Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on 23 June 2026.

MLA: Mr Paul Frew
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 23 June 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Executive Committee Business
Heading: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5637665

Text

The Member has put his point on the record with that intervention. I cannot possibly speak on the Minister's behalf. If she wants to address that point, I will give way. If not, I will move on. The Minister said that she had asked for the number of trans people in our prisons currently and in the past, but it could not be disclosed, as there was a danger that people could be identified because the number was so small. The Minister therefore cannot go into further detail in the House or anywhere else for that matter. In order to protect people's human rights and, of course, their safety, we do not want them to be identified. The Equality Commission assisted and engaged with the Department of Justice in the production of the guidance, as it is constituted to do. The Minister stated that she is not the Scottish Minister and is not responsible for the Scottish law or guidance. She then talked about the Supreme Court judgement and said that she accepts the Supreme Court's opinion. She said, however, that she is responsible for the Justice Department in Northern Ireland and that that is not the case with the court opinions that have been formed in Scottish law and guidance over the past months. On amendment No 97, the Minister was concerned that prisons might be out of lockstep with the rest of the bodies in Northern Ireland if they had to adhere to section 212(1) of the Equality Act 2010. She said that rule 90 of the Prison and Young Offenders Centre Rules (Northern Ireland) 1995 would be out of lockstep with the other laws, as it would need to be applied by the Equality Act 2010 in the same vein. That concludes my winding-up speech, other than to say that I thank every person who took part in or listened to the debate. Nine groups of amendments have been debated over seven days. We have not finished yet; we will vote on those important issues. I record my gratitude to everyone who supported any amendments that I put my name to — I really appreciate it — and, of course, with the votes coming up next Tuesday, I would appreciate your support for the amendments that we as a party tabled and that I have put my name to. It would be much appreciated. We are here to make law and to make good law. If it takes seven days to iron things out, put the Bill through the ringer and scrutinise it properly, we will do that, and we will apologise to no one. We are here as legislators, and we will do that job.

449 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: 0.14 (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 (0.60).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.76).
Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
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	0.11	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.03	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.04	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.06	No
Controversy escalation	0.12	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.60	Yes
Overall judgement	0.14	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.76
Reports or questions it	0.23
Criticises or condemns it	0.01
Adopts it	0.00

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.95
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups	0.03
Another identity-related subject	0.02
No identity-related subject	0.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:12 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