Member's statement: Apprenticeships
Member's statement by Ms Sorcha Eastwood on .
- MLA
- Ms Sorcha Eastwood
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 26 February 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Apprenticeships
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4230532
Read the official Assembly record
Text
February is the month when we mark Apprenticeship Week and celebrate our apprentices. I believe that we had another bit of business on that week, so I raise it now, and better late than never. Apprenticeships are a great way to grow our economy, to tackle poverty and social inequality and to help us to address the many and various challenges that face our economy, including productivity, meeting the challenge of skills gaps and looking at how we develop a strategic plan for our economy. They are a key part of widening participation and access to education. However, all of us can do a lot more to promote apprenticeships. We need to be honest: every time that we talk about education and skills, there appears to be an ingrained bias in our society that always goes down the well-trodden path of academia. Did anyone ever stop to ask why? I am one of those in the House who benefited from a pilot of a higher-level apprenticeship, which was brought in by my party colleague Dr Stephen Farry when he was Minister for Employment and Learning. I see some younger people in the Gallery, and it is a shame that they cannot shout down. I believe that there is a perception in society about apprenticeships. I do not know whether that is developed by the system or how it has come about. It may be due to different policies that seem to be, at times, at cross purposes, but there is a bias out there around apprenticeships. However, I believe in our young people and that they are being more informed than ever. Indeed, Members will know that one of the issues that I will seek to further in my time as this mandate goes forward is careers advice in schools. I believe that there is very much an effort across Education and Economy. Part of helping us to grow apprenticeships and opportunities for young people and, indeed, people of all ages is having a vibrant and thriving further education sector. I am deeply concerned about some of the issues that are being raised by people who work in that sector and by people who avail themselves of the courses that are available there. We speak about 25 years of prosperity, and all of us want to see that. However, each one of us has a role to play in the House in advocating for not just apprenticeships but the role of further education. I also want to raise again the issue of the apprenticeship levy. We have a role to play on that issue in this House and in the other place, and I will not rest until we get that resolved. I also want to place on record my thanks to all the apprentices working across Northern Ireland. They are delivering great work.
474 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 (0.76).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.76 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.55 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.34 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.09 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:38 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.