Member's statement: Scrambler Bikes: East Belfast
Member's statement by Mr David Brooks on .
- MLA
- Mr David Brooks
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 13 May 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Scrambler Bikes: East Belfast
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4947504
Read the official Assembly record
Text
There is an increasing plague on communities in east Belfast, as there is across the country, I am sure, and that is the illegal use of scrambler bikes. In recent weeks, I have met police officers who cover the east Belfast and Dundonald areas to discuss the subject. It was clear from our discussions that the police have dealt with issues in the same areas as have been reported to me: on the greenway, at Tullycarnet, on the Beersbridge Road and Albertbridge Road, in Orangefield Park, on the Newtownards Road and in Ballybeen. On roads and in parks, residents are tortured, and parents are afraid for their children. Only a couple of weeks ago, a police officer was hurt in the course of their duty while trying to prevent the misuse of a scrambler. I recall that, in 2016, a mother was killed in, I believe, Falls Park in west Belfast, yet it seems that the police are still trying to deal with the problem with their arms tied behind their backs by regulations on engagement. The danger has increased because of the proliferation of quieter electric scramblers. There is also an awareness that scramblers are used not only in reckless, antisocial behaviour or by naive youngsters but in a more sinister role. It is suspected that the bikes are regularly used by those who seek to collect debts or intimidate and in the supply of drugs. It is clear that our police require more tools and direction to tackle the issue. From talking to the police, I feel that an increase in drone teams would be useful and make it easier to track, follow and, hopefully, apprehend culprits after the fact. The police also felt that the mandatory registration of such vehicles would be a step in the right direction. We could also look at education and awareness campaigns similar to those traditionally undertaken on speeding and drink-driving. Ultimately, we have a problem where culprits are almost arrogant in their understanding of the limitations of officers, who often cannot give chase. We have to tilt the balance to ensure that those flouting the law are afraid of the repercussions and are aware that being caught is a real prospect. We ask the Justice Minister to seriously look at how our police are resourced, enabled and empowered to resolve the issue for our communities.
394 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: 0.05 (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 (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 | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 | 0.94 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.02 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.01 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:33 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.