Debate contribution: Insurance Costs: Reductions for Workers, Families and Businesses
Debate contribution by Ms Diane Forsythe on .
- MLA
- Ms Diane Forsythe
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 14 May 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Insurance Costs: Reductions for Workers, Families and Businesses
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4490386
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I will first say that my party supports the motion. We are all aware that insurance premiums have been increasing on our cars, homes and even pets. That is putting additional pressure on hard-pressed working families. The Republic of Ireland is having similar problems, with an enormous 10% increase in private health insurance compared with the previous year. That leaves the price of health insurance in the Republic now with basic insurance costing around £1,500, but it certainly can range well in excess of £5,000 a year, and we are truly fortunate to have healthcare that is free at the point of delivery in Northern Ireland via the NHS. Whilst in the past, insurance premium increases seemed to follow inflation, they have recently shot up by some 12% compared with this time last year, significantly higher than the rate of inflation. We know that car insurance, in particular, is a serious issue in Northern Ireland, especially for young drivers. I am extremely grateful that our DUP colleague, Carla Lockhart, the MP for Upper Bann, has championed that in recent times. She secured a debate on the issue in the House of Commons only two months ago, raising it directly with the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, Anthony Browne MP. She was supported by Gregory Campbell and Jim Shannon in that debate, both of whom reinforced the point that that level of cost to motorists is unacceptable. This party will never shy away from taking the fight to where the decisions are actually made. Having examined car insurance in more detail, we know that, on average, 17- to 20-year-olds have had their insurance premiums rise by more than £1,000 compared with last year. Those substantial rises must be examined by the FCA because they are simply pricing many young drivers out of the market. Put simply, the cost of insuring a car for a year is now significantly higher than actually buying the car in the first place. It is most certainly the case that most young people drive responsibly and safely, but it is also the case that the majority of young drivers suffer because of the actions of the minority. That is part of the reason for the spiralling cost of insurance. We can learn some lessons from other countries about how we progress on this issue. In Australia, learner drivers are statistically 20% less likely to be killed or seriously. The differences are that young people can apply for a provisional driving licence at age 16 and a half, but they then have to drive for 120 hours before they take their test. The average amount of time that young people in the UK drive before they take their test is 40 hours. Those fairly small changes have meant that, in Australia, the number of those likely to be killed or injured has dropped by 20%. Legitimate questions need to be asked about why the average cost of house insurance in Northern Ireland is £347, while in London, where house prices are considerably higher, it is £309. There seems to be no reason nor rationale for that. Surely that also needs to be examined by the regulator. To widen that point, if houses are more expensive in London and the repair costs are clearly higher, the legitimate question needs to be asked: why are insurance costs higher in Northern Ireland, where the repair costs are significantly lower? When it comes to our four-legged friends, pet owners in Northern Ireland pay more than owners in Scotland and Wales, but pet insurance is more expensive in England. The cost of pet insurance is determined by breed, and we can easily assume that breeds are fairly spread across the entirety of the UK. In summary, we are content to support the motion and ask that the appropriate regulators investigate the unexplainably high levels of insurance that Northern Ireland people have to pay.
653 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: 0.04 (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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.06 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 | 0.64 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.36 |
| 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 10:27 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.