US stops funding peacebuilding project for island of Ireland after 40 years

Programme to prevent young people being recruited by paramilitaries among scheme’s initiatives

Ellen Coyne, Political Correspondent, Irish Times, March 5th, 2026

The United States has ended what was its main financial support for the peacebuilding project on the island of Ireland over the last 40 years, it has been confirmed.

The International Fund for Ireland (IFI), which helped to lay the foundation for the Belfast Agreement, was created in 1986 through a historic agreement between the Irish and British governments, with the support of Ronald Reagan, then US president, and “Tip” O’Neill, who was US speaker of the House.

The peace and reconciliation project has funded the removal of peace walls in Northern Ireland and programmes to prevent young people from being recruited by paramilitaries. It has been credited as one of the greatest success stories of the peace process.

IFI, which funds civic projects which bring nationalist, unionist and cross-Border communities together, has inspired attempts to create a new project for Israel and Palestine modelled on the IFI.

Over the last 40 years, the US has been one of the main supporters of the fund. Successive Washington administrations – including the first Trump one – together contributed more than $500 million (€435 million) to it.

The Irish Government has described Washington’s contribution to the fund as “the main financial means for US government assistance to peacebuilding on the island”.

Part of Trump ‘efficiency’ drive

Last year, US president Donald Trump started to dismantle the US Agency for International Development (USAid) as part of what was presented as a plan to improve US government “efficiency”.

It had then prompted fears that IFI could lose one of its most important sources of income, but the withdrawal of US funding from the peacebuilding project was not confirmed.

The IFI had said last year it had received financial support from “a range of international donors, including the US government” and was seeking clarity and support from its US partners.

Now the Department of Foreign Affairs has confirmed the US did withdraw funding from the IFI last year.

The confirmation was included in a briefing document prepared for Minister for Foreign Affairs Helen McEntee when she took over from Simon Harris late last year.

It said the priority of the IFI was to develop and fund initiatives that “tackle segregation and promote integration to build a lasting peace in Northern Ireland and six southern Border counties”.

“US funding was withdrawn in 2025 as part of the global foreign assistance review by the US administration,” the briefing document said.

Last year, The Irish Times revealed how the UK government had pulled its funding for the IFI because of budget cuts imposed by Westminster.

The UK had committed to paying £4 million (€4.6 million) to the IFI between 2021 and 2025, in four instalments of £1 million.

But the UK government confirmed last year it could not afford the final £1 million instalment because it had “inherited a very challenging fiscal position”.

The US department of state did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokesman for the Department of Foreign Affairs said the Government continued to engage with the US government on American support for the International Fund for Ireland, in particular on the delivery of the new funding mandated by Congress.

Benn: Executive must help fill growth fund shortfall

CLAUDIA SAVAGE, Irish News, March 5th, 2026

SECRETARY of State Hilary Benn said the Stormont Executive has to “put some money in” to support community groups impacted by the switch to the Local Growth Fund.

The chairwoman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, said the voluntary sector had been left in an “intolerable” position, adding that “it’s not right that the Government is doing this”.

In 2023, EU funding to charities and community groups in Northern Ireland from its European Social Fund (ESF) was ended because of Brexit.

It was replaced by the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF), which will in turn be replaced by the Local Growth Fund next year.

That new fund has a 70/30 capital-to-revenue split, resulting in funding cuts to the voluntary and community sector, prompting the Executive to write to UK Communities Secretary Steve Reed calling for “a more favourable resource allocation”.

The letter stated that the “much-reduced quantum of the Local Growth Fund will have a significant and detrimental impact on achieving local growth, and the capital/revenue split of this fund makes matters much worse”.

The Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action (NICVA) had criticised the lack of clarity and warned that nearly 24,000 people face losing access to support.

Will Stormont help fill funding gap?

Yesterday, Ms Antoniazzi said community groups “don’t need buildings, they need to be employing people”.

She said: “Those other routes that have been suggested aren’t going to provide that stability of being able to keep people employed and delivering those services.”

She added: “I find it absolutely unbelievable that we can’t move back from it.”

Ms Antoniazzi continued: “Sorry to get so passionate about it, but you’ve met these people, you’ve met these people. It’s not right that the Government is doing this.

“What can we do? And what can you do as secretary of state and minister for Northern Ireland?’

Mr Benn said: “We’ve got a problem and the question is, what are we going to do about the problem?

“I must be frank with the committee, that 70/30 split is not going to change and as you would expect, as ministers representing the interests of Northern Ireland, we have done our job.”

He later added: “The fact remains that it is open if the executive thinks that these programmes are really important, and they clearly do, because of the representations we’re having, it is open to the executive to put some money in alongside the money that the government is putting in.”

