Some journalists’ data can atill be shared with intelligence agencies: PSNI
CONNLA YOUNG, Irish News, October 13th, 2025
CONCERNS have been raised after the PSNI confirmed that journalists’ data will continue to be provided to British intelligence agencies, which includes MI5.
Deputy Chief Constable Bobby Singleton said personal data held by the PSNI will be supplied to intelligence agencies if there is a “lawful policing purpose”.
The rare admission that police provide journalists’ data to other agencies comes just weeks after a review into PSNI snooping on members of the media and others confirmed the practice was widespread.
The McCullough Review revealed the PSNI carried out two ‘defensive operations’ involving hundreds of journalists over a 13-year period between 2011- 2024.
Headed by London-based barrister Angus McCullough KC, the review also confirmed 21 unlawful uses of covert powers to identify journalists’ sources.
It has emerged that eight journalists were subject to unlawful use of powers to identify their sources, while lawyers were also placed under illegal surveillance.
The PSNI was involved in a “wholesale” process of ‘washing through’ journalists’ numbers against PSNI records in a practice deemed by Mr McCullough to be a “likely breach” of Article 8 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects private life and freedom of expression.
The phone numbers used by the PSNI in both ‘defensive operations’ were obtained from the police press office, which falls under the Strategic Communications and Engagement Department (SCED).
The PSNI say the practice has now ended.
The McCullough Review was ordered after the London-based Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) last year found the PSNI and Metropolitan Police unlawfully spied on Belfast-based journalists Barry McCaffrey and Trevor Birney in order to identify their sources.
Mr Singleton, who has responsibility for SCED, was asked by The Irish News if he could provide an assurance that the police press office will no longer share journalists’ data with the Professional Standards Department, its C3 unit, otherwise known as Special Branch, or any other intelligence department within the force.
In response, the senior officer said SCED “will not be sharing journalists’ details with Professional Standards Department or any other department within the organisation”.
“Staff within SCED have been directed if they receive any requests to pass them directly to the head of department who, in turn, will liaise with my office,” he added.
Mr Singleton was also asked if he can provide an assurance that journalists’ data will no longer be supplied to other British intelligence gathering agencies including MI5, GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters), National Crime Agency, British military intelligence or The Metropolitan Police.
In his response, the senior officer confirmed journalists’ data is provided to agencies outside the PSNI.
Will only supply data for ‘lawful policing purpose’
“We will only supply data with other security organisations if there is a lawful policing purpose to do so, for example under Article two, threat to life,” he said.
After the McCullough report was published, some human rights organisations and political parties called for a public inquiry into the role of MI5 in spying on journalists.
It emerged through the IPT last month that the spy agency illegally snooped on former BBC journalist Vincent Kearney, who is now the
Northern Editor with RTÉ.
Seamus Dooley of the National Union of Journalists, who was a member of the McCullough Review Group of Experts and Stakeholders, believes an MI5-focused inquiry is necessary,
“The assurances that were given by the chief constable that the practice had ended in relation to the sharing of journalists’ numbers… and there was no qualification given by the chief constable in relation to that,” he said.
“I place in the context of the call by the NUJ for an investigation into the activities of security forces other than PSNI.
“This response would give us for concern and reinforces the need for such an inquiry.”
And he added: “If we are talking about cleaning up what has happened arising from revelations at the IPT, there’s no comfort in knowing that only one bit of the house is clean,” he said.
“We know from McCullough and we have concerns in relation to the behaviours of external forces, that their understanding of ‘lawful purpose’ is very broad and has not always been proven to be correct.
“I think we would have a concern about that.”
Daniel Holder of the Committee on the Administration of Justice said: “It is welcome there are new safeguards within the PSNI regarding journalists data not being shared for unlawful purposes, in the environment following the McCullough Review attention has to focus on the extent to which MI5 and other security agencies have also sought to unlawfully track journalists sources.
“MI5 has already admitted unlawfully obtaining phone data from journalist Vincent Kearney, and CAJ along with Amnesty and the NUJ have called for a public inquiry into MI5’s role in such surveillance.
“The PSNI should also ensure that any onward sharing of journalists data with other law enforcement bodies is subject to safeguards whereby it could not be subsequently misused.”
'We're not going anywhere', say families campaigning for answers to 1994 Chinook crash
Belfast Telegraph, October 13th, 2025
LAST WEEK, IT EMERGED THAT PSNI CHIEF CONSTABLE JON BOUTCHER WROTE TO SECRETARY OF STATE HILARY BENN APPEALING FOR 'TRANSPARENCY AND OPENNESS' OVER THE CRASH, SAYING THE SITUATION WAS 'ADDING TO SUFFERING', WRITES ANDREW MADDEN
“I feel I would be doing my father an injustice if I didn't try to find out what happened,” says Des Conroy.
The 52-year-old's father, also named Desmond, was an RUC Detective Chief Superintendent in 1994 and one of 29 people who lost their lives when the Chinook Mk II helicopter they were flying in crashed into the Mull of Kintyre in Scotland.
There were no survivors.
On board were four crew and 25 of the most senior members of the security services, tasked with combating paramilitaries in what turned out to be the final years of the Troubles.
In one fell swoop, the upper echelon of Northern Ireland's security apparatus had been wiped out.
“The RUC Chief Constable at the time spoke of it being a catastrophic loss, he didn't try to hide it,” says David Walmsley, who covered the crash and its aftermath for the Belfast Telegraph at the time.
David has also covered the story in the years since the tragedy.
“It was unimaginable. The individuals who died were irreplaceable, so the big question was what caused it? Was it a terrorist act? There was no claim of responsibility, but there were no shortage of conspiracy theories.”
One of those who died in the crash was RUC Assistant Chief Constable Brian Fitzsimons, the head of Special Branch. He himself personally ran agents within the various paramilitaries.
Such was the panic after the crash, agents were ringing his office asking what had happened, fearing their names may have been in documents on board the Chinook.
In 1995, an RAF board of inquiry found nothing obvious to indicate what caused the crash, but said the wrong rate of climb was a contributory factor, however, a technical malfunction could not be ruled out.
Despite this, two senior RAF air marshals reviewed the evidence and found that flight lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper had been “grossly negligent”.
