Debate contribution: Special Schools: Nursing Provision
Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .
- MLA
- Mr Mike Nesbitt
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 1 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Special Schools: Nursing Provision
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4562863
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for his question. I very much commit to such a meeting. As with many of the issues that we face as a devolved Executive and Assembly, the answers do not lie with a single Department. In this case, cooperation between Health and Education is critical. I have enjoyed working with officials from the Department of Education as I have enjoyed working with Justice officials and the Minister of Justice. A lot of these things are cross-departmental. If we are going to be a mature, devolved set of institutions that really deliver for people, that is the sort of road that we have to go down. I apologise that I have no detail on the issue but I look forward to learning.
125 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: 0.03 (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).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.17 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 | 0.68 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.28 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.02 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:22 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.