Motion or amendment: Minimum Income Guarantee
Motion or amendment by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 10 February 2026
- Type
- Motion or amendment
- Business
- Motion · Private Members' Motion
- Heading
- Minimum Income Guarantee
- Assembly identifier
- Document 470442
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
Minimum Income Guarantee
That this Assembly notes with alarm that people here remain particularly vulnerable to poverty due to lower incomes and limited financial resilience; recognises the harm caused by financial insecurity, with nearly half of adults here holding less than £1,500 in savings; further notes that a majority of people in poverty live in working households, including 64 per cent of children and 60 per cent of working age adults; and calls on the Executive to produce, not later than March 2027, a time-bound and costed plan to deliver a Minimum Income Guarantee by 2030, including through the creation of new a universal payment to mitigate the rising cost of living, increasing the value of basic payments made to families in receipt of means-tested benefits, introducing a permanent cost of disability payment and taking measures locally to end unnecessary delays to vital payments, such as the five-week wait for Universal Credit.
152 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 (0.97).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.97 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.98 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| 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 09:20 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.