Debate contribution: Constitutional Change

Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on 18 May 2026.

MLA

Ms Claire Sugden

Party at the time

Independent

Date

18 May 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

Constitutional Change

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5548173

Read the official Assembly record

Text

People today are worried about getting a GP appointment, paying their mortgage or their rent, accessing childcare, finding housing and whether public services will still be functioning in five or 10 years' time, because, let us face it, they are barely functioning now. Those issues are not mutually exclusive to the context in which we provide them, but we should be focusing on them. I appreciate that there are Members whose genuine constitutional aspiration is for there to be a united Ireland. They are entitled to hold that aspiration. They are entitled to advocate for it peacefully and democratically, and I have absolutely no issue with their doing that. I do, however, take issue with the constant attempt to frame constitutional change as somehow being inevitable, urgent or the singular answer to the challenges facing people in Northern Ireland today. That is gaslighting. It disregards my aspiration, and I can assure Members that it is not endearing me to the vision of a new Ireland. If that is our answer, what are we really saying to people? Are we saying that the Northern Ireland Executive are not working? Are we saying that every Minister in the current Government is failing? Are we saying that, because we cannot fix our health service, improve our economy or reform public services, let us instead hand over Northern Ireland to another jurisdiction and hope for the best. Let us be honest as well that the Republic of Ireland has significant pressures of its own, including housing pressures, healthcare pressures, cost-of-living pressures, political frustration and rising polarisation. The South may not have a Nigel Farage, but it does have left-wing and right-wing politics. The idea that south of the border is somehow immune to instability and division is often conveniently overlooked. If we are genuine about improving people's lives, surely it is the House's responsibility to focus on making this place work, rather than on constantly talking it down. We have already heard Northern Ireland be described as a failed state by Members who have been responsible for governing it for the past 10 years.

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I appreciate your contribution, Emma, but I struggle to accept the points that you made, because, after 10 years, the first Minister is a Sinn Féin Member, but we are not seeing any progress. Are you saying that you are failing in that respect? If you are —

I did listen to what you said. I have been listening to what Sinn Féin has been saying for the past 10 years. If we are going to describe Northern Ireland as a failed state, parties across the Chamber that have been involved in the Northern Ireland Executive need to take responsibility for that failure.

The purpose of a jurisdiction is not simply to satisfy identity but to organise society in a way that allows people to live well. It is about public services, opportunities, security, rights, responsibilities and helping people to build a decent life. I do not accept that the answer to every difficulty in Northern Ireland is to move that responsibility elsewhere. We are essentially advocating for our responsibility to be taken away. Under devolution, many of the powers that people are concerned about — powers over housing, education, justice and economic development — already exist. Therefore, when people point to failure in those areas, we should be honest enough to acknowledge that many of those failures are not failures of the United Kingdom but failures of devolved government, failures in decision-making and failure to reform, which, at times, have been caused by the absence of government, for which both of the big parties in the House have been responsible in the past 10 years. Changing the constitutional status of Northern Ireland will not automatically fix that. The motion makes a fundamental mistake by trying to link frustration with British politics to support for constitutional change. Yes, I have concerns about the rise of Reform UK and the type of politics that it represents. Populist politics, if anything, thrives by exploiting that frustration rather than solving problems. It offers simplistic but usually wrong answers to deeply complex issues and tells people that all their problems are somehow someone else's fault. People feel abandoned. They have watched successive Governments promise change while public services deteriorate and living standards decline. That frustration is real, even if I profoundly disagree with some of the political conclusions that people are reaching because of it. It is also important to note that it is not just a rise in right-wing politics; it is a rise in the middle and the left. Political frustration does not automatically translate into a united Ireland. Elections are not border polls or opinion polls. The Assembly is an example of that. I do not believe that its make-up would ever represent how people outside it might vote. They vote for all sorts of reasons. Some are against parties rather than for them. Sometimes, people feel that they are politically homeless. Sometimes, they are angry, and, sometimes, they simply feel that no one represents them. That does not amount to evidence that constitutional change is inevitable or even close. In fact, I do not even think that we are anywhere near it. There is a danger in constantly pushing the idea that major constitutional upheaval is around the corner. People often say that Brexit brought us closer to that, but, if anything, it took us further away. We cannot have another constitutional upheaval on these islands —

— and that includes the island of Ireland.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:32 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