Oral question AQO 3278/22-27
Oral question by Mr Jonathan Buckley on .
- MLA
- Mr Jonathan Buckley
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 26 February 2026
- Type
- Oral question
- Assembly reference
- AQO 3278/22-27
- Department
- Northern Ireland Assembly Commission
- Business
- To the Assembly Commission
- Assembly identifier
- Document 473543
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Assembly Commission to outline any actions it has taken, following the Supreme Court judgment in the case For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers, to ensure access to female toilets and other single-sex private spaces within Parliament Buildings is managed in accordance with the law.
49 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Follow-ups by the same MLA in the Chamber
These were assessed together with this record:
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: 0.60 (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 (0.75).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.46).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- None of the culture-war criteria came close to being met, and the subject matter alone is not enough for it to be flagged.
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 | 0.15 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.04 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.23 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.27 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.75 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.60 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.45 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.09 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.46 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.84 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.16 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 08:35 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.