Debate contribution: Tackling Paramilitarism and Promoting Good Relations
Debate contribution by Ms Michelle O'Neill on .
- MLA
- Ms Michelle O'Neill
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 28 April 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Tackling Paramilitarism and Promoting Good Relations
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4913518
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I concur with the Member in calling out those people who are responsible for intimidating communities and trying to claim space within communities by erecting flags, symbols and emblems. That is not acceptable. I am determined to build a better future for everybody, and that includes tackling some of those issues that have not been tackled to date. There is a difference in approach from what has been done before with the Flags, Identity, Culture and Tradition report. However, we now have an opportunity, with it being looked at in the round with the other areas of work, to maybe advance it and do something about what comes next. I look forward to engaging with the Member on the topic as we move forward.
124 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: 0.10 (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).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.98).
- Subject area: Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials.
- 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 | 0.46 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.17 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.13 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.14 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.37 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.10 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.02 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.98 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.98 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| 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 12:26 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.