Debate contribution: Windsor Framework: Ongoing Harm
Debate contribution by Ms Kate Nicholl on .
- MLA
- Ms Kate Nicholl
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 17 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Windsor Framework: Ongoing Harm
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5245700
Read the official Assembly record
Text
When I came back, I was determined that my contributions were going to be positive and that I would not be snarky. I am going to try so hard, but oh, my goodness. I suppose that there is comfort to be taken in the fact that we know exactly what the arguments are going to be, because we have rehearsed them so many times. One positive thing that I will say for the DUP motion is that it calls on the UK Government to find solutions and work through issues with the EU. The responsibility is with the UK Government, and we are grateful that the DUP now acknowledges that. It would have been nice to have had that before the Assembly collapsed. The "suck it up, buttercup" mentality is a difficult one for me to listen to. We know that the Windsor framework is not perfect. I listened to the people who came to the Economy Committee and articulated the problems that they were having, and I sympathised and empathised with them. Of course, we need to find solutions. The one thing that I took from Lord Murphy's contribution when he came to the Committee two weeks ago was that we need to work together in order to find practical solutions. I may have laughed, but I was not being flippant. It is not that I do not appreciate the magnitude of the problems that exist. The issue is that, when the referendum happened, we said, "These are the bad things about Brexit". You said that you wanted to have Brexit, but now you are saying, "These are the bad things about Brexit". We are in a state of disbelief sometimes, because those were the things that we were worried about. We live in a complex place, and there are significant sensitivities that have to be managed. The reality is that none of us is ever going to get the perfect post-Brexit landscape. We are not going to get everything that we want, but we have to move on and work together. What people want is an Assembly and a Government that are focused on solutions, problem-solving and making things better. We need to talk about how we can do more upstream. We see that problem at the Windsor Framework Democratic Scrutiny Committee. We talk about there being a democratic deficit; of course there is. We left, and that is the reality of it. We are not able to influence things further upstream, which is a pity. We should do more to see how we could do that. Good relationships with the EU and our European neighbours are so important and should be welcomed. The UK Government's attempt to reset relations has been a welcome relief from the chaos and division that characterised the previous Government's engagement with Europe. That reset presents a window of opportunity to implement an ambitious sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement, which the UK Government are taking forward with the EU. My colleague David Honeyford, who is such a fierce champion for dual market access, talked about the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) report, which found that 71% of businesses want us to talk about it more. Our Executive need to speak with one voice on that matter and ensure that there are opportunities for people to invest in Northern Ireland and that it is properly marketed. We are not doing that. Let us sell it. Let us sell Northern Ireland. There are so many wonderful things about this place. Our business landscape is amazing. Look at what is happening in tech. We should be selling the opportunities in Northern Ireland, not focusing on the negatives. We want to focus on solutions, not just on diagnosing problems. Our economy really needs stability, certainty and clarity. There are issues to be worked through. It is not that we are oblivious to those or that we have not been listening about them. However, the constant negativity undermines the very stability that businesses crave. Brexit put up barriers to building more positive relationships, and, as Northern Ireland's cross-community party, Alliance remains completely committed to making sure that the connections and collaboration across and beyond jurisdictions deliver the opportunities and benefits that communities deserve. In the spirit of what Lord Murphy said, let us work together, look at the practical solutions and try to move on.
727 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: 0.10 (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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.94).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- 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 | 0.09 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.14 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.55 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.10 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.94 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.04 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.84 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.13 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:58 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.