Debate contribution: AI Strategy
Debate contribution by Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly on .
- MLA
- Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 10 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- AI Strategy
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5224468
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Mr Speaker —. Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, with your permission, I will answer questions 3 and 7 together. The Office of AI and Digital, under the leadership of Professor Helen McCarthy, is preparing a comprehensive strategy for the ethical adoption of AI in the public sector. That is a collaborative effort, which draws on expertise from across government, industry and academia. The scoping phase of that work is now complete. It incorporated input from a diverse group of stakeholders, which has been instrumental in shaping the key pillars of the strategy. To support that drafting phase, the office set up two key groups: an external AI advisory panel, made up of industry leaders, including the Artificial Intelligence Collaboration Centre (AICC) and local universities; and a government AI network, which brings together representatives from all nine Departments. Efforts are under way to consolidate feedback from the advisory panel and the government AI network. The government AI network will reconvene in December to review and discuss an early draft of the strategy. Taking an iterative approach will help to ensure that the strategy is robust, inclusive and future-proofed. At the heart of the strategy is a firm commitment to the ethical and responsible use of AI, which is embedded in the governance pillar. The governance pillar is grounded in the principles of transparency, respect and fairness, ensuring that AI is deployed ethically and responsibly across Departments. By embedding those principles, we reinforce our commitment to inclusive governance and to ensure that AI solutions are developed and used in ways that are morally responsible, socially beneficial and aligned with human values.
268 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: 0.02 (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 | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.48 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:41 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.