Debate contribution: Democratic Consent Resolution

Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .

MLA
Mr Matthew O'Toole
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
10 December 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Democratic Consent Resolution
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4716132

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I am aware that the Member is now possibly filibustering and just reading out stuff that is in front of him in order to eat up time, but he may not be aware that some of the regulations that he just mentioned are critical to the functioning of the single electricity market. That is how electricity flows. That is why the Building and the Chamber are alight. Can he explain how, without the provisions of the protocol, we would keep the lights on, because that requires the single electricity market to function?

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

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: 0.09 (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 (0.74).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.08No
Controversy escalation0.06No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.74Yes
Overall judgement0.09At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.64
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.36
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:45 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