Naomi Long
East Belfast · Alliance Party · Northern Ireland
“Underneath the Facebook posts to say that he had passed away, people speculated with such comments as, "Probably high on drugs", "Probably drunk", and, "Typical boy racer". There was all of that speculation. It was hurtful to the family, and it was inaccurate.”
“There are circumstances that we need to consider and be careful of. I was told, for example, that, when the issue of good character references at trial was being looked at in New South Wales — Committee members may wish to look at this for themselves — one of the groups that opposed their removal was representative of domestic abuse victi…”
“It sets out the strategic direction adopted by the Department and key partners to tackle those appalling crimes and protect vulnerable victims of exploitation.”
“The provision seeks to provide protection, via legal advice and representation for complainants, against the use of non-relevant personal material and evidence of previous sexual history being used in the court process.”
“<BR /> <BR />On the wider issue of ensuring that a withdrawal of services never happens again, I think that most of us agree that, although everyone has the right to take industrial action, no one has the right to derail and hold to ransom the entire justice system in that way.”
“Those measures will go some way towards helping to support complainants and enable them to have input into the decision-making process about what records containing their personal and sensitive information are required to be shared with the defence.”
The complete record
Every one of 7,548 lines we hold for Naomi Long, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 25 of 151.
“It is important for me to respect the work that the Policing Board is doing on its oversight of the PSNI, which is done on a cross-community and fully inclusive basis.”
“I set out in my original answer that I had discussed with the Chief Constable the McCullough review and the importance of the work that was done. The Member has to understand that some matters are reserved, and national security issues are reserved matters and do not fall within my remit. It does not mean that I do not care about those matters, because, as Mr O'Toole indicated, they have an impact on community confidence. I take interest in what the PSNI does and in its being respected across the community; that is an important part of my role. However, it is not for me to sanction or oversee the use of investigatory powers, particularly in Vincent Kearney's case, which actually involved MI5 and the security services, as was found by the inquiry.”
“I note that the Chief Constable acknowledged that the McCullough review identified concerns about specific authorisations and has committed to improving processes and addressing inconsistencies. <BR /> <BR />The PSNI has provided assurances that comprehensive and robust measures have now been implemented in the system to prevent a recurrence of similar failures. The revised system is scheduled to undergo review as part of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office inspection in 2026. I also note that the PSNI has enhanced the central record of surveillance authorisations to provide greater transparency to the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office and its inspections.”
“With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions 6 and 13 together. <BR /> <BR />Freedom of the press is fundamental to a democratic society, allowing independent scrutiny of those in power and giving the public reliable, fact-based information. I therefore share the concerns raised around the surveillance of journalists. However, the UK security services and the oversight of such surveillance are excepted matters and fall outside the purview of my role as Minister of Justice. <BR /> <BR />I recognise the importance of the issues raised in the McCullough review, particularly those relating to the protection of press freedom and the oversight of covert surveillance authorisations involving journalists. The operational responsibility for covert surveillance lies with the Chief Constable.”
“Crucially, if they do not reoffend, we can keep them out of the justice system and, hopefully, avoid problems that we might otherwise have with desistance. <BR /> <BR />The key for me is the outcomes and the satisfaction of victims. In many cases where it takes a long time for the courts to get to the point of giving out a monetary penalty, that seems to be unsatisfactory.”
“I give that assurance. We are looking at particular cohorts of cases for which, at the moment, the normal, most likely penalty would be monetary. Allowing the PSNI to deliver that as a penalty notice rather than have to go through the courts and prosecutors in order to get, in essence, the same outcome will free up significant resources. Lord Leveson's study demonstrated that the public were happier because they saw justice being delivered more swiftly. That also allows for additional rehabilitation opportunities for the individual and ensures that, if somebody already has a penalty notice, they cannot benefit from a second one. If somebody reoffends in short measure, they will end up going through the courts.”
“Defining what measures we should monitor is straightforward, but agreeing what meaningful targets look like is less straightforward, so we are still working on that. <BR /> <BR />In line with the public transformation board funding, a range of action-based targets has been set. At present, as I said, we are focusing on the development of out-of-court disposals. After that, we will look at the Magistrates' Court and then at some of the other measures that I mentioned earlier.”
