Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Debate contribution by Mr Conor Murphy on .
- MLA
- Mr Conor Murphy
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 7 December 2022
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Assembly Business
- Heading
- Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4178670
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for giving way. I will correct him on two points. First, when he talks about the three years, he knows that he and I agreed a deal in February 2018 to put the Executive back in place, and he knows that his party scuppered that over the following weekend and would not announce the deal. He knows that. Also, as I pointed out in my contribution, it was for the Executive to decide what to do with that £300 million. They could have put it all towards dealing with the overspend of Departments, which was caused by the fact that we had no Budget in place, or they could have used some or all of it to deal with the cost of living and fair pay awards. Crucially, it was for the Executive to decide, and, crucially, the DUP has prevented that from happening.
That is
That is the £160 million that they gave us for the home heating scheme.
There was £160 million for the scheme that they gave us in February.
Will the Member give way again?
183 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: 0.10 (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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.55 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.10 | At or below not-flagging 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.93 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.05 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:33 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.