Debate contribution: Catherine Connolly, President of Ireland
Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Matters of the Day
- Heading
- Catherine Connolly, President of Ireland
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5212761
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The election of the Irish head of state is, of course, a matter for those people, but Members on these Benches and the vast majority of the unionist community will not miss Michael D Higgins as he leaves office. The former holder of the Irish presidential office brought that office into disrepute as he entered into unnecessary and unwanted political tirades. His antisemitism, which many in the House share, will be what he is remembered for. This election will be remembered for these issues: how dare a Protestant run for the highest office in the land? How dare Heather Humphreys get above her station and try to be a Protestant woman who wanted to be the head of the Irish state? It was the same old story, and those in the House who continue to campaign to break up this United Kingdom may be sorry for what they have got. Unionists across Northern Ireland have seen that the so-called new Ireland means that Protestants should be neither seen nor heard and that the treatment of Heather Humphreys reflects how any unionist, Protestant or anyone in Northern Ireland who has any British way of life would be treated in a new Ireland.
Not that hypocrisy is something that anyone in the House would engage in, but, in 2018, the Irish president-elect visited Syria at the taxpayer's expense to see her friend Mr Assad. I am sure that People Before Profit's TDs in the Irish Republic will table a motion of no confidence in that office holder, but, given the fact that the people whom she visited were not Jewish, perhaps the views of People Before Profit will not stretch to doing so. We all know People Before Profit's views, because, when 1,200 people were murdered, the Member for West Belfast tweeted, "Victory to the Palestinian Resistance" —
Unlike you, Mr Carroll, I do not read from a prepared script. Just you sit there in the corner and be quiet. We heard enough from you over the weekend. We wish the president-elect well, but she has a difficult task. I am sure that Members on all sides of the House will hold her accountable for her disgraceful support of a tyrannical regime.
370 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)
Jev’s structured answers met every documented threshold for a qualifying culture-war activity.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.94 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.97); Sectarian or communal antagonism (0.85); Cultural grievance politics (0.75); Dog-whistle messaging (0.92); Controversy escalation (0.90).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.99).
- Subject area: Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice).
- The text adopts an antagonistic or dog-whistle framing, which qualifies even alongside legitimate scrutiny.
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 | 0.97 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.85 | Yes |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.75 | Yes |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.92 | Yes |
| Controversy escalation | 0.90 | Yes |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.07 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.94 | Above qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.68 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.32 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:46 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.