Debate contribution: Freedom of Expression
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 16 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Freedom of Expression
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5111272
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It is incredibly important that everyone have a right to their opinion, but, in a civilised society, those are qualified rights. The manner in which people express their opinion and the means by which they choose to do so are often regulated for the good order of society and to protect the rights of others with whom they share this space. It is therefore important that people be free to express and expound their views, but it is also important that they can do so safely and be properly protected. I have no role to play in what Tommy Robinson does in London. It is well outside my jurisdiction. In this jurisdiction, however, we already have a well-established Parades Commission and well-established laws around public assembly. We need to respect the law, cooperate with the law and work via the law in order to make our opinions heard.
148 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: 0.13 (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 (0.97).
- Subject area: Parades, bonfires and commemorations.
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.06 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.11 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.42 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.13 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.97 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.02 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.44 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.42 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.07 |
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.06 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:13 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.