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 4860637
Read the official Assembly record
Text
As I said, the deputy First Minister and I have met some of the groups because we want them to know that they are being heard in our office and that, as we advance the memorialisation, we do so in a way that will be received well by them and will make a difference to them and their experience. We will ensure that their voices are heard. As I said, we have made progress in this Building, but, as part of our next steps, officials will continue to engage directly with victims and survivors not only through the representative groups but by direct outreach to those who are not affiliated with any of those groups. We also envisage that the additional element to all that will be that the Arts Council will provide a structured forum for victim and survivor input. Therefore, they will get to help shape the final memorial and what it might look like, what form it might take and what its wording might be. They will be part and parcel of helping to shape memorials in a way that reflects their personal experience and their wishes. We hope that that broad approach will be the best way for us to ensure that the widest possible range of voices is heard as we develop the plans further.
220 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: 0.05 (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 (0.71).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.07 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.71 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.97 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.03 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:11 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.