Member's statement: Artificial Intelligence

Member's statement by Ms Kate Nicholl on 20 April 2026.

MLA: Ms Kate Nicholl
Party at the time: Alliance Party
Date: 20 April 2026
Type: Member's statement
Business: Members' Statements
Heading: Artificial Intelligence
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5493200

Text

I will speak on the topic of artificial intelligence (AI), which is something that I talk about a lot. About a year and a half or two years ago, I attended a number of economic conferences, and I realised that they always had a panel on AI. It was something that I did not really understand, but I realised that I needed to. I started to speak to experts in academia, business and safeguarding, and it became clear to me that we needed an AI strategy. A draft strategy was worked on and was given to the Executive Office in December 2025, but we are still waiting for its publication. In Scotland, they are on the second iteration of their strategy. They have issued specific guidance to schools in relation to AI. Down South, they are on their second or third iteration, but we still wait. We are already world leaders in medical software and cybersecurity. When you look at our skills and the links that our universities have with business, you see that we are primed to be world leaders in the AI space. Businesses tell us that, with strategy and support, we could lead the way in so many areas. The opportunities are enormous. The Northern Health and Social Care Trust has had success with its fracture clinics, and Queen's University is looking at how to cure motor neurone disease. There are amazing opportunities, but we also know that AI comes with serious risks, and we see the darker side of that in so many ways with ChatGPT and some of the awful things that have been happening. We need to understand that, and we need to have a strategy and a vision. We cannot put our heads in the sand. I feel as though I am one of the few people who talk about this constantly, but it is so important. Our young people will have to imagine a completely different future in a world that we do not know. They do not need software development skills; they need critical thinking skills. When we are looking at a new curriculum, we will have to take advances in AI into consideration.
We have enormous potential in Northern Ireland, but, so often, we lack ambition and drive.
We need to ensure that we can be world leaders in the ethical and responsible use of AI. That requires having an AI strategy from the Executive Office. There needs to be a specific strategy in Education and real, meaningful work in Economy. I welcome the meeting of the AI advisory panel with the Minister last week, but that was too slow. If we are really to capitalise on AI and ensure that people are upskilled and able to utilise AI and mitigate its risks, we need to have a plan. It is important that the Executive act with urgency on that.

480 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: 0.02 (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).
Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.90).
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

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	0.02	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.02	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.01	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.02	No
Controversy escalation	0.02	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.90	Yes
Overall judgement	0.02	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
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 area (top five)
Subject	Probability
No identity-related subject	0.97
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits	0.02
Education structures, integration and community division	0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:21 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