Debate contribution: Cost-of-living Crisis
Debate contribution by Mr Andy Allen MBE on .
- MLA
- Mr Andy Allen MBE
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 19 October 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Cost-of-living Crisis
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5795949
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I too thank the SDLP for bringing this important motion to the House. The cost of living continues to be a real pressure for households across Northern Ireland. I see its effect daily, and I have no doubt, as other Members have articulated, that they too see it across their constituency offices. Energy costs in particular are once again putting additional pressures on households at a time when food, housing and most everyday costs remain high or are rising. That is not a new issue, as has been highlighted. We have debated the cost of living on many occasions in the Chamber, and the proposer has already set out many of the pressures that people face. The only difference, perhaps, is the cause. The measures brought in by the UK Government, the Department for Communities and the Department for the Economy are welcome. While they will provide some short-term relief, they only scratch the surface, and, given the scale of the pressures faced by many households, that support will only go so far. There will always be a need for immediate short-term and sometimes one-off support, particularly when we see sudden increases in energy costs or other household bills, but we also need to move beyond simply responding to each cost-of-living shock as it comes along. We have, unfortunately, been through enough of them in recent years to know that those pressures are not going away. Energy is but one example. We can provide money to help someone pay their energy bill — at times, that will be necessary — but, if their home is poorly insulated or expensive to heat, they will face the same problem the next time prices increase. That is why energy efficiency and tackling fuel poverty have to form part of any solution. As chairperson of the all-party group on fuel poverty, I regularly hear about households that would benefit significantly from energy-efficiency improvements but simply do not have the means to pay for them. Often, it is those who can least afford high energy bills who live in the homes that cost most to heat. There is a wider point around prevention. We talk a lot in this place about early intervention and prevention and the need to spend money earlier to avoid an adverse impact on people and much greater costs further down the line; indeed, I made that point at Question Time today. It does not necessarily mean creating another new scheme every time we face a shock. We should look at what already exists, whether the support is reaching the people who need it most and whether the money we spend is making a lasting difference. There is also a role for appropriate advice and making sure that people receive all the support that they are entitled to. I recognise the work of our advice sector in that regard. Day and daily, advice workers help people who struggle with their household bills and debt to access the support that they might not otherwise have known was available. We should not underestimate the value of that work, particularly when the pressures on those services continue to grow. I understand the call in the motion for the Executive to introduce a package of measures. There is no doubt that there is a need for further support, but we also need to be honest with people about the challenging budgetary landscape. If the Executive bring forward further support, I want to see it go beyond providing short-term interventions. Part of the solution should be leaving people less exposed to the next cost-of-living increase or shock, and clearly that requires an agreed Executive Budget. Let me be clear: that must be a Budget that provides Departments with the required funding to deliver those outcomes.
There are significant pressures across every Department, and that makes it even more important for the Executive to agree on their priorities and give the Departments the certainty that they need to plan. Did somebody want to come in?
The Member makes a valid point. I alluded to that when I referenced debating the various cost-of-living shocks in the Chamber. The only difference is what has caused them, and, on this occasion, there is a particular global shock. No doubt, the funding that the UK Government provide in response to those shocks comes to the Executive, but, on occasion, it goes into the big black hole or the pit and does not provide the intervention or the measures that were intended in GB. We have a duty here to make sure that, when funding is provided, it goes to the measures and interventions that are needed to make a difference in people's lives. It is a double-pronged approach. We also have a responsibility here to make sure that we support households. That is why I have been fundamentally clear that, when we take forward those measures and see short-term interventions delivered through schemes, such as Bryson Charitable Group and other charities that step in to do the work of the Executive, that only goes so far. It only tops up an individual's meter by £200, but, year on year, it does not deliver the same level of intervention. That is why I have always been clear when I speak in the Chamber that we need to move beyond those important short-term interventions. They need to be long-lasting. I pay tribute to —.
901 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.