Motion or amendment: Removing the Universal Credit Two-Child Limit - Amendment 2
Motion or amendment by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 10 April 2024
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion Amendment · Private Members' Motion · to “Removing the Universal Credit Two-Child Limit”
- Heading
- Removing the Universal Credit Two-Child Limit - Amendment 2
- Assembly identifier
- Document 397296
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Removing the Universal Credit Two-Child Limit - Amendment 2
After ‘three or more children;’ insert: ‘agrees that welfare reforms were designed to punish the most vulnerable in our society and should never have been introduced by this Assembly; agrees to never again allow the British government to introduce welfare reform measures with similar intent in Northern Ireland;’
57 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: 0.11 (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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.13 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.11 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.58 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.11 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.83 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.09 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.04 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.02 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 08:52 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.