Debate contribution: Children's Year 1 Health Review
Debate contribution by Mrs Michelle Guy on .
- MLA
- Mrs Michelle Guy
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 10 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Children's Year 1 Health Review
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4841451
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. This great motion is really worthwhile, and I thank the proposer for moving it. Our amendment does not seek to remove anything from the original motion; it seeks to do two other things. First, it makes reference to the importance of delivering an updated Healthy Child, Healthy Future framework, which, I know, is advanced in its progress. Secondly, it recognises and underscores the important intersection between health and education in relation to child development. The intention of the amendment is to strengthen and reinforce the central tenet of the original motion that the one-year assessment is a vital tool for tracking a child's development progress in health and early education. We reference two important, credible reports: the independent review of education and the Executive-endorsed 'A Fair Start'. Both highlight how crucial the health visitor role is in the educational outcomes of our children. I am sure that Members on the Health Committee share the frustration of those of us on the Education Committee about the sheer volume of evidence that shows how vital early intervention is but how relatively little it happens in practice. Early years assessments provide a perfect opportunity for effective collaboration. Health visitors are one of the clearest examples of the power of early intervention. They play such a wide-ranging role, providing parental education and support, providing positive parenting advice and health advice, safeguarding, assessing development milestones and ensuring early identification of additional needs and interventions. They are there for the child, but they are, importantly, also there for the parents and carers. There is a growing body of evidence that the first 1,000 days of a child's life, from conception to age two, are absolutely essential to their long-term outcomes. That is why the 'A Fair Start' report highlights the fact that the highest rate of return in terms of childhood development will come from investing as early as possible. That is crucial in reducing the educational attainment gap, which begins at a very young age and continues to widen. Parenting can be incredibly difficult, especially for those who are struggling financially, those dealing with health issues or those who have little family support. Health visitors can guide and reassure parents. They are a source of trusted information on the daily challenges of parenthood. With social media and the huge amount of non-evidence-based advice that is going around, parents need those trusted sources more than ever. Given how important the role is, I was extremely concerned when I read the latest Healthy Child, Healthy Future review statistics. They showed that only 59% of year 1 reviews were completed within the accepted time frame, and, as the motion references, 15% were not done at all. In the Southern Trust, 46% or over 2,000 year 1 reviews were recorded as not completed. When I asked about those missed year-1 reviews in a question for written answer, the Minister, in his response, noted the workforce challenges faced, in particular, by the Southern Trust, and that, for those who missed a review, an appropriate in-person review has now taken place. It clearly shows a system that is under great pressure. I do not know whether the impact of a delayed review can be clearly demonstrated. The current Healthy Child, Healthy Future framework was produced in 2010 and is due to be replaced imminently. It notes that the year 1 review is to include an updated family health assessment, monitor the growth of the child, review speech and language development and promote oral and general health, including dental registration. Those are all vital, let alone the issue of safeguarding, which I have already mentioned, and the role that health visitors play in ensuring that issues are prevented or reported. Through our amendment, my party is keen to hear from the Minister about whether the new Healthy Child, Healthy Future framework, which has long been delayed, has taken on board the recommendations from the 'A Fair Start' report and the independent review of education. 'A Fair Start' noted:
"Parents and families need supported to understand the child’s developmental milestones and the importance of play based learning."
It recommended that the Department:
"should expand the developmental role of the health visitor...to provide early support, education and sign posting."
The report specifically highlighted the importance of the reviews at one year and two and a half years from an early education perspective, noting that, while those reviews may be of lesser significance than earlier reviews from a health perspective, they are crucial in relation to cognitive development; for example, in relation to speech and language. In a similar vein, the independent review outlined just how vital health visitors are and recommended that the programme of assessing beyond six to nine months should be reviewed to ensure that cognitive development is properly tracked. We have had little information about the development of the new Healthy Child, Healthy Future framework following the workshops with the voluntary and community sector that took place in 2022. It is my understanding that there will be no formal consultation process. The voluntary and community organisations that provided expert advice during the workshops have not been kept up to date with the progress of the framework. There is a lot to get reassurance and clarity on from the Minister. What is clear is how fundamental health visitors are — maybe more now than ever before — but the value that they bring through the early assessments can be realised only if they happen and happen consistently. We need reassurances from the Minister that there will be safeguards in place to ensure that the level of missed appointments noted in the motion never happens again, especially as the new Healthy Child, Healthy Future framework is produced.
959 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: 0.02 (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).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 0.86 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.05 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.04 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.03 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:06 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.