Member's statement: Carrickfergus Rugby Club
Member's statement by Mr John Stewart on .
- MLA
- Mr John Stewart
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 24 March 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Carrickfergus Rugby Club
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4864526
Read the official Assembly record
Text
First, I associate myself with the Member for North Antrim's comments. I had the privilege of serving on Mid and East Antrim Borough Council with Beth Adger. It was a privilege to work with her, and my thoughts and deepest sympathies are with her friends, her family and all her colleagues in the DUP. I commend Carrickfergus Rugby Club and wish it the very best of luck as it looks forward to two climactic weekends. This Saturday, the first XV takes on Ards Rugby Club in the Junior Shield final at Ravenhill. It is sure to be a special day for the club and its supporters, and I wish captain, Conor Cambridge, coaches Andrew Hughes and Shane Kelly and all the players the very best of luck ahead of their special day. The whole town will be supporting them, and we look forward to seeing the Junior Shield return to Carrickfergus on Saturday evening. On Saturday as well, Carrickfergus Rugby Club under-18s will take on Clogher Valley under-18s in Omagh in the Bowl final. The following Saturday, its under-16 team will take on Instonians under-16s in the Plate final. I congratulate both junior teams and wish them all the best in their respective finals. The success at all levels of Carrickfergus Rugby Club is further evidence of and a testament to the hard work and dedication of so many individuals at the club. From the president, Raymond Crooks, down, I commend the coaches, the committee, all the officials and all the volunteers for everything that they do to foster amazing sporting achievement at the club. Here's to hopefully celebrating lifting three trophies in the coming weekends.
276 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).
- Subject area: Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies.
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.81 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.15 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:10 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.