Member's statement: Sectarian Hate Crimes: Lower North Belfast
Member's statement by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 10 June 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Sectarian Hate Crimes: Lower North Belfast
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5000978
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I raise my deep concern at the rise in sectarian hate crimes aimed at the community of lower North Belfast. This weekend, my young teenage constituent Cooper Mason was set upon by a group of two dozen masked individuals armed with sticks and a knife. Cooper spent the weekend in hospital with a fractured jaw and broken bones, and, only for the intervention of a passer-by, he could have been in a much worse situation. In recent weeks, Alexandra park has been used as a means for attacks on the community of lower North Belfast. I pay tribute to Belfast City Council and to the police, who have now listened to requests from my party colleagues Brian Kingston and Dean McCullough and from me to close those gates in order to protect that community. I am calling on political parties and community leaders in all parts of North Belfast to call that behaviour out. When we see other incidents of disgraceful sectarianism in North Belfast, our party rightly calls it out. The media give coverage to some elements of that but are deathly silent when it comes to attacks on the community in lower North Belfast. I make it clear that Mr Kingston and I will continue to stand up for that community. We will give a voice to it and ensure that it is given the same protections as any other part of North Belfast. Sectarianism may be uncomfortable for some, but it must be called out. As a party, we will continue to stand by the families that were subjected to those disgraceful attacks.
266 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: 0.16 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.75).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.97).
- Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
- 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 | 0.75 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.07 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.57 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.16 | 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) | 0.97 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:41 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.