Debate contribution: Loyalist Communities Council
Debate contribution by Dr Caoimhe Archibald on .
- MLA
- Dr Caoimhe Archibald
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 14 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Loyalist Communities Council
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4590031
Read the official Assembly record
Text
No, I do not think that it is appropriate to meet the LCC to discuss issues of public policy. We are 26 years on from the Good Friday Agreement, so there is no place in this society for paramilitary groups. There is no role for paramilitary groups. There is no excuse for the continued existence of those groups. Despite the work of the PSNI's paramilitary crime task force (PCTF) and the tackling paramilitarism programme, those paramilitary groups continue to exist. Tolerance of those groups is indefensible and must be called out.
91 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 (0.50).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- 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 | 0.14 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.16 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.27 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.10 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.37 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.18 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.47 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.50 |
| Adopts it | 0.03 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.99 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| 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 11:18 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.