Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Debate contribution by Ms Kellie Armstrong on .
- MLA
- Ms Kellie Armstrong
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 3 August 2022
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Assembly Business
- Heading
- Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4178001
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On a point of order, Mr Acting Speaker. I want to raise the point that, in the House and through the code of conduct, we are all supposed to respect each other. Mr Allister has just tried to denigrate members of my party, who are designated as "Others" under the rules of the Good Friday Agreement, by calling us another name. I would like a ruling from the Speaker's Office on whether Members should respect each other's designations, whether "Unionist", "Nationalist" or"Other" and use that accordingly when speaking.
88 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
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: 0.39 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.76); Controversy escalation (0.67).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.87).
- 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 | 0.76 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.50 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.07 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.67 | Yes |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.15 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.39 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.08 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.04 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.87 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.82 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.11 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:32 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.