Member's statement: COVID-19 Vaccine
Member's statement by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 12 February 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- COVID-19 Vaccine
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4217612
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Gandhi, I think it was, said:
"The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members."
This Chamber — the elected Members in it — is supposed to represent society. Yet it turns its face away and tries to ignore a certain type of people who have been seriously injured and bereaved. Of course, I talk about the COVID-19 vaccine injured and bereaved. Over the past two years, I have met people who have lost loved ones and who have been seriously damaged. They live with that damage every day, to the point where some wish to take their own life. However, what hurts them just as much as their injuries is the fact that, when they try to gain assistance from their MLAs and MPs, they are given the cold shoulder. They are ignored or gaslit. That is not acceptable. For as long as the history of man and medicine, we have known that medicine can cause side effects and adverse reactions. Why do so many people in the House turn their face away from people who have serious injuries that just happen to be from medicine? Why do you turn your face away from those people? I have worked extremely hard with the support groups, in Northern Ireland and in the UK: VIBS-NI (Vaccine Injured and Bereaved Support, Northern Ireland) and UK CV Family and Vaccine Injured Bereaved UK. They do tremendous work to support those people, some of whom have injuries that leave the medical profession completely flummoxed. The profession just does not know what way to go or how to create a care pathway for those people. They need your support, they need people to represent them and they are being ignored. An event was to be held in this place for VIBS-NI, but parties here, Sinn Féin and the SDLP, blocked it. Alliance told the group that this is not the place for them and that they should meet in a community centre. I ask now and plead with every Member of the House to search their heart and give those people the recognition and acknowledgement that they deserve.
361 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: 0.25 (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 (0.93).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.15 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.07 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.08 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.23 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.52 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.25 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.93 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.02 |
| Adopts it | 0.04 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.86 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.11 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:35 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.