Debate contribution: Domestic Abuse Calls: Christmas Increase
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 13 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Domestic Abuse Calls: Christmas Increase
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4738172
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I can give the assurance that, first of all, that formed my priority in the previous mandate, which is why, during that period, the legislation changed so dramatically around this issue, stalking, sexual offences and all of the other related issues. It continues to be my priority. It is important that anyone who is under threat from someone living in their household and feels fearful for their life or safety, or feels that they are being coerced and controlled into doing things with which they are uncomfortable, has the confidence to come forward and make those reports, and that they are believed. As the Member will know, there is a programme of ongoing training for first responders in that area to ensure that they are ready to direct people to the right services. There is also training in place right across the justice system for those with whom victims will come into contact. I cannot guarantee — no Minister can — that everyone will have a perfect experience when they report a crime, but I can say, hand on heart, that the response to such situations has improved dramatically in recent years. I fully encourage people who report a crime but do not get the response that they are entitled to under the Victim Charter to come forward and make that known either to the Commissioner Designate for Victims of Crime or to the Department, because we will act on that and raise it with those who are responsible.
249 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 (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 | 0.80 | 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 | 0.72 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.15 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.13 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:42 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.