity at that level. It was not imposed on the communities that it was trying to work with. Those are important points to make. There was further talk of a day of reflection. The FICT report mentioned the need for that. I know that Healing Through Remembering has a day of reflection on 21 June each year. When we are looking at these issues, we should engage in a way that is inclusive and has communities at its heart.
Belfast City Hall is a prime example of that.
758 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 (0.62).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.93).
- 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 | 0.26 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.32 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.13 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.62 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.11 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.93 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.04 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.49 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.40 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.10 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:38 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.