“Our reaction as a family was one of shock, disbelief,” says Des.
“We never believed it, we knew quite early on that these two pilots were top-end — you don't put 25 of the highest ranking intelligence officers on board a helicopter with two rookies.
“We were obviously dealing with everything in our own family and our grief, losing the centre of our world very suddenly. But we were very much taken aback by the pilots being blamed.”
Several more inquiries into the crash were held in the ensuing years, but it was not until 2002 that the two pilots were cleared of any blame, but questions remain unanswered.
“Those in charge have always avoided accountability. None of the inquiries have examined why the helicopter was allowed in the air if it was not airworthy,” says Mark Stephens, a solicitor representing the Chinook families who are campaigning for a public inquiry into the tragedy.
“Immediately after the crash, the Mk II was grounded for a period. Nobody ever looked at what happened afterwards. So there's this one rogue helicopter flying for no reason and then after they ground all of them.”
Cleared to fly against advice of test pilots
It subsequently emerged that the Chinook Mk II in question, serial number ZD576, was cleared to fly by at least two senior RAF air marshals against the advice of test pilots at the RAF's military testing site at Boscombe Down.
Concerns about the airworthiness of the helicopter were so strong that, a day before the crash, an internal Ministry of Defence (MoD) memo was circulated stating concerns about the aircraft's engine control software had been “ignored” and that air crews would be at risk if they continued flying the helicopter.
The memo urged the MoD hierarchy “in the strongest possible terms” to end operational flights of the Chinook Mk II until the problems were fixed.
Due to fears about the safety of the helicopter, pilot Richard Cook increased his life insurance before the tragedy. Jonathan Tapper also asked to use the safer Chinook Mk I for the doomed flight, but this request was denied.
Furthermore, it later emerged that the RAF was engaged in legal action against Boeing, the Chinook's manufacturer, over issues with the aircraft's computer software at the time of the crash.
“The reason why that aircraft was flown in spite of all the reservations, and indeed the request from one of the dead pilots at the time, was to show the Army that the Chinook programme was running on time and the Mk II was perfectly safe to go into service,” retired RAF Squadron Leader Robert Burke recently told the BBC.
“It was a show flight. This journey — from airfield to airfield — was a perfect opportunity to fly such a high-profile group in an RAF Hercules, for instance.
“Not in a helicopter about which there were so many concerns. It was a gesture, that flight. A reckless act, but a show flight — it's as simple, and utterly tragic, as that.”
Another of Des Conroy Snr's children, Patricia Conroy, says she felt “sick” when she heard this revelation.
“It was just shocking to think that everyone on board were like guinea pigs,” she says.
“Was this just an ego trip, you know, so they could prove to people that this aircraft was good?
“My dad and all of those on board were not told that the aircraft was really unreliable. Who would get on anything like that? So his right to life was taken away and our human rights, they're not being taken into account.
“We want to know all the circumstances surrounding all the deaths.”
Government files relating to the crash have been sealed until 2094. The MoD says they contain personal information relating to third-party individuals and the early release of this information would breach those individuals' data protection rights.
Boutcher has appealed to Benn for ‘transparency and openness’
Last week, it emerged PSNI Chief Constable Jon Boutcher has now written to Secretary of State Hilary Benn appealing for “transparency and openness” over the crash.
“The families want a public inquiry and, in such an inquiry, a judge would be able to look at these secret files,” says Mark Stephens.
“Also, this 'personal information' could easily be redacted. The whole thing stinks of a cover-up.”
Following a documentary into the tragedy that aired last year that contained fresh evidence relating to the crash, the families of many of the victims came together and formed the Chinook Justice Campaign, which is calling for a public inquiry into the crash.
“When Keir Starmer got into 10 Downing Street he gave a great speech about a duty of candour and how he was going to hold senior civil servants to account,” says Patricia.
“Well, that just means nothing to us now, because the MoD essentially has told us to shut up and go away, that there's nothing to see here. But we're not going anywhere.”
In a letter to the families in August, Sir Keir said a public inquiry would not “bring any greater certainty” and would not be “in the public interest”.
A Change.org petition calling for a public inquiry has to date garnered more than 40,000 signatures.
Sir Keir said the MoD had advised him that records they hold “offer no insights into the crash”.
His letter read: “This Government is committed to transparency and accountability.
“However, given the extensive investigations already conducted into the crash, including two independent, judge-led processes, inquiries by both House of Commons and House of Lords select committees, and the original RAF board of inquiry, I do not believe that a new inquiry can bring any greater certainty or is in the public interest.”
The MoD said: “The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident, and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died. We understand that the lack of certainty about the cause of the crash has added to the distress of the families.
“We provided a detailed and considered response to the pre-action protocol letter, stating the reasons why we cannot accept the demand for establishing a new Public Inquiry. It's unlikely that a Public Inquiry would identify any new evidence or reach new conclusions on the basis of existing evidence.
“The accident has already been the subject of six inquiries and investigations, including an independent Judge-led review.”
David Walmsley says there are people out there who know exactly what happened on the evening of June 2, 1994.
“I think they will hold the line to stop the truth from emerging, but the truth doesn't have a deadline.”
UUP too big to fail ..and too unwieldy to change
JOHN MANLEY POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, Irish News, October 13th, 2025
ANALYSIS
ULSTER Unionist leader Mike Nesbitt believes his party is too big to fail.
“I think it’s very difficult to kill off a party that’s been around this long and is this well embedded in the community,” he told The Irish News last week.
They used to say the same about Glasgow Rangers, before the club went into administration in 2012.
Yet there may be some truth in what Mr Nesbitt says, borne out by the fact that 120 years after its foundation (as the Ulster Unionist Council), the UUP is still around, albeit a decidedly less-powerful force than the one which dominated politics in Northern Ireland for the first 50 years of its existence.
The Ulster Unionists’ steady electoral decline corresponded with the rise of the DUP. It’s more than 20 years since the latter eclipsed its rival, yet recent elections have shown that the DUP’s grip on power isn’t unassailable.
The UUP has managed to make minor gains and even landed a punch on the DUP when Robin Swann took the South Antrim Westminster seat last year but Mike Nesbitt’s party is failing to fully capitalise on the unionist electorate’s growing weariness with the DUP.
