Debate contribution: Climate Change
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew Muir
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 1 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Climate Change
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4562675
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I have lead responsibility for climate change in the Executive, but it is also a cross-departmental responsibility. We also need to step together across society, because the only way in which we will address the issues arising from climate change is by doing so together. I take the issue seriously, and I have prioritised it. One action that arose from the climate change legislation is reporting by public bodies. I took that action forward and made regulations earlier this year. I have tabled proposals on the setting of carbon budgets to the Executive, and I am engaging with my ministerial colleagues. I am also preparing to table the first climate action plan for Executive approval. This month, I will commence consultation on establishing a just transition commission. I am also looking at setting up a citizens' assembly on climate change for young people. Lastly, I am glad to see the issues raised and commitments made on climate change reflected in the environmental improvement plan (EIP) and the draft Programme for Government. There is a lot that we need to do, and time is not on our side. We lost two years of the mandate, during which we were not able to progress such issues, but I am working hard and at pace with my ministerial colleagues and the rest of society to take forward the necessary actions to address climate change and to take advantage of the opportunities that arise.
240 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: 0.02 (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 (0.65).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.65 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.97 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:21 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.