Debate contribution: Holiday Hunger
Debate contribution by Mrs Diane Dodds on .
- MLA
- Mrs Diane Dodds
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 19 March 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Holiday Hunger
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4279633
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I add my support to the motion and the amendment. I will say a few words on this really important issue. We have all had to deal with high inflation and the cost-of-living crisis. The cost of food, particularly for families, has rocketed dramatically. In recent times, food inflation has peaked at 19·1%. That is a significant additional burden for families, but it is also a burden for the Department when it is administering any scheme. We also understand that, in Northern Ireland, the number of families now visiting food banks has increased by 175% compared with five years ago. That is an extraordinary increase in the number of families who require additional help. Between 1 April and 30 September, almost 10,000 people were forced to turn to a food bank. Research by the Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network found that nearly one in eight children — 12%, which is around 50,000 children — is materially deprived, which means that their families cannot afford the basic items and activities that we consider to be essential for a healthy and happy childhood. The ''Northern Ireland Poverty and Income Inequality Report, 2021/22', found that 15% of children in Northern Ireland are in absolute poverty and that 18% are in relative poverty. That means that almost one fifth of children in Northern Ireland are living in those circumstances. The issue of holiday hunger becomes really important in the context of those figures. I stress that, while this is a matter that the Education Minister is here today to deal with, it is important for every Department across the Executive. It is not just for one Department to deal with the levels of child poverty that we are experiencing in Northern Ireland. That is very important. It is also very important to acknowledge that many teachers to whom I speak are tired of the expectation that they solve every problem that comes across their desk. We all know that the holiday hunger scheme came about during COVID, but, in order to reinstate it, we must stress today the need for an adequate budget for the Department of Education. If we are to really address the issue — if we are to be serious in addressing it — that underinvestment in education must cease and we must be willing to support the Minister in his drive for additional funds so that he can assess the problem and see how to address it.
406 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 (0.93).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.76 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.11 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.09 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.03 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:53 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.