‘A party struggling to appeal to young forward-thinking voters’
Large numbers of voters have seemingly bypassed the Ulster Unionists in favour of Alliance, which suggests that while their constitutional allegiance hasn’t shifted significantly, they are less enamoured by traditional identity politics—or a party with a tired image and incoherent messaging.
Four leaders in five years and the prospect of a fifth within a matter of months hasn’t helped efforts to present the party as united in its focus.
The UUP has intermittently sought to position itself as a centrist, liberal party but struggles to ditch the historical baggage that would potentially attract new voters.
It was the only unionist party to oppose Brexit, but its opposition was muted. UUP representatives claim to have no issue with the Irish language but oppose every measure to increase its visibility.
It may be a broad church but that can often make it unwieldy.
“The UUP has intermittently sought to position itself as a centrist, liberal party but struggles to ditch the historical baggage that would potentially attract new voters
So while opportunities exist to carve out a distinct pitch to unionists as the DUP lurches right in an effort to fend off the TUV, the UUP needs unity and strong leadership.
Yet the current leader remains coy about his future intentions, although the tone of his speech reinforced the expectation that he’ll announce his resignation early in the new year.
There are limited options in terms of a replacement, with three of the UUP’s Stormont team having already been in the role at least once.
It’s highly probable it’ll be a man – shamefully only one of the UUP’s nine MLAs is a woman – and someone on the wrong side of 50.
In many ways that sums up the UUP’s problem: it’s stale and grey, too embedded in the north’s old establishment to appeal to younger, forward-looking voters.
Meanwhile, the decision to enter the Executive last year wasn’t universally popular among members, but Mike Nesbitt clearly regards it as an opportunity to demonstrate serious intention while at the same time raising his and his party’s profile in the same manner that helped his predecessor as health minister secure a Westminster seat.
There’s always a danger that the UUP could be tarnished by association with the Sinn Féin/DUP-led administration, but the party leader believes it’s a risk worth taking.
The need to change and put clear blue water between itself and other unionist parties remains, but in its current confused state, the UUP doesn’t appear ready for the challenge.
Diana Armstrong, the UUP’s sole female MLA of nine in total.
Mike Nesbitt has steadied party's ship, but now he sounds ready to pass the baton
SUZANNE BREEN POLITICAL EDITOR, Belfast Telegraph, October 13th, 2025
COMMENT
Mike Nesbitt's speech to his party's annual conference in Belfast seemed like that of a man with one eye on the exit.
He has said he will make a decision in January about whether he wants to stay on as UUP leader, but the impression on Saturday was that he already has his mind made up.
Nesbitt addressed last year's conference virtually because he had Covid.
Yet while he was there in the flesh this time, his contribution felt flat.
Unsurprisingly, delegates' responses were more routine than enthusiastic. Unlike some other party leaders, he's a natural behind a lectern. Never once does he stumble or look wooden.
His broadcast media experience always make for an effortless performance.
Yet this address sounded more like a series of well-made points strung together than a compelling narrative. There was no rousing of the troops, no memorable one-liners.
It seemed like a holding speech: one of a man who will be passing on the baton to somebody else soon rather than leading his team into battle in the next Assembly election.
That job may well fall to the newest addition to UUP's Assembly benches, Jon Burrows. Some say it's too early for the North Antrim MLA to be a leadership contender if Nesbitt stands down.
But his energy, ardour and confidence suggest otherwise. In his first address to delegates, he spoke without an autocue, which takes some nerve.
Although he's only in the door, there is a feeling growing among some councillors and grassroots members that he might be right for the top job.
With just two months under his belt at Stormont, he certainly hasn't proved himself as a seasoned political operator. However, despite his lack of political experience, he is probably the person the DUP and TUV would least like to see becoming leader because he could appeal to their voters.
Nesbitt holds the most demanding and important portfolio in the Executive and he has been completely up front from the start that being Health Minister is his first priority.
He branded the claim that the health service is “broken” as “an insult” to its workers. “What needs fixed is the pathways through which you access that care,” he said.
“Our capacity to meet demand is a mis-match and that has been a problem for well over a decade. But under the UUP, the dial is beginning to turn.
“The numbers waiting unacceptably long times are falling and falling quickly. Some lists, especially paediatric or children's, are being cleared entirely.”
Yet those who have waited not just long hours, but in some cases days, in A&E would justifiably describe the system as broken.
So would those patients red-flagged for cancer assessment but still waiting, and the thousands who day and daily struggle to get through to their GP surgery on the phone, let alone secure an appointment.
Putting in long hard hours
Nesbitt has inherited a dysfunctional health service. He is putting in long and hard hours as minister. His optimism is well-intentioned, but it won't appear valid to those whose lived experience of the system's ongoing failings suggest there's no grounds for hope.
Nesbitt also defended unionists who engaged in the debate on our constitutional future against the “Lundy” label.
He claimed a strong case could be made for the Union.
“We are part of the UK's (economy) and as such, we're with the sixth largest in the world,” he said.
“The Republic rates 25th. Who votes for relegation? Some say unification would be transformational.
“What was transformational was the crash of the Celtic Tiger in 2008 which required a massive bail-out from... the sixth largest economy on the planet.”
Hotelier and publican Bill Wolsey was interviewed on stage by David Trimble's biographer and former BBC journalist Stephen Walker.
Wolsey certainly didn't mince his words about official agencies, civil servants, or politicians.
He branded Jim Allister as “King Canute commanding the sea of progress to go back”.
Wolsey said: “The TUV are doing to the DUP what the DUP did to the Ulster Unionists. We have a province where our best and brightest leave and never come back.
“There's an opportunity for any party to be modern in their thinking, look forward and put out their hand of friendship.”
‘Angry Mackerel’ Land
Wolsey claimed that were too many in politics who “stir up trouble”.
He said they return to their “middle-class seaside homes” and the most danger they face “is an angry mackerel”.
Asked about his own identity, he said he supported the Northern Ireland soccer team first, the Republic second, then Scotland, Wales and “reluctantly” England in that order.
He questioned being British meant when someone drove a German car to an Irish pub where they drank Belgian beer and watched a Japanese TV.
Aside from interviewing Wolsey, Walker was on the podium to discuss his biography of Trimble.
