Debate contribution: Religious Education and Collective Worship in Schools

Debate contribution by Mr David Brooks on .

MLA
Mr David Brooks
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
3 February 2026
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Ministerial Statement
Heading
Religious Education and Collective Worship in Schools
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5362367

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Minister for the clarity that he has brought this morning on the way forward. He, like me, will have received a petition last week, which was signed by over 90,000 people and outlined their concern at the Supreme Court judgement. He spoke about the unique role of the Churches in drafting the curriculum. Will he outline that role?

61 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: 0.20 (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 (0.67).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.71).
  • Subject area: Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice).
  • 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 framing0.15No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.25No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.15No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.67Yes
Overall judgement0.20At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.71
Reports or questions it0.29
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)1.00
No identity-related subject0.00
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 14:23 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