Debate contribution: Public Sector: Late Payments
Debate contribution by Miss Deirdre Hargey on .
- MLA
- Miss Deirdre Hargey
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 10 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Public Sector: Late Payments
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4517796
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I am also pleased to speak on the motion. It is vital that our businesses and traders are paid promptly and in full when working with the public and private sectors. Government has a duty to set an example to all industries by ensuring that invoices are paid as soon as possible. The prompt payment of invoices is particularly important when working with small businesses in order to ensure that they can maintain their proper cash flow and, importantly, pay their employees and suppliers. The previous Finance Minister, Conor Murphy, provided an important intervention in that regard when, during COVID, he instructed all Departments to continue paying suppliers who provide goods and services for which the demand had been reduced or paused temporarily. Our small businesses are the backbone of our economy, crucially, along with the role of labour and, importantly, our workers. Proper and prompt payment is the least that they should expect for the services that they provide. Minister Caoimhe Archibald has been working closely with the Federation of Small Businesses to ensure that that is the case. Indeed, the federation has been quick to thank the Minister and her officials for the work that she has done on the issue. While there is always room for improvement, it is worth noting that the Executive Departments are largely meeting their payment time frames, and payments are being made much more quickly, when compared with those coming from trusts, arm's-length bodies, councils or other agencies. Indeed, central government is performing well in paying invoices on time. We need to focus on areas of improvement, but let us not forget the contribution that those services and procurements make to society, our economy and those small businesses. Annually, we procure over £3 billion in local services. While that money is going directly into those businesses to the supply chains, importantly, it is recruiting workers to our workforce as well. That adds to infrastructure, training and investment. Importantly, if we can do more to align that to social value, what role can the bedrock of our economy play in doing more to lift up all people in our economy? We should not forget that the economy should work for the people, rather than people working for the economy. That does not mean that we should be complacent. Setting targets can only increase accountability and act as a signal for other industries that they should do the same. I commend the Minister for the work that she has been doing so far and the engagement that she has been having with key stakeholders, particularly those relating to our small businesses. I support the motion.
441 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: 0.02 (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 (0.88).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.88 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:02 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.