Debate contribution: Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill: Consideration Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on .
- MLA
- Mr Robbie Butler
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 13 May 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Committee Business
- Heading
- Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill: Consideration Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4947709
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Principal Deputy Speaker for raising that issue. When I looked at some of the amendments that were permitted, I thought that the Speaker's Office had been incredibly generous. Is the Member able to point to any clauses in the Bill that would stop an independent body from considering anything that he has put forward? I know that there is a Member who wants to strip the absolute independence of the board away and has previously offered advice and direction to a panel. We have sought not to give any direction to the panel. Is there anything that the Member can state that would stop an independent panel from considering the things that he has suggested? Is he, or the Member for West Belfast, putting on the record that, in the event of any pay rise, they will not take anything beyond the CPI?
As has been suggested today so far, I find calling into question why this is being brought forward and the morals of Members of the House quite repulsive.
174 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: 0.12 (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 (0.85).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.05 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.11 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.15 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.52 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.12 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.85 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.15 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.97 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 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.