Despite all the abuse, would I still recommend a career in politics for women? Hell, yes

LINZI McLAREN, Irish News, March 5th, 2026

AS we prepare to celebrate International Women’s Day 2026, you might be shocked to know that only a generation ago, my mum was forced to give up her career in the bank when she got married.

Known as the ‘marriage bar’, this practice only legally ended in the early 1970s.

When I say ‘forced’, of course I mean leaving without putting up a fight or feeling aggrieved, because that was simply ‘what was done’.

Or you may be astonished to learn that it was only in the 1990s that female police officers were deemed emotionally stable enough to carry a gun, previously dealing with major terrorist incidents armed with only a police-issue handbag and a pair of American tan tights for protection.

It seems like a lifetime ago, but actually it is still tangible enough for there to be lived experience.

During my lifetime I have met some of the most incredibly inspiring women who continue to push boundaries.

However, as a woman with a public platform, and a recent career in politics, there are a number of things which I consider to be universally true.

No matter how important your job or how significant your contribution to your profession, you will always be judged by a secret majority on what you wear.

No matter how many glass ceilings you break through, you will be judged on the perception you have chosen your career over your children, and feel eternal guilt as a consequence.

And finally, despite the perception that times have changed, if women are to be taken at all seriously, they must be held to a higher standard than their male counterparts.

While you might find these comments overstated, they are the reality for women in public life.

Saying that, it is not a woman’s job to sustain the notion that we need to be better to be equal.

Historical discrimination

That is a flaw carried over from historical discrimination and perpetuated by weak and insecure people in society who need to catch up and stop holding women to this endless bar of inequality.

Women in politics today in Northern Ireland know they stand on the shoulders of giants who have gone before and who paid a significant price for daring to insert themselves into the male-dominated world of the affairs of state.

Would I tell women interested in a career in politics to go for it, and continue to push boundaries society puts in their way?

“I recently became the target of the vilest abuse online for having the audacity to articulate a change in my political journey

Intelligent, charismatic, fearless and ground-breaking women faced misogynistic abuse on a daily ba- sis, but proved themselves remarkably noble and dignified in the face of challenging conditions, and ultimately as capable as any of their peers.

Whilst there are a significant many more women in politics today, they still make up less than half of Stormont MLAs and only five of the 18 Northern Irish MPs in Westminster.

Tomorrow I will be sitting on a panel at Queen’s to talk about the experiences of women in politics.

I know I will be asked the question ‘Would you recommend a career in politics for women?’

I would love nothing better than to tell the young, aspiring women in the audience that they will be treated with respect and fairness and enjoy their time as a political representative.

But I know that not to be the case.

I recently became the target of the vilest abuse online for having the audacity to articulate a change in my political journey.

Change of perspective

A change of perspective which, by the way, I have every right to make if the politics I aligned with no longer inspire me or give me confidence in our future.

The same stance then taken a week later, by an albeit much more significant figure within unionist politics, who announced his similar opinion on a united Ireland, was met with a damp squib of gentle intolerance.

Personal attacks and an avalanche of comments about my integrity, versus a spattering of ‘Sure I don’t agree with him, but fair play for his opinion’.

How do we square that circle?

Will I tell the women in the audience to go for it and continue to push the boundaries society puts in our way?

Hell yes, I will.

Will I tell them the reality of the challenge?

Absolutely.

Will I expect them to say they represent the next generation and will refuse to tolerate inequality?

I hope so. In fact, I know so.

PSNI can increase Catholic recruits without return to 50:50, says Jon Boutcher

By Claudia Savage, Press Association, Belfast News Letter, March 5th, 2026

The PSNI "doesn't need" 50:50 recruitment targets to increase the number of Catholics in the force, the Chief Constable has said.

Jon Boutcher told the policing board there is a "collective responsibility" in improving representation in the police, but accepted the PSNI "need to do a lot more".

Figures released by the PSNI following their last recruitment drive showed that the percentage of new Catholic applicants to join the force was at its lowest in more than a decade.

Police said more than 4,000 people had applied for their latest student officer recruitment campaign, with 65.6% from a Protestant background, 26.7% from a Catholic background and 7.7% undetermined.

The Patten Report was the 1999 policing review that created the PSNI and introduced the 50:50 recruitment initiative, meaning between 2001 and 2011, there was one Catholic recruit for every one person from a Protestant or other background.

Mr Boutcher said on Thursday he was "delighted" by the response to their recruitment campaign and the larger intake.

He said: "We must explore how to collectively increase the number of applicants from all of those groups currently underrepresented in the PSNI.

Clear Challenges

"There are clear challenges facing some of those considering a career in policing.

