Debate contribution: The Rates (Exemption for Automatic Telling Machines in Rural Areas) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024
Debate contribution by Mr Eóin Tennyson on .
- MLA
- Mr Eóin Tennyson
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 14 May 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- The Rates (Exemption for Automatic Telling Machines in Rural Areas) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4490221
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Again, I rise to very briefly put on record the Alliance Party's support for the proposed rule, which will reinstate the micro policy of applying a rates exemption to ATMs in designated rural areas. Like the previous order that we debated, this is an example of a policy that lapsed in the absence of an Assembly, and, as someone who does not really use cash very often, I have to say that I was surprised at the extent to which I was lobbied on the issue when the Assembly was down. I welcome, however, that we are now in a position to reinstate the policy in this annual technical vote. Having been a feature of our rating system since 2007, and having been consulted on twice since then, the exemption has a negligible impact on cost and administration, given that Land and Property Services is able to automatically apply it. However, the exemption has a hugely significant impact on our rural communities. There is, as others said, an important equality consideration in access to cash for not only our rural communities but those older people who are not necessarily digital natives. However, figures suggest that, even with the policy in place, there continues to be a decline in the availability of rural ATMs and bank branches on our high streets. The very recent announcement that a Halifax branch in Portadown in my constituency will not reopen following a fire earlier this year is another example of that. We all have examples of loss of services in our constituencies. Whilst I appreciate that powers in this space are limited because, as others said, financial services and banking is largely a reserved issue, I encourage the Minister to continue to advocate as best she can at a UK level. That is because it appears that our policy approach in this area sometimes appears to be a carrot approach from the Assembly without there necessarily being a stick at UK level through regulation to work with industry in order to ensure the accessibility of cash and other banking services on our high streets. I thank the Minister for tabling the motion, and I am happy to support the order.
366 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 (0.89).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.86 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.13 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:23 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.