Motion or amendment: Breaches of the Ministerial Code of Conduct - Amendment 3

Motion or amendment by Mr Stewart Dickson on 13 November 2024.

MLA: Mr Stewart Dickson
Party at the time: Alliance Party
Date: 13 November 2024
Type: Motion or amendment
Business: Motion Amendment · Private Members' Motion · to “Breaches of the Ministerial Code of Conduct”
Heading: Breaches of the Ministerial Code of Conduct - Amendment 3
Assembly identifier: Document 417869

Read the official Assembly record Open Data source

Text

Breaches of the Ministerial Code of Conduct - Amendment 3
Leave out all after second ‘cross-border cooperation’ and insert:
‘; and further calls on The Executive Office and the UK and Irish Governments to explore wider reforms to Northern Ireland’s political institutions, including steps to prevent one party from taking unilateral action to collapse the Assembly, the introduction of voluntary coalition in the Executive and replacing cross-community voting with a weighted majority system.’

73 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

Not qualifying

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: 0.15 (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 (0.80).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.12	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.04	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.05	No
Controversy escalation	0.08	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.80	Yes
Overall judgement	0.15	At or below not-qualifying threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.99
Reports or questions it	0.00
Criticises or condemns it	0.00
Adopts it	0.01

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty	0.59
No identity-related subject	0.33
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations	0.08
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 08:58 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9. The text was identical to an already-assessed record, so the same answers were reused.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification