Debate contribution: Rural Crime: Policing Resources
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 29 April 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Rural Crime: Policing Resources
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4922077
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The Member is correct that, when people know that a house is empty, there is an increased tendency for burglary. We see similar patterns before Christmas, when people know that people are storing Christmas presents. It is an opportunistic way of breaking into homes at that time. Through PCSPs and the police, there are lots of opportunities for householders to get advice and guidance on how to secure their properties and how to avoid them looking empty for long periods and, hopefully, to dissuade those who are involved in crime. Burglary and robbery represented about 24% of agricultural crime, not just rural crime, while theft was about 76%. That gives you some idea. Burglary has been between 23% and 36% of rural crime, while theft has tended to make up the rest in that context. It is clearly something that we are concerned about and want to raise public awareness of. I encourage Members to use some of the tools that are available on the Department's website, in local PCSPs and on the PSNI's website about how to secure your property over the summer period, particularly when you are on holiday, so that it does not look as though it is available for criminals who might wish to target it in your absence.
213 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 (0.71).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.71 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:28 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.