Member's statement: Bowel Cancer Screening
Member's statement by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 24 March 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Bowel Cancer Screening
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5462781
Read the official Assembly record
Text
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. You have stolen my thunder somewhat, but, with your indulgence, I will take a few moments to recognise a lifetime of service to this institution, to our democracy and to MLAs by our senior usher Mr Billy Mooney. Billy has been here since the inception of the institutions and has treated every Member who has graced these corridors with respect and dignity.
I am a relatively new Member of the House, and Billy has ensured that I have acted appropriately and entered the Chamber when I am able to do so. Today marks his final day in service to the House and its Members, having first come here in 1998. I wish Billy many years of happy retirement and, on behalf of the whole House, thank him for his service to us and to our democracy.
143 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: 0.01 (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 | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.02 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.01 | 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 | 0.77 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.17 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.04 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:15 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.