"We need to see open, constructive conversations about how we overcome any barriers that dissuade people interested in policing as a career and joining. This is a collective responsibility."

The Chief Constable quoted the Patten Report, stating "all community leaders, all political leaders, all local councillors, bishops, priests, school teachers and sports authorities should work to prevent the discouragement that exists with regards to joining the police and should actively encourage people to join the police service".

He said: "I don't think any of us over the last 25 years can probably say as a society, that has happened in the way that it should have happened.

"That's why this anniversary year, I'm determined that we will have this debate.

"We have got to address, what has always been in 25 years, either just above or just below 30% applicants from the nationalist Catholic background.

"That's the number, whether you've got 50:50, or not."

SDLP MLA Colin McGrath, a political representative on the board, said that he felt that the idea of reintroducing 50:50 had been knocked "back a bit quick" when discussed at the last meeting and the police should not "lock such an option out without giving it some more thought".

DUP MLA Trevor Clarke said the last recruitment campaign was "one of the best that the police have conducted", adding "if the political leaders don't get behind recruitment campaigns and endorse this as a career for policing then it'll never work".

In his reply the Chief Constable said: "I always say it's a stock answer for me, nothing's ever off the table, but I don't think we need 50:50 if we do what I've just been describing.

"I think we will see the increase in numbers, and it's a point I say this, not just from the nationalist Catholic community, but from new and emerging communities.

"And some of the data on that's very positive, actually, but there are a number of different cohorts, and we talk about young working class Protestants applying for the organisation, where we need to do better.

"I think if we do apply ourselves properly, all of us, then I think we would not need 50:50, but I always say nothing is off the table."

Additional barriers

Sinn Fein MLA Deirdre Hargey said "we do all have a role and a responsibility" but there were additional barriers for people from nationalist backgrounds including "a lack of cultural understanding" in the police as well as Troubles legacy issues.

Mr Boutcher said he's "raised every one of those issues, all of that".

He did highlight that some Catholic recruits to the force "have to consider the dissident Republican threat against them and "feel that nothing has really changed with regards to societal support for policing".

Sinn Fein MLA Gerry Kelly later said 50:50 recruitment could change the force's demographic "substantially", and "it is people doing the things people need to do, as opposed to the politicians needing to make a statement" that will improve numbers of Catholics.

The Chief Constable replied: "I spent Christmas, New Year, re-reading the Patten report, and I came back and said to the team, 'we're just not doing enough'.

"We're not doing enough to try to shift these percentages across a number of different communities, but very relevant for the nationalist Catholic community, so there is a real acceptance that we need to do a lot more."

Why are so few women applying to join the PSNI?

John Laverty, Belfast Telegraph, March 5th, 2026

Were you aware of that recent political 'debate' about the PSNI's religious makeup? If not, don't worry; it was the same old, same old, with the DUP seeing nothing wrong with a current Protestant-Catholic 2-to-1 disparity and Sinn Fein taking the opposite view.

So far, so utterly predictable. The Shinners want a return to the good old days of '50-50' recruitment and 'positive' discrimination, the Duppers don't. End of.

Like so many others here, I couldn't give a stuff about what denomination police officers come from when they respond to a distress call.

In a similar vein, I suspect that even the most vile racist bigot would put up with a foreign surgeon saving a loved one's life in an emergency operation.

Like all police forces, the PSNI is far from perfect, but it bears little resemblance to the “SS-RUC” label regularly painted on both republican and loyalist gable walls during the Troubles.

Different era, different mindset — and a post-conflict generation left wondering what all the fuss is about.

It's unlikely that there'll ever be parity on the religious front, with would-be Catholic officers from nationalist areas subjected to the sort of threats and reprisals their loyalist counterparts are unlikely to encounter.

On the other hand — and for the whataboutery merchants out there — there are over twice as many Catholics as Protestants working as prosecutors for the PPS.

That said, surveys show that Protestants are more inclined to believe our prosecution service acts in a fair and impartial way. Go figure!

Frankly, a conspiracy theory based on the tired, archaic presumption that all Catholics are nationalists/republicans/Sinn Fein voters simply doesn't hold water anymore.

More Christian than feminist

And, if you look at it in a more pragmatic way, the PSNI is around 99% Christian — i.e, solidly representative of the region itself.

Compare that to forces elsewhere, where 26.77% in Police Scotland is the highest figure for GB-based officers identifying as Christian.

The political fuss over religious breakdown in our police service, however, overshadows the fact that women are almost as underrepresented as Catholics.

Not only that, but the number of females applying for new jobs in the PSNI appears to have stalled.

At present, approximately 32.78% of officers in Northern Ireland are of the fairer sex — significantly fewer than the healthy 55% which make up the force's civilian/support staff.

