Member's statement: Defence Spending: First Minister's Comments
Member's statement by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on .
- MLA
- Dr Steve Aiken OBE
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 31 March 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Defence Spending: First Minister's Comments
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4871536
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It has been 24 days since our First Minister stated that she was "incredulous" that export credit scheme money would be used to help Thales to build air defence missiles for Ukraine in its fight against Putin. Last week, she said that UK defence spending was a "macho agenda of militarisation". In that 24-day period, Putin's armed forces conducted 1,318 attacks by drones, ballistic missiles and glide bombs on Ukraine's infrastructure. The attacks have included power stations, factories, schools, hospitals, apartment blocks and just about anything else that the Russians designated as a target. At the same time, there were over 800 incidents of heavy shelling, and well over 1,200 engagements between the Russian and Ukrainian armies. Remarkably, with that intense bombardment, the Ukrainians managed to beat off or shoot down the majority of the attacks. However, they still resulted in over 95 civilian deaths and two or three times that number of casualties. Even as we speak, somewhere over Ukraine the wail of air raid sirens is going off, along with alerts across the Ukrainian civil population's mobile phone apps. The reason why the casualty figures are not worse or why Russia has not occupied Odessa or Kyiv is that the Ukrainians have been able to make use of defensive weapons, many of which, I am proud to say, were made here in Belfast.
That is something that we should all be proud of. Putin and his apologists have stated that they have no alternative to their invasion of Ukraine. He states that he has a legitimate right to use force in flagrant breach of territorial sovereignty and international norms. The First Minister says that she believes in diplomacy, but it is a diplomacy that is Trumpian in its terms and would deny President Zelenskyy the means to secure Ukraine's peace. The hypocrisy of the First Minister's remarks are bad enough coming from a political leader who has no qualms about saying that there was "no alternative" to the murderous and genocidal campaign of the Provisional IRA. More worryingly, however, she attempts to speak as a political leader on behalf of the people of Northern Ireland about events on the other side of Europe. She does not do that in my name or in the name of the majority of our people who will, rightly, stand up for Ukraine and our support for its fight. As an avowed apologist for the IRA campaign, she is entitled to speak as the deputy leader of Sinn Féin. She is not, however, as "First Minister for all", entitled to represent the views of Northern Ireland in her appeasement of Putin.
438 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: 0.57 (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 (0.53).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- The overall probability was moderate at most and none of the culture-war criteria was close to being met.
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 | 0.29 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.12 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.48 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.34 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.43 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.57 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.53 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.16 |
| Adopts it | 0.31 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.96 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:15 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.