“Significant progress has already been made, but we are in a difficult position because the withdrawal of the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) from cases has been, if you like, acting contrary to our intentions. However, we have been looking carefully and, of course, there is much more to be done. We made a 7·8% reduction in case-processing times across 2023-24 and another 0·5% across 2024-25. That is something positive that we have been able to deliver. <BR /> <BR />The Criminal Justice Board is also giving careful consideration to the development of formal targets for reducing delay so that we can provide those measurables. A range of options has been explored to determine how system-wide targets can be approached and derived.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is important that we are able to get out-of-court disposals progressed because that will, ultimately, underpin much of the rest of the work that we do, and it is our justification for the application and bid to the transformation fund.”
“<BR /> <BR />To deal most swiftly with serious cases that are heard in the Crown Court, including murders, serious sexual offence cases and others, we need to create capacity across the system and free up police, prosecutors and courts. It will be vital, therefore, that cases are dealt with proportionately, prosecuted at the right court tier or, if appropriate, dealt with through out-of-court disposal. The measures are not about leniency. They are about delivering the same outcomes but through a shorter measure. Most of the cases that we are talking about for out-of-court disposal will be those that would receive similar outcomes — that is, a monetary penalty — when they go through the courts. In order to get to that point, however, much more resource will have been used by police, prosecutors and the courts.”
“Out-of-court disposals are part of the Programme for Government commitment and are central to tackling delay in the criminal justice system, which is under significant pressure due to years of underfunding. Out-of-court disposals have been recognised by Lord Leveson as a central measure to reduce demand on the criminal courts, and stabilise the system, which is at risk of collapse, offering a far faster and more proportionate and cost-effective response to lower-level offending whilst improving victim satisfaction and creating opportunities for early rehabilitation. Out-of-court disposals are long-standing and essential tools to help to divert appropriate cases that involve low-level offending away from prosecution through the courts and ensure that resources are used well.”
“Taken collectively, the programme should rebalance resources, where lower-level offending will be dealt with outside formal court processes, releasing much-needed resources to deal with the most serious offending.”
“That is supported by early engagement, which is exploring opportunities for early engagement between police, prosecution and defence so that cases move faster through the system. <BR /> <BR />Work is progressing on a number of initiatives, including measures to improve file quality and taking learning from the better case management processes used in England and Wales. I am progressing work on the remit of the Magistrates' Court project, which is exploring options to expand the jurisdiction of Magistrates' Courts, enabling cases to be handled in a more proportionate manner and helping to reduce backlogs in the court system. <BR /> <BR />All the projects will be supported by digital initiatives, which can help to make the projects more sustainable in the long term.”
“<BR /> <BR />Work on out-of-court disposals is advancing at pace, and I hope to bring forward secondary legislation on that in the coming months that should see expanded powers for police officers to deal with lower-level offences by way of penalty notices. That will help to divert cases that involve lower-level offending away from prosecution through the courts, where they are currently attracting only monetary fines, and ensure that finite criminal justice resources are used effectively. <BR /> <BR />Building on the first phase of committal reform, work is progressing on the next phase — direct committal — which I plan to implement in November 2026. That will allow the most-serious cases to progress more quickly to Crown Court.”
“The speeding up justice programme is a five-year programme of work driven by the Criminal Justice Board and aimed at reducing avoidable delay across the criminal justice system. The programme is part of the Executive's Programme for Government delivery, specifically with regard to the safer communities priority and underpinned by the reform and transformation of public services priority. <BR /> <BR />The programme comprises five projects: out-of-court disposals; early engagement; committal reform; remit of the Magistrates' Court; and digital. The early engagement and out-of-court disposals projects are supported by £20·5 million of transformation funding.”
“We have been able to deliver in a number of areas. Not everything that we will deliver, however, will have the kind of upstream impact that, for example, the busting of rape myths will have. On many occasions, we are dealing with people who have already been victimised. The purpose of the Executive Office strategy was to ensure that people would move upstream and to look at how we could prevent those things from happening. Many of those actions will not necessarily fall to the Department of Justice, but where we can feed in to those and provide background and evidence to move them forward, we will, of course, play our full part.”
“I have already outlined a considerable amount of the work that we have done around the Gillen review. In addition, we recognise that, whilst not all offences against women and girls are domestic offences and that not all domestic offence victims are women and girls, there is a reinforcing overlap. Therefore, we have done work in that space jointly with the Health Minister to produce the domestic and sexual abuse strategy. We are doing work around reinforcing protections for victims and witnesses, particularly those who are vulnerable, and the victims and witnesses Bill will reflect that. We have also undertaken a lot of research into correlation between domestic abuse and other violence in society, which has been helpful in shining a light on some of the areas where improvement can be made.”
