Debate contribution: Dynamic Pricing

Debate contribution by Mr David Brooks on .

MLA
Mr David Brooks
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
16 September 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Dynamic Pricing
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4532717

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I, too, support the motion. I have concerns about dynamic pricing, which seems to be a polished and marketing-agency-approved term these days for price gouging. It is equally important to address the dominance of Live Nation, Ticketmaster's parent company, and its subsidiaries. I declare an interest, as Matthew did, given that I, too, sat by the computer that day, as did a number of other MLAs. I know that Deborah Erskine and Cheryl Brownlee were on a number of devices trying to secure tickets for Oasis.

86 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: 0.04 (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).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.64).
  • 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

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 antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.04No
Controversy escalation0.16No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.64Yes
Overall judgement0.04At 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
No identity-related subject0.84
Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies0.15
Another identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:03 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