PONI ‘blocking own report into Martin O’Hagan murder’

Connnla Young, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

THE Police Ombudsman is blocking the publication of its own report into the murder of Sunday World journalist Martin O’Hagan, it has been claimed.

The 51-year-old was shot dead by LVF members in September 2001, as he made his way home from a night out with his wife Marie.

No one has been convicted of his murder, which is believed to have involved British agents.

His case was referred to the Police Ombudsman by the Public Prosecution Service in 2013 but, 13 years on, the investigation report has yet to be made public.

In December last year ombudsman powers were delegated to senior staff after the retirement of Marie Anderson.

It is understood the selection of her replacement has been with First Minister Michelle O’Neill and Deputy First Minister Emma Little Pengelly since at least February.

Fresh concerns have now been raised after ombudsman chief executive Hugh Hume recently wrote to the murdered journalist’s brother, Fintan O’Hagan, saying he believes it is “appropriate and important that reports of this significance are issued by a sitting Police Ombudsman, with the full authority that comes from that”.

Mr O’Hagan said his family is now being “fobbed off”.

“The Police Ombudsman has to release its report now – for too long our family has been denied justice,” he said.

“We have been repeatedly informed that the investigation was complete, only for publication to be delayed and delayed again. Now we are being fobbed off with another excuse not to publish.”

Seriously flawed investigation

Mr O’Hagan said the police investigation” into his brother’s murder “was clearly seriously flawed”.

“The fact that in nearly a quarter of a century no one has been brought to justice for our brother’s murder is an outrage,” he said.

“We need the ombudsman’s report and then we must have an independent public inquiry.”

Patrick Corrigan, of Amnesty International, said: “The murder of journalist Martin O’Hagan casts a long shadow on press freedom in Northern Ireland.

“Nearly 25 years since Martin O’Hagan was gunned down, Northern Ireland remains the most dangerous place in the UK for journalists.

“No more excuses. The Police Ombudsman’s report must be published now – the O’Hagan family has been waiting for too long.”

Niall Murphy, of KRW Law, said the O’Hagan family was told in 2024 the ombudsman report had been completed.

“Our clients repose very serious concerns as to the failure by police to secure the convictions of those responsible for Martin’s heinous murder,” he said.

“Our clients are concerned that the status of suspects as state agents has been prioritised in their protection from prosecution.

“It is imperative that this report is published immediately.”

Responding, a spokesman for the Police Ombudsman’s office said: “In his letter to Mr O’Hagan’s family, Hugh Hume, the chief executive of the Police Ombudsman’s Office, has referenced the fact that there is currently no Police Ombudsman in post and that although certain functions can be exercised under delegated authority, he considers it “both appropriate and important that reports of this significance are issued by a sitting Police Ombudsman, with the full authority that comes from that position”.

Eleanor Donaldson 'did nothing' when told of abuse claims, court hears

Allison Morris, Belfast Telegraph, June 2nd, 2026

Eleanor Donaldson “did nothing” when told of an allegation of abuse by her husband Jeffrey Donaldson, a court has heard.

The claim from one of the alleged victims came during week two of the former DUP leader's trial.

Donaldson (63) has pleaded not guilty to 18 alleged offences said to have taken place between 1985 and 2008 involving two complainants, known as Witness A and B.

The charges include one count of rape and allegations of indecent assault and gross indecency.

Eleanor Donaldson faces a trial of the facts, linked to aiding and abetting allegations, after trial judge Paul Ramsey ruled her medically unfit to stand trial during an earlier hearing.

As week two of the trial got under way at Newry Crown Court yesterday, Jeffrey Donaldson sat between two female custody officers dressed in a navy suit and teal blue tie, occasionally taking notes.

On Friday, his defence barrister Kieran Vaughan KC concluded his questioning of Witness A, the younger of the two complainants.

On the third day of her evidence yesterday, the woman known as Witness A was questioned by Ian Turkington KC, representing Mrs Donaldson.

While Eleanor Donaldson is not in court she is still represented by her legal team.

Mr Turkington questioned the witness about not disclosing details of counselling sessions she had to police.

The court heard the woman had spoken with four, potentially five, separate counsellors over the years and was asked why she didn't disclose all of this to police.

She said some of this was linked to a traumatic incident while she was volunteering in Africa and therefore she didn't feel it was relevant.

Mr Turkington questioned as to why this wasn't disclosed to police at an interview on March 8, 2024, saying “you came armed with notes” to the interview.

The witness said: “I didn't come armed with notes, I came with a small note (on a phone) that had some dates on it.

“I did not come armed with reams of A4 pages,” Witness A added.

The barrister referred to an allegation made by Witness A. On Friday the jury heard that on one occasion she claimed Jeffrey Donaldson had “perched” over the top of her, using a light to look at her “private parts” when she was of secondary school age.

Memory ‘really foggy’

Witness A said she had raised the alleged incident with Eleanor Donaldson.

She said: “I knew by the look on her face she knew I was telling the truth.

“Why would I make something like that up? I had no motive. Once she identified I was telling the truth, she did nothing about it.”

The witness was also questioned about allegations that Mr Donaldson put his tongue in her mouth and moved it around and that she had told police this happened on “several occasions”.

The witness told police in her original Achieving Best Evidence (ABE) interview that “it was all sort of laughed off” when she told Eleanor Donaldson about the kissing. When asked by the barrister: “Are you making this up as you go along?”

Witness A replied: “Absolutely not, I find that ridiculous that you would infer that.” On Friday the woman had told the jury of an incident when she claimed Jeffrey Donaldson felt her breasts and that his wife would have seen this.

“If she saw what was going on, she didn't mention that.”

When accused of “spectacularly backtracking” on evidence provided on Friday, she said: “I don't recall being asked that level of detail.”

“You're making this up as you are going along,” Mr Turkington suggested.

“I am here to tell the truth and I am telling the truth,” the witness said.

“I apologise if I created the impression she definitely saw, she may have seen.”

She added: “I can only tell the facts and I have told the facts.

“I will not be changing anything I say, the facts stand - she looked into the room… and if she saw it, she saw it.”

He also asked her why she hadn't told police about abuse at the hands of another man when she was around seven years old.

Mr Turkington asked, if she was concerned “about protecting children”, why did she not disclose information about this man. The witness replied that the case against Mr Donaldson was “my primary focus at the time”.

The barrister also questioned her about why she had not mentioned during her police interviews in 2024 all of the counselling sessions she had received following the alleged abuse.

The witness said she had “nothing to hide” and had forgotten to mention some of the counselling.

Mr Turkington referred to Complainant A's use of the words “really foggy” in her police interview, relating to her memories of some of the alleged abuse.

She said: “Many people know with childhood abuse there is an issue with memory.

“I have tried to remember these events and convey them to the best of my ability.”

The barrister referred to notes made by a counsellor following a session with Complainant A, where he had recorded: “Memory really poor, very bad.”

He said: “Which of those five words would you not use?”

She said: “I think it is unfair to say really bad… his notes are his interpretation.”

The barrister then referred to a specific allegation made by Complainant A.

Complainant A said she had raised some details of this alleged incident with Eleanor Donaldson, telling her that Jeffrey Donaldson had been acting “like a weirdo” and looking at her.

At hearing.

Heated exchanges as barrister clashes with ‘Complainant A’

Paul Ainsworth, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

INSIDE THE COURTROOM

“IT’S not quite as sultry as it was last week,” Judge Paul Ramsey stated in reference to the heat inside the courtroom as the second week of the Jeffrey Donaldson trial got underway yesterday morning.

He might have been right, in that the stifling temperatures of the previous week had abated, but despite the grey, damp day outside Newry courthouse it was still warm enough that the judge set his traditional wig aside for the day’s hearing.

Counsel remained wigless too, including the barrister representing Eleanor Donaldson, Ian Turkington KC, who began his cross-examination of Complainant A – one of two women who allege the former DUP leader abused them as a child.

The woman had spent the end of the first week of the trial facing a grilling from Mr Donaldson’s barrister, Kieran Vaughan KC. Yesterday, Donaldson continued to observe proceedings from the dock.

As she is standing a trial of facts, and not a regular criminal trial herself due to the judge’s previous ruling on her mental health, Eleanor Donaldson – facing charges relating to aiding and abetting – was not present in the courtroom to scrutinise what became an at-times intense and probing cross-examination.

This would culminate in Complainant A – who as in the first week gave her evidence via video link from another location – being accused by the KC of “making this up as you go along”.

But the hearing began calmly enough with questions over the chronology of the witness’s disclosures about the allegations before contacting police.

The focus then moved to aspects of her Achieving Best Evidence (ABE) statement to police that would go on to form the basis of the prosecution’s charges relating to her.

One thing Complainant A wished to make clear to the KC, as he questioned her on certain points, was summed up succinctly in one response: “I think you’ll agree that an ABE interview is an extremely stressful process.”

There followed a back and forth over the “notes” she had brought to police for this interview, or as the senior lawyer put it, “came armed with”.

