Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 2 June 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5584894
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Minister for that contribution. She says that the live links that came out of the Coronavirus Act have been working successfully for six years, but how does she know that? Does the Minister not agree that a review could iron out any problems, fault lines or errors in the system in order to make it even better than it is? I will leave that point there. I hope that Members will consider voting for the amendment. I will not go through all the Minister's amendments to do with live links in courts, but I will speak to amendment No 124. I find it interesting.
We have said countless times that there should not be a default position on live links for courts, and I agree with that. We do not want to get to the point where live links are the default position, albeit they speed up justice, help vulnerable witnesses or help children, all of which we support. Amendment No 124 inserts into a new schedule 5 the presumption of giving evidence by live links in certain cases, which includes the First Minister, the deputy First Minister and the Northern Ireland Ministers; a district council; the Local Government Staff Commission for Northern Ireland; a constable; the Police Service of Northern Ireland; any body of constables; any body of special constables; the Attorney General for Northern Ireland; the Director of Public Prosecutions; the Police Ombudsman; the Probation Board; the director of the Serious Fraud Office; His Majesty's Revenue and Customs; the National Crime Agency; and even health trusts. That also includes the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA), the regional agency for public health and social well-being, the regional Business Services Organisation — really? — the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, the Northern Ireland transport holding company and Northern Ireland Water Ltd, which should probably be up in court more often than it is. Why would you need to give those particular bodies the presumption of using live links? Would that lead to more effective government, less time wasted and less transport? It might be because of security.
Yes, I will.
353 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: 0.04 (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 (0.91).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.07 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 | 0.95 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.03 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:46 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.