Motion or amendment: Paramilitary Groups Transition from Violence and Crime - Amendment 3
Motion or amendment by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 6 March 2025
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion Amendment · Private Members' Motion · to “Paramilitary Groups Transition from Violence and Crime”
- Heading
- Paramilitary Groups Transition from Violence and Crime - Amendment 3
- Assembly identifier
- Document 431455
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Paramilitary Groups Transition from Violence and Crime - Amendment 3
Leave out all after 'disbandment;', and insert:
‘expresses alarm that paramilitary organisations play an unacceptable role in the stoking of racial hatred in our communities; notes with concern that those living in nationalist areas are unjustly subjected to high levels of stop and search, as well as over policing; agrees that, more than 25 years after the signing of the Good Friday Agreement, there is no place for paramilitarism in our society, and that such groups should immediately disband; welcomes the work of the Executive Programme on Paramilitarism and Organised Crime; and calls on the UK and Irish Governments to abandon plans for this scoping and engagement exercise and reinvest the associated funding in preventative and community engagement approaches to paramilitary activity.’
132 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: 0.31 (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 (0.74).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.81).
- Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
- The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
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 | 0.24 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.11 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.06 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.19 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.13 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.74 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.31 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.07 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.81 |
| Adopts it | 0.12 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.55 |
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.39 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.05 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:03 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.