Motion or amendment: International Women’s Day 2025
Motion or amendment by Ms Claire Sugden on .
- MLA
- Ms Claire Sugden
- Party at the time
- Independent
- Date
- 20 February 2025
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion · Private Members' Motion
- Heading
- International Women’s Day 2025
- Assembly identifier
- Document 429301
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
International Women’s Day 2025
That this Assembly welcomes the theme of Accelerate Action for International Women’s Day 2025; recognises that focusing on the need to accelerate action emphasises the importance of taking swift and decisive steps to achieve gender equality; and supports increased momentum and urgency in addressing the systemic barriers and biases that women face, both in personal and professional spheres.
62 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:
- Dr Caoimhe Archibald – record
- Ms Diana Armstrong – record
- Ms Paula Bradshaw – record
- Miss Nicola Brogan – record
- Mrs Linda Dillon – record
- Mrs Diane Dodds – record
- Miss Jemma Dolan – record
- Ms Connie Egan – record
- Mrs Sinéad Ennis – record
- Mrs Ciara Ferguson – record
- Ms Aoife Finnegan – record
- Miss Órlaithí Flynn – record
- Miss Deirdre Hargey – record
- Ms Liz Kimmins – record
- Ms Sinéad McLaughlin – record
- Mrs Cathy Mason – record
- Miss Áine Murphy – record
- Ms Carál Ní Chuilín – record
- Ms Michelle O'Neill – record
- Ms Aisling Reilly – record
- Ms Emma Sheerin – 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: 0.04 (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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.23 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.52 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.48 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 20 October 2026 at 22:50 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r4, methodology 1.3. This record has been assessed 3 times; the latest assessment is shown.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.