Debate contribution: End Israeli Impunity in Gaza
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 24 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- End Israeli Impunity in Gaza
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5047632
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I am absolutely astounded by the position of the SDLP and the Alliance Party. Why have I picked those two parties out from all the rest? It is because I do not believe for one moment that those two parties, the SDLP and Alliance, would produce a motion like this. If I were to see the motion and the amendment side by side, I would put money on Alliance and the SDLP going with the UUP amendment or producing something like that themselves.
I am absolutely appalled that they have got themselves stuck in the debate supporting what I can only describe as propaganda. For the Alliance Party to base that support only on the divestment and arms trade is astounding. It is absolutely astounding.
It is huge. The Foreign Secretary announced the suspension of around 30 of approximately 350 arms export licences to Israel. If he were to ban all of them, it would do two things: Israelis would get their arms from somewhere else, and you would lose trade; and you could risk leaving a nation state not being able to defend itself. Of course, that is exactly what the motion alludes to. Sinn Féin will produce a motion such as this no bother — absolutely no bother — but I find it astounding that the SDLP and Alliance have attached themselves to it. It is astounding. It is absolutely astounding. I must say that the UUP has acted honourably and admirably in its amendment, demonstrating lived experience of a war scenario and what it feels like to be in a war. I applaud the UUP for that and give it credit. Sinn Féin will associate itself with all ranks and measures of terrorism. It will align itself with and be an apologist for the IRA. It will align itself with and be an apologist for FARC terrorists in Colombia. It will align itself with and apologise for the atrocities of Hamas, Hezbollah and the Basque terrorists. It comes as second nature to Sinn Féin. It is what Sinn Féin is.
Yes, I will.
I 100% agree on that point.
That is what Sinn Féin is. How did the Alliance Party and the SDLP fall into that trap, and how could they turn their nose up at an amendment that holds Israel to account? It holds Israel to account. It does not say anything pro-Netanyahu; in fact, I was in Israel, and I found it hard to find somebody who supported Netanyahu. The amendment is exactly what you are looking for and exactly what you need, yet you will align yourselves with Sinn Féin, which will produce propaganda for its terrorist bedfellows, and you will lump it, swallow it and walk into the Lobby with Sinn Féin. I just do not understand the position, in particular, of the Alliance Party. I understand that the SDLP may be playing to a base to try to out-green the green Sinn Féin, but be aware of your actions, because every action has a consequence. Not once do I see in the motion anything about the depravity of 7 October.
518 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism
Jev’s structured answers met every documented threshold for a qualifying culture-war activity.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.73 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Dog-whistle messaging (0.82).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.76).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- The text adopts an antagonistic or dog-whistle framing, which qualifies even alongside legitimate scrutiny.
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 | 0.51 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.56 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.82 | Yes |
| Controversy escalation | 0.43 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.26 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.73 | Above qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.18 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.06 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.76 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.87 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.09 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:55 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.