Debate contribution: Katie Simpson Review

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on 5 May 2026.

MLA

Mrs Naomi Long

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

5 May 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Ministerial Statement

Heading

Katie Simpson Review

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5524447

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I think that we all agree in principle, with the benefit of hindsight, that the decision to permit bail on that occasion was deeply flawed. However, such a decision is made without the benefit of hindsight, and it falls to the PSNI and the courts and not to me as Justice Minister. As I said in my statement, it is important that the risk to victims and witnesses and, indeed, the risk to any future trial should be properly considered when making a decision about granting bail. I do not agree with the Member when he says that the pendulum has swung too far towards the rights of those who are accused, but I agree that there has to be a careful balance. That balance has to be maintained by the information that the PPS and the PSNI present to the courts and by the judiciary's careful consideration of it. There is a balance of rights. Decisions not to grant bail where bail is appropriate can, of course, be challenged, as can decisions to grant bail. There is a balance to be struck. From my perspective, I want to ensure that, when such decisions are made, particularly in cases where coercive control has been a factor, the implications for victims and witnesses are properly and thoroughly considered before any decision is reached.

First, we will ensure that this report's specific recommendations are implemented. As I said, I have already asked Dr Melia to continue her work, which is unique in this space, to oversee the implementation of the arrangements, because it is important that there is uptake. It is also important that we monitor delivery of training. Whilst my Department is not responsible for the training of front-line police officers or of members of the judiciary or Public Prosecution Service, given that they are operational and independent, it is nevertheless important that the House and my Department have the information necessary for us to scrutinise that training and see whether its uptake has been adequate or whether more can be done. A number of areas have been identified as part of the CJINI report and, more widely, as part of reviews that have been undertaken over recent weeks and months of the PSNI's conduct and attitude that give food for thought about where further training may be beneficial to officers, not just at the commencement of their training to become officers but throughout their time serving in the PSNI. We will continue to have that conversation with the PSNI, the PPS and the other parts of the justice system, as well as, crucially, with the Policing Board, which holds the Chief Constable to account for performance on such matters.

In the case of any unexplained or sudden death, there are always opportunities to remain alert to the fact that the facts as they present themselves initially may not reflect what has happened. I think that the Chief Constable referred to it as maintaining "professional curiosity". That needs to be done. Every unexplained or sudden death, even where it is assumed to be a suicide and presents as such, needs to be treated as a crime scene until such times as it can be verified that it no longer is. That has already changed in how the PSNI conducts its investigations. Time has elapsed since Katie's case, and changes have already been instigated in that regard. There is also a need for professional staff in hospitals to broach such issues sensitively. They often have to do so in the context of visits to the maternity ward, prenatal appointments and other sensitive circumstances, particularly where there is a pattern of repeat attending or where people turn up at hospital always with the same person accompanying them, who always answers questions on their behalf. There is therefore a need for us to be willing to ask those questions and to be asked those questions. We have to accept that, while it may not be relevant to our particular case, it is part of the overall picture that staff are trying to build of what has happened in each case that comes through the doors. There are things that we, as individuals, can do to promote that approach. As Members will see as a result of the recommendations, there are things that the health trusts will, undoubtedly, need to do with regard to guidance on how that can be done most appropriately, but, in the majority of cases, people in the health trusts will understand the need for sensitivity and will know how to broach those subjects. I suppose that the real challenge for hospital staff is to get the time and space privately to engage with a patient so that they can ask those questions in an appropriate way and, hopefully, elicit the right answers. Staff cannot rely on a simple denial as evidence that no abuse is taking place, because people may be under pressure, particularly where there is coercive control, to cover up the violence and abuse and to cover for the perpetrator. That also needs to be at the back of people's minds. If people are at least given the opportunity to make a disclosure, that is a starting point.

The Member is right: the recommendations are specific to what happened in Katie's case. Although the learning from them is specific to her case, there are significant implications more widely. Such things do not happen in isolation; they form patterns of practice, thought and behaviour that can also impact on other people. The implementation of some of the recommendations will make a tangible difference to our system. In addition, through the EVAWG strategy, we continue to work with the PSNI and the Executive Office to deliver the Power to Change public awareness campaign. I have talked a little already with Members about the need to raise awareness of why people might be asked those questions when they turn up at hospital, for example. We are also looking at the implementation of the domestic abuse offence to capture coercive and threatening behaviour. Training is very much part of that. A diverse range of legislative measures aimed at addressing sexual offending, coercive control and domestic abuse has been introduced, and further measures are planned that will tackle the use of online or technologically aided abuse. Officials are also planning the introduction of domestic abuse protection notices and orders, and, hopefully, that will provide additional protections for victims of domestic abuse. A new, enhanced, multi-agency model that will replace MARAC is being developed and will be in place in 2026-27. It will deliver earlier intervention, stronger coordination and a greater focus on managing perpetrator behaviour. A comprehensive review of the statutory guidance underpinning PPANI is being scoped by officials. PPANI was first introduced in 2008, and amendments have been made to the guidance to keep pace with legislative developments in recent years. However, a review of the guidance in its entirety is long overdue, so that is what we are embarking on at this point. By taking together that review, the domestic homicide reviews and, in particular, the review of Katie Simpson's case we have a robust work plan for putting the mechanisms in place that will better protect the community. However, ultimately, it will work only if those who are engaged in that work are committed to implementing it fully and faithfully on every occasion.

1,233 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:35 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