Donaldson complainant rejects barrister’s suggestions she is ‘making this up as you go along’

This earned a cold response from Complainant A, as she replied: “I did not come armed with reams of A4 pages”, before explaining how the notes were mostly about dates of the allegations, and were made on a smartphone.

Pressed on preparations for the ABE interview, she stated: “I have had my entire life to prepare.”

Donaldson, meanwhile, was doing noticeably more note-taking in the dock than he did on Friday, as he followed his wife’s barrister’s questioning.

The witness’s memory was a key theme of Mr Turkington’s cross-examination, with the KC asking if she agreed it was “foggy” – a term she had used herself in her police interview.

“With child abuse, often there’s an issue with memory at times,” she said, adding: “I have tried to remember these events and I have tried to convey them to the best of my ability.”

Following further exchanges, the woman conceded that she accepted her memory could be “poor”.

The barrister asked the complainant at one stage, during a discussion about what she had and had not told police: “Are you making this up as you go along?”

She replied “absolutely not”, adding it would be “ridiculous” to infer that.

The KC asked Complainant A about her claims regarding Eleanor Donaldson’s presence in a house during an alleged assault while the witness had been sitting on Mr Donaldson’s knee.

Eleanor Donaldson was said by the witness to have been in an adjoining kitchen during the alleged assault, but would have had a view into the room, while also frequently “popping” her head in to watch a Formula One race on the TV.

“ With child abuse, often there’s an issue with memory at times. I have tried to remember these events and I have tried to convey them to the best of my ability

Complainant A

Questioning over exactly what constituted Mrs Donaldson being in the same room at the time led to an increasingly fraught exchange, in which the barrister asked the woman: “Can I suggest you’re spectacularly backtracking in your evidence?”

Mr Turkington continued, echoing his earlier question: “You’re making this up as you go along, isn’t that so?”

The woman was adamant, however, stating that Eleanor Donaldson “may have saw” what was alleged to be happening, adding: “I will not be changing anything I say.”

As the dispute continued, Judge Ramsey urged both to refer to a photograph of the room in which the assault is alleged to have occurred.

As the morning session drew towards its conclusion, the barrister quizzed the witness over why she didn’t disclose to police the claim she revealed last week under cross-examination that she had been abused by another man as a child.

Referring to her claims regarding the Donaldsons, she said: “This was my primary focus at the time.”

Another day in the trial wrapped up early after the lunch break as the witness’s cross examinations concluded.

Today will see the first cross-examination of Complainant B, the second woman accusing Mr Donaldson of historical sex abuse.

“You’ve heard a lot of evidence over the last few days, but there’s a lot more to come,” the judge warned the jury as he dismissed them with another warning not to discuss the case outside the court.

“I’m probably saying it until you’re tired hearing it,” he told the 12 men and women before they left.

A party divided: The landmine letter that ripped apart the UUP

Suzanne Breen, Belfast Telegraph, June 6th, 2026

Doug Beattie didn't miss and hit the wall. Resignation letters are often finely tuned balancing acts. A little disappointment here, a reference to different priorities there, and everyone moves on with their dignity intact.

This departure wasn't an exercise in ambiguity. The former UUP leader delivered a bruising broadside against the man who now holds that job. He accused Jon Burrows of having a dismissive and overly centralised approach.

MLAs have been left “marginalised, ignored, isolated and discredited”. Beattie spoke of a “toxic atmosphere” which had allowed an “insidious campaign of rumour and gossip” to be waged against him.

UUP HQ opted for a measured response. It thanked him for his many years of service and wished him well, while adding that it didn't accept his “characterisation of recent events”.

A year ago, nobody would have predicted that the relationship between these men would end in such public acrimony. Last March, Beattie said of Burrows on X: “Jon is intelligent, compassionate and a subject matter expert in the field he comments on. He's both a friend and someone I trust.”

The relationship between Burrows and most of his MLA colleagues significantly deteriorated when he stopped being a backbencher and became a leadership contender. His ambition didn't sit well with them.

They were stunned that somebody who had just crossed the front door now wanted to run the house. By contrast, UUP councillors and members were enthused by the new North Antrim MLA and his combative political approach. They saw him as representing renewal.

That chasm continues. Indeed, it's impossible to overestimate the gulf between the party in Parliament Buildings and that at association level. Burrows has been busy visiting constituencies where the welcome stands in stark contrast to the frostiness in Stormont.

His high approval ratings in April's LucidTalk poll — beating Gavin Robinson and Jim Allister to become the most popular leader with unionist voters — hasn't shifted the dial an inch in his favour among his Assembly colleagues.

There is now open hostility from his MLAs. He can rely only on deputy leader Diana Armstrong for loyalty. There is no risk to Burrows' job — members hold all the power in choosing the leader, and they're very much behind him. But the threat to the UUP brand is undeniable. Divided parties don't win elections. While the strained relations between Burrows and his MLAs were no secret to Stormont insiders, Beattie has now placed them on public record.

Moving forward, every public appearance of the party in Parliament Buildings and every media interview will come under intense scrutiny. Silences will be interpreted, absences noted, body language decoded.

Beattie may not be the last to leave. There is speculation that it won't be too long before North Down MLA Alan Chambers — who is facing deselection — follows him to also sit as an independent unionist.

Any departure costs the UUP money. Parties receive £10,000 in funding every year per MLA. But it is potentially plummeting in the polls due to these public divisions which will most worry party strategists. They will be frustrated that it comes at a time which should be challenging not for their party, but for the DUP.

Burrows desperately needs allies at Stormont. He will be hoping that councillors Pete Wray and Kyle Savage — the likely candidates in North Down and Upper Bann respectively — will be joining him on the blue benches next May.

Beattie landed a big blow on Burrows, but his own future is hard to predict. He is one of the best-known figures in politics here. He communicates well. He attracts attention, and that's only going to increase. He has massively upped his constituency game this year. His profile dwarfs that of Kyle Savage, who will now surely be the UUP's sole runner. All the party's rivals rate the former party leader highly. They also like and respect him.

As an independent, Beattie may have greater appeal and secure support from a mix of politically homeless unionists, Alliance and SDLP voters. Yet politics is littered with the corpses of candidates who overestimated how much support for them is personal and underestimated how much is party-dependent.

Visibility isn't the same thing as votes. Beattie was UUP leader at the last Assembly election and still relied heavily on transfers to get over the line. This time, he won't have a party machine behind him.

There is currently a reservoir of sympathy for him across the political divide. How long that lasts remains to be seen, and Upper Bann has never been a sentimental constituency.

Over coming days, we may see more of 'Doug unplugged' as he further let's rip at those he believes made it impossible for him to remain in the UUP. But this could carry risks. There is speculation that some who crossed paths with him when he was leader may then decide to speak out.

The fortunes of both Burrows and Beattie are now tied together. The former thinks the UUP can move forward without one of its most recognisable faces.

The latter hopes that his political appeal extends beyond the party he once led. Only one of them will be proved right.

Beattie slams Burrows as 'vindictive' for reopening tweets case against him

Andrew Madden, Belfast Telegraph, June 2nd, 2026

FORMER UUP LEADER ADMITS BEING 'ECONOMICAL WITH TRUTH' IN POST

Doug Beattie has admitted to lying in a social media post as the fallout from the former leader's resignation from the UUP continued.

The Upper Bann MLA quit the party on Sunday, stating there had been a “marked difference” in relations between party officers, constituency associations and MLAs.

Mr Beattie took aim at UUP chief Jon Burrows, stating that the deteriorating situation in the party was “accelerated” after the latter became part y leader.

In an interview on the BBC's Nolan Show yesterday, Mr Beattie said there was an “insidious element within the party who have been continually briefing against me with regards to selections and other issues”.

And he also said that he was “economical with the truth” regarding a social media post in which he claimed to have been canvassing for two colleagues, when in fact he wasn't there.

Mr Beattie said things came to a head on Thursday last week when he said Mr Burrows rang him to inform him that he was reopening a disciplinary case against the Upper Bann MLA “for tweets which I apologised for four years ago and had considerable media attention”.

“In many ways, whether I had resigned or not, I would not have been able to apply to run in Upper Bann, because I would have been under disciplinary watch and that means I couldn't have put my name in,” Mr Beattie said, labelling Mr Burrows as “vindictive”.

“I didn't know any of this, when I wrote my letter.”

Mr Beattie said Mr Burrows is more of a “manager” than a leader and alleged he hadn't received “a single policy direction” from him during his time in charge.

“Stuff has been released to the media about finances, and stuff has been released to the media about employment issues in regards to me,” he said.

“All of these have been done to damage me, and it came to a head on Thursday night.”

Explaining the misleading social media post, Mr Beattie said his only motivation was to support party colleagues.

“I'm out promoting and delivering for two members of the Ulster Unionist Party, and I was economical with the truth,” he said.

“I was trying to promote those two individuals. I was trying to promote the party”

He added: “I lied there. I was dishonest. That's fine, but I wasn't dishonest in a manner to damage anybody.

“It was because I was trying to promote two elected representatives of our party and the party itself.”

