Debate contribution: Flood Prevention
Debate contribution by Ms Liz Kimmins on .
- MLA
- Ms Liz Kimmins
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 29 June 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Flood Prevention
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5644983
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I have outlined some of the issues that we are working to address. In my response to my colleague, I said that we are looking at the assessment criteria to ensure that we are investing properly and reducing impacts on people. It is also important to say that we cannot build our way out of flooding. It is something that many people will have to live with, as a result of climate change. Flooding is becoming more frequent, and we have seen the evidence of that, particularly in the past few years. It is not always the case that physical interventions are required. That having been said, however, alongside the work that has been happening or is planned, we have invested over £76 million in capital in the past four years in new fluvial and tidal flood-alleviation projects, which have had an impact in reducing flood risk for more than 5,000 properties. We also look at how we build community resilience, and significant work has been done by community resilience groups, some of which have been really successful. That is about how we can be more prepared and work together in the event of flooding, particularly when it occurs at very short notice . There is work for everybody to do. It is not just a DFI problem; it is something that affects everyone. We are working across a number of Departments and with local councils in order to ensure that we are addressing all of the issues that have been outlined. We have been working really hard to be prepared as best we can for the future, as well as looking at the physical interventions we can continue to make that will help protect people, homes and businesses for as long as possible.
294 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.85).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.85 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:03 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.