Debate contribution: Remuneration: Criminal Bar Association Negotiations
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 24 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Remuneration: Criminal Bar Association Negotiations
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4865092
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Engagement with the legal professions and other stakeholders has been ongoing since the launch of the programme. The substantial 16% uplift in fees that I am implementing is based on the recommendations of the independent fundamental review of criminal legal aid, which was informed by 10 months of engagement with, and evidence submitted by, the Criminal Bar Association and others. My officials and I have also met professional bodies regularly since the review report was submitted. Since I announced my decisions in December, I have taken a number of further steps to address their concerns, including delaying publication of, and subsequently reprioritising, my delivery plan and enhancing fees for the whole profession at the earliest opportunity, which will be in May. Following constructive engagement with the Law Society and the Solicitors Criminal Bar Association (SCBA), I have also taken the unprecedented step of backdating the uplift to December 2024. In light of concerns that the CBA expressed, I have also undertaken to implement a scheme of interim payments that should assist with cash flow for the profession. In short, I feel that I have gone as far as I possibly can with my duty to ensure that public funding decisions are supported by robust evidence. However, and importantly, in establishing the working group under an independent chair, Judge Burgess, I have created an opportunity for additional evidence to be submitted to inform further decisions on fees. The work of the group and its subgroups is already well under way, and I welcome the CBA's decision to participate and to continue to engage with us.
264 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: 0.02 (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 (0.87).
- 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 | 0.02 | 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 | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:12 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.