Stephen Kelly had caught a thief breaking into his car to steal petrol and called police in the early hours. But, it took almost 90 minutes before police came, and only after ringing Mr Kelly 30 minutes before to ask for directions.

We all have specific expectations of the emergency services; the public demands swift service. When we see someone threatening our property, as Mr Kelly did when he scared off the would-be thief at his car, we want the police there quickly.

This is not just to apprehend the thief if possible, but also to reassure us that help really is just a telephone call away.

The police, however, tend to have a system of prioritising incidents. Their explanation was that it was a busy night and the officer on her way to Mr Kelly's home was diverted to another, ongoing incident.

In other words, something more immediately important, was happening elsewhere, and, in this kind of choice, the police take the bigger view and opt for the more potentially serious incident.

Public confidence, however, is on a slender thread. It's subjective, and it doesn't take much to damage our view of police efficiency.

Perhaps an explanation by the officer at the scene on their view of the situation would have helped diffuse Mr Kelly's anger. As property owners, we naturally expect prompt attention when a criminal threatens, but this is not always viewed as serious community crime.

As to the lack of local knowledge by the officer, we trust that the police have an effective local street geography system. It would be a pity if we had a repeat of the incidents hitting the ambulance service not long ago when personnel got lost.

Public confidence is vital to a successful police force. We trust that Mr Kelly's complaint is taken seriously, and that such situations don't recur.