Debate contribution: Policing Resources

Debate contribution by Mr Keith Buchanan on .

MLA
Mr Keith Buchanan
Party at the time
Democratic Unionist Party
Date
9 September 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Policing Resources
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4511606

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

I welcome the opportunity to open the debate on the case for additional policing resources. The Democratic Unionist Party stands with the Chief Constable as he continues to make the case powerfully for additional resources for policing in Northern Ireland. In tabling the motion, my party and I understand the strain on the current PSNI budget and the need for a budgetary increase to ensure community safety and combat crime in all its forms. Each of us is seeing growing pressure on neighbourhood policing, crime investigation and community PSNI officers in our constituencies. It is deeply troubling that the Justice Minister has endorsed attempts to undermine what was an entirely legitimate request for extra support from the Prime Minister.

Minister, you can respond when you have the opportunity; maybe you will feed back in your comments. Did you support the letter from the permanent secretary to the Chief Constable?

OK. The Minister can obviously feed back later, if she has had time to reflect, on whether she is supportive of the letter that was written. Whether she saw the letter or not is irrelevant: did she support it? I will continue. The role of the Chief Constable includes being the accounting officer for the Police Service of Northern Ireland. In light of that, the Chief Constable was entitled to make approaches to the Prime Minister on the financing of the PSNI. Funding of the PSNI involves the interests and responsibilities of not only our devolved Government in Stormont but the Westminster Government. It is the Chief Constable's role to ensure that he has a significant investment to increase police officer numbers and to allow him to ensure that we have a visible, accessible, responsive and community-focused service. For some time, the PSNI has warned of the pressures facing its finances as a result of years of underinvestment, but those warnings have been largely ignored by the Department of Justice and the UK Government. Funding in England and Wales between 2010 and 2022 increased by 20%. By comparison, the PSNI budget has gone down slightly. Over the same period, inflation was at 36% and, consequently, the PSNI budget has decreased. At a meeting with the Northern Ireland Policing Board in April 2024, the Chief Constable said:

"My focus is now firmly fixed on securing an improved budget settlement for policing. For too long, officer and staff numbers have been allowed to decline, along with the supporting infrastructure. Policing is at the heart of any functioning society and needs to be given adequate priority in funding decisions both by the NI Assembly and Department of Justice."

He also highlighted the following:

"Despite the NI Block growing ... the police budget has fallen from £903m to £892m, without any adjustment for purchasing power or inflation. Whether intentional or otherwise, the reality is that the priority of policing has been eroded and this inevitably comes at a cost to services."

The Chief Constable should be commended, not chastised, for his action to date. As well as the forthright approach that he has taken to the challenges that his organisation faces, Jon Boutcher is well known and highly respected in UK policing and has a strong relationship with Ministers and officials in Whitehall. Why, then, should he be expected to hide his light under a bushel and not use every tool at his disposal to advocate for the best outcome for Northern Ireland? In recent weeks, I had the opportunity to complete a weekend ride-along with officers in Magherafelt. That gave me an opportunity to understand at first hand the many issues facing our local officers. The trip around Magherafelt started at 7.30 pm and ended at around 2.15 am on Saturday night/Sunday morning. Thankfully, there was little action that night, but it was a great opportunity to have a one-to-one conversation with two officers for the entire night in the back of a police car. We were heavily flak-jacketed up, but it has to be done, and it was good to get an understanding of what the PSNI faces nightly. I recommend anybody to do it. The Chief Constable and his predecessor have highlighted to the Policing Board stark warnings about the impacts of cuts on front-line policing in Northern Ireland across the political spectrum. Concerns have been well documented and recognised. We believe that the Chief Constable was right to seek additional funding from the Prime Minister and the UK Treasury, and that is not at all the position held by the Northern Ireland Executive. It is also crucial that the PSNI has the necessary resources to combat the ongoing threat from dissident republicans who still seek to unleash terror in our community. A significant proportion of the police budget is made up of additional security agreed with the UK Government. The idea that it violates protocol or principle for the Chief Constable to advocate for additional resources from the UK Government is therefore baffling; in fact, it would be remiss of him not to raise those issues at the highest levels of His Majesty's Government. I am sure that we all agree that there has been chronic underfunding of policing and public services in Northern Ireland and that that must be addressed. We will continue to press the Government to tackle those challenges and to urge others to support that crucial message, not to undermine it. We hope that the Minister will reflect on the damage caused by her Department's intervention in this case. An advantage has come from this difficult situation in that it seems to have sparked more constructive engagement by the Minister with the PSNI on the Chief Constable's proposed recovery plan for rebuilding officer numbers. Let us be clear, however, that that should not have required public anger at the Minister and her Department's attitude towards the Chief Constable and his attempt to secure the necessary funding. The PSNI has statutory obligations to protect life and property, maintain law and order, prevent crime and bring offenders to justice. The DUP will always side with the Chief Constable in his efforts to uphold the rule of law and build safer communities across Northern Ireland. Last week in the House of Commons, our party leader, Gavin Robinson, urged the Prime Minister to provide a funding package to alleviate the current pressures on the PSNI. That is where the focus of the House should be. The amendments proposed by the SDLP and the UUP are in keeping with the spirit of our motion. The focus on increasing additional security funding is especially relevant, as that has plateaued in recent years and no longer reflects the challenges facing officers and our citizens from dissident republicans. Those gangs exert criminal control over many of our communities.

1,127 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: 0.11 (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 (0.93).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.83).
  • 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 framing0.08No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.08No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.09No
Controversy escalation0.10No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.93Yes
Overall judgement0.11At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.83
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.05
Adopts it0.12
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.58
No identity-related subject0.31
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations0.08
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.02
Another identity-related subject0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:58 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