Topical question AQT 1325/22-27

Topical question by Mr Peter Martin on 19 May 2025.

MLA: Mr Peter Martin
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 19 May 2025
Type: Topical question
Assembly reference: AQT 1325/22-27
Business: Oral Answers to Questions
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4968453

Text

Mr Martin asked the Minister of Finance whether he is aware that Stonewall, which his Department funds, has been referred to the Charity Commission for actively encouraging organisations to disregard the implications of the recent Supreme Court ruling and the subsequent Equality Commission and Human Rights Commission guidance.

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

Follow-ups by the same MLA in the Chamber

These were assessed together with this record:

19 May 2025 – I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he remain content for his Department and the Northern Ireland Civil Service…

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.50 (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).
Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.68).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.48).
Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
The overall probability was moderate at most and none of the culture-war criteria was close to being met.

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	0.08	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.07	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.04	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.29	No
Controversy escalation	0.33	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.68	Yes
Overall judgement	0.50	Between thresholds

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.48
Reports or questions it	0.15
Criticises or condemns it	0.01
Adopts it	0.36

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.91
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups	0.05
No identity-related subject	0.02
Another identity-related subject	0.02
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:36 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.

Challenge this classification