Debate contribution: Gillen Review: Implementation
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 19 November 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Gillen Review: Implementation
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4666088
Read the official Assembly record
Text
My Department continues to oversee a multi-agency programme of work to implement the Gillen review's recommendations. That work includes progress against a range of recommendations intended to support child victims of serious sexual offences, including the ongoing delivery of a judge-led voluntary protocol to expedite serious sexual offence cases involving child witnesses under 13 years of age in Belfast Crown Court and Antrim Crown Court. An evaluation of the protocol cases in 2023 found that there was a 70% reduction in the average time taken between reporting the crime and court disposal. The principles of the protocol have been extended to similar cases for children aged under 16 across all court areas. Sexual offences legal adviser (SOLA) services have been provided successfully, giving free legal advice and support to more than 2,000 adult complainants in serious sexual offence cases. Those services will shortly be extended to child complainants. My officials have engaged with stakeholders, including children and young people, to develop the child SOLA scheme, which will provide general and specific legal advice on their case and ensure that their interests and wishes are communicated to the court. Remote evidence centres (RECs) have been established in Belfast and Craigavon to provide a safe, comfortable space away from the court building for vulnerable witnesses, including children, to give their best evidence by video link. So far this year, 317 witnesses, including 133 children, have attended, or are scheduled to attend, an REC to give evidence. All achieving best evidence (ABE) interviews with child victims of sexual offences are now conducted by a specialist ABE cadre with expertise in that area. The Minister of Health and I are also committed to considering the development of a Barnahus-style model for Northern Ireland to provide a multidisciplinary and rights-based response for child victims and witnesses of violence. My Department also continues to provide funding to support services for child victims of sexual crime. That includes funding for Victim Support NI to deliver the children's independent sexual violence advocate (ChISVA) service and the NSPCC young witness service, which supports young victims and witnesses who are called to give evidence. We also contribute funding to the ASSIST NI advocacy service, which is dedicated to providing support to all victims of domestic and sexual abuse.
378 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: 0.02 (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 (0.78).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.78 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.80 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.18 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:37 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.