Debate contribution: Protecting Victims of Coercive Control

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .

MLA
Mrs Naomi Long
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
5 May 2026
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Protecting Victims of Coercive Control
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5525280

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Member for giving way and for raising that issue. I am sure that he is aware of the report by Dr Aisling Swaine that looked at the intersection between paramilitary coercive control in our communities and domestic violence and abuse and at the significant overlap that exists, with community surveillance and pressure being applied to victims and witnesses not to come forward to make complaints. I am sure that he agrees that that is completely unacceptable.

79 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: 0.09 (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 (0.58).
  • Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
  • 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 framing0.07No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.05No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.05No
Controversy escalation0.04No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.54No
Overall judgement0.09At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.58
Reports or questions it0.02
Criticises or condemns it0.37
Adopts it0.03
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.79
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.15
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.03
No identity-related subject0.02
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:38 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