Judging by the queue to buy the book outside the conference hall, delegates were massively impressed.
Inside the room, Burrows wasn't retreating on his criticism of Alliance.
Alliance had let down victims and farmers
“The party is, in my view, incompetent in its ministries. It has let down victims. It has let down farmers,” he said.
“Naomi Long's leadership of justice has been disastrous. All the agencies in the criminal justice system have persistent problems that got worse.”
He cautioned against leaving the European Convention on Human Rights in what was a “head and heart battle”.
Despite any emotional tug, departure would create battles both with nationalism and London as well as creating “another border in the Irish Sea” on rights. Burrows described himself a “proud unionist” — one who went hard on challenging Sinn Fein's position on the IRA campaign, but one who was forthright in calling out racism and offensive bonfire effigies.
Mayor of Antrim and Newtownabbey Leah Kirkpatrick spoke of the sexism that women in politics faced, and how they shouldn't have to chose between their children and their careers.
In his address, new UUP press officer Lewis McVitty argued that farmers were being “scapegoated” for the pollution of Lough Neagh.
There was a large Union flag on display at the side of the conference stage, but the UUP did not follow the DUP which reinstated flag-waving at its annual gathering last month.
Nesbitt unselfishly stepped up to the plate to lead his party just over a year ago at a precarious moment following Doug Beattie's resignation. He has helped to heal some of the divisions in its ranks.
He walked to the stage to Southside Johnny's Talk to Me. It's a Bruce Springsteen song about unrequited love, and frustration at a lack of communication.
It was an original choice from an original leader. But the impression is that, while Nesbitt has steadied the party, he'll be leaving it to somebody else to bring back the oomph.
Time to go after directors of terrorism, Doug Beattie tells UUP
By David Thompson, Belfast News Letter, October 13th, 2025
Hilary Benn is returning to the failed approach to legacy of the Stormont House Agreement, Ulster Unionists were told on Saturday.
The party’s justice spokesman, Doug Beattie MC MLA, reminded party delegates why the UUP was alone among the main local political parties in opposing the Stormont House deal a decade ago.
In a debate on legacy at the annual event at the Crowne Plaza hotel in Shaw’s Bridge, Belfast, Mr Beattie said: “Everything we do must be victim-centred on legacy. Those responsible need to be held to account. And we're not just talking about those who pulled the trigger. We're not just talking about those who planted the bomb. We're talking about those who sent them out to do it. It's about time we went after those who directed terrorism.”
He said: “Our Northern Ireland Office, our UK government, are weak on this issue, we as a party should be absolutely proud of ourselves ... The Stormont House Agreement was absolutely and fundamentally flawed. We as a party, the only major party, stood alone to say no to the Stormont House Agreement. And I remember when Mike [Nesbitt] was a leader in 2016, and I was a justice spokesperson, then us arguing that we will never support the Stormont House Agreement.
“Why would we never support it? Because they created a parallel police force. Why would we not support it? Because if you had a desktop Historical Enquiries Team investigation, you would not get an investigation under the Stormont House Agreement. If you were left limbless, burned, blind, psychologically damaged, you would not get an investigation.
“If you were kidnapped in Northern Ireland, taken into the Irish Republic, tortured and murdered, you would not get an investigation.”
Mr Beattie added: “And all of the other major parties said, we'll sign up to that, and we as a party, said no, and we stood by that principle, and we did not support it.”
Mr Beattie went on to say of the recent joint legacy plan unveiled by the Northern Ireland secretary, Mr Benn, and the Irish deputy prime minister Simon Harris: “We now have new legacy mechanisms, and those new legacy mechanisms, we have to give time for the legislation to come out so we can see it in detail. But I am concerned. I am concerned when our secretary of state keeps saying we're going to go back to the principles of the Stormont House agreement.”
It did not fill him “with any confidence whatsoever”, Mr Beattie said.
Among the other speakers were Jon Burrows, who wrote about legacy in the News Letter on Friday and Jeffrey Dudgeon, who is chair of the South Belfast Ulster Unionist Association.
Mr Dudgeon, who also convenes the Malone House group which campaigns against what they say is the imbalance on legacy, said: “We never supported the Stormont House Agreement, unlike the Conservatives and the DUP. We oppose the rewriting of history through state-funded lawfare, be it in the courts or in the academy.
“We will resist the continued persecution, and the actual prosecutions of veterans, whether in the Army or police, through ceaseless re-investigations and reopened inquests.”
He added: “Where Hilary Benn’s new Joint Framework is concerned, we oppose Dublin’s involvement in Strand One and Ireland’s breath-taking hypocrisy, given the hundreds of failed extraditions and the cruel and devastating cross-border raiding that they led to.
“Our team are doing great work in that respect. They recognise that the joint framework with Dublin – by definition – goes in only one direction. There is nothing absolutely nothing in it for unionists let alone victims’ families.”
Conservatives must reject the Irish Sea border
Owen Polley, Belfast News Letter, October 13th, 2025
In the summer of 2024, it was a sentiment they shared with voters across the UK.
Since then, the mood has changed completely.
From a Northern Ireland point of view, just weeks ago, Sir Keir Starmer and his ministers reached a deal with Dublin on the legacy of the Troubles that resembled a capitulation.
Similarly, while the Conservatives introduced the Irish Sea border, Labour has allowed it to become much worse, enforcing trade barriers enthusiastically and dismantling schemes that helped move goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Starmer and Hilary Benn claimed that a ‘reset’ of relationships with the EU would help. Now, it has emerged that Brussels is demanding that the sea border becomes even more rigorous, before it agrees to an agriculture deal. Who realistically expects Starmer to stand up to them?
It is not unfair to say that, rather than tackling our difficulties effectively, Labour has allowed almost every serious problem that the country faced to become worse.
The Conservative government allowed public spending to rise dangerously. Unfortunately, under the chancellor Rachel Reeves, this issue has deteriorated. At the coming budget, she faces a £50 billion ‘black hole’ in the country’s finances.
The current wave of immigration started under the Tories too, but Labour is less equipped to tackle this influx of people. It started its time in office by stopping the Rwanda scheme, which was one of the few potential disincentives for new arrivals.
