Member's statement: Ukraine War: Defence Spending
Member's statement by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on .
- MLA
- Dr Steve Aiken OBE
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 March 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Ukraine War: Defence Spending
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4825670
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Before I start my remarks, I declare an interest as chair of the all-party group on aerospace, defence, security and space. Last week, in the Oval Office, we saw a dramatic but long-signalled change in our geopolitical world. I am afraid that certainties about our transatlantic relationship, which was first established 82 years ago by a boiler-suited Prime Minister and his US contemporary, are no longer there. Probably rightly, the US complained that Europe has been ignoring its defensive security for far too long. As 'good Europeans', we cannot ignore that reality. On Sunday, the Prime Minister made clear that we are at a once-in-a-generation moment when it comes to the security of Europe. While we must all wish him well in his attempts to create a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, it is difficult to see how it could lead to a peace that the dictator Putin finds acceptable. No matter the Prime Minister's laudable peace efforts, we will have to rearm, as will the rest of Europe. We know from history that the failure to deter means a much heavier price later on. We in Northern Ireland will have our part to play. The welcome announcement of the £1·5-billion-plus order for Thales is a great start. Our industries have capacity and capability that will be needed. There is much that our R&D sector can and must contribute in everything from cyber, AI and novel materials. There will also be a strategic role when it comes to our food and energy security. We will also continue to serve with pride in our armed forces, placing ourselves at the forefront of deterrence. However, our Executive cannot be half in, half out. It is regrettable that Sinn Féin and People Before Profit are outliers when it comes to condemning Russia's attacks on Ukraine. Instead, Sinn Féin and Ireland's far-left MEPs have, bizarrely, blamed the West, when they should have been blaming Putin. Our Economy Ministry and Invest NI must not throttle but promote investment in our defence and security sectors. Remember: despite what those parties think, Russia threatens us all, regardless of identity. It is noteworthy that Ireland, now recognising the threat, is looking to invest in undersea cable protection with the Royal Navy. It is, at last, building an air force that has actual fighter aircraft, and it is becoming more closely integrated with the European defence structures. For that, the Irish Government should be applauded by all parts of the House, as the security of the Republic of Ireland is also our security. Finally, maybe we can look forward to a joint statement from the First Minister and deputy First Minister, all the Executive parties and the leader of the Opposition that supports the Prime Minister's initiative and welcomes his call for increased defence spending across all these islands. Slava Ukraini.
473 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: 0.15 (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 (0.83).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.67).
- Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
- 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 | 0.09 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.08 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.24 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.15 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.83 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.15 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.67 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.26 |
| Adopts it | 0.06 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.42 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.31 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.15 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.10 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:03 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.