Member's statement: Fermanagh and Omagh District Council: Irish Unity Working Group

Member's statement by Ms Diana Armstrong on 27 January 2026.

MLA

Ms Diana Armstrong

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

27 January 2026

Type

Member's statement

Business

Members' Statements

Heading

Fermanagh and Omagh District Council: Irish Unity Working Group

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5344947

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I place on record my serious concerns regarding the decision by Fermanagh and Omagh District Council to establish what it calls an Irish unity working group. Let me begin by acknowledging the basic facts: yes, the decision was taken in accordance with the council's standing orders and, yes, the stated purpose of the group is:

"to assess views on all the issues relating to constitutional change."

The real issue is not with how the group was created but what it is doing and how far it has drifted from any neutral or exploratory role. In a council report to its policy and resources committee, dated 20 January 2026, reference is made to the council proceeding:

"to commission research on the role of Local Government in preparing for a new Ireland".

The same report refers to organising:

"lectures, presentations and discussions on work already undertaken in relation to preparations for a new Ireland and constitutional change."

Finally, it refers to arrangements that are being made:

"to convene a political panel discussion on preparing for Irish Unity".

Those are not neutral terms, nor are they balanced formulations. They do not describe an impartial assessment of competing constitutional futures; they describe active preparation for a specific outcome. There is no evidence that council officers have, at any point, cautioned the working group about the shift in language or direction, or that they have taken steps to ensure that the council remains within the bounds of political impartiality. If such evidence exists, I would, of course, be willing to consider it, but none has been presented to date. Local government has a clear responsibility to serve all ratepayers, regardless of constitutional aspiration. It must also avoid the reality and the perception of political advocacy on matters of this kind. References to preparing, planning or otherwise advancing a particular constitutional outcome raise serious questions about whether the council is still meeting its duty of neutrality. As an MLA and a ratepayer in the district, and having listened to constituents, I am absolutely entitled to challenge what I regard as a clear example of local government overreach. The promotion or facilitation of a constitutional agenda, funded by ratepayers, falls well outside what many people would reasonably consider to be the remit of a district council. Councils exist to deliver services, manage local infrastructure and improve the everyday lives of the communities that they serve, not to involve themselves in constitutional engineering. This is not about shutting down debate but maintaining clear institutional boundaries and good governance. It is also about protecting the principle that public money should not be used to promote one side of a deeply contested constitutional question. That is the basis of my concern, and that is why I believe that the matter deserves serious scrutiny.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:20 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