This isn't the utopian PSNI you see in popular BBC drama Blue Lights where, for every Tommy, Stevie and Shane, there's a Grace, Annie and Sandra.

They used to have more blokes, but then went and killed off Gerry... boo, hiss.

Back in the real world, it could be another 30 years before there's anything approaching gender parity within the force — maybe even longer before ethnic minorities or the LGBT+ community are properly, proportionally represented.

Like other forces, our lot are finding it hard to shake off a 'boys' club' reputation, and some relatively recent headlines haven't helped.

These include the former PSNI chief superintendent (and current Police Scotland assistant chief constable) Emma Bond, who was awarded £30k in compo after a tribunal found her sex discrimination claim to be “well founded”.

Last year, a PSNI officer was sacked for sending WhatsApp messages containing material which was “sectarian, racist, homophobic, antisemitic, misogynistic and sexualised”.

Chief Constable Jon Boutcher revealed at the time that three other officers had been dismissed in “similar circumstances”.

Macho culture

And, only this week, it emerged that over 60 cases of 'abuse of position for sexual purposes' by police officers have been reported to the Police Ombudsman of Northern Ireland since 2018.

A recent in-depth study by the University of Portsmouth found a “macho culture” within most UK forces, hostile behaviour towards females and a “child tax” hampering women's progression.

It also revealed a scenario where physical fortitude is inordinately valued by the male officers — although “making tea and participating in a drinking culture” is likely to help women recruits gain “acceptance” among colleagues. Perhaps these are the sort of issues our politicians should be focusing on, instead of squabbling over what shade of Christianity is metaphorically colouring the boys in blue.

But don't hold your breath.

Ironically, the folks on the hill and at Westminster are, unlike the police, properly representative of an electorate which, despite the great strides made, still prefers to vote along antediluvian sectarian lines.

“Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose” is what you guys opted for at election time, so don't moan when that's what you get.

It could be worse, though; the US is now five years into its '30x30' recruitment drive, aimed at increasing the representation of women in American law enforcement from 12% to 30% by 2030.

That initiative began after it was revealed that approximately 40% of 18,000 stateside law enforcement agencies have no full-time women officers whatsoever.

By comparison, that makes the Police Service of Northern Ireland look positively inspirational.

Executive Office forks out £150k on hospitality in just 14 months

ANDREW MADDEN, Belfast Telegraph, March 5th, 2026

The Executive Office (TEO) spent almost £150,000 on hospitality in the space of just 14 months, new figures show, including forking out £60,000 over the St Patrick's Day period last year.

It comes as Stormont departments face significant financial pressures, with the Treasury last month giving the Executive a £400m loan to prevent an overspend.

Under Civil Service guidelines, hospitality refers to “meals, beverages, and light refreshments”.

Figures revealed in response to an Assembly question tabled by TUV MLA Timothy Gaston show significant spending in this area by the Executive Office from December 2024 to the end of January 2026.

Along with its arm's-length bodies, TEO spent £191,867 over this period.

However, the vast majority of this, £149,078, was spent by the core department, with the remaining £42,789 being racked up by a dozen arm's-length bodies combined.

Individual arm's-length body hospitality spending includes £1,295 by the office of the Commissioner for Survivors of Institutional Childhood Abuse and £11,707 by the Community Relations Council.

TEO's departmental spending on hospitality is split across its Stormont operation and bureaux in Washington, China and Brussels.

From December 2024 to January 2026, some £25,185 was spent on hospitality by the Washington office, £35,974 by the China bureau and £35,870 by the Brussels office.

TEO at Stormont spent £52,049 on hospitality.

Paddy’s Day spike

Looking at the breakdown of the expenditure by month, there was a significant spike in spending in March 2025, when St Patrick's Day falls.

In March last year, TEO's Washington bureau spent £14,756 on hospitality, while the China office spent £27,686 and Brussels forked out £10,583. TEO at Stormont spent £6,027 on hospitality in March 2025.

Mr Gaston raised concerns over some of the spending, in particular for the overseas offices.

“Promoting Northern Ireland internationally is important, but these figures inevitably raise questions about the scale of hospitality spending being incurred,” he said.

“What particularly stands out is the very sharp spike in spending in March 2025, when hospitality costs across the department reached £64,423 in a single month.

“While one accepts that [this spending] obviously includes St Patrick's Day it is an extraordinarily high figure for one month, and it raises obvious questions about what events were being funded and who attended them.

“At a time when households across Northern Ireland are under real financial pressure, it is entirely reasonable for the public to expect transparency about how public money is being spent.

“I will continue to scrutinise spending by the Executive Office to ensure that public funds are being used appropriately and that taxpayers are getting value for money. It is telling too that some worthwhile organisations which have an extremely limited budget and very few staff have been able to operate with a very modest spend on hospitality.

