Debate contribution: Ending Violence Against Women and Girls: Funding

Debate contribution by Mr Stephen Dunne on .

MLA
Mr Stephen Dunne
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
1 July 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Ending Violence Against Women and Girls: Funding
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5061741

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The town of Donaghadee in my constituency is still in shock after the events of the weekend. Pregnant mother of two, Sarah Montgomery, became the twenty-seventh female to be murdered in Northern Ireland since 2020, which is a shocking figure. Will the First Minister provide an update on what more the Executive can do and how the change fund can make a change in the Ards and North Down Borough Council area of which Donaghadee is a part?

78 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.06 (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 (0.91).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.07No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.91Yes
Overall judgement0.06At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.98
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.02
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.52
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.48
No identity-related subject0.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:03 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.

Challenge this classification