Member's statement: Parents 4 PEGs NI
Member's statement by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 December 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Parents 4 PEGs NI
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4690750
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I rise today to talk about the support group Parents 4 PEGs. The group came to Stormont yesterday, and it fights — families, parents and friends — for their children, who have complex medical requirements and needs and thus have to be fed through a tube. Many of the children are still in prams or wheelchairs, and, for most if not all of their short lives, they have had to be fed through a tube. The tube goes up their nose and down their throat. Some of the children have to use the tube for 17 hours a day, every day of their short lives, but that can be fixed by a simple procedure that takes up to 15 minutes to replace the tube with one that goes directly into the child's stomach. The procedure only takes up to 15 minutes, yet there are over 90 children in Northern Ireland who suffer this impact even though they have complicated medical needs and have to be fed through a tube that goes up their nose and down their throat. For the life of me, I do not know why those small vulnerable children cannot be served by our health service. Many of the children have to go to London to have the procedure done. All of them are on a waiting list; some have been waiting for years. It is not fair, it is not right, and the health service should sort it out.
243 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 (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.92 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.95 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.05 |
| 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 11:41 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.