“I think particularly of the Commissioner for Survivors of Institutional Childhood Abuse who spent a mere £1,265 on hospitality in a 14-month period — a fraction of what the central departmental costs were, not for the year but for a month.

“For example, in the month of December 2024 the commissioner didn't spend a penny on hospitality.

“Contrast that with the central costs run up by Ms O'Neill and Ms Little-Pengelly in that same month of over £9,000.”

An Executive Office spokesperson said: “All expenditure by TEO and its arm's length bodies is incurred in line with the principles set out in Managing Public Money NI, and mindful of the pressures on the public purse.”

Large crowd attends UCD protest after ‘nude, bruised’ image of student shared

Ellen O’Riordan, Irish Times, March 5th, 2026

University says it stands with its students in support of victims of sexual violence

Students gather for 'Not in Our UCD' Rally organised by UCD Students’ Union and calling for systemic change in how the university responds to sexual violence and gender-based harm. Photograph: Nick Bradshaw/The Irish Times

More than one thousand people attended a protest at University College Dublin (UCD) on Wednesday after a “nude, bruised” intimate image of a female student was shared with staff and students.

“Not in our UCD”, “we stand with her” and “shame” were chanted by those present, with these and other statements printed across many placards.

The rally called for systemic change in how the university responds to sexual violence and gender-based harm.

Michael Roche, president of the UCD Student’s Union, told gatherers they were attending to show of support for victims of sexual assault, gender-based violence and misogyny.

“We’ve all heard the horrific story of one of our students ... We’re here today to offer her solidarity,” he said.

In mid-February, Socialist Party TD Ruth Coppinger told the Dáil the image shared of the young woman, a student at its school of medicine, was taken after she said she was raped in 2023. Coppinger said the image showed the victim “nude, bruised and unconscious” and was accompanied by “further rape threats and further threats to use objects to violently rape” her.

It was circulated to staff and students through WhatsApp and email. The victim chose not to report the alleged rape to gardaí, Coppinger said.

In an email to students and staff on February 20th, Orla Feely, president of UCD, said that the university “takes a zero-tolerance approach to all forms of bullying, harassment and sexual violence”.

The university reported the incident to gardaí “immediately” after becoming aware of it, she said, adding that the female student was being supported by the head of student advisory services.

At the college campus on Wednesday, Coppinger criticised UCD’s handling of the case, saying the victim’s trauma began three years ago and she has since left her education place.

She said she spoke to two others: a victim of sexual assault and a victim of harassment, who dropped out of their colleges after their experiences, while the “perpetrator sits in the exam hall and not a bother on them”.

‘Forced to navigate harm from institutions that claim to care’

The student union’s education officer Matt Mion said the female student at the centre of the case has been “forced to navigate harm from institutions that claim to care”.

“What we are witnessing is not an isolated breakdown, but a predictable outcome of a system that prioritises procedure and policy over people,” he said.

“Universities speak fluidly about equality, dignity and inclusion ... In this case, the response has exposed a deep contradiction between rhetoric and reality.”

He said this moment demanded ”more than procedural responses” and required “structural change” and a “leadership willing to prioritise people over liability”.

Rachel Morrogh, chief executive of the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre, said the protesters stood “shoulder to shoulder” with “every person who has experienced sexual violence and the harm that is caused by individuals, by institutions and systems that harm with impunity”.

“Let us demand today not just a campus but a country where survivors are met with humanity and not hurdles, where survivors are supported to heal and not silenced by systems that block, delay, deny and defend,” she said.

In a statement, UCD said it stood “with our students and our entire university community in support of the victims”.

A spokesman for the university said it would engage closely with the students’ union and took a victim-centred approach to tackle these issues and “protect out community to the best of our ability”.

The case of the student whose sexual assault and image-based sexual assault came to public attention recently was “extremely distressing and complex”, he said.

“The needs of the student have been at the centre of the university’s response throughout. We care deeply about the trauma and anguish that she has experienced.”

The university provided gardaí with all information at the “very earliest stage of becoming aware of this criminal activity”, he said.

Alleged vigilante not allowed to attend public demonstrations

ALAN ERWIN, Irish News, March 5th, 2026

AN EAST Belfast man accused of racially-motivated assaults on staff at a McDonald’s restaurant refused permission to attend public demonstrations.

His application to vary his bail conditions while facing allegations that he verbally abused victims before recorded footage appeared on TikTok was dismissed as “ridiculous”.

Instead, a judge reinstated a ban on the 37-year-old using social media platforms amid police claims that he remains involved in vigilante patrols and setting up anti-immigration accounts.