At Labour’s conference, the new home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, introduced new plans aimed at curbing migration. There are doubts, though, that she can persuade her backbench colleagues that action to secure our borders is even necessary.
Anyway, she implied that concern about immigration is caused by small minded nationalism, rather than genuine worries about the UK’s resources and society. That attitude does not inspire any confidence that she is serious about cutting numbers.
It was against this backdrop that the Conservatives held their annual conference last week, in Manchester. Labour’s troubles should have provided the opposition with hope, but its own circumstances are not encouraging.
Reform still ahead of Conservatives in Polls
The party is behind Reform in most opinion polls, putting it in third place overall, while some surveys suggest it may be fourth.
As Conservative activists are keen to point out, though, in the UK, elections rather than polls determine political influence. The country certainly needs a strong, credible opposition.
Did the Tories sound like one last week?
On the Northern Ireland issues, there were signs of hope.
The party defended its legacy policies robustly. The shadow defence secretary, James Cartlidge, pledged to ‘restore full legal protection for our veterans’, if Labour goes ahead with its agreement with Dublin. The ability to ‘stop our veterans being harassed through the courts’ was also one of party leader Kemi Badenoch’s ‘five tests’ for whether the UK could be described as a sovereign state.
The Tories’ attitude to the Windsor Framework, which is even more directly related to sovereignty, is more complicated. At the Northern Ireland Conservatives’ reception, the local Tory chair, Paul Leeman, attacked Labour for “allowing the Irish Sea border to become harder”.
He urged the government to use safeguards against diversion of trade, help unionists to pull the Stormont brake (which could prevent certain new EU laws from being imposed here) and demand a change to the definition of goods that pose a risk to Brussels’ market.
As this paper reported, the Conservatives also claimed they would make “whatever changes are necessary” to ensure that the whole United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, can pull out of the European Convention of Human Rights. That could, in theory, include scrapping or changing the framework.
It is encouraging that these kinds of ideas are at least being discussed, but Kemi Badenoch has never admitted that the Tories got the sea border badly wrong originally. And she told the News Letter earlier this year that she would not look to ‘unpick’ the Windsor Framework. That implies that, if the Conservatives’ are edging toward a coherent policy on the sea border, they have certainly not yet reached the destination.
The national themes explored last week may not be enough to change the Tories’ fortunes either. On immigration, the Conservatives promised to leave the ECHR, but that simply puts them on the same ground as Reform.
Their best ideas, arguably, related to reforming the welfare system. The proposal that only British citizens should be able to claim benefits is overdue. If foreign nationals are not here to work and support themselves, then why on earth are they here?
Likewise, the Tories pledged to stop all kinds of over-diagnosed mental health issues, like depression, anxiety and ADHD, from entitling claimants to disability payments. That was the Conservatives at their best.
The party’s emphasis on cutting spending and the exploding cost of welfare is the kind of thinking that can help recover its credibility, while distinguishing it from Farage and Reform.
It is still far from clear that Kemi Badenoch is the right leader to oversee a Conservative revival, of course. But, last week, the Tories at least showed signs of life.
Unfortunately, while Northern Ireland badly needs a strong centre-right government, from our perspective the Conservatives cannot be convincing until they renounce their previous failures on the Irish Sea border.
‘To build a new Ireland, we must stop living in the past’
Irish News, October 13th, 2023,
SDLP leader says the BBC’s new Borderlands podcast was a ‘bleak listen’
PLATFORM: Claire Hanna
LAST week at the SDLP 2025 conference, I set out our party’s approach to progressing the journey towards a new Ireland.
It is a realistic but hopeful vision.
While we are very clear about the governance failures at Stormont, and structural problems of partition, we reject the tired narrative that the north is a “basket case”.
We instead focused on the potential of our people, our place, and our ability to build something new and better together.
It was forward-looking and rooted in an understanding that getting to that place safely starts with a genuine effort to understand the views, hopes and fears of everyone who calls this place home; creating a positive and shared plan and identity for the future.
We are also honest about what it will take to ensure a convincing vote in support in the Republic – taking on a “s***hole” will be a hard sell.
So, having a profound interest in the discussion about constitutional change, I tuned into the BBC’s new Borderlands podcast the evening it was released. It was a bleak listen.
What should have been a window into a modern debate about the future of this region and island instead felt like a retreat into the trenches, raking over the ugliest parts of our past and repeating the same moral evasions that have poisoned public discourse for decades.
The narrative that murder was justified or inevitable is a massive landmine under the road ahead, both in terms of a cover for those threatening it in the future and in perpetuating an association between sovereignty and death.
Decades of toxicity
To release us from these decades of toxicity, campaigners must decide whether to prioritise defending their past deeds—republican or loyalist—or their preferred constitutional future.
Moving forward means finding the courage to confront the truth of the damage that violence has done. Trading insults and score-settling on podcasts might make for ratings, but it reinforces old divisions and silences the thoughtful new voices that we desperately need to hear.
The new Ireland we should be working towards is one that learns from the past, rather than trapping the next generation in it. It needs to approach reconciliation not as a photo op, or a burden, but as a new way of living, with empathy and reflection.
It must be a debate in which this region is treated not as a lost cause but a place of potential that we can start unlocking in the here and now. If we keep looking backwards, we’ll never move forward.
Those of us who believe in a new Ireland must clearly demonstrate that it’s not about revenge for a historic constitutional wrong, but about renewal and getting the tools to change lives for the better.
That’s why the SDLP has proposed a Ministry for a New Ireland, a practical mechanism to start preparing for the future in a structured, sensible way. It would provide the space to anchor facts, research and discussions on what is required, and how we can collectively design a new nation.
This is not about setting a date for a border poll. It’s about reshaping how government thinks and acts. Our politics may feel broken, but our people are not. So before we reach the “when”, we need to think much deeper about the “how” and the “why” so that when the time comes, a new, hopeful, respectful and diverse future can become a reality for all.
The SDLP has a good record on finding a way forward when politics seemed broken, and we’re ready to do that again.
Claire Hanna is the MP for South Belfast & Mid Down and leader of the SDLP
Revisiting the past shouldn’t boil down to rows for clicks
Pro Fide et Patria
Irish News, October 13th, 2025
SHARPLY contrasting views of the appalling and prolonged violence during the Troubles, which resulted in over 3,500 deaths, and tens of thousands of serious injuries, have been under detailed discussion in recent days.
