Member's statement: Belfast Protests: Impact on Businesses
Member's statement by Mr Trevor Clarke on .
- MLA
- Mr Trevor Clarke
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 12 May 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Belfast Protests: Impact on Businesses
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5528222
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Yesterday in the House, a few Members talked about the ridiculous prosecution of Pastor Clive Johnston, a man who wanted to hold to his personal convictions in silence about 100 metres away from a hospital. The Members opposite all supported that ridiculous legislation. Almost every weekend in Belfast, there is protest after protest. Most of the protests are about the Palestinian plight, so far away. The Members opposite remain silent, however, on the harm that those protests do to the businesses of Belfast.
On Saturday past, they took the protest not outside but inside a shop, where the staff, who have nothing to do with Palestine, were only out to earn a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. Of course, the Members opposite remain silent. There has been no condemnation of the attacks on the individuals and staff in the shop. There has been no condemnation of the fact that those staff risk losing their jobs. The Members opposite remain silent, but, of course, they were all pontificating when a pastor read from John chapter 3, verse 16. Do the Members opposite not realise the contribution that such shops and banks make to the high street? What if continual protests put jobs at risk? What if those shops close and Belfast City Council loses an enormous amount of rates? What if the people who work in those shops are their voters and come to them when they lose their jobs? Why do they remain silent, and why do they support people going into shops on the high street with their face covered? Pastor Clive was 100 metres away from a hospital. I read the judgement, and it stated that someone may have been in the hospital getting an abortion. What Pastor Clive did is in stark contrast to what happened in Zara in Belfast on Saturday. The protesters took the protest inside the shop; they covered their face; and — guess what? — they even had a megaphone to make sure that all those in the shop and in the vicinity could hear them. I am highly disappointed with the action, or little action, of the PSNI. The PSNI needs to be more robust in taking action against those protesters. It is right that we have a right to protest in this country, but we do not have the right to intimidate staff and those shopping on the high street for the day. The PSNI needs to be more robust and use the powers that it has to take action against the individuals who take part in those protests and bring them before the courts.
437 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Uncertain: weak signal Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)
Uncertain: this record is excluded from all totals until a person reviews it.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.54 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.41).
- Subject area: Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice).
- The answers did not meet either automatic 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 | 0.22 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.21 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.10 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.38 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.50 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.54 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.54 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.37 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.41 |
| Adopts it | 0.22 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.63 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.35 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:21 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.