Debate contribution: Ending Violence Against Women and Girls
Debate contribution by Ms Diana Armstrong on .
- MLA
- Ms Diana Armstrong
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 14 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Ending Violence Against Women and Girls
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4736276
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome the motion that has been moved in the Chamber this morning. Many Members have articulated clearly the horrifying impact of violence against women and girls, but it is a societal issue that, even with the parameters of the Assembly, we cannot truly come to grips with. Twenty-five women have been murdered in Northern Ireland since 2020. Worse than that, since 1996, 272 women in the Republic of Ireland have met a violent death, the most recent a woman in Ballyconnell. To her family I send my sincere sympathy. Those women are not just names; they were people with families, friends and lives to live that were brutally cut short. They must not be forgotten, and we must tackle the ever-rising rate of femicide. However, we cannot let emotions cloud our judgement. We must legislate carefully and ensure that what is done is practical and is not rushed and impotent. The experience of female students at university here shows that 67% of that cohort have had at least one unwanted sexual experience. That is not to mention the many victims of spiking in clubs or bars or those who are catcalled and harassed in the street after dark. Those actions represent a vile and pervading misogynistic underbelly that is prevalent in society. There has been a systematic failure to safeguard women and girls on such issues. Indeed, we have seen just recently how, in England, victims of grooming gangs have been failed by the refusal of the Labour Government to set up a public inquiry. It is imperative that we do not allow something as sick and gut-wrenching as organised grooming gangs to operate here. Those gangs and perpetrators of such heinous and depraved crimes must be apprehended and should face the full force of the law. We desperately need transparency on what the Justice Ministry is doing to stop gender-based violence. That Ministry is the primary institution responsible for upholding justice and protecting citizens, so the answers must come from the Minister. Women and girls are terrified in their own homes and in their places of work and education. Those are places where women and girls should feel safe to flourish, but, instead, they must live in fear. In Northern Ireland, the PSNI receives a call related to domestic violence every 17 minutes. The onus of protecting women against violence and abuse has seemingly been left to women themselves. They police themselves on where they can and cannot go without someone knowing where they are or having someone go with them. To address the amendment, there is a distinct need for consultation before implementation to ensure that pretrial jury education does not bias the jury. Moreover, consultation allows stakeholders and support groups to have input on important legislation, while providing educational content that is relevant and does not overwhelm jurors. There is a desperate need for consultation on the legal framework for reasonable belief in consent, as it can vary in interpretation, leading to inconsistencies in court rulings. Consultation helps to refine that definition —
— to ensure that it is clear on consent.
516 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.08 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.91).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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 | 0.10 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.08 | At or below not-qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.91 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.09 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.54 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.46 |
| 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 11:47 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.