‘More akin to a manager than a leader’

Regarding Jon Burrows, Mr Beattie said: “He's more akin to a manager than a leader, to be honest with you.

“But he is a leader of the party. But he manages, he doesn't lead.

“I haven't had a single policy direction since he took over as the party leader. Not a single one. There's more style than substance at this moment in time.”

Following the announcement of Mr Beattie's resignation on Sunday, the UUP said: “We thank Doug for his many years of service to his country and to the party, and we wish him well.

“The party doesn't accept the characterisation of recent events set out in Mr Beattie's letter. “The party management board met on Thursday evening to consider serious concerns about Mr Beattie's conduct and judgement.

“The board unanimously agreed a course of action which was due to be communicated to Mr Beattie by the party leader on Monday. Mr Beattie's resignation has overtaken that process.”

Burrows insistence that all MLAs paid into the party fuelled tensions among Stormont team

By David Thompson, Belfast News Letter, June 2nd, 2026

An insistence by the Ulster Unionist leader that all of the party’s MLAs paid dues into the party contributed to tensions within its Assembly group, the News Letter understands.

On Monday Doug Beattie, who quit the party at the weekend, said rumours he hadn’t paid in to the party himself are “absolutely not true” – and confirmed that he had paid his fees.

Jon Burrows and Diana Armstrong were often the only UUP MLAs in the Assembly chamber in Monday, joined here by Alan Chambers.

But the former UUP leader said there was a deliberate attempt to undermine elected representatives based on “part information”.

He said he had been contacted by a journalist about the claims – and that other MLAs “had their names leaked at the same time”.

Party insiders say there was internal pushback from some in the Stormont team over an attempt by Jon Burrows to make all MLAs pay into the party – and in some cases pay arrears.

North Down MLA Alan Chambers has told the News Letter that he doesn’t believe MLAs or councillors are required to pay anything beyond the basic membership fee.

That is, he said, unless they hold jobs like a ministry or committee chair role, in which case he says there is a requirement to pay 10% of additional earnings.

Successive leaders have expected elected representatives to pay part of their income to the party, however it is understood that for a number of years this was not enforced – and some paid consistently, while others did not.

It was a source of tension prior to Jon Burrows being elected leader earlier this year, and it is understood progress had been made under Mike Nesbitt to ensure a consistency in approach.

However, the issue had not been entirely resolved when Mr Burrows was elected leader earlier this year and it is understood he has demanded that all of the MLA team pay up, as well as any arrears.

The Ulster Unionist Party was approached for comment, as were each of the party’s elected representatives on Stormont’s blue benches.

The News Letter has contacted all of the MLAs individually to ask whether they had paid all dues on time over the past year, and whether they had any arrears.

At the time of going to print, Mike Nesbitt, Steve Aiken and Alan Chambers confirmed that they had paid, and did not have any arrears. Jon Burrows said: “I take my obligations as a member of the party seriously. However, it is in my view not appropriate to comment on internal party financial matters”. The other four MLAs had not responded.

In his resignation letter to party leader Jon Burrows at the weekend, Doug Beattie highlighted “an insidious campaign of rumour and gossip” which he said “was being waged against me regarding selections, party relationships, financial matters, and employment issues”.

Speaking in an interview with the BBC Nolan Show on Monday morning, he elaborated on what he meant by financial matters.

“Stuff has been released to the media about finances, and stuff has been released to the media about employment issues in regards to me. All of these have been done to damage me, and it came to a head on Thursday night”, Mr Beattie said.

Asked what the rumours were, the former UUP MLA said: “That I was not paying into the party when clearly I was.

“But then there’s rumours that I wasn’t, to the stage that the Irish News rang me, and asked me the question. Interestingly, other members also had their names leaked at the same time.

“This is deliberate. This is deliberate undermining of elected representatives, and it’s coming from within”.

Asked how he knew this, Doug Beattie said: “How would it not? How would anybody else know about the financial dealings of the Ulster Unionist Party?”

Mr Nolan said: “But you’re saying it’s not true?”

“No it’s absolutely not true.

“The thing you have with people is they get part information – and they think they have all information.

“And then they say things which are simply untrue – and I’ll stand over that if anybody needs me to stand over that”, the independent unionist MLA said.

In its most recent accounts published on the Electoral Commission’s website for 2024, the UUP raised £108,265 from its membership and took in £20,854 from donations.

If you’re really serious about an electoral comeback, you have to look serious about it

Alex Kane, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

OPINION

IN a column for the Irish News on May 13th,  I noted: “From the moment he put himself forward as a candidate for the leadership in January, there were concerns within the MLA group that one of his priorities, should Burrows win, would be to reshape the group in the run-up to 2027” when elections to both the assembly and local councils are due. The news – which had broken two days before the column – that Doug Beattie was to be deselected in Upper Bann, was viewed by some as the start of that reshaping process. A process which gathered speed when Alan Chambers, the MLA for North Down, claimed there was a move to deselect him and rumours concerning two other MLAs also began to circulate. In a party with only nine MLAs it’s no surprise most of them, with the exceptions of the leader and his deputy, Diana Armstrong, are feeling pretty spooked. In one sense, Doug Beattie’s resignation from the party has done Burrows a huge favour. It leaves Upper Bann free for a candidate of his choice.

Yes, Beattie may decide to throw his hat into the ring next May, but electoral history, in terms of former party MLAs holding their seats as independents, is not on his side. Also, I think Beattie’s interview with Stephen Nolan yesterday –which was rambling and confused at times – did him no favours.

Where Jon Burrows may a problem, though, is with the contents of Beattie’s resignation letter: “Over the past two years I have witnessed a marked deterioration in the relationship between the Party Management Board, constituency associations, the UUC Councillor Association and the MLA group at Stormont. This became particularly apparent and accelerated following your election as party leader, when MLAs were increasingly marginalised, ignored, isolated and discredited. Your leadership style became dismissive and overly centralised, empowering individuals to actively undermine elected representatives. In the absence of any coherent policy direction from the leadership, a toxic atmosphere has been allowed to flourish within the party.” That’s a powerful, indeed excoriating condemnation of a leader who has only been in the job for four months and has yet to be electorally tested: and who, according to the latest Lucid Talk poll, is more popular than Gavin Robinson, Jim Allister and Emma-Little Pengelly. Yet if, as Beattie says, this disfunction can be traced back almost two years, then why didn’t any of the other MLAs challenge for the leadership in January, rather than leave it to the co-opted and barely-through-the-door Burrows?

If any of those MLAs were now to raise their voices in support of Beattie, in effect confirming that his analysis of the leadership, lack of coherent policy and isolation of the MLAs was accurate, then what is presently an internal irritant involving one MLA could escalate into a crisis for Burrows. Again, though, his resignation makes it less likely that any former colleague will be willing to put his head above the parapet. Let’s face it, what’s the point of going into bat for someone who has left the field altogether. There is, it needs to be said, some support across the UUP for Beattie, particularly from those on the ‘moderate’ wing of the party. That said, I detect no enthusiasm whatsoever for the toppling of Burrows. The party has had its fill of ongoing crisis and factionalism since David Trimble stepped down in 2005. All it wants to do, after 20 years of treading electoral water, is win and win well. The sort of win that gets it noticed again: and noticed for the right reasons. It looks to me like Burrows will survive until next May at least. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t lessons to be learned from this episode. The grassroots responded well to his leadership message in January, but he must be careful not to antagonise or sideline the very people – at Assembly and council level – who have already proved they can win seats.

So, my advice to the leader, MLAs and party members is this: you will either win together or lose together. Get this crisis behind you. Mend fences that have been broken. Another public fistfight will have the party placed on the political equivalent of a suicide watch. If you’re really serious about an electoral comeback, then the very least you can do is look serious about it.

Translink services in crisis due to Stormont inaction

By ​Esmond Birnie, Belfast News Letter, June 2nd, 2026

We now know that Translink’s train and bus services are about to be pared back to cut costs.

It is all too easy to assume this must be the fault of that public corporation. It is the policy approach of the infrastructure minister in particular and of the NI Executive in general which have forced Translink into this undesirable position.

Translink made a loss of £23m in 2025/26, up from the loss of £11.9m in 2024/25. We tend to think of Translink as a state body. It is in fact a public corporation which implies it is meant to act somewhat commercially: to balance its books and to raise most of its revenue through fares charged to customers.

Here’s the crucial point, whereas Translink have been facing large increases in costs (notably in terms of fuel but also in terms of National Insurance contributions for staff), infrastructure minister Liz Kimmins has vetoed any fare increases for the second year in a row. In fact, over the last nine years, executive ministers have blocked fare increases on five occasions.

Of course no one enjoys paying more for fares. But imagine what would happen if government tried via diktat to prevent petrol stations from charging more for fuel given the supply reduction coming from the Gulf. Or if government tried to ban increases in grocery prices in the face of rising costs at the global level. The result would be chaotic and even more harmful.

It is not as though Stormont has increased the operating subsidy paid to Translink to compensate for higher costs and/or the absence of fare increases. The transport company has in fact been forced to eat into its reserves.

