Topical question AQT 2123/22-27
Topical question by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 March 2026
- Type
- Topical question
- Assembly reference
- AQT 2123/22-27
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5434823
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Mr Frew asked the Minister for Infrastructure, given the unrealistic targets in the Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, which has been an absolute disaster as a result of parties following a populist pipe dream that has turned into a nightmare, what good there is in having an Infrastructure Minister who cannot build infrastructure because of the amendments to the legislation that her party, the SDLP, Alliance and the Greens supported.
71 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Follow-ups by the same MLA in the Chamber
These were assessed together with this record:
- 3 March 2026 – I thank the Minister for her answer, but she fails to explain to the House how, she thinks, the existing legislation…
- 3 March 2026 – By the 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: 0.16 (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 (0.97).
- 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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.06 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.30 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.13 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.54 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.16 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.97 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.03 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.91 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.05 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:00 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.