Debate contribution: European Parliament Observer Status

Debate contribution by Mr Peter Martin on 8 December 2025.

MLA

Mr Peter Martin

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

8 December 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

European Parliament Observer Status

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5284346

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am a little surprised by the Member's criticism of, I assume, Members over here for student politics and sneering. Often, when I watch across to the Alliance Benches, I see him laughing at some of our Members when they are speaking. He is angry, and he can be angry if he wants. My colleagues have covered a range of points, and I have no intention of going over them again. The United Kingdom has, contrary to what the motion suggests, a democratic mandate to remain outside the European Union. Therefore, there is no need or requirement for observer status. In fact, EU observer status in the European Parliament would bring with it no right to vote. It would do nothing to address the democratic deficit that we have with the protocol or the deprivation of locally elected representatives' ability to make laws. I have said before in this place that many countries in Europe are incredible. They have interesting cultures, many of which I love, and I have very much enjoyed travelling to many of them. However, there is no dichotomy between valuing European countries and culture and being wholly opposed to an economic lock-in with them. The motion suggests that we would be:

"best served by rejoining the European Union".

That is the same nirvana that many in the Chamber suggested when they said, "If only the Assembly was back up and running, everything would be great. All our problems would be solved". I certainly was not in the Assembly — I was not elected at that time — but I remember watching many of the Members who have spoken today going to the gates at Hillsborough saying, "If only we could get this place back up, all our problems will be solved". We all knew then — I certainly did — that that was never going to be the case. It was never going to be the nirvana that people said it would, and telling the electorate that or, in the context of the motion, telling them that rejoining the EU will somehow solve all our problems is simply dishonest. It is also worth looking at some of the economics underlying that premise, particularly the economic performance of some big EU countries. Data that the OECD released last week states that UK GDP growth outstripped that of eurozone countries in quarter 1 of 2025. It is particularly noticeable that we will continue to grow faster than Germany through all three quarters of 2025.

I will give way to the leader of the Opposition.

That is very kind. I always welcome the leader of the Opposition's comments. A lot of that is about diversion, and we have heard some of the diversionary arguments. Trade is going down South that we would like to see going to and coming back from GB, and that is a consequence of the operation of the protocol. Germany, of course, is the economic powerhouse of the EU, yet it is suffering and struggling financially. In fact, France has stagnated all the way through 2025 and is struggling still. Data from the World Bank this year confirms that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the sixth largest economy in the world and is ahead of all eurozone countries except Germany. Therefore, why would we want to leave the strength of the United Kingdom for a united Ireland or, for that matter, to rejoin the EU? I will move on to the letter that spawned the private Member's motion. I think that it did, but there has been some debate on the other side of the House over who exactly is responsible for the motion or whose idea it was. I will not get into that, but I checked who signed the letter, and I found that one of the people was a lady called Lynn Boylan, who is a Sinn Féin MEP. Many in the Chamber will not have heard of that lady, but she was in the news recently for one particular reason, which was that she abstained from a resolution in the European Parliament that called for EU support for Ukraine. After three years of Russia's war and aggression, there was a proposal for a 30-day ceasefire and an expectation that Russia would agree to it and would cease all attacks on Ukraine. Ms Boylan could not even support that.

I do not believe that it is in our best interests to rejoin the EU. I also note that, in their letter to President Metsola, the MEPs who signed the letter even admitted that the granting of observer status would in fact, and I quote directly:

"require a request from the UK government"

Therefore, to be honest, I am not even sure why the motion refers to writing to the EU Parliament, unless the policy wonks on the other Benches have got it so badly wrong at the drafting stage. Regardless, I will not support the motion, and nor will my party.

I have all of 10 seconds, and you can have it.

My time is up.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:08 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