That is obviously not a strategy which can be pursued indefinitely. Something had to give and outgoing Translink chief executive Chris Conway indicated that costs will be reduced by reductions in service provision.

Abdication of responsibility

Fundamentally what is going on here is an absence of taking responsibility on the part of the minister, or the executive more widely. The infrastructure minister may set the broad objectives for Translink but she is denying it the commercial freedom to meet those objectives.

She does not provide enough funding to meet those objectives. When Translink is forced to make some hard choices she tries to deny this has got anything to do with her.

Readers may recognise a familiar pattern. In a similar way, the infrastructure department is the parent department for Northern Ireland Water (NIW).

NIW is given lots of objectives and legally required standards but this begs the question, what happens when the level of subsidy given by the department falls short of that necessary to meet those outcomes?

One obvious way to square the circle would be to introduce domestic water charges (although making allowance to protect low income households). The infrastructure minister, and probably all her executive colleagues, remains adamantly opposed to such charges.

Turning back to Translink’s predicament - what could be done?

I would suggest looking again at the level of subsidy given, although given the current budgetary difficulties at Stormont finding extra money will be challenging.

Yes, the transport corporation should be given more commercial freedom to raise some fares. There is scope to cut costs through, for example, removing the 60+ Smart Pass concession (i.e. zero) fare.

This was an ill-advised “freebie” policy give away of the Robinson-McGuinness era.

Why should someone in the early 60s who is still in work and earning get free public transport? Why should Northern Ireland be able to afford free public transport for everyone in their early 60s when this policy is not being pursued in either England or the Republic of Ireland?

There may also be some scope to raise productivity. Translink’s accounts for 2024-25 indicate that in that year the number of staff employed increased slightly more than the number of passenger journeys. Admittedly, a crude measure of efficiency and productivity.

Public transport obviously matters a great deal in terms of the impact of mobility on the economy and people’s wellbeing as well as regional balance.

What I am arguing here is that Translink’s problems, along with those of NIW, are a symptom of something bigger. The Stormont Executive is not working properly.

So-called Arms Length Bodies (ALBs) such as Translink and NIW act as the agents which deliver for the executive ministers, but those ministers constrain what those ALBs are able to do.

When the ALBs are forced to make the hard choices, the executive ministers try to shield themselves by saying it has nothing to do with them.

That is becoming a less and less credible defence as is the claim being made by both Sinn Fein and the DUP that ultimately problems in public service delivery are caused by alleged under-funding by the UK government. 

Dr Esmond Birnie is senior economist, Ulster University Business School

Presbyterian Church's 'safeguarding roadshows' spark 'difficult questions'

Brett Campbell, Belfast Telegraph, October 2nd, 2026

CONGREGATIONS' CONCERNS REVEALED AHEAD OF ROLLOUT OF UPDATED POLICIES

A series of “safeguarding roadshows” conducted by the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI) ahead of new policies being rolled out in April prompted “difficult and challenging questions” and revealed feelings of “frustration”, “concern” and “trepidation” for the future.

Congregations have also expressed “real concern” that they don't have the resources or expertise to customise procedures to their particular needs. 

The church's new director of operations, Ken Swarbrick, has provided parishioners with an update on changes being rolled out in the aftermath of the scandal that resulted in Dr Trevor Gribben resigning as moderator and general secretary last November and prompted a PSNI criminal investigation.

In the latest edition of the Presbyterian Herald magazine, Mr Swarbrick thanked colleagues who have worked on developing new procedures and helped guide officials through “the regulatory minefield”.

Whilst he reported “considerable progress” has been made since establishing a multidisciplinary team — made up of a range of staff including social workers and individuals with a background in justice and education — the director referred to roadshows delivered to more than 600 people around the entire island at the beginning of this year.

“The roadshows also generated some difficult and challenging questions, revealing perhaps a level of frustration, possibly tinged with concern and trepidation, for the months ahead,” Mr Swarbrick wrote.

“We understand and appreciate that the extent of regulation in the system may leave many of you concerned, but the bottom line is that we're trying to keep each other safe as we serve the Lord together as Presbyterians in Ireland.”

New vetting procedures

Worshippers were told that “great progress” is being made in regard to the “significant task” of vetting people through AccessNI and Garda Vetting, with almost 2,700 applications processed in the first three months of 2026.

Mr Swarbrick explained the process is regulated by governments on both sides of the border, with different rules in each jurisdiction, as he said the church has sought to bring clarity to the vetting of elders where it is not always possible to conduct checks. He cited individuals working with other adults in a home setting as one such example.

“But vetting is not the only way we can protect people,” he added.

“We also need to ensure we put the right people in roles [safe recruitment] and make sure our procedures are robust and well applied.”

The new safeguarding procedures agreed by the General Assembly have been published on the PCI website along with bespoke guidance and resources for Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. “They are comprehensive documents, but, accordingly, very substantial. And I suspect their sheer size has contributed to some of the worry people are feeling about safeguarding,” Mr Swarbrick acknowledged.

“Just remember, while we want you to have a reasonable understanding of good safeguarding practice, you don't need to be a qualified social worker to be a Sunday school teacher.”

Mr Swarbrick said the original intent of a suggestion that congregations tailor the rules to their own circumstances “seems to have been lost” and resulted in some churches expressing “real concern” that they don't have the ability “to re-write hundreds of pages of procedure”.

“We're going to look again at how we can help with that,” he promised, explaining that it will likely be in the form of a short, customisable template.

The director made it clear the church is unable to provide written advice on every situation, but insisted additional guidance on issues, including intimate care and working with disclosures, is at various stages of development.

“If there is an area of risk you would like help with, let us know and we'll try to address the most common issues raised,” Mr Swarbrick added.

An external review is being carried out by independent safeguarding organisation INEQE at the request of the Charity Commission and is due to be published early next year.

The PCI previously said it will be a “victim-focused and trauma-informed” probe examining the church's governance and safeguarding arrangements that led to the admission that “serious significant failings” resulted in people being harmed and put at risk.

In a separate article in this month's edition of the Presbyterian Herald, incoming moderator Rev Richard Kerr admits he is stepping into the top job “in fear and trembling” amid “unprecedented challenges” resulting from “a crisis of our own making”.

The minister of Templepatrick Presbyterian Church told the publication he has no inside knowledge about what exactly went wrong, and that answers to questions might be limited while investigations are active.

“What has happened in our central safeguarding — and the failures in that are totally unacceptable — they are a matter of shame for us as a denomination. It grieves me that people have been harmed and hurt by our failings in all of this,” the clergyman said.

Rev Kerr accepted that, as a member of the church, he “cannot wash his hands of this” but stressed that he believes “we're trying to put things right”.

Sinn Féin Stormont proposals aim to ‘remove ever-present threat of collapse’

Party publishes document advocating measures including removing FMDFM appointment veto, greater fiscal powers for Stormont and ‘normalising’ appointment of justice minister

Rebecca Black, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

SINN Féin has launched a series of proposed reforms aimed at “removing the ever-present threat of collapse” at Stormont.

The largest party in the assembly is the latest to publish a reform document aimed at stabilising the institutions, which have experienced significant turbulence in recent years and effective collapses between 2017 and 2020 and 2022 to 2024.

Launching the proposals at Stormont yesterday, first minister and Sinn Féin vice president Michelle O’Neill restated the party’s preference for a united Ireland, but said their Building Better Politics document was a bid to improve the operations of the current institutions.

The eight-page document includes proposals for reform designed to ensure the assembly and executive can continue to function during a political crisis, and prevent any single party being able to “block or collapse” the institutions.

While Sinn Féin is proposing that the largest nationalist party and the largest unionist party should retain the right to nominate the first minister and deputy first minister, if either chooses not to nominate, that opportunity would pass to other parties.

The party is also proposing the removal of the “veto” over the election of the Stormont speaker at the first meeting of a new assembly, ensuring no potential blockage for the assembly starting its work.

In addition, there is a proposal to explore options to “introduce greater transparency and accountability in relation to decisions made by the speaker”.

Other proposals include devolving fiscal powers, equality for MLAs who are designated as “other”, instead of unionist or nationalist, and “normalising” the appointment of the justice minister.

The document comes after proposals for reform of the institutions previously published by the Alliance Party as well as the SDLP, which leads the official Opposition at Stormont.

Forced Coalition

Ms O’Neill said the current setup, working in a “forced coalition” with parties which had “very different politics”, made for a “challenging and difficult arrangement”.

“I think our unusual, and some might also say abnormal, political infrastructure are the necessary product of the peace process and

therefore we are committed to being here, to working every day, to try to deliver for people despite all those challenges,” she said.

“But we do believe that we can make changes that improve how we do government, that we can do without undermining the core principles of the Good Friday Agreement.

“So today, this is about our contribution to the ongoing debate. It’s an important piece of work and we’re presenting our considered proposals on reform, that we believe will make a difference to the political institutions.”

