Debate contribution: Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 10 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5224652
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The majority of provisions in the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (Northern Ireland) 2021 have now been commenced. However, work to implement a few outstanding measures is still in train, one of which is section 27, which makes provision for my Department to make regulations on protective measures for victims of abuse; in particular, domestic abuse protection notices (DAPNs) and domestic abuse protection orders (DAPOs). I have already set out the challenges that my Department has encountered in trying to develop a DAPN and DAPO model for Northern Ireland that will enhance the protections available to victims of domestic abuse whilst being operationally viable and affordable. My officials are continuing to work with partners, including the PSNI, to resolve the challenges, with a view to launching a DAPN/DAPO pilot in the next financial year. The model will take into consideration the specific Northern Ireland context, including operational capacity, cost and, most importantly, the needs of victims. Fact-finding visits to pilot areas in Croydon and greater Manchester have been valuable in informing policy development. The aim is to agree a preferred pilot model with delivery partners by the end of this financial year. The Member may like to write to me, because there are, I think, about four other sections that still have to be commenced in order for delivery. It would be better to put those in writing rather than prevail on the patience of Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.
240 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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.02 | 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 | 0.59 | No |
| 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 |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.61 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.21 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.18 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:42 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.