Debate contribution: Tomb of Lord and Lady Craigavon
Debate contribution by Mr Trevor Clarke on .
- MLA
- Mr Trevor Clarke
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 10 March 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Tomb of Lord and Lady Craigavon
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5436626
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for his question. I can confirm that the specialist cleaning of the tomb that was scheduled for this week has already taken place. In managing a heritage asset of such significance, it is essential that maintenance interventions are proportionate, conservation-led and compliant with best practice. Portland stone is a natural and comparatively porous material. Overly frequent cleaning can accelerate surface erosion and, ultimately, shorten the lifespan of the stone. Cleaning is scheduled to balance the need to maintain the asset against the risk of damaging it.
90 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: 0.06 (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 | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.48 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.06 | 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 | 0.54 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.45 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.01 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:12 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.