Debate contribution: Allowances to Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly

Debate contribution by Mr Trevor Clarke on 4 February 2025.

MLA: Mr Trevor Clarke
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 4 February 2025
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Assembly Business
Heading: Allowances to Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4779020

Text

First, I will advocate for only myself — no one else — because I cannot speak on behalf of my colleagues. Of course, I encourage the Commission to take note of the opt-out option — I have already indicated that at the Commission — which could be used if some Members do not want to take the increase. Whether you take it would then be up you, Mr Carroll. I cannot advocate for something on behalf of my colleagues. What I will say, for those who did not hear me the first time, is that you are talking about 5% for one year. You are also using the 28% figure. If you take the cumulative figure for an increase of 5% a year from 2015 until 2025, I imagine that it will be much more than 28%. The other thing that you talked about was workers' rights. I am probably at the upper end when it comes to the age of Members; there are many younger Members who have young families to keep. Why should their pay not stay in kilter with that of their counterparts in other places? I am happy to let you in, if you want in on that.
Sorry, it does not stand up in your mind, but it stands up in the minds of others. Whilst you do not take the full wage, which is your choice, other Members have young families —
I will.
I thank the Member for putting that on the record. As a Member whose family is grown-up, I have no need for that provision.
However, it is, of course, important that, when looking at workers' rights, we look at their rights across the board. I will give way.
So —.
I need to address that comment, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I did not call out Mr Allister incorrectly. I said that Mr Allister refused to take his place on a Committee. Committee membership is allocated by d'Hondt. That is how the allocations are made. No Member has the right to pick the Committee that they want. Committee membership is allocated on the strength of a party's membership. If Mr Gaston wants to rewrite the rules for his media story, that is fine, but the reality is that Committee membership is picked on the basis of party strength, and because he did not get the Committee that he wanted, Mr Allister ran away. So, based on performance, Mr Allister did not deserve his salary.
Madam Principal Deputy Speaker —
— I commend the motion.

423 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: 0.12 (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 (0.73).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
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	0.09	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.05	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.10	No
Controversy escalation	0.30	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.73	Yes
Overall judgement	0.12	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.99
Reports or questions it	0.00
Criticises or condemns it	0.00
Adopts it	0.01

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups	0.85
No identity-related subject	0.15
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 11:51 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