Debate contribution: Paramilitary-style Attacks
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 3 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Paramilitary-style Attacks
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4774213
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I was clear in my statement that, while I welcome the fact that the criteria for extra points relating to paramilitary harm have been changed to reflect the wider harms that happen in our society, such as domestic violence and sexual abuse, which were very much a secondary consideration when it came to claiming points for homelessness, I recognised the importance of ensuring that people are no longer being driven from their homes by such organisations or individuals. The Executive now need to focus on how we can ensure that people can remain in their home safely rather than allow individuals to dictate where and when people can live at peace and get on with their lives.
117 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: 0.09 (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 (0.86).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.69).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- 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 | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.86 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.69 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.31 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.79 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.11 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.05 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.04 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:52 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.