Debate contribution: Science and Research
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew Muir
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 25 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Science and Research
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4866602
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I recognise the crucial importance of science and research in helping to achieve my Department’s strategic goals and objectives by ensuring that policy is evidence-based and delivers tangible actions. I personally believe in that. We need to get back to making decisions that are based on science and evidence and away from populism. Also, science is key in developing innovations to address the strategic challenges that we face on issues such as climate change and the nutrient pollution in areas such as Lough Neagh. I want policymakers to have access to the best available data, evidence and knowledge, which will benefit every citizen in Northern Ireland. As set out in my Department’s business and corporate plans, championing and investing in science, including social sciences, innovation and knowledge transfer is a means of addressing policy challenges and unlocking new economic opportunities. My Department invests significantly in science services each year, and its science strategy framework guides how that investment can be optimised. DAERA’s science system has three goals: get the best science, get the best value from science and make the best use of science. Under the guidance of my Chief Scientific Adviser, a series of project-led science transformation initiatives is being embedded across multidisciplinary teams in the DAERA family.
209 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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.63).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.63 | Yes |
| 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:08 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.