Debate contribution: Social Services Vacancies: North Belfast and West Belfast
Debate contribution by Ms Carál Ní Chuilín on .
- MLA
- Ms Carál Ní Chuilín
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 8 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Social Services Vacancies: North Belfast and West Belfast
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4582063
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
At the outset, I acknowledge that the Minister has had a day of talking about social care, but he is up for it, so he will be grand. This debate is not about criticising social services. If anything, I am trying to make a case for getting additional workers into both constituencies. It is also about trying to get answers to how the recruitment and retention of social workers to fill the gaps in North Belfast and West Belfast will be achieved. I am sure that, having prepared for the debate, Members may have some of the information that I will set out. In February, I asked the Department how many vacant posts there were for child and family social workers, disability social workers and out-of-hours social workers in North Belfast and West Belfast. The response from the Department was that there were 72 vacancies for child and family social workers; seven for disability social workers in children's services; two for disability social workers in adult services; and none for out-of-hours social workers. That was a total of 81 vacant posts. In May, I asked a further question of the Minister, which was that he detail his Department's plans to recruit, given that there were 81 gaps in February. The Department responded by saying that health and social care trusts had undertaken a large recruitment exercise to recruit 200 newly qualified social workers and that the Belfast Trust intended to appoint approximately 60 newly qualified social workers throughout the summer. Minister, I ask that, in responding to the debate, you say whether those 60 posts have been filled. If they have been filled, can you say in which field they have been filled? If you cannot, I am sure that you can provide any additional information in writing. I appreciate that you do not always have these things to hand. The Minister has said that he wants to end inequalities in health and social care. The topic of the debate is an example of where some of the biggest inequalities have persisted. Some of our most vulnerable families face additional pressure due to not having access to much-needed expertise and support when they need it most. One example that is persistently raised with me is unallocated cases. That concern is constantly raised with me by my constituents. For example — I will touch on this further later — during COVID, people worked steadily and at pace. When kids went back to school following that, however, the number of children who were brought forward and deemed as being at risk had severely increased. For a lot of those children and families, cases had not been allocated simply because the staff were not there in sufficient numbers. As the Minister and all Members will appreciate, when families are contacted by social services, it causes fear and panic. Some may expect it, but most do not. That is a fact. When that contact is made and the case has not proceeded, it places additional pressure on the people who made the referral in particular, but also on the social workers. For most cases, there is a resolution, which is worked out in conjunction with the families, social services and others who provide support. The delay in getting an allocated social worker causes an awful lot of stress. That is not down to the social workers: it is down to workforce planning. The Minister will be aware that, in May and June, social workers were out on strike. Some were on strike because of the pressure, but some were on strike because of issues around safe staffing and safeguarding legislation, which we desperately need. For the most part, their main concern was that they felt vulnerable. A lot of the stuff, such as other issues around terms and conditions and workforce planning, was, largely, unresolved due to staff shortages, sickness and the lack of pace in recruitment and, even more so, with retention. I remind us all that the work that our community and voluntary sector undertakes to support some of the most vulnerable families is an integral part of the overall support. I would be shocked if you did not hear that during today's debates. As mentioned, since COVID and the return to school proper, there was an increase in support, which shows that safeguarding is working. Again, however, the system is trying to catch up. The community and voluntary sector worked in partnership with child and family teams to support families by providing fuel, food, counselling, emotional support and some short-term stopgaps. That was not always done through family support hubs, but they were critical. The issue needs to be sorted. I know from my experience in North Belfast that the complexity of the issues that families are dealing with are deepening. You could have an elderly parent, alcohol and addiction issues or issues with waiting for children to be assessed. The list goes on. Therefore, the wrap-around support that is needed is more complex. Social workers, in my experience in North Belfast, have been integral in helping with that multi-agency approach, but I can see that they are exhausted. I see people who are already stretched trying to do their very best. Regrettably, throughout the summer in our constituency, as well as in West Belfast, we witnessed some very young children and young people getting involved in rioting and antisocial behaviour. It is regrettable that some of those children will go through the criminal justice system. When children are brought together through that multi-agency approach, that is normally when those interventions work. Some of those families are also involved in kinship arrangements, or they care for family members or provide, as I mentioned, care and support for vulnerable people. That is critical. The social worker is the linchpin in all that success. You have heard about the lack of respite and support generally for families with children with disabilities. We all know that that is unacceptable. There is a lack of support for them when they are getting the initial social services contact and support thereafter, and they feel unsupported and alone. We need to talk about that when we look at the issue, and I know that that has been at the centre of debates today. The issue for us is that children and families in North Belfast and West Belfast are living in persistently high levels of deprivation and inequality. The additional inequality is compounding the sense that there is a need for a whole-system approach and that, unless we get that fixed, there is just a constant cycle of misery. Nobody wants that at all. There are unintended consequences. For example, providing sponsored day-care places is an initiative where social services, in partnership with day-care providers, try to help families to get children minded so that some of the parents or carers can get some support, counselling, parenting skills or whatever. There were not enough staff to make the referrals, so those children did not get the day-care places that they needed. The day-care places that were secured for social services went amiss, which has resulted in the day-care providers having to almost block-book because they cannot afford to lose those places. That was all because of staff sickness and people who were genuinely sick and perhaps even burnt out. It was not that there was no engagement: it was that that essential cog was missing. There is another example of unintended consequences that have a direct impact on the vulnerable. When they are not there and there are concerns about children who are vulnerable or are at risk, what happens to that vulnerability and risk? Even working with the PSNI, the community and voluntary sector, youth services and social services, it is really hard to get people engaged, but, once they are engaged, there is normally a positive outcome. I would like to know how the gaps — the 81 vacant social worker posts — have been filled. If they have not been filled, what is the plan? I take the opportunity to commend our youth services in particular and our family support hubs. They go above and beyond in North Belfast, and I know that it is the same for West Belfast, because they all work across the community and help each other out. They are keeping kids safe but keeping them well. They are the agencies that have advocated, along with social services, to have better outcomes for the kids, because that is what it is all about. It is about having better outcomes. I will finish by repeating that our social services and our social workers need our support. They do not need us to pay tribute to them. They need us to pay them; they need us to look after them; they need us to introduce the legislation, guidance and protection that will ensure that they will be looked after. I am really concerned and surprised that there have not been any serious adverse incidents (SAIs) up until now, not because of any mistakes that they have made but because of the pressure that they are under. The pressure is increasing, and the supply of workers is not there. We need that to be resolved. I pay tribute not just to social workers but to people who, as we speak, will be out, going above and beyond to make sure that those who are the most vulnerable are safe and protected and get the support that they need. While it is about gaps in social services in North Belfast and West Belfast, in the end, it is all about making sure that our residents, constituents and families and friends will have better outcomes than they currently have.
1,631 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 (0.96).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.80 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.15 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.04 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:13 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.