Debate contribution: PSNI Support at London Protest

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on 6 October 2025.

MLA

Mrs Naomi Long

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

6 October 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Question for Urgent Oral Answer

Heading

PSNI Support at London Protest

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5157021

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The deployment of additional officers to other regions of the United Kingdom requested under mutual aid arrangements is an operational matter for the Chief Constable, who is accountable to the Northern Ireland Policing Board. It is in the best interests of the public generally that all police forces across the UK can call on support to help maintain safety and public order.

First of all, I would be surprised if the Member was surprised at me stating the fact that the police are operationally independent of me and my Department. That begs this question: why did the Member ask the question in the House at all? It is clear from previous Speaker rulings that I am not answerable for the operational decisions of the PSNI. I and my officials were was not consulted because it is solely an operational decision. The Member commented on the policing of threats from paramilitary organisations. The Member will be well aware of my view of such threats. There should be no paramilitary threats, no paramilitary intimidation and no attacks on either politicians or public servants who are working for the council. There is no excuse for that happening. I look forward to the police being able to resolve who made those threats and deal with the matter appropriately, but they will do so independent of my direction.

The right to peaceful protest is an intrinsic part of living in an open and free society, and it is important that people are free to engage in such demonstrations. It is, however, a qualified right, as are all such rights, and it is one that requires a balance in its impact on competing rights that are being exercised in the same space at the same time. It is not for me to opine whether the Met Police did their job correctly. Most people, even those who mock the fact that the police are operationally independent of me as Justice Minister, accept that directing the Met is well outside my remit. However, it is a matter for the Met, and, when PSNI officers are deployed under mutual aid, they act at the direction of their commanding officers in the force to which they are deployed. It is not a matter for us. With respect to rolling back on protests, parades and other gatherings in Northern Ireland, we have no plans in the Department of Justice to do that.

At the end of the day, it is not for me to decide what the police do and how they do it; it is for the Chief Constable to decide that. They are proscribed organisations, and that is the rationale for the arrests that took place. Again, it is not for me to defend the policy, because it was not made here. It was made in Westminster. It is a reserved matter, so I will not opine on it. However, it remains the law across the whole jurisdiction, whether in Northern Ireland or in the rest of the UK. When it comes to policing, as I said, officers act at the direction of their commanding officers on the day, and that would be the service to which they are deployed, which, in this case, was the Metropolitan Police, which was acting to deal with the protest issues that it had on Saturday.

The Member will not be surprised when I say yes. The Policing Board is the correct place to raise those issues and to hold the Chief Constable operationally accountable for his decision-making. Sometimes, in the desire to be critical of the answers that Ministers give, there is an intention to encourage Ministers to step outside the strict responsibilities that they have: I warn people against doing so. Were I to behave in a politicised manner — directing the police, telling them where to go, what to investigate, whom to charge, how to handle cases — you can just imagine the reaction that I would get in the Chamber on a week-to-week basis. Not everything that I might prioritise would be what you or the police might prioritise. Inviting me to step into a space into which I will not be drawn sets a dangerous precedent. We see political policing in other places. We understand from our own history the dangers of it, and that is why we have a Policing Board and a separation of powers. Members should be wary of trying to undermine it.

As I stated in my original answer, it is in the best interests of the public generally that all police forces across the UK can call on support to help maintain safety and public order. The PSNI provided mutual aid assistance to the Metropolitan Police at the weekend. Requests for such assistance are coordinated by the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC), and I believe that it is important that the PSNI have recourse to that resource when it is required.

The Member sits on the Policing Board, so he will have every opportunity to ask that of the person who made the decision. If the Member wants me to make the decisions here in the Chamber, that will mark a departure from the view of his predecessors, who jealously guarded the tripartite arrangements for policing in order to prevent political incursions into the operational space. It seems that the SDLP is more concerned with scoring cheap political points than it is with the substance of the issue, which is that the Member sits on the Policing Board and has every opportunity to challenge the Chief Constable, both about the speed of response in the Member's constituency and about his decision-making on mutual aid.

I think that my —.

I am well aware that matters to do with policing can become politically fraught. It is therefore important that the decisions on the allocation of resources to policing and policing structures, and the prioritisation and distribution of those resources, remain a matter for professional police officers. As armchair generals, we may all wish to give our opinion on what we see as priorities, but I prefer to leave that to the professionals, who have to do the job and who can be held accountable at the Policing Board for how they do it.

I am not sure whether the Member or I should feel queasy if we are in such complete agreement today, but, yes, I agree that every Member has a duty to uphold the operational independence of the PSNI and to hold it accountable through the appropriate structures. Those are the arrangements that were put in place to build confidence in policing, and part of our role, as political leaders, is to build that confidence through using the structures properly.

I agree that the Chief Constable is best placed to make that call. That is what I have said throughout my response to the question for urgent oral answer. It is not for any of us to decide, based on whatever perspective we might have, whether it is appropriate for officers to be deployed in any situation. Making those decisions is for the Chief Constable, who is ultimately accountable to the Policing Board. By all means, Mr Chambers, as a member of the Policing Board, you can hold him to account as well as its other members can.

We benefited from mutual aid in the summer, when, sadly, we had to call on those arrangements. Of course, it is not free. It comes at considerable expense. The force that requests mutual aid has to pay for it. There is a full-cost-recovery system. However, it is important that, at times — for example, when the police are stretched thinly because of a number of competing operational demands — we can make that call and have that additional support. For me, the fundamental issue around policing is that we have a shared objective, which is to keep people safe. That is what needs to be upheld, whether by bringing police officers to Belfast or by using officers from Northern Ireland elsewhere on occasion.

1,339 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:23 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