Debate contribution: Prisoners: Home Address
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
- Prisoners: Home Address
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4666152
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Initiatives are in place to mitigate the risk of homelessness, but, to be clear, when somebody leaves prison, they leave the care of the prison system and the Department of Justice. We cannot, for example, retain people in custody or deprive them of their liberty at the end of their sentence on the basis that they have nowhere to go. Prisoners will often not share the information with us. Many have not given us a forwarding address. They are not obliged to, once they have discharged their sentence. It is widely acknowledged that there is a lack of suitable social and affordable housing, and that is felt acutely by those who are leaving prison. A protocol for the management of accommodation and the related support needs of people in custody was published by the Housing Executive in December 2023 and sets out a collaborative approach to addressing accommodation needs by the Housing Executive, Housing Rights, the Probation Board and the Prison Service. The Prison Service has also put in place initiatives to mitigate the risk of homelessness for those leaving prison. They include an assessment of prisoner needs on committal, which includes their housing arrangements and enables staff to put in place interventions, for example, to prevent someone on a short sentence losing their tenancy. The introduction of housing advisers in Maghaberry provides early intervention on housing needs and allows decisions on accommodation to take cognisance of other resettlement factors, including health and employability. There is also the use of approved premises to enable appropriate support and supervision arrangements to be put in place for high-risk offenders who are subject to public protection arrangements in Northern Ireland and the introduction of a partnership project between Hydebank Wood Secure College and Belfast City Council's Complex Lives, looking at how better information sharing at committal and release could support the females most at risk of chronic homelessness. It is not an issue that is only or even primarily for the Department of Justice. We are willing to play our role in a collaborative effort with other Departments to ensure that we do better by those who leave custody. We know that having a home is one of the main reasons why people desist from offending.
373 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 (0.90).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.03 | 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 | 0.90 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.59 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.22 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.16 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
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.