Debate contribution: Fishing Industry: Skilled Worker Visa

Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .

MLA
Mr Andrew Muir
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
19 February 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Fishing Industry: Skilled Worker Visa
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4223231

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am aware of the issue that the Member refers to. At this moment, I outline that, as Minister, my approach to EU exit will be different to what has gone before. I intend to implement the law. To me, respecting the law is important. I believe in upholding the ministerial code in word and deed. I also want to focus on working with others to find solutions. I will focus on that issue in the time ahead. I am not focused on deliberately enlarging problems. I am focused on solutions. My task at hand, and this is what I intend to do, is to make the job of managing EU exit exceedingly boring. We have had far too much drama. What we need is delivery.

126 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).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
  • 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.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.04No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.05No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.13No
Overall judgement0.05At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.62
No identity-related subject0.33
Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers0.05
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:37 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