Debate contribution: Places of Worship: Attacks
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 9 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Places of Worship: Attacks
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4511538
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Mel Jones stated in her public comments that she believed that paramilitaries were involved in some of that violence. She has been clear about that. Irrespective of whether paramilitaries are involved, however, the behaviour is not acceptable. It is important that we all speak with one voice. It is hugely frustrating to see people who come here to serve the community by working in our public services or in private industry to grow our economy or who come here in desperation to seek protection from harm at home being terrorised in their homes and communities instead of being welcomed, respected and treated with dignity. It is completely unacceptable. If my Department can do things in addition to the actions that we already take to provide support, we will continue to explore those with the sectors that best represent those voices and with my Executive colleagues to make sure that it is a joined-up approach.
154 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: 0.10 (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).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.76).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.12 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.05 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.46 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.10 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.22 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.76 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.40 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.34 |
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.17 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.08 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:58 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.