Debate contribution: Self-directed Support: Payments and Budgets
Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .
- MLA
- Mr Mike Nesbitt
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 1 July 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Self-directed Support: Payments and Budgets
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4499268
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Mr Deputy Speaker, before I answer the question, I want, with your indulgence, to acknowledge that I came across a social media post from Mr Baker last night that marked the second anniversary of the sad passing of his baby nephew Enda, who succumbed to a genetic disease called Edwards' syndrome. I believe that that was not the first time for the family. I just want to acknowledge that and reach out. As I often say, health is personal. In answer to Mr Baker's question, my Department has always supported and continues to support the promotion of self-directed support, as it allows an individual to have as much choice and control as they wish over their personal budget, which has been identified and allocated to them by their local trust to meet their assessed needs. On 1 April 2024, my Department announced an uplift of the regional hourly rate for direct payments by 9·8% to £16·88 per hour from the previous £15·37. It is a set regional rate per hour, and therefore that is the rate that all trusts give to an individual in receipt of a direct payment. I am aware that there can be a disparity in the rates paid to personal assistants. However, the rate of pay is ultimately a private arrangement between the service user and the personal assistant whom they employ, and, on that basis, the rate of payment to the personal assistant is negotiable. The service user, as the employer, is responsible for meeting all the administrative costs associated with being a recipient of a direct payment, such as National Insurance contributions, pension contributions, sick pay, annual leave, redundancy and so on, all from within the direct payment amount that has been allocated to them. Over and above that, my Department endorses the need for personal assistants to receive a rate of pay that is, as a minimum, reflective of the national living wage, which is £11·44 per hour.
325 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 (0.87).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.87 | 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 | 0.97 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| 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 10:57 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.