Debate contribution: Holding Ministers to Account

Debate contribution by Mr Pat Sheehan on 10 November 2025.

MLA

Mr Pat Sheehan

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

10 November 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Holding Ministers to Account

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5225168

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

First of all, there may be people watching this — sad, as they may be — who do not really understand the remit of the Assembly and Executive Review Committee. With regard to the proposed reforms of the institutions, the Committee will take evidence from experts, academics, constitutional experts and so on, who will lay out what they think is a possibility with regard to reform. We will question them, ask them how it affects the Good Friday Agreement and so on, because we do not want to bring in any aspect of reform that might damage either the spirit or the letter of the Good Friday Agreement. When the Committee has completed its hearing of evidence, it will then lay out the options and have a much bigger public consultation. The need for reform in these institutions is clear, especially with what has happened over the past couple of weeks and the outworkings of that here today. A majority voted in favour of no confidence in the Education Minister, yet he remains in post. That outcome underlines the need for serious work to be done on how we ensure accountability in these institutions. Twenty-seven years on from the Good Friday Agreement, we must acknowledge just how far we have come and how much things have changed, as I pointed out to Mr Gaston. The context in which we now operate is fundamentally different from that of 1998, and, with that in mind, we must look seriously and maturely at the question of reform.

Sinn Féin is up for that discussion. We are open to exploring how our institutions can be strengthened and accountability improved, but we are equally clear that any reform must defend, not dilute, the principles and protections of the Good Friday Agreement. That is why our amendment refers the matter to the Assembly and Executive Review Committee, which is the proper forum in which to examine the issues in detail, hear the expert evidence and bring forward meaningful proposals.

As part of the Committee's current work, we are already engaging with academics, constitutional experts and others on questions such as the role and election of the Speaker; cross-community voting and designations; the process for Executive formation; and all the other important issues. They are complex issues that require thoughtful consideration. The Assembly and Executive Review Committee is the place to have that conversation, test ideas, build consensus and ensure that any changes strengthen rather than undermine the institutions. I was pleased to support a proposal from my Committee colleague Alliance Member Michelle Guy to explore enhanced civic engagement on institutional reform. Civic participation was key to building the Good Friday Agreement, and it should remain central to how we continue to shape the political institutions. Let us be honest, however: reform here cannot happen in isolation. Legislative change would ultimately be required at Westminster, and that, too, must be approached in a spirit of cooperation. I take issue with the leader of the Opposition here. Throughout his speech, he almost suggested that reform here can happen quickly, that it can be done almost immediately. I am not suggesting that he did that deliberately to make a misrepresentation, but that is what he suggested. I also take issue with the line in the motion that states that the First Minister and deputy First Minister must, together, bring forward proposals for reform. He knows that that will not happen. He knows that the DUP is opposed to reform and that the First Minister, in that role, cannot bring forward proposals for reform on her own. Forgive me for thinking that that line in the motion is just cynical.

Yes.

As our leader in the Assembly, Michelle O'Neill appointed Carál, Sinéad and me to the AER Committee. We constantly report to her as our party leader here, and she, at times, delegates it to us to bring forward proposals at the Committee and supports those proposals as leader of Sinn Féin. She will not do that as First Minister, because she cannot. You know that. That is why I said that you were being cynical: you know that you are asking for something that cannot be given. You are like everybody else who uses broad brushstrokes rather than laying the blame where it belongs. If Members are serious about reform of the institutions, they need to move away from mealy-mouthed words and start being honest and having a bit of integrity. Our message is clear: Sinn Féin is up for a discussion; we are engaging with the detail; and we will continue to do so through the proper forum, which is the AER Committee. Others, particularly the DUP, need to explain where they stand, because setting their face against reform —

— is not a plan for the future and is not good enough —

— for the people we represent here.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:43 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