Member's statement: PSNI: Alleged Sectarianism in the Tactical Support Group
Member's statement by Mr Trevor Clarke on .
- MLA
- Mr Trevor Clarke
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 27 May 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- PSNI: Alleged Sectarianism in the Tactical Support Group
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4971982
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I rise following what many of us hope is the closure of the "Sean" saga within the tactical support group (TSG) in the PSNI. For weeks, many people have pushed the narrative of sectarianism within the PSNI. The closure would not have come had it not been for the efforts of retired police officer John Burrows and the 'News Letter', which continued to campaign to try to clear the besmirching of the PSNI and the officers, Catholic and Protestant, who continue to serve on a daily basis without fear or favour. It is disappointing that some decided to continue to back one individual, when, as I said, others from Catholic and Protestant backgrounds in the TSG, current and retired, came out to condemn those words and said that they were a falsehood. If it had not been for John Burrows's continued pushing, the allegations of a sectarian police force would have stayed on the record. I am glad that, eventually, "Sean" withdrew the comments and cleared the names of his former colleagues and, indeed, those who continue to serve. Many in the Chamber should apologise for continuing to appease that narrative and keeping it in the public domain. They should be ashamed of themselves. I see that the Chief Constable made efforts to bring the issue to an end. I do not think that he did enough; he should have been clearer and firmer in what he said. Last week, at the Policing Board, he indicated that "Sean" is a decent man — I am sure that he is — but more could have been said to stand up for the officers. There should have been an investigation at the time to clear the names of those serving officers. Whilst it was a sorry saga that "Sean" continued to push out the allegations, supported by a law firm, I am glad that he has withdrawn the comments. I am equally glad that he is receiving support for whatever he is going through as an individual. I wish him well, and I am sure that the officers that he worked with wish him well and will be glad that the whole saga has been brought to an end. Considering all the changes that have been made in the police, it is disappointing that sectarianism was ever brought to the fore. I am glad that this has been brought to an end. Mr Speaker, I am sure that you will give me a degree of latitude to introduce another topic. There is a big birthday in the Building today; someone is celebrating 60 years. Of course, that is you. I wish you a very happy birthday, Mr Speaker, and many more.
449 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: 0.31 (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 (0.80).
- Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
- The overall probability was low and the text did not adopt any identity-based framing.
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 | 0.56 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.05 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.15 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.12 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.49 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.24 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.31 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.16 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.80 |
| Adopts it | 0.03 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.98 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.02 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:33 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.