Debate contribution: PSNI Funding Shortfall
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 10 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- PSNI Funding Shortfall
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5224597
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The Member will be aware that, when it comes to Justice funding in general, I have said on many occasions that we have seen an increase that is well below inflation; in fact, had we matched inflation over the last 10 years, Justice would have around £225 million in addition to what we have at the moment. That would have been a game changer when it comes to things such as injury to feelings, pensions issues, holiday pay and, indeed, the data breach. Those are things that at a better time, perhaps, we could have absorbed, but we are not in a position to do that now.
I continue to engage with the Department of Finance, the Executive more widely, the NIO and Treasury, because, in addition to the issues of which we have been apprised already, there are the issues of legacy, the cost of policing and the pressure on the wider justice system coming down the tracks as a result of new legislation. We need to work out a sustainable model that allows us to have a Police Service that is properly resourced for its primary task but, at the same time, does not eat up the entire Justice budget, which would mean not being able to have courts, prisons and all the other facilities that we need to provide. If I may, with your indulgence, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I will correct, for the record, something that I said to Mr Clarke last week. He asked about the release of an individual on pre-release testing. I said that that person was time-served on their tariff; in fact, they were not time-served but approaching that point, which is why their pre-release testing had been started. Apologies to the House if anyone was misled by what I said.
299 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: 0.03 (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).
- Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.70 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.30 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:42 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.