Debate contribution: Rates (Exemption for Automatic Telling Machines in Rural Areas) Order (Northern Ireland) 2025
Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .
- MLA
- Mr Matthew O'Toole
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 10 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Rates (Exemption for Automatic Telling Machines in Rural Areas) Order (Northern Ireland) 2025
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4841013
Read the official Assembly record
Text
— in time will be appreciated. Perhaps I will get some applause and maybe hugs of appreciation. I will speak on the order largely for the Committee for Finance, and I may then say something extremely short in an Opposition capacity. There is widespread support for the measure, and I thank the Minister for his comments. The Committee considered the statutory rule to extend until 31 March 2026 the rates exemption for separate entries in the valuation list associated with ATMs in designated rural areas. The Committee first considered the policy in SL1 letter format on 22 January 2025, when members noted that the exemption applies to any ATMs that are valued individually, for example those located outside petrol stations or on high streets. ATMs located in banks, building societies or shops tend to be valued as part of the building so are unlikely to be eligible. During that meeting, members again received a useful briefing from the director of rating policy on current pertinent issues. Members also noted that the scheme is essentially about maintaining the ATMs that are already in rural areas; it is not necessarily about incentivising banks and building societies to put in new machines. It is an area in which the Finance Committee is particularly interested, given our current inquiry into banking and financial services. Whilst members noted that only 180 ATMs across Northern Ireland are valued separately and are on the list and, of those, 26 are in rural areas, which is 14% of ATMs, members also wished to be updated on any plan that the Minister may have on other measures to enhance the access to cash as part of the small business rate relief review. The Committee also had a general discussion about whether there is a case to provide an exemption for all separately rated ATMs, considering issues here with access to cash. As per common practice, the Committee noted assurances provided by the Department on equality impact and financial implications, the latter indicating that the estimated maintenance cost for the scheme for 2025-26 is under £50,000. Members also noted that there are no directly equivalent statutory instruments in Great Britain and that the Department considered previous regulatory impact findings as still valid. Members noted the Department's position on section 24 of the NI Act and EU implications. At the Committee's meeting on 22 January, members indicated that they were content with the proposal for the statutory rule. However, additional information was sought on stand-alone ATMs, and the Committee considered the response to that at its meeting on 19 February. Members noted confirmation from the Department that, in 2024-25, the average rating charge for stand-alone ATMs, excluding those entitled to the rural ATM exemption, was £1,399. The Rates (Exemption for Automatic Telling Machines in Rural Areas) Order (Northern Ireland) 2025 was formally laid in the Business Office on 14 February as SR 2025/28. At the Committee's meeting on 26 February, members noted that the Examiner of Statutory Rules had reported on the rule and not drawn anything to their attention. The Committee therefore unanimously agreed to recommend that the rule be affirmed by the Assembly. The Finance Committee supports the motion to affirm. It would be helpful if the Minister could indicate whether the Department is looking at extending the measure to other stand-alone ATMs that are independently rated. The issue is not just in rural areas. On the Ormeau Road, a famous and busy thoroughfare in South Belfast, my constituency, we are losing ATMs. There is an ATM in a shop that effectively serves as the ATM for a large part of the road. Exempting such ATMs from rating would improve access to cash. I draw Members' attention to the ongoing sterling work of my Committee on the banking and financial services landscape. I commend and support the motion.
639 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 (0.90).
- 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 | 0.02 | 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 | 0.90 | 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 | 0.97 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.02 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:02 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.