Pinkerton, of Clandeboye Street, is charged with common assault, attempted criminal damage, harassment, incitement to hatred and disorderly behaviour over incidents at Connswater Retail Park in the east of the city last September.

Belfast Magistrates’ Court heard he allegedly threatened a delivery driver outside the restaurant, becoming racially abusive and demanding to know his reasons for being there.

The victim realised he was being filmed on a mo-bile phone and asked for the recording to stop, only for a second unknown man then joined in the tirade.

Fearing an imminent assault, the driver got into his car and locked the door for his own safety.

Pinkerton continued shouting and swearing while punching the vehicle’s bonnet, it was claimed.

Later that day, the complainant discovered videos of the incident had been posted on TikTok.

“It caused him further anxiety as he fears his identity, workplace and vehicle are now known,” a Crown lawyer said.

Pinkerton is also accused of confronting two door staff at McDonald’s after they stopped teenage girls from entering the premises due to an anti-social behaviour policy.

“He became aggressive, shouting at them, pointing in their faces and implying they are not allowed to speak to females from Northern Ireland,” the prosecutor added.

“The door staff viewed this as particularly aggressive and racially motivated.”

Police later seized two mobile phones in searches carried out at the defendant’s home.

With Pinkerton out on bail since last September, he applied to vary a condition which prohibited him being at any rallies.

‘Is this a joke?’

Defence barrister Turlough Madden said: “He wishes to attend public demonstrations as his right in a democratic society.”

But District Judge Steven Keown described suggestions he should remove the condition as being ludicrous.

“I am that close to asking if this is a joke…It is a ridiculous application and it is refused,” he confirmed.

During the hearing police succeeded in having a previous ban on Pinkerton using social media put back in place.

An investigating officer claimed information obtained on January 30 this year suggests he has created and promoted new Tik-Tok accounts and Facebook pages.

“These continue to promote anti-immigration sentiment, and Pinkerton and others continue to carry out vigilante patrols throughout east Belfast,” she alleged.

Mr Madden insisted the defendant had not breached any of his bail terms and urged the court not to grant the PSNI’s application. However, Judge Keown ruled: “I disagree and I reinstate the (condition) not to access any social media platforms, based on the information police have.”

With the case adjourned until next month, Pinkerton was released on continuing bail.

Irish signs for street where two-thirds didn't want them blocked

By Iain Gray, Belfast News Letter, March 4th, 2026

A Sinn Fein push to blaze Irish signs along an east Belfast street where two-thirds of residents don’t want them has been narrowly defeated after a council deadlock.

Stormont Park, a leafy residential road that runs next to the estate containing the Northern Ireland Assembly, was in line for signs in Irish despite an overwhelming majority of residents rejecting them.

A survey had 67.47% of householders against them compared to 15.66% in favour. As Belfast Council’s threshold for building dual language signs is 15%, however, that 0.66% over the target was enough to make them happen.

On Wednesday night, a council committee saw six streets that had passed the 15% threshold up for approval; two in east Belfast, Stormont Park and Onslow Gardens, had more residents voting against than in favour, though Stormont Park saw a commanding majority opposed.

Alliance’s Jenna Maghie suggested approving four of the streets, leaving out the two east Belfast roads, but Sinn Fein’s Rois-Marie Donnelly insisted all six should be given a green light.

Heading straight to a vote without a debate, committee members were deadlocked – nine in favour of the Alliance option to nine in favour of Sinn Fein’s.

That left the casting vote with the committee’s chair, DUP man Fred Cobain, who plumped for the Alliance option and ensured signs reading ‘Pairc Chnoc an Anfa’ and ‘Gairdini Onslow’ would not be built on the east Belfast streets.

The system of building dual-language street signs has been a regular bugbear for Belfast’s unionists since the council massively relaxed its conditions a couple of years ago.

DUP had casting vote

A council committee deadlocked on the signs at Belfast City Hall tonight, leaving its DUP chair with the casting vote.

Since then, more Irish signs have been approved than in the 24 years of a previous stricter regime, while no signs in any other language have been given a green light.

All it takes is for a single resident of a street, or a councillor representing the district, asking for Irish signs to kickstart the process of putting them in place.

Two householders on Stormont Park wrote to officials complaining about the system, which until Wednesday night’s slim vote was to have seen the wishes of 13 residents in favour of Irish signs overrule the 56 who were dead against them.

One householder argued the 15% target is “not democratic”, while the other felt it “lacks legitimacy and is purpose-built to create division and resentment, not foster community cohesion”.

