Debate contribution: ‘Individual Wellbeing in Northern Ireland 2023/24’
Debate contribution by Ms Michelle O'Neill on .
- MLA
- Ms Michelle O'Neill
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 18 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- ‘Individual Wellbeing in Northern Ireland 2023/24’
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4860587
Read the official Assembly record
Text
When you reflect on the report, you see that there have been some improvements, but there are some areas on which we need to keep a very close eye. The Programme for Government measurements are well-being indicators that will be used to chart our advances and progress across all those areas. The fact that those will be continuously updated will give us a chance to see where we are making progress and, perhaps even more importantly, where we are not making progress and where people's outcomes have not improved. There are 51 indicators in total, all of which will be updated at various points throughout the year, in line with their source of publication, because they all come from different sources. We will update those on an ongoing basis. To give you an example, data on the indicators for life satisfaction, self-efficacy and loneliness were published as part of the 'Individual Wellbeing' report on 6 March, and the well-being framework was updated to include those indicators just five days later, on 11 March. That gives you a sense of how, in real time, those things can be updated.
188 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 | 0.38 | 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 | 0.96 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.03 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 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.