Debate contribution: Enabling Access to Justice Reform Programme: Update
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 3 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Enabling Access to Justice Reform Programme: Update
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4774251
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The intention is that the secondary legislation that underpins that will complete its passage by May. As you know, I have foreshortened the consultation on it to eight weeks because it is a targeted consultation, given that it affects a narrower group of people. We will have further conversations tomorrow about the commencement date for the 16% uplift. It is important to recognise, however, that I did not pluck the figure of 16% from the air. That is a recommendation that was based on evidence in the Burgess review report. Those who are now telling me that it is a paltry sum, that it should be discounted and that I should go with some other, more inflated figure therefore need to come to the point of realisation that, without an evidential basis, that is not on the table. We have to look at what Tom Burgess recommended, and we have to get it delivered. I have said that we will do that as quickly as possible. We then have to get people back to work, because, at the core of all this, victims are being retraumatised by delay in the criminal justice system. People are using the Crown Court — we are talking about rape victims and the families of murder victims — and waiting for trials to take place. It is incredibly retraumatising for them to be told that their case is not only adjourned but indefinitely adjourned because there is no end in sight. I want to bring this to a conclusion. I do not believe that strike action was necessary, given that I was about to publish my intentions. We have moved some considerable distance since I did so. I do not believe that the extension is necessary either, but I will sit down tomorrow, and we will work through this, because it is in all our interests, including those of the criminal Bar, that we bring it to a conclusion.
324 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: 0.04 (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 | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 | 0.40 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.21 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.19 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.18 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:53 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.