Debate contribution: EU Funding for the Community and Voluntary Sector

Debate contribution by Ms Diane Forsythe on 9 September 2024.

MLA

Ms Diane Forsythe

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

9 September 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

EU Funding for the Community and Voluntary Sector

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4511854

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I welcome the motion's bringing to the Floor the critical issue of the funding of the voluntary and community sector in Northern Ireland, and I thank the Members for the opportunity to speak to it. Importantly, as chair of the all-party group on the voluntary and community sector, I welcome the opportunity to formally recognise once again on the Floor the value of the sector. Its contribution to the delivery of positive outcomes across society in Northern Ireland is critical to every Department in delivering public services at the heart of communities in every constituency, urban and, especially, rural, such as my constituency of South Down. They deserve clarity about the sustainability of their funding. The DUP believes that the UK Government have a responsibility to provide clarity on the future of the funding without delay. It is appalling that community and voluntary organisations, which do essential work, have been left in such an uncertain position. The cliff edge of March 2025 must be removed. With organisations, sadly, preparing to put staff on three months' notice, the decision-making cliff edge is even closer. We need clarity before December of this year. It is urgent: staff in the sector are skilled and valued, and they deserve clarity. We, as a society, cannot afford our services to collapse as we get closer to the cliff edge. We want to see the spending power that was provided under the EU structural funds replicated and enhanced. The UK always paid more into the EU than it received back under structural funding. There can be no excuse for any shortfall in the funding now. The DUP does not accept that the situation was in some way inevitable as a result of our exit from the EU. Ultimately, previous Governments made promises that they have not honoured. We are also of the view that long-term, multi-annual budgeting for replacement EU funds should be a priority in what comes next. When the DUP held the Department for the Economy, it secured funding to ensure that projects benefiting from the European social fund were extended to March 2023. However, we need the Government's support to go beyond the temporary fixes. Sinn Féin's motion focuses primarily on the quantum of the funding provided under the Shared Prosperity Fund. The size of the pot is, of course, extremely important. However, it is also critical that the priorities of future programmes better reflect the needs and circumstances of communities in Northern Ireland. Local projects have been hit with a double whammy: not only are we receiving less than we ought to, but the reduced funding that is coming is not being directed in the right way to meet local needs. Over the past two years, we repeatedly sought clarity on when shared prosperity funding would be available, how it would be administered and the degree of input that would be afforded to local Ministers. It is clear that, on all those fronts, the engagement of the previous Government was severely lacking. We want to see that remedied in future Northern Ireland investment plans. We have always been clear that the aims and funding objectives of the Shared Prosperity Fund must align with the Executive's agreed plans for economic growth and social inclusion. We cannot be in a situation again where funding coming from the UK Government duplicates aims already covered by an Executive programme or where Northern Ireland's unique circumstances are not reflected in the development or administration of the funding. Equally, the DUP does not believe that providing a more meaningful role for the devolved Administrations in deciding how and where the funding is targeted needs to be at the expense of retaining a national approach to providing greater economic and social cohesion between different parts of the United Kingdom. Given the tough decisions that will need to be taken by Executive Ministers in the coming weeks and months, we, on balance, do not believe that adding to the challenges facing our Departments by devolving responsibility for the schemes solely to local Ministers would be prudent or conducive to providing greater certainty to the community and voluntary sector. It should be noted that, even under the framework of the previous EU structural funds, there was a role for the UK Government, working in conjunction with the devolved Administrations. That should be the blueprint. Locally, there is a need to enhance work with local projects to ensure that they are able to compete for funding effectively. It is timely that the critical nature of funding for the voluntary and community sector has been raised on the same day that consultation on the draft Programme for Government was brought to the Chamber, as organisations in that sector play an incredibly valuable role in this. We support the call for the UK Government to honour their funding promises and provide clarity on the future of the funding without delay. Our amendment adds the call on the UK Government, working in conjunction with the devolved Administrations, to deliver on meaningful local projects that add value in our communities. I commend the amendment to the House.

851 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:01 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