Member's statement: Balmoral Show 2025
Member's statement by Mr Declan McAleer on .
- MLA
- Mr Declan McAleer
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 19 May 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Balmoral Show 2025
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4967839
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I commend the Royal Ulster Agricultural Society for another hugely successful Balmoral show, which was attended by over 100,000 people over four days. It was a fantastic networking event and a fantastic platform to showcase the talent and creativity of our rural communities. I had the opportunity to attend for three days. We had our party stand there; we had an AERA Committee meeting at the show; and the Assembly had a base there as well. It was a wonderful opportunity to engage with farmers. We also had a very good Q&A session with the Young Farmers' Clubs of Ulster. I commend and thank the staff for helping to facilitate that. Whilst the mood at the show was vibrant and good — and, importantly, the sun shone — farmers are deeply concerned at proposals that are coming down the track that could have a serious impact on their livelihoods and the wider rural economy. The four days were a really good opportunity for farmers and people who are not farmers to come and speak to us about their concerns. Some of the key issues that were raised with us during the show were the inheritance tax changes that are coming down the track; the review of the nutrients action programme; the spiralling rate of bovine TB; the future of farm support; ammonia; planning; and even the recent trade agreement with the USA, which was mentioned a few times. We must continue to engage and work on those issues with farming organisations and their representatives to help address them where we can, given the huge impact of farm businesses on the vitality of rural communities, on the economy and on underpinning our food security.
283 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: 0.02 (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 (1.00).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.50 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.93 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 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.