Debate contribution: Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Peter Martin on .
- MLA
- Mr Peter Martin
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist 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 5686447
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for taking my intervention. Does he agree that, as the Minister rightly pointed out, the Department is under significant budgetary pressure when it comes to dealing with the issues that we raise with her in the Chamber weekly, such as potholes and road resurfacing? Does he agree that, if taking down 20 flags cost £20,000, and the opportunity cost of taking those flags down was getting a pothole filled on a road or getting a new or resurfaced road in their area, a lot of constituents would rather get the pothole filled or the new or resurfaced road?
102 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: 0.36 (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 (0.73).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.62).
- Subject area: Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials.
- The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.06 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.12 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.36 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.23 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.73 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.36 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.62 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.09 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.28 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.96 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| 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 16:17 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.