Debate contribution: The Troubles: Young People
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 24 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- The Troubles: Young People
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5046821
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I will answer the first part of that question as best I can, although it is not necessarily one for the Department of Justice alone to answer. A number of factors are involved. First, there is young people's lack of lived experience. Young people see stuff on television and think that it looks exciting. If you have never feared for your life in the way in which the people who lived at interfaces when riots were taking place did, you will not recognise the potential risks. Young people, because of the stage that they are at in their development, are often risk-takers. They often do not foresee long-term consequences in the same way in which adults do. There is therefore a tendency for them to engage in high-risk behaviours, and that is challenging to deal with. There are also those who are subject to criminal coercive control in communities, and there has been, online and in communities, a degree of indoctrination and radicalisation of young people to think that rioting is exciting. I say very gently to Members in the Chamber that, if we glorify people and put them on a pedestal as heroes because of things that they did during what was a horrendous period, there is a risk that young people will view them as people whom they should emulate instead of looking up to those who were law-abiding throughout and who adhered to the normal rules of society. As we work through how we respect those who have passed, we have to be conscious that we do not glorify situations or behaviours that could endanger another generation of young people.
273 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: 0.12 (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 (0.71).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- 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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.08 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.11 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.21 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.12 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.54 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.12 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.71 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.26 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.81 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.15 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:53 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.