“The social media campaign will shine a light on the facts, counter long-standing misconceptions and help to change our public narrative.”
“We have been working alongside partners such as the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA), Victim Support, Nexus, Women's Aid and academics who have expertise in the field. We have developed a series of graphics to challenge those misconceptions. The graphics will be issued through my Department's social media channels and will then be shared by our partners through their social media channels. Importantly, CCEA and the Department of Education have also agreed to support the campaign and make those resources available to teachers through the relationships and sexuality education (RSE) hub. Challenging rape myths is essential if we want to build a society where survivors are heard and supported free from shame and stigma.”
“I can indeed, and I could talk about a number of the other issues, too. I plan to deliver independent legal representation for specific pre-trial applications; to publish media guidance to encourage a trauma-informed, victim-centric approach to reporting sexual crime; and to consider options for a Barnahus-informed facility. <BR /> <BR />Unfortunately, rape and sexual assault myths are still widespread, and they can be a deterrent to people coming forward and disclosing. In the report on how we handle sexual offences, Sir John Gillen highlighted the fact that rape myths represent some of the greatest impediments to justice for all victims and survivors of domestic and sexual abuse but especially women and girls.”
“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. <BR /> <BR />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 —.”
“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. <BR /> <BR />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.”
“<BR /> <BR />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.”
“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.”
“The situation will therefore remain fluid and responsive to the needs of those who are affected by service withdrawal. <BR /> <BR />My focus is not on the derogations and the interim measures that we can take, albeit they are important. Rather, it is on trying to get to a full restoration of services. Given that, for example, the CBA agreed to a process as recently as 8 December 2025 and said that it was happy to follow it through to a conclusion, I do not accept that it cannot return to full service now and continue with the negotiations. As I said, the negotiations will not be influenced by whether the CBA is or is not at work. The only impact of its members being at work or not being at work will be on the families who are waiting to have their cases heard.”
“The PPS has reviewed and will continue to review cases based on the needs of victims and witnesses. That will change over time, as new issues and new vulnerabilities emerge. What is critical, and what informed my decision to commence the accelerated review, is that the PPS will now have sole responsibility for determining the high-priority cases that will proceed. I said to Members before that I believed it to be a direct conflict of interest for anyone in the CBA to be making such decisions, given that its members will often be representing defendants in the same cases. Although I would of course expect them to recuse themselves from that immediate decision, I still believe that it is inappropriate for the CBA to play any role in the process.”
“I have not informed the Chamber of that, because it is factually inaccurate. It is true to say that the offer of an accelerated review was contingent on a return to work, but that was rejected out of hand by the CBA. The only red line that I have had in this process is that the CBA would no longer decide which cases were a priority and which were not. When we got together in the wake of the meeting with Chloe Mitchell's family, which the Member attended, we were able to agree that that was and would be the case. That is why the taking on of priority cases has now been instituted.”
“Were it to provide me with the same level of information and evidence, its members could return to full work tomorrow. Doing that would not influence the outcome of the accelerated review. All that its withdrawal of services does is cause harm to the justice system and draw resources away from something that, I believe, would better suit the CBA, the SCBA and the members of the public who rely on the justice system progressing at speed.”
“Given the resources that are available to the Department, the truth is that there is very little by way of contingency measures that we can put in place to secure recovery of the backlog. When we met before, and I addressed the issues, I made the point that the money that is being spent on, for example, the accelerated review comes out of exactly the same pot that we use to deliver any catch-up to deal with the delays. The point that I have made all along is that the SCBA has continued to work throughout the process . It has continued to make progress on the issues that it has raised with the Department. <BR /> <BR />The CBA, however, has withdrawn its services. It has not made the same progress, because it has not provided the same level of information and evidence.”
“The important thing for me is that, from this point onwards, it will not be for the CBA to decide which cases get a derogation. Rather, where there is an urgency to a case, it will be a decision for the Public Prosecution Service (PPS). That is the right place for that decision to reside.”
“Neither we nor the CBA want to be in this position again. I hope that, in future, we will have better working relations, and I am, as always, optimistic about the potential outcome of the accelerated review. I am open to listening to the arguments if they are made with robust evidence in place. For my part, however, I have to consider what steps I can take to ensure that victims and witnesses cannot again be used as leverage in any circumstance in such cases. There is a range of actions that can be taken to that end, including the use of alternative delivery models, which I have mentioned previously in the Chamber. Consideration of those is at a very early stage, so I cannot really say any more on that at this point, but I will provide updates as work progresses.”
