Debate contribution: Scottish Election and Welsh Election
Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 11 May 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Matters of the Day
- Heading
- Scottish Election and Welsh Election
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5523521
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome Sinn Féin's new-found interest in politics in other parts of our United Kingdom. Even by Sinn Féin's standards of rewriting the past, the Chief Whip of the party opposite has managed to completely gloss over the actual results of the election. Ms Ennis described the SNP victory as a historic victory for the people of Scotland: Mr Speaker, I have not been in politics for as long as you have, but, if my party had lost half a million votes and six seats, I would not call that "a historic victory". What there has been is a rejection of the Labour Party in other parts of the United Kingdom, just as the people of Northern Ireland rejected the Labour Party's sister party here, the SDLP, and voted it into opposition. The party opposite, having outsourced its failed attempts to break up the United Kingdom and blamed the Irish Government for that failure, is now trying to cling to the coat-tails of the outcomes of elections in other parts of the United Kingdom so that it can continue to tell its followers that it was not, in fact, lying to them when it promised the people of Northern Ireland a border poll in 2016; that the current First Minister, who promised one in 2020, was not lying to the people of Northern Ireland; and that Mary Lou McDonald, who set a date of 2035 for a border poll and was then quickly corrected by her party colleagues, who said that it had to be 2030, was not lying to the people of Northern Ireland. When polls for the party opposite continue to fall in Northern Ireland and in the Irish Republic, what do we see? We see calls for a border poll to take place. The people of Northern Ireland see through the distraction politics. They see that, since 1998, the votes for the parties in Northern Ireland that want to break up our United Kingdom have not grown by 1%. The leader of the Opposition seems to be the man most obsessed with Nigel Farage becoming Prime Minister. We will not have a general election in Northern Ireland for a number of years, but, in the SDLP's hope for relevance, it tries to scare the people of Northern Ireland into wanting to pursue a different constitutional settlement, because it knows, despite the arguments made by Sinn Féin, the SDLP and the Alliance Party, that the people of Northern Ireland know that the Union is best for all.
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. At the Executive Office Committee last Wednesday, despite numerous attempts by me and the Member for North Antrim —.
Sorry, Mr Sheehan, you —.
Mr Sheehan, if you want to be Speaker, put a good word in with Ms Ennis, and she might take out Carál and put you in.
Despite attempts by Mr Gaston and me to seek information from the Office of the Irish Language Commissioner, the commissioner has refused to provide the details, stating that he is currently dealing with a freedom of information request from a private citizen. Mr Speaker, are you aware of any rules or Standing Order that would prevent a body that is accountable to the Assembly from providing factual information to Committees if a freedom of information request is being dealt with?
556 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Not flagged on a second assessment, because Jev’s answers did not settle it. The reasons are given below.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.64 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.83).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.55).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- The answers did not meet either automatic threshold.
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.
Second assessment
Jev’s answers did not settle this record, so a second model, claude-opus-5-5, read the same text (without the MLA’s name or party) and gave its reasons on 23 October 2026. How the second assessment works
- Verdict
- Not flagged
- Public interest or divisiveness
- Mixed
Against the published rubric
The main contribution is partisan sparring over the constitutional question. It accuses named parties of "rewriting the past", of "lying" about border poll dates and of "distraction politics", and asserts that "the Union is best for all". This targets the record, promises and tactics of specific parties rather than portraying nationalists or any community as a group as disloyal, threatening or illegitimate, so it falls under criticism of a party's record, which the rubric excludes. The closing point of order asks a procedural question about whether the Irish Language Commissioner can withhold factual information from a Committee during a freedom of information request, which is an accountability matter rather than an objection to the language itself.
Public interest or divisiveness
The speech adds little substance and is mostly point-scoring, with mocking lines such as "new-found interest in politics" and "tell its followers". However, the point-scoring is aimed at rival parties' constitutional arguments and electoral claims rather than at a community's culture, symbols or place in public life. Arguing for the Union and disputing claims about a border poll is ordinary, if combative, democratic debate. The point of order serves a genuine scrutiny purpose about a body accountable to the Assembly.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.83 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.22 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.05 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.53 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.33 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.17 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.64 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.43 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.55 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.83 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.15 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:33 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.