Debate contribution: Ending Violence against Women and Girls Strategic Framework and First Delivery Plan
Debate contribution by Ms Michelle O'Neill on .
- MLA
- Ms Michelle O'Neill
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 16 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Ministerial Statements
- Heading
- Ending Violence against Women and Girls Strategic Framework and First Delivery Plan
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4531925
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member. I know that you also raised the issue earlier during Members' statements, so thank you for that. I also know that you will get behind the framework. All Executive Ministers signed up to the framework. It is now a collective Executive strategy, so it is down to the collective Executive to make it happen. I can say no more than that. I can tell you that I am determined, and I know that the deputy First Minister is determined, to ensure that the framework and delivery plan are live from today. I encourage people to look them up online. We want people to be engaged in them. The hard work starts here. We have a huge opportunity to turn this tanker and to end violence against women and girls. It is incumbent on us to get to the point at which we end violence against women and girls. If we do nothing else in this Assembly mandate, is that not the thing to do? Thanks to everybody for their contributions to the debate.
177 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: 0.03 (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 (0.97).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.29 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.97 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.03 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.52 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.48 |
| 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 11:01 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.