“The Member is right. There have been some fairly horrific cases that have been released only one at a time thus far. I do not think that any of us believes that that is fair on all the other cases that are in the queue or helpful for speeding up justice, which is something that we are all committed to seeing happen.”
“In my original answer, I set out exactly what we are doing to try to resolve the dispute, and we have invested heavily in that accelerated review. That is proceeding with the agreement of the CBA, the SCBA and others who are party to the issue. I am afraid that I cannot provide the Member with a timeline, because it is not me who is withholding service; it is the CBA. I encourage him to ask the CBA when its members intend to return to work. I am keen to see them returning now because, to be honest, their attendance or non-attendance at work will not influence the outcome of the accelerated review.”
“It provides yet another opportunity for the CBA and its solicitor colleagues in the Solicitors’ Criminal Bar Association (SCBA) to make their case. That is the proper forum for evidencing the necessity of any action, and I trust that it will soon lead to a resolution and a return to normal operation. I will keep the Chamber updated in due course.”
“I have had the opportunity to hear directly from many victims and their families, and, while I have been humbled by their resilience, I am deeply concerned about the added stress and uncertainty that the withdrawal is causing to those who are already suffering unimaginable trauma and loss. I continue to hope that the CBA will take cognisance of that impact and return to full service. Leveraging suffering serves no purpose. <BR /> <BR />I have already shown that I am open to action where evidence allows, and I have initiated a further independent accelerated review to allow remaining issues of concern to be addressed at pace. The review, which commenced on Friday, is expected to be completed no later than 27 April.”
“With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will address questions 3 and 11 together as they speak to the same issue. <BR /> <BR />As I have said many times, the impact of the CBA service withdrawal is significant, and it will resonate for some time and cause further delays in the system. According to our most recent data, 965 cases have been impacted on since 5 January: 195 trials, 469 arraignments and 301 plea and sentencing hearings. <BR /> <BR />The number of victims, witnesses and defendants affected will obviously be higher, and the impact on some will be incalculable.”
“As a key safeguarding mechanism, DVADS supports individuals to make informed decisions about relationships, and the Department takes every opportunity to make people aware of it. <BR /> <BR />Work is ongoing to replace the multi-agency risk assessment conferences (MARAC) with a new perpetrator-focused arrangement, and there has been increased investment in behaviour change programmes. As part of the review process, we are looking very carefully at the right time to include within its remit suicide that has been driven by domestic homicide and at the resources that would be required.”
“Twenty-eight domestic homicide reviews have been commissioned, and seven have been completed and published on the DOJ website. Learning from those has driven significant improvements across agencies. The Department continues to embed that learning in its practice. <BR /> <BR />In response to identified learning, we have also delivered public awareness campaigns on things such as non-fatal strangulation, aligned with the commencement of the new offence. That included a three-week TV campaign, a new nidirect information page and engagement with victims' groups during its development. There has also been an increased emphasis on promoting the domestic violence and abuse disclosure scheme (DVADS). The PSNI and my Department now routinely include information about the scheme in domestic abuse-related media releases.”
“Unlike with domestic homicide, where a cause of death is directly attributable to another individual, domestic abuse-related suicides will often, but not always, involve multiple intersecting factors, whether that be mental ill health, previous trauma, substance misuse or broader personal or social pressures. Determining whether domestic abuse was the primary contributing factor can therefore be very difficult. That has actually been the finding in cases that have gone through the process in England and Wales. We recognise that it is a challenge. We would still like to learn from the domestic homicide review process and look at including suicide in that. However, we have to do so in a very careful and measured way.”
“There are two separate issues. The first is whether there is the capacity in the Department to undertake the scoping exercise itself, because that would be an extensive piece of work. Obviously, the Member is aware of the constrained nature of the resources within which I have to operate. Furthermore, the domestic homicide regime itself is embedding now. We have commissioned 27 reviews, and seven have reported. It is important that we focus our resources on trying to ensure that any learning from those reviews is embedded before we take on new pieces of work. <BR /> <BR />It is about more than just resources, though. Determining a clear causative link between domestic abuse and suicide is often highly complex. Establishing a clear, demonstrable link between domestic abuse and suicide can be extremely difficult.”
