Motion or amendment: Promoting On Farm Investment - Amendment 1
Motion or amendment by Mr John Blair on .
- MLA
- Mr John Blair
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 13 June 2024
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion Amendment · Private Members' Motion · to “Promoting On Farm Investment”
- Heading
- Promoting On Farm Investment - Amendment 1
- Assembly identifier
- Document 405588
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Promoting On Farm Investment - Amendment 1
Leave out all after the first ‘Northern Ireland’ and insert:
‘notes that the Office of Environmental Protection commenced an investigation into Ammonia Standing Advice on 23 May 2023 and subsequently issued a judicial review pre-action letter to the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency; affirms the importance of compliance with environmental laws and the need to reduce unsustainable levels of ammonia pollution; further notes the range of interventions available to reduce ammonia pollution and the importance of increased future UK Government earmarked funding to enable appropriate capital grant support; and agrees that the future Operational Protocol and Ammonia Strategy must be evidence and science-based, respecting environmental obligations.’
121 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Also tabled by
Each MLA who tabled or co-signed this item has their own record:
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-qualifying 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 08:56 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.