Member's statement: Open Farm Weekend
Member's statement by Mr Alan Robinson on .
- MLA
- Mr Alan Robinson
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 17 June 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Open Farm Weekend
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5013399
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The weekend past was Open Farm Weekend, when townies such as me got an opportunity to connect with farms and farm families as they showcased Northern Ireland's farms and the food that comes from them.
It is an annual event organised by the Ulster Farmers' Union. This year, almost a couple of dozen farms threw open their gates for the public to enjoy and better understand the rich, rural, farming way of life and how food is produced on the farm. As a townie with zero farming background for many generations of my family, I visited Glebe Farm just outside Limavady. Over the weekend, it provided a really interesting and fun experience for the general public, some of whom had never been on a farm in their life. Glebe Farm was just one such example, where local schools attended on Friday and the general public on Saturday and Sunday, affording them an opportunity to meet some of the animals, attend live cooking demonstrations of local produce and enjoy various other games and tours. I thank Glebe Farm for its warm welcome and encourage anyone visiting the Limavady area to drop by its farm shop to sample the very best of local produce. I also thank the Ulster Farmers' Union for affording the wider public and schools the opportunity to learn why local farming is so important to all our futures. At a time when the local farming community has been under so much pressure, the open farm weekend venture provides a positive lift in challenging times for such a key sector in our Province's way of life.
267 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.08 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.04 | 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 | 0.71 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.26 |
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.01 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:47 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.