Debate contribution: Gillen Review: Implementation Update
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 9 March 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Gillen Review: Implementation Update
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5453222
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Numerical reporting on the number or percentage of completed Gillen recommendations does not convey the true scale of positive change in outcomes for victims. However, I am pleased to report that 181, which is 72%, of the 253 Gillen review recommendations are now assessed as complete, with a further 24 — that is 9% — partially complete, meaning that some provision is in place but that further work will be required to establish longer-term mainstream service provision. I have prioritised the recommendations that deliver meaningful improvements for victims of sexual crime, including access to free legal advice for all victims of serious sexual offences through the sexual offences legal advisers (SOLA) and children’s SOLA schemes; and establishing new remote evidence centres, where victims can give their best evidence from a secure and comfortable facility away from the court building. I am encouraged that the conviction rate in remote evidence cases among domestic abuse contest cases stands at over 90%. I have also prioritised the recommendations on measures to reduce delay, including committal reform, which means that victims are no longer required to give oral evidence at the committal hearing. Supporting the ongoing delivery of the under-13 and under-16 protocol is also significantly reducing the time taken to deal with cases involving young victims. There has been significant improvement to disclosure and achieving best evidence (ABE) procedures; better training to enable front-line staff to adopt a trauma-informed approach with victims; and new legislation to exclude the public from court in serious sexual offence trials. Today, in line with another Gillen recommendation, I have launched a social media campaign aimed at challenging rape myths and other damaging misconceptions about sexual crime. Rape myths create shame and self-blame and, in many cases, prevent people from reporting those horrific crimes, allowing perpetrators to escape justice. We all have a role to play in challenging those myths through education, accountability and cultural change, and I hope that the campaign will play an important part in changing the public narrative. I remain fully committed to delivering the remaining accepted recommendations in the coming months. I plan to introduce new legislation to clarify the right of complainants in serious sexual offence cases to independent legal representation —.
370 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: 0.03 (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 (0.91).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.91 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.09 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.76 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.23 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:03 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.