Debate contribution: Sectarianism
Debate contribution by Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly on .
- MLA
- Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 9 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Sectarianism
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4997334
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for her question. This is not about calling out just one side. I appeal to the Member to make sure that, in calling out such behaviour, she calls out all sides. There are activities by criminal organisations and by dissident republicans; there is glorification of the terrorism of the past; and there are ongoing threats and intimidation in some places. We have come a long way, but there is still a journey to go. We should not only stand shoulder to shoulder and call out all sectarianism and intimidation but do so not just for what is happening now but for all the terrorism, intimidation and sectarianism that happened in the past. We do not send that clear message to a new generation when we partake in the glorification of terrorism. That is why it is important for us to condemn not just such behaviour in the present but the absolutely unjustified acts of terrorism and sectarianism of the past.
164 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: 0.14 (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 (0.96).
- 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 | 0.37 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.12 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.10 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.15 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.28 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.14 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.03 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.96 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.86 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.14 |
| 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 12:46 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.