Member's statement: Danny Baker

Member's statement by Mr Jonathan Buckley on 6 May 2025.

MLA: Mr Jonathan Buckley
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 6 May 2025
Type: Member's statement
Business: Members' Statements
Heading: Danny Baker
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4929245

Text

Sinn Féin's Danny Baker attempted to have an item listed in today's Order Paper to condemn my attendance at an Apprentice Boys parade in Lisburn. It fooled nobody. The business is not in the Order Paper. I note, however, that the Sinn Féin MLA who was so keen to discuss that matter, Mr Baker, has not shown up in the Chamber. Perhaps he is away somewhere polishing his brass neck. My colleague Mr Givan once said that that Member should:
"not judge me by one's own sectarian standards." — [Official Report (Hansard), 3 February 2025, p410, col 1].
It appears that he is doing just that. Just this weekend, that man — Sinn Féin MLA Danny Baker — was among a crowd that wreaked havoc in south Belfast. What did we see there? We saw rioting; a police car's window being smashed; chants of, "Orange bastards"; IRA chants and songs; the targeting of a Polish war memorial; the ripping apart of poppy wreaths that had been laid by the Polish community; and an IRA flag. What else? We saw Danny Baker promoting the illegal use of flares at football games, yet that Member saw fit to deflect from that and try to target a parade in Lisburn that was attended by thousands of people and at which Lisburn Apprentice Boys put on a fantastic display.
The Member is fooling nobody. The slur that he attempted to place on the community in Lisburn is nothing short of disgraceful, but it lays bare the crass sectarian acts that he has engaged in time and again. How quick has the Sinn Féin West Belfast Member been to condemn the actions of Kneecap: the chants of "Kill your MP"? There has been no comment from Mr Baker in that regard. That may not be surprising; maybe it was a tad embarrassing, because it was Sinn Féin's policy for many years to target and kill MPs in this country. We take no lectures from the party opposite when it comes to standing up and speaking out for victims of terrorism across the community. Mr Baker was not finished. At the weekend he attended an event, smiling next to a memorial to Bobby Sands, a man who planned the bombing of Balmoral Furniture Company. It is ludicrous: the Member wants to gaslight Members across these Benches, yet his sectarian actions are laid bare for all to see. Perhaps it is time that he came to the Chamber and faced up to the reality, rather than hiding away and scurrying about in corridors so that Sinn Féin Members can take their seats as British members of this state and, indeed, the Crown.

445 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Qualifying Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations

Jev’s structured answers met every documented threshold for a qualifying culture-war activity.

Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.93 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
Criteria met: Identity framing (0.96); Sectarian or communal antagonism (0.64); Cultural grievance politics (0.90); Dog-whistle messaging (0.84); Controversy escalation (0.75).
The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.87).
Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
The text adopts an antagonistic or dog-whistle framing, which qualifies even alongside legitimate scrutiny.

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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.96	Yes
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.64	Yes
Cultural grievance politics	0.90	Yes
Dog-whistle messaging	0.84	Yes
Controversy escalation	0.75	Yes
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.06	No
Overall judgement	0.93	Above qualifying threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing	0.01
Reports or questions it	0.00
Criticises or condemns it	0.12
Adopts it (chosen)	0.87

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations	0.96
Parades, bonfires and commemorations	0.02
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism	0.02
No identity-related subject	0.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:23 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification