Debate contribution: Front-line Services: Employers’ National Insurance Increase
Debate contribution by Mr Phillip Brett on .
- MLA
- Mr Phillip Brett
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 13 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Front-line Services: Employers’ National Insurance Increase
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4738716
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It was hoped by some that, with the election of a Labour Government, things could only get better. We were told that that Government would deliver a Budget that would be about growth and investing in the long-term future of the United Kingdom. Despite their whopping majority, they have presided over cuts and chaos. The first target was our pensioners across the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, whom they stripped of their entitlement to a universal winter fuel allowance. They next targeted our farmers by proposing the most fundamental reform to family farm inheritance anywhere in western Europe in a generation. Now they are targeting small businesses and hard-pressed family budgets across the United Kingdom, which is worrying for us in Northern Ireland. Their record of delivery as a Government has made this place seem like a panacea and makes the record of Ministers here at Stormont get an A+. I am extremely concerned at the effect that the changes will have on our economy. I make these remarks as DUP spokesperson on the economy and not as Chair of the Committee for the Economy. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy. Official records show that 90% of businesses in Northern Ireland are small businesses. Their turnover is less than £100,000 in 60% of cases, and, for every full-time employee, the additional cost to them will be £2,500. Frankly, for many businesses that is unsustainable. What that will do and what we have already seen in the media and in conversations that I and, I am sure, other Members have had is that those businesses will slow down expansion opportunities, reduce the number of hours that they offer to workers and limit new job opportunities into the future.
The Labour Government's Budget is anti-growth and anti-competitive in trying to get Northern Ireland's economy back on the right footing. That is why this party has taken immediate action on issues that that Budget inflicted upon the people of Northern Ireland. Our Communities Minister has come forward to deliver £100 for those families that were impacted on by the cut to the winter fuel allowance. Our Education Minister today announced that the childcare subsidy scheme will continue next year. The childcare sector in Northern Ireland estimates that the extra cost of the National Insurance contribution changes for some of its providers next year will be £18,500. However, that subsidy scheme will ensure that millions of pounds are put back in that sector's pockets. However, we need strong action from our other Departments. To date, the Department of Finance has been unable to tell us how much those changes will impact on budgets right across Northern Ireland and the public sector. We are now weeks and weeks and months and months after the announcement, and not having those figures makes the case for change even more difficult. The Department for the Economy had its budget set just before Christmas. There is not a single proposal or mitigation package for the businesses right across Northern Ireland that will be impacted on by the changes. I understand that the Minister for the Economy's focus may be on seeking election to other places rather than on protecting the economy here in Northern Ireland, but my focus and that of my party is on protecting the economy. We need to see the Executive collectively coming together, but that means that other Ministers now need to step up to the mark. In the brief time that I have left, I want to make clear the impact that the increase will have on our universities. Our two universities estimate that the impact on them will be £5 million of extra cost each year. Their income is already dropping, and this measure will see discretionary spend being lowered. That is on issues such as maintenance support for those who are on low incomes and widening participation bursaries. Again, the most vulnerable will lose out on the support that they need and deserve. One of my other hobby horses, the Northern Ireland Hospice, has estimated that the cost to it will be £3 million. That is simply unaffordable, but we now need the evidence to go to the Executive. I call on the Minister to try to get those figures and facts together as quickly as possible so that the House can speak with one voice. I commend the leader of the Opposition for attempting to defend his sister party's actions, but the policy was more like something that Vicky Pollard would say — "Yes, but no, but yes, but no".
761 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: 0.05 (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 (0.93).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.11 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 | 0.79 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.15 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.02 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:43 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.