Debate contribution: Sinn Féin Billboards: Illegal Erection

Debate contribution by Mr Andrew McMurray on 20 January 2026.

MLA

Mr Andrew McMurray

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

20 January 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Sinn Féin Billboards: Illegal Erection

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5348716

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Following Mr Wilson's maiden speech, I welcome him to the Chamber. The subject matter of the motion has been raised at the Committee for Infrastructure intermittently now for the past number of months. While I thank Mr Martin, Chair of the Infrastructure Committee, for tabling the motion, I cast my mind back to one of his utterances about not wanting to make the matter a political football. In rugby parlance, the garryowen has been launched to test the opposition full back, and, in football terms, the high ball has gone in to the full forward. Everyone is hoping for a clean catch at best or a lucky bounce at worst. The matter is both serious and trivial. It is serious in that it is a matter of law and policy and to breach those things is serious. Furthermore, matters of cultural, political and constitutional expression are constants that many in our society hold dear, and I do not want to belittle those things. However, we could be talking about roads, planning, waste water infrastructure, flooding or climate change, all of which are serious issues for the Infrastructure Department. Instead, we are talking about a billboard at the Egyptian Arch in Newry. When the issue is stacked against some of those other topics, it is not hard to find it somewhat trivial. I acknowledge that a matter such as this garners greater scrutiny when the Minister's Department holds the remit for certain aspects: planning, land and railways. I also know that the DUP would like to have the matter debated as a single-ticket item: an opportunity for a proxy culture skirmish as well as an attempt to create space between it and its partners in the Executive. However, the scrutiny must go right across Northern Ireland in relation to the erection of paraphernalia on public property. There are nuances to the motion, but, in its genesis, it is simple: is prior consent required from the relevant statutory authority before something is publicly erected? It is that simple. The law is clear that permission is required before the erection of any form of advertising. I had cause to drive past the billboard in question the other day: it is quite the size and quite the structure. On seeing its size and location, a layperson would conclude that planning permission would be required for something like that, but, in this instance and many others, it has not been sought. Communication and answers on the matter have been sought from the Department and the Minister via the Infrastructure Committee. However, to put it at its most generous, the responses received have not been overly transparent or conclusive. I have no problem with the issue that is currently highlighted on the billboard: it is a Christmas message to the children of Palestine. Previously, it was a call for a united Ireland that bore a Sinn Féin logo. It has also been adjusted by a satirist who wished to express support for Northern Ireland. You would need to have a bit of a sense of humour. I have quite a high tolerance for political and cultural messaging. For me, toleration is integral to a pluralistic liberal democracy. However, when the countryside is saturated with subtle political messaging all year round, even my tolerance can be exceeded. The key question is whether we, as a society, should continue to allow things to be displayed in a public space without having gone through a defined process. That applies equally, whether the object in question is a Sinn Féin billboard, a "Go slow" sign with political branding, a sign saying, "No Irish Sea border" or the flag of whichever constitutional jurisdiction you hold dear. The motion mentions that the failure to remove the billboard is contrary to how other businesses and individuals are treated, and I cannot disagree. Every year, without fail, I and, I am sure, many others will be contacted about the erection of flags on lamp posts. Coincidentally, lamp posts are also property for which the Minister for Infrastructure has some remit. I have cycled the land border. It took me three and a half days to do so. Along the way, I lost count of the overt expressions of political aspiration. That is the way of this country.

I agree that that is an aspect of it. However, in Northern Ireland, nothing is ever simple, and it points to wider issues at hand. The issues of ownership, public property and permission are all tied into the debate.

Sorry?

Anyway. We cannot dodge the fact that there is no process. Where there is no process, there is misunderstanding. That is a common thread through this. My colleague Ms Bradshaw has long advocated for and will introduce legislation on the display of flags and emblems. What that calls for is not complicated. What Ms Bradshaw, the Alliance Party and many people in Northern Ireland are calling for is clarity through legislation. Clarity will bring consistency and a plan for dealing with displays where the required process has not been followed.

I totally agree with the Member.

Does the Member want to intervene as well?

OK. Dead on.

I want to live in a society in which we have tolerance for those —

— who may have a different cultural — sorry, Speaker?

Dead on.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:15 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