Debate contribution: For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 12 May 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4937726
Read the official Assembly record
Text
In light of the recent UK Supreme Court judgement, I have asked my officials to consider the Department's policy in that area. I intend to set out the Department's policy on the issue in the coming weeks. Let me make it clear, however, that, regardless of the recent court decision, I do not believe that a boy who identifies as a girl should participate in girls' sports or use girls' changing and toilet facilities.
74 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues
Jev’s structured answers met every documented threshold for a qualifying culture-war activity.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.54 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Identity framing (0.62); Dog-whistle messaging (0.71).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.79).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The text adopts an antagonistic or dog-whistle framing, which qualifies even alongside legitimate scrutiny.
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 | 0.62 | Yes |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.59 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.06 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.71 | Yes |
| Controversy escalation | 0.24 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.47 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.54 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.21 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.79 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.98 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.01 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:23 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.