“That in no way diminishes the importance of domestic abuse-related suicides, and the families and communities who have been left devastated by those deaths remain firmly in my thoughts. Rather, it highlights the additional complexity of such cases and the need to ensure that any future expansion of the DHR model is robust, properly resourced and, crucially, capable of delivering meaningful learning. <BR /> <BR />My officials continue to maintain regular communication with colleagues from other UK jurisdictions, monitoring their procedures, practice and emerging learning. My Department remains committed to continually improving the current model and to strengthening the positive impact of DHRs across all agencies, including health and social care trusts, emergency services, the police and wider society.”
“Expanding the model without assurance on the necessary additional resources that will be required to support it, including the availability of specialist expertise, would risk placing further pressure on already stretched organisations and, I believe, impact on the quality and timeliness of reviews and the work to implement the learning from them. <BR /> <BR />To date, my priorities have been to embed the existing DHR process, progress reviews, respond to the recommendations arising from those reviews, and ensure that learning is shared effectively across agencies and wider society. Further investment from the Executive and relevant agencies would be necessary before there was an extension to include domestic abuse-related deaths by suicide.”
“I remain committed to exploring whether the domestic homicide review model can be widened to include domestic abuse-related deaths by suicide. Our initial assessment, which has been informed by the experience in England and Wales, indicates that significant additional investment from the Executive and relevant agencies would be required before such an extension could be considered. <BR /> <BR />Before any formal scoping can commence, including an assessment of the operational readiness of all agencies and organisations that are involved in DHRs, it is essential that the current system is operating effectively, efficiently and sustainably.”
“I beg to introduce the Criminal Justice (Sentencing etc) Bill [NIA 26/22-27], which is a Bill to make provision about the exercise of the court’s discretion when sentencing; to make provision about the availability and effect of suspended sentence orders; to create general principles relating to the determination of tariffs where a court is required to pass a life sentence on an adult; to provide for the review of certain sentences by superior courts; to make provision about the effect of an offender convicted of murder or manslaughter failing to disclose information about the victim’s remains; to create an offence of assaulting a public worker; to create sentencing aggravations concerning offences against public workers, particular groups and vulnerable victims; to amend the law relating to penalties for certain road traffic offences; and to make provision for connected purposes.”
“The new clause will place a duty on a seller who has made any reportable sales of related articles to notify a person to be specified in regulations made by the DOJ of those sales, and failure to do so would be an offence.”
“I plan to introduce legislation later this year to commence section 46 of the Offensive Weapons Act 2019, which will amend section 114 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to make it an offence to possess in private any weapon listed in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988. The possession of such weapons in public is already an offence. Aligned to that, my Department also plans to introduce a voluntary surrender scheme for a fixed period that will allow individuals who possess weapons that will be made illegal by the new provisions to dispose of them safely. The provision in the Westminster Crime and Policing Bill relating to the duty to report the remote sale of knives et cetera in bulk will be extended to Northern Ireland via a legislative consent memorandum.”
“That aside, both of us will be committed, where resources permit, to see it move forward, because we know that, when someone experiences trauma or an adverse childhood experience of such magnitude, positive early intervention can undo and mitigate much of the harm that has been caused and allow that child to go on and thrive. If I may speak for the Health Minister, that is what Mike and I would want to see.”
“Our officials have ongoing contact on the issue. However, we made a joint visit to the Rowan centre and had a conversation about the potential for a Barnahus. Obviously, the Rowan centre gives an example of that wrap-around care for adults, but other therapeutic interventions would be required for Barnahus. <BR /> <BR />Remember that many of the pieces are in place. There are debates, for example, on whether it would be better to keep the remote evidence centre separate from the consulting rooms where people go for counselling. We do not want children to become confused between those who are questioning them for therapeutic reasons and those who are questioning them in the course of a criminal investigation.”
“We made a joint visit to the Rowan sexual assault referral centre, where we were shown a piece of land where a Barnahus-style model might be accommodated, and we will work on that together.”
“I shall have to revert to the Member about the detailed timeline. I have not received it as yet, but I am aware that officials have been working on it. As I said earlier, there are significant challenges in the work being done by the team who have been involved with the Gillen review. We have made significant progress and are engaging with our partners, who will be part of the delivery of a Barnahus model. <BR /> <BR />Much of what is required by a Barnahus model is already in place. We need to find ways to bring it together in a single place, where that is appropriate, and to resource that. That is a conversation not just for me but for the Health Minister, who, handily, has just arrived in a timely fashion. We will have to continue to have those conversations.”