Debate contribution: Victims and Survivors: Memorial
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
- Victims and Survivors: Memorial
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4860631
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I assure you that we will do everything that we can to make sure that their views are taken on board. Those people have been failed at every turn over the years. It is important that we get this right. We are committed. The deputy First Minister and I have met some of the groups and individuals and want to continue to engage with them, because their voices are crucial. We must get the remaining part of the jigsaw — memorialisation — right. We are making strides with memorialisation in this Building, but, wider than that, we will work with the Arts Council on what other form of memorial would be appropriate. As the Member recognised, there are different views. Some feel that an education programme would be the best way to go, and some feel that plaques are appropriate. Everybody will have a different view, but we must make sure that we have a forum in which everybody's view is heard, and I can assure you that that is the determination of the deputy First Minister and me.
179 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: 0.06 (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 (0.99).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- 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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.23 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.58 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.89 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.10 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 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.