Debate contribution: Antisocial Behaviour
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 30 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Antisocial Behaviour
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4563911
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I do. It goes way beyond antisocial and veers into the space of hate crime, given the intimidation effect that it has on GAA users of the pitch. It is not acceptable and is incredibly disruptive to not only those who play GAA but those who use the pitches for other purposes and other sports. It is also incredibly disrespectful and disruptive to the children of the local nursery and primary school and their parents. Those who are behind the campaign need to catch themselves on and recognise that there is space enough in this world for us all, and that we need to respect other people's traditions and allow them to get on with their lives in peace and quiet without that disruption.
It is also becoming a drain on PSNI resources. That is hardly helpful at a time when we need the PSNI to be actively preventing crime and dealing with serious issues rather than dealing with that kind of stupid behaviour, which is completely disruptive and unnecessary.
170 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: 0.18 (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 (0.96).
- Subject area: Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies.
- 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 | 0.40 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.09 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.55 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.19 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.23 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.34 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.18 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.03 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.96 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.68 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.32 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:12 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.