Member's statement: Department for Communities: Staffing
Member's statement by Mr Daniel McCrossan on .
- MLA
- Mr Daniel McCrossan
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 24 June 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Department for Communities: Staffing
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4497431
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Since the return of the Assembly in February, I have been continually raising issues and concerns about staffing, recruitment and retention in the Department for Communities. I have raised issues about temporary promotions, including those on some posts that have been temporary for seven years now. Concerns have also been raised with me that the avoidance of fair competition is affecting morale and causing frustration in the Department. A response to a question for written answer that I received from the Minister for Communities last week outlined further concern for me, because he said that he is announcing a further 95 job reductions in the Department this year. That is on top of 600 in the previous year. That is a significant number of job cuts — let us be under no illusion: that is exactly what it is — in the Communities Department, and it raises important questions that are specifically about which areas are affected and the reasons behind those decisions. While it is acknowledged and well played out in the House that financial pressures are facing the Executive and, in turn, individual Departments, the implications of such widespread job losses on the Communities Department's services cannot be ignored. Given the critical nature of the work that the Department for Communities carries out, particularly in areas such as housing — the House has an abysmal record on that, especially the Executive, given that they are not even announcing the sufficient level of new builds this year, with the 400 that have been announced an insult to the many people in Northern Ireland who are waiting to be housed — it is crucial that public services do not suffer as a consequence of those cutbacks. As a representative of West Tyrone, my thoughts are first and foremost with all the DFC staff who are stuck in this disastrous mess and affected by job losses. It is distressing to consider that individuals may be affected directly as a result of the Executive's inability to manage their Budget or, indeed, even provide a Programme for Government to outline the direction of travel for the Government. There is a pressing need for transparency about the locations in the Department where the job losses have happened, and I have requested that Minister Lyons provide a detailed account of those job losses to the House. There is a constant avoidance of providing answers to these important questions, and this matter cannot be dressed up: in real terms, it means 695 job losses. The House is quick to criticise the austerity that London implements, but I do not hear the dissenting voices of Sinn Féin members of the Executive crying out about job losses and the effect that they are having in our communities, particularly when we cannot even deliver on something as simple and fundamental as housing for our people. This is a ridiculous situation, and the Minister for Communities and, indeed, the First Minister and deputy First Minister need to address it.
499 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: 0.12 (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 (0.90).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.09 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.90 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.12 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.98 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.93 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.02 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:48 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.