Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on 9 June 2026.

MLA: Mr Paul Frew
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 9 June 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Executive Committee Business
Heading: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5602233

Text

I will not keep the House too long on the matter. You will be thankful that I will not go through a full winding-up speech, other than to say, "Thank you very much" to every person who has contributed to the debate. There were others on these Benches who wished to participate, and I thank them for their perseverance and endurance and for lifting their name off the list at the last moment. Thank you very much for that. I acknowledge that, because you all had something powerful to contribute. I will raise some of the issues that were raised with me. The Minister responded to an intervention from David Brooks on the level of drugs in someone's system. One of the reasons why that is so important to bring in is that it provides an evidential base when police are investigating and when it goes to court. Jaidyn Rice's family was deprived of that at the time. There is a real issue with regard to making sure that those tests are done so that the most thorough evidential base can go to a police file, to the PPS and, then, on to court.
That is why it is really important. We understand that there will be operational matters around that. We understand those sensitivities. Stephen, Brian, Maurice and I commit to working with the Department and the Minister on any amendments that may need to be tabled at Further Consideration Stage.
Connie Egan raised an issue about, I think, the new article 17CB(6), which says:
"A person commits an offence if without reasonable excuse he fails to co-operate with a check-point drugs test in pursuance of a requirement imposed under this Article."
I think that that is what she referred to. That is the only place in the amendment where I could see the phrase "reasonable excuse". That is a read-across from the existing article 17CA on "Breath testing at authorised check-points". It has been read across in order to be thorough. I hope that I have been able to answer and address the questions that were posed to me. I will not go through a full winding-up speech, because it would not be fair on the House. We have been here for a long time. We have had a very good debate. I thank every Member who contributed and who will vote for the three amendments. Thank you.

400 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: 0.03 (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 (0.80).
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	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.02	No
Controversy escalation	0.03	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.80	Yes
Overall judgement	0.03	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
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism	0.02
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:53 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