Motion or amendment: Implementation of the Strategic Framework to End Violence against Women and Girls
Motion or amendment by Ms Emma Sheerin on .
- MLA
- Ms Emma Sheerin
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 13 February 2024
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion · Private Members' Motion
- Heading
- Implementation of the Strategic Framework to End Violence against Women and Girls
- Assembly identifier
- Document 388097
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Implementation of the Strategic Framework to End Violence against Women and Girls
That this Assembly affirms that the Executive Office’s Strategic Framework to End Violence against Women and Girls must recognise that misogyny is a root cause of violence against women and girls; laments that since 2021, we have had the joint highest rate of femicide in Europe; expresses deep sadness that violence against women and girls is endemic here, with one woman killed every three months; regrets that victims of sexual and gender-based violence still face obstacles within the justice system and within society itself and that these obstacles prevent many women from reporting their abuse; condemns the budget cuts imposed by the British Government which significantly cut funding for public services, early intervention and rehabilitation services, community and voluntary sector services and Women’s Aid; and calls on the Executive Office to urgently implement, in full, the Strategic Framework to End Violence against Women and Girls to transform how society understands and responds to violence against women and girls.
170 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Also tabled by
Each MLA who tabled or co-signed this item has their own record:
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.07 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.87).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.10 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.07 | At or below not-qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.87 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.13 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.78 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.22 |
| 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 08:48 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.