Debate contribution: Assembly Business
Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .
- MLA
- Mr Matthew O'Toole
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 6 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Assembly Business
- Heading
- Assembly Business
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5156478
Read the official Assembly record
Text
With the greatest of respect, it is in Standing Orders, so I think that it was in order to ask that question. My second point of order relates to the Executive legislation programme, which came out via email to Members of the Assembly on Friday. It is supposed to be the legislation programme for what is left of this year and next year. Given what the Speaker has said about statements being brought to the Assembly, it is highly unacceptable that it was emailed to us with no oral statement from the First Minister and deputy First Minister. Will the Speaker's Office advise on whether it is comfortable with such an important document being emailed to Members on a Friday as if it were correspondence about a lunch event?
129 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).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.10 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.18 | No |
| 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.99 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:21 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.