Debate contribution: Programme for Government: Justice
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
- Programme for Government: Justice
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4608328
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I intend to prioritise them in the manner that I always have. I want to say a couple of things. First and foremost, as I have made clear, if we are going to change the rates of femicide in Northern Ireland and tackle violence against women and girls, we need an Executive-wide approach. It requires, for example, changes to our relationships and sexuality education (RSE) in schools, which was recommended by Sir John Gillen but never delivered by Ministers. Changing attitudes in society to women and girls will require cross-departmental cooperation. The truth is that, by the time people come through my Department, where we have made changes to the law around, for example, domestic abuse, stalking and sexual offences, they are already victims and it is, essentially, too late to protect them from harm. Protection from harm means moving upstream. It means working with the Department of Health, as I do, on the domestic and sexual abuse strategy. Money has been allocated to that. It also means working with TEO to ensure that the ending violence against women and girls strategy can be fully implemented in a way that complements the domestic and sexual abuse strategy. There is no question but that it will require difficult decisions. Everyone in the justice system will be hurting. Members can expect to get many letters that will tell them that different aspects of the justice sector are under pressure. That is as true for my Department as anywhere else. We are carrying a vacancy rate of between 10% and 12% as a result of a lack of resource.
266 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: 0.04 (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 (0.91).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.55 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.45 |
| 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 11:27 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.