Debate contribution: Ending Violence Against Women and Girls
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
- Ending Violence Against Women and Girls
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4608343
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Every life lost through violence is an unacceptable tragedy, and I think that we are all rightly and deeply appalled at the increase in incidents of violence against women in recent weeks. All of us must do everything in our power to challenge and change the attitudes and behaviours that treat women's lives as though they are expendable. There must be a collective effort across society and government to address those issues. The cases involving four of the recent victims are being processed through the criminal justice system. Domestic homicide reviews have so far been commissioned in two of those cases. However, there is also ongoing work under way to reduce risk and to contribute to an end to violence against women and girls. That includes work under the domestic and sexual abuse strategy, which is led by my Department and the Department of Health. That strategy was launched by the Health Minister and I on 25 September. The interdependencies between that strategy and the strategic framework on ending violence against women and girls (EVAWG) are evident, given that women and girls are disproportionately affected by domestic and sexual abuse. All efforts to address domestic and sexual abuse under the strategy will directly contribute to the broader goal of ending violence against women and girls. However, importantly, we also recognise that violence perpetrated against women and girls is not restricted to domestic situations and that domestic and sexual abuse can also affect men and boys. That reinforces the need for the Executive's strategic framework on violence against women and girls to be implemented in parallel with the domestic and sexual abuse strategy. My officials work closely with the Executive Office on the development of the EVAWG framework, and we are committed to continued collaboration and partnership. Our governance structures will ensure alignment and support ongoing joint efforts to protect everyone.
310 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 (0.80).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.95).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.80 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.95 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.05 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.53 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.47 |
| 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.