Debate contribution: Child Poverty

Debate contribution by Ms Cara Hunter on .

MLA
Ms Cara Hunter
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
15 April 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Child Poverty
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4483080

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to talk about an issue that is as important as tackling child poverty. We in the SDLP want to deliver motions on the issues that matter most and that are impacting on the most vulnerable, and who is more vulnerable than the children who are experiencing poverty? Under years of brutal Tory austerity, we have continued to witness how the most vulnerable struggle and suffer the most. While canvassing over the years and meeting people in our constituency offices, I know that I am not alone when I say that I hear time and time again first-hand the common theme, specifically in the past one or two years, which is the inability to afford the basics — to afford breakfast, lunch and dinner, and keep the lights on, and afford hygiene products, and afford car insurance, and pay electric bills. The list goes on. We know that children feel that too. Parents are struggling, including parents who are working and parents who are on benefits. The awful thing about child poverty is that it is not always obvious. It happens quietly when a child turns up to school with an empty stomach, and, if you are not looking hard enough, you just might miss it. Maybe they cannot afford to go on a school trip or a trip to the cinema. They are wearing school uniforms or shoes that are too small because this month the budget just could not stretch far enough. Parents are doing all that they can, but they cannot make budgets stretch. The cost of living, married with low wages, is a complete disaster. It is too much and is putting pressure on the shoulders of so many parents. Those small moments of humiliation in a child's life due to poverty can be so difficult for our young people. It is not their fault but is the consequence of a cruel, callous Tory Government that do not prioritise the health and well-being of our young people. We know that poverty impacts the whole family, and research has shown that poverty has a profound negative impact and affects specifically maternal depression, stress and anxiety. I welcome the fact that that was echoed around the House today.

I thank the Member for his intervention. He is right: welfare reform has crippled families here. Sadly, that has had a trickle-down effect on our young people, and it continues to worsen the crisis here. In addition to that, the instability of this institution has prolonged the suffering of children and families in our communities. It is important to raise that. I return to my initial point. Early intervention is absolutely key, and a number of studies point to improvement in children's educational, social and emotional outcomes as family incomes increase. As we see family incomes increase, we also see betterment in the development of our young people, but, without that support, children living in poverty are less likely to receive A to C grades when it comes to GCSEs and are, on average, six months less ready for school than those who do not experience poverty. That can trickle into higher rates of unemployment and increased uptake of welfare later in life. That is important, and that is why we are here today. Now is the time to tackle this head-on. That is why decisions made in this Building are so important. We need to meet needs in early years and create a comprehensive child poverty strategy with measurable targets to reduce child poverty and increase the quality of life for all our young people, regardless of their background or belief. There is a shared consensus across the House to get this over the line: to create a time-bound strategy with ring-fenced funding that seeks to support our children in these key early years of development. When children develop their sense of self, that is the time when poverty can, sadly, craft and shape their experience in this world, and it often makes them feel unequal to their peers. If we look across these islands, we see that Scotland, specifically, has done a remarkable job in showing us just what can be done to support children and young people and just how beneficial investment in our young people and tackling child poverty can be. This issue matters, and, if we invest in our young people today, we will have a much better, healthier generation tomorrow. That is why, today and tomorrow, my party's motions are focused on tackling poverty head-on. Studies have shown that child payments will transform the lives of young people who have endured poverty. Scotland has gone from being one of the most unequal places in Europe to live in to being one of the most equal. In short, we have seen strategies across these islands that can help to tackle child poverty. I really welcome the hunger of the Minister and his Department to move forward on child poverty.

I thank the Member for his intervention. Absolutely, the emphasis is on each and every one of us, while our parties have Ministries, to do what we can to tackle child poverty, especially as children are so vulnerable and cannot speak for themselves. The duty is on us, as elected representatives, to utilise our positions, whether holding Ministries or not, to speak up for them and use our voices to ensure that they get the best support and investment as early in life as possible. I really feel that it matters to meet the needs of early years, and that is why, over the next few days, my party will talk about tackling poverty. We know that child poverty, specifically, is an issue of dignity. It not only affects the immediate well-being of children but shapes their future prospects and opportunities. Growing up in poverty can have long-lasting effects on children's physical, emotional and cognitive development, perpetuating cycles of disadvantage and limiting their potential. Often, children living in poverty may experience stigma, as has been mentioned in the House. That is important as well, as living in poverty can often create a sense of social exclusion at school, as those children may be unable to participate in activities or access resources that their peers can afford. A prime example of that is in extracurricular school activities or sports. Some sports are more expensive to take part in than others, so poverty limits opportunities and equality, and that is not right. Addressing poverty with dignity for children means prioritising their unique needs and rights, ensuring that they have access to quality education, which was mentioned, healthcare, and opportunities for play and social interaction. We must recognise the inherent worth and potential of every child, regardless of their socio-economic background. It is essential for breaking the cycle of intergenerational poverty and creating a more equitable society. Before I move to Members' points, it is important to mention that child and youth poverty is on the increase. Sadly, we are now moving towards that statistic of one in four experiencing child poverty. There are a number of pathways out of that. We should be looking at economic investment in youth work and the youth sector and supporting pathways to sustained employment. It is important to raise that today. I will just mention a few Members' points. Sian Mulholland touched on the importance of early years and of access to nutritious meals in those years, which has an effect later in life. Colm Gildernew said that the cost-of-living crisis is only worsening, with which I wholeheartedly agree. We all see that every day in our constituency offices. Mr Butler touched on the fact that child poverty is linked to poor health outcomes, which, sadly, can be worsened by adverse childhood experiences. We are seeing that impact later in life with mental health challenges. He made another point about the stability of this place and the link between that and young people's sense of hopelessness. When this place is up and running and this institution is creating laws and having conversations, as we are today, our young people feel heard and feel part of the democratic process. That is so important, specifically when we are talking about the poverty that they experience and endure. My colleague Sinéad McLaughlin touched on the importance of regional balance. Being based in the north-west also, I know that the area has seen decades of underinvestment. That has materialised into a lack of jobs, with people fleeing our part of the North to go elsewhere. Given the impact of that, it is time to invest in those areas. Ciara Ferguson touched on the key point of why we are here today: no child should live in poverty. That is the be-all and end-all. We all share that view. That is why it is so important that we get the strategy delivered. Mr Robinson touched on the importance of dealing with these issues with urgency. Mr Carroll emphasised the impact of Tory austerity, essentially robbing children of their childhoods due to the ongoing pressure of poverty in the home. Lastly, the Chair of the Education Committee touched on the important role of education in tackling child poverty. In closing, I thank Members for their comments. I welcome the fact that we are on the same page in terms of aspiration, but we are not all on the same page with regard to delivery. We want specific targets and dates. Our motion states we want to see this done by September 2024. Parents everywhere want to see action and action now. That time-bound element is crucial.

Yes, very quickly.

Absolutely. I do not believe that we can support the amendment. It removes the urgency that we have all talked about. I thank everyone for their contributions. Hopefully, we can get the motion over the line.

1,645 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.06 (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 (0.92).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.05No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.04No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.92Yes
Overall judgement0.06At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.98
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.02
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.43
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.35
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.14
Another identity-related subject0.04
Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:00 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.

Challenge this classification