Two contributors to a high-profile new BBC podcast, ‘Borderland — UK or a United Ireland’, suggested that murder could be justified in some circumstances, drawing a firm and unequivocal response from our religious hierarchy.
While examining the tragedies of the past six decades is invariably a complex process, a case can always be made for facilitating constructive debates which carefully review the sequence of events, shed new light on the circumstances and offer insights into ways of resolving our legacy issues.
It was depressing to instead hear outdated and predictable exchanges on all too familiar themes on a BBC production which was plainly expensively funded by licence payers.
“It is essential that, as political groups defend their beliefs and pursue their aspirations, we respect the memory of all the victims, and support their relatives as they try to cope with the burden of their losses
The former Sinn Féin MP Michelle Gildernew and the loyalist activist Jamie Bryson set out to legitimise some of the killings from their separate republican and loyalist perspectives.
Unrepresentative
Although both are entitled to put forward their assessments, it is worth pointing out that Ms Gildernew no longer holds an elected position while Mr Bryson has never represented anyone other than himself. The arguments they offered were from the fringes, and reflected the thinking of the dark days of the past, rather than the spirit and the potential of the Good Friday Agreement, unfilled in many respects but still very much present today.
Every killing, regardless of where it happened and whether it involved nationalists, unionists or the forces of the state, was wrong, cruel and only capable of causing bitterness and grief on an enormous scale.
It is essential that, as political groups defend their beliefs and pursue their aspirations, we respect the memory of all the victims, and support their relatives as they try to cope with the burden of their losses. The intervention by senior Catholic, Church of Ireland, Methodist and Presbyterian clerics, and also signed by Rt Revd Sarah Groves, president of the Irish Council of Churches, was appropriate at every level.
It said: “As people of faith, as Christian leaders, and as individuals made in the image of God, we believe that human life is a divine and sacred gift to be cherished, nurtured and protected. Murder, which is the intentional and unlawful killing of another human, can therefore never be justified or legitimised.”
While politicians on all sides may occasionally provide different opinions, the vast majority of our citizens will regard the statement from the churches as the simple truth.
Criminal damage to Irish language street sign condemned as ‘disgraceful’
KIRSTY KING, Irish News, October 13th, 2025
POLICE are appealing for information following a report of “hate-motivated” criminal damage to an Irish language street sign in east Belfast.
It is believed the white sign at Shandon Park was cut with an angle grinder, with the Irish language wording removed, at around 8.15pm on Saturday evening.
Sinn Féin councillor Pádraig Donnelly condemned the attack, describing it as “a disgraceful act of vandalism designed to stoke division and intolerance”.
“There is nothing to fear from the Irish language, or indeed from equality,” he said.
“The rights of Irish language speakers must be respected.”
East Belfast Alliance MLA, Peter McReynolds, said in a social media post yesterday that “violent and destructive acts like this have no place in Belfast”.
The incident follows a spate of similar incidents targeting Irish language street signs in Belfast in recent years.
A dual-language sign at Haypark Avenue in the Ormeau area of south Belfast was targeted for the third time in just over three months in March 2024.
In the first incident it had the Irish wording scratched off, while in the second incident the signs ends were cut off with a power tool.
In the third incident the sign was stolen from its posts.
A sign at Judes Parade in the same area was also cut in half in March of last year.
Meanwhile, at the end of 2023, four Irish language signs were damaged in the north of the city.
A Belfast City Council policy introduced in 2022 allows for a consultation on dual-language signs in a street to be triggered upon the request of just one resident or local councillor.
Under the policy, just 15% of residents are required to back the sign before it is agreed by the council, while the previous policy required 33.3% of residents to trigger a consultation, and 66.6% to agree to a sign before it would be erected.
Speaking of Saturday’s incident, a PSNI spokesperson said: “Anyone with information about the incident on Saturday is asked to contact police on 101 quoting 1298 11/10/25.
‘Tiny minority’ against bilingual Belfast street signs, survey finds
ALLAN PRESTON, Irish News, October 13th, 2025
AN Irish language rights group has said nine out of 10 people in Belfast support Irish/English street signs.
The new survey from Conradh na Gaeilge claimed that outside of the Gaeltacht Quarter scheme, only 2.9% of residents opposed dual language signs across 536 streets approved since the introduction of the policy from Belfast City Council in 2022.
It comes ahead of an assembly motion from the DUP today calling for the “undemocratic and oppressive” policy to be replaced.
The policy requires a street survey and at least 15% of residents to be in favour of a dual language sign before it may be approved by the People and Communites Committee and the full council.
Calling it “the imposition of minority rule,” the DUP motion said that only 12% of applications for Irish language street signs approved by the council have had the majority support of residents.
Stating that the minority votes from residents were successful in nine out of 10 cases, the motion also claims that residents are surveyed repeatedly to get the desired result.
Conradh na Gaeilge say that of the 536 streets with dual language signs, 244 were approved through the People and Communities Committee, with the remaining 292 streets approved through the city’s Gaeltacht Quarter scheme.
The survey figures also state that in three out of four streets (76%, or 409 out of 536 streets), not a single resident opposed the signs.
There were also zero streets that returned a majority of residents opposed and, on average, 1.7% opposition was received per street.
A total of 20 other streets surveyed did not meet the 15% support threshold and were not approved.
Ciarán Mac Giolla Bhéin, president of Conradh na Gaeilge, said the figures proved there was “an incredibly tiny minority” opposed to the sign policy.
“What we have here entirely contradicts long-standing complaints from the DUP and others, who have been boasting fictional mass opposition to signage in order to disrupt the implementation of the policy,” he said.
“That stance simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny when you study the hard data.”
Rather than “continuing to stoke tensions and sow division and fear”, he said the DUP should make better use of their time by honouring their commitments on Irish language rights, immediately appoint a new Irish language Commissioner and bring forward an Irish language strategy that has been “promised in law since 2006”.
Earlier this month, Belfast councillors also passed a new Irish language policy despite unionist opposition, which would mean council signage and uniforms would have English and Irish.