She said: “Principally, we are proposing to remove the ever-present threat of collapse, because this is something that frequently is raised, because the greatest obstacle to delivery is when the institutions are prevented from operating themselves, so removing the veto of the largest parties over the operation of the Executive and Assembly is therefore the primary proposal we are advocating.”

Ms O’Neill said other proposals in the document were aimed at improving transparency, accountability, democracy and delivery.

“We do recognise that these proposals alone will not resolve every challenge that we have, and the reason that I say that is that reform won’t overcome the reality that there are those who simply don’t want to share power,” she said, highlighting the DUP.

Meanwhile, DUP leader Gavin Robinson said he would read the proposals with interest, but that he wanted to see a reform of how parties engaged.

“One thing that needs to happen in this place is reforming of the heart and how people are willing to engage with each other, and whether they’re interested in making this place work or not,” he told media in the Great Hall at Stormont.

“The structures, the procedures, the institutions – that doesn’t matter, whatever they are, if someone is coming at it with the wrong approach, it isn’t going to work.”

No single party should have power to prevent formation of executive

Michelle O’Neill, Irish News, January 2nd, 2026

PLATFORM MICHELLE O’NEILL SINN FÉIN VICE PRESIDENT AND FIRST MINISTER

TWENTY-eight years on from the Good Friday Agreement, we have witnessed and continue to witness significant and historic changes to the political landscape of the north.

Recent election results in Scotland and Wales have reinforced the growing momentum for constitutional change across these islands.

Becoming the first nationalist first minister reflected the progress made in the north consigning the days of one-party rule and Unionist dominance to history.

The institutions have delivered real progress, but at times through vetoes, blockages or collapse effective government has been denied.

That is not good enough. The public deserves better. They rightly expect stability and a government that delivers for them.

Sinn Féin believes power-sharing must evolve to reflect the political realities of the day while protecting the core principles of the Good Friday Agreement.

Greater stability, increasing accountability and modernising how government functions can improve how the assembly and executive operate.

Our MLAs on the Assembly and Executive Review Committee have been working alongside other parties to identify reforms that strengthen the institutions so they can deliver for workers, families and communities.

Firstly, no single party should have the power to prevent the formation of an executive.

The current veto held by the largest nationalist and unionist parties on the nomination of first minister and deputy first minister is not sustainable for effective governance.

First refusal

Sinn Féin believes the largest parties within both designations should retain the first opportunity to nominate. However, if either party refuses to do so, the opportunity should pass to another party so the institutions can continue to function.

The institutions should be ready and able to function on day one without delay or obstruction.

The same principle should apply to the election of the Speaker.

The independence of the Speaker, once elected, is vitally important. However, like any democratic institution there should also be transparency and accountability in how key decisions are made.

Looking at international best practice we want to identify how best to ensure transparency and accountability in the Office of Speaker.

Another anomaly in the assembly relates to those who designate as ‘Other’.

While the designation system remains an important safeguard within the Good Friday Agreement, legitimate concerns exist regarding the weight their votes carry in certain circumstances, such as the election of the Speaker.

These concerns should be considered positively while protecting the core safeguards of power-sharing.

Sinn Féin believes the appointment process of the justice minister needs to be consistent with all ministerial positions that are appointed through the D’Hondt process.

At the same time, the executive should be given more fiscal powers to generate income. This will give ministers the tools to manage the economy and to properly invest in public services.

Moving forward, Sinn Féin will continue to work constructively with other parties on institutional reform. Reform is not exclusive to any one party and all proposals should be considered on their merits.

Unfortunately, some parties want to prevent and slow change in an effort to turn back the clock.

No party should have the ability to stall and block progress or hold the entire assembly back.

We believe institutional reform can improve transparency, stability and accountability.

However, reform alone cannot overcome the ongoing reality of British government underfunding and austerity or the reality that some parties are fundamentally opposed to equality, to power-sharing and simply do not want to work in partnership with others.

Ultimately, Sinn Féin believes the best future for all the people of this island lies in constitutional change and a united Ireland within the European Union..

Reforms of Stormont must extend to attitudes of parties

Pro Fide et Patria, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

“ An institution designed to deliver effective, responsive, partnership government has all too often been characterised by delays, disputes and dysfunction. And that is only in the periods where MLAs have actually graced us with their presence in the Assembly

IT should be abundantly clear by now to all the Executive parties that Stormont is not operating at anywhere near the levels the public expects or deserves.

An institution designed to deliver effective, responsive, partnership government has all too often been characterised by delays, disputes and dysfunction.

And that is only in the periods where MLAs have graced us with their presence in the Assembly and it has not been in suspension due to walk-outs by one or other of the main parties.

Against that background, reform of the Good Friday Agreement structures are long overdue and the publication of proposals by Sinn Féin, the largest Stormont party, is therefore welcome.

The short document acknowledges that “delivery is frustratingly slow” and sets out six suggestions for improvement.

Most significantly, it proposes that no single party should have the power to block the formation of, or to collapse the Assembly.

The largest nationalist and unionist parties would retain the right to nominate the First and Deputy First Ministers, but if either chooses not to nominate, the opportunity would pass to other parties.

Equally, ending the requirement that a Speaker is elected by cross-community vote would remove a veto on the formation of an Assembly.

Sinn Féin has also proposed greater transparency in decisions by the Speaker; more weight given to votes by those designating as ‘other’; and normalising the process of appointing the justice minister, which is certainly an anachronism.

The party also calls for greater fiscal powers to empower the Executive “to raise revenue to invest properly in public services and to respond to other local economic challenges”.

The immediate riposte would be that neither Sinn Féin nor Stormont in general have shown any willingness to use the levers they already hold to raise revenue, seemingly content instead to blame the British government for austerity.

Nevertheless, anything that improves the ability of MLAs to respond to local needs, rather than priorities in Westminster, would be welcome.

The Sinn Féin proposals on Executive formation and the election of the Speaker follow similar recommendations by Alliance last month, and will be shared by many at Stormont.

While the DUP may have other ideas, momentum is building and the SDLP’s call for a short process to agree reforms before the next Assembly election is surely the next logical step.

If adopted, such reforms would go a significant way towards ending the cycle of stopstart government that has been so detrimental to tackling the very serious issues facing the health system, growing the economy, safeguarding the environment and supporting other vital public services.

What is really required, however, is a transformation in attitudes at Stormont and a genuine commitment to work together in the best interests of all voters, rather than dodging difficult decisions and indulging in the kind of dog-whistle politics that has left confidence in the institutions, and those who operate them, at an all-time low.

'I will be a mayor for all the people': Sinn Féin to head NI council area for the first time

Niall McGreevy, Belfast Telegraph, June 2nd, 2026

A history-making Sinn Féin mayor has pledged to be a voice for all in the community.

Henry Cushinan has been appointed to the top role at Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council for the next 12 months — the first time the party has held the mayor's role.

A former Blanketman, Mr Cushinan will take over from UUP councillor Leah Kirkpatrick, who has served her one-year term.

The Dunsilly councillor said he will be a mayor for every person of Antrim and Newtownabbey.

“For over 41 years, I've had the privilege of standing with local people, families and communities through decades of change and progress,” he said.

“I entered politics during the civil rights era and, as a young republican, was imprisoned for my political beliefs. Alongside my comrades in the H-Blocks, I refused to be criminalised.

“When I first entered the council chamber in 1985, I faced hostility and division, but I never backed down from the mandate the people gave me. Now, as mayor, my focus is simple — to represent everyone, respect every community, and support families facing the cost-of-living crisis. I will be a mayor for all the people of Antrim and Newtownabbey.”

Former blanketman

Councillor Rosie Kinnear, who previously held the role of deputy mayor in the council, described her 69-year-old party colleague as a “gentleman and an inspiration”. She said: “A lifelong republican, former H-Block Blanketman and a councillor for over 40 years, Henry, come Monday, will be the first Sinn Féin mayor in Antrim and Newtownabbey.”

Maighréad Ní Chonghaile — joint leader of the Sinn Féin group on the Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council — said Mr Cushinan would bring “compassion and integrity” to his newfound position.

She said: “To see someone who has dedicated decades of his life to republicanism, to public service, equality and community representation, take on this role is a historic moment for our borough and our party, but most of all for the people who vote for us.

“Henry brings experience, resilience, compassion and integrity to the position, and I know he will rightly represent every section of our community with dignity and with respect.

“A significant moment — and one we approach with confidence, humility and determination to continue delivering for all our communities.”

Monday marked the last day of Ms Kirkpatrick's tenure as mayor. She told the Belfast Telegraph she has “loved every single second of it”.

She said: “It's been challenging trying to juggle it all with family life — I have an amazing husband at home, who has been great — but I have really enjoyed it.

“The Deputy Mayor [Councillor Julie Gilmour] has been great as well. I think having two females at the top has been very different for our council, but we get on so well and we worked so well together.

“I've used it as a personal development journey for myself, and have said yes to everything and pushed myself way out of my comfort zone. I'll miss it. I would have taken it for longer if I could have.”

Ex-Alliance councillor says Sinn Fein 'need to be more generous' in victory

By Adam Kula, Belfast News Letter, June 2nd, 2026

A councillor who has just criticised and quit the Alliance Party has said that Sinn Fein is not being “generous” in its attitude, including in its stance on Irish language signs.

