Motion or amendment: Audit and Re-Imaging of Memorials- Amendment 3
Motion or amendment by Ms Sinéad McLaughlin on .
- MLA
- Ms Sinéad McLaughlin
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 7 November 2025
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion Amendment · Private Members' Motion · to “Audit and Re-Imaging of Memorials”
- Heading
- Audit and Re-Imaging of Memorials- Amendment 3
- Assembly identifier
- Document 457967
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Audit and Re-Imaging of Memorials- Amendment 3
Leave out all after ‘glorifying terrorism;’ and insert:
‘notes with concern that some of these memorials have been erected or maintained at the behest of organisations which continue to exert coercive control over communities; regrets that paramilitarism persists in parts of our society, undermining public safety, confidence and the rule of law; calls on the Minister of Justice to report to the Assembly within six months, on whether existing criminal law and its enforcement adequately address the erection or maintenance of memorials linked to proscribed organisations, alongside any key proposals for reform; and further calls on the First Minister and deputy First Minister to work with other departments and agencies to support communities in promoting lawful and inclusive forms of remembrance that contribute to reconciliation.’
132 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: 0.15 (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 (0.73).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.82).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- 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 | 0.14 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.07 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.13 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.21 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.14 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.73 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.15 | At or below not-qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.15 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.82 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.86 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.10 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.03 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:17 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.