Member's statement: Church of the Holy Name, Greenisland: Fire
Member's statement by Mr Stewart Dickson on .
- MLA
- Mr Stewart Dickson
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 9 September 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Church of the Holy Name, Greenisland: Fire
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4511111
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Last Sunday evening, a major fire occurred in my home community of Greenisland at a Church of Ireland church known as the Church of the Holy Name. Following Ms Brownlee's comments, I place on record my thanks to the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service, the PSNI and Northern Ireland Water, all of which assisted so remarkably on that very sad and difficult evening. That event brought the community of Greenisland together, as, indeed, I expected it would, having been a lifelong resident in the community. We came together last Wednesday evening not only to reflect on and think about the incident that occurred but to look positively to the future, to rebuild that church community and to build on our endeavours to unite the community of Greenisland. I place on record my thanks to the Reverend Isobel Hawthorne-Steele, who is in charge of the congregation there, for her grace in the way in which she handled all the difficult events that followed the fire.
165 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: 0.03 (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: Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.06 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:57 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.