Debate contribution: Palestine Action: High Court Ruling

Debate contribution by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on 16 February 2026.

MLA: Dr Steve Aiken OBE
Party at the time: Ulster Unionist Party
Date: 16 February 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Matter of the Day
Heading: Palestine Action: High Court Ruling
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5390994

Text

It is interesting that people here describe Palestine Action as some form of peaceful organisation. Before I talk about the serious attack on a policewoman, I remind Members that Palestine Action attacked two Royal Air Force aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Royal Air Force aircraft at Brize Norton are probe-and-drogue refuelling aircraft, which, as everybody knows, Israel does not have. Everybody will also know that, at the moment, those probe-and-drogue refuelling aircraft are specifically supporting NATO air operations in the Baltic, over the Black Sea and in eastern Europe. In order to realise what has been going on
— it is not particularly funny to have to listen to that across the Chamber — we have to ask these questions: who is behind Palestine Action, who funds it and who directs it? Questions have already been asked about defence industry companies. We have talked about attacks on Elbit Systems, which is an Israeli-owned company. It is also doing an awful lot of work to support Ukraine, however. We have two clear examples — one of aircraft that have absolutely nothing to do with what is going on in Israel or the Middle East being attacked and one of a defence company that is supporting Ukraine being attacked — so we have to ask these fundamental questions: exactly why is Palestine Action doing that, who is directing it and who are its fellow travellers? The most egregious thing, however, was the attack on Sergeant Kate Evans. Sergeant Evans had her spine fractured with a sledgehammer. Please tell me what peace activists go around using a sledgehammer to attack somebody and fracture their spine? What message does that send to the good members of law enforcement organisations across our nation, be they in the police or wherever they happen to be? It is that the justice system does not support them. What does the ruling say to those who put themselves on the line every day to protect us? What does it say about the justice system? I will say no more, because the Government are now, I imagine, progressing towards an appeal. I hope that they stand firm and deal with the issue, because the ruling is something that cannot be allowed to stand. You really have to ask what the motives are of people who support the like of Palestine Action and what it does.

395 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: 0.28 (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 (0.80).
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.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.12	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.15	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.30	No
Controversy escalation	0.15	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.49	No
Overall judgement	0.28	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.80
Reports or questions it	0.01
Criticises or condemns it	0.05
Adopts it	0.14

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
No identity-related subject	0.76
Another identity-related subject	0.10
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations	0.05
Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)	0.02
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.02

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:21 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.

Challenge this classification