Member's statement: Ulster-Scots Culture
Member's statement by Ms Diane Forsythe on .
- MLA
- Ms Diane Forsythe
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 February 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Ulster-Scots Culture
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5362294
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I was incredibly disappointed to watch last week's Communities Committee meeting, especially when I heard my fellow South Down MLA Sinn Féin's Cathy Mason shamefully refer to the Minister's support for Ulster Scots and the marching bands community as "vanity projects". That is incredibly offensive, especially to those of us in the minority unionist community in South Down. The Member went on to lambast the Minister for not providing enough funding for the Irish language or the GAA and called him "sectarian". The mask truly slipped. To her, the Irish language and the GAA are legitimate, but Ulster Scots and Ulster-British identity and culture are simply deemed to be vanity projects. There are 30,000 members of the marching bands community and over 700 bands in Northern Ireland. In the previous census in 2021, 190,000 people stated an affinity with the Ulster-Scots language. While Sinn Féin demands a £300 million GAA stadium in west Belfast, it cannot accept the pennies in comparison that go to marching bands or the Ulster-Scots community. In our South Down constituency, the Ulster-Scots community is thriving in spite of Sinn Féin. Our bands are outstanding and award-winning. The Schomberg Society in Mourne is incredible at organising cultural events and opportunities for our children and young people to learn Highland dancing, drum majoring and many other skills. People travel across the world to visit here and learn about our local Ulster-Scots culture and heritage. In reality, I am not that surprised about what the Member said, because, in my constituency, with a Sinn Féin-dominated council, we are well used to being swept the crumbs off the table. Money is pumped into Irish festivals, signs and Irish funding streams, all of which are billed to our local ratepayers, whilst we are cast aside. That is how they treat our culture at a local level, and that is clear now to all in the Assembly. To Sinn Féin, our Ulster-Scots culture is just a vanity project; it is not real. That is the true face of the so-called party of equality and respect.
344 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.87 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.96); Cultural grievance politics (0.98); Controversy escalation (0.81).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.96).
- Subject area: Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy.
- All qualifying thresholds were met.
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 | 0.96 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.50 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.98 | Yes |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.52 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.81 | Yes |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.15 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.87 | Above qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.04 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.96 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.83 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.15 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:21 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9. This record has been assessed 2 times; the latest assessment is shown.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.