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
22 September 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Display of Flags and Emblems Bill: Second Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5740175

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I addressed the excessive period issue earlier. You may wish to reflect on what I said by reading the Hansard report. However, a lot of that is taken from the FICT code of practice, which, obviously, is not set in stone. The basis, however, was there for anybody who was preparing for this debate to look at, and, as I said earlier, all five parties were represented on that commission.

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

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.19 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.96).
  • Subject area: Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 framing0.08No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.14No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.16No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.24No
Overall judgement0.19At or below not-qualifying threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.96
Reports or questions it0.04
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.56
No identity-related subject0.40
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.01
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.01
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:40 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