Debate contribution: Domestic Abuse Protection Notices and Domestic Abuse Protection Orders
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 22 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Domestic Abuse Protection Notices and Domestic Abuse Protection Orders
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4608304
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The Member's question on the success of various strategies has a number of strands. The first thing is that the rise, if you like, is likely to increase and then level out as people become more familiar with the use of the system. That is why the cost goes from £12 million to £17 million. It is then likely to be maintained at that level. With respect to the cost, it is hard to know exactly how many will come forward, but we have done it on the basis of an estimate from looking at what is happening in other jurisdictions where they have not been introduced successfully and have been judged not to add value. We are trying to take account of that learning. However, we are working with the PSNI and the Department of Health to identify not just how we can better introduce DAPOs and DAPNs with the right underpinning regulations but further measures that, we believe, would enhance the protection of those at risk of harm from domestic abuse. That includes investment in services to address offending behaviour; measures to enhance multi-agency work to assess and mitigate the risk posed to victims of domestic abuse; investment in technologies to support the PSNI response; and measures to reinforce the ability of Health and Social Care (HSC) to support those at risk. Again, additional resources will be needed for that. We have included DAPOs and DAPNs as an inescapable pressure because there is a statutory duty on the Department to deliver them, but that requirement has not been met. We need additional resources, which we bid for through the transformation bid for the violence against women and girls strategy, but, again, that bid was not agreed.
288 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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.79 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.18 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:27 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.