Debate contribution: Ending Violence Against Women and Girls: Update

Debate contribution by Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly on .

MLA
Mrs Emma Little-Pengelly
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
7 October 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Ending Violence Against Women and Girls: Update
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4579219

Read the official Assembly record

Text

As the Member will be aware, we recently launched our framework and delivery plan. We are actively working on delivery of the challenge fund and the change fund. The challenge fund will be based on two key questions being put out to the sector and inviting organisations to come forward with proposals on how to meet the challenges. We aim for that to go live this month. The change fund will work with councils and community-based organisations. That will have to be delivered through different mechanisms, but we are striving to get it out as early as possible — no later than January 2025 and prior to that date, if at all possible.

113 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: 0.03 (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 (1.00).
  • Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
  • 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 scrutiny0.52No
Overall judgement0.03At 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
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.63
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.26
No identity-related subject0.11
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:18 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