Debate contribution: Out-of-Court Disposals: Consultation
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 1 December 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Out-of-Court Disposals: Consultation
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5269207
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I will never shirk from an opportunity to provide clarity. The proposals were developed through a cross-justice working group led by PSNI, and they included measures to reduce pressure on the system through additional powers for police and prosecutors to deal with lower-level offences. That included expansion of the offences that the PSNI can deal with by way of a penalty notice, which it already does for many of the cases that are listed. I am disappointed that the people who wish to criticise the proposals are focusing solely on the more serious examples in the cohort of cases rather than looking at the cases that could fall within that definition albeit at the more minor end. Penalty notices are designed to target first-time or non-habitual offenders for a set number of offences. Once you have had a penalty notice, you have a criminal record. Therefore, you cannot get a penalty notice again, and the case has to go to court. Those notices are a criminal penalty. It is not, as some people were describing it, like getting fined for parking. Parking offences, of course, have been decriminalised; assault has not. It would affect only those cases that are at the lowest end of the scale.
Most cases will continue to go through the courts, but one of the reasons why we are talking about the out-of-court disposal system is so that we can use the courts for the most serious cases and speed those up and so that we can ensure that people are punished for lighter offences, which very often get tossed out by the PPS or get a derisory fine from the courts at the end point anyway. To me, it seems much better to allow police officers to use their judgement. To be clear, it will be police officers who will make the judgement, and they will have to take into account the views of the victim of any crime before they-decide to dispose of it via a penalty notice.
334 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: 0.04 (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 (0.91).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 14:03 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.