Debate contribution: For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers
Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .
- MLA
- Mr Matthew O'Toole
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 12 May 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4937512
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Notwithstanding the outcome of the court case, which is a court case and needs to be understood and acknowledged, will you, as deputy First Minister, make any attempt to reach out specifically to people in the trans community — ordinary trans people, including those who are having an event upstairs in the Building today — who feel anxious and, at times, frankly threatened by some of the language that is used in politics, in order to assure them that they are esteemed and should be treated with proper respect?
89 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: 0.22 (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).
- The text criticises or condemns the framing or division (0.69).
- 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 | 0.36 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.36 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.33 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.47 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.22 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.28 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it (chosen) | 0.69 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.96 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:22 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.