Debate contribution: Communities in Transition
Debate contribution by Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly on .
- MLA
- Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 31 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Communities in Transition
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4871713
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for that important question. We measure that in a number of ways. I highlighted some of the sentiment surveys that we do with those who partake in the programmes initially and those who have completed particular projects. It is positive to see that participants in those programmes, particularly young people, feel more resilient and that they have more ability to resist those types of activity in their communities. They are more positive when they look to the future. It is not just that, however. The heart of the programme is about driving down criminality and ensuring that every community, no matter where in Northern Ireland it is, has the social capital that enables it to thrive. To that end, there are statistics that we measure to assess the success of such things. While a range of factors may come into play, I am pleased that, since the commencement of the programme, there has been, for example, a 60% reduction in paramilitary-style attacks and a 71% reduction in the number of households presenting as homeless due to paramilitary intimidation. Furthermore, the number of convictions for paramilitary or organised crime-related activity has increased sevenfold since the outset of the programme.
202 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 (0.70).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.82).
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.70 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.82 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.18 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.95 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:16 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.