Debate contribution: Votes at 16
Debate contribution by Ms Michelle O'Neill on .
- MLA
- Ms Michelle O'Neill
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 24 June 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Votes at 16
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4497826
Read the official Assembly record
Text
That is certainly my personal view of what should happen. We can discuss it again in the Executive Office, but it is certainly my view that that power is something that we should have. We should have control of the maximum number of powers that have an impact on our lives here and on the people whom we represent, so I concur with that. You were speaking about young people and 16-year-olds. Over the past two weeks, I think every Member in this Chamber has brought young people in here for work experience. That is a fantastic thing that we all should encourage. We want young people to be part of the electoral system and the democratic system; we want our politics to reflect society; we want our politics to have more young people and more people from black and ethnic minority backgrounds; and we want our politics to reflect the world that we live in. So my message to all young people — I am sure that you will concur — is that there is a role for them to play in politics and voting is a key element of that. I, like you, am of the view that the voting age should be lowered.
206 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: 0.05 (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: 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.54 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging 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 | 0.53 |
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.46 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
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.