Written question AQW 40779/22-27
Written question by Ms Cara Hunter on .
- MLA
- Ms Cara Hunter
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 17 February 2026
- Type
- Written question
- Assembly reference
- AQW 40779/22-27
- Department
- Department of Education
- Business
- To the Minister of Education
- Assembly identifier
- Document 471813
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Minister of Education to detail (i) any ways he is using the duties and powers under the Children’s Services Co-operation Act (Northern Ireland) 2015 to work with other Departments and public bodies, to improve the availability of school based counselling and mental health support for children and young people; (ii) any progress made in achieving shared outcomes across Departments for children’s mental health and well being, including the pooling of resources where appropriate, to fund dedicated counsellors in schools; (iii) any data his Department holds on the current gap between demand and provision of counselling support in schools, including how that has changed over time; and (iv) whether his Department has any plans to strengthen co-operative mechanisms under the Act to ensure sustainable, cross government funding for universal counselling support in schools.
135 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: 0.03 (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 (0.97).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.97 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.67 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.28 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.04 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 06:01 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.