Debate contribution: Belfast City Hall: 19 October 2024
Debate contribution by Ms Michelle O'Neill on .
- MLA
- Ms Michelle O'Neill
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 1 December 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Question for Urgent Oral Answer
- Heading
- Belfast City Hall: 19 October 2024
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5269246
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Yes, I agree with that. The Member will be aware, but I refer to the comment from the artist himself at that time on his view around all that. You are absolutely right that we have a serious problem with misogyny and violence against women and girls in our society. We have serious work to do in this institution, and I encourage Members to focus on the things that really need to be grappled with in our society: the problem with violence against women and girls and tackling the racism and the rise in hate crimes that we have seen, particularly over the past year. That is the business of the people elected to this Chamber, and that is where I am focused.
I agree that it is our responsibility to stamp out and say no to racism and to face it down when we see it in our society. You referred to the racial equality strategy; that is a really important piece of work. The strategy is multifaceted, because there are many barriers that people in the ethnic minorities out there in society are facing. We all need to properly understand the data that is available to identify those barriers, if we are to tackle hate crimes, which, unfortunately, are on the rise. The strategy itself looks to how we can support community cohesion, and I am very pleased with the work that we have done, particularly since the summer, in supporting communities that face race-hate-fuelled incidents. It is important that, where those occur, we are able to respond immediately. I am pleased with the work that we have been able to do. All aspects of the strategy are important, but it starts here, with appropriate information, with facing down racism and with the language that is used even in the Chamber. It starts with honesty and taking to task people who peddle myths and create divisions in society and perceptions of divisions and the unequal nature of some things in society. If we work together on that, it will lead to a better and more inclusive society.
The Member knows that that is the role of the PSNI and the PPS.
Well, as a matter of fact, folks, it is. I have discharged my duty in my remit; my role as Sinn Féin vice president. Outside that, it is for the PPS, which has made its views known.
I agree. I say it time and again, because it is important to underline it. Across the world, you can see how harmful disinformation and misinformation are, particularly in the world of social media where things can be said unchecked. Quite often, a lot of the big companies are not even taking those things on in a responsible way. People look towards us, as political leaders, for some guidance as to the misinformation that we see. Absolutely, we should all be about promoting inclusivity and tackling the hatred that we see sometimes. That is the huge responsibility that we all have as political leaders. The tone of some commentary that we have heard in recent weeks adds fuel to the fire. People elect us to speak up on their behalf and to lead society. We need to ensure that we call out the wrongdoing when we see it.
548 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: 0.19 (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).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.93).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- 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 | 0.21 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.07 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.18 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.41 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.19 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.07 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.93 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.41 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.25 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.17 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.17 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:03 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.