Written question AQW 10425/22-27
Written question by Mr Jim Allister KC on .
- MLA
- Mr Jim Allister KC
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 18 April 2024
- Type
- Written question
- Assembly reference
- AQW 10425/22-27
- Department
- Northern Ireland Assembly Commission
- Business
- To the Assembly Commission
- Assembly identifier
- Document 397991
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Assembly Commission, further to paragraph 15(1) of Assembly Members (Salaries and Expenses) Determination (Northern Ireland) 2016 as amended by the Assembly Members (Salaries and Expenses) (Amendment) Determination (Northern Ireland) 2020, to detail (i) whether an independent MP, by virtue of suspension from their party, is regarded as being a member of the same party as an MLA with whom they share a constituency office for the purposes of this determination, and the rationale for this decision; and (ii) the impact on an MLA’s eligibility for allowances, including rent and rates, as a result of sharing an office with an MP who has been suspended from their party.
110 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: 0.09 (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 (0.81).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.81 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | 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 | 0.83 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.09 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.05 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 23 October 2026 at 14:27 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.