Eric Hanvey told the News Letter he will “probably” still vote for Alliance, though he is “disillusioned” with politics in general.

He announced on Monday that he will now sit as an independent on Belfast City Council, reducing their influential 12-seat bloc to 11, and will stand aside when his term ends next year.

Representing Lisnasharragh in the east of the city, he was elected twice (in 2019 and 2023) and describes himself as having been on the “progressive” wing of the party, which he criticised for taking part in Northern Ireland’s “travesty of an Executive”.

Party politics has “never worked at Stormont since the Good Friday Agreement” he said, and it would have been better to sit in opposition instead.

Sectarianism remains Northern Ireland’s “key problem” he said.

He was asked if he would lay the charge of sectarianism at the door of both Sinn Fein and the DUP and, if so, whether one is worse than the other.

"I think they’re different, but I do think at the end of the day they both play to their audiences rather than taking things forward,” he said.

"To be frank now, I’d say I can understand it more in terms of the DUP because I think they’re under pressure from the TUV, they’re losing vote share generally across NI, whereas on the other side Sinn Fein, you could argue, are the winners – their vote share is increasing, the demographics are in their favour, and the potential for a united Ireland has certainly increased over the last couple of decades.

"But they don’t tend to behave like winners.”

Instead, he said, they tend to “push a very limited agenda” and not be “generous”.

He said that GB political issues are increasingly coming into council, and “a lot of it has absolutely nothing to do with the role of council or the powers that we have”.

It was put to him that some people feel that way about the recent flying of the Palestine flag from City Hall – something which was backed by Alliance. Does that count?

"Yes and no. Voices of solidarity are okay, whatever it happens to be that you’re showing it for,” he said.

"It’s something a council can do.”

Rather it is the “discourse” that surrounds such issues that is the problem, he said.

What of Sinn Fein’s Irish language sign policy in Belfast – does he think it is divisive or sectarian?

"It’s not something I think should be divisive,” he said, noting that other parts of the UK have dual-language systems.

"But having said that again, the way it has been dealt with within council has not been helpful, has not been edifying from either side of the side of the argument in my opinion.

"If you’re saying you’re coming from a sort of ‘supporting the Irish langauge’ perspective, then I don’t think it has helped that – I think it has hindered it.

"I think there is this sense from me that Sinn Fein need to recognise that they’re no longer the small party, they’re in the ascendancy and they need to be more generous and they need to work with people.”

In his lengthy resignation statement, posted online, councillor Hanvey, who has a master’s degree in economics, criticised his former party for “continuing to endorse the neo-liberal concept of balanced budgets”.

He also said that the party “could have and should have done more to condemn [Israel’s] atrocities” in Gaza and he attacked the Cass Review, which criticised the state of transgender medicine in GB, as a “perversion of the process of evidence-led policy making”.

Call for toxic tyres to be removed from loyalist Eleventh Night bonfire

Connla Young, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

THERE have been calls for toxic tyres placed on a notorious bonfire in Co Tyrone to be removed.

The tyres have appeared on and around the controversial pyre in Moygashel, near Dungannon, in recent days.

The ‘Eleventh Night’ bonfire has made headlines in recent years after a series of racist and other displays.

Last year a shocking display mocked the plight of vulnerable refugees and migrants.

It included a small boat with a number of dark-skinned mannequins dressed in lifejackets and hi-vis vests.

In 2023 an image of former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and a tricolour were placed on the bonfire.

A year later a replica PSNI vehicle was placed on the pyre.

Concerns about tyres at the site come just days after a “racist” sign claiming ‘Muslims are not welcome’ appeared at a children’s playpark in the loyalist village.

Police said they are treating the offensive display as a “hate incident”.

While hundreds of pallets have already been built at the site, images of the bonfire appear to show tyres and other materials, including mattresses, inside the main structure.

SDLP councillor Karol McQuade said “this is completely unacceptable”.

Tyres have been placed on an Eleventh Night bonfire in Moygashel, Co Tyrone

“Burning tyres releases toxic fumes and pollutants into the air, and it is local people in Dungannon, Moygashel and the surrounding area who will be left to breathe it in,” he said.

“It is bad for public health, bad for the environment, and it should not be tolerated.

Mr McQuade urged those responsible to remove the dangerous material.

“No tradition or celebration gives anyone the right to put the health of the wider community at risk,” he said.

“Those responsible need to remove these tyres immediately, and the relevant authorities must take action before serious harm is done.”

The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affair was contacted.

Police probe racist graffiti as threats appear against landlords and NIHE staff

Conor Sheils, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026OR SHEILS

POLICE are investigating a number of hate incidents after threatening graffiti appeared in Co Antrim over the weekend.

The sinister art work appeared in various spots around the Rathcoole area of Newtownabbey carrying racist messages and threatening Housing Executive staff and landlords.

One such message read: “The Rathcoole people want no foreign national’s (sic) in are (sic) area’s (sic).”

It was accompanied by a target sign.

Meanwhile, a second such message threatened NI Housing Executive staff.

A poster placed at various locations in the area read: “Take notice. Anyone facilitating the settlement of Muslims or illegals in our areas will be held responsible. We are watching.”

Target signs were also scrawled next to the words “NIHE staff” and “landlords” in at least one location.

Graffiti bearing the words ‘Locals only’ was also sprayed on boarded up windows which were smashed on a property.

A spokesperson for the NI Housing Executive said: “The Northern Ireland Housing Executive strongly condemns the threatening graffiti that has been directed at our staff and painted on our office and in the surrounding neighbourhood. Any threat against our teams or our contractors is completely unacceptable, and no one should be subjected to intimidation while carrying out their public service duties.

“The safety and wellbeing of our staff is our absolute priority. We would appeal to everyone to respect the work that our teams carry out in supporting local communities and to allow them to do their work free from threat, intimidation or fear.”

A PSNI spokesperson said: “Police received a report of posters erected on a number of lamp-posts in Newtownabbey on Sunday, May 31, and have also been made aware of graffiti which has appeared on a number of buildings in the area.

“Enquiries are ongoing into each of these reports to establish if a crime has occurred.

“In line with our incident reporting policy, these reports are initially being treated as hate incidents while our enquiries continue.

“Officers are currently liaising with relevant agencies who are responsible for the property upon which the material is displayed.”

Warning of potential ‘costly catastrophe’ caused by the north’s two landfill sites

John Manley, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

NORTHERN Ireland will face a “costly catastrophe” unless there is a major rethink about how the region deals with its waste, an MLA is warning.

SDLP representative Colin McGrath was speaking as it was confirmed that there are currently just two remaining landfill sites in the north that accept household waste.

It recently emerged that the region exports a disproportionately high amount of waste for incineration.

Despite having just 3% of population, the north accounts for 16% of all UK exports of so-called residual waste.

Councils pay for the waste to be shipped overseas, mostly to Scandinavia, where it is used to generate heat and electricity.

Agriculture and Environment Minister Andrew Muir confirmed in a response to a written assembly question that there are two landfill sites that can accept household waste – Cottonmount in Newtownabbey, Co Antrim and Craigmore in Co Derry, which are operated by Biffa and RiverRidge, respectively. Mr Muir’s department declined to say how long each of the sites were expected to remain operational.

The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs said it had “previously identified a need for additional residual waste infrastructure capacity as Northern Ireland currently exports large amounts of residual waste”.

It said the Strategic Investment Board (SIB) had been commissioned “to provide insight and technical support in addressing key waste challenges”.

“While householders and councils have reduced the amount of waste going to landfill, recycling rates are stagnating with approximately 51% of waste in residual bins comprising recyclable material,” the department said.

It said proposals aimed at reducing residual waste and increasing the quality and quantity of recycling are “pending publication”.

Need  ‘to rethink how we handle waste’

Mr McGrath said it was necessary “to rethink how we handle waste”.

“Part of any consideration has to be how we handle our waste at home.

It is too easy to pay people to take our waste and then sell it overseas – though such practices cost the public purse and misses an opportunity to revenue raise for the public purse – both are literally a waste,” he said.

“I would urge the department to come up with alternatives to burying or paying for our waste to be taken away and find a model that fits our needs, the environment and the public purse too, otherwise we’ll face a costly catastrophe.”

The six councils that make up the Arc21 consortium are still pursuing their plan to build an incinerator at

Hightown on the edge of north Belfast, which is currently being considered for planning approval.

Colin O’Hanlon of Indaver, the private company hoping to build the energy from waste plant on behalf of Arc21, said the absence of adequate infrastructure to process residual waste meant a reliance on export markets.

“The current approach is not only unsustainable and fraught with economic, environmental and reputational risks, but the markets for this waste are increasingly unreliable and volatile,” he said.

Colin Buick, the chair of campaign group No Arc21, said proposed policy changes could increase recycling rates, meaning the residual waste produced would equate to just half the capacity needed to run the Hightown plant.

