Debate contribution: Foster Carers
Debate contribution by Mr Alan Robinson on .
- MLA
- Mr Alan Robinson
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 23 April 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Foster Carers
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4485632
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I begin, as others have, by commending foster carers past and present throughout Northern Ireland for their vital contribution. Those unsung heroes have played a key role in shaping the lives of our most vulnerable children and young people. Their dedication, compassion and unwavering commitment creates safe havens for young people who face adversity, loss and uncertainty. In the embrace of a loving foster home, children find solace, stability and a chance to reach their full potential in a place where predicted futures can be rewritten. Yet, as we debate the motion, the number of children and young people in care has reached its highest level since 1995, while only 2% of people in Northern Ireland who took part in a Barnardo's poll indicated that they would consider fostering a child in the next five years. The Fostering Network tells us that the Province is short of approximately 300 foster carers, meaning that the stability that I mentioned will be lost to some children as a result of their being moved around the system. Why are we short of foster carers? Is there a lack of aggression in the recruitment processes? Is it because of a lack of strategic planning? Is it because of the cost-of-living crisis in which families struggle to care for their children? Is it the case in Northern Ireland because the weekly fostering allowances in the Province have not kept up with inflation or with the same allowances in the Republic of Ireland or mainland UK? In the Irish Republic, in November 2024, the foster care allowance for children under 12 will increase to €400 a week, and that allowance for children aged 12 and over will increase to €425 a week. Foster care allowances here sit 16% below the GB average, with the gap set to widen further. Effectively, the real-world costs are transferred to the families who foster. Merely pinning the blame on money would do foster carers a disservice; indeed, there is a similar problem in England with the number of foster carers stepping forward. Foster carers have pointed to poor communication between trust staff and social work teams that has left them feeling undervalued. Addressing that will require a cultural change in the health system. Rather than being seen by trusts as service users, foster carers want to be treated as key partners. Those who consider being foster carers would be more willing if they knew that they would be regarded as an integral part of not only the care plan for those in their care but the children's social services workforce. Receiving the right, easily accessible support is also key to transforming people's attitudes to taking on the foster carer role, which provides opportunities for development and specialist training. I am keen to hear from the Minister what feedback is collated from those who leave fostering, to uncover the reasons behind their decision to exit or deregister. That information would be useful in dictating current and future policies and could help to drive recruitment campaigns, including to attract different demographics, such as single people —.
Yes, I am happy to do so.
Absolutely. I am more than happy to agree with that. That information would be useful in dictating current and future policies and could help to drive recruitment campaigns, including to attract different demographics, such as single people, those who do not own their home and those with a disability. In conclusion, Minister, I ask what your vision is: what action plan do you have to recruit, retain and reward carers before the crisis in foster care deepens any further?
600 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 (0.96).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | 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 | 0.51 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.17 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.13 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.10 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.09 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:08 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.