Topical question AQT 845/22-27

Topical question by Miss Nuala McAllister on 9 December 2024.

MLA: Miss Nuala McAllister
Party at the time: Alliance Party
Date: 9 December 2024
Type: Topical question
Assembly reference: AQT 845/22-27
Business: Oral Answers to Questions
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4698356

Text

Miss McAllister asked the First Minister and deputy First Minister, given that the First Minister referenced the consultees who responded to the mother-and-baby homes inquiry consultation, whether the Executive Office has had any engagement across the Catholic Church dioceses in Northern Ireland and with other religious institutions on their role in the mother-and-baby homes inquiry.

55 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Follow-ups by the same MLA in the Chamber

These were assessed together with this record:

9 December 2024 – I thank the First Minister for her answer. You will be aware, of course, that the preservation of documents will be…

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.15 (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 (0.97).
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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.06	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.02	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.03	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.03	No
Controversy escalation	0.11	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.84	Yes
Overall judgement	0.15	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.97
Reports or questions it	0.03
Criticises or condemns it	0.00
Adopts it	0.00

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)	0.96
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.03
No identity-related subject	0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:40 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.

Challenge this classification