Irish sign destroyed by angle grinder will not be the last, say loyalists
ALLISON MORRIS, Belfast Telegraph, October 13th, 2025
DAMAGE CONDEMNED AS 'DISGRACEFUL ACT OF VANDALISM DESIGNED TO STOKE DIVISION'
Loyalists who vandalised an Irish language street sign in east Belfast say “it won't be the last”, as police launched an investigation into the “hate-motivated” damage.
The sign to Shandon Park in the east of the city — which bore the street name in both English and Irish — was cut with an angle grinder, to remove only the Irish Páirc an tSeanduín, at around 8.15pm on Saturday.
Loyalists based in the nearby Braniel estate were responsible for the vandalism of the recently installed sign.
Reacting to the damage, Sinn Féin councillor Pádraig Donnelly branded it “disgraceful”.
“This was a disgraceful act of vandalism designed to stoke division and intolerance,” said councillor Donnelly.
“The rights of Irish language speakers must be respected”, he added.
Currently, dual language street signs can be applied for by a resident who is registered on the electoral register, or an elected member who represents the area. Developers and owners of new builds can also apply for dual language signs.
The city council then carries out a survey in the street.
The street survey involves a canvass of all households that are registered on the electoral register to seek their views.
If 15% or more of all occupants surveyed want to have a dual language sign, a report is sent to the People and Communities Committee for a decision. If approved, the sign is then installed.
However, loyalists responsible for the weekend vandalism have told the Belfast Telegraph in a statement that the council policy is unworkable.
If Belfast City Council think imposed Irish language signs will remain in unionist and loyalist areas they are deluded,” they said. “If they want to waste money replacing signs, that's a matter for them. The Irish language signs should be placed in communities where they are wanted and welcome.
“If not, ordinary people are and will take matters into their own hands and no loyalist will stand in their way.”
“This won't be the last Irish sign removed”, they added.
Earlier this month, Belfast city councillors voted in favour of adopting a new Irish language policy.
The policy aims to promote the use of Irish in public life, and pledges for the council to adopt English-Irish signage at all its facilities.
A DUP proposal for no changes to be made to staff uniforms failed during a sitting of the council on Wednesday, October 1. The motion was defeated by 42 votes to 17.
Ahead of the vote, the DUP said it was “madness” to adopt the new policy. It also claimed the plans have not been fully costed, and described them as “divisive”.
DUP councillor Sarah Bunting said: “This isn't the end and we will continue to fight for this policy to be scrapped”.
However, Sinn Féin councillor Tomás Ó Néill said the new policy will be “transformative”, and was a “historic decision".
‘United Ireland’ billboard standing two years after Sinn Féin ordered to remove it
PAUL AINSWORTH, Irish News, October 13th, 2025
SINN Féin has been accused of “arrogance” over a billboard that remains standing in Newry more than two years after the party was ordered to remove it.
The billboard at the Egyptian Arch at Newry’s Camlough Road features the slogan ‘a United Ireland is for everyone’ along with ‘let’s talk about it’ in both English and Irish.
Standing beside a flagpole with an Irish tricolour, the billboard had previously featured Sinn Féin’s party logo, which is no longer visible.
The location has previously featured an image of Belfast schoolboy Noah Donohoe, who was found dead in June 2020, six days after going missing, and a poster promoting an Easter Rising commemoration parade in Newry.
The Department for Infrastructure (DfI), which owns the land where it stands, asked Sinn Féin to remove the billboard in August 2023, when there was no minister in place.
As of this week it remains up, with the united Ireland slogan still visible, but no Sinn Féin logo can be seen.
‘Double standards’
The party’s MLA Liz Kimmins is now the infrastructure minister, and in answer to a recent assembly question by Newry and Armagh SDLP MLA Justin McNulty, she referred to a previous answer revealing DfI had requested her party remove the billboard.
“No further action has been taken by my Department at this time,” the minister stated in her recent written answer.
“My Department will take action where unauthorised attachments to its property are likely to have an immediate impact on road safety (e.g. obscure a sightline, obstruct the passage of vehicles or pedestrians, or compromise the structural stability of a street lighting column or traffic sign).”
A separate billboard that had featured a Sinn Féin poster in Newry’s Dorans Hill area had also led to previous scrutiny.
Another written answer from the infrastructure minister earlier this year confirmed no DfI funding or resources had been used to construct the Camlough Road billboard.
Mr McNulty hit out at what he termed “shameless double standards” by Sinn Féin over the Egyptian Arch billboard.
“When Sinn Féin break the rules, nothing happens. That tells you everything you need to know about their arrogance in government,” he said.
The SDLP MLA said the united Ireland message was one “many people, myself included, see as laudable”, but accused Sinn Féin of treating public land as “their own political playground”, adding: “It’s arrogant, it’s cynical, and it makes a mockery of government.”
Both the Department for Infrastructure and Sinn Féin have been approached for comment.
Casement Park redevelopment 'in limbo' due to lack of correspondence
GARRETT HARGAN, Belfast Telegraph, October 13th, 2025
LYONS HAS MET WITH NI SECRETARY JUST ONCE IN 16 MONTHS REGARDING REBUILD
The redevelopment of Casement Park “is lost in limbo”, the SDLP has said.
The party hit out after Stormont departments and Executive parties failed to say whether the Communities Minister has brought a paper to the Executive on the redevelopment of Casement Park — a full year after GAA President Jarlath Burns urged him to.
The SDLP accused DUP minister Gordon Lyons of “playing a cynical waiting game”, and suggested Sinn Féin is “failing the gaels of Ulster and people of west Belfast”.
It has also emerged that the Communities Minister has only met with the Northern Ireland Secretary once since Labour came into power in July 2024 to discuss the Ulster GAA stadium's redevelopment.
That is in contrast to Finance Ministers who have met with Hilary Benn MP on five occasions to press the case for progress on the stadium over the same period.
The Casement Park saga has dragged on since 2011.
At that time, a pledge was made to redevelop Windsor Park to increase its existing capacity of 13,500 to accommodate 18,000 football spectators, to build a 40,000 capacity Casement Park and a 15,000 seater Ravenhill for Ulster Rugby.
The redeveloped Ravenhill opened in 2014 and Windsor Park in 2016.
Legal objections, planning issues and, more recently, a funding shortfall means the Casement build has not started.
