Debate contribution: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on 14 February 2023.

MLA: Mrs Naomi Long
Party at the time: Alliance Party
Date: 14 February 2023
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Assembly Business
Heading: Election of Speaker and Deputy Speakers
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4178845

Text

Before I make my remarks on the election of a Speaker, I associate myself with the remarks of Michelle O'Neill and Paul Givan in extending our condolences to Alex Easton on the death of his parents. I acknowledge at the outset that this is an emotional and difficult day for many people in our community. Young Dáithí and his family are, of course, at the forefront of our minds. They invested time, energy and passion in the campaign for the law, and all of us in the Chamber owe them a debt of gratitude. I am glad that they are here today. There are others, however, whom we do not know who face the same anxious wait and need change to be delivered now. Those who are waiting for life-saving transplant surgery and their loved ones are looking to us today to finish the work that we started together in the previous mandate and to offer them hope that a suitable organ can be found for transplantation. The Organ and Tissue Donation (Deemed Consent) Act or "Dáithí's law", as we call it, offered the hope of an increase in the number of donors, but, for it to take effect, the regulations need to be affirmed by the Assembly. That is stated in the Act, and it is the fastest and best route to delivering on the promises that we made in that legislation. To do that, however, we first need to elect a Speaker. Today, Alliance will support each of the candidates who have had their name put forward. The issue for us is not who will be Speaker but that we elect one. That would open the door for the Assembly to pass the regulations and give people who are waiting for transplant surgery a better chance of survival. For them, this is a life-and-death issue. I have heard in the Chamber and on the air waves that the DUP will not consent to the election of a Speaker. I appeal to it, even at this late stage, to reflect on what is at stake and on the message that it will send if we cannot elect a Speaker, even in these circumstances. For our part, whatever the outcome in the Chamber today, we remain absolutely committed to working with others here and in Westminster to deliver the regulations as soon as possible and to raise awareness and encourage people to have the conversation with their family about what should happen to their organs if they should pass away.
Our preference is clear: today is the right time, the Chamber is the right place, and now we need to do the right thing.

444 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.05 (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 (0.88).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.05	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.02	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.02	No
Controversy escalation	0.04	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.88	Yes
Overall judgement	0.05	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.99
Reports or questions it	0.01
Criticises or condemns it	0.00
Adopts it	0.00

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
No identity-related subject	0.78
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits	0.10
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.05
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism	0.02
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations	0.02

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.

Challenge this classification