Debate contribution: Criminal Justice System: Failure to Transform

Debate contribution by Mr Patsy McGlone on .

MLA
Mr Patsy McGlone
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
6 October 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Criminal Justice System: Failure to Transform
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5157483

Read the official Assembly record

Text

We welcome the motion and the opportunity to highlight concerns about the criminal justice system and the experiences of victims and witnesses of criminal activity, since the devolution of policing and justice. The DUP motion, as we now expect from a motion tabled by another Executive party, blames the Justice Minister for almost everything. However, it is, ultimately, the Minister's responsibility to set the agenda and to ensure that strategies are in place to achieve her vision for her Department. Perhaps that is where the problem lies, because the criminal justice system is in need of transformation. Like the Executive, it is not entirely working. The Police Service is understaffed and underfunded, and is not representative of the community. There have been systematic abuses of police surveillance powers, and arrests often seem arbitrary. Prosecutions take too long to go to court, and, when they do get to court, sentencing often appears to be unduly lenient, even to the Public Prosecution Service. The Prison Service, the Probation Board, the Youth Justice Agency and Forensic Science all face staffing and resource pressures. The Minister's promise in 2020 to address hate crime as a priority was suspended along with the Executive. The stand-alone hate crime Bill, which was proposed in Judge Marrinan's review of hate crime legislation, has been dropped, as the Minister informed the Assembly in September 2024, because of a lack of time and resource. Over a year later, the Marrinan recommendations that she is bringing forward remain in draft form. That is not the new start that was promised by the Good Friday Agreement, and certainly not the new start that was promised when policing and justice were eventually devolved. All that has an impact on public confidence in the criminal justice system, and that is the responsibility of the Justice Minister. As the motion points out, it is more than nine months since the publication of the recommendations in the Criminal Justice Inspection report. That report made recommendations for system-wide improvement. It called for the Minister to agree, along with the Criminal Justice Board, a shared future vision and strategic priorities to deliver change across the criminal justice system. To date, it has not happened, and I look forward to the Minister's response on that. Until the shared future vision is agreed, the corresponding strategy, objectives and actions cannot be properly developed. Again, it would be helpful if the Minister were to explain where any current disagreements on the future vision remain. The Minister previously stated that the CJI has been informed of and accepted her position on the timescales. The Minister has, of course, argued that, given the scale of the ambition and the complexity of the system, it is important to do it right, and so it is. Again, I look forward to hearing from the Minister as to how that intention is going, as it is the Minister's role to lead. Transforming the criminal justice system needs a Minister who is determined to drive the necessary transformation, convince others of the need for reform and get agreement on the way forward. That is where the Minister is failing in her duty to the Assembly and the public. There is as yet no shared future vision, action plan or strategy. There must be no more delay. The Minister needs to explain what her vision for the future criminal justice system is. She needs to explain to the Assembly what she plans to do to reach agreement with the Criminal Justice Board on that vision and when. Then, and only then, can effective strategies, objectives and actions, to which my party and I look forward, to achieve that vision can be properly developed.

615 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: 0.07 (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 (0.94).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.95).
  • Subject area: Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations.
  • 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 framing0.04No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.04No
Controversy escalation0.05No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.94Yes
Overall judgement0.07At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.95
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.04
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.94
No identity-related subject0.04
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.01
Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:26 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