If you’re a civil servant, this could leave you as a scapegoat

 Sam McBride, Northern Ireland Editor, Belfast Telegraph, March 5th, 2026

TUV MLA Timothy Gaston, North Antrim Assemblyman tabled a series of written Assembly questions to the Health Minister. The questions – on everything from palliative care to cancer – were meant to get a response within ten days, but instead after hundreds of days (in one case, 475 days) there’d still been no answer.

This is common for some Stormont ministers. However, Gaston refused to accept it and went about trying to establish what was going on. He made a Freedom of Information request for the material which had been generated within the Department of Health in relation to his questions.

The response was in many ways more remarkable than anything he might have got if the questions had simply been answered.

The department said it doesn’t retain draft answers to MLAs’ questions and said emails between officials are “routinely destroyed”. Gaston said this meant “there is no audit trail of what the minister saw, when he saw it or who caused the delay”. He has now referred this to the Information Commissioner, the FoI watchdog.

In a letter to the commissioner, he said: “It is difficult to accept that a department of government can operate a formal ministerial clearance system for Assembly Questions while holding no drafts, no submissions, no clearance records beyond the final answer, and no recorded ministerial or special adviser input”.

He said that if ministers “can sit on questions for over a year — and then destroy the trail” accountability in the Assembly “becomes meaningless.” He’s right.

I do not, however, believe that this information is in fact fully destroyed. In the RHI Inquiry, the civil service was able to access material from inboxes years into the past. This was because any IT system involves multiple backups. If the civil service had no such mechanisms, it would be wide open to losing legal actions which it otherwise could defend, simply because it couldn’t prove to a court that it had acted properly.

Instead, civil servants appear to operate a policy whereby material can be said to be deleted if they don’t want to – or can’t be bothered to – go and find it. However, if it matters enough to officials or ministers, or if a stern judge is asking awkward questions, this material can be retrieved.

Three years ago, as part of a tranche of Stormont Castle material released to me under the Freedom of Information Act, there was a fascinating reference to the problem of routinely wiping inboxes which shows that the head of the civil service, Jayne Brady, and other very senior figures were made aware of it.

As officials discussed the handling of a report by external consultants into the behaviour of the chief vet, Robert Huey, one of Stormont’s most senior officials, Chris Stewart, warned that there would be “sharp criticism” of the consultants’ comment that key elements of what had gone on couldn’t be established because the documentation simply didn’t exist.

This memo from Chris Stewart went to the very top of the civil service.

Failing to learn lessons of RHI scandal

Stewart had been an important witness at the RHI Inquiry and, like so many witnesses before Sir Patrick Coghlin, the scrutiny of that investigation had left an indelible mark – which is evidence of at least one benefit of the process. He noted that the criticism of not having records would be especially problematic for the civil service “not least because it is a repetition of a recognised RHI failing”.

But he then went on to identify the fundamental problem: “In my view, the focus in the reports on training and documentation etc, fails to address the core issue — our system is not failsafe. The three-month deletion rule on the email system creates an unmanaged risk that our record keeping policies can be obviated (or circumvented) by accident or design.

“Action is needed to manage that risk in a failsafe manner, and to provide guidance to…all employees on: their responsibility to maintain corporate records (decisions etc); and their responsibility to maintain personal records.

“The latter is easily overlooked. Since RHI, I have adopted the personal practice of retaining a record of every email and document that I issue, in chronological order. That is a very old-fashioned practice that dates from my local government days (when it was ubiquitous). However, it means that I have a reliable record of my involvement in any matter.”

This sounds like common sense, yet still isn’t civil service policy. To this day, civil servants are told in writing: “The 3-month rule, which is applied to all mailboxes, deletes the contents of all mail folders after 90 days.”

Even the policy document itself alludes to major problems with this. There is substantial long-term sickness in the civil service; what happens if someone was meant to save something into the official archive but wasn’t in the office for three months?

The policy says line managers should ensure that the IT department gives them access to their subordinates’ inboxes so they can do this for them. Does anyone really believe this is what happens in every case? What if the line manager themselves is off sick? Yet despite the obvious problem, the policy states: “The 3-month rule will continue to apply to the mailbox without exception.”

This is the definition of bone-headed bureaucracy. Why is it so important to wipe everything within three months – so important that there can’t be a single exception to it, regardless of how extreme the circumstances might be?

Senior official Chris Stewart raised internal concern about the email deletion rule in 2022

The civil service would say that it already has a requirement for anything significant to be saved into its archive, meaning this shouldn’t create difficulty. Yet that involves a host of inescapable flaws, as Stewart could see. If someone has done something obviously improper, they’re not going to save that into the official record – and can claim they just forgot during a busy period only for the system to automatically wipe it.

But perhaps more significant is the multitude of what seem like small or uncontroversial decisions which only years later become the focus of controversy. None of the handful of mid-ranking and junior officials dealing with a highly technical renewable energy scheme in 2011 thought their actions would become front page news as their emails were pored over by the most in-depth public inquiry into the civil service in the organisation’s history.

