Debate contribution: RHI (Closure of the Non-Domestic Scheme) Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .

MLA
Mr Phillip Brett
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
20 October 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Executive Committee Business
Heading
RHI (Closure of the Non-Domestic Scheme) Bill: Second Stage
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5188362

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Minister, for covering those points. I know it is not within the scope of the Bill per se, but I have questions about the underutilised AME. First, can you confirm to the House what that figure is, currently; and, secondly, what work are your officials doing to advance a scheme that can draw down that funding? Obviously, if we are going to close the scheme, and this Bill can pass by March of next year, we need to have a new scheme ready to rock, so I would like to hear some views on that.

97 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.03 (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 (0.89).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.89Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.98
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.02
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:31 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.

Challenge this classification