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 5436630
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Those were very good supplementary questions. The tomb was last cleaned in 2019. As I said, the preservation of the tomb has to be taken into consideration. The Commission is committed to ensuring that the site is subject to regular cleaning and maintenance. That work will be undertaken in line with conservation guidance and best practice to ensure that any maintenance protects the fabric of the site and avoids causing damage, bearing in mind the importance of the tomb's grade A listed status. I will take the Member's second point, which was about an information panel, back to the Commission for an answer in writing.
105 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).
- Subject area: Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials.
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.07 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.44 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.61 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.37 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.02 |
| 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.