Debate contribution: Bullying in Schools

Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .

MLA
Mr Paul Givan
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
3 June 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Bullying in Schools
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4493307

Read the official Assembly record

Text

It is about actions and further research to make sure that, where the actions that we are taking can be improved, they are improved. It is not an either/or. We are doing far more than just doing research on the issue. I outlined the measures and the impacts that we have already had in trying to support schools. The Member raises an important issue about online social media abuse. Children, in particular, given their sensitive age, are much more vulnerable to that than adults, and it can be devastating for adults as well. It is vital that we support schools as they manage the issues around online communication and social media posts. All of that can be difficult to do. What I can do to support schools I will do. Where we can have research to provide better-informed practices, we will do that to help inform how we address those issues.

151 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: 0.03 (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 (0.73).
  • 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-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 framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.73Yes
Overall judgement0.03At 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
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.44
No identity-related subject0.39
Education structures, integration and community division0.14
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.02
Another identity-related subject0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:33 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