Written question AQW 45479/22-27
Written question by Ms Cara Hunter on .
- MLA
- Ms Cara Hunter
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 5 May 2026
- Type
- Written question
- Assembly reference
- AQW 45479/22-27
- Department
- Department of Justice
- Business
- To the Minister of Justice
- Assembly identifier
- Document 483002
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Minister of Justice, in light of the findings of the Katie Simpson review, which found evidence of institutional misogyny within the PSNI, to detail (i) any measurable indicators that she will use to define and assess the cultural shift required in policing; and (ii) how she will independently evaluate whether changes in recognising coercive control, safeguarding practice and officer accountability, are being effectively implemented in practice, rather than simply stated in policy.
75 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: 0.09 (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 (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.86).
- 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 | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.86 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.07 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.02 |
| Adopts it | 0.05 |
| 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 06:43 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.