Since October 2024, GAA chiefs have urged Department for Communities (DfC) Minister Gordon Lyons to bring a paper to the Executive.
Freedom of Information (FoI) responses show that by December 2024 ,Ulster GAA said it had a “constructive and positive” meeting with the NI Secretary Hilary Benn.
Writing to the DfC, Ulster GAA said the Secretary of State (SoS) Mr Benn was keen to see Mr Lyons and other NI Executive ministers prioritise funding for the project in the context of a “decade-long successive Programme for Government commitment”, and called for additional Government funding for the Executive for this year and next.
Ulster GAA added: “One matter that disappointed us greatly was that SoS did not seem to have received any correspondence from (the) DfC Minister relating to the project despite our understanding that this was to happen after our meeting on 31st October.”
Shortly before Christmas 2024, GAA President Jarlath Burns wrote to Mr Lyons, beginning by complimenting him for “your commitment to the role and to the communities you serve is evident”.
He then says two “critical action points” were raised at an October 31 meeting, which were to write to the Executive, requesting that “Casement Park be put on the agenda for discussion at a forthcoming meeting.”
The second ask was to write to Hilary Benn requesting a meeting to get his perspective on securing central funding.
Mr Burns added: “The GAA community is eager to understand the progress being made and to see tangible actions that reflect the significance of this project.”
Mr Lyons was told that his “leadership and advocacy are instrumental in bringing Casement Park to fruition”.
Commenting on the delayed progress, SDLP Opposition leader Matthew O'Toole MLA said: “Casement Park is lost in limbo. Despite pledges of extra money from both the Irish and British Governments, the Executive has done nothing to advance the project since returning.
“The transformative prospect of the Euros is a distant memory. The DUP and their minister appear to have played a cynical waiting game, but that has been made worse by Sinn Féin apparently being unable or unwilling to advance the issue.
“The Finance Minister repeatedly speaks of 'standing ready' and that may be the correct analogy for Sinn Féin frozen into inaction, failing the gaels of Ulster and the people of West Belfast.”
Sinn Féin, the DUP and the Alliance Party have all been asked whether a paper was brought to the Executive. None answered the question.
A Sinn Féin spokesperson did, however, say that Casement Park is more than just a sporting venue, “it will serve as an economic driver for the surrounding communities and region, creating jobs and attracting investment.”
The party added that it is “fully committed” to Casement and “working tirelessly” to see it built.
DfC and The Executive Office were contacted for a response, as were the DUP and Alliance Party.
Lady Chief Justice's launches one year pilot for High Court Family Law cases
Allison Morris, Belfast Telegraph, October 13th, 2025
Within the next few weeks, accredited journalists in Northern Ireland will be able to report in the family division courts for the first time.
The one-year pilot scheme was proposed by the Lady Chief Justice Dame Siobhan Keegan, the most senior lawyer in Northern Ireland, who has made it her mission to make the judicial process more open and transparent.
For the first time in this jurisdiction, journalists who have registered to take part will be able to apply for a Transparency Order, permitting them to attend and report on what they see and hear in specified cases in the Family Division of the High Court.
The media pilot aims to test the workability of the processes based on the Transparency Model operating in England and Wales.
The pilot is not without controversy and does not have universal support, even among the family court solicitors and lawyers.
While some tentatively support it, others have expressed concerns about the dangers of jigsaw identification of those involved, in what are often very difficult cases.
Those reporters who meet the strict criteria to apply for a transparency order, will be well versed in court reporting and anonymity orders, there is no reason why the pilot should not run smoothly in the circumstances currently set out.
Indeed, the move by the Lady Chief Justice to introduce the pilot is itself a demonstration of her faith that the local media and court reporters here are used to navigating any potential concerns.
There are also already times when family court orders are reported on. For instance, criminal proceedings arising from breach of orders.
As a journalist, I will not have been entitled to report on the hearing during which a Non-Molestation Order was granted, but will be able to report on the criminal proceedings arising from any breach.
In child abuse cases, we will often hear as part of the prosecution case a lengthy background of family court involvement and intervention prior to often very tragic events.
Northern Ireland has a high rate of domestic abuse and femicide.
In some femicide cases, there will have been a lengthy history of involvement with the family courts due to domestic abuse, prior to the murder of a woman.
And so if we are to reduce the number of women and children — and at times men — who are losing their lives in their own homes as a result of domestic abuse, it seems to me that the role of the family courts is crucial.
Solicitors and lawyers who have worked in that often overlooked and underfunded area of law, should be part of any policing or government strategy to end violence against women and girls.
In the Republic of Ireland, the Courts and Civil Law Act 2013, removed the ban on media representatives attending family law, child care and adoption cases.
This was to achieve greater openness and transparency in the family courts in accordance with the principle of open justice, but also with the aim of educating the public.
I am often contacted by people who want me to report on what they see as wrongdoing at the hands of the family courts.
They are often angry and, at times, in a place where they want their grievances aired publicly, their anger is often directed at a ex-partner.
Public interest is not necessarily just what the public are interested in, and any reporting must not be simply for voyeuristic purposes, but instead provide an understanding of how and why decisions are made.
Because the family courts have always been closed to the media and public, there is now a growing deluge of misinformation and deliberate disinformation being peddled online.
The so-called citizen journalists, the sovereign citizens, despite being from very different parts of Northern Ireland, have all managed to find each other in some corner of the internet.
They are the very people who would defy court orders, breach anonymity and cause more harm than good and that is why the office of the Lady Chief Justice has set specific criteria as to who can apply to report on family court cases.
The case of Sara Sharif is one of the most compelling in the argument for increased transparency.
Sara's father Urfan Sharif, (43), and stepmother Beinash Batool, (30), were jailed for life for her murder in Woking, Surrey, in 2023.
Following their convictions, the media were able to publish details from previous Family Court hearings relating to Sara's care before her death.
However, a High Court ruling prevented the media from naming the three judges involved in the case, Judge Alison Raeside — who sat on most of the hearings — Judge Peter Nathan and Judge Sally Williams.
Media organisations successfully appealed, arguing that judges must expect “their decision-making to be the subject of public scrutiny”.
The success of the pilot very much depends on the actions of the journalists involved, with more access comes a responsibility to treat the cases with the sensitivity they deserve.
