Member's statement: Dr Rosemary Coogan
Member's statement by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on .
- MLA
- Dr Steve Aiken OBE
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 23 April 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Dr Rosemary Coogan
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4484981
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I rise to speak as the Chair of the all-party group on science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) to congratulate Dr Rosemary Coogan on being selected for the final stage of her astronaut programme and being awarded her astronaut wings yesterday. It is a remarkable achievement for someone from Northern Ireland to join the European Space Agency's astronaut programme, but it also highlights the importance of the space sector to Northern Ireland. It was not so long ago that, here in Belfast, we had the UK Space Conference, at which many companies from Northern Ireland demonstrated their ability to work in the space programme. Indeed, some of you might be surprised by the amount of work that is done in Northern Ireland towards the space programme. Work is being done in not only our universities and the Armagh Observatory, but in some of the great companies that we have in Northern Ireland such as Thales, which is heavily involved in the Artemis programme. We are all proud of everything that Dr Coogan has done. Now that she has joined the astronaut programme and is very likely to fly, I hope to have her here in Parliament Buildings at some stage to talk about the importance of STEM, particularly to our young people — especially our young women — who will see that the study of engineering, science and technology is a great way ahead and a great way forward. Finally, before I sit down, I will also talk about the new all-party group on aerospace, defence and space that I am setting up. That will be a great opportunity for all of us to encourage those developments here in Northern Ireland.
281 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: 0.02 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.10 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-qualifying 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.56 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.20 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.17 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:03 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.