Debate contribution: Ending Violence against Women and Girls
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 14 April 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Ending Violence against Women and Girls
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5482328
Read the official Assembly record
Text
That has been raised with me and is something that causes many of us concern. In recent months and years, we have seen situations in which one co-parent has taken the life of the other co-parent, leaving their children, in most cases, without a mother. We have seen the distress that is caused to families when that person continues to have parental rights. Ultimately, the family courts make the determination on that, and, when it comes to the area of parental rights and so on, it is for the Department of Finance to introduce any change to family law. That does not lie in the criminal justice sphere, which is where my responsibilities lie. I have looked into that, however, and, in the engagement that I have had with officials in the Department of Finance, there has been a view that, given that the courts have discretion to grant access to children and are genuinely supposed to put the needs of the child rather than the demands or desires of the parents first, there is sufficient scope for a similar approach to be taken within the courts, without any substantive change to primary legislation. I am happy to continue to engage with the Minister of Finance on that issue, but it is for the Minister of Finance to do the policy development work on that, rather than for my Department.
230 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: 0.04 (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 (0.77).
- 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 | 0.03 | 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 | 0.77 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 | 0.66 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.30 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:18 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.