Debate contribution: Malone Integrated College: New Build
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 8 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Malone Integrated College: New Build
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5068412
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It is not about Malone being added to a list; it is one of many schools that are on that list. Of the 28 post-primary schools on the list that were identified for new build, only seven have moved forward to the various design stages — 21 schools have not advanced at all — and the 28 post-primary schools sit alongside primary schools on the list. The list is extensive. If we were to continue with the current projected capital expenditure, it would take decades to deliver what is already on the list of schools that require a new build. That is why I have not been able, much as I would like to, to open up a new call for schools to indicate that they require a new build. There are many schools that deserve a new build, but, because of the insufficient funding, we have not been able to do that. Capital funding has been given a SEN-first priority. We have spent £114 million on special educational needs provision to provide capacity in the school estate. That was not additional funding that we were given. That funding could have been spent on other capital projects, but we — rightly, in my opinion — have to use it to meet the needs of children with special needs. They have had the first call on that funding. That is why the challenge, collectively, goes out to the wider Executive. Whilst Members will rightly vociferously campaign for new builds in their constituencies, when it comes to the reality of decisions that are being taken in the Executive by their leaderships, that is not reflected in the allocation that comes to my Department. That is the honesty that people in the Chamber need to have about the reality of the decision-making process in the Executive.
303 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: 0.04 (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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.90 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.05 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.05 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:01 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.