Debate contribution: Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021: Section 26
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 24 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021: Section 26
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4813808
Read the official Assembly record
Text
That is a really important and timely question. When we introduced the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Bill, which became the 2021 Act, to the House, I was clear that the provisions were to be gender-neutral so that, irrespective of a person's gender, sexuality, race, age or whatever they identify as, they could fall into the categories that were listed in the provisions. I recognise that, while people always assume that domestic abuse is, stereotypically, a strong man physically abusing a weaker woman, that is not always the pattern. There can be many permutations. Whether the abuse happens in same-sex relationships or through a child's abuse of a parent in the home, for example, whereby a child who is the main carer can exert coercive control over a parent who relies on them for care, all of it is captured in the domestic abuse offence. It is therefore important that, when we see synergies, which we do, with the ending violence against women and girls strategy, we recognise that not all violence against women and girls happens in a domestic setting and that not all domestic offences are against women and girls. In our original advertising on the subject, we made sure that we showed a range of victims. When it comes to the support that we provide for victims of domestic abuse, representatives of charities that are involved with male victims provide support for men who come forward and make such disclosures.
243 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: 0.05 (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 (0.75).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.92).
- 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 | 0.08 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.75 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.92 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.07 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.93 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.07 |
| 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 12:00 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.