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 4871717
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for his question. I have said this before in this place, and I will say it again: there was never any justification for paramilitary organisations or for the criminal behaviour and the thuggery that we saw in the past and, sadly, see too much of in the present. That criminality should stop. That criminality demands a criminal justice response from the agencies. The agencies have my full support and, I believe, the support of all Executive members and parties in that. Of course, we want to help and support communities to have resilience and robustness to resist those who attempt to assert control over them. That is very much what this type of programme does. It is supplementary to the criminal justice response. Let us make no mistake, however, about the fact that there is no role whatsoever for criminality in our society today and there never was in the past.
155 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 (0.61).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.34 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.61 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.39 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.98 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 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.