“The incinerator would cost ratepayers in the order of £1.5 billion-plus over a period of up to 25 years – at around £200 per tonne of waste incinerated,” Mr Buick said.

“This is well above the market rate and participating councils would be unable to escape long-term waste contracts.”

Dangerous driving accused was in court two days prior to incident

Paul Higgins, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

A CO Down man accused of dangerous driving was refused bail yesterday after a judge heard he had been in court two days beforehand.

Standing handcuffed in the dock of Downpatrick Magistrates’ Court, 27-year-old Kieran Turley confirmed that he understood the three charges against him, alleged to have been committed on 31 May this year.

Turley, from the Vianstown Road in the town, is accused of driving dangerously on the Colmcille Road, in addition to driving while disqualified and without insurance.

Giving evidence to the court, a detective constable said he believed he could connect Turley to each of the offences, adding that police were objecting to bail.

Reading from the police structured outline of the case, District Judge Peter Magill told the court that at several points during a police pursuit around 4.45am on Sunday morning, the VW Jetta came to a complete stop.

The court heard that when the car came to a halt, a passenger got out and threw bottles of alcohol at the police vehicle before it sped off again.

At one point, a passenger “signalled for the police to approach him for some sort of confrontation,” but the Jetta accelerated away.

During the pursuit around Downpatrick, police lost sight of the car for a few minutes but the driving was “dangerous and weaving across both lanes of traffic”.

A driver wearing a red-coloured top ran away from police and Judge Magill said that when police were looking for the driver, Turley ran away when he was spotted hiding in a garden.

When he was arrested, his clothing matched the description of the driver and he was found to have the key to the VW Jetta in his pocket.

During police interviews, Turley was asked to account for his movements but he refused to answer questions.

Judge Magill asked the officer if anyone else had been arrested, and the detective confirmed that a man and a woman remain in police custody “and enquiries are ongoing at this point”.

It is understood part of that investigation relates to attempted murder after an officer was struck by a stolen police vehicle.

In a PSNI statement issued on yesterday they said that detectives “investigating an incident in which an officer sustained serious injuries when he was struck by a stolen police vehicle have charged a man to court and made two further arrests”.

‘Utterly untrustworthy’

The statement added: “The man, aged 27, has been charged with dangerous driving, driving while disqualified and using a motor vehicle with no insurance.

“He is due to appear before Downpatrick Magistrates’ Court today, Monday 1st June. He has been bailed to allow for further enquiries in respect of driving whilst unfit, and aggravated vehicle taking causing injury and released unconditionally in respect of attempted murder and a number of driving related offences.

“As is usual procedure, the charges will be reviewed by the Public Prosecution Service. Meanwhile, a man aged 36 has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder and aggravated vehicle taking causing injury. A woman aged 27 has been arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving and failing to stop for police. Both remain in custody at this time while enquiries continue.”

In court yesterday, a defence solicitor argued that Turley could be granted bail, subject to strict conditions.

Highlighting that the defendant had been granted police bail on other matters so police had approved his address, the lawyer said Turley was willing to abide by any and every bail condition the court could impose.

Judge Magill highlighted, however, that Turley has 16 previous convictions, many of them relevant.

That included, he told the court, Turley being given a combination order instead of a prison sentence on Friday, just two days before this incident.

“He is utterly untrustworthy as far as this court is concerned,” Judge Magill declared as he refused bail.

Turley was remanded in custody and the case adjourned to June 25.

Derry councillor suspended over speaking out on animal cruelty video

Conor Sheils, Irish News, June 2nd, 2026

A DERRY city councillor has been suspended for a month after sharing a social media post about an animal cruelty video that featured in a BBC investigation into dog fighting.

Shauna Cusack, who has represented the Foyleside area on Derry City and Strabane District Council since 2013, was found to have breached the local government Code of Conduct following an adjudication hearing last week.

The Northern Ireland Local Government Commissioner for Standards confirmed the suspension, finding that Ms Cusack had breached standards relating to confidentiality and bringing her office into disrepute.

The case centres on a video published in 2024 showing a man holding a dead dog with his arm around its neck and a muzzle taped to its snout, and biting the animal’s ear.

The footage sparked widespread outrage when it circulated on social media and was later referenced in a BBC Spotlight documentary on dog fighting.

The Commissioner found that Ms Cusack’s post included information she should reasonably have known to be confidential, with the potential to place at risk individuals who had no connection to the alleged cruelty incident.

The complaint was brought by a member of the public.

While the Commissioner accepted that Ms Cusack, as a political representative, had an enhanced right to comment on animal welfare and justice matters, he concluded that right did not extend to disclosing information about uninvolved third parties.

A statement by the Commissioner said that she should have raised her concerns “in a more measured and neutral way, and one which avoided potentially placing individuals at risk and contributing to an already hostile online commentary”.

In a statement to constituents posted on Saturday, Ms Cusack said: “It is with great regret that I have to inform you that I will be unable to undertake my duties as your elected rep for the next month.

“On Thursday, after two years fighting the case, I was found guilty of breaching the Code of Conduct and suspended from Council by the Commissioner.

“This was in relation to a social media post where I voiced serious and genuine concerns regarding an animal cruelty issue. You all know how much I love our beautiful, ‘superior’ creatures and my anger and empathy erased my ability to apply ethics.

‘‘ I’m overwhelmed with all your messages of concern and support

“It’s little known that (some) elected reps do not really have ‘freedom of speech’.

“We have to be measured in what we say as well as what we do, regardless of the circumstances, because if someone complains you are (or should be) accountable.

“A costly post for me, but when it comes to animal welfare issues I will continue to raise my voice, albeit with the knowledge that sometimes the bad guy wins.

“Still here for help, advice and a bit of craic folks.”

The statement drew a significant response from the public with many messaging in support of the councillor.

Writing on Sunday, Ms Cusack said she was “overwhelmed with all your messages of concern and support,” adding: “You’ve no idea how appreciated it is.”

The councillor left the SDLP in 2024 following a dispute over its mayoral nomination process and has since sat as an independent.

Stormont to wrestle with debate on when young people are responsible for crimes

Andrew Madden, Belfast Telegraph, June 2nd, 2026

Two horrific crimes more than 30 years apart and in a different country are overshadowing a debate on what would be a seismic law change in Northern Ireland.

The minimum age of criminal responsibility here, the age at which a child can be arrested, prosecuted and convicted of a crime, is 10 — one of the lowest in Europe.

It's the same in England and Wales, while in Scotland and in the Republic of Ireland it is 12, with caveats for the most serious crimes.

However, the Assembly is about to debate several proposals that could see the age increase, via amendments to Naomi Long's Justice Bill.

The SDLP, Alliance and Sinn Féin have jointly tabled an amendment to raise the age to 14, except in cases involving more serious crimes, such as murder and rape, where those aged 12 could still be prosecuted.

Those in favour of raising the age cite reasons such as international standards, neurological development research and youth rehabilitation.

Opponents, meanwhile, can point to two extreme cases to justify their argument.

One case involves two girls, then aged 14 and 15, who were subjected to separate sexual assaults in Hampshire between November 2024 and January 2025.

Two 14-year-old boys carried out the rapes, while a third boy, aged 13 at the time, was convicted for his role in one of the attacks.

Despite the gravity of the crimes, the offenders were handed Youth Rehabilitation Orders instead of custodial sentences, with the judge stating he wished to avoid criminalising the children unnecessarily.

Following a public outcry, the sentences have been referred to the Court of Appeal.

Speaking about the case in the Assembly, the DUP's Jonathan Buckley referred to calls to raise the age of criminal responsibility.

“Under that proposal, one of those boys would not have faced any form of judgment. It is despicable in the extreme,” he said.

The other case is the murder of two-year-old James Bulger in Liverpool in 1993.

Two boys, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, both 10 at the time, were found guilty and sentenced to indefinite detention.

Both were held in youth justice facilities before being released aged 18 under life licence in 2001 with new identities.

Thompson back in prison

Thompson has not been heard of publicly since, but Venables is currently in prison, having been recalled after child sex abuse images were found on his computer.

Venables' lawyer, Laurence Lee, said he supports the age of criminal responsibility staying at 10, but only for the most serious crimes, adding there would be “chaos” if it was increased, with young criminals “running wild”.

“I think there should be a two-tier system, and that for cases like murder, rape, serious crime, that it should stay at 10,” he said. “Because the criminal age of responsibility is 10, it doesn't mean to say that every offender is going to be charged with an offence.

“All it means is that it's like a safety barrier. They can be charged, which is often a good thing as far as peace of mind is concerned.”

More recent scientific evidence suggests children do not have the emotional maturity or capability to understand the gravity of their actions at 10, however, Mr Lee branded this “absolute nonsense”.

“Kids are very savvy nowadays, and they know the difference in right and wrong well before 10,” he said.

Statistics show that even if the minimum age of criminal responsibility increased, it would impact only a small number of children.

In Northern Ireland, offenders under 18 can be dealt with through referrals to the Youth Justice Agency (YJA), which deals with more minor offences, while those who receive custodial sentences serve time at the Juvenile Justice Centre in Bangor.

