Debate contribution: The Rates (Exemption for Automatic Telling Machines in Rural Areas) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024
Debate contribution by Dr Caoimhe Archibald on .
- MLA
- Dr Caoimhe Archibald
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 14 May 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- The Rates (Exemption for Automatic Telling Machines in Rural Areas) Order (Northern Ireland) 2024
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4490223
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank Members for their useful comments on the order and on the wider issues relating to the extension of the exemption in rural areas. The scheme is, as things stand, worth continuing for those who live in isolated rural communities and who still depend on the availability of cash from ATMs. We all appreciate the difficulties that are encountered in those communities because of any measure that could limit the circulation of cash, and I am happy to continue this one as long as it continues to help provide some support to people and businesses in rural areas. I will pick up on some of the comments that Members made. The policy intent is about retaining ATMs in rural areas, and Matthew and Diane referred to how some ATMs are fee charging. During the initial consultation on the measure, there was a suggestion that it should apply only to free-to-use ATMs. However, some of the feedback was that even a fee-charging ATM is better than no ATM in a rural community. Certainly, I am of the view that it is less palatable to give a rates exemption to those who charge fees, but it is also about retaining services in a local area. I raised that issue when I met the representatives of the banking industry. Mr O'Toole also asked about that engagement. It was about the broader issues in the concerns about the branch network and the number of closures that we have seen over recent years. It was also about how those decisions are taken and the need to ensure that communities have access to cash. We are a region that is more cash dependent. Figures from last year showed us to be the only region to have had an increase in cash withdrawals since the previous year, so it is important to ensure that communities have access to cash. Diane and Áine spoke to the importance of that in rural areas that have recently lost bank branches. I will continue to engage with the sector on that. In the autumn, I hope to have a repeat of the round table that Minister Murphy had in the previous mandate. My officials have been engaging with the Treasury and the Financial Conduct Authority on all these issues. It is important that, collectively, we make the case for people to have the ability to access banking services. In closing, I ask Members to support the measure and I commend the order to the Assembly.
415 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: 0.02 (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 (0.87).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.98 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 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.