Debate contribution: T: BUC Review: Update

Debate contribution by Ms Aisling Reilly on .

MLA
Ms Aisling Reilly
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
24 June 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
T: BUC Review: Update
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4497760

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Yes, I am happy to provide that for the Member. We are currently considering the budget allocations across the Executive Office. When that is finalised, we will consider the recommendations from officials on how good relations funding should be distributed across T:BUC headline actions and broader good relations programmes. All preparation work is complete, including the assessment process for all 2024-25 applications for good relations funding. Letters of offer to successful applicants will be issued where appropriate after a budget for each programme in 2024-25 has been confirmed.

88 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).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
  • 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 antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.01No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.39No
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
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.89
No identity-related subject0.08
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.02
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:48 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