Written question AQW 15489/22-27
Written question by Mr Declan McAleer on .
- MLA
- Mr Declan McAleer
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 23 September 2024
- Type
- Written question
- Assembly reference
- AQW 15489/22-27
- Department
- Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs
- Business
- To the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs
- Assembly identifier
- Document 411099
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, given that many designated Special Areas of Conservation are concentrated in Less Favoured Areas (LFAs), (i) how his Department will ensure farmers in LFAs are not disproportionately impacted by spatially targeted measures contained in the Draft Ammonia Strategy (DAS); (ii) to detail (a) the number of farms impacted; (b) the amount of land affected; and (c) the total production losses related to proposed spatially targeted measures; (iii) why his Department has not conducted a full (a) Equality Impact Assessment; and (b) Rural Impact Assessment to determine the impacts on farmers, particularly those in LFAs and on specific equality groups; and (iv) how his Department plans to ensure compliance with its own equality scheme commitments by providing the necessary data and evidence on the social and economic impacts of the proposals contained in the DAS.
144 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: 0.05 (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 (0.95).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 | 0.46 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.45 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 02:02 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.