Debate contribution: Ageing Population: Strategic Plan
Debate contribution by Ms Paula Bradshaw on .
- MLA
- Ms Paula Bradshaw
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 25 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Ageing Population: Strategic Plan
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4815143
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I support the motion. I very much welcome the subject matter in the motion from Claire Sugden. The Alliance Party has a manifesto commitment to include in the Programme for Government outcomes for an ageing population, so of course we will support the motion, particularly that element of it. The motion speaks of, "pressures on healthcare, social care" and other issues. Other Members will cover those, as some have already done. I wish to emphasise one element in the area, and not just because I have just passed the age of 50. We are in what is defined by the UN as the decade of healthy ageing. We need to think increasingly of our healthcare system in terms of what is known as "50-40", which is how we ensure that people who reach the age of 50 and who can reasonably expect to live for another 40 years are supported as much as possible to do so and do not live those four decades in poor health. We have already seen some reshaping of our healthcare system, and we need to move forward on our general healthcare policy and ensure that the ageing population is at the forefront of that. More broadly, I will focus not only on the contributions of older people but on the challenges and opportunities of which the motion speaks, in the important sense that we are approaching the stage at which our population will peak. That has significant consequences for how we adapt and change resourcing in order to sustain public services and, indeed, prioritise the right things when developing legislation and public policy. I had not included the issue in my written speech, but I welcome the comments from Mr Kingston, Mr Butler and others on the digital inclusion piece. Increasingly, we see that people can only access public services online, and we need to be mindful of the cost and complexity of accessing information and services online. People need to pay for their Wi-Fi, computer equipment and smartphones, and we need to be mindful of the fact that pensioners do not always have the funds to do so. The Alliance Party has long publicised its concern that older people are too often seen primarily as being consumers of public services. That presents them as being passive service users rather than active citizens. Last month, a population projection by NISRA and the Office for National Statistics suggested that Northern Ireland's population will peak by as soon as 2033. NISRA emphasised that that was a projection, not a forecast, and that there was significant evidence to suggest that the date could be rather later than that. However, the peak will surely come before the middle of the century. It is already the case that, for example, the number of children in Northern Ireland is declining, and, as we speak, we are just passing the point at which there are more over-65s than under-16s living in Northern Ireland. Indeed, already, one in six of the population is aged 65 or over, and over-65s account for most of the population growth. The motion's reference to the "wider population" hints at that and the fact that it will suffer if we do not begin planning for an ageing population now. If we consider the issues as being about not just an ageing population but population decline, we see that we need to hone in on where the strains on the public services are, as Ms Sugden referenced in her opening remarks. However, that is not the only issue. A declining population would shake many of the assumptions that we currently include in the development of public policy. That affects not only the type of health and social care services that we offer and how those are paid for but how we adapt a host of other public policy issues, such as the design of our planning system and how we develop infrastructure so that there is less pressure for new builds. As Mr Butler referenced, we need to think about what housing needs to look like to ensure that people can live comfortably at home for longer. In fact, we need to look at things like skills development as well, so that we have the health and social care workforce that is necessary to meet the demands. We need to ensure long-term sustainability and resilience in public services. We need to ensure that our old people are allowed to contribute and participate as active citizens for as long as possible, but they need support from government in order to do so.
763 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 (0.93).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | 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 | 0.98 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| 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 12:01 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.