Member's statement: Linking Generations Northern Ireland
Member's statement by Miss Michelle McIlveen on .
- MLA
- Miss Michelle McIlveen
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 26 November 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Linking Generations Northern Ireland
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4677258
Read the official Assembly record
Text
We all love to see the pictures on social media of the older folk in our communities visiting schools and sharing tech experience or gardening tips with the younger generation. There are mutual social benefits from that work, but it does not happen without facilitation. Since 2009, Linking Generations Northern Ireland (LGNI) is the only catalyst organisation leading the way in developing quality and sustainable intergenerational practice across Northern Ireland. Its work takes a capacity-building approach and connects, inspires and supports practitioners in organisations and settings to develop an intergenerational approach that benefits local people and achieves multiple outcomes. LGNI coordinates a Northern Ireland-wide intergenerational network with nearly 1,000 members; provides a range of training, advice and support; develops intergenerational projects; disseminates resources; runs small grants programmes; acts as a strategic voice for intergenerational practice; and is the Northern Ireland lead for the annual Global Intergenerational Week campaign. Intergenerational approaches are a key component of the Public Health Agency's age-friendly strategy to encourage communities to be places that are good for people to grow up and to grow old. LGNI works with 11 age-friendly council officers, who coordinate local action plans supported by community and statutory partners. Those plans recognise and include intergenerational activity, with LGNI providing data to demonstrate impact and the achievement of multiple outcomes. The new Programme for Government requires intergenerational working to ensure that Northern Ireland is a place that supports today's generations and future generations, cutting across numerous Departments, such as Communities, Health, TEO and Justice. Truly age-friendly communities are healthier communities and places where all ages are connected, respected, valued and engaged together. LGNI uses the opportunity that intergenerational practice presents to support quality and sustainable practice and connections between generations that promote improved mental health and well-being, social inclusion, educational outcomes for children and young people, community safety and skill sharing. LGNI operates with a team of just four part-time staff, but it is in a funding crisis. It receives a small amount of infrastructure funding from the Public Health Agency, but that does not sustain its daily operations. Reliance on project funds means that LGNI's future is insecure. It is at risk of closure. I want to make Members aware of LGNI and its need for core funding to protect its infrastructure and the requirement of a cross-departmental approach. As it is a global leader in the intergenerational field, the potential closure of LGNI risks the loss of expertise, the strong infrastructure that it has built and the support that it has garnered. Its Scottish partner, Generations Working Together, benefits from government funding, and we look to that example as a model of best practice.
443 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 (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.91 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.09 |
| 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 11:35 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.