Debate contribution: Schools: Damage from Storm Éowyn
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 11 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Schools: Damage from Storm Éowyn
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4793588
Read the official Assembly record
Text
With the Speaker's permission, I will answer questions 4 and 10 together. I begin by expressing my sincere thanks to the staff in all our schools, in the Education Authority and in NIE and to members of our community who worked extremely hard, sometimes in very challenging conditions, to protect our schools estate from the storm and subsequently to ensure that schools could safely reopen as quickly as possible. The Education Authority maintenance help desk received in excess of 1,000 calls from schools reporting damage to their premises following storm Éowyn. Those calls ranged in severity from missing roof tiles and damaged fences to significant structural damage. On Monday 27 January, 60 schools were closed. Of those, 10 were closed due to major damage and the rest were closed due to power outages. I confirm that all schools were reopened by Friday 31 January due to the tireless work of the Education Authority's maintenance teams and other agencies, including NIE and Northern Ireland Water. Significant damage has been experienced across the schools estate. The Education Authority's maintenance teams have been collating damage reports and triaging on a safety basis. Plans are well developed to address the required remedial works, which are likely to be ongoing in some schools for several weeks and, indeed, months. The Education Authority and the Department will continue to liaise with schools to provide support and ensure that any outstanding repairs or replacements are progressed as quickly as possible.
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: 0.02 (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).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.51 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.95 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 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 11:58 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.