Debate contribution: Dean Maguirc College, Carrickmore

Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .

MLA
Mr Paul Givan
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
17 September 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Dean Maguirc College, Carrickmore
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4537091

Read the official Assembly record

Text

We are well off the topic of the substantive question; nevertheless, I will do my best to provide an answer. Members previously raised the issue of that funding. I moved quickly to secure funding allocations for integrated schools. We moved those school projects into the main capital projects of the Department, and we have been able to advance a number of them. I reassure the Member that those school projects are being taken forward by my main capital project team. Obviously, we were able to secure funding for the shared education facility in Omagh. I visited that just last week, as we have now moved into the contract phase, and the construction phase can commence in due course.

118 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: 0.07 (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 (0.71).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Education structures, integration and community division.
  • 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 framing0.06No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.03No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.04No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.71Yes
Overall judgement0.07At 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
Education structures, integration and community division0.99
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:10 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