Debate contribution: Policing Resources

Debate contribution by Mr Peter Martin on 9 September 2024.

MLA

Mr Peter Martin

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 4511703

Read the official Assembly record

Text

My goodness. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I feel that you have just taken off my Kevlar, which, perhaps, has some relevance to what we are talking about. I start my first speech by thanking the Member of Parliament for North Down, Alex Easton, for my place on this Bench. I also wish Alex's wife, Denise, well, as she recuperates in South Africa from unexpected surgery. In all honesty, I do not consider this to be my seat until I win it at an election; of course, that will be up to the people of North Down. My constituents know from their experience that I have a strong work ethic, and I have, hopefully, built up a reasonable reputation as an on-the-ground councillor. I take the opportunity to pay tribute to my mum and dad for their constant support and their wisdom for the name that I got at birth. My father and grandfather were both named James Alphonsus Martin, so I narrowly body-swerved being called after Saint Alphonsus de Ligouri, the patron saint of moral theologians. Thankfully, I got simply "James". I thank my wife Melanie, who has had to endure the ups and downs of political life for 14 years, and our three children, Lucy, Sam and Zach. If I did not get their names in, my life will not be worth living when they watch this later. They mean the world to me. Lucy, at 13, is a political animal who can explain the single transferable vote or d'Hondt as well as anyone in the Chamber. Sam, at 11, is a skilled cricketer and rugby player. Our third child, Zach, is best described by a T-shirt that he likes to wear, which simply reads, "Admit it: life would be more boring without me". It will come as a shock to no one in the Chamber that I am a proud and unashamed unionist, but that solely, in itself, does not define me. I have personal faith in my Lord, who wants me to treat people with dignity, respect and compassion, regardless of their background or political allegiance. I care passionately about the children in this country, and it makes no difference to me whether they are from east or west Belfast. I am concerned about the vulnerable: those struggling to make ends meet at the end of the week; the elderly, who feel increasingly isolated; and, perhaps, the most vulnerable of all in our society — the unborn child — who has no voice. I turn to the debate in hand. I have had a number of police officers contact me in the past week, and, when the debate was tabled, several more contacted me over the weekend. I have heard from a range of ranks. They have highlighted to me the immense pressure that the service is under, the additional hours that they have to work and the stress that that puts on them and their families. They have said to me that they have been appalled at this political debacle that has unfolded over the past number of weeks. It was a simple series of events. The Chief Constable wrote directly to the Prime Minister for additional financial resources, and we have talked about it this afternoon already. My colleague said that that was maybe not the procedural way to do things, but it has certainly engendered some debate and discussion about PSNI funding. That then prompted the permanent secretary in the Department of Justice to write a letter admonishing the Chief Constable or, to use the words of the Police Federation — the body that represents the rank-and-file police officers that we have been talking about in the Chamber — to "gag" and "embarrass" the Chief Constable. I do not know the Chief Constable, but, from what I have learned about him over the past few weeks, I suspect that he is not easily gagged, and more power to him, because he has the welfare of the people who serve and protect all of us in the Chamber and anyone who happens to be watching this live feed. I am not going to talk about the macro issues of the Budget. Mr Dickson talked about the accounting officer and accountable officer. During Question Time, the Minister answered a question from me about funding and mentioned that, if we in the Chamber got the money, it would go to the Executive; it would not go directly to the PSNI. Do you know what? That is probably true. However, Treasury could ring-fence that money, and the Executive would have to take cognisance of Treasury's — I see the Member shaking his head — ring fencing of the money. That is not really what concerns the police officers whom I have spoken to. One said to me, "If Justice actually got the money, would it send it back? Say the Chief Constable had been successful in getting the additional funding, what would Justice have done?".

Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Thank you for your lenience and the Kevlar.

844 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

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