In 2024/25, there were 1,078 referrals to the YJA by the PSNI relating to 1,045 children. Around half of these children were in care.

More serious child offenders, who were given custody orders, serve their sentence at the Woodlands Juvenile Justice Centre in Bangor. In 2024/25, there were 180 admissions to the centre, down from 214 in 2023/24.

To put these figures in perspective, more than 30,000 people — both children and adults — went through the justice system in 2024/25.

‘We’re not advocating for a free pass’

Chris Quinn is the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People. He believes the age of criminal responsibility should be 16.

“It's really important for me to say we're not advocating for a free pass,” he said.

“We're just saying that we approach the justice system in a different way with children than we do with adults, and at the minute, actually we're doing that. So for a child under 10, we're doing that.

“The process would be that if a child under 10 breaks the law, involving serious offences, there would be intensive psychological programmes and they would engage in programmes around how to deal with harmful behaviour.

“Now we know a lot more about restorative justice and I think it's really important to stress that we are concerned about the victim. We need to put victims at the centre of this as well.

“But the current system as it is for teenagers doesn't work well, not as well as it could. There are structural failures there, and there are delays. It doesn't protect victims as well as it should and it doesn't protect children as well as it should.”

When the Stormont numbers are analysed, it is largely academic — as the decision needs Executive support.

So, regardless of the number of MLAs in favour of change, the DUP and (more ambiguously) the UUP, are against it — so change is doomed to fail.

Sinn Féin's Emma Sheerin said criminalising children so young “does not make society safer”.

The SDLP said the current threshold is “simply too young”.

The Alliance Party, which has its MLA Naomi Long as Justice Minister, said it supports raising the age to 14, “with carefully defined exceptions for the most serious crimes”.

Curiously, when the Belfast Telegraph asked the UUP for the party's stance on the issue, we were provided with a comment from party leader Jon Burrows, which did not explicitly say he stuck by keeping the age at 10. Previously, this was Mr Burrows' stance.

In a statement, Mr Burrows said the proposals from Alliance and Gerry Carroll are “dangerous and have not been thought through”.

Amid the debate, though, lies a simple question — referring both to the parents of the victim and perpetrators: “What would you do if it was your child?”

Prison should serve justice, not public rage.

Carl Frampton's new BBC series shows us that there are better ways

Malachi O’Doherty, Belfast Telegraph, June 2nd, 2026

What is prison for?

If we are to judge by the demands that three young sex offenders be locked up rather than dealt with more humanely, it is about satisfying public outrage.

Three young thugs raped or sexually assaulted teenage girls. One of the girls, who was 15, says her attacker made her life hell. She is afraid to go out for fear of meeting her rapist.

The cases turned on a law that requires the judge, in dealing with minors, to prioritise the prospects of rehabilitation over punishment.

The media and many political figures are outraged.

Labour MP Jess Phillips, who was the minister for safeguarding and violence against women and girls, said that giving the offenders youth rehabilitation orders sent a 'bad message'.

The Prime Minister himself has commented on the decision and the Attorney General has referred the case to the Court of Appeal.

So, whatever the boys do, they cannot rest easy. They may yet find themselves in custody, serving time for their crimes.

And most will say, slap it on them.

But what is prison for?

Everyone who works in the service knows that it is more likely to confirm you in your criminal tendencies than to make you a better person.

We have seen in Carl Frampton's brilliant series on the probation service how genuinely compassionate and pragmatic people in the system work to keep offenders out of prison, because they know time spent inside does more harm than good.

Young men going to jail for the first time are introduced into the company of more experienced criminals. They learn criminal ways from them and get inducted into drug use.

If prison is for getting offenders to change their ways, then it is a colossal and expensive failure.

If it is simply for punishing people and satisfying society that they have been punished, then there are cheaper ways of doing that.

Should courts be impervious to outrage?

We could flog them. But we kid ourselves that we are too civilised for that. We don't have caning in our schools anymore, though in this country many were happy with young offenders being shot in the legs.

In the past, when I wrote about the kneecapping culture, I was often sneered at for showing sympathy for hoods and druggies.

Parliaments in European societies have managed to abolish execution as a punishment for crime, despite the fact that majorities in those countries, at the time, wanted to preserve the death penalty.

So a humanitarian approach has reined in a little the popular demand that offenders be punished to the satisfaction of people who have little regard for whether the approaches taken produce a better society.

Now, instead of the kind of punishment that would make us feel that we are a barbaric society, we use another type that takes the offenders out of sight, locks them up in overcrowded old buildings among other hoodlums and disturbed people, and exposes them to bullying and drug use.

Of course, there is the question of how the victims of crime feel and what they want.

We commonly see relatives of victims coming before the TV cameras after a court case to complain that the sentence delivered is not enough. 'We are serving a life sentence,' they will say.

They see the length of the sentence as the measure of how seriously the offence against them has been taken. They want their anger validated by the court.

No one steps forward to explain to them that, unlike in Saudi Arabia, we do not punish people for the express purpose of satisfying the hurt, anger and vengeful feelings of the victims or their families.

Judges take victim impact statements into account when sentencing, but they don't ask victims what the sentence should be, nor should they ever.

We do subscribe to the idea that prison should rehabilitate as well as punish. The only real value in the punishment that I can imagine is deterrence. I may not steal a car because if I get caught, I may go to jail.

But sometimes the offender is clearly unlikely to offend in the same way again. The drunk driver who kills a child may conceivably have learned a life-changing lesson from the shock of what he has done so arguing that his sentence is too short means only that it is too short to satisfy the child's family.

The whole point of a judicial system is that these decisions are removed from the offended, to replace revenge with justice.

It is also to separate the judiciary from the Executive, so that politicians cannot overrule judges. Yet that is what we have seen politicians like Jess Phillips try to do in using their moral pressure to undermine a judgment in the case of those three young men.

The law should be impervious to public outrage, however understandable that outrage is. But is it?

Shear Genius - How farmers and environmental experts are using wool to restoring Co Antrim peatland

By Iain Gray, Belfast News Letter, June 1st, 2026

An innovative bid to save and restore threatened peatland is under way on a mountain in the Co Antrim hills – and it could turn out to be a ‘woolly’ good idea.

Hardy souls have carted 60 ‘wool logs’ up Slievenanee Mountain, installing them in areas of exposed and eroded blanket bog.

Made from scoured fleece compacted into wool textile sacks, the logs are designed to slow water flow, trap sediment, and support the re-establishment of moss and other vegetation that creates peat.

The hope is that the logs can be used to stimulate the growth of an important part of Ulster’s environment, and is the largest trial of wool logs in Northern Ireland so far.

Volunteers carried 60 wool logs weighing 8kg up Slievenanee Mountain to the project site.

The peatland restoration project has been organised by the Ulster Farmers’ Union and Ulster Wildlife, working alongside Sustainable Rope Ltd, Ulster Wool and Ulster University.

Most schemes to restore peat involve importing coir, a fibre extracted from coconuts, which is usually sourced in south-east Asia. Wool has already shown promising results in trials elsewhere in the UK, especially upland sites in Scotland and northern England, and it’s hoped fleece could prove to be a locally-grown solution to the problem of eroded peatlands.

Volunteers

The trial was carried out by nature conservation charity Ulster Wildlife, with around 30 volunteers who transported the wool logs by hand across challenging terrain, reaching heights of over 500 meters above sea level.

The Slievenanee site lies within the Antrim Hills Special Protection Area, designated for its upland bird populations and the habitats that support them. Significant weathering and erosion over time have left areas of bare peat where vegetation has struggled to recover naturally, and the introduction of wool logs aims to stabilise these areas to create conditions for peat-forming plants to return.

The wool logs are used to trap moisture and sediment, providing the conditions for peat-creating moss to form.

Ulster Wildlife’s peatland restoration manager, James Devenney, said it is essential to tackle the erosion problem.

“Healthy peatlands are one of our most important natural assets,” he said. “They store carbon, improve water quality, reduce flood risk and provide a home for specialist wildlife.

“We’re incredibly grateful to the farmers on Slievenanee Mountain, and the volunteers for their support in making this project happen. Early indications from the site are encouraging, and we’re excited to monitor how the wool logs perform over the coming months in slowing water movement, stabilising exposed peat and supporting vegetation recovery.”

Organisers say the project demonstrates the value of collaboration between farmers, environmental organisations and industry partners, with Ulster Farmers Union peatlands officer Stephanie Clokey stating: “Wool is a natural, biodegradable material and is a logical solution for peatland management.

It's hoped the wool logs will be a locally sourced method of restoring damaged peatlands, instead of importing material from Asia to do it.

“Here we’re helping to rebuild damaged areas by using materials that work with the landscape, while supporting local farmers and adding value to something that has recently often been treated as a waste product rather than a resource."

A blended approach using both wool and coir may also be explored in future trials, combining the additional weight and durability of coir with the sustainability and local sourcing benefits of wool. Findings from the project will help determine whether wool logs could be adopted more widely in peatland restoration across Northern Ireland.