Member's statement: First Minister: Failure to Condemn Abuse
Member's statement by Mrs Deborah Erskine on .
- MLA
- Mrs Deborah Erskine
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 6 October 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- First Minister: Failure to Condemn Abuse
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5776560
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Yesterday, when the First Minister finally came to the Chamber, she was asked a number of times to condemn the language and vile abuse that has been directed at Carla Lockhart and Diane Dodds, but she refused to do so. The First Minister has a lot of grand titles. She previously told us that she was "First Minister for all", and yesterday she told us that she was:
"the First Minister of what is right." — [Official Report (Hansard), 5 October 2026, p45, col 1].
What is right? Is it right that someone who is mother, a daughter and a wife should be subjected to horrific abuse and threats simply because she is a woman in public life? Is it right that a woman should face threats of physical violence, intimidation and misogynistic abuse, and that the First Minister for Northern Ireland cannot bring herself to simply say, "Stop"? The Executive whom the First Minister claims to lead, have made ending violence against women and girls a priority. That cannot simply be a slogan or a strategy document. Leadership matters most when it requires you to speak out, including on occasions when the women who are being targeted happen to be your political opponents. Other Sinn Féin representatives have managed to do exactly that. I welcome the fact that John O'Dowd went on the radio this morning and condemned the activity, and that Catherine Seeley condemned it publicly this morning. Clearly, they have recognised that the abuse crosses a line, yet the First Minister — the woman who holds the highest office in this place and tells us that she represents everybody — cannot do the same. Right now, the First Minister stands alone, and there is a wedge between her and her party colleagues. Her silence, by not calling out the abuse of DUP representatives and asking for it to end, is stark. This should not be about party politics. It is about basic decency. No woman should be threatened with violence because of her political views, and no woman should have to accept vile abuse as a price of her public service. Therefore I ask the question again: First Minister, will you condemn the threats and abuse that have been directed at Carla Lockhart and Diane Dodds? Will you, clearly and unequivocally, tell those responsible to stop? If we cannot unite around something so basic as that, what does the term, "First Minister for all" actually mean?
409 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: 0.19 (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).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.90).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.42 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.07 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.13 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.42 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.19 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.10 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.90 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.98 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:42 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.