Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Ms Paula Bradshaw on .

MLA
Ms Paula Bradshaw
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
14 September 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5686254

Read the official Assembly record

Text

On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I do not go by "Mrs Bradshaw". I am married to a man called Mr Parsley. I am Ms Bradshaw. I had to tolerate it in the previous debate, but if anyone is referring to me, I would appreciate their calling me "Ms Bradshaw". I am not "Mrs Bradshaw"; that was my mother. Thank you.

64 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.13 (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).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.12No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.04No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.51No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.03No
Overall judgement0.13At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.49
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.33
Another identity-related subject0.16
No identity-related subject0.02
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:17 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.

Challenge this classification