The civil service’s stance that not everything can be retained is not entirely unreasonable. There has to be some point at which it is decided that routine material is wiped. If everything was retained, the Public Record Office would find it impossible to wade through hundreds of millions of pages of material to decide in 20 years’ time if it should be made public.

But setting an autodelete at three months, and refusing any exemptions, is ludicrously extreme. While there’s reputational damage to the civil service every time this rule means it has to tell the public it doesn’t have records of this or that, the far greater internal difficulty is the absence of information for the people who use it most – civil servants. Is it any wonder this organisation struggles to get things done?

The civil service system is set up to be composed mostly of generalists who constantly move from department to department. This harks back to an age of paper files and a time in which record-keeping was a core skill of the service.

The system is meant to allow an official to come from working on addressing school truancy or health waiting lists to just a few weeks later handling policy on gas network expansion or rates policy. But it can only work if those officials can read themselves into their new role by having an accurate account of what has preceded them, and then have a record of what has happened in niche areas which later become problematic.

For the civil servants reading this, there’s one simple principle to bear in mind: If you are acting properly and you don’t keep records to prove that, then if someone – maybe a former minister or spad or a colleague or someone outside government – claims you did something improper, you will have no way of convincingly disproving that. It will be your word against theirs.

Keeping good records is an important bulwark for government, and that’s in the public interest. But there’s also a keen personal interest for those with nothing to hide. It might suit someone else for awkward or embarrassing material to be quietly wiped – but you might end up being the scapegoat.

LETTER: Irish Times

GAA’s uneasy Allianz alliance

Sir, – Last weekend’s GAA annual congress will best be remembered for the protests regarding Allianz sponsorship of the national leagues. GAA president Jarlath Burns may have hoped that this emotive and moral issue had been put to rest at Christmas when the executive rejected the motions forwarded by 10 counties to drop the Allianz sponsorship.

Regretfully and shamefully, the delegates from those 10 counties failed to raise their voices in defence of their motions in Friday evening’s meeting.

The grassroots Gaels were angry and frustrated. Little wonder then that they were left with little option but to make their way to the top table on Saturday and remind delegates that the matter is not going away.

Burns dismissed the protesters as having crossed “a red line and making an illegal entry to our congress and our property”. But that arrogant dismissal failed to recognise that the protesters are every bit as much part of the GAA as he is and most sacrifice themselves every weekend for the promotion of our national games.

Burns told the protesters to “examine their conscience” but perhaps it is he who needs to examine his own conscience and discern how he can continue to take tainted sponsorship when more ethical companies of integrity can easily replace Allianz.

Having handled the matter so poorly, any decision to continue or discontinue the partnership will not gain him any credit.

Perhaps Allianz might read the writing on the wall and save him embarrassment by quietly withdrawing at the end of this league campaign. – Yours, etc,

Fr GABRIEL DOLAN,

Aghadrumsee,

Co Fermanagh.

Editorial: ​Baroness Foster calls out Sinn Fein on Northern Ireland defence jobs

Belfast News Letter, March 5th, 2026

Sinn Fein’s attitude to Northern Ireland’s vital defence sector needs to change, and former first minister Baroness Arlene Foster is right to continue to push republicans on the issue.

Investment in the industry here is largely thanks to the actions of the UK government – and in spite of the local Sinn Fein economy minister. Her leader, the self-styled ‘First Minister for all’ said she was “incredulous” over a £1.6bn investment in the Thales site in Belfast. That was to assist in Ukraine’s war effort against its Russian occupiers.

The moral clarity of that conflict – an unprovoked invasion by Vladimir Putin – was still not enough to make republicans question their world view. Kiev needs weapons, and we can produce them – it shouldn’t be a difficult call for any political leader in Europe.

Having a party wedded to hard left ideology in charge of the local economy is a problem for Northern Ireland. Last year, major global financial services firm Cantor Fitzgerald pulled an offer of 300 jobs during a meeting with the economy minister Caoimhe Archibald.

The full details have yet to emerge, but we know it came after a discussion on “geopolitical issues”. The Sinn Fein minister has also appeared reluctant to celebrate a significant investment from Bank of America in the province – with neither her nor Michelle O’Neill attending a meeting with the firm when they visited Stormont.

Baroness Foster, herself a former economy minister, has rightly said that NI needs jobs. These are jobs that will benefit all section of our community, with good wages and prospects – and a knock-on benefit for the wider economy.

Sinn Fein can’t stop investment in the sector, so it must set its ideology aside and start to behave in a manner that attracts, rather than repels, investments which benefit everyone.