Debate contribution: Support for Carers

Debate contribution by Mr Mark Durkan on .

MLA
Mr Mark Durkan
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
10 February 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Support for Carers
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4791065

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Member who tabled the motion. The SDLP will support it and the Alliance amendment. Both could go further, but not every motion can do everything. My colleague Daniel McCrossan had been working on an amendment that does not seem to have made the cut. In that, we called for a carers' charter, similar to the one proposed by Carers NI, that would have gone further than the motion and the amendment. In June, my colleague Daniel McCrossan presented to the Speaker a petition with almost 1,500 names on behalf of Carers NI. It called for the introduction of a carer's allowance recognition payment as recommended by the independent review of welfare mitigations. This issue affects 48,000 people in the North who struggle to make ends meet on carer's allowance. Carer's allowance is the main social security benefit for people providing unpaid care for sick or disabled family members or friends. It is available only to those who care for a loved one for a minimum of 35 hours a week, although, for a significant number of recipients, as others have alluded to, the caring role is around the clock. It is 24 hours a day, seven days a week and 365 days a year. Other Members mentioned the lack of respite opportunities, and the Health Minister and we, as an Assembly, really need to get that addressed. People need the opportunity to recharge. In exchange for their Herculean efforts, carers receive a weekly payment, as Mr Carroll reminded us, of £81·90, which equates to less than £2·50 an hour or nearly five times less than the national living wage. It is hardly surprising that nearly half the people who rely on carer's allowance in the North are living below the poverty line. Over 40% are having to cut back on essentials such as heating, and one in seven of our carers have been forced to use a food bank. The shocking rate at which carer's allowance is paid represents nothing less than the exploitation of the love, devotion and dedication of those carers. You cannot put a price on that love, but look, as others have said, at the pressure that they are taking off and the money that they save our Health and Social Care system for one. A recognition payment will not fix the carer's allowance payment for everyone, but it would be a crucial starting point in delivering the financial support that unpaid carers need. Carers need more than money, though: they need a charter of rights and more support. They need the right to live free of poverty; the right to regular breaks; the right to be treated as equal and valued partners in the health and social care system; the right to have access to education and employment opportunities; and the right to proper and timely information and support. Our carers make an immeasurable contribution to society across the North every day, and, in return, they deserve so much more than a social security benefit that forces them to go hungry and sit in the dark. It is time that government cared for our carers, because God only knows where we would be without them.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

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 (0.96).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.96Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.99
No identity-related subject0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:56 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