Debate contribution: Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Act 2024

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .

MLA
Mrs Naomi Long
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
17 June 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Act 2024
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4496499

Read the official Assembly record

Text

My Department is working with the UK Government and operational partners on the implementation of the Act. That includes identifying any cases that are within the scope of the legislation, notifying the individuals concerned and ensuring that their records are updated. That work is ongoing. Although the number of cases that have been identified in Northern Ireland is relatively small, the hurt and distress that the Horizon scandal inflicted on the individuals concerned is no less significant. Therefore, I am keen to ensure that all those who have had convictions overturned or cautions deleted are notified as soon as possible and that those eligible to receive financial redress are allowed to access that as swiftly as possible.

117 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: 0.02 (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).
  • 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.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.01No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.57No
Overall judgement0.02At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject1.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00
Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:44 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