Member's statement: Storm Bert
Member's statement by Mr David Brooks on .
- MLA
- Mr David Brooks
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 25 November 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Storm Bert
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4674541
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Like many in the House, I spent some of this weekend dealing with residents in my constituency who had been affected by the flooding caused by Storm Bert. It has been a stressful time for them and their families. We know, especially in the mouth of Christmas, how they will feel, looking at their belongings that have been ruined by the water that got in. We need to step up and take action to assist them. I know that they are thankful for the contribution of the Minister for Communities, Gordon Lyons, who has quickly brought forward the emergency £1,000 payments. We know that those will go only a short way towards mitigating the losses that have been incurred, but they will be of assistance in the initial stages, and the residents of the area are thankful for that. I thank the Northern Fire and Rescue Service for the huge effort that its personnel made to clear the water at Park Avenue in Dundonald. I thank the community groups and agencies that attended the scene. Crosspoint Church opened the church to allow affected residents to come in to get support from various agencies, and Dundonald Orange hall made the same offer. Staff from the British Red Cross, Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council, the local health trust and the Housing Executive all spent much of their Saturday as part of the emergency response to help residents who were in distress and families who could not, for quite some time, get access to residents who were stuck in their houses. I also thank the local businesses, including The Golden Chip and Café Nosh, that offered to feed those who were affected. In times like that, it is good to see communities coming together and rallying round to support those who have been most affected. The issues in Park Avenue in Dundonald have been there for some time. In previous years, Joanne Bunting, Gavin Robinson and I, along with DUP council colleagues, have supported residents to get sandbags and so on as the waters rose. What they really want, however — their frustration came across at the weekend — is a permanent solution. When the river waters rise, they are left vulnerable. This incident was the worst for some years, but the water levels have been increasing and the warnings were there. I appeal to the Department for Infrastructure and the Minister for Infrastructure to investigate and find out what the problems are, because we need to see action. Ms Dillon said that the Minister is ready to step up. The residents of Park Avenue want to see that being delivered on. They want to see a permanent solution that means that they will not have to face this situation again this year or in the coming years. We need a permanent solution that can protect them.
474 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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.84).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.84 | Yes |
| 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 |
|---|---|
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.44 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.41 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.10 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:38 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.