Debate contribution: Healthy Lifestyle Facilities: Parliament Buildings
Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on .
- MLA
- Mr Robbie Butler
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 25 June 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Healthy Lifestyle Facilities: Parliament Buildings
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4498667
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I have a lot of answers, and this one might talk slightly more directly to your query about distance markers on the floors. The Assembly Commission recognises that it is a positive suggestion to promote a healthy and active environment, and it shares the commitment. Given that Parliament Buildings is grade A listed, the Assembly Commission must be mindful of the architectural integrity and heritage of the Building. Therefore, placing distance markers on floors or walls of corridors would be problematic. However, the Assembly Commission will consider other ways of highlighting distances around the Building. Our schools do the daily mile, which would be a wonderful initiative. As a Commission member, I will take that back to the Commission for the Member.
122 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: 0.